# Upgrading AV Amp



## nolia (Sep 2, 2010)

I am getting rid of my Yamaha RX-V765 and I have short listed potential amps to sit on my rack



Onkyo 807, Yam RX-V2065 and Denon 2310. 3D business isn't important to me. Sound is. So which one will drive my Missions best ladies and gents?


----------



## eugovector (Sep 4, 2006)

Most folks here prefer Onkyo. Check accessories4less, shoponkyo, and amazon (sometimes) for good prices.


----------



## nolia (Sep 2, 2010)

I am in the UK. I am aware this is a Yankee based site. I just want something that will perform well music wise via iPod. I know a stereo amp will perform better. A av amp that will perform well with music and movies. I have only listened to Onkyo 607 wasn't impressed. I am using Mission speakers


----------



## ojojunkie (Jun 23, 2010)

you forgot to mention the model of your speaker. If they are floorstanders, they really need more power to make them sing. you have to pair them with a decent powered AVR. :bigsmile:


----------



## bambino (Feb 21, 2010)

Ojojunkie is correct if they are floor standers, more power never hurts even if not. My personnal preferance is Denon but the Onkyo's sound like they are quite the performers. Check out our hometheater store for some options.:T


----------



## Shackmonster (May 5, 2007)

Unless you are prepared to spend a pretty good deal of money on your receiver (over $1,000) I would buy the receiver based upon features, NOT specs and surely not power specs. I am not saying everyone needs a $1,000 receiver, most don’t, I am saying that from my experience receivers/amps won’t have much audible difference unless they are pushed into distortion. In fact there has been a $10,000 challenge out there for more than 10 years to anyone who can reliably hear the difference between any two amps of any design as long as they aren’t pushed to distortion. To date thousands of people have taken the challenge including professional reviewers and nobody has even come close to winning the money.


----------



## recruit (May 9, 2009)

Shackmonster said:


> Unless you are prepared to spend a pretty good deal of money on your receiver (over $1,000) I would buy the receiver based upon features, NOT specs and surely not power specs.


Sorry but what is your point there? as features are meaningless if the sound is not up to scratch, surely you would purchase an AVR for the SQ as well, leaving out the $10,000 thing :scratch:


----------



## Shackmonster (May 5, 2007)

recruit said:


> Sorry but what is your point there? as features are meaningless if the sound is not up to scratch, surely you would purchase an AVR for the SQ as well, leaving out the $10,000 thing :scratch:


I agree with you and apologize if I wasn't clear enough making my point. I think any receiver/amp you buy today will have good quality audio, it is a matter of how much demand your speakers and room will put on the amp section of the receiver.


----------



## bambino (Feb 21, 2010)

Shackmonster said:


> In fact there has been a $10,000 challenge out there for more than 10 years to anyone who can reliably hear the difference between any two amps of any design as long as they aren’t pushed to distortion. To date thousands of people have taken the challenge including professional reviewers and nobody has even come close to winning the money.


Where can i find this challenge? As many can attest to this first hand at hearing an audible differance in there system when more power is added.:huh:


----------



## Mike P. (Apr 6, 2007)

The challenge is here:

http://www.davidnavone.com/a2000/Amp challenge 2001 Revision.pdf

From this point we'll keep the original thread on track as this "challenge" could possibly get a lot of responses. Anyone who wants to persue this can start a new thread.


----------



## lsiberian (Mar 24, 2009)

I do think it's pretty tough to really tell the difference between receivers based on sound. I think your best bet is to go on reliability, features, and personal preference. Personal preference normally goes with how the menus work how the back is laid out etc. I think my next receiver I'll probably try out a Denon. But I did really like the Onkyo I had. 

A lot of differences people hear can be a difference in volume too.


----------



## Shackmonster (May 5, 2007)

Mike P. said:


> The challenge is here:
> 
> http://www.davidnavone.com/a2000/Amp challenge 2001 Revision.pdf
> 
> From this point we'll keep the original thread on track as this "challenge" could possibly get a lot of responses. Anyone who wants to persue this can start a new thread.


Mike P
Thanks for posting a link to the challenge. I didn't think about how many responses that might make and I certainly didn't mean to send the conversation off track, sorry about that. I was however trying to make a point. I don't mean to be argumentative but I don't think people can really hear a lot of difference "just because of the amplifier", I think there are more factors at work there, that's all I'm saying. Please don't misunderstand me, I am not trying to say people aren't hearing a difference. We all need to take the emotion out of our perceptions. WE all want to hear or see a difference with the new gadget we just used our hard earned money to purchase. If you think you hear a difference and you enjoy it then great, you have made the right choice for you and your situation. Happy listening.


----------



## recruit (May 9, 2009)

lsiberian said:


> I do think it's pretty tough to really tell the difference between receivers based on sound. I think your best bet is to go on reliability, features, and personal preference. Personal preference normally goes with how the menus work how the back is laid out etc. I think my next receiver I'll probably try out a Denon. But I did really like the Onkyo I had.
> 
> A lot of differences people hear can be a difference in volume too.


No, I just think his post did not make much sense that is why I asked what exactly is your point, amps may be difficult to determine which is better but the processing, pre-amp stage and DAC's will all determine the overall sound and especially with music, when I went from an Onkyo 905 to an Arcam AVR600 the difference was massive IMO, with the SQ taking a leap forward for both movies and music, even more so for music.

To say all AVR's or processors sound the same is just not right.


----------



## Shackmonster (May 5, 2007)

lsiberian said:


> I do think it's pretty tough to really tell the difference between receivers based on sound. I think your best bet is to go on reliability, features, and personal preference. Personal preference normally goes with how the menus work how the back is laid out etc. I think my next receiver I'll probably try out a Denon. But I did really like the Onkyo I had.
> 
> A lot of differences people hear can be a difference in volume too.


I agree with you completely and that is what I was trying to convey although you have done so more eloquently, thanks. I am also looking at trying a Denon for the first time because of the factors you mention, especially the features. I currently have a Yamaha, an Onkyo, and a Panasonic digital receiver. They all work fine and after the excitement of the new acquisition wears off I don't hear differences in the sound quality. I have however felt 100% sure I heard differences when I first got the new unit and began to use it. I have differing speakers for each and they are in different rooms, in fact two different houses for that matter. I have used the Yamaha with the same speaker setup and felt when I acquired the Panasonic there was a clear difference. When I really thought about though I had made some changes like cleaning the speaker connections, re-soldering the wires, changing the speaker positions slightly, the adjustments available within the receiver weren't the same etc. Now I am not sure there is a difference.

As I have really dug into the specs/features it seems to me that Denon offers a lot more for the money and so I am going to try them out. I had looked at Onkyo, Yamaha, Pioneer std and Elite, as well as Sherwood Newcastle. If I looked at a different level the decision might be different.


----------



## Shackmonster (May 5, 2007)

recruit said:


> No, I just think his post did not make much sense that is why I asked what exactly is your point, amps may be difficult to determine which is better but the processing, pre-amp stage and DAC's will all determine the overall sound and especially with music, when I went from an Onkyo 905 to an Arcam AVR600 the difference was massive IMO, with the SQ taking a leap forward for both movies and music, even more so for music.
> 
> To say all AVR's or processors sound the same is just not right.


John,

Sorry for not being more clear in my post there. I got the feeling from the OP that he was most concerned with which receiver would be more powerful because he asked which would "drive" his speakers better. I took from that he felt the power would be the most important thing. I wanted to let him know my feelings are not to focus so much just on the power (which comes from the amp section), things such as you mention all come into play and are arguably more important. Of course there are sound differences between receivers, however those perceived differences ( I don't mean they aren't real)are very subjective and individual so we each need to listen for ourselves in our own room/house to hear/know what they may be. Thanks for questioning me as it made me see I wasn't expressing myself clearly.


----------



## recruit (May 9, 2009)

Shackmonster said:


> John,
> 
> Sorry for not being more clear in my post there. I got the feeling from the OP that he was most concerned with which receiver would be more powerful because he asked which would "drive" his speakers better. I took from that he felt the power would be the most important thing. I wanted to let him know my feelings are not to focus so much just on the power (which comes from the amp section), things such as you mention all come into play and are arguably more important. Of course there are sound differences between receivers, however those perceived differences ( I don't mean they aren't real)are very subjective and individual so we each need to listen for ourselves in our own room/house to hear/know what they may be. Thanks for questioning me as it made me see I wasn't expressing myself clearly.


Thanks for explaining soundcrazy as I was under the impression you were saying that all AVR's sound the same, which obviously is not the case.


----------



## bambino (Feb 21, 2010)

I must note that power does come into play when speaker size, room size and volume are a concern. The circuitry involved in the unit is what factors in the sound quality IMO.

Now i have to say this is based off of personnal experiance: when Class D amps first became available for full range audio i bought one for a car audio system i had and right when i fired it up i could not tolerate the way it sounded, now do to it being a newer tecnology for full range i knew that it was the amp i was hearing the sound differance from. Now days Class D has come such along ways i think it would be hard for one to tell the differance.:T


----------



## eugovector (Sep 4, 2006)

I'd like to add that, in my opinion, 3 good receivers should all sound the same: they should have low distortion for minimal coloration of the sound. Any receiver that does anything other than present the source material flat from 20-20k and beyond is introducing a flaw, not a feature. The exception to this rule would be room correction filters, but once again, the goal of these should be a flat 20-20k or the perception there of.


----------

