I noticed there's a good amount of suggestions for Denon, Yamaha, and HK receivers... what about Rotel?
I have an Onkyo TX-DS676 right now... which isn't bad... but, from what I've heard, it doesn't compare to Rotel... unless I went with their Integra series... which I have yet to see.
Thoughts? Ideas? Suggestions?
Rotel is a great brand and their receivers won't disappoint you, but are you looking for better features or better sound than your Onkyo TX-DS676? The 676 is a few generations old, so getting a new Rotel receiver will get you more of the latest/greatest bells and whistles, but the sound quality is not likely to improve much. Both Onkyo and Rotel make great, well-built solid state amps.
["Rotel is a great brand and their receivers won't disappoint you, but are you looking for better features or better sound than your Onkyo TX-DS676?"]
Better sound.
["but the sound quality is not likely to improve much"]
From what I understand, Onkyo's have an incomplete soundstage. Also, Japanese receivers tend to be a tad harsh and lack warmth.
I forgot to mention, I also plan on buying a seperate Rotel amp... which should also help.
["Both Onkyo and Rotel make great, well-built solid state amps"]
...but they don't play in the same league. Why else would Onkyo bother with their Integra line?
Rotel can play with the big boys like Krell, from what I understand... granted, Krell beats Rotel, but apparently, not by much... and Rotel does it for a lot less money.
Marketing, marketing, marketing. Where did you hear that Onkyo's have an incomplete soundstage? That's ridiculous. I have an Onkyo TX-DS575 and it has no such issues. Differences between well-built, solid state amps are subtle if they exist.
I'll leave JohnK or another forum regular to help fill you in.
Voodoo marketing! Can someone please explain how a receiver can affect the soundstage?
X, you've apparently been reading a lot of hogwash about receivers. There's no way that a purely electronic signal going through a receiver and being amplified acquires "soundstaging" characteristics unless special processing to do that(e.g. DPLII)is intentionally applied. Also, Japanese receivers have the same frequency response characteristics as those designed in any other country and therefore sound identical to them.
The features of your present receiver are getting a bit dated and if you want to update for that reason, fine, but don't get taken in by any nonsense about differences in basic sound quality somehow depending on what receiver you use.
I would definitly go to a dealer that has both (if possible). Test drive them both with the same speakers and music. Luckily when I purchased my Integra, the dealer was very honest with me and didn't try to talk me into a Krell or Parasound setup (Although it would be nice to be able to afford gear like that
). I love my Integra DTR-7.4. It natural sounding. I would never describe it as warm like my tube amps and vinyl.
I agree, It's all marketing. It's like what the car manufactures are doing. Lexus and Toyota etc....
I would have picked up the Onkyo if my good friend my local sound shop didn't cut me a deal.
["Differences between well-built, solid state amps are subtle if they exist"]
Explain this...
http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=7593
"FYI -- I migrated from the Denon 3802 to Rotel in two steps:
Added Rotel amps to the Denon's pre-outs - amazing improvement in dymamics, details, control etc hard to believe the difference until you heard it. After some listening I went for the RB-1080 for the front left and right and the RMB-1075 for the rest.
Then I swapped the Denon for a Rotel processor - and stereo came alive again, while HT gained even further 3D ambience and reality.
Couldn't recommend it highly enough. Especially with your quality (and power hungry) speakers."
If what your saying is true, then I should be able to buy a $100 Sony receiver from BestBuy and be done with it.
What about the BMW Z series vs Mazda Miata?
Granted, same type of car, but they will perform very differently.
["There's no way that a purely electronic signal going through a receiver and being amplified acquires "soundstaging" characteristics unless special processing to do that(e.g. DPLII)is intentionally applied"]
Correct... BUT, there is a way that soundstage can be impededed and/or distorted.
["Also, Japanese receivers have the same frequency response characteristics as those designed in any other country and therefore sound identical to them"]
Spec sheets and the human ear RARELY agree... which is why people audition receivers and speakers.
JohnK- can you please explain your previous statements a bit further for us? I don't agree with what you've said about all receivers sounding the same and I'd like to hear your take on it if you have the time. To me, there can be a huge variance in sound quality between all types of receivers (as well as all types of seperates) and I'm interested to learn more about your opinion on why you feel there isn't.
Much thanks,
Kevin
Are they made by the same company? No they are not. Toyota and lexus are. Like Onkyo is with Integra. That was my point.
My suggestion was clear yesterday when I said you should go test drive some of these receivers. Trust your ears.
The Miata isn't even in the same food group.
Kevin, I've gone over this several times previously and it isn't simply a matter of my take on the question. Audio engineering principles require an amp to be flat enough in frequency response and low enough in noise and distortion so that any slight differences which are measurable are inaudible. This is commonly achieved these days at low cost and that's all there is; no mysterious effect on soundstage, etc. exists.
Once labels and price tags have disappeared in blind listening tests differences which were previously described in lavish terms have likewise disappeared. As Dr. Toole once commented to an AES meeting(relating to the fallibility of human perceptions), when you can see what you're listening to you can't hear it.
In reply to:
when you can see what you're listening to you can't hear it.
Gee! I wish
I'd said that! (And you can bet the farm you'll be hearing it from me,
often, from now on
)
John, am I correct in assuming that based on what you just stated above, there is no difference is sound quality between $10,000 in McIntosh equipment and a $100 Sony receiver? I would really have to think that the entire audio industry isn't gullible enough to purchase equipment that can cost well up into the hundred of thousands of dollars if they could simply get the same performance and sound quality from cheap entry-level electronics. If that were the case, Bose would putting companies like Mark Levinson and Wilson out of business left and right.
Just speaking from my own experience, I recently upgraded my power amp from an entry level AMC to an Acurus and I found the change to be drasticly better then what I heard before. There is more detail and higher resolution then what I previously heard. There's also a bigger soundstage and sweetspot to the music, which I can now confirm because of the fact that I don't have to be dead center on my couch to enjoy the highest quality of sound reproduction. Before, I was never really blown away by what I heard when I was running the AMC amp. I can't imagine that this is all being made up in my head. That's why I'm respectfuly asking for your own personal opinion on the matter, because you seem to know what you're talking about.
In reply to:
John, am I correct in assuming that based on what you just stated above, there is no difference is sound quality between $10,000 in McIntosh equipment and a $100 Sony receiver?
Driven within their respective limits? Yes, no noticeable difference.
Look. Nobody is saying that the two are equivalent in all aspects. I would personally much prefer the McIntosh to the Sony. But I also know that at moderate listening levels, the differences between the two are negligible. One of the things you get when you buy McIntosh is peace of mind -- in the build quality, in the available power, and in the mesmerizing
BLUE LIGHTS!
The widening of the sweet spot when you switched from the AMC to the Acurus is -- I hate to say it -- may he completely cerebral. In order to find out whether or not the differences are in your head or real, you'd need to have someone else switch the amps back and forth (and ensure the volume levels were matched) without you knowing which was currently playing. There are many variables at play in audio that need to be reduced or eliminated in order to make varifiable statements about the quality of sound reproduction.
In reply to:
The widening of the sweet spot when you switched from the AMC to the Acurus is -- I hate to say it -- may he completely cerebral.
Entirely possible. One should never underestimate the ability of the human mind to deceive itself, or be deceived by one's senses.
I don't believe your'e going to win the argument about differant sounding amps with JohnK.What Pmbuko said driven within there limits is correct.No my Panasonic reciever can not reach the same levels as my Rotel amp, when drive real hard the Panasonic will run out of juice.But at low to moderate levels there is only the slightest differance.Also it has alot to do with the power supply and other quality parts used by Rotel.The Panny would not be able to push a low impedance load.So its my belief there is a differance in SS amps but it is not the way they sound.Build quality is another issue.
I was going to wait to see if JohnK would have responded by now, but I guess I'll respond to these two posts in the meantime.
My perception of the widening of the sweet spot (or more specifically, the increase in the resolution of the sound I heard) could very well be all in my head. But I really doubt it. I'd like to invite anyone else over to my place who disagrees with me to do a comparison between the two amps to see/hear for themselves. This would be very interesting to me. I purchased the Acurus amp online before I ever tested it out, and I only got it because I found a deal. I actually hooked it up thinking that it probably won't be too much of a difference, but I was thrilled at the difference in sound quality. I didn't just dream this up.
In regards to comparing a McIntosh setup to an entry level Sony receiver, I really would suggest that you go out to a high-end shop and take a listen to the difference for yourselves. I am not a proponent of high end esoteric audio equipment because of a lot of reasons, so I don't want to be taken here as an audio snob. But, with that said, I'll stick with the McIntosh and Sony examples since I mentioned them earlier. A low-end Sony receiver has a lot of bells and whistles on it all in an effort to make the sound reproduction "better." Things like "enhanced bass output," all sorts of DSP settings, even on down to seperate bass and trebel controls or maybe a cheap EQ. I'm sure I won't be the the only person here to agree that all these "ad ons" do not much more than color or distort the sound. When you compare, side by side, a unit like a Sony as I've just described to a McIntosh setup, which usually doesn't even have bass and trebel controls because they want the sound to be as acurate as possible without adding or taking away anything from the original recording, I really think you'll be in for a shock. All the studies and lectures in the world really don't take the place of sitting down and experiencing something for yourself in a willing hi-fi shop, which I suggest you guys may want to do in this situation.
We're all friends here, so please don't hesitate to take me up on my offer to come do a comparison at my apartment in Los Angeles. It would be a nice education for all of us I think.
-Kev
how many of you arguing have had any electrical engineering education? how many of you have an electrical degree?
hrm.... answer that please...
if you have had any formal electrical education, then you would understand what part of there receiver is worth paying for, and what part, any 100$ receiver can do just as well has a 2000$ receiver... no im not going to be specific, because it seems to me the educated people here "know what they are talking about" the others are going by what they have been "told"... and not by a professor…
and yes, i do have formal electrical engineering education... and yes, some receivers are better than others, but in many way the solid state receivers of today, are all the same [censored], just different quality components manufactured with in certain tolerances... some times you dont even need that exact of a tolerance, to get the job done other times its damn nice to have that tight of tolerances...
you have to keep in mind, this business has a lot of emotion involved in it, why else would there be so damn many lights on the receivers ect.. i could go on.... but im not, i have to go to bed... past my bed time
....
My own take on the situation is that the price/performance curve on electronics is asymptotic (anybody remember your geometry?) meaning that the curve approaches, but never attains perfection.
I don't know how to link to a curve which illustrates my idea, but hopefully this will be clear enough. The numbers presented are for illustrative pruposes only.
Your entry level Sony, for instance, will get you 99% of the way to perfect. A middle range receiver from Denon, Onkyo, H-K, or similar will get you 99.9%. Go to the flagship receivers from these companies, or Rotel, and you get 99.99% of the way to perfection. Whip out the Krells, or other ultra-expensive esoterica, and you are 99.999% of the way there.
The point is, that after a certain point, you pay an order of magnitude more money for an infinitesimal benefit. Personally, I don't think I can tell the difference between 99.9% perfect and 99.99% perfect, but maybe some people can.
For most people, I think it would be a waste of money to buy anything more expensive than a mid to upper eange Denon, Onkyo, H-K or Yamaha. There are probably some people who are capable of hearing that increased .001% of performance, and who are willing to spend 10 times as much money to get it, and to them I say, knock yourself out. Just don't try to tell me that my equipment sounds "harsh" or "lacks soundstage".
The reason that Onkyo makes the integra line is to make money. There is a higher profit margin on expensive gear.
Don't even try to tell me that you didn't expect your new amp to sound any better than your old amp. In my experience, your brain can alter your perception of sound far more than any change in equipment.
Mark
["Are they made by the same company? No they are not"]
That's not my point. My point is similar devices can look similar and achieve a similar goal, but they are NOT the same animal and they do NOT perform the same.
That's all.
I do plan on auditioning some Rotels
["Yes, no noticeable difference"]
Yeah, to a deaf person.
["solid state amps are subtle if they exist"]
Unless you have an audiophile's ear.
Sure, there's marketing envolved... almost EVERYTHING has marketing. But, to say there's little difference between solid state receivers is 100% bullshit.
My first receiver, a Technics (100w), was okay. When I bought my next receiver, the Onkyo (80w), I didn't even need to do an A/B test-- the Onkyo was far ahead of where the Technics was-- same speakers and same cabling BUT more clarity and more sound (not louder). The difference was HUGE. Seriously, it was like I was listening to my music again for the first time.
Granted, the further up you go, the more it'll plateau, BUT, there are significant differences... you probably don't have the ear for it.
["Also, Japanese receivers have the same frequency response characteristics as those designed in any other country and therefore sound identical to them"]
What are you talking about?
Frequency response is a spec. And, like all specs, they don't mean [censored]. This is where auditioning comes into play.
["I don't believe your'e going to win the argument about differant sounding amps with JohnK"]
More than likely.
It helps when the other person knows what they're talking about.
["how many of you arguing have had any electrical engineering education? how many of you have an electrical degree?"]
Let us know when you have a Physics degree. This is acoustics, pal. We're not trying to make a light bulb glow.
["My own take on the situation is that the price/performance curve on electronics is asymptotic (anybody remember your geometry?) meaning that the curve approaches, but never attains perfection"]
You are correct!
It's completely ignorant to say it's all marketing. Yes, there is some marketing. If it wasn't marketed, nobody would buy it. BUT, if it was ALL marketing, manufacturers would go under VERY quickly.
I don't think you will be unhappy with the Rotel equipment. It is very good equipment. I have a sweet system in my office entirely Rotel with Energy loudspeakers.
Now, BEFORE I ever go on a message board such as this and post questions, I always research my topic on my own. I try to educate myself with every little detail. Then, I can have an intelligent question to post and offer an educated answer. I NEVER go to a message board like this and provide verbal (keyboard) flatulence. Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. Their are a lot of HIGHLY educated and knowledgeable people here willing to help, at least have the common courtesy to evaluate their answers to your questions.
It's also your money. If you don't mind spending more on gear, thats your choice. I personally refuse to spend more on gear that will be obsolete in a few years.
Good luck on your qwest!
My $.02
I wasn't trying to be harsh. My point was to make you think.
I also understand your desire for the best sound possible. No one wants to spend their hard earned money on "junk". At the same time there are a lot of cheaper options that you would be happy with. I went through the same thing when I bought my Rotel gear seven years ago. Since then it's been a passion and an addiction for the best sound for the money.
The money I saved on my current home theater saved my marriage
No joke. I took my wife on a cruise. My home theater rivals most boutique systems out there. I'm not bragging just extremely excited and HAPPY with my system.
tleigh, you were far from harsh. Consider the tone of the man to whom you responded.
I went to a high-end store recently. My totally unreliable, personally biased perceptions. Integra and Rotel amps sounded identical; B&W CD4MHT (or some slew of alphanumerical crap) DO NOT sound like M60s - the B&W tweeter was sibilant as heck and the midrange was terrible, just awful; the McIntosh equipment wasn't in the same room as everything else so that you can't do any direct comparisons.
Wish I had more time - I'm going swimming. Enjoy wasting your money xopher.
In reply to:
Unless you have an audiophile's ear.
That's just like putting your fingers in your ears and sticking your tongue out at us. Once someone drops that line, there's no sense trying to reason with them.
Thanks for stopping by xopher. It's been fun.
[rant]
Xopher's primary reason in posting here was obviously to impress us with his perceived knowledge of and taste in audio equipment, not to ask us for advice. In 2 separate threads he asked the group what we thought of certain equipment (while dismissing anything else as being "harsh" or "lacking soundstage"), and then, after we offered him our honest opinions and advice, proceeded to tell us why we are all full of crap.
Xopher considers himself an "audiophile". "Audiophiles" derive their own sense of importance by looking down their noses at those of us who refuse to buy into the idea that you have to pay a lot of money for acceptable sound.
Maybe there are people who can perceive a big difference between, say, a Denon 3805 and a Rotel receiver costing twice as much, and don't mind paying the difference. If you are one of them, power to you, and enjoy your expensive gear. Don't, however, come on a board like this one and act like a big snob who knows more than the rest of us.
[/rant]
Mark
Don't get your panties in a bunch, guys. While I was swimming (I got water in my ear now - my M60s sound like Rockets) I realized that xopher is probably TonyGeno in disguise. His sole purpose in life is to try to piss you off.
BTW, it is nice when we rally together like this, eh pmb?
I think we're speaking to the wind. While we were not particularly gentle with xopher's ideas, we, for the most part, confined our criticism to the arguments he was presenting.
Unfortunately he seems unable to separate the arguments we presented from the people who made them, finally losing his temper, and resorting to the last bastion of the unreasonable; the personal insult. Too bad.
Very Funny
I actually Had some time to think this over and agree with both you and Mark. Funny how our hobbies take over.. Personally, I wanted to b*tch slap X. Pardon the expression it's the beer talking.
Tom
I agree with your thoughts on the originator, and the motives and lack of openness to listen to differing opinions.
But I think you have missed the mark by using a single brush stroke to paint all "audiophiles" as arrogant. Yes, I have met many of these during my time, but have also met, and try to be as objective as possible. I beleive there is better equipment out there, and I am lucky enough to be able to attain expensive equipment if I so choose.
I have however, spent a lot of time helping people buy their first, or entry level systems. I try to provide balanced, objective and honest advice based on the supplied criteria ( budget, wants, needs). Not everyone believes in the information that abounds in audio (myths, ramblings, lies, scientifc facts - or whatever you would like to term them) and genuine audio fans (like most on this board) will enter into rational debates, and be open to alternate views.
There are however, people who are above the law, and these unfortunately give all of us a bad reputation
I heard a phrase once - Never wrestle with a pig. Nobody will know the difference, and only the pig will be happy!
Unless you are Ghostwheel and watching DSOTM/Wizard of OZ.....and his weedwacker and live chicken parties!!!
I wasn't trying to lump all audiophiles together...that's why the use of quotations around the work "audiophile" in my rant. I was referring to that subset of people who, like Xopher, think they know it all and look down their nose at anybody with a Japanese receiver. I also didn't want to launch a personal attack on Xopher alone, thinking that that may violate the rules of this forum, so I directed my rant at "audiophiles" like Xopher.
As I stated in my rant, there are probably those who can hear the difference between a $1,000 and $10,000 receiver, and are willing to pay the difference, and I have no problem with that. My problem was with someone who asks us our advice, and then after we give it, calls us a bunch of ignoramuses
Mea Culpa.
Mark
You guys done went and had a fracas and didn't invite me.
I like the Marks' take on this (and most other things). MH defines my perspective on equipment well; I KNOW I've lost some hearing capacity, and I cannot control external noise (dishwashers, children, dogs, wind, furnace, the voices in my head, etc.) well enough to perceive that last .01% towards the ideal. MW, as usual, made my favorite beverage of the moment shoot out my nose by concisely defining the perpetrator's intent.
Now, go have a beer.
I like the pig thing! I heard a couple other versions:
Never try to teach a pig to dance; it just frustrates you and confuses the pig.
Never wrestle with a pig; you both get dirty, but the pig likes it.
What do expect from a pig except a grunt?
Yes, there is also the old British story of the young politician who asks the weathered speaker if, on this his first day in the House, if he should attack with educated opinion the first opponent who speaks, or should he wait.
The speaker replies, " It is better to have people wonder why you did not speak, then to have people wonder why you did..."
I agree with the analogy provided, but can suggest that the percentages are not nearly that accurate. A basic economical Sony does not approach the threshold given. Subsequent movement up the food chain will provide greater than given improvement percentages.
But the concept is well stated, and point is very valid. The entire "amplifiers are amplifiers" discussion is well documented on this board. I disagree, as there are great differences between the components included in a $300 amp and $1500+ amp - and for the person questioning Phsyics/Electronics credentials - I have a degree in Electrical Engineering and 20 years in all facets of electrical/electronic/IT design, implementation and such - not bragging, just attempting to stem personal attacks!!! [Smile]
Or the bad shot in golf that works out for you in the end...
Frequently uttered on links around my neck of the woods, "That shot was like perfume on a pig - Ugly, but it'll get the job done."
And, I too was also happy to see Xopher get called out...I had been reading his posts, and couldn't put my finger on why, oh why, he just irked me the wrong way. Mayeb it was his style to post 14 messages in a row, or talk down to me incessantly. But, hopefully, he's gone for good, and we can move on to discuss what really matters - gorrilla ports.
[Homer Simpson voice]
Ummmmmmmm. Gorilla ports.
[/Homer Simpson voice]
Mark
Damn - missed all the fun!!! BigWill & Mark - you didn't leave anything to add. How does someone take this seriously and personally? It's a HOBBY.