$2000 budget AVR choices

[Lukeqc 6]

Hi.  I have an Audiolab 6000a along with a pair of B&W 603 floor standers. I’m after an AVR, and I’ll be getting the matching 600 series centre and rear speakers at the same time. I don’t mind buying second hand. What are my options with a $2k budget? Obviously I would like to get an atmosphere receiver but the budget is at a bit of stretch. Thoughts?

[hopefullguy 404]

here ?

https://www.excelhifi.com.au/audio-visual-receivers/

[Hytram 308]

+1 for Excel for receivers, I got my rxv1081 from them, refurb, but about 40% off

 

In your range 

https://www.excelhifi.com.au/yamaha-rx-a3080-refurbished.html

[betty boop 15,807]

1 hour ago, Lukeqc said:

Hi.  I have an Audiolab 6000a along with a pair of B&W 603 floor standers. I’m after an AVR, and I’ll be getting the matching 600 series centre and rear speakers at the same time. I don’t mind buying second hand. What are my options with a $2k budget? Obviously I would like to get an atmosphere receiver but the budget is at a bit of stretch. Thoughts?

anything from 2016 onwards. dont buy brand new.... 2nd hand and a few years old will buy something as cutting edge as need and will do all throw at it  

 

$2k should buy something pretty decent am thinking  eg a top end denon or marantz AVR

 

keep a look out in the forsales  

 

 

[Lukeqc 6]

Cool. Thank you. What models of Denon/Marantz/Yamaha should I be looking out for? Is the Yamaha model above a good quality amp?

[betty boop 15,807]

35 minutes ago, Lukeqc said:

Cool. Thank you. What models of Denon/Marantz/Yamaha should I be looking out for? Is the Yamaha model above a good quality amp?

id be trying to get something like the marantz  SR7011 that was a $4k rrp beast  

 

in denons X4400H or maybe even the previous gen X4300H

 

 

 

 

[Lukeqc 6]

Cheers betty boop. The hunt begins!

[Snoopy8 3,530]

Cannot let that cat @betty boop have the only say!  😛 😁 

 

As an alternate, look for the NAD T758V3 which uses Dirac Live room correction. New is over your budget (need to include USD100 for full Dirac license and usb microphone, stand) but second hand will fit under.  Unfortunately, there are no NAD dealers in the west.

 

If you are not familiar with room correction software

 

[Lukeqc 6]

Cheers snoopy. I use IK Arc room correction in my studio space, although that was after spending a heap of time treating the room and getting the mix position right. I have already conceded defeat in regards to acoustics in my theatre space. It was a pain to do it once... but you have me thinking along those lines again. I could definitely get the room sounding better than what it is at the moment. 
 

Regardless of room correction, does the NAD perform as good as the Marantz SR7011?

[Snoopy8 3,530]

1 hour ago, Lukeqc said:

Cheers snoopy. I use IK Arc room correction in my studio space, although that was after spending a heap of time treating the room and getting the mix position right. I have already conceded defeat in regards to acoustics in my theatre space. It was a pain to do it once... but you have me thinking along those lines again. I could definitely get the room sounding better than what it is at the moment. 
 

Regardless of room correction, does the NAD perform as good as the Marantz SR7011?

Am using NAD T758V3 in family room, performs well. Room correction, plus well integrated dual subs has been the saviour in my shared environment, impossible to do room treatment.  The NAD has decent power with a 7 X 60W, all channels simultaneously driven (most others fudge this by using misleading 2 channel power specs). The T777V3 has more power and more HDMI ports but if you do not need the extra power and ports, then the T758V3 is a value for money AVR.

 

BluOS is excellent and easy to use, a bonus I did not expect. While the NAD (& some AVRs) is ok with music, it is better to use an Integrated Amp or Preamp with HT bypass for stereo.

 

Have not compared with Marantz.

[Soundfever 109]

How about this one for $1829?

 

https://www.digitalcinema.com.au/denon-avr-x3600h-9-2-channel-home-theatre-av-receiver.html

[MaxPlumage 103]

Second the x3600h.

It's part of Denon's 70% power guarantee usually reserved for Marantz. Basically they guarantee 70% of watts delivered of 2ch specs, when all 5ch are driven.

The other thing about this Denon is that it disengages the power amp when using preamp out in 11.1 ch. amp assign mode, making it a 'pure' preamp for L&R - i.e. no noise from the amp gets into the preouts.

If you can, grab this one.

[Lukeqc 6]

ok. Cheers guys. I’ll add the Denon to the list

[Snoopy8 3,530]

On 04/11/2019 at 8:43 PM, MaxPlumage said:

It's part of Denon's 70% power guarantee usually reserved for Marantz. Basically they guarantee 70% of watts delivered of 2ch specs, when all 5ch are driven.

I am sorry to say that this is marketing spin, designed to make owners feel good.  If 70% was real, they would be publishing in the specs for 5 channel driven.  Let me use a Marantnz SR6014 as an example of how marketing spins the story and how it compares with an Arcam AVR390, costing twice as much.

 

The Marantnz SR6014 screenshots used were taken from here

https://www.qualifi.com.au/media_content/media/product-info-marantz-sr6014.pdf

Note the 185W is 6 ohm at 1 kHz, 1%THD 1 Channel driven.  The 110W is the most realistic number and for 2 channels only.  And they do not publish a 5 channels driven number.  If the marketing spin of 70% guarantee was correct, it would be producing 77W for 5 channels at unknown THD.

Note that 185W was used as the first line in the highlights.  WOW, look how much power it can produce

 

Interestingly, Qualfi used the 110W number on their website page

 

The total power consumption is 680W.  With 9 channels at 50% efficiency for a Class A/B amp, this works to 38W per channel.  Now IF they are using Class D amps, which they would likely trumpet in their spec sheets (but I did not see it), efficiency would be 80%, making the number 61W.  This is still lower than the 70% guarantee of 77W.

 

Let's contrast it with the Arcam AVR 390, their lowest model capable of only 7 channels. Screen shots taken from

https://www.arcam.co.uk/products,FMJ,AV-Receiver,avr390.htm#techspecs

Note the 7 channels number producing a measly 60W.

What a power hog this box is and must cost a lot of money to run.  If you divide the 1,500W by 7 channels at 50%

it would be 107W.  

 

There is a reason why the Arcam cost twice as much as the Marantz and the clue is in the amps and how much power it can produce.  Many companies publish misleading power numbers.  Use the multiple channels driven if available.  Otherwise, use the total power consumption as a better indicator of how much power an AVR can produce.

-----------------

 

I hope this explains what to look for when selecting an AVR.  And I am indeed sorry to deflate the various owners...

Edited November 6, 2019 by Snoopy8
Typo, messed up formatting

[MaxPlumage 103]

I am sorry to say that this is marketing spin, designed to make owners feel good.  If 70% was real, they would be publishing in the specs for 5 channel driven.  Let me use a Marantnz SR6014 as an example of how marketing spins the story and how it compares with an Arcam AVR390, costing twice as much.
 
The Marantnz SR6014 screenshots used were taken from here
https://www.qualifi.com.au/media_content/media/product-info-marantz-sr6014.pdf

Note the 185W is 6 ohm at 1 kHz, 1%THD 1 Channel driven.  The 110W is the most realistic number and for 2 channels only.  And they do not publish a 5 channels driven number.  If the marketing spin of 70% guarantee was correct, it would be producing 77W for 5 channels at unknown THD.


Note that 185W was used as the first line in the highlights.  WOW, look how much power it can produce
 

Interestingly, Qualfi used the 110W number on their website page
 

The total power consumption is 680W.  With 9 channels at 50% efficiency for a Class A/B amp, this works to 38W per channel.  Now IF they are using Class D amps, which they would likely trumpet in their spec sheets (but I did not see it), efficiency would be 80%, making the number 61W.  This is still lower than the 70% guarantee of 77W.
 
Let's contrast it with the Arcam AVR 390, their lowest model capable of only 7 channels. Screen shots taken from
https://www.arcam.co.uk/products,FMJ,AV-Receiver,avr390.htm#techspecs

Note the 7 channels number producing a measly 60W.


What a power hog this box is and must cost a lot of money to run.  If you divide the 1,500W by 7 channels at 50%
it would be 107W.  
 
There is a reason why the Arcam cost twice as much as the Marantz and the clue is in the amps and how much power it can produce.  Many companies publish misleading power numbers.  Use the multiple channels driven if available.  Otherwise, use the total power consumption as a better indicator of how much power an AVR can produce.
-----------------
 
I hope this explains what to look for when selecting an AVR.  And I am indeed sorry to deflate the various owners...

Thanks snoopy for your insights as always. I am sure there is some level of marketing. I got my information from here, which is very compelling though. Infact I'd highly recommend the op to check the article and video at:

https://www.audioholics.com/av-receiver-reviews/denon-avr-x3600h

To quote a particular paragraph of interest:

"....In the case of the AVR-X3600H, Denon has it listed as featuring discrete high-current amplifiers on all channels delivering 105W per channel (8 ohms, 20Hz-20kHz, THD: 0.08%, 2 Ch. driven). In fact, Denon claims their latest AVR lineup also meets the 70% power guarantee found on Marantz AV receivers. In this case, the AVR-X3600H is guaranteed to deliver 73.5 watts/ch with 5CH driven.
Denon engineering supplied us with their test data for the AVR-X3600H showing it was able to deliver 81.9 watts/ch with 5CH driven into 8 ohm loads. How's that for exceeding ones specs?..."

The last few lines really got my attention.

In any case for what it's worth, I hope you find it useful

[betty boop 15,807]

6 minutes ago, MaxPlumage said:

n the case of the AVR-X3600H, Denon has it listed as featuring discrete high-current amplifiers on all channels delivering 105W per channel (8 ohms, 20Hz-20kHz, THD: 0.08%, 2 Ch. driven). In fact, Denon claims their latest AVR lineup also meets the 70% power guarantee found on Marantz AV receivers. In this case, the AVR-X3600H is guaranteed to deliver 73.5 watts/ch with 5CH driven.
Denon engineering supplied us with their test data for the AVR-X3600H showing it was able to deliver 81.9 watts/ch with 5CH driven into 8 ohm loads. How's that for exceeding ones specs?..."

The last few lines really got my attention.

In any case for what it's worth, I hope you find it useful

Makes sense doesn’t it ? 

 

5x 73.5= 367.5w but firstly it’s not a 5ch amp its supposed to be a 9.2 Ch amp

 

2ndly that 73,5w x 5 is flat out isn’t it likely cranked to max nothing left in reserve. Not even considering other amp ch load ...

 

with av amps you want dynamic range power reserves... which is where power amps come in with much bigger power supplies and better heat sinking and not trying to drive so many channels. Most more honestly specd and drive typically 2-5-7 ch max

[Lukeqc 6]

It looks like shopping for an avr can quickly turn into a numbers game. I am using a 50w 2ch Audiolab 6000a to drive a pair of B&W 603’s and I haven’t maxed out volume, nor noticed lost information at higher levels of listening. 
 

I feel that a true 50w per channel will be more than enough for my requirements (if we are comparing apples with apples)

 

I know that most manufacturers inflate power output figures when it comes to amp specs, but is it more so in avr’s than 2ch audio?

[MaxPlumage 103]

Makes sense doesn’t it ? 
 
5x 73.5= 367.5w but firstly it’s not a 5ch amp its supposed to be a 9.2 Ch amp [emoji3]
 
2ndly that 73,5w x 5 is flat out isn’t it likely cranked to max nothing left in reserve. Not even considering other amp ch load ...
 
with av amps you want dynamic range power reserves... which is where power amps come in with much bigger power supplies and better heat sinking and not trying to drive so many channels. Most more honestly specd and drive typically 2-5-7 ch max [emoji4]

Cheers Betty. Despite not being rated for 9 ch, would you agree though they're being honest with their 5ch/70% 2ch rating?

[betty boop 15,807]

4 minutes ago, Lukeqc said:

It looks like shopping for an avr can quickly turn into a numbers game. I am using a 50w 2ch Audiolab 6000a to drive a pair of B&W 603’s and I haven’t maxed out volume, nor noticed lost information at higher levels of listening. 
 

I feel that a true 50w per channel will be more than enough for my requirements (if we are comparing apples with apples)

 

I know that most manufacturers inflate power output figures when it comes to amp specs, but is it more so in avr’s than 2ch audio?

You’ll note a 200w supply on your audio lab to support the 2x50w claim sec. this is honest and conservative power rating.

 

will find 2ch amps even from other makers being discussed here similarly rated. It’s just that with Avrs all that goes out window

 

its also not the wattage but quality of that power and will find with makes talked about here it to comes down to getting what pay for and claims are more sustained as tend to go up the tree

[MaxPlumage 103]

It looks like shopping for an avr can quickly turn into a numbers game. I am using a 50w 2ch Audiolab 6000a to drive a pair of B&W 603’s and I haven’t maxed out volume, nor noticed lost information at higher levels of listening. 
 
I feel that a true 50w per channel will be more than enough for my requirements (if we are comparing apples with apples)
 
I know that most manufacturers inflate power output figures when it comes to amp specs, but is it more so in avr’s than 2ch audio?

Yep I tend to agree. Most won't crank up the volume that high and in any case the difference in dB between 50w and 70w is miniscule...

[betty boop 15,807]

1 minute ago, MaxPlumage said:

 

 

Cheers Betty. Despite not being rated for 9 ch, would you agree though they're being honest with their 5ch/70% 2ch rating?

 

Honest to the 5ch 

 

but it really it’s a bull dust rating. What it admits is they’ve been called out ... but we’ve been seeing through this already for years with the max consumption ... these amps can’t suply more than they consume. 

[MaxPlumage 103]

I suppose the other side of the equation is speaker sensitivity and variable impedance. Those same 50 watts mean more if you have sensitive speakers

[Snoopy8 3,530]

14 minutes ago, MaxPlumage said:

Thanks snoopy for your insights as always. I am sure there is some level of marketing. I got my information from here, which is very compelling though. Infact I'd highly recommend the op to check the article and video at:

https://www.audioholics.com/av-receiver-reviews/denon-avr-x3600h

To quote a particular paragraph of interest:

"....In the case of the AVR-X3600H, Denon has it listed as featuring discrete high-current amplifiers on all channels delivering 105W per channel (8 ohms, 20Hz-20kHz, THD: 0.08%, 2 Ch. driven). In fact, Denon claims their latest AVR lineup also meets the 70% power guarantee found on Marantz AV receivers. In this case, the AVR-X3600H is guaranteed to deliver 73.5 watts/ch with 5CH driven.
Denon engineering supplied us with their test data for the AVR-X3600H showing it was able to deliver 81.9 watts/ch with 5CH driven into 8 ohm loads. How's that for exceeding ones specs?..."

The last few lines really got my attention.

In any case for what it's worth, I hope you find it useful

Thank you. If those numbers were so good, why aren't they being published in their specs? Why resort to the silly 1 channel driven number as the opening power highlight in my earlier example?

 

Wow, more power per channel, cheaper to buy and at the same time, lower power consumption. A marketing heaven!

 

Something does not gel??? 

[cwt 1,022]

4 hours ago, Snoopy8 said:

Thank you. If those numbers were so good, why aren't they being published in their specs? Why resort to the silly 1 channel driven number as the opening power highlight in my earlier example?

Love to see a 9ch driven figure ; but they would probably give it a 6  or 4ohm load to bump the figure and hang the high THD figure  Marketing would be apoplectic anyway 🤢

[MaxPlumage 103]

Thank you. If those numbers were so good, why aren't they being published in their specs? Why resort to the silly 1 channel driven number as the opening power highlight in my earlier example?
 
Wow, more power per channel, cheaper to buy and at the same time, lower power consumption. A marketing heaven!
 
Something does not gel??? 

True snoopy. We do have a long way to go before honest/transparent power ratings start showing up. I hope this is at least a (very small) step in the right direction...

To contrast some manufacturers were pushing 200w per ch at 1ch, 6 Ohm, 1KHz ratings at .9% distortion. Now that's really bad given most AVR buyers will look at power first (and maybe the number of stickers!) ... so this is a good place to be at today, but agree we have some ways to go....

[Snoopy8 3,530]

2 minutes ago, MaxPlumage said:

True snoopy. We do have a long way to go before honest/transparent power ratings start showing up. I hope this is at least a (very small) step in the right direction...

To contrast some manufacturers were pushing 200w per ch at 1ch, 6 Ohm, 1KHz ratings at .9% distortion. Now that's really bad given most AVR buyers will look at power first (and maybe the number of stickers!) ... so this is a good place to be at today, but agree we have some ways to go....

At least people here are starting to learn how to read the numbers... 

[Hi-Fi Whipped 1,145]

• 1800w Max Power Consumption
• 170W RMS /ch (2ch driven @ 8 ohm)
• 120W RMS /ch (all 7ch driven @ 8ohms)

No distortion figures but that's the basic Cambridge CXR200 figures hence why I brought it. That said it looks like the days of the powerful Cambridge AVR are numbered, they've archived both AVRs from their website and I can't find any details about new models coming out.

[hopefullguy 404]

isnt this getting off what op was asking about? not everyone wants  100- 200w per channel separates to run what is basically rear + atmos effects speakers. op has his main 5 speakers covered.

 

i highly doubt in a home HT room a mid level avr can not power those mentioned speakers... 2 rears+2 atmos or 2 rears+ 4 atmos. yes avr figures are fudged but with normal 6/8 ohm speakers at say 90db sensitivity how many watts do they actually need?

 

if people want excess watts then good for them, avrs are for people that want to hear the movie not study, graph and dissect the sound. as for the B.S. power figures well thats life.. do you believe every piece of advertising you see/read?

 

my denon 4311 powers 6 of my 9 speakers fine, rotel runs front stage. dont really need to care about the output if you stick to mid/upper level avr for the "lesser" speakers . but we all have our own thinking.. op?

[Hi-Fi Whipped 1,145]

58 minutes ago, hopefullguy said:

isnt this getting off what op was asking about? not everyone wants  100- 200w per channel separates to run what is basically rear + atmos effects speakers. op has his main 5 speakers covered.

 

i highly doubt in a home HT room a mid level avr can not power those mentioned speakers... 2 rears+2 atmos or 2 rears+ 4 atmos. yes avr figures are fudged but with normal 6/8 ohm speakers at say 90db sensitivity how many watts do they actually need?

 

if people want excess watts then good for them, avrs are for people that want to hear the movie not study, graph and dissect the sound. as for the B.S. power figures well thats life.. do you believe every piece of advertising you see/read?

 

my denon 4311 powers 6 of my 9 speakers fine, rotel runs front stage. dont really need to care about the output if you stick to mid/upper level avr for the "lesser" speakers . but we all have our own thinking.. op?

I dont think so, the OP is looking to purchase an AVR and I would say with all of the contributions here he is now much better placed to understand what he is buying than before he posted. 

[Lukeqc 6]

After looking at reviews, I think the Marantz sr6014 is a goer. Is the Marantz a quality amp with good features and enough grunt at a reasonable price?

[Hi-Fi Whipped 1,145]

2 hours ago, Lukeqc said:

After looking at reviews, I think the Marantz sr6014 is a goer. Is the Marantz a quality amp with good features and enough grunt at a reasonable price?

You've got all the info here to make a sensible decision and if you think its the Marantz, buy the Marantz!

[Lukeqc 6]

22 minutes ago, Hi-Fi Whipped said:

You've got all the info here to make a sensible decision and if you think its the Marantz, buy the Marantz!

Is that insinuating that the Marantz isn’t the best option?

[betty boop 15,807]

2 hours ago, Lukeqc said:

After looking at reviews, I think the Marantz sr6014 is a goer. Is the Marantz a quality amp with good features and enough grunt at a reasonable price?

be nicer if can get in the 7 . instead of brand new 6014 i woudl look older gen 7011 as indicated, will miss out on nothing, will do everything throw at it. but in end if cant find a 7 series at budget and all that fits is 6 series so be it. they will be close and no doubt be happy  

[Hi-Fi Whipped 1,145]

23 minutes ago, Lukeqc said:

Is that insinuating that the Marantz isn’t the best option?

Not at all, I don’t have any experience with it, But if I was spending over $2k I’d be using more than reviews to make the decision at the very least.

[Lukeqc 6]

Ok no worries. More research needed. Cheers. 
 

haven’t seen a 7011 come up anywhere Betty 😩

[Neo 941]

 Neo

[Lukeqc 6]

Thank you for the heads up Neo. Legend

 

 

How does the onkyo stack up against the older Marantz that I’m looking for?

[Neo 941]

2 hours ago, Lukeqc said:

Thank you for the heads up Neo. Legend

 

 

How does the onkyo stack up against the older Marantz that I’m looking for?

Way above my knowledge on that one, but give a call to oztheatre and discuss with them. I suspect that you will be very close to the latest spec on this avr, compared to the older marantz that you are considering.  On the flip side when you upgrade later on a large portion of the depreciation already happened. 
I wouldn’t really wait for the feed back in here as more than likely it’s just one unit at a considerable saving.

Double check that it’s got proper manufacturers warranty and enjoy

Neo

 

ps: with avr almost every year they bring out sometimes new as a feature, then you are out of spec so to speak with the trend. Grab one at a considerable savings and enjoy what it has to offer as an avr as a whole, rather than the chase for being up to date.

Edited November 27, 2019 by Neo

[betty boop 15,807]

27 minutes ago, Neo said:

ps: with avr almost every year they bring out sometimes new as a feature, then you are out of spec so to speak with the trend. Grab one at a considerable savings and enjoy what it has to offer as an avr as a whole, rather than the chase for being up to date.

this as i mentioned to OP honestly I am running a 2015-6 av processor and not missing anything in fripperies they do with updates. for sound and capabilities i can chuck anything at it from any source disc to streaming. 

 

re onkyo just keep in mind EQ wise they dropped audyssey for some home brewed thing that isnt upto level audyssey achieves.  this was really to cut cost and save on processing needs on onkyos part. 

 

there is no need to buy latest and greatest...as long as buy something thats a 2016 model and later. buy 2nd hand and older if possible to save some bucks

[cwt 1,022]

4 hours ago, Lukeqc said:

Thank you for the heads up Neo. Legend

 

 

How does the onkyo stack up against the older Marantz that I’m looking for?

Its a case of the quick and the dead sometimes Luke ; the Onkyo is gone already [was a bargain in some ways as it had a 11ch amp for the full 7.1.4 atmos/dts-x rather than a 9ch amp for others] - not that it was very powerful  . The important difference to look for with avr's feature wise is the hdmi version as you want something that will handle 4k  @ 18gbps so high frame rates and HDR can pass through ..

 

The later Marantz and others have this bandwidth -hdmi 2.0a or b as has been mentioned