AV Receivers - Can't Tell any difference for Music

[thoglette]

I have tried 3x different AV Receivers, and can notice zero difference in the sound QUALITY at normal listening levels.

Fixed it for you.

 

Seriously, AV receivers at any particular price point are all going to have the same flaws and same positives.    Try a NAD 3020 or ME or the McChanson 300B currently for sale and you might see some differences to your me-too AV receivers, depending on your speakers. (See posts from Zaph and others above)

[ufo]

The only way you'll ever get close to 2 channel, close, but not equal, is to spend upwards of 6k or more on an AV Pre/pro. The only way to get the best of one world (Surround) and a great result of the 2nd world of 2 channel.

Look at my sig, that's a system that kicks ass as a home theater and does more than adequate of a job with 2 channel.

Mostly agreed but not on is to spend upwards of 6k or more on an AV Pre/pro . I am extremely happy with my setup using Yammy RX-A5100 which is only $3899 RRP .

I've read so much on US forums people comparing, running full shoot-outs with Yammy CX-A 5000/5100 and Marantz 8801/8802. The conclusion is that the difference is hair splitting.

The price difference between Yammy & Mary in US is not that huge but it is in AU because Yammy has fully established company presence here where as Mary is running thru a third party distributor and they are trying their best to rip off AU.

I suppose, just like Automotive Import/Distribution Industry they think that we have much higher income and can be ripped off based on it if you like it or not

Edited August 18, 2016 by ufo

[ufo]

Hey Chris,

 

Here is a great deal going on at the moment;

 

http://www.dtvforum.info/index.php?/topic/224719-fs-integra-305-avr-rotel-rb-1552-combo/

 

only for $900.

[CMC22]

Hey Chris,

 

Here is a great deal going on at the moment;

 

http://www.dtvforum.info/index.php?/topic/224719-fs-integra-305-avr-rotel-rb-1552-combo/

 

only for $900.

Thanks UFO, I don't have the cash available to purchase at the moment unfortunately. It looks like a good deal however:)

[CMC22]

I am sorry to say, but it does look that all of us trying to give advice are wasting our time.

IMO we have been trying to give the OP some advice, which to date he largely has ignored.

A member told him not to connect a 2 channel amp and an AVR receiver at the same time - he went and did it anyway  . And blew up the AVR. Maybe the 2 channel amp is gone too.

Now he wants to spend more money on the broken AVR to end up with the same problems he have in the first place?  .

When will he learn?

 

@@ChrisMac - an AVR is not designed for 2 channel sound for many reasons. There are some exceptions .

This is an excellent forum if you read what we say and do what we recommend. IMO you are not really listening/reading what we are saying.

We are hamstrung as we can only type and tell you what you think, but I am sorry to say you are on a wild goose chase.

 

At work we call this Talk Straight: You are waisting your and our time by trying to get a Pioneer AVR do things it was not designed to do. 

 

So far we have been quite nice to you, and we do try to be nice on this forum. My apologies if I am bursting a bubble, but you have to read what we say to move forward. Learn from we have said and your mistakes and move on, is that so hard?

 

All the best.

 

I am sorry to say, but it does look that all of us trying to give advice are wasting our time.

IMO we have been trying to give the OP some advice, which to date he largely has ignored.

A member told him not to connect a 2 channel amp and an AVR receiver at the same time - he went and did it anyway  . And blew up the AVR. Maybe the 2 channel amp is gone too.

Now he wants to spend more money on the broken AVR to end up with the same problems he have in the first place?  .

When will he learn?

 

@@ChrisMac - an AVR is not designed for 2 channel sound for many reasons. There are some exceptions .

This is an excellent forum if you read what we say and do what we recommend. IMO you are not really listening/reading what we are saying.

We are hamstrung as we can only type and tell you what you think, but I am sorry to say you are on a wild goose chase.

 

At work we call this Talk Straight: You are waisting your and our time by trying to get a Pioneer AVR do things it was not designed to do. 

 

So far we have been quite nice to you, and we do try to be nice on this forum. My apologies if I am bursting a bubble, but you have to read what we say to move forward. Learn from we have said and your mistakes and move on, is that so hard?

 

All the best.

Hi JVenter,

 

I found this post of yours a bit harsh, and unfair. Its like rubbing salt in a wound with those emoticons. I would appreciate if you would not make fun of me in future please.

 

I HAVE listened to people on this forum. I may not have read every single post, but there are so many posts  (over 200 now) with differing views.

 

I have tried adopting a few lower cost options that have been suggested by various members here to improve the 2x channel sound including:

 

A) Try connecting an external DAC  

B) Try connecting a 2x Channel Power Amplifier

 

The only thing I haven't tried yet is replacing the Pre section (i.e. or getting an integrated 2x channel amp). I don't have the money for this yet.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by 'not listening'. If by 'not listening' you mean that I may not have read every post, or that I need to spend thousands of dollars (which I don't have) on dedicated new 2x channel equipment, then that is not fair. I am listening, and learning quite a lot.

 

I have appreciated all the advice to date

Edited August 18, 2016 by ChrisMac

[CMC22]

LOL...........Why do think it's a gamble?

 

Sounds like a one sided BELTING to me.

 

A stand alone recent/current generation DEDICATED DAC........... vs...........a DAC from an older mid range AVR!!!!!!!

 

I think you are giving your AVR WAY too much credit..................unless you have recently heard some you probably don't realise just how much better DAC's (and associated electronics) have gotten.

 

I would be SHOCKED if you are NOT VERY impressed.  

 

Be sure to post your findings!!!!

Hi JohnL,

 

Unfortunately the Cambridge DAC made no difference to the SQ. So in my case, it was a waste of money and time unfortunately!

[CMC22]

Perhaps....  they both mid-priced consumer electronics.    Whether you should notice an improvement is a complex question.   Have fun.

The Cambridge Dac made no difference. As long as i ran my PS3 via HDMI and used the PS3 dac, or AVR DAC. It was fine.

 

The Samsung TV DAC sounded muddy and crap.

 

I sold it today anyway. so no loss really and I've ruled out the DAC as a source of quality loss for 2x channel!

Edited August 18, 2016 by ChrisMac

[ufo]

The Cambridge Dac made no difference. As long as i ran my PS3 via HDMI and used the PS3 dac, or AVR DAC. It was fine.

 

The Samsung TV DAC sounded muddy and crap.

 

I sold it today anyway. so no loss really and I've ruled out the DAC as a source of quality loss for 2x channel!

I wonder if it is only the DAC or also other digital circuitry on TVs responsible with poor audio performance when hooked up to quality Audio gear?!?

Previously I was coming from my LG smart TV to my AV processor via optical when watching music videos from U tube and sound quality was awful.

Then got an Apple TV and connected that to the same AV Processor and watched the same clips and the improvement in the sound quality was quite considerable.

[MIKE.D79]

Hi again,

 

I have to agree with the above the posts in regards to a 2 channel set up, I initially wanted the same as you with my AVR (more details as I posted before on page 4 post 91) And always used to think  how much different could a dedicated 2 channel be?

 

If you want quality stereo listening, and you already don't seemed two impressed with what you AVR is producing, or you believe there is more to be had from your speakers, then i think an integrated is defo the way to go.

 

even a second hand $165 Denon PMA 750 off ebay (turns out it is in fact quite a well regarded amplifer, although built in 1981) amplifier ran rings around my AVR, it came across a lot smoother, detailed, non fatiguing etc. just seemed to produce the music a lot more harmoniously?

 

My point being, is maybe hold of a while to build up some cash and keep your eye on ebay and gumtree for something to come up, if your TV has an aux out (not even sure if TV's these days have this) you could still run that option to a integrated whilst still having some form surround sound.

 

It's not ideal I know, but considering your AVR is now Cactus it could be the option for you if your not willing to pay to fix it, then later as some others have suggested think about options to integrate an AVR. The Amp switch i mentioned in the post above could be a good option.

 

Mike

[CMC22]

I wonder if it is only the DAC or also other digital circuitry on TVs responsible with poor audio performance when hooked up to quality Audio gear?!?

Previously I was coming from my LG smart TV to my AV processor via optical when watching music videos from U tube and sound quality was awful.

Then got an Apple TV and connected that to the same AV Processor and watched the same clips and the improvement in the sound quality was quite considerable.

So many variables, yes. I don't know. I tried every possible setting on the TV/AVR and in the end couldn't get any sort of improvement. I was wondering the same thing, but fairly confident that its a waste of time in the end.

[betty boop]

Again missed the point selling the Cambridge dac. It wasn't the Cambridge dacs fault !

It's the pre stage in your avr ! You could probably hook up a $10k dac to it prob not make a crackers difference ...

[Guest Sime]

Look, at the end of the day, your at that point of time when there's a huge learning curve. You will be chasing your tail quite a bit until you understand what does what well and dosnt in a system, that suits you.

You'll get to a point when you know what's what and can buy a system that works well even with little auditioning. Of course you need to hear what your buying, but experience will guild you along easier.

The system in my sig was written down on note pad on my phone as to what I wanted and how much I needed to spend to achieve it. This was once I had found the speakers I wanted, the rest was setting up a system to support them.

And if you want results, and good results, you can't be afraid of spending money, even if it takes you 12 months of saving to get the desired result. But you need to learn over time, what works well in systems and what dosnt.

AVRs are your one box solution. They are perfect for what they do, but if you have an ear that exceeds what they produce, well then it's a whole new ball game.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Sime

[JohnL]

Chrismac,

 

 

Sorry buddy but you must be either overdue for a hearing test........... or you made a(nother) connection error.

 

There is NO WAY in a MILLION years that a CA Dacmagic sounds the same as the DAC in your Pioneer AVR!!!

 

Please describe how you connected up and what settings were in play in your AVR.........also how you actually listened when comparing

 

ANYTHING other than a set of I/C's from the DAC to your AVR's analog ins..........and setting Analog Pure Direct on the AVR and all bets are off.

 

You must utilise the CA DAC PROPERLY before claiming that they both sound the same.

 

By the look of how this thread is travelling you have bigger concerns ATM anyway!!!!

 

I stand by my earlier statement and am very interested in your next response.

Edited August 18, 2016 by JohnL

[JohnL]

Betty,

 

 

Agree do a degree.........

 

But surely SOME of the CA's goodness would fight it's way through the AVR's horrors.

 

Still think it would sound better and hereby refuse to compromise.....  

 

You and Sime are spot on anyway regarding AVR "quality"........as I intimated in my Post #93

 

I only first mentioned the DAC option in Post #107 ..............in response to ChrisMac stating a budget of $500!!!!!

Edited August 18, 2016 by JohnL

[Bonecrusher]

Don't worry about it Chris, there is stuff all difference unless your running into distortion . They will keep saying there is to justify there outlay.

[Freedom]

Look, at the end of the day, your at that point of time when there's a huge learning curve. You will be chasing your tail quite a bit until you understand what does what well and dosnt in a system, that suits you.

AVRs are your one box solution. They are perfect for what they do, but if you have an ear that exceeds what they produce, well then it's a whole new ball game.

 

Yep, I'm gradually learning or 'understanding' what does well and what doesn't in a (my) system.

 

AVR's are a good all in one solution, but I am finding they have huge limitations for 'music'. I think it won't be too long before I bit the bullet and get a good '2 channel' amp for music, and leave my AVR for DVDs and TV streaming.

 

I've already bypassed the 'phono' stage in my AVR and bought a nighthawk phono stage, which has made listening to vinyl enjoyable again, to the point of being 'very' comparable to my digital.

 

A decent 2 channel amp will make a huge difference (for music)!

Edited August 18, 2016 by Freedom

[joz]

Well we all have to start somewhere.

 

When I re-entered audio after about a 20 year hiatus it was via an AVR/HT setup. A near top of the line Yamaha AVR with a complement of Whatmough P series speakers.

 

Yep I thought it was pretty good too

 

Anyhow the first thing I added was a power amp (welcome Elektra the power amp) this made a massive improvement but I still knew that my 2 channel was lacking.

 

Next step was a DAC, yep a few $K later and I think I could hear an improvement but in reality it was probably an expensive sideways step.

 

Then finally came the the new pre with HT bypass ( another Elektra component).

 

It was only then that the real value of both the DAC and the power amp came into play.

Now I was listening in a way that I have never before. Now if I removed the DAC it was immediately noticeable and I mean in a bad way.

 

 

Anyhow what I am saying is I have travelled your road, except I didn't blow anything up

So I can offer my view from first hand experience.

 

Don't give up.

[Guest Sime]

I've blown a few tweeters back then, bout it.

[Familyguyhifi]

Chrismac,

 

 

Sorry buddy but you must be either overdue for a hearing test........... or you made a(nother) connection error.

 

There is NO WAY in a MILLION years that a CA Dacmagic sounds the same as the DAC in your Pioneer AVR!!!

 

Please describe how you connected up and what settings were in play in your AVR.........also how you actually listened when comparing

 

ANYTHING other than a set of I/C's from the DAC to your AVR's analog ins..........and setting Analog Pure Direct on the AVR and all bets are off.

 

You must utilise the CA DAC PROPERLY before claiming that they both sound the same.

 

By the look of how this thread is travelling you have bigger concerns ATM anyway!!!!

 

I stand by my earlier statement and am very interested in your next response.

 

I experienced this when I recently purchased a Bluesound Node 2. To test the DAC theory I've been able to run  both a digital and analog out from the node into my Anthem MRX-710.

 

By using the digital out on the NODE; the Node is acting as a streamer only and I'm using the DAC on the Anthem.

 

By using the analog out on the NODE; I'm using the Nodes DAC, and only using the Anthem as a power amp.

 

I've been able to A/B compare the same file (hi-rez audio streamed from a NAS), and I found quite a difference between the Nodes DAC and the Anthem. The DAC in the Node presented a bigger, fuller sound stage. One that I certainly prefer.

 

So all things begin equal, the DAC Magic, set up correctly, should have made a difference to the sound quality coming out of the Pioneer.

[Guest Sime]

@@Familyguyhifi so you liked the Nodes DAC better than the Anthem?

Not a good thing for anthem, being as I dislike the Nodes DAC.

[Familyguyhifi]

@@Sime Yeah, with the current set up the Node 2 does sound better. A bigger and brighter sound is how I would describe it (and I just went and checked to make sure I had it round the right way).

 

Don't get me wrong the Anthem doesn't sound bad by any means, I rate it very highly and I would love to have my system set up in a room properly to really hear the digital input un-encumbered by room constraints (sub tucked away in a cabinet, L-front speaker locked into a corner etc).

[betty boop]

I experienced this when I recently purchased a Bluesound Node 2. To test the DAC theory I've been able to run  both a digital and analog out from the node into my Anthem MRX-710.

 

By using the digital out on the NODE; the Node is acting as a streamer only and I'm using the DAC on the Anthem.

 

By using the analog out on the NODE; I'm using the Nodes DAC, and only using the Anthem as a power amp.

 

I've been able to A/B compare the same file (hi-rez audio streamed from a NAS), and I found quite a difference between the Nodes DAC and the Anthem. The DAC in the Node presented a bigger, fuller sound stage. One that I certainly prefer.

 

So all things begin equal, the DAC Magic, set up correctly, should have made a difference to the sound quality coming out of the Pioneer.

 

 

a good comparison .... says a lot of things really...some to be explored further...

 

now while you'd think gee that doesnt say a lot for the anthem...actually what it tells you straight up... is some good things about the anthem...thats its pre stage is good enough to show difference of using a standalone dac. that says a lot and have always considered anthem as one of those brands nad, rotel, cambridge audio arcam as those that do 2ch and analog side a bit of justice. have to keep in mind the when doing a comparison such as this the analog side and pre stage in the avr is also in play.

 

what I does also say though is you are getting gains with the better dac stage of the bluesound node.... something to explore further because I can tell you the analog out from the node feeding my 2ch rig pales in comparison to feeding digital into a standalone kora dac and analog out into my 2ch rig. so chances are you will get gains with a standalone dac and also a 2ch rig but hey if happy and content wiht things as they are ... so be it

[Familyguyhifi]

@@betty boop Are you sure you weren't in the shop this week when I picked up my C390DD 

 

Seeing the small difference the Node made, made me realise that I need to not put lipstick on the Anthem, but to branch out completely into the 2ch realm and let the anthem shine for what it is.

 

I was able to get the C390 for a great price so I'll be looking to build a 2ch system centred around that.

 

Separate threads to follow asking for speaker recommendations that play nicely with the C390.

[betty boop]

@@betty boop Are you sure you weren't in the shop this week when I picked up my C390DD 

 

Seeing the small difference the Node made, made me realise that I need to not put lipstick on the Anthem, but to branch out completely into the 2ch realm and let the anthem shine for what it is.

 

I was able to get the C390 for a great price so I'll be looking to build a 2ch system centred around that.

 

Separate threads to follow asking for speaker recommendations that play nicely with the C390.

 

 

hehe not in any shops this week !

 

but oh wow there you go ! thats a great step ahead, congrats !  

 

nice piece in the nad !

[Guest Sime]

You should here the difference between a 2Qute and the node, blimey.

The 8801's DACs aren't that great either, compared of course.

Edited August 19, 2016 by Sime