[JimC]

I have previously inquired about receivers or pre/processors that would
be good performers in a system with both audio (stereo and SACD
surround) and HD video. It was suggested that it would be some time
before receivers and/or pre/pros would incoporate or be compatible with
all the most desirable HDTV and SACD features/codexes. In other words,
those units intended primarily for video didn't include features I would
want for SACD surround, (such as adjustable bass management for
front/surround/center channels, good level matching from multiple
positions, etc.). Also, few "audio-centered" units seemed to include all
the possible video functions one might want in the future, such as HDMI
1.3, etc. - Since I don't upgrade very often (new electronics maybe
every 10 - 15 years), it didn't see, to make sense for me to replace my
existing system with one that lack features I may want in the next few
years, despite that fact that some of those features won't be in general
use soon (e.g., HDMI 1.3, deep color, etc.).

Recently, however, some new receivers coming on the market seem to
include lots of such capabilities and features. For example, from the
reviews and specs of the new Onkyo TX-SR receivers, e.g., the TX SR-705
and SR-805, I can't think of much else that I would want in the near
future. They all include HDMI 1.3 compatibility, 1080p upconversion,
multi-channel bass management, etc., and the 805 includes Burr-Brown DAC
circuitry, HD tuner, etc., etc. I think that some others also include
many of these features. - I'm aware that I can't get a system that's
entirely "future proof", but these units seem to go a long way. At a
minimum, the switching capabilities of these units could be an
improvement over my existing rats-nest (three banks of multisection
swithing units connected to multiple cables.) - Does anyone have any
comments regarding these, or other such units?

Since I have three stereo power amps that I use to drive my Maggies, I
probably wouldn't use the power amp sections provided in such a
receiver. - So, I might prefer to get a good pre/processor rather than a
receiver if it would provide higher quality audio. - However, I don't
see any pre/pros on the market that have anywhere near the versatility
and features of these new receivers. Also, I don't really want to
invest multiple thousands of $$$ in a low-volume "hand crafted" unit
from a high-end manufacturer.

Any comments would be appreciated, including suggestions regarding
units from other manufactures (Sony, Pioneer, HK, Outlaws, Rotel)
expected on the market in the next six months that would have similar
capabilities. Basically my major concern relates to the quality of the
audio of the preamp sections (not the power amps) of units such as these
from Onkyo, comparable to the better current Onkyo units? If the answer
regarding audio quality is negative, I suppose that I could still use my
old Carver preamp and external power amps for stereo.

Jim

[Vinyl Rules!]

A few comments below:

1. I think a surprisingly large number of people use the preamp
sections of A/V receivers with separate power amps for their A/V
systems. There are many A/V receivers with preamps much more
sophisticated than those in separate preamps that sell for thousands
of $$$.

2. IMHO, Onkyo makes good quality receivers. There was an interview
with the head designer of Onkyo in a UK magazine about two years ago
("Stereo World"). In the interview, he noted that he used McIntosh
amps to "voice" Onkyo products to sound as close as possible to a
McIntosh amp. I believe there is some truth to this:
I went through the same dilemma you are going through about 5 years
ago. I have all McIntosh amps for my stereo/5.1 A/V system and I was
looking at the MX134 A/V preamp made by McIntosh. I brought one home
to listen to, but I also, on a friend's recommendation, brought home
an Onkyo TX-DS696 5.1 A/V receiver to use as a preamp as well.

I was astounded at how little difference I heard between the two
units. I certainly didn't hear $5,000 worth of difference. Yes, the
Mac would have looked better in my system, but not $5,000 better.
YMMV, of course. I returned the Mac and kept the Onkyo.

About 18 months ago I was looking for something with a bit more
flexibility than the Onkyo and I wanted to try the DTS "Neo" Cinema
and Music features that the Onkyo did not have. Lo and behold, Chris
Marteens reviewed the Yamaha RX-V657 in "The Perfect Vision" and "TAS"
and couldn't write enough kind words about it.
So I ordered one, figuring I could use it in a spare room if I didn't
like it. IMHO, it actually sounded better than the Onkyo, it had more
inputs, and its tuner was much more sensitive, so it replaced the
Onkyo and the Onkyo is now in the spare room.

3. I didn't need HDMI switching (no HDTV signals can be picked up
where I live, no cable available, so my only source is satellite and
that's not full 1080p). Onkyo now make several A/V receivers with HDMI
switching and full decoding of the higher resolution HD-DVD and Blu
Ray audio channels. I'm not sure about Yamaha, but I'm guessing they
probably offer several as well now.

4. I'm not worried about HDMI switching at this point. I happen to
think that both HD-DVD and Blue Ray will be formats that will
ultimately fail, both because of the format war and because with the
upscalers being added to low-cost DVD players like the Oppo DV-981HD,
many people aren't going to see that much difference in signal quality
between a $15 DVD and the $25 to $30 HD-DVD/Blu Ray disc. Your opinion
may be different, but I think most people are satisfied with a 42" (or
smaller) display fed with either an upscaled component or HDMI output
from their DVD player. I just don't see masses of people ditching
their DVD movies and replacing them with higher-resolution and
slightly better-sounding HD-DVDs or Blu Ray.

5. Finally, if you go the receiver route, you won't have megabucks
invested in a full blown A/V preamp/processor that does all HDMI
switching and decodes the higher resolution audio currently on the
meager assortment of hi rez DVD's currently on the market.
..
On Aug 24, 6:36 pm, JimC wrote:
I have previously inquired about receivers or pre/processors that would
be good performers in a system with both audio (stereo and SACD
surround) and HD video. It was suggested that it would be some time
before receivers and/or pre/pros would incoporate or be compatible with
all the most desirable HDTV and SACD features/codexes. In other words,
those units intended primarily for video didn't include features I would
want for SACD surround, (such as adjustable bass management for
front/surround/center channels, good level matching from multiple
positions, etc.). Also, few "audio-centered" units seemed to include all
the possible video functions one might want in the future, such as HDMI
1.3, etc. - Since I don't upgrade very often (new electronics maybe
every 10 - 15 years), it didn't see, to make sense for me to replace my
existing system with one that lack features I may want in the next few
years, despite that fact that some of those features won't be in general
use soon (e.g., HDMI 1.3, deep color, etc.).

Recently, however, some new receivers coming on the market seem to
include lots of such capabilities and features. For example, from the
reviews and specs of the new Onkyo TX-SR receivers, e.g., the TX SR-705
and SR-805, I can't think of much else that I would want in the near
future. They all include HDMI 1.3 compatibility, 1080p upconversion,
multi-channel bass management, etc., and the 805 includes Burr-Brown DAC
circuitry, HD tuner, etc., etc. I think that some others also include
many of these features. - I'm aware that I can't get a system that's
entirely "future proof", but these units seem to go a long way. At a
minimum, the switching capabilities of these units could be an
improvement over my existing rats-nest (three banks of multisection
swithing units connected to multiple cables.) - Does anyone have any
comments regarding these, or other such units?

Since I have three stereo power amps that I use to drive my Maggies, I
probably wouldn't use the power amp sections provided in such a
receiver. - So, I might prefer to get a good pre/processor rather than a
receiver if it would provide higher quality audio. - However, I don't
see any pre/pros on the market that have anywhere near the versatility
and features of these new receivers. Also, I don't really want to
invest multiple thousands of $$$ in a low-volume "hand crafted" unit
from a high-end manufacturer.

Any comments would be appreciated, including suggestions regarding
units from other manufactures (Sony, Pioneer, HK, Outlaws, Rotel)
expected on the market in the next six months that would have similar
capabilities. Basically my major concern relates to the quality of the
audio of the preamp sections (not the power amps) of units such as these
from Onkyo, comparable to the better current Onkyo units? If the answer
regarding audio quality is negative, I suppose that I could still use my
old Carver preamp and external power amps for stereo.

Jim

[Chung]

Vinyl Rules! wrote:
A few comments below:

1. I think a surprisingly large number of people use the preamp
sections of A/V receivers with separate power amps for their A/V
systems. There are many A/V receivers with preamps much more
sophisticated than those in separate preamps that sell for thousands
of $$$.

The latest advances in DSP tend to show up in receivers first. The
economy of scale dictates that. It is very difficult for small lables
now to compete with the major manufacturers. Separate pre-pros simply do
not make economic sense, and they hold no performance advantages over
receivers used as pre-pros.


2. IMHO, Onkyo makes good quality receivers. There was an interview
with the head designer of Onkyo in a UK magazine about two years ago
("Stereo World"). In the interview, he noted that he used McIntosh
amps to "voice" Onkyo products to sound as close as possible to a
McIntosh amp. I believe there is some truth to this:
I went through the same dilemma you are going through about 5 years
ago. I have all McIntosh amps for my stereo/5.1 A/V system and I was
looking at the MX134 A/V preamp made by McIntosh. I brought one home
to listen to, but I also, on a friend's recommendation, brought home
an Onkyo TX-DS696 5.1 A/V receiver to use as a preamp as well.

I was astounded at how little difference I heard between the two
units. I certainly didn't hear $5,000 worth of difference. Yes, the
Mac would have looked better in my system, but not $5,000 better.
YMMV, of course. I returned the Mac and kept the Onkyo.

It is to be expected that preamps should not have their own sound
signatures: it is not hard to design them so that they are accurate.
After all, we're not talking about phono-preamps.


About 18 months ago I was looking for something with a bit more
flexibility than the Onkyo and I wanted to try the DTS "Neo" Cinema
and Music features that the Onkyo did not have. Lo and behold, Chris
Marteens reviewed the Yamaha RX-V657 in "The Perfect Vision" and "TAS"
and couldn't write enough kind words about it.
So I ordered one, figuring I could use it in a spare room if I didn't
like it. IMHO, it actually sounded better than the Onkyo, it had more
inputs, and its tuner was much more sensitive, so it replaced the
Onkyo and the Onkyo is now in the spare room.

3. I didn't need HDMI switching (no HDTV signals can be picked up
where I live, no cable available, so my only source is satellite and
that's not full 1080p).

The difference between 1080i and 1080p is small and not noticeable by
most people unless you have huge displays. AVS forums have a lot of
discussions about this, and a lot of people do not think 1080p will
bring noticeable image improvements over 1080i.

OTOH, component outputs work well for 1080i.

Onkyo now make several A/V receivers with HDMI
switching and full decoding of the higher resolution HD-DVD and Blu
Ray audio channels. I'm not sure about Yamaha, but I'm guessing they
probably offer several as well now.

4. I'm not worried about HDMI switching at this point. I happen to
think that both HD-DVD and Blue Ray will be formats that will
ultimately fail, both because of the format war and because with the
upscalers being added to low-cost DVD players like the Oppo DV-981HD,
many people aren't going to see that much difference in signal quality
between a $15 DVD and the $25 to $30 HD-DVD/Blu Ray disc.

This is simply wrong. There are significant differences between either
HD format and the stanfard DVD format. Everyone can see that easily on
HDTV's.

It makes little sense to get the Oppo upscaling players now, because the
HD-DVD players have dropped so much in price. You can get the Toshiba
HD-DVD player for less than $300, and they give you 5 HD-DVD discs with
it. The Toshiba is also a great upscaling player for standard DVD's.
Even if HD does not make it, you still have a very nice DVD/CD player so
it is not like it is totally obsolete.

Anyone who has seen HD or BD on HDTV displays can't help but be
impressed. The question is whether those differences are important; I
know people who are happy watching movies on VHS tapes using a
10-year-old 27" CRT TV.

Even putting aside the image quality differences between HD and standard
DVD's, there are other improvements. Much better and more consistent
menu systems, better sound (OK, this is subjective), and potentially
more content on a disc.

Your opinion
may be different, but I think most people are satisfied with a 42" (or
smaller) display fed with either an upscaled component or HDMI output
from their DVD player.

My opinion is definitely different. Since the HD-DVD player is
relatively cheap, and Netflix carries HD and BD discs, it is really a
no-brainer if you already have a good HDTV. Why buy an upscaling DVD
player when you get one with HD-DVD capability for practically the same
price?

I just don't see masses of people ditching
their DVD movies and replacing them with higher-resolution and
slightly better-sounding HD-DVDs or Blu Ray.

No one has to ditch their DVD movies when they buy the newer format
players. I am happy with my standard DVD collections, which play nicely
on the HD-DVD players, but for sure I will buy new titles in HD if they
are available.

[JimC]

Vinyl Rules! wrote:
A few comments below:

1. I think a surprisingly large number of people use the preamp
sections of A/V receivers with separate power amps for their A/V
systems. There are many A/V receivers with preamps much more
sophisticated than those in separate preamps that sell for thousands
of $$$.

2. IMHO, Onkyo makes good quality receivers. There was an interview
with the head designer of Onkyo in a UK magazine about two years ago
("Stereo World"). In the interview, he noted that he used McIntosh
amps to "voice" Onkyo products to sound as close as possible to a
McIntosh amp. I believe there is some truth to this:
I went through the same dilemma you are going through about 5 years
ago. I have all McIntosh amps for my stereo/5.1 A/V system and I was
looking at the MX134 A/V preamp made by McIntosh. I brought one home
to listen to, but I also, on a friend's recommendation, brought home
an Onkyo TX-DS696 5.1 A/V receiver to use as a preamp as well.

I was astounded at how little difference I heard between the two
units. I certainly didn't hear $5,000 worth of difference. Yes, the
Mac would have looked better in my system, but not $5,000 better.
YMMV, of course. I returned the Mac and kept the Onkyo.

About 18 months ago I was looking for something with a bit more
flexibility than the Onkyo and I wanted to try the DTS "Neo" Cinema
and Music features that the Onkyo did not have. Lo and behold, Chris
Marteens reviewed the Yamaha RX-V657 in "The Perfect Vision" and "TAS"
and couldn't write enough kind words about it.
So I ordered one, figuring I could use it in a spare room if I didn't
like it. IMHO, it actually sounded better than the Onkyo, it had more
inputs, and its tuner was much more sensitive, so it replaced the
Onkyo and the Onkyo is now in the spare room.

3. I didn't need HDMI switching (no HDTV signals can be picked up
where I live, no cable available, so my only source is satellite and
that's not full 1080p). Onkyo now make several A/V receivers with HDMI
switching and full decoding of the higher resolution HD-DVD and Blu
Ray audio channels. I'm not sure about Yamaha, but I'm guessing they
probably offer several as well now.

4. I'm not worried about HDMI switching at this point. I happen to
think that both HD-DVD and Blue Ray will be formats that will
ultimately fail, both because of the format war and because with the
upscalers being added to low-cost DVD players like the Oppo DV-981HD,
many people aren't going to see that much difference in signal quality
between a $15 DVD and the $25 to $30 HD-DVD/Blu Ray disc. Your opinion
may be different, but I think most people are satisfied with a 42" (or
smaller) display fed with either an upscaled component or HDMI output
from their DVD player. I just don't see masses of people ditching
their DVD movies and replacing them with higher-resolution and
slightly better-sounding HD-DVDs or Blu Ray.

5. Finally, if you go the receiver route, you won't have megabucks
invested in a full blown A/V preamp/processor that does all HDMI
switching and decodes the higher resolution audio currently on the
meager assortment of hi rez DVD's currently on the market.
.
On Aug 24, 6:36 pm, JimC wrote:

I have previously inquired about receivers or pre/processors that would
be good performers in a system with both audio (stereo and SACD
surround) and HD video. It was suggested that it would be some time
before receivers and/or pre/pros would incoporate or be compatible with
all the most desirable HDTV and SACD features/codexes. In other words,
those units intended primarily for video didn't include features I would
want for SACD surround, (such as adjustable bass management for
front/surround/center channels, good level matching from multiple
positions, etc.). Also, few "audio-centered" units seemed to include all
the possible video functions one might want in the future, such as HDMI
1.3, etc. - Since I don't upgrade very often (new electronics maybe
every 10 - 15 years), it didn't see, to make sense for me to replace my
existing system with one that lack features I may want in the next few
years, despite that fact that some of those features won't be in general
use soon (e.g., HDMI 1.3, deep color, etc.).

Recently, however, some new receivers coming on the market seem to
include lots of such capabilities and features. For example, from the
reviews and specs of the new Onkyo TX-SR receivers, e.g., the TX SR-705
and SR-805, I can't think of much else that I would want in the near
future. They all include HDMI 1.3 compatibility, 1080p upconversion,
multi-channel bass management, etc., and the 805 includes Burr-Brown DAC
circuitry, HD tuner, etc., etc. I think that some others also include
many of these features. - I'm aware that I can't get a system that's
entirely "future proof", but these units seem to go a long way. At a
minimum, the switching capabilities of these units could be an
improvement over my existing rats-nest (three banks of multisection
swithing units connected to multiple cables.) - Does anyone have any
comments regarding these, or other such units?

Since I have three stereo power amps that I use to drive my Maggies, I
probably wouldn't use the power amp sections provided in such a
receiver. - So, I might prefer to get a good pre/processor rather than a
receiver if it would provide higher quality audio. - However, I don't
see any pre/pros on the market that have anywhere near the versatility
and features of these new receivers. Also, I don't really want to
invest multiple thousands of $$$ in a low-volume "hand crafted" unit
from a high-end manufacturer.

Any comments would be appreciated, including suggestions regarding
units from other manufactures (Sony, Pioneer, HK, Outlaws, Rotel)
expected on the market in the next six months that would have similar
capabilities. Basically my major concern relates to the quality of the
audio of the preamp sections (not the power amps) of units such as these
from Onkyo, comparable to the better current Onkyo units? If the answer
regarding audio quality is negative, I suppose that I could still use my
old Carver preamp and external power amps for stereo.

Jim


Thanks for the information. I will probably wait for several months to
see whether other manufacturers release comparable units. However, the
Onkyo 705, 805, and 875 models seem to include every feature I may (or
may not) want in the forseeable future. It's unfortunate that they don't
make a pre/processor (or receiver with the same features but with with
relatively smaller amps) those of us who intend to use external amps, at
least for the main speakers.

Jim

[JimC]

JimC wrote:
I have previously inquired about receivers or pre/processors that would
be good performers in a system with both audio (stereo and SACD
surround) and HD video. It was suggested that it would be some time
before receivers and/or pre/pros would incoporate or be compatible with
all the most desirable HDTV and SACD features/codexes. In other words,
those units intended primarily for video didn't include features I would
want for SACD surround, (such as adjustable bass management for
front/surround/center channels, good level matching from multiple
positions, etc.). Also, few "audio-centered" units seemed to include all
the possible video functions one might want in the future, such as HDMI
1.3, etc. - Since I don't upgrade very often (new electronics maybe
every 10 - 15 years), it didn't see, to make sense for me to replace my
existing system with one that lack features I may want in the next few
years, despite that fact that some of those features won't be in general
use soon (e.g., HDMI 1.3, deep color, etc.).

Recently, however, some new receivers coming on the market seem to
include lots of such capabilities and features.-----------

As understood (correct me if I'm wrong), SACD audio can be processed,
(with bass management and room equalization functionality) in the newer
receivers and pre/pros, provided both the SACD player and AVR receiver
or pre-pro are HDMI 1.2 or 1.3 compatible. Has anyone had experience
with such systems, and does anyone have an opinion as to the quality of
the resulting SACD audio? Would the equalization systems (e.g., the
Audyssey MultEQ system) utilized in some of the new receivers work with
SACD inputs in HDMI 1.3 format, and would the results be as good as I
get with line-level analog signals fed through an ICBM? (One current
problem being that not many SACD players are HDMI 1.2 or 1.3 compatible).

Incidentally, if this is the wrong ng for such a subject, perhaps
someone can tell me where to go. There are a few discussions of the
issue on AVS, though not primarily of the audio quality issue.

Jim Cate

[Kalman Rubinson]

On 12 Sep 2007 22:33:46 GMT, JimC wrote:

As understood (correct me if I'm wrong), SACD audio can be processed,
(with bass management and room equalization functionality) in the newer
receivers and pre/pros, provided both the SACD player and AVR receiver
or pre-pro are HDMI 1.2 or 1.3 compatible.

And have DSD included.

Has anyone had experience
with such systems, and does anyone have an opinion as to the quality of
the resulting SACD audio? Would the equalization systems (e.g., the
Audyssey MultEQ system) utilized in some of the new receivers work with
SACD inputs in HDMI 1.3 format, and would the results be as good as I
get with line-level analog signals fed through an ICBM? (One current
problem being that not many SACD players are HDMI 1.2 or 1.3 compatible).

I have been using this configuration. Contact me off-line, Jim.

Incidentally, if this is the wrong ng for such a subject, perhaps
someone can tell me where to go. There are a few discussions of the
issue on AVS, though not primarily of the audio quality issue.

Really? I see it there.

Kal

[Steven Sullivan]

JimC wrote:
JimC wrote:
I have previously inquired about receivers or pre/processors that would
be good performers in a system with both audio (stereo and SACD
surround) and HD video. It was suggested that it would be some time
before receivers and/or pre/pros would incoporate or be compatible with
all the most desirable HDTV and SACD features/codexes. In other words,
those units intended primarily for video didn't include features I would
want for SACD surround, (such as adjustable bass management for
front/surround/center channels, good level matching from multiple
positions, etc.). Also, few "audio-centered" units seemed to include all
the possible video functions one might want in the future, such as HDMI
1.3, etc. - Since I don't upgrade very often (new electronics maybe
every 10 - 15 years), it didn't see, to make sense for me to replace my
existing system with one that lack features I may want in the next few
years, despite that fact that some of those features won't be in general
use soon (e.g., HDMI 1.3, deep color, etc.).

Recently, however, some new receivers coming on the market seem to
include lots of such capabilities and features.-----------

As understood (correct me if I'm wrong), SACD audio can be processed,
(with bass management and room equalization functionality) in the newer
receivers and pre/pros, provided both the SACD player and AVR receiver
or pre-pro are HDMI 1.2 or 1.3 compatible.

HDMI 1.2 and up offer the option of passing DSD digitally.
SACD's native sample rate is more than 2 MHz. More than
likely,any receiver that can process SACD will convert it to a more manageable
rate as PCM...say, 88.2 kHz/24bit.

Has anyone had experience
with such systems, and does anyone have an opinion as to the quality of
the resulting SACD audio? Would the equalization systems (e.g., the
Audyssey MultEQ system) utilized in some of the new receivers work with
SACD inputs in HDMI 1.3 format, and would the results be as good as I
get with line-level analog signals fed through an ICBM? (One current
problem being that not many SACD players are HDMI 1.2 or 1.3 compatible).

ilink (and Denonlink) could pass decoded DSD digitally to receivers,
and have been around for several years. In all cases I know of,
if any digital processing is done to the signal, it is converted
to PCM first.

More recently, HDMI 1.1 could pass a DSD--PCM conversion in the player,
digitally.

I would not expect either of these to be inferior to the ICBM, on the
contrary, keeping the signal digital allows delay and bass management
and room EQ and other DSP like Dolby Pro Logic to be applied more
consistently.

___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason