Emotiva vs. Denon

[Max2]

I own a 4311 and have for 8 or 10 years. The upper end of Denon is very good IMO and they bench very well. In most cases they best other AVR's when it comes to the multi channel bench  power output as well as great noise floor numbers. But to say it sounds better or even as good using it as an AVR than using it as a PRE/PRO for my outboard amp has not been my result and Im basically a 1 watt listener. Maybe my amp is adding color or maybe,  just maybe, its offering a cleaner sound like its specs note.

[dtel]

Ceptorman; I had the same experience. I had a 10 year old Yamaha AVR, it sounded good, but with the addition of an Emotiva XPA-2, HOLY crap my towers came to life. Much more detail, clarity, bass, even the kids were cleaner. 

33 minutes ago, Max2 said:

I own a 4311 and have for 8 or 10 years. The upper end of Denon is very good IMO and they bench very well.

I think it is true with most brands, there seem to be some models that just sound better and it's not always just the higher end of a brand. And AVR receivers from brand to brand have kind of there own signature sound somewhat through the whole line, sounds like it to me anyway. 

 

I had kind of the same thing happen, an old Yamaha AVR replaced by a DAC, a big difference in sound I was very happy but was limited to what connections I could use.

A friend came in town and wanted to switch things around and I was not really happy but trusted him. He wanted to connect another receiver I had started using for HT to have more control and easier connections, just the pre-outs like I did on the Yamaha.

He wanted to try the Pioneer since the different sources were already going into it. The Pioneer is a couple of years newer but still really old, I was just using the pre-outs for 2 ch and the Pioneer was just as good as using the DAC for a pre-amp, the Yamaha did not come close. 

This AVR is 12+ years old, a Pioneer Elite VSX 82TXS which came out in 06 for $1200,  I was talked into trying it instead of the DAC and I fought it all the way until it was turned on, I was shocked. I was sure before trying it I would switch back to the DAC, but no.

 

You just never know until you try it, a brand name or high price does not guarantee anything, there seems to be some that outperform and some that are OK at best in every different line.

I still can't believe I connected the 2 ch back into the AVR, I was against the idea.  

 

 

[Max2]

41 minutes ago, dtel said:

Ceptorman; I had the same experience. I had a 10 year old Yamaha AVR, it sounded good, but with the addition of an Emotiva XPA-2, HOLY crap my towers came to life. Much more detail, clarity, bass, even the kids were cleaner. 

I think it is true with most brands, there seem to be some models that just sound better and it's not always just the higher end of a brand. And AVR receivers from brand to brand have kind of there own signature sound somewhat through the whole line, sounds like it to me anyway. 

 

I had kind of the same thing happen, an old Yamaha AVR replaced by a DAC, a big difference in sound I was very happy but was limited to what connections I could use.

A friend came in town and wanted to switch things around and I was not really happy but trusted him. He wanted to connect another receiver I had started using for HT to have more control and easier connections, just the pre-outs like I did on the Yamaha.

He wanted to try the Pioneer since the different sources were already going into it. The Pioneer is a couple of years newer but still really old, I was just using the pre-outs for 2 ch and the Pioneer was just as good as using the DAC for a pre-amp, the Yamaha did not come close. 

This AVR is 12+ years old, a Pioneer Elite VSX 82TXS which came out in 06 for $1200,  I was talked into trying it instead of the DAC and I fought it all the way until it was turned on, I was shocked. I was sure before trying it I would switch back to the DAC, but no.

 

You just never know until you try it, a brand name or high price does not guarantee anything, there seems to be some that outperform and some that are OK at best in every different line.

I still can't believe I connected the 2 ch back into the AVR, I was against the idea.  

 

 

Agreed.   Im in the market for a dedicated Marantz Pre/pro as I need the old Denon 4311 for a downstairs ceiling speaker setup. I figure it would make more sense to get a pre to match with my amp as opposed to buying another AVR.  Of course the new Marantz Pre's have better numbers, DACs and what not, but I have been listening to my combo for a while. You get accustomed to things after a while and even though something may be better on paper, your ears may not agree. 

[dtel]

That's exactly what happened with that old Yamaha AVR for pre-outs. The speakers were new to me and it was what I first tried because I had it, I thought it sounded fine and not trying anything else i found out later It was the speakers sounding better, but not nearly what they could do being behind the Yamaha.

 

Since you have the Marantz already that would probably be a good idea.  I would guess on average a pre-pro would sound better than an AVR and since you already have the amp.

10 minutes ago, Max2 said:

You get accustomed to things after a while and even though something may be better on paper, your ears may not agree.

Your exactly right, part of the reason I may try that DAC again one day to check and see if is no better than the AVR.

 

I did this once, about 5 years after having the K402 horns for 2 ch, I questioned if it really was better then what I was using. I drug in some split LaScala tops and tried them as a comparison. Just to recheck if it was just the new horn and new sound I was sold on when I switched, it took about 10 seconds to know why I switched, I did leave it like that until the next day to adjust a little, but on the second day I had to change back,  I was sold again.

 

But it was really good to go back and check, sometimes we get tied up in what should sound better or as you said on paper or even just a new sound.

 

Guess I need to plug in that DAC again to compare, it's going to be a pain, I hate messing with the birdnest of 2 ch and HT in one space. 

[Max2]

49 minutes ago, dtel said:

That's exactly what happened with that old Yamaha AVR for pre-outs. The speakers were new to me and it was what I first tried because I had it, I thought it sounded fine and not trying anything else i found out later It was the speakers sounding better, but not nearly what they could do being behind the Yamaha.

 

Since you have the Marantz already that would probably be a good idea.  I would guess on average a pre-pro would sound better than an AVR and since you already have the amp.

Your exactly right, part of the reason I may try that DAC again one day to check and see if is no better than the AVR.

 

I did this once, about 5 years after having the K402 horns for 2 ch, I questioned if it really was better then what I was using. I drug in some split LaScala tops and tried them as a comparison. Just to recheck if it was just the new horn and new sound I was sold on when I switched, it took about 10 seconds to know why I switched, I did leave it like that until the next day to adjust a little, but on the second day I had to change back,  I was sold again.

 

But it was really good to go back and check, sometimes we get tied up in what should sound better or as you said on paper or even just a new sound.

 

Guess I need to plug in that DAC again to compare, it's going to be a pain, I hate messing with the birdnest of 2 ch and HT in one space. 

Actually I have a McIntosh 7205 setup for multi channel, but Im a two channel listener 99% of the time. Even then, my multi channel use is for DVDA's and Bluray Audio now and again.

 I guess my post was misleading when I said buy a "matching Pre."  I really don't need to spend the money and Im holding off as long as I can until at least the wife has had enough of this dated Sony AVR and its antics that happened to be in a rack when we purchased this home.  I have looked at several older multi channel Pre's, but with all the HDR and Dolby Vision and all the other new gadget garb, Im a little hesitant to not buy something I may need further down the road. Having said that, I don't see my interest of Home Theater setups increasing in time, a 5.1 set up is all I need.  Hard for me to sit still for a full movie and no way you catch me at a Theater, but I can waste hours out in my shop somehow   

 

 

DACs are definitely different. I flop back and fourth from my AVR to my MAC mini just to keep me guessing  

[dtel]

4 hours ago, Max2 said:

Im holding off as long as I can until at least the wife has had enough of this dated Sony AVR and its antics that happened to be in a rack when we purchased this home.  

That's funny but the best way.

 

4 hours ago, Max2 said:

I don't see my interest of Home Theater setups increasing in time, a 5.1 set up is all I need. 

I agree I'm the same way, it's 6.1 but only because I bought Forte ll's in pairs and didn't want to find a place to store the extra.

 

4 hours ago, Max2 said:

Hard for me to sit still for a full movie and no way you catch me at a Theater

My wife is the same way, she has made it through very few movies and we do not go to a theater, the last movie we went to see was Coming to America, with Eddie Murphy. Just looked it up it was in 1988 

[Zen Traveler]

9 hours ago, Max2 said:

Maybe my amp is adding color or maybe,  just maybe, its offering a cleaner sound like its specs note.

What specs would that be? 

[Zen Traveler]

6 hours ago, dtel said:

i found out later It was the speakers sounding better, but not nearly what they could do being behind the Yamaha.

My guess at the time your Yammi's didn't spec well compared to the Denons in the Amp section--After owning 3 I found out the hard way. 😕 {Note: The Yamahas I owned worked in a small room but once I found out why they were shutting down in a larger room realized they didn't have the same robust power supply as the Denons at the time.}

 

[Zen Traveler]

6 hours ago, Max2 said:

Actually I have a McIntosh 7205 setup for multi channel, but Im a two channel listener 99% of the time. Even then, my multi channel use is for DVDA's and Bluray Audio now and again

Ha! I am actually the opposite when it come to music but still like concert Bluray and 4k, Blurays along with my multichannel music. Heck, I'm watching a U2 DVD that I enjoy in the collection.

 

(Note: No amp and the MV is set to 20 after the Audyssey setup...Probably close to 80 dB w/higher peaks. 😎 }

[Fish]

I had Denon when I joined this forum, 3802, then 03, 05 till I became bored and unhappy with the sound on rf7's. I added a Parasound amp and that helped but still too polite. 

The Emotiva's are on par with Rotel, Outlaw etc.....Just way better sound for music and movies, to my ears. They(Emo)priced themselves out of my range unless you want to miss features. For music, critical listening no big companies cut it for me, I've had em' all. I use an old Sansui for music. I have an Onkyo 5008, best they made and it's just ok, for music.

 

I know the threads old but........

[Zen Traveler]

1 hour ago, Fish said:

I know the threads old but........

Yeah, and so are the AVRs we are talking about....A lot has changed in the processing/switching and they seem to work efficiently with the amps so I think today is a different ballgame. 

[T2K]

I had several Scott integrated tube amps years ago. I used the tube amps with mint pairs of Chorus And Chorus II's, among others. At medium to upper medium volumes the Chorii gave listening fatigue after a while. So I decided to sell everything except my ear pleasing KSP HT setup. When a buyer visited I, for the first time ever, hooked up my Denon 3801/Acurus 125x5 HT receiver/amp to the Chorus/II's and could not believe how much better that sounded than the tube amps sounded. We listened for a short time while I questioned myself as to why I had never tried the combo's before.

 

Keith

[dtel]

3 hours ago, Zen Traveler said:

My guess at the time your Yammi's didn't spec well compared to the Denons in the Amp section--After owning 3 I found out the hard way. 😕

 

I was only using the amps in the AVR's for HT and your right about that but the Pioneer was rated at twice the power, why else it sounded better exactly, I don't know.

 

But there was an even bigger difference just using just the pre-outs of both AVR's for 2 ch, the Pioneer sounded much better than the Yamaha by far.

 

On both AVR's it was pre-outs to electronic crossover (Ev Dx38) onto 2 amps (Crown D75s) and out to the speakers, no AVR amps were used for 2 ch. So just the processing or lack of it was much better with the Pioneer over the Yamaha. This was with no "sound effects" that AVRs can add, I don't like those even for movies. 

 

I liked Yamahas but after hearing something else I won't get another, but it could have been the model? RX V730 still working completely at our daughter's house.

Now to be fair the Yamaha was a little over $500 new back then and a year or so later the Pioneer was $1200 new so it could have been a little better overall?

 

I bought the Yamaha new back then but bought the Pioneer just a couple of years ago, used 100% working for $100. 

 

[Fish]

10 hours ago, Zen Traveler said:

Yeah, and so are the AVRs we are talking about....A lot has changed in the processing/switching and they seem to work efficiently with the amps so I think today is a different ballgame. 

I actually typed a big whoop and deleted it. Long story short, I bought a Denon 4520ci about two years ago. It was like a 2k avr I bought for $800 delivered. It was sounded so bad I thought it was defective. I got another but it was the same, I was really bummed cause it had such great specs and features. If it would have sounded as good as the 38xx I would have kept it.

 

I also had a Yamaha Aventage  some years back, not too impressed, I sold it here for about 1/2 its retail. Since the "digital" age I have not heard one avr that really did it for me. The Rotel and Harman Kardon , Sherwood, were decent. Now don't get me wrong, for general use they all are ok. I have a cheap Onkyo and a lower end Pioneer Elite, both are fine for their use. The Pioneer would be my pick for music. The old Denons were solid good performers and solid real power. They may have even been great for music with other speakers but the 7's really needed more in the preamp departmant. Now that I think about it...I gave the 3803 to my son and some dcm 212's and they sounded pretty good just to hear, don't know about listening.

[glens]

Nobody's mentioning NAD, is there a reason?  If I was shopping for an AVR it'd be the first brand I'd look at.  None of the other brands mentioned would even be considered...

[Max2]

 

16 hours ago, Zen Traveler said:

What specs would that be? 

Well the Denon has a rated THD of .05% @ its rated power output and my amp is .005% THD @ rated and Im guessing its well under that at the low levels I play.  The SNR of my amp is 113db and Im not sure where the actual noise floor is when incorporating its power source on the Denon, but its not close to it.  The pre side on the Denon isn't bad at all, but gaining a few DB on the noise floor will be something I welcome to aide in the blackness.

[Max2]

50 minutes ago, glens said:

Nobody's mentioning NAD, is there a reason?  If I was shopping for an AVR it'd be the first brand I'd look at.  None of the other brands mentioned would even be considered...

I have always liked NAD. Anthem is another that is glossed over, yet we have to consider pricing for all these too.

[Fish]

28 minutes ago, Max2 said:

Anthem is another that is glossed over, yet we have to consider pricing for all these too.

Certainly one anyone that cares about music would look at. Considering it's priced like a higher end Denon or Yamaha etc.....you'd think it would be clearing off the shelfs. Just one of the best avr line ups in it's price range, imo. Buying used would be even better still, maybe 1k or less for sonic bliss, yep....NAD  another good one priced refurb wise.....sounds similar to upper HKs to me.

[Max2]

15 minutes ago, Fish said:

Certainly one anyone that cares about music would look at. Considering it's priced like a higher end Denon or Yamaha etc.....you'd think it would be clearing off the shelfs. Just one of the best avr line ups in it's price range, imo. Buying used would be even better still, maybe 1k or less for sonic bliss, yep....NAD  another good one priced refurb wise.....sounds similar to upper HKs to me.

Even dated refurbs look expensive to me.  Used units are scary in my book. Seen too many sitting on carpeted floors, or a drip or two from a cup sitting on a unit gets on a board, next thing you know you have a hot spot on the board  that will rear its head a year or so later with a dead diode, resistor or cap.  Heck even the new units are a crap shoot anymore. 

[Fish]

 Used don't scare me in the least,or a large number of buyers evidently. I've sold many thousands of $  on this site with never a complaint. I don't think I've ever had a used/refurb unit fail of 20+ I've owned in the last few decades. I sold every one for what I paid or more after using them all I cared to. All the duds I bought were new oddly enough. I bought a used Onkyo 5008 a few years back for $200, with reciept, box, I sure would not pay $2500.Still using it, its 8 or 9 years old plays from 5 or 6 pm till 12 or 1 am 6 days a week for a few years. A sweet Sherwood 972 for $250, not $2k. I have used units 45 years old still rockin . They probably been through worse than sitting on carpet. A used Anthem 5xx, or 7xx under a grand, pretty sweet.

 

There certainly is nothing wrong with new either if that's your thing. These companies need to make money. I just think all this stuff is overpriced new.