Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Most Musical HT Receiver

Out of the following, which one is the most musical? I am leaning twords the Denon at the moment..

Harmon Kardon AVR-125
Outlaw Audio 1050
Denon 1803

Any other suggestions? Nothing more than 500 bucks please

If the CD or whatever you're playing is "musical", any properly designed amp or receiver will be equally so. Don't get caught up in the music/HT nonsense. Also consider the Kenwood 6070 and Marantz 5300.

well I have a kenwood now and I can't stand the thing..that's why Im upgrading...
you mean the receiver doesn't affect sound at all?

I'm almost certain that the Outlaw will be the best performer on that list for music, judging from everything I've read on various web sites. Marantz is also a brand worth considering.

The most musical receivers (not counting the megabuck B&K units) are the Arcam AVR100 and AVR200 by a runaway margin. Neither have 6.1 processing or component switching, but the music performance is night-and-day better than a Denon or Yamaha unit.

AMD,
I echo JohnK's opinion.

With the equipment you are looking at, it is unlikely you would hear any significant difference between those receivers.
Differences between speakers is usually apparent to almost anyone. However, differences between electronics so close in design will not likely be distinguishable by the usual home users (if at all) unless you were using some very high tech measuring equipment.
If you want some warm and sludgy sounding music, buy some Bose speakers instead of the Axioms. The speaker change will produce a far different 'musical' sound than swapping between any of those 3 receivers you mentioned.

I too say you won't hear any difference between the two.

AMD, an amp or receiver doesn't care whether the information it's been given is music, speech, explosions, or whatever; if it amplifies one accurately, it'll do the same for the others.

I began to wonder if your receiver had developed a defect, but then I read your other thread. If the sound on movies is in fact "very good", that indicates that the DVD player, receiver and speakers aren't the problem. If the music isn't good, then that's because the music coming into the receiver isn't good.

CD's blow. Boycott music until a reasonably priced alternative with quality recording and media is available at more than one worthwhile song per disc.

I just did a side by side comparison between a 320Kbps rip of the Donnie Darko remake of Mad World and the one on the DVD extras. To my ears the quality was exactly the same...I should try this again, with a 128 rip. What receiver would you guys get in terms of features and bang for the buck?

Yes, that's a better question. For features and bang for the buck it's not likely that you'll be able to beat the Kenwood 6070, a THX certified receiver with all the bells and whistles except on screen display, and which you can get for around $400.

The Kenword probably has the most features at that price range. The Denon would probably be second in my mind, but I'm horribly biased in that regard.

Prioritize what's important to you feature wise and scale back with that. They'll all basically sound the same.

I purchased the Denon 1803 in December 2002. I use it with my M22ti's, VP100,QS4,and EP175 the sound is amazing, both for music and movies. Good Luck on your search. I paid $683 Canadian for it.

Repectfully disagree that choice of receiver does not make a material difference re sound quality. I've had a bunch and can comment from personal experience. First off, best bang for the buck is the Panasonic SAHE200 - incredible for home theater or two channel music. I had a Harmon Kardon AVR 65, very nice, replaced it with an HK 320. Returned it. Currently have an Onkyo 797 (THX), a Sony STRDB 1070, Pioneer SX850 and Antique Sound Labs MG S1 15DT - do these units sound different? Yes they do. Each of my systems includes Axiom like Michaura speakers (M60 type, M50 type and M22 type) and each has driven Axiom M50s, M22s, and M3s.

Of the receivers you mentioned, I'd get the Outlaw 1050, but for the money, I'd get the Panasonic. Alternatively, I'd consider the Onkyo, Denon, Sony ES - (I'd avoid Pioneer a once great brand), Marantz, Kenwood 6070, didn't like the Sherwood 7090.

Your source is very important to your system's sound quality. My best sounding system is a 2 channel 5 watt per channel tube integrated amp driven by an Ah! Njoe Tjoeb (modified with Ediswan tubes, direkt power kord, Burr Brown OPA 627s) pushing a pair of M66s (similar to the M50s) and a Velodyne 8" sub.

My next favorite source is a Toshiba SD9200 DVD Audio player hooked up with an Onkyo 797. I use an Outlaw ICBM-1 bass management unit between the DVD A player and receiver, stereo subwoofers (Klipsch 1640 watt LF10 and Velodyne CHT100), M60 type fronts, Merak MC6H center with Radio Shack super tweeter, M50 type side surrounds and Mission 77ds back surrounds (driven by an outboard Denon PMA500V amp soon to be replaced by a vintage Kenwood KA9100).

The office system has a Philips SACD 1000 player, a Sony STRDB1070 receiver, another Merak MC6H center, 4 M22 type speakers and a Dahlquist PDQ1500 15" sub.

They're all sweet, all different. For knock your socks off HT power and DVD Audio dazzle, the Onkyo/Toshiba DVDA system, for kicking back and getting lost in sweet, sweet music, the 5 watt tube amp/Ah! CDP combo.

As for speakers, well friends, your Axioms are IMHO the best speakers for the money out there. What you hook them up to matters.

In reply to:

---

Repectfully disagree that choice of receiver does not make a material difference re sound quality.

---

We were specifically talking about the "musical" comment. If a receiver does fine with HT, it will do fine with music. An amp's purpose is to take the PCM stream from whatever source, and add enough power to drive the speaker. It doesn't care if it's a movie or an opera.

Hello Semi-on
My Onkyo does a wonderful job with both music and HT. The Sony system appears to have more 'slam' in HT and HT sounds great but is not as musical. I had a Technics 5x100 watts SADX940 which I picked up for a song to hold me over until I chose a tube amp. That Technics was unbelievably musical, maybe the most musical of all the HT receivers I've used including some which cost more than 5 times as much. That's why I recommended the Panasonic so highly. Just a thought.

I would describe the AVR125 as musical. Their dual power supply design packed with massive amperage makes them sound closer to pre-amp/power amp combos rather than a receiver. I also find their D/A convertors more open sounding and with better stereo imaging that what I have encountered with similar priced receivers. I can appreciate that someone with a good ear has put a lot of effort into it.
I have never heard the Outlaw receiver though but have heard very good things about the sound quality.

In reply to:

---

The Sony system appears to have more 'slam' in HT and HT sounds great but is not as musical.

---

That's because very little music goes down to 20Hz where you get the rumbling feeling. Most music stays up around 40-60Hz which should "slam" you at all. When was the last time you saw a live concert where you felt "slammed"?

In reply to:

---

That Technics was unbelievably musical, maybe the most musical of all the HT receivers I've used including some which cost more than 5 times as much.

---

Define this. How exactly does a musical signal differ from a movie one in order to make one receiver good at movies but not as much so at music.

Actually, the 'slam,' I enjoy in the Sony is more noticeable for HT and even digital cable TV modes than in music mode (DVD, CD or SACD). At first, I thought this quality was attributable to the Merak MC6H (2 x 6.5" drivers and a 7" x 3" horn tweeter). I picked up another for my Onkyo/Toshiba system, and note that the Sony system still has more 'slam.'

Well, as to the musicality (in 2 channel mode) of the Technics SADX 940, I suppose I could describe it as low noise floor, airy, open highs, excellent soundstage (large, high and wide), lack of compression during busy orchestral pieces, sweet accurate midrange and strong, tight bass. As to each of these qualities, the Technics is superior to the Sherwood 7090, for example, and although I used a different source, I think it's superior to the Sony STRDB 1070 as well. (the Sony's source is the Philips SACD 1070, so it is a high quality source.) The Technics demonstrated these qualities with both an 8 year old JVC CD changer (garage sale value of about $10) and an Ah! Njoe Tjoeb with Burr Brown OPA 627s, direkt power kord and upgraded Ediswan British (1964) CV2492/5358 tubes (total about $1000). Interestingly, I tried and returned the well reviewed Cambridge Audio D500SE which had blowsy bass, poor sound staging and other shortcomings.

I suppose the bottom line is the source and amplification of your system allows your speakers to reach their potential. Garbage in, garbage out ...

These are just my opinions, if you think equipment doesn't matter, or that equipment which does a good job with HT will automatically do a good job with music, you're entitled to your own opinions.

In reply to:

---

Actually, the 'slam,' I enjoy in the Sony is more noticeable for HT and even digital cable TV modes than in music mode (DVD, CD or SACD). At first, I thought this quality was attributable to the Merak MC6H (2 x 6.5" drivers and a 7" x 3" horn tweeter). I picked up another for my Onkyo/Toshiba system, and note that the Sony system still has more 'slam.'

---

Right. As I said, music doesn't go down that low so it shouldn't (I see there was a typo in that one word) slam you much at all. Musical instruments simply don't play that low. Which is why you experience more slam in movies.

In reply to:

---

Well, as to the musicality (in 2 channel mode) of the Technics SADX 940, I suppose I could describe it as low noise floor, airy, open highs, excellent soundstage (large, high and wide), lack of compression during busy orchestral pieces, sweet accurate midrange and strong, tight bass. As to each of these qualities, the Technics is superior to the Sherwood 7090, for example, and although I used a different source, I think it's superior to the Sony STRDB 1070 as well. (the Sony's source is the Philips SACD 1070, so it is a high quality source.) The Technics demonstrated these qualities with both an 8 year old JVC CD changer (garage sale value of about $10) and an Ah! Njoe Tjoeb with Burr Brown OPA 627s, direkt power kord and upgraded Ediswan British (1964) CV2492/5358 tubes (total about $1000). Interestingly, I tried and returned the well reviewed Cambridge Audio D500SE which had blowsy bass, poor sound staging and other shortcomings.

---

And these traits are not desireable in a movie theater how? All you've described is a quality reproduction system and not anything specifically musical. Movies would benefit just as much from this making your claims that some receivers are more "musical" a little dubious.

I didn't post to argue with you. I thought you were actually curious. My mistake. I didn't realize you already have all the answers. If you need to find music which goes down to 20 Hz, just ask around.

Hi Folks,

I do not wish to solicit a flame war, but have to say that music materials do readily go down to the 20Hz realm. And they do without any syth or electronic sources. The base tone for the lowest key of a piano is 27.5Hz (4 octaves down from the 440Hz "A"). A large organ will go at least 1/2 to full 1 octave further down. And this is so far considering "tonal" instruments only. Enter the purcussion; a large bass drum or gong will readily produce sound components down to well below human audible limits.

Cheers!

Oops, forgot to include my own question... LOL

It seems that opinions on the Pioneer Elite receivers are divided. Some seem to value the MCCAC feature, while others say it is mediocre even as a "starting point" setter. Some warn on the lack of power reserve and inability to properly drive 4-ohm loads, while others say that this has been fixed in firmware in recent shipments. Some are worried about Pioneers running so hot, while others say other brands can also get quite hot (I do know that Pioneer recommends a very generous clearance, like 1', above the receiver for heat dissipation).

Pioneer's VSX-45TX is one of the candidates I am considering to purchase for my new 5.1 system. But somebody suggested to me that a Denon or H/K might be a better choice, especially given that my Hales is rated 4 ohm.

So... what is the update on Pioneer's reputation, and what are the best-buys under $1,000 street in your opinion?

First,sushi, on MCACC(Multi Channel ACoustic Calibration),although I haven't tried it, my impression is that the great majority of reports from owners is highly favorable. It would seem that if even a partial correction of response irregularities caused by the listening room and/or speakers can be achieved with so little bother, that it's a worthwhile addition to a receiver. It should be noted that Pioneer announced at last month's CES that 3 of their new line of lower cost receivers(out in March)would have MCACC, including a microphone for automatic operation on the 912( 6 X 110 watts; probably $300-$350 street price).

On the 4ohm question, I suppose that we've read the same reports and they're so conflicting that I don't know what to make of them. The technical reason given for the rumored "fix" a couple weeks ago made no sense to me. I'd be inclined to give it a try. In roughly the same price range the Denon 3803 and Sony DA4ES would also be fine choices(wonder about the loud fan reports on the HK525).

I was looking at Pioneers last year before i bought my Onkyo.
Sound quality aside, the specs for the Pioneer top model (MSRP $4000Cdn) were rated for 6 ohms and up.
I was downright shocked that their flagship model was not listed as supporting 4 ohm speakers for that much cash.

In having a former roomate that owned a Pioneer, and having gone into a shop to look at a VSX 39TX, i can attest to the generous heat output of their receivers.
These two qualities alone made me question the build quality of Pioneer receivers.

Then the final straw. i received a bad review from one of the local electronics gurus here (not a salesman) who also had a rather negative comment on the Pioneer receiver build quality, basically something to do with inadequate amps and heatsinks. I won't go looking for Pioneer receivers again until i start hearing (and reading) better things.

All that aside, i think Pioneer receivers sound just fine and i have seen them drive 4 ohm speakers before, but hey, my Onkyo does the same thing, for the same price, but virtually without any heat.
I believe Denons fall into the same, low heat category, although there have been a couple of posts about H/K also running rather warm.
If you are looking for under 1k, i do suggest you take a look at the Denon, Yamaha and Onkyo offerings.

Well... I did a bit of research on the power consumption specs of several receivers in the price range of under $1,000 street.

Obviously, a receiver can never send the speakers a higher (continuous) total wattage than the wattage it gets from the AC line. So, I figured that the rated AC power consumption of a receiver would likely give us some insights into its "power reserve" and aspects of design philosophy. Of course, this is under the assumption that the manufacturers are fairly honest about the AC power specs (which I guess they must be because of safety regulations). So, here are some results:

Denon AVR-3803: 566W** / 7.0A

H/K AVR-7200: 1040W / 12.9A**

Onkyo TX-SR800: 655W / 8.1A

Pioneer VSX-45TX: 600W / 7.4A**

** Presumptive calculated values based on Onkyo's specs, which list both wattage and amperage (since the power transformer in an amp is not a purely resistive load, you cannot get wattage by simply multiplying amperage by voltage). All amperages are at 120V AC.


Assuming that these listed and calculated values are not grossly different from the real maximum power consumption of these receivers, it is quite interesting to look at these numbers. For example, the Denon appears to have the lowest maximum power consumption, despite the fact that it is rated at 110W x 7 (all others are rated 100W x 7) and despite its reputation of good power reserve. If these numbers are correct, the Denon cannot possibly feed more than ~560W of total continuous power to the speakers.

H/K's numbers are striking. I also found that this receiver is listed to consume as much as 120W when idle (powered on, but no signal). My guess is that H/K's final stage uses a relatively "shallow" design of Class AB operation (i.e., closer to Class A design, with lots of shunt currents), which might provide some benefits on sound quality and dynamic power handling. Anyway, no wonder the H/K has a reputation of running quite warm even when idle. By the way, will the 7200 have a cooling fan?

How about the Pioneer? Considering these numbers in conjunction with Pioneer's reputation of also running quite warm (again, probably reflecting a shallow Class AB final-stage design), I would have to agree with some folk's claims of its relatively anemic power reserve.

Just my 2 cents...

One very important thing to consider when it comes to electronics......HEAT. It is a very simple formula. Less heat=longer life. You don't have to be Bob Carver to understand this principle. I simply would not purchase any receiver (no matter how great it sounded etc.) that runs noticeably hot.

Hi Mike,

Yes, I agree with your "less heat=longer life" thought, but only with everything else being equal. And I want to believe that the engineers at whatever brand that runs hot know that much.

When it comes to the issue of an amp's heat handling, I think we have to consider two different things:

(1) How much heat is, by design, generated by the power-stage transistors (and other components), at various power output levels.

(2) How well the generated heat is dissipated.

I do not have any hard data here, so the following is all my speculation (something I really don't like ). But I just cannot believe that the differences in the operating case-surface temperature is all ascribed to (2), i.e., a severely inferior heat-dissipation design in the hot-running brands. The consensus seems that, for example, Onkyo and Denon generally run cool, whereas Pioneer can get very hot. But does this automatically mean that the engineers at the latter brand care less about heat and try to skimp on thermal management? Umm... not very convincing to me.

Just as a side, among those 4 models I listed above, H/K and Pioneer, the two allegedly hot-running models, are in fact heavier than the other two. Where do these brands invest that additional amount of metals? I do not know...

Well, I start to realize that these comparisons only confuse me. And, to be honest, I seriously doubt that I can hear a clear difference in sound quality among these models (unless I have a chance to do a true A/B testing at my home, which I do not think I can). I already know from my casual auditioning at local stores that all these brands at this price range sound, well..., wonderful.

So, after all, I guess I will have to decide based on factors that are obvious, including functional features, appearance, and the ability to drive various loads properly, etc... Operating temperature will unlikely be my primary criteria. I do not think they are that stupid...

Sorry for this confused, vague post...
Cheers!

You have more confidence in the engineering quality of a 'for profit' company than i do Sushi.
Although i'm sure they have minimum requirements for their heat dissipation components, etc., i would prefer to buy a unit that goes beyond minimums and into the 'very safe' zones.

If an amp is running hot, but weighs 10 pounds more than one that does not, what does that say?
Perhaps different metals were used? Maybe same metal, same heatsink weight, but more plastic in the lighter unit overall.
Perhaps electronic components with less tolerance in the hotter unit?

There are alot of possibilities really, but in the end, i prefer not to mix extreme heat with electronics if i can avoid it (too many burned cpus from overclocking....not that i can overclock my receiver, but if i could....).

I would just err on the side of caution as opposed to trusting that the company knows what it is doing and perhaps what they are doing is cutting corners to cut costs albeit within safety specs.

Of course there is also the thought that a hotter unit warms up the already high temperatures in your listening room down there in balmy Texas (it was -49 here yesterday with windchill). If anything, maybe you should be trying to look for a receiver unit that actually cools your room when its turned on!

In reply to:

---

JohnK: on MCACC(Multi Channel ACoustic Calibration),although I haven't tried it, my impression is that the great majority of reports from owners is highly favorable.

---

I have to agree. I went through many AV/HT forums pretty exhaustively on this subject, and most Pioneer Elite owners seemed to be making a valuable use of MCACC.

In reply to:

---

JohnK: On the 4ohm question, I suppose that we've read the same reports and they're so conflicting that I don't know what to make of them.

---

It seems that at least one person who had had the 4-ohm shutdown problem got it actually fixed by Pioneer. See this and earlier posts by the same person.



Also, thanks for the info on the new VSX-D912-K. Looks like this model has, besides the auto-MCACC, just enough set of features for many potential buyers. For example, they did not omit rather important things like 7.1 analog inputs. This model might be a great bargain indeed, if you do not need the Elite warranty/appearance/pride.

For others who are interested, here is the press release.


Cheers!

Here is an update in case anybody is still interested...

The auto-MCACC on the new VSX-D912 receiver does not include the equalization feature that the Elite models have. For me, this makes it basically useless; one can do the basic balance/delay calibration just fine with a RadioShack SPL meter and a measuring tape. The per-channel equalization is the feature that makes the MCACC unique and potentially valuable. After all, you get what you pay for...

Also, I just got their response to an inquiry about the 4-ohm shutdown issue that I sent directly to Pioneer's Tokyo headquarters. They flatly deny that the "issue" exists, saying that the specs clearly state that speakers rated 6-16 ohm should be used with the Elite receivers, and these models are designed accordingly. They also deny that they have done or will do any update, repair or modifications to the receiver to accommodate 4-ohm loads upon a customer's request. They said this even though I phrased my inquiry sound like the 4-ohm issue is the make-or-break factor for my purchase decisions in the very near future. Incidentally, they were prompt and appropriately polite in answering my questions.

So, I guess I have to conclude that Pioneer, for whatever reasons, does not want to go public or official on this issue; they even took the risk of losing one potential buyer in denying the issue. On the other hand, judging from recent posts in various forums, Pioneer does seem to "fix" it on case-by-case basis upon customer requests, apparently regarding the fix as the normal repair of an individual malfunctioning unit under warranty.

Just FYI...
Cheers!

So once again i ask, why would anyone buy a four thousand dollar top of the line Elite receiver that is officially not supportive of 4 ohm speakers?
You would think for 4 grand they would build an amp that was capable of such a feat.

I just don't know about Pioneer anymore. But they've made such great strides in the DVD-RW fields...

Sushi, your information about the 912 would certainly disappoint someone who was considering it based on a presumed equalization ability. Without this it would be similar to the HK models which automatically set speaker levels, and I agree that this would be a relatively minor attraction. I assume that you got this from Tokyo and that the info would be more reliable than what was at least a misleading Pioneer press release which spoke of the MCACC success in the Elite series and strongly implied that the same abilities would be offered in the lower-cost models(although I did note that the release didn't specifically mention equalization). It's curious then what the two "manual" models offer, since all HT receivers have provisions for manually adjusting for speaker distance and levels.

chesseroo: Well, with regard to the official spec, my understanding is that relatively few brands support 4-ohm speakers in their (even high-end) all-in-one receivers anyway, with Onkyo being one of those few that officially mentions 4-ohm speakers in the spec. Correct me if I am wrong, but I cannot find a mention of 4-ohm speaker support in the receiver specs/manuals from Pioneer, Denon, H/K, Yamaha, or Marantz.

That said, I do agree with you that the overly conservative setting of protection circuits in Pioneer Elite receivers is, at best, very strange, especially in their more expensive models. According to reports from people who had their Elite "fixed," the receiver seems to be capable of driving their 4-ohm speakers just fine after the fix. Just paraphrasing what you already said, I guess people who want a no-brainer support for 4-ohm speakers, need a peace of mind, and have several grands to spend on amps (not me ) should really go for separates rather than one of these higher-end all-in-ones.

JohnK: I got the info on D912 from Tokyo, and they were very articulate about the point. Indeed, the PR does not specifically mention equalization, which triggered me to send my inquiry in the first place. This PR could serve as a text-book example of misleading advertisement. Oh well...

Cheers!

Actually Sushi, if you look at the dynamic power listings for the Denon 4802 (a model i was considering before i got the Onkyo) and the Yamaha RX-V1, they are 'rated' for 4 ohm loads (2 channel) and both models list ratings down to 2 ohms.

I nabbed this from the manual specs:
Denon 4802 170W-8 ohm, 270W- 4 ohm, 350W- 2 ohm
Yamaha RX-V1, 150W, 180W, 240W, 340W at 8, 6, 4, 2 ohms

I could not find this same info for the H/K, Marantz or Pioneer (although to be fair i couldn't find a user manual for Pioneer).

I may not consider running a 4 ohm speaker all the time with these models but it certainly would depend on how the 4 ohm rating was assessed. If the speaker has several spikes down to 4 ohms but really averages about 5 or 6, then i probably would not be so concerned. If the speaker was more an average of 4 ohm with spikes below that, i would probably look alot closer at getting separate components.
I'm sure that several of these amps/receivers should drive 4 ohm speakers just fine (my Onkyo did) but i agree that the Pioneer protection circuitry might be a bit on the overly conservative side. Perhaps it is because their amps get hot enough just powering 8 ohm speakers that they NEED the protection circuitry more so than some other cooler running brand names.

chesseroo,

Thanks for correcting me a big time; I certainly did not look at the user manuals of Denon or Yamaha (are they available online?). I may have judged these models based on the brief catalogue specs and the rear panel photo on the web site -- the rear panel of Denon does seem to mention "6-16 ohm." At any rate, the manual specs you cited surely sound admirable for an all-in-one, especially Denon's, which are essentially linear, meaning that only the swing voltage, not the current, of the final stage is the limiting factor. I would strongly suggest the marketing department of these companies do mention and promote these specs in a more visible way!

I might sound like crazy or simply stupid when I tell you that, after this much of Pioneer bashing by myself and others, I still have not dropped the Elite line from my candidate list. But despite the rather negative comments by Alan about automatic equalization in general, I feel that, judging from owners' reports, MCACC may well help in my situation... Well, if I ever go for one of the Elite receivers, I will probably keep my Adcom GFA-555II power amp for my 4-ohm Hales speakers (the amp is huge and heavy for its mere 200W x 2 output, and surely cool-running LOL).

Cheers!

Interesting post. I recently started setting up a HT system. Have the HDTV and got a great deal on the Onkyo sr800. Now I need the speaker system to finish it out. Yes, this receiver states it is capable of 4 ohm operation with a setting change, but I don't really know how that would affect its operation relative to sound quality, volume, etc. So to stay within the know area of the amp, I have been considering the M60s (8 ohm) over the M80s (4 ohms). Where has my thinking gone astray ??

Dynamic power ratings are very misleading, don't know why more companies don't give RMS values which are more representative of the true capabilites of the amp.

The M80 is a 5 ohm load, but there is still enough 'dynamic range' to trigger my onkyo 787 protection circutry on occasion. SO much for Onkyo's WRAT (Wide range amplifier technology)...another useless marketing gimmick.

redget,

chesseroo would give you a more definitive answer, but I suspect that the amp's impedance setting only changes the stringency of its current protection circuit. You can certainly experiment with both settings using your existing speakers, to see if it changes the sound quality at all.

That said, and given that your Onkyo officially supports 4-ohm loads, I would not consider the impedance rating as a primary factor in choosing between speaker models. Moreover, I understand that the M80s are more efficient than the M60s, which will reduce the amp's actual workload.

Cheers!

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

Uh-Oh, here is an Onkyo owner who has been able to engage the protection circuit with the M80s... Well, I do not know what to read into anymore... After all, a total rated power of over 700W was simply unthinkable from relatively compact all-in-ones 15 years ago. It may be that we are just expecting too much on those poor receivers.

As amer stated:
"Dynamic power ratings are very misleading, don't know why more companies don't give RMS values which are more representative of the true capabilites of the amp"
This is true but the dynamic power rating should not be considered an absolute value for what speakers can be used on that amp. I read dynamic power readings as the power capabilities that the amp can handle but for short bursts or spikes of a heavier load.
I still prefer to read the RMS values of an amp and i would put more confidence in running a 4 ohm speaker for an amp that is rated with 4 ohm under the RMS spec. Most of the Denon, Onkyos , etc. usually have an RMS value of 6-16ohm with all channels driven and sometimes they throw out a spec like 4 ohm (xx Watts) 2 channels driven.
They market the very limit of the amp to make it sound like the amp is capable of such a feat but again, as amer noted:

The M80 is a 5 ohm load, but there is still enough 'dynamic range' to trigger my onkyo 787 protection circutry on occasion. SO much for Onkyo's WRAT (Wide range amplifier technology)...another useless marketing gimmick."

This is why i threw our my earlier comment:
"I may not consider running a 4 ohm speaker all the time with these models but it certainly would depend on how the 4 ohm rating was assessed. If the speaker has several spikes down to 4 ohms but really averages about 5 or 6, then i probably would not be so concerned. If the speaker was more an average of 4 ohm with spikes below that, i would probably look alot closer at getting separate components."

Unfortunately i've read about amer's problem with several other people who own the 787 model. Since i have the 797 model which does not have a cooling fan, i'm guessing that Onkyo changed their heatsink or other internal components to make it a bit beefier. I've run some 4 ohm Kefs off this receiver without any problems or auto shutoffs.

All that aside, i have heard Pioneer receivers, i like them and their onboard toys and if i soley used 6-8ohm speakers i would look at them more seriously as a contender, just as i did last year.
Certainly if you already have a separate amp for your Hales, then just use the receiver as the pre-amp for processing and let the Adcom handle the power as you seemingly plan to do.

In that case, i don't think the power specs of the Pioneer would matter quite so much in your decision to purchase one.
I'm guessing you are not interested in finding a separate pre-pro and amps for surrounds eh?

I am probally being to hard on Onkyo here. I think the problem is local to the 787 and the corresponding Integra model of the same vintage.

All that being said.....if Boeing ever comes out with a plane called the 787....I'm not flying in it......lol.

I will be heading down the separates route, and looking for a good surround pre-amp processor able to handle all the latest HT formats (ie: Dolby EX, DTS-EX Discrete). Any recommendations?

Amer,do you mean that even if you set your 787 to 4ohms that it would still shut off on occasion?

If you're set on the separates, the most obvious suggestion to keep costs reasonably in line would be the Outlaw 950 plus as many M200 amps as you'd need. Let me suggest something different. Consider the Sony DA4ES receiver(available for $650 including shipping), which does all the formats and has an exceptionally wide selection of surround modes and other bells and whistles. If there wouldn't be complete satisfaction running the M80s at either 8ohm or even 4ohm receiver settings, get a pair of M200s to power the M80s, using the DA4ES pre-outs.

John,

I don't think the 787 has a switch for 4 ohm loads (if it does it will be very pleasant news to my ears and wallet). Its only rated down to 6 ohms by Onkyo, and the manual clearly states that running under 6 ohm loads could damage the reciever and invalidate the warranty.

Thanks for the info on the Sony and outlaw stuff, I will definately look into it.

Amer,there isn't an 8/4ohm switch on the back, but I know that the 797(which Chess has)and I'd presume the 787, both have a sub-menu during setup which allows selecting a 4ohm setting. Check your manual and try it. Since the 4ohm setting limits the voltage and therefore the current flow and available power, it should only be used when necessary, although owners manuals, in an excess of caution, usually say to use it whenever 4ohm speakers are present. Let us know what you find.

John,

I can't seem to locate any 4 ohm selection in the manual or as I flip though the setup options on screen. I checked the speaker and audio setup options, and couldn't find a thing. Not sure what section its under on the 797 menu (perhaps chess can let me know where it most likely would be).

On another interesting note, on the last page of the manual it Onkyo rates 'dynamic' power at 250W down to 3 ohms on this sucker. Interestingly enough they rate the continuous average power with all channels driven at 100W RMS for 6 channels driven....surprising since power consumption is rated at 440W. The mystery deepens..........

Went to the Onkyo site and looked at both the 787 and 797 manuals. My presumption wasn't correct; the 797 has a sub-menu during setup which allows setting 4ohms, but the 787 doesn't have such a setting and apparently has no type of adjustment at all for 4ohm speakers. You'd think that this would imply that there would be no trouble with 4ohm speakers and no adjustment was needed, but that's apparently not the case. The only thing I saw in the 787 manual that might even remotely be helpful was a bass-limiter in the sub-menus. It's unlikely that the bass is being overdriven and drawing too much current, but that was the only thing that was even close.

In reply to:

---

Certainly if you already have a separate amp for your Hales, then just use the receiver as the pre-amp for processing and let the Adcom handle the power as you seemingly plan to do.

---

Right, chesseroo. My Adcom has only 2 channels, so I will still have to use at least 3 channels of whatever receiver's power amp. According to my current plan, those 3 channels will drive a VP150 and a pair of QS8, all rated at 6 ohms. I hope Pioneer and other brands will "approve" this plan. Unfortunately, $1K is about as much as I can possibly spend on the amps at this time (including a pre/pro and power amps). So I do not consider separates right now, although things like Outlaw 755 and M200 are certainly very attractive.

Cheers!

I beleive that's to be expected from the Onkyo ds787, as they specify min. impedance of 6 ohms. On the other hand the DS797 is last years model of the current sr800. It has a setup screen for impedance selection; ie, for less than or greater than 6 ohms. I was not concerned with the unit shuting down. The concern is tonal quality, reduced volume (?), etc., if switched to the low impedance. Anyone have experience with this ?? Sorry! Didn't mean to take this thread away from the original topic!!

Now I am certainly not the most knowledgable when it comes to electronics.... but I know that I always look for the Dynamic Headroom spec. Most integrated receivers don't list this spec...probably because there isn't much and providing it would do more harm than good.

Correct me if I am mistaken, but I am under the impression that the dymanic headrom spec/rating is a good indicator of the amps inherent power characteristics....especially in terms of reserve power (for spikes such as chees eluded to). Is my impression accurate?

It would be nice if manufacturers listed the dynamic headroom of their receivers.

Yes certainly, Mike... But the problem is that there are numerous possible definitions for "dynamic headroom" ratings. When they say "dynamic," how long does the "peak" power or current has to be sustained? - should it last for 1 millisecond or 1 second? - with what level of allowable harmonic distortions? - with how many channels simultaneously driven? - and with what frequency ranges? I have never seen a dynamic headroom spec with all these qualifications.

As far as I know, there is no established industry-standard methods for the measurement of dynamic headroom. This means that there is no way of comparing these numbers in a meaningful manner among different brands. For the same reason, comparing loudspeakers' "frequency response" ratings among different brands is almost meaningless, even if one assumes that all manufacturers publish honest numbers.

There are certain numbers from which you can guestimate the amp's relative power reserve (although it would by no means be quantitative). For example, I understand that H/K publishes what they call "high instantaneous current capability (HCC)." It is certainly nicer to have these numbers than not. But again, without defining what "instantaneous" means, the number conveys little information. Plus, in this case, without having a rating for power-stage's maximum peak-swing voltage, you cannot even start translating the Ampere rating into the actual power delivered to the speaker. For example, H/K's new AVR7200 is said to have an HCC rating of +/- 75 Amperes, which is admirable. But if you do simple calculations, this can imply that the amp is capable of supplying the whopping 45000W of instantaneous peak-to-peak power into an 8-ohm load (75^2 x 8), or 22500W into a 4-ohm load. Of course, this is not at all the case, because the amp's output voltage will clip way before the current limit is reached.

Another rating that I see often cited in higher-end amp specs in relation to dynamic power handling is the total capacitance per channel of power-supply condensers. A $1000-class receiver tend to have 3000-5000 microfarad per channel, while a good separate power amp may boast >20000 microfarad per channel. Again, it is nice to know these numbers, but the capability of an amp's power supply is determined by numerous factors, with the condenser capacitance being only one tiny bit of information.

Obviously, manufacturers regard these specs as powerful marketing tools. Accordingly, they choose to publish only a carefully selected set of ratings, without providing us the whole picture... A huge dilemma for "well-informed" consumers!

Cheers!