# need some quick expert advice on these receivers



## vikod (Sep 30, 2010)

guys....been reading the forum for a while now....for my need to pick up a budget receiver for my friend....he's flying to singapore today and is back on sunday and has limited budget... after going through a bunch of sites looking at features and price....have zeroed down on the below model...

Onkyo

ONKYO HT-RC180 
ONKYO TX-NR708
ONKYO TX-SR608
Onkyo HT-RC270 Network Receiver

Yamaha
Yamaha RX-V467
Yamaha RX-V765
YAMAHA RX-V667BL

Pioneer
Pioneer VSX-1120

need some advice on which one is the best - and any place in singapore (will add up)
would these receivers fit in the 500$US - budget??

will greatly appreciate quick response... thank you so much


----------



## Andre (Feb 15, 2010)

Feature set wise, Its a close IMHO notable additions (all else being comparably equal):
Pioneer VSX-1120 - Room calibration (pioneer), no need for IPOD dock, Bluetooth (requires additional purchase)
Onkyo RC270 - 4 ohm stable, 2 subwoofer outputs, room calibration (Ausyssey)
For a Yamaha that is comparable to the above two you would have to go with a RX-V867

Hope I was have help


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
I would personally go with the TX-NR708 as it offers Audyssey MultEQ, Preamp Outputs, THX Post Processing and Internet Radio. I have greatly enjoyed having Internet Radio on my TX-NR3007.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## Andre (Feb 15, 2010)

The only differnce between the NR708 and the RC270 is that the NR708 has one extra HDMI input, Sat radio ready and an RS-232 connection. Its all about the features that are most important to your friend.


----------



## bambino (Feb 21, 2010)

Out of those choices i'd get the Onkyo, you can get great deals on them to boot.:T


----------



## Moonfly (Aug 1, 2008)

Another vote for the Onkyo here, they are my favourite AVR's personally.


----------



## sparky77 (Feb 22, 2008)

I've had a Sherwood RD-7503 for several months now. 3 hmdi inputs, decodes all the latest audio codecs, and doesn't seem to run out of power at reference level with low efficiency diy speakers, and it has an autocalibration system, but the auto eq doens't seem to be the best, at least I haven't had much luck with it for the limited amount of time I have to run the test routine before the wife gets irritated.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Yamaha for reliability and overall quality as well as service support and parts when needed. Onkyo for most features and bang for the buck.


----------



## vikod (Sep 30, 2010)

thanks guys - comparing Onkyo with the others....feature wise onkyo seems to wins hands down...if the NR708 or the RC270 dont fit in the budget range - how does SR608 figure.
Have never got a chance to audition any of the onkyo series mentioned....though did audition a YAM RX467 (with YAM speakers - not sure on the model) - nd completely fell in love with YAM sound reproduction....and for YAM which one do you guys suggest out of the models mentioned?

Also any idea if these units would carry any international warranty?


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I know of no brands that carry an international warranty. The entities in each country that sell and support the products are usually completely different corporations and most do not provide warranty support to products not sold in their country. Even if all of the national or regional entities are owned by the same manufacturer, they are not usually going to provide support for products from the others.


----------



## akeoo7 (Feb 11, 2010)

The Onkyo 708 and RC270 seem quite Good choices.
The others from Yamaha and pioneer are not bad either but I prefer Audyssey calibration in onkyo.
Listen to the contenders if you can and try to make a personal decision based on your preference.
Good Luck


----------



## spartanstew (May 7, 2009)

While this is traditionally an Onkyo forum, I tend to go against the grain and would get the Pio 1120.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

How is this " traditionally an Onkyo forum?" 

All views are encouraged here. Onkyo tends to have a lot of fans because they have generally been a good value for performance and features. I personally, however, have pointed out the shortcomings in their support and service quite a few times. Home Theater Shack does not seek to be known as primarily promoting any one product, other than REW, around which the forum was built. Other products will get lots of discussion from time to time becuase they have lots of users or users have issues with them. Don't ever feel shy about discussing a preference that is counter to the majority of users. In fact, we encourage it. We would like you to give your reasoning, rather than just stating an opinion. There may be something that others do not know that has influenced your perspective.


----------



## Jasonpctech (Apr 20, 2010)

My vote is for the PIO 1120 I would have bought it in May but it was not available.
I have the only review on epinions covering the VSX-1020 That I own now and love.
Preouts would have been nice and a phono input but other than that my Klipsch setup sound fantastic.
You might consider the VSX-1020 if you want to save money seeing it can be had at 399. online now. Anyways see my review.


----------



## spartanstew (May 7, 2009)

lcaillo said:


> *How is this " traditionally an Onkyo forum?" *
> 
> All views are encouraged here. Onkyo tends to have a lot of fans because they have generally been a good value for performance and features. I personally, however, have pointed out the shortcomings in their support and service quite a few times. Home Theater Shack does not seek to be known as primarily promoting any one product, other than REW, around which the forum was built. Other products will get lots of discussion from time to time becuase they have lots of users or users have issues with them. Don't ever feel shy about discussing a preference that is counter to the majority of users. In fact, we encourage it. *We would like you to give your reasoning, rather than just stating an opinion.* There may be something that others do not know that has influenced your perspective.


Seems more members have Onkyo than anything else, so they're more often recommended.

As for the Pio over the Onkyo, Marvell Qdeo processor in the Pio wins in the video processing department, Onkyo's have a history of heat issues, the Pio has better energy consumption, I like the GUI better, prefer MCACC, and Pio's sound better to me: Tighter bass, less brittle high end, and more power available when you crank it up. I also prefer the look of the Pio's to Onkyo's and in my experience they're more durable (problem free in the long run).


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

spartanstew said:


> Seems more members have Onkyo than anything else, so they're more often recommended.
> 
> As for the Pio over the Onkyo, Marvell Qdeo processor in the Pio wins in the video processing department, Onkyo's have a history of heat issues, the Pio has better energy consumption, I like the GUI better, prefer MCACC, and Pio's sound better to me: Tighter bass, less brittle high end, and more power available when you crank it up. I also prefer the look of the Pio's to Onkyo's and in my experience they're more durable (problem free in the long run).


Hello,
I do not believe that the Onkyo's have "heat issues". Rather, they were Designed to run somewhat hot. Many Amplifiers run quite hot and have stood the test of time. My Aragon 8008bb, Parasound HCA-3500, and HCA-2205AT all run hot and are going on being in use for a Decade. Many other Amplifiers run hot as well. Especially Krell's Class A offerings and many other Designs.

My TX-SR875 was used for 3 Years being on 24/7 with nary an issue. Even though I did not use the Amplification in the AVR, it still ran quite hot. The TX-NR3007 I purchased last Month runs way cooler. With these Models the combination of Reon HQV Processing, MultEQ XT, and much heavier Amplifier Sections than the competition made it hard not to go with Onkyo. Before HDMI 1.3 and Onkyo's x05 Models, I was using Denon AVR's before the VSX-49txi.

And while I am glad you are happy with MCACC, most Professional Reviewers have given Audyssey better Reviews. I purchased a VSX-49txi just to have MCACC years ago as it really was the only game in town. While I found it to be excellent, the MultEQ XT in the TX-SR875 that replaced my VSX-49 was a major step forward. Especially in the Bass department as MCACC does not work below 60 Hz.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## Moonfly (Aug 1, 2008)

I also still run my launch 875, which I do use for amplification, and its ever missed a beat. Onkyo service support is top quality here in the UK too, I got the firmware update done and turn around was within a couple weeks. I agree the Pio's look better, and I do like their sound (although I obviously favoured the Onkyo personally), but I would take Audyssey room correction over MCACC any day.

It really depends on what the individual likes, and maybe it just is that more individuals prefer Onkyo's, at least at the minute. I find times change and what goes around will usually come around, but I think for the money Onky have the best balance of performance, specification and reliability. JMO.


----------



## spartanstew (May 7, 2009)

Jungle Jack said:


> Hello,
> I do not believe that the Onkyo's have "heat issues". Rather, they were Designed to run somewhat hot.


My apologies, I should have said design flaw.



Jungle Jack said:


> And while I am glad you are happy with MCACC, most Professional Reviewers have given Audyssey better Reviews.
> JJ


Most is a very dangerous word. Is it 51% to 49% or 90% to 10% for Audyssey over MCACC? Either way, I haven't found that to be true. 

Everyone has their opinion and there is no consensus (or a majority), especially when you consider that there are different versions of Audyssey, so there really can't be a majority. The Audyssey used in the 608 (2EQ) vs the 708 (MultEQ) is vastly different.

Granted, MCACC doesn't auto-correct the subwoofer, but I prefer to do that individually anyway. The MCACC is the most flexible IMO, as it allows you to customize the 9-band EQ and several other settings after the auto calibration is finished. In addition it provides you with 6 presets so you can save several "tuned" calibrations.

Pio's MCACC also has standing wave and phase control which helps eliminate the "boomy" sound most (untreated) rooms have from echoes. 

If you just want to activate it and forget it, I'd probably give the nod to Audyssey as well. If you want to tweak it further, and get the best sound possible for many different rooms, I'd give the nod to MCACC.




lcaillo said:


> All views are encouraged here.


Encouraging views and having to defend them are two different things.


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
Audyssey is truly incredible. Especially the MultEQ XT Equipped Models that can be made Audyssey Pro. Pro involves having a Technician come out with special Tools and EQ'ing the room from up to 32 Points. 

There is nothing to defend here. While some of us prefer Onkyo here, there are certainly some who do not. And I do agree there is a range between 2EQ, MultEQ, MultEQ XT, and now XT 32. For what it's worth, I almost universally recommend AVR's that have at least MultEQ on board. However, even 2EQ works on the Subwoofer Channel which is a major problem area for many.

Moreover, how is it that Qdeo is found to be better than Reon HQV? I suppose I should have kept it to my personal experiences in respect to Audyssey. However, with testimonials like this: "There are maybe a half dozen products over the last 15-20 years that have changed the industry because of what they’ve done. The Audyssey Sound Equalizer Pro is on that list. It’s one of those products that I’d be lost without.
—Frank Filipetti, Grammy Award-winning Music Producer" and this "I have never heard such a monumental improvement in the sound of an audio system as I heard with the Denon AVR-5805 with Audyssey's MultEQ engaged. Currently this is the most innovative and advanced room correction system in the industry. It is very promising (and) could set the next trend and evolution in home theater to come." and the fact that Audyssey's technology has won awards from Stereophile, and the myriad Reviews I have read, it is hard not to feel like Audyssey is truly something special.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## Andre (Feb 15, 2010)

The only problem I have heard about eq's like the Audessey is that when you take those ever important measurements, make sure the room is dead quiet throughout the process. The mic hears everything. HVAC turning on, dog barked, buzz from an audio component....etc AND its not a one shot deal, move your sub 1 foot, toe in your mains, adding/removing furniture


----------



## spartanstew (May 7, 2009)

Jungle Jack said:


> However, with testimonials like this: "There are maybe a half dozen products over the last 15-20 years that have changed the industry because of what they’ve done. The Audyssey Sound Equalizer Pro is on that list. It’s one of those products that I’d be lost without.
> —Frank Filipetti, Grammy Award-winning Music Producer" and this "I have never heard such a monumental improvement in the sound of an audio system as I heard with the Denon AVR-5805 with Audyssey's MultEQ engaged. Currently this is the most innovative and advanced room correction system in the industry. It is very promising (and) could set the next trend and evolution in home theater to come." and the fact that Audyssey's technology has won awards from Stereophile, and the myriad Reviews I have read, it is hard not to feel like Audyssey is truly something special.
> Cheers,
> JJ


Or this:

*I was far more impressed with the results from Pioneer’s MCACC than the Audyssey room-correction system in my Marantz SR8002 AVR*

from HERE

You can find quotes on the internet to support anything. The fact is that each will perform differently in different rooms. One just happens to be more flexible. To my knowledge, nobody has done a comprehensive comparison of both in the same room and in a blind test, and MCACC has won just as many awards and the frequency with with Pio's make magazine's best lists (receivers) is unsurpassed.

PS. I like how you pulled the second quote directly from Audyssey's promotional web page (and failed to identify who said it).

This is the exact reason, I originally stated that this is mainly and Onkyo forum. 

I stated I thought Pioneer was better.

A moderator stated that points of view were encouraged and asked why I thought that.

I stated my OPINION.

Another moderator feels the need to make a point-counterpoint post, letting me know that my OPINION isn't supported by "professionals" (therefore it must be wrong).

Thanks for making my point for me.


----------



## Moonfly (Aug 1, 2008)

spartanstew said:


> My apologies, I should have said design flaw.


To state that Onkyos running hot is a design flaw is borderline just hating on a product for no reason other than your own personal opinion. If they are designed to run hot, then that is the design. Its no issue at all, it isnt a flaw and Onkyo products suffer no more than any other from failures, which some people try attribute to the heat, even when there is no connection, simply because some of them run warm.



spartanstew said:


> Encouraging views and having to defend them are two different things.


We all have to defend our views, or at least try to justify them. If you simply dont like Onkyo, then that is absolutely fine, that is your view and there is no need at all for you to have to defend your personal opinion. If you find Pioneer superior in your experience, and prefer them, that is also fine for the same reason. When you start to make comments as to why MCACC is superior to Audyssey, I think its only natural anyone making such a statement is somewhat expected to back it up. When you state that an Onkyo designed to be able to run warm, has been constructed with a design flaw, I think your would also be expected to back that up. To my knowledge, there has been no product recalls of Onkyo units by the manufacturer due to problems with units overheating. If I state that Audyssey is superior to MCACC, then isnt it only natural that you would expect me to validate that opinion from a technical standpoint.


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

spartanstew said:


> Or this:
> 
> *I was far more impressed with the results from Pioneer’s MCACC than the Audyssey room-correction system in my Marantz SR8002 AVR*
> 
> ...


Oh goodness. You left out a great deal of what I wrote. However, the feelings about Audyssey are not strictly a Onkyo thing as Denon, Marantz and others use them. As I said, I purchased a very expensive Pioneer AVR strictly to have MCACC and said it was excellent. I did not realize this was an Academic Paper where Attributions and Footnotes were needed. I said they were testimonials. Why would the source matter? Also, Audyssey MultEQ Pro also won Stereophile's Joint Component of the Year for 2008.

I am glad you are pleased with your Pioneer and wish you many years of happiness with it.


----------



## lsiberian (Mar 24, 2009)

I've found all the eq systems to be pretty even for the most part. Outside of REW which is the real deal, but a lot more work. Still not eqing the sub channel is a big shortcoming. Subs need eq more than any other channel. The Pioneer won't do that while the Onkyo's will. If you plan to use REW it's not a big deal but if not I think it's certainly a feature worth the added cost. Auddysey does an excellent job of correcting crossover issues in my experience. 

There is nothing wrong with liking a different EQ setup and I do think the differences have been overplayed. EQ has it's place but it's not the most important thing in a receiver for me. I much prefer reliability over all.


----------

