Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Stereo Wow... Receivers really do sound different!

When I bought my M3's this past November, I absolutely loved the them - the detail was incredible when powered by my DENON 2800 receiver. However, when I upgraded the receiver in early December to a H/K 630 - all of a sudden the M3's sounded extremely laid back! I couldn't believe the difference - I always held the opinion that all the banter over "bright" (yamaha), neutral (denon), and warm (h/k) receivers was ridiculous... well not anymore, everyone was right! Oh well, I finally gave in and ordered the "brighter" M22's to better match my H/K - what a great excuse :-)

Everyone take cover!

"everyone was right"

Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggie" while reaching for a big rock.

How was that again - "smiling, nodding and backing away"?

I can't wait to see what happens next. JohnK?

I love yertle!

Wow. It all might sound better once you give it time to...... break in.

I just could not help myself. It's a sickness I tell ya!

Beez, that banter is still just as ridiculous as you thought, but you may have been listening at a slightly lower level on the HK. Their frequency response is identical.

The banter is even more ridiculous as it gets perpetuated by such uncontrolled home listening sessions with the word "UPGRADE" sitting firmly in the forebrain.

Speaking of the word upgrade, it has been used quite heavily lately to describe the purchase of speakers which are more expensive than others.
"I want to upgrade my QS4 to the QS8".
'Is the M80 a better upgrade than a VP150"
Take a read at my rant on the word "upgrade" where spiff and i discuss its sad and sorry excess usage. I think i might go add to that post again.

I would like someone to administer a double blind test for beezer with the two receivers and see how reliably he can pick out the brighter one.

(btw - all amplifiers sound different)

Hmmm... this is obviously a hot topic around here... as far as a blind test - I still own the DENON so I may try it for fun

I suppose I could always use the H/K as a pre-amp...

Wow, Beezer, you just had a head-on with the flat earth folk. Of course there's a difference in the sound between receivers, and more differences than are measured by a frequency response curve. I've owned enough receivers over the years to be able to say with confidence that there are major differences in sound quality from one receiver to another.

Among my personal favorites among low price units is the Panasonic SA-HE200 which I compared to the Harman Kardon AVR65, Onkyo 797, Sony STRDB1070, Sherwood something or other. The Panny did very well, sounded better than the HK unit.

Careful if you're considering bringing up the subject of speaker wire or interconnects. Some folks around here think string does as good a job and can get pretty riled up if you think there's anything better than zip cord.

Any one else getting a strange feeling of déjà vu?

Any one else getting a strange feeling of déjà vu?

Yes.
You are so right.
There are SO MANY things OTHER THAN sound frequencies that the human ear can hear.
Gee, you must be one amazing medical specialist with lots of auditory research and publications on double blind testing with human subjects to know such "facts" that others do not.
Just in case you could not comprehend the previous statements, they are referred to as sarcasm. I can send you a link to a definition if you would like.

My current receiver sounds like crap in two-channel stereo mode -- far worse than my previous receiver. The current one sounds fine if I run the CD player through the multichannel analog inputs, though.

The thing I don't understand about the "receivers sound different" argument is in this context we're referring only to the amplifier component of the receiver. IOW one amp sounds different or better than another.

Yet I thought the job of an amp is to perfectly reproduce the input signal, or as close as possible. In EE classes you learn about the "ideal amplifier", which does this. If one amp sounds different from another, that implies that one or both are not perfectly reproducing the input signal. Wouldn't that be noise or distortion?

I also don't buy the argument that you can't measure it. It's essentially comparing two sampled waveforms. The bandwidth involved is very low (audio range), so it doesn't take particularly exotic data acquisition equipment. 25 years ago there were digital oscilloscopes with 50Mhz sample rates. Today you can buy a PC Card that does that. I wonder if anyone has done such a study?

Really! So, what kind of receivers do you all use in your systems? Curious given this all-receivers-are-the-same theory.

all-receivers-SOUND-the-same.

That's much different than saying they ARE the same. Features should be the driving factor behind a receiver purchase.

More specifically:

All-receivers-sound-the-same-when-all-DSPs-tone-controls-etc-are-turned-off-and-the-volume-controls-are-set-to-the-same-level.

Because one could argue with the first statement quite easily.

a few months back when I was still looking I posted :
You know, any of these will be fine but I just wanted to let you know that 4 months ago I was also in the market for my first HT setup and while I think the HK line was the most pleasing to look at, to my ears it colored the music in a sort of "muzak" sort of way if you know what I mean. I also looked at the Onkyo TX-SR700 and the Denon 2803. Both were very comparable but the Denon won out"....

Yes'm receivers do sound different!

Yes, I should have asked what all those who believe "all-receivers-sound-the-same" are using. Thanks for straightening me out. You are entitled to your opinions, but it seems to me that your opinions are theory driven and ignore the obvious differences in sound among receivers. On the other hand, maybe there are folks whose hearing is a bit impaired.

As a matter of fact, I think you all should be called on what appears nonsense. Really, what receivers do you all use? Did you really pick expensive receivers for the features? What about receivers with same or better specs and features at a lower price? Why didn't you choose one of the real bargain receivers out there. Anyone pay more than $300 for their receiver? Why, when you can get a Panasonic SAHE200 for $300? Could it be that some of you don't really believe what you're saying?

Here again we have yet more examples of generally bright folks refusing to accept scientific facts and instead following the silly "Just trust your ears" mantra, which collapses when it's actually applied in a blind test and the nameplates and pricetags disappear.

2x6,

What exactly are you getting at? Do I have to spell it out completely for you? OK then. Here are just a few reasons to buy receiver A over receiver B:

1. price
2. features
3. build quality
4. history of brand reliability
5. appearance
6. size

So, yes, even those of us who don't believe receivers sound different have plenty of reason to subjectively choose one over another. Also, you keep mentioning that our views are theory driven. I would call it data driven. You can only trust your ears to be truly objective in a blind listening test.

Hear hear JohnK.
Succinct and concise.
I think it is up for most brilliant post of the year, although Intrepid has been writing poetry over in that other column so you have some stiff competition.

For those who missed the age old argument, see this thread here in which cblake and sushi have a great discussion on the supposed theories behind the differences in receivers/amps thing.
Gee i miss sushi.
Objectivity in a box wrapped with a ribbon of intelligence he was...um...is.

OK, those who believe all-receivers-sound-the-same, please tell me who has paid more than the $200-300 street price at which the Panasonic SA HE 200 can be had and why?





Dolby Digital Decoder (Dolby Digital EX)

DTS Decoder (DTS-ES)

Dolby Pro Logic Surround 3 (Pro Logic II)

MOS-FET Output Stage

Subwoofer Level Control

Large Speaker Terminals

6-Ch Discrete Inputs

Enhanced Class H+ Amplifier

2-Channel Down Mixing

SFC (Sound Field Control) 6 presets

Digital Synthesizer Tuner (Frequency Range - FM Tuner: 87.9-107.9MHz, AM Tuner: 530-1710kHz)

Subwoofer Output

Illuminated Universal Remote Control

Speaker Size Configuration large/small/none (except left/right channels)

Tape Monitor

Speaker Selector A and/or B

Output Power - Stereo Mode 100W per channel (20Hz-20kHz, 6 ohms, 0.05% THD) View all models with this feature

Frequency Response PHONO: RIAA standard curve ±0.8dB
CD, TAPE, DVD, TV, VCR: 10Hz-100kHz View all models with this feature

S/N Ratio (IHF A) PHONO: 70dB (80dB, IHF '66)
CD, TAPE, DVD, TV, VCR: 90dB (95dB, IHF '66)
DVD 6-channel: 100dB

Load Impedance A or B: 4-8 ohms
A and B: 8 ohms
Center: 6-8 ohms
Surround: 6-8 ohms

Component Video Switching (2 inputs, 1 output)

Output Power - Home Theater Mode 130W per channel (6 channels, 1kHz, 6 ohms, 0.9% THD)

DVD-Audio Ready Yes

Multi-Source Re-Master Processing

Gold-Plated Terminals

S-Video Inputs/Outputs 5 in, 3 out

Video Inputs/Outputs 4 in, 3 out

Digital Inputs/Outputs 5 in (4 optical, 1 coaxial), 1 out (optical)

Audio Inputs/Outputs 7 in, 4 out


Dimensions (H x W x D) 16 15/16'' x 6 1/4'' x 14 27/32''

25.4 lbs.

__________________________________________________

So, explain please why any of you paid more than the $200-300 for which you can pick up one of these?

I am confident that in the informal, uncontrolled listening tests that provide the basis for most of these comparisons, many receivers do sound different. But it's not because of a unique sound characteristic of the amplifier section. Rather in most cases it's due to loudness not being perfectly controlled in an A/B test, or a misunderstood DSP mode, digital arrival time, EQ or bass management feature accidentally left on or misconfigured.

For example a good number of these tests likely aren't in "direct stereo mode". Receivers are so complicated nowadays, knowing exactly what mode they're in and the details of that mode isn't always easy, esp when the manual is poorly written (or translated). E.g, my RX-V1400 has both a "straight stereo" mode, and a "direct stereo" mode. Some Onkyo receivers have both a direct mode and a similar "pure audio" mode. Knowing which does what requires careful study of an often vague and poorly-worded manual.

Receiver listening comparisons really shouldn't use a subwoofer, yet many likely do. Direct stereo modes (required for the best chance at an equal comparison) usually disable the digital domain processing necessary for bass management, plus it's complicated calibrating a common sub for two different receivers.

It's well documented that small differences in loudness significantly affect the perceived sound quality. Therefore it's necessary in any controlled listening test to calibrate the peak level of the test material on both receivers. Just setting volume controls to about the same point isn't sufficient.

I know these may be obvious, but it's very likely many casual receiver A/B listening tests don't meticulously follow these, making the comparisons questionable.

Obviously I'm talking about contemporary solid state receivers. It seems more likely (although I don't have any hard data) that an audible difference might exist for tube amps in some circumstances.

The reason for not buying a bottom-of-the-line receiver is simple: features. E.g, the Panasonic SA-HE200 is a OK receiver but doesn't have on screen display, EQ, or automatic calibration. The bass management has only three fixed crossover choices, 100, 120 or 150 Hz. It has somewhat limited input/output jacks. The amp is class H, so some theoretical differences there. If none of those are issues for a potential buyer, I don't see why not buy it.

Indeed joema.
That is often the case and is how the sound character of a brand gets started, posted, read and propagated.

In reply to:

---

It seems more likely (although I don't have any hard data) that an audible difference might exist for tube amps

---

Obviously we are talking about 2 amps that are at least the same amp design. Tube amps have known MEASURABLE differences to back up the claims of audible reports. Together this is enough proof to say tube amps do sound different than solid state. Yet blind tests and measurements of equal build SS amps have shown there is no sound difference (when comparing the apples to apples situation per joema's post) and for some reason this conclusion is not accepted by self professed audiophiles.
Amazing how selective ppl become when the results do not follow one's beliefs.

This Panasonic 2x6 is touting is a Class H amp, not a Class A/B. That alone makes it directly incomparable to what most ppl own.
Experimental design theory 101.

I see. So, when we compare "equal build SS amps" there is no discernable difference in sound. I suppose the best example of this would be to compare 2 identical receivers, like an Onkyo 797 vs. an Onkyo 797. OK, I see, but as to receivers which are not of "equal build SS amps," then we can expect to hear differences, right?

You have an amazing way of twisting people's words.
Truly incredible.
Keep trying though.
One day you might understand.

In reply to:

---

OK, those who believe all-receivers-sound-the-same, please tell me who has paid more than the $200-300 street price at which the Panasonic SA HE 200 can be had and why?

---

My Onkyo TX-DS575 is 4 years old. I paid about $425 for it. The Panasonic wasn't available at the time.

In reply to:

---

...So, when we compare "equal build SS amps" there is no discernable difference in sound...

---

No. As I stated above, people often hear differences between similar SS amps. IMO many of those are true, valid differences that could be proven with instrumentation. However it's unlikely those differences are due to tonal characteristics of the amplifier stage, rather the uncontrolled test scenario and receiver configuration causes it.

Right on joema.

In order to compare any two audio components -- be they speakers, receivers, or amplifiers -- in any meaningful fashion, you have to remove as many variables as possible.

I thought this was the thread concerning receivers as opposed to the thread dealing with integrated amps.

truly incredible
keep trying though
one day you might understand

Chess that's almost a haiku!

"Re: Wow... Receivers really do sound different!... "

Well, it's pretty obvious that there is "party line" to which posters must conform unless they want to be subject to personal attacks and ridicule.

So, for all of you who know all there is to know about amps, and who "don't trust your ears," screw off.

If your intent was to make the Axiom site an unfriendly and intolerant place, you should be proud.

In reply to:

---

truly incredible
keep trying though
one day you might understand

Chess that's almost a haiku!

---

Hey you're right Raindance!
How does that go again?
5, 7, 5?
So mine is actually 6, 4, 7 syllables?
Well at least i got the total right.

Perhaps a little rearranging and substitution:

Truly marvelous.
One day you might understand.
Keep trying hard though.

Hmm, not quite as poetic.
How about:

Truly marvelous.
One day you might understand.
Keep concentrating.

Peter? Ray? Ajax? Intrepid? TomT? Bigwill?
Care to take a crack at that one?
I want to see JohnK do haiku.

I'm compelled to agree. This site has jumped the shark. Can't really call it a forum anymore. It's more of a double-blind clique or a scientific circle jerk dominated by individuals who will stridently and truculently shout down anyone who dares voice an opinion or an experience that they view as heresy. What a wonderful combination of hubris and pedantry. Julian Hirsch is not dead. His spirit lives on in this forum.

P.S. Receivers, interconnects, speaker cable, power conditioners, etc., all have an audible effect on the sound. If you can't hear it, TFB.

You are going to have a hard time convincing people that things like speaker cable make a difference when Alan (the editor of Sound and Vision magazine) is posting that in scientific blind tests run for many years they have proved that you cannot tell any difference.

Ask him yourself, he had a good article on it you can access if you subscribe to the monthly newsletter.

I've got an H/K 525. Reasons I didn't get that one:
1. It wasn't out when I purchased.
2. It's a Panasonic. Sorry, but I don't equate them with quality in audio equipment. I could easily be wrong, here.
3. It's ugly.
4. My reciever has 8 channel input and output.
5. Logic7.
6. Triple crossover.
7. Multiroom.
8. More than one coaxial digital input/output.
9. I don't know that thing's true output ratings (ie, not Manufacturer's claimed), but the H/K actually performs better (wattage-wise) than the manufacturer claims.

Essentially, it comes down to feature set. And I only paid $500 for it.

In reply to:

---

Can't really call it a forum anymore.

---

Twirly,

Everyone here is welcome to his or her own opinions. It's only when people try to pass their opinions off as fact that the "scientific circle jerks" feel it is necessary to point out the flaws in those beliefs. I don't know about you, but I'd trust results from scientifically controlled tests over my own ears in an uncontrolled environment any day.

This Axiom Forum (and it's still a forum) happens to be home to many people who value scientific data over personal opinion. Part of the reason why Axiom speakers are so good is that through their entire development process they've been subjected to test after test after test after test -- many of them double-blind. Would you rather the designers had just trusted their ears and produced an un-neutral speaker tailored to their own personal bias?

If you don't like it here anymore, then GTFO.

chess - I'm not touchin' that haiku!! I had it once and it took enormous amounts of penicillin to clean up. The itching was unbearable.

Twirly, I read your posting three times. I'm not sure what you said but I'm strangely excited. I love you man!!!!

In general, when I wandered into this forum, I found it's tone refereshing and the information was really helpful. I did alot of deep diving and the detail was wonderful. Of late, there is a hint of wandering and hijacking. I am going to try and get a bit more focus on the esoteric goal of actually being helpful, but I don't think the forum is becoming an animal house.

Having said that, - "Quoits, anyone?"

A few haiku entries:

Wonderful mantra:
My ears have god-like power
Science can't touch them


Always trust your ears
Scientific evidence
Is a pile of crap


Rock, paper, scissors
I'll roshambo you for it
BAM! Ears beat em' all.


Ears are not alone
In between then sits a lump
Influencing all

Does GTFO mean what I think it means? If it does, then real classy.

For those of you who have not been around very long, I believe that this thread progressed (mastastisized - sp?) in such a way due to many past, irresolvable disagreements between certain members of the forum.
I would hope everybody can discern differences of opinion from personal attacks. If we cannot differ w/out getting personally upset then interaction and the free exchange of info will be impossible.
I KNOW I have offended many people with my opinions, but there are many reasons why I hold them and voice them. Some of those whom I have offended, I am pleased to see, seem to still consider me a "friend".
And (my 2 cents) if receivers do sound different, it is to such an infinitesimal (sp?) degree as to be largely irrelevant in the face of other factors.

Is is really worse than TFB? At least I didn't resort to name-calling and personally insulting a large percentage of the forum membership.

Around here it's hate the sin and not the sinner.

pmb, how could you get it so backwards? There is an arrogant and immodest intolerance among a clique on this site. Review this thread and you will see rude and insulting comments. What provoked this behavior? A different opinion? A report that someone can hear an audible difference between receivers?

Who is stating 'facts' in an arrogant and pedantic manner? Not folks to whom these insults have been directed.

If all we do here is stroke each other about how smart we are for having chosen Axiom speakers, that really gets old pretty quickly. I think it doesn't bode well for this site that one clique of rude shouters attempt to drown out any opinion which differs with their own.

It's hard to stay mad at a big palooka.

BTW, I highly recommend this site. Every regular here fits at least one (if not more) of the illustrated personas.

My replies to you
shall heretofore be stated
in a haiku form.

Arrogance is not
on one side of the battle.
Pride is everywhere.

I'm right! No, I'm right!
This is what it boils down to
when you look at it.

Fundamental diffs
aren't easy to overcome
when we're all entrenched.

Thanks pmbuko. Hysterical. Now I just need to figure out which one I am....

jr

I like Peter's Haikus A LOT.

I hope both 2x6spds and Chesseroo stick around, because I enjoy and learn from both of them A LOT.

Craig has got to be shaking his head, and his restraint is something to which I can only aspire.

I think y'all should spend more time on listening and drinking and less time typing and thinking.

My receiver sounds the same as it did yesterday, as far as I can tell.

Where's Bren and his campfire sing-a-long?

talking and learning
are not like understanding
but beer often helps

In the words of Lyle Lovett, I love everybody.

Peace out, word up, GTO, AM/FM ... oh whatever.

What have I done???...Sorry - oh well, debate is healthy! The M22ti's sound awesome!! Can't wait to play with my amps...

Yes i've learned from 2x6 as well.
I've learned how he has the amazing ability to insult people in a real mild and subtle manner and yet continue to post me away like his sh_t don't stink.
Anonymity behind the computer empowers him oh so greatly.

For those relatively new to the forum, this is unfortunately not the first time 2x6 has inflamed so many in a given thread and somehow tried to blame the elevation of tempers on someone else. I think Semi put it best so long ago.

I'm no Palooka! I'm always right and I always win!

You strike me as a bit of a "L'Enfant Provacateur", however.

Somehow, as one who has had heated discussions with you, BigWill, I don't think Peter was referring to you as the Palooka...

In reply to:

---

Everyone take cover!

---

Wow...did I ever call this one!

I'll never understand how discussions about people's home electronics can become so heated. It's a chunk of metal that makes music.

Group hug everyone...let's move on. This board is full of too many great people, great information, and great fun to have these type of threads ruin it.

It's those sacred cows. When you shoot them people get upset. ;-)

jr

I'm somewhat amazed watching this unfold. Tom hit the nail on the head; It's entertainment, not life & death. There is nothing here that is worth getting this heated about. The banter, the info exchange, the help for the newbies and occasional visitors - that's where the critical mass is. This is a welcome haven in the day, a place to kick back with your feet up and revel in the experience. Opinions can be expressed without putting a finger in someone's eye. I'd rather see a little positive bent and support. Makes the experience worthwhile and attracts folks to learn about Axioms rather than putting them off for reasons unrelated to discourse on audio. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Alright, I can't resist.
I've read almost all of the "Flame Warrior" bios that Peter linked.
What identities most corellate to our primary combatants here? I'm voting one or both of them of them is "Stone Deaf".
I was looking for "Steel Trap" and "Stubborn Mule" but those weren't on the list.

i'm nominating everyone on this board as a Tireless Rebutter. Other than that "universally loathed" thing.

Peter...you're a nut.

Is the riot over, yet?

maybe someone can post a poll to find out how many people think receivers do or do not sound different....i would set it up,but i dont know how...ron

I think that is the gist of the argument rcvecc. People "think" receivers sound different without any actual proof. They listened to the old receiver last night, bought the new one today, plug it all up, and wow...it sounds "better". No adjusting them the same, no hooking both up to listen back and forth, etc. Besides the fact if you just spent big bucks on a receiver, you need to justify its purchase (you are biased).

As I mentioned above, people think those $500/ft speaker cables sound better, but actual tests show that you cant tell the difference.

Note: Im just a noob relating facts, not trying to take a side

Oh, but you just did.

Wait for it....

Here it comes....

FLAME WAR!

OK, here's the poll.



There, how's that? I think it sums up the arguments here nicely.

Do receivers sound different single choice
	Of course they do, you knucklehead!
	Of course they don't, you moron!
	I trust my ears. I've heard a lot of them, and they do, you idiot!
	If you turn off all the tone controls, DSPs, equalize everything, etc., then they don't, you jerk!
	Who gives a rat's ass, anyway?
	I'm a bunny rabbit with a pancake on its head!
Votes accepted starting: 05/24/06 10:11 PM
View Results

Thanks, Ken. My only regret is that I cannot vote more than once for the "rat's ass" option. I was SO hoping that it would be included.

That is actually a standard response in our house -
Q. How do you feel about ?
A. Well, if you just sneak the phrase "rat's ass" in there somewhere, I think you'd just about have it.

Hi all,

Not trying to be a tireless rebutter, but just returned home and thought this an interesting thread. Anyhow, I think intuitively that electronics, cables, etc, are the combination of numerous parts that combine to form an end product. In the culinary arts, different ingredients yield quite different food items.

The application of casual empiricism would lead me to believe the same about receivers and audio components. I don't think that different models that have heterogeneous components will sound homogenous in their final state. Speakers with the same drivers can sound very different if the crossover is tweaked slightly or if the box volume and dimensions are adjusted. In the same way I would think that individual parts of receivers can affect the unit's sonic presentation significantly. Do power supplies, DSP processing chips, and resistors make a difference? Does the quality of the receiver's pre-amplifier section make a difference? How about the internal toplogy? I have seen Yamaha advertise their TOPART design philosophy and have wondered if if influences sound (my first receiver was a Yammy that I was happy with).

Anyhow, I may be respectfully disagreeing with the majority here, but I do think that receivers and components introduce their own unioque sonic character in the audio stream. From cables to the speakers, I feel the audio signal is incluenced at each level.

I personally do not buy exotic cables or wires, and only stumbled on some Kimber 8PR cable on the cheap as someone I know was practically giving it away. More to the point however, I recently purchased a NAD receiver that I side-by-side compared with my older HK and a Denon 3802. I am not a scientist or audio guru, but using flat settings, banana plugs for hot swaps, and my trusty rat shack digital SPL meter, the same speakers in the same spot, and the same source material, I thought I heard distinct sonic characters of each receiver. I would have been happy with each and the differences weren't always nicght and day, but in the end my wife and I felt to our ears there was a clear winner.

Anyhow, I have always appreciated the advice and information on these boards and have an almost complete Axiom system because of it. I do however allow for the possibility of distinct differences in audio equipment. Regards,

Chad

Thank you for the polite, well fleshed-out response. It's nice to see someone injecting civility into this. (spoken as one who is often not very civil.)

Oh yeah, and welcome! Not all of our threads are so contentious. Really.

Excellent argument. I had a similar experience when I went shopping for a new receiver two years ago. I compared a Denon 2802 to an Arcam AVR100. Granted, the audition wasn't done with an SPL meter, but volumes were adjusted up and down for comparisons. The Arcam won the audition, and my business, in a no-contest. I had read a single review in Home Theater magazine on the Arcam, and multiple reviews on the Denon. I don't think my expectation was great enough going into the audition to explain the differences I heard.

I believe there are significant differences between electronic components that are compatible with a scientific viewpoint. Noise floor/background hiss is a perfect example, as is attack and decay. Neither would show up on a frequency response graph (which is done with test tones), but both have easily appreciated audible differences.

FH, I didn't want to extend this thread still further, but a couple of comments are in order. Certainly a much higher noise level in one receiver could in some circumstances be audible in quieter passages, but manufacturers specify noise and distortion ratings(and a few reviewers actually test for them)which are generally inaudibly low and in any case don't affect the other aspects of sound quality.

What you termed "attack and decay" would in fact show up in frequency response graphs if it was inadequate in some poorly-designed amp. In order for an amp to reproduce a frequency at a flat level and with low distortion, it has to have a high-enough "slew rate", which measures the ability to rapidly supply changing voltage requirements at different frequencies and levels of loudness. If it can do 20-20,000Hz flat and with inaudibly low distortion, that establishes that it has a high enough slew rate. No differences in "attack" exist in such items.

Sheesh, where did you get a 525 for $500? I just picked up a 330 for $500 (same price jandr.com is selling them for) and thought that I got a good deal...

It was a refurb from One Call (an authorized online retailer). I think it was actually more like 550-600 after all was said and done... (Yeah, I bought into their rip-off extended warranty...) but it was still a fantastic deal.

I don't want to open up anything that will lead to another group hug (after another breech), but a simple question here, especially for the no-difference crowd: What about THD? Receivers have different THD levels. Surely one can hear an appreciable difference when the THD gets up above 1%, as it does on some of the cheapest consumer-big-box and HTIB receivers. (None of which are regularly recommended on this forum.) I'm further willing to believe that your run-of-the-mill hifi enthusiast can detect subtle differences between a receiver with THD of .04% (say, Yamaha) and one at .08% (H/K). I haven't heard the difference, but that's because I've never done the blind (or even sighted) A/B test. But it hardly seems far-fetched to accept that there is a difference. I KNOW BEYOND A DOUBT that I can hear it above the 1% range, b/c I've brought home and returned some cheap-o receivers in my day. Features didn't account for the poor sound quality.

Birdman

Oh, I don't think anyone is saying that the cheap-o ones don't sound different. Or ones that are underpowered for the speakers and clip. However, 1% is a whole lot bigger than a .03% differential. (BTW, just because I looked at the specs recently, the H/K 525 has a THD of .07%) Because I don't have data in front of me, I can't quote numbers, but I seriously doubt that anyone can hear this difference.

One other point: When doing A/B comparisons in a retail store you usually have your back turned to the salesworm. All kinds of shennanigans could be going on. While comparing a Denon 2802 to a Sony ES receiver the salesworm turned the volume and treble down on the Denon in order to get me to buy the Sony (it seems he and another salesworm were disagreeing about who should get credit for the sale - as I had demoed Denons with the other guy the day before).

Rjones -- I just "ordered" the HK AVR 525 from Harman Kardon's ebay account. They sell them refurbished with warranty -- the winning bids typically end somewhere between 450-560. My winning bid was 480, but it was $515 after shipping. You should check it out, as HK seems to put them up for sale daily.

The main reason I purchased it was to replace my cheapo one, which had a high THD rating of .7% at some rated frequency like 2 khz. I'm anxious to hear if I do perceive a difference -- seeing as the HK will be a bit beefier in power.

AB, of course when distortion gets high enough it can be heard as a difference in sound. How high is "high enough" depends to a large extent on what type of material is being reproduced. On music, testing has shown that THD has to be higher than 1%(sometimes 2-3%) before a difference is identified in blind tests. There's no way that distortions so far below the threshhold of audibility as .04% and .08% could be differentiated. They would have to be at least 20 times as much. So yes, of course very high levels of noise and distortion, along with big frequency deviations could be heard, but they don't occur in well-designed equipment, whether it costs $200 or $2,000.

hi john,dont take this as a stab at you,ok,but i believe receivers sound different.As you said in your last sentence,---So yes, of course very high levels of noise and distortion, along with big frequency deviations could be heard, but they don't occur in well-designed equipment, whether it costs $200 or $2,000.---wouldnt you say that different receivers are designed differently,and somwhere down the line,one would be not so well- designed as the others resulting in a different -or -not as good sound as the others?...is it possible for one receiver to have more output in the higher freq or lower range than the next?...ron

John K: What you said makes sense to me ("On music, testing has shown that THD has to be higher than 1%(sometimes 2-3%) before a difference is identified in blind tests. There's no way that distortions so far below the threshhold of audibility as .04% and .08% could be differentiated."). I haven't A/B'ed anything, so was just wondering.

Are those tests on the Web anywhere?

So....I am confident that I personally can not distinguish the differences between "high-end" receivers when tested blind and equally configured.

That said, I don't much care to test them like that. While it may be meaningful for advertising and benchmarking, it's not how, IMO, people listen to them in their homes. (In other words "I'm a bunny rabbit with a pancake on its head"?)

What do people think about the sound of the receivers when they are *not* equally configured? Meaning:
YES equal volume levels.
But aside from that, let each company run with whatever effects it provides over the others.

And lets not limit this to receivers, since I'm operating under the assumptions I stated above about my hearing ability, lets open up the floor to pre-amps too (assume, if you will feel better about it, that they're connected to the same amp.)

Prompted by this and [many] other online postings, I set out to learn, once and for all, 'do all receivers sound the same in a real-world setting?' So, early last month I took the better part of a weekend and set to work recruiting help and components. I own three receivers; a modern, (two-years old), high-end Pioneer Elite VSX-36tx, an old, (some would call it vintage), Pioneer SX3700, and a Technics SA-DA10 unit, (most expensive in the ‘SA’ line which they manufactured before they pulled the plug in North America a few years ago). One sits in the living room, one is generally in the basement packed away and the other in the shop. I also borrowed my brother's ‘low-end’ Kenwood VR806 receiver, a local store's top-of-the-line NAD 773 and my ex-roomate’s Denon AVR 1603. I scrounged around for both Yamaha and Onyko receivers but came up empty... which is unfortunate as I have always had this mental image of Yamaha products sounding ‘better’ than all other components; maybe I have been sucked in by the “natural sound” mantra of the company…

My brother and I both have excellent hearing, he is 26 I am 39 years of age, and we prefer different music styles... to say the least. We both play 7-string guitar, as does my wife who is also blessed with a beautiful voice, (sings at special events). Additionally, we attend a great many live musical presentations in our city, thus, I feel that we have a solid foundation of how music ‘should sound’.

Armed with more audio gear than common sense would allow, we sat down for the better part of an entire weekend of -20 degree outdoor temperatures, (hiding in the house from our beautiful Canadian weather), swapping receivers and cables from our source, (a brand-new Elite 47Ai, SACD / DVD-A CD player). Our reference material included ‘standard’ CDs, as well as SACD & DVD-Audio discs. We listened to a stunning array of material from raunchy punk-rock & metal, (his choices), to more ‘moderate’ selections from Dylan, Pink Floyd, Neil Young, BB King and, for the reference sake of clarity, (to cleanse the mental palette), a ‘sampler’ Teldec CD of classical music. Our patch cabling was all Audio Research manufactured with the exception of the heavy-gauge speaker wires which were manufacturer by Paradigm. The loudspeakers were swapped back and forth between a set of Magneplanar 1.6QR’s and Paradigm Acoustics Monitor 9’s, (indulgent enough to own both). The room is irregularly shaped, sort of an abbreviated “L”, approximately 20 feet wide and 35 feet long, carpeted and hosting a variety of soft furniture, but mostly ‘acoustically hard’ walls.

After many hours of work swapping components and listening, (repeat), at a variety of volume levels, from subtle to uncomfortable, both of us agreed; when tone controls are set to 'flat', volume is adjusted to produce the same SPL, (using a Radio Shack SPL meter mid-room) and all DSP sound effects are disabled on the units (the method we employed for all testing), the end-result is that (our samples), of reasonably well constructed receivers appear to, quite frankly, sound pretty damned much the same - this includes units in our test group running from a little more than a hundred and fifty dollars, all the way up to a unit which costs nearly three grand (with taxes).

What else can I say, well, to quote my grandma, “stick that in your pipe and smoke it”

I read a lot of stuff I can't comprehend here. When I bought mine, I tried an Onkyo and a NAD, both similar in price. They sounded incredibly different. The NAD was smoother and beefier. The Onkyo seemed a little more detailed.

Even my girlfriend who could care less about audio was able to tell which receiver was which in blind testing. I had already heard them so I couldn't do the blind tests.

Hey DF,

I just got back from vacation and have been catching up on the ungodly number of posts that occured in the past week. This thread seems to have fallen by the wayside, so I thought I'd lift it up again.

It sounds like you really took the time to try to do the comparative listening thoroughly and carefully. Although I can't say I find your results surprising, I thank you for sharing the results of your "ears-on" test.

Just to let you know, Big John.....filled in with the "jokes" while you were gone.

LT

From the looks of it, some comic relief was needed around here.

I also “herd” a difference between receivers when I started shopping around for a new one. I went to the local audio store and demoed a Denon 1905 and a Yamaha 650. And I herd a difference. The Yamaha was brighter. A few days later I went a different store and listened to the same receivers again. Could not here one bit of difference between the two. I got the Denon and I’m very happy with it. After hooking it up when I got home I could not here a difference between it and my Sony HTiB receiver accept at very high levels. The Denon has some head room and my old Sony didn’t. The salesman at the first store was a Yamaha fan. The salesman at the second store did not seem to have a preference and focused on the features of the receivers. After all this the next time I buy a piece of equipment I’ll bring the items home give them a try and take back the ones I don’t want.