 Re: New Receiver...Onkyo 809 or Yamaha A2000 or..?
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 57
buff
|
OP
buff
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 57 |
Thanks guys. I hope to have made a decision by Monday and will call if I have too depending which way I go. Any places out there with a better price on the a2000 under 1299. The local shop is selling for 1299 and includes hst. Seems power output is not as high as what rxv1800 achieved. http://www.hometheater.com/content/yamaha-aventage-rx-a2000-av-receiver-ht-labs-measureshttp://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article/test-bench-yamaha-rx-v1800-av-receiverDifferent magazines testing I know but it is food for thought. The Yamaha's innards seem a organized and neatly placed away inside there as to the Onkyo has everything looking crammed in there any which way. Thanks again
Last edited by Wiggins; 08/21/11 02:12 AM.
Panny 50"PZ85u, Anthem MRX510, Emotiva UPA7, Monitor Audio Silver 8, Centre, FX, HTPC, PS4
|
|
|
Re: New Receiver...Onkyo 809 or Yamaha A2000 or..?
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 13,840 Likes: 13
shareholder in the making
|
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 13,840 Likes: 13 |
have you tried deleting your browser temp/cache files?
M80s VP180 4xM22ow 4xM3ic EP600 2xEP350
AnthemAVM60 Outlaw7700 EmoA500 Epson5040UB FluanceRT85
|
|
|
Re: New Receiver...Onkyo 809 or Yamaha A2000 or..?
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 57
buff
|
|
OP
buff
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 57 |
Yeah I've cleaned out all temporary and cache files. It's beyond me why it won't come up. Same as on my iPhone 4, my fiance's iPhone 4(it doesn't load the website for her).
I'll place a call if I need to or see if another retailer I deal with will price match.
The rest of the weekend I'll be deciding which way I want to go with this.
All suggestions are welcome.
Panny 50"PZ85u, Anthem MRX510, Emotiva UPA7, Monitor Audio Silver 8, Centre, FX, HTPC, PS4
|
|
|
Re: New Receiver...Onkyo 809 or Yamaha A2000 or..?
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 57
buff
|
|
OP
buff
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 57 |
Finally got through to electronicsforless.ca today. I was able to get another dealer I normally use to price match plus 5% so I am going to be a proud owner of the tx-nr809 hopefully before the end of the weekend.
I will be going from my previous Yamaha rxv1800 and looking forward to some of the new features that are available to us today and using the new OSD and GUI. Also looking forward to see how Audyssey works in my room.
In a month and 10 days I will be moving into a new house that is being completed right now. I am fortunate enough to get a dedicated media room. My side and rear surrounds have been prewired already as well as hook ups and conduit behind the drywall for cables to wallmount my plasma for a nice clean look. The room is rather narrow at 19L. 11W. 8H. I will just be using a 5.1 setup for now and eventually go 7.1 if I feel the need in that room. The receiver should be fine for a smaller/medium size room. It does not open out to any other rooms and I am able to shut the door.
Thanks for the suggestions and advIce. The Yamaha was just a little out of the price range I wanted to spend and feel I got a decent deal on the Onkyo. The 1009 model has even more features that I would not use like 9 channel amplification so I felt the 809 fit the bill. I feel the 1009 should have included multieqxt32 to separate itself from the 809 more.
One more question: on the Yamaha it indicates only 400 watts of consumption compared to 7.5 amps from the Onkyo. How do they come up with those numbers in a similar spec'd piece of equipment? I know there is more to sound quality than just watts but moreso the delivery of that watt. The new xx9 series seems to be a jump ahead of it's previous year offerings for the price and also running at cooler temperatures.
Panny 50"PZ85u, Anthem MRX510, Emotiva UPA7, Monitor Audio Silver 8, Centre, FX, HTPC, PS4
|
|
|
Re: New Receiver...Onkyo 809 or Yamaha A2000 or..?
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 912 Likes: 4
aficionado
|
|
aficionado
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 912 Likes: 4 |
Finally got through to electronicsforless.ca today. I was able to get another dealer I normally use to price match plus 5% so I am going to be a proud owner of the tx-nr809 hopefully before the end of the weekend.
I will be going from my previous Yamaha rxv1800 and looking forward to some of the new features that are available to us today and using the new OSD and GUI. Also looking forward to see how Audyssey works in my room.
In a month and 10 days I will be moving into a new house that is being completed right now. I am fortunate enough to get a dedicated media room. My side and rear surrounds have been prewired already as well as hook ups and conduit behind the drywall for cables to wallmount my plasma for a nice clean look. The room is rather narrow at 19L. 11W. 8H. I will just be using a 5.1 setup for now and eventually go 7.1 if I feel the need in that room. The receiver should be fine for a smaller/medium size room. It does not open out to any other rooms and I am able to shut the door.
Thanks for the suggestions and advIce. The Yamaha was just a little out of the price range I wanted to spend and feel I got a decent deal on the Onkyo. The 1009 model has even more features that I would not use like 9 channel amplification so I felt the 809 fit the bill. I feel the 1009 should have included multieqxt32 to separate itself from the 809 more.
One more question: on the Yamaha it indicates only 400 watts of consumption compared to 7.5 amps from the Onkyo. How do they come up with those numbers in a similar spec'd piece of equipment? I know there is more to sound quality than just watts but moreso the delivery of that watt. The new xx9 series seems to be a jump ahead of it's previous year offerings for the price and also running at cooler temperatures. Who knows how they come up with any of these numbers, however, in the end, whatever choice you made, you couldn't lose in the deal. In the past, it had been reported that Onkyo's were inclined to run somewhat hotter than their competition, however, I don't know whether or not that is still the case with these current models. Incidentally, you wondered about the difference between the 809 and 1009 and coincidentally that came up in a recent review in Audioholics that asked that same question. The difference in price between the two could not be justified and said the 809 was simply a much better value. In fact when I had a discussion with the rep from the other optional website I passed on to you (HD.CA)he indicated to me because of this the 809 and below will always be, by far, their best sellers. Overall, they will sell proportionately very few of the upper series (1009,3009,5009).
|
|
|
Re: New Receiver...Onkyo 809 or Yamaha A2000 or..?
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654
shareholder in the making
|
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654 |
Chris, on power consumption figures there's no specific standard required by law for stating them. In contrast, for power output, FTC regulations set a required standard which we can rely on.
The first point is that the consumption number isn't at maximum power unless explicit language such as "maximum" or "full power" is used, which few do. Usually it's at some average power output, such as the 1/8th power which Underwriters Laboratory uses in testing for overheating since 1/8th is considered to be roughly the average usage in playing an entire disc. So, a number such as 400 watts for consumption in a 7x100 watt unit isn't inconsistent(and certainly not lying, as some of those lacking knowledge of the measurement basis claim)since it's typically measured using about 90 watts(1/8th)rather than 700 watts and class AB amplifier efficiency is on the order of 20% at 1/8th power(compared to around 50% at full power). Therefore 400 watts or so input is required for about 90 watts output.
The reason that when the consumption number is given in amperes rather than watts it seems to give a considerably different result is that although a watt is defined basically as a volt x an ampere, in actual audio amplifier circuitry the voltage and current aren't perfectly in phase with each other and the result of volts times amps is substantially fewer watts of power(typically around 70%). So the two units you mention would have about the same consumption when measured at the same output and both being stated in watts(or both in amperes).
-----------------------------------
Enjoy the music, not the equipment.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,943
Posts442,465
Members15,617
| |
Most Online2,082
Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
|
0 members (),
845
guests, and
4
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
