# Is Onkyo 818 worth $100 more then the 809?



## tfontana625 (Jan 15, 2009)

I'm looking at A4L to by a new Onkyo Receiver, I've had my I on an 809 for a while but now notice that they have the 818 now for just a $100 bucks more. The only difference I see it the Audyssey XT32 in the 818 over the XT in the 809. Are there other differences that I am missing and is the XT32 that much better? 

I'm planning on running this with Aon2 fronts and Supersat rears from GET. Then eventually getting a SVS sub.

The room I have is about 12' x 22' wide living room with two double door wide openings on either side of the front wall with TV in the middle and Couch, LS and Recliner along the opposite long wall about 11 to 14 ft from the TV. I wouldn't say the room is overly live or dead.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Yes, I do think the XT32 is worth it. Particularly if your running two subs.


----------



## asere (Dec 7, 2011)

tonyvdb said:


> Yes, I do think the XT32 is worth it. Particularly if your running two subs.


Yes I completely agree!!


----------



## ALMFamily (Oct 19, 2011)

Completely agree with Tony - I have an 809 and would gladly trade it in with an additional $100 to get XT32.


----------



## JBrax (Oct 13, 2011)

I also have the 809 and as Joe said I would trade up for $100


----------



## sdurani (Oct 28, 2010)

Worth it for Audyssey MultEQxt32, which does a better job correcting problems in the low frequencies than MultEQ by concentrating more of the filter taps in the bass range. Old MultEQ spread the filters evenly across the entire frequency range, which isn't as useful since corrections in the low frequencies are the more audible and make for a bigger improvement. 

9.2 pre-outs and DTS Neo:X processing are nice features as well.


----------



## magic (May 23, 2011)

The 818 does not do 2 sub equalization separately. In order to get you xt32 (at that price) they took it out. They Y split the second sub internally. 

If you only use 1 sub it will use xt32 filters for it though. The second sub will be set to the same settings as the first. Fyi Most people use one sub they say they will get a second one but don't. Or they get one and make a second zone/ room etc...

It is worth it for $100 more. In my opinion.


----------



## tfontana625 (Jan 15, 2009)

I'm definitely sold on the 818 now. I don't plan on getting 2 subs unless I upgrade to the Triton Towers some day, but that may be a long while. I am considering psb image speakers as apposed to the GETs, but that's a topic for another thread and that's not affecting my decision on the Receiver.


----------



## sdurani (Oct 28, 2010)

magic said:


> If you only use 1 sub it will use xt32 filters for it though. The second sub will be set to the same settings as the first.


That's not quite how it works. When you fire up both subs together, you hear the interaction between the subs, and that interaction is what xt32 sets the filters for. It's not like it measure one sub and then sets the "same settings" for a second sub.


----------



## magic (May 23, 2011)

sdurani said:


> That's not quite how it works. When you fire up both subs together, you hear the interaction between the subs, and that interaction is what xt32 sets the filters for. It's not like it measure one sub and then sets the "same settings" for a second sub.


No, 
The 818 doesn't have SubEQ HT, which allows the independent EQ'ing of two subs. In a sense it's second out is a Y splitter 

The 1010 and up can because it has it. 

Edit 

https://audyssey.zendesk.com/entries/20953442-subeq-ht-vs-multeq-xt32

Read the response by Chris Kyriakakis posting as he explains it better.


----------



## asere (Dec 7, 2011)

I wonder how much improvement I can get on my Hsu with the xt32. My multi eq is nice now but curious with better filters.


----------



## sdurani (Oct 28, 2010)

magic said:


> The 818 doesn't have SubEQ HT, which allows the independent EQ'ing of two subs.


Sub EQ HT doesn't independently EQ each of the 2 subs; it calibrates each sub (sets levels and distances) separately, but it EQs them together as a single sub. 

Since the listener never hears each sub independently, it doesn't make sense to EQ them separately. All the listener hears is the sound of both subs interacting in the room, which is why the interaction between the two subs is what is EQed. 

Suppose you place one subwoofer in the room and measure a peak at 65Hz. Then suppose you add another sub opposite the first sub, which ends up cancelling the 65Hz peak. It wouldn't make sense to EQ the peak away on the first sub when it automatically disappears by adding a second sub.


magic said:


> Read the response by Chris Kyriakakis posting as he explains it better.


I'll quote from the link you posted: 

_"The idea is to first measure each sub separately, then apply delay and level settings so that the two subs are now time and level aligned. Then we ping them once more as "one" sub to derive the room correction filter."_ 

Note that last sentence.


magic said:


> The 1010 and up can because it has it.


Again, from Chris: 

_"As far as I know these are simply internally connected to play the same signal so no individual control is possible on the 1010 and 3010."_


----------



## magic (May 23, 2011)

sdurani said:


> Sub EQ HT doesn't independently EQ each of the 2 subs; it calibrates each sub (sets levels and distances) separately, but it EQs them together as a single sub.
> 
> Since the listener never hears each sub independently, it doesn't make sense to EQ them separately. All the listener hears is the sound of both subs interacting in the room, which is why the interaction between the two subs is what is EQed.
> 
> ...




Ok, bad choice of words saying EQ but the original poster and others who are looking at this receiver and are not going to use 2 subs don't need this feature. 

If I have a 2 subs( example ) 
reasoning say I have 1 by Hsu and the second 1 from Jbl then have them in different locations in the room this feature is applicable. Your scenario of having 2 identical subs at equal distances to the listening position is what he was referring to. That is my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong.

The premis behind this is to say the 1st sub gives a 65 khz spike of +10 db and the 2nd sub is set to high counteracting the first 65 khz by say -5db but if you had run the sub EQ HT it would have say fixed the 2nd subs level, nulling the difference. but now because you don't have sub EQ HT you have to eq it when you didn't. have to etc... and i haven't mentioned the first sub is a 12inch and the second is a 15inch one. 


He was incorrect. or the website for Audyssey is wrong. I think he was wrong. Please see link below The 1010,3010 and 5010 all have Sub EQ HT
select [Sub EQ HT] and then [search products] 

http://www.audyssey.com/products?field_multeq_flavor_value[]=MultEQ+XT32&tid[]=100&pid=All&ptype=



sorry I'm not sure how to quote and respond to each one as you did. I have to read up on this


----------



## sdurani (Oct 28, 2010)

magic said:


> If I have a 2 subs( example )
> reasoning say I have 1 by Hsu and the second 1 from Jbl then have them in different locations in the room this feature is applicable. Your scenario of having 2 identical subs at equal distances to the listening position is what he was referring to. That is my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong.


The subs don't need to be identical nor at equal distances from the listening position in order to cancel room modes and yield a smoother response. Multiple subs can give you improvements even when you can't adjust their delay and level through your pre-pro.


magic said:


> The premis behind this is to say the 1st sub gives a 65 khz spike of +10 db and the 2nd sub is set to high counteracting the first 65 khz by say -5db but if you had run the sub EQ HT it would have say fixed the 2nd subs level, nulling the difference. but now because you don't have sub EQ HT you have to eq it when you didn't. have to etc... and i haven't mentioned the first sub is a 12inch and the second is a 15inch one.


Once you find a location for the second sub that cancels the peak from the first sub, you can adjust their relative levels on the subwoofer amps. It's not really necessary to have that functionality built into the pre-pro. Once you have your subs optimized, you can treat them as a single subwoofer. That's the only time you need to be able to adjust subwoofer level and distance in the pre-pro, so that you can match the speakers. 

Earl Geddes has a good primer on using more than one sub to get better bass. Start reading from the part titled *calibration procedure*: http://mehlau.net/audio/multisub_geddes/


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
I too would go ahead and spend the additional $100 to get the 818. Audyssey XT32 is utterly brilliant and I have enjoyed it immensely. I will also say that SubEQ HT is special as it offers almost the entire functionality of the $800 SVS AS-EQ1 that was co-developed by SVS and Audyssey.

In my particular situation SubEQ HT was perfect as I am using 2 different Martin Logan subwoofers that share the same design, but use different size woofers and the Descent i has a much larger cabinet. While the MultEQ XT on my TX-NR3007 did a nice job with the tandem, SubEQ HT was transcendent.

So with this being said, if you can find a TX-NR3009 for anywhere near the price of an 818, I would jump all over it. Not only would you get SubEQ HT, you would also get a 9 Channel AVR, THX Ultra2 Plus Certification, and Multichannel Analog Inputs. For that matter, the TX-NR3008 that I am using offers XT32/SubEQ HT and is HDMI 1.4. The Video Processing offered by the HQV Vida/Marvell Qdeo tandem is a touch better than the HQV Reon VX, but it is not a huge downgrade.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## DanTheMan (Oct 12, 2009)

At this point I would say get the best version of Audyssey you can afford.

Dan


----------



## adept777 (Nov 6, 2011)

Guys; I have noticed the price of TX NR818 dropping since the last few weeks. So I was wondering if it would be a major upgrade for me to buy that over what I have now; TX NR709. For speakers I have the complete Energy RC series: RC70 for FLFR LCR for Center RC10 for SLSR and the RCR for the SBL SBR. I also have the VTF-1 MK2 and the ED A2 300! Thank you for your input.


----------



## asere (Dec 7, 2011)

adept777 said:


> Guys; I have noticed the price of TX NR818 dropping since the last few weeks. So I was wondering if it would be a major upgrade for me to buy that over what I have now; TX NR709. For speakers I have the complete Energy RC series: RC70 for FLFR LCR for Center RC10 for SLSR and the RCR for the SBL SBR. I also have the VTF-1 MK2 and the ED A2 300! Thank you for your input.


I have looked into getting the 709 many times because it seems to be a nice receiver and at one point I almost got it until I saw the price drop on the 818 I became more interested in the 818 primarily because it has XT32. I currently on a Denon thats amazing with just Multieq and never owned an Onkyo but my next step will be maybe the 818. To answer your question I am not sure if the 818 would be much different than the 709. They both have pre outs to add an amp, THX etc. The main reason to get the the 818 would be for XT32 and has a bigger amp. Many swear by XT32 and thats why I'm tempted.


----------



## randyc1 (Jul 20, 2011)

Is the 3008 or 3009 availible at around the same price point as the 818 ??


----------



## asere (Dec 7, 2011)

randyc1 said:


> Is the 3008 or 3009 availible at around the same price point as the 818 ??


I haven't had luck finding it for 800 or so.


----------

