# Which HT receiver features do you suggest?



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

Which features do you suggest in a receiver?

I have a pretty short list including:
* pre outs on all channels
* component video inputs
* component video upconversion
* 4 ohm stable preferred

I'm sure many of you could suggest a lot of features I haven't considered. Which features matter to you? And in particular, which do you consider to be indispensible?


----------



## Anthony (Oct 5, 2006)

hdmi switching and upconversion if necessary. It really is nice having one cable go from receiver to projector/TV and not have to change inputs.

that's pretty much my must-have.

2nd zone audio, room EQ, and the latest and greatest codecs/formats are high up there too.


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
Definitely agree that transcoding (multiple sources with one HDMI cable out) is huge. Audyssey Room EQ is also huge to me in addition to the above as well.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Are you looking at getting a receiver paulspencer? do you have a budget?


----------



## recruit (May 9, 2009)

Most of the new AV receivers are really quite fully loaded with all the latest and newest features, and now Networking ability has also been added to most of them, either wireless or hard wired, I do actually stream music from my PC to my Arcam and more so lately.

One thing I would point out though, having all the latest gizmo's does not necessary mean that the SQ is going to be the best, and I would rather have superb SQ over multiple feature counts.

Just to add, one important feature which I do feel is probably one of the most important to have is a good EQ system and the majority have opted for Audyssey which IMO is probably one of the best.


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

Budget? Well, it's hard to talk budget from here in Australia! You guys get things so unbelievably cheap! (Yes, I'm jealous). I've found that receivers that retail here for $1k tend to have what I'm looking for and end up going for $900. (AUD) and quite a bit less in the US. However, I saw a Marantz going on ebay that was around this price point for $150 second hand. Maybe 5 years old. I would have jumped at that price but it only had s video. 

My plan is to turn my diy mains into surrounds and upgrade the mains - probably active speakers. I already have EQ - Behringer Ultracurve and digital active xo (Ultradrive), so I'm not really concerned with the built in EQ features, but I do need preouts. I use separate power amps but will probably just use the receiver amps for the surrounds - either 2 or 4 (undecided). That would be 2 x 4 ohm or 4 x 8 ohm. 

SQ wise I'm not overly concerned. When the mains have their own power amps, I don't think it's going to be an issue. I'll be using phantom centre, which makes sense in my particular setup.

What I'm most interested in are the important and handy and useful features. The kinds of things you find out after using a number of different receivers over time. I've been running 2 channel for a long time, yes even for movies!

So what are the other features I might have missed? Maybe ones I might not think of ...

Recruit,
So with networking ability, would this mean storing music on your PC then sending a digital signal to the receiver which is then handled by the receiver DAC? This is a nice feature! ... or is it a little different? I'll have to look into this.


----------



## recruit (May 9, 2009)

paulspencer said:


> Recruit,
> So with networking ability, would this mean storing music on your PC then sending a digital signal to the receiver which is then handled by the receiver DAC? This is a nice feature! ... or is it a little different? I'll have to look into this.


Yep, that is more or less correct, dependant on the audio codecs that the receiver can recognise ie mp3/Flac/WMA...


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

I'm going to add networking ability to the list! It's appealing to be able to access all my music without having to get cds out! Add on a remote to the PC and remote extender and it would work nicely!


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

1. Big main power transformer (the bigger the better).

2. Quality output transistors (and more the better).

3. Big solid aluminum heatsink(s) (the more and the bigger the better).

4. Big block capacitors (the more uFarads the better).

5. Additional auxiliary transformers for the audio and video sections.

6. Quality Dacs (and more the better: differential configuration).

7. Quality DSPs (and more the better, faster and larger CPU resources & processing power).

8. Minimum 5 HDMI inputs and 2 HDMI outputs (the more the better).

9. Automatic Room EQ, with capability for manual calibration adjustments (example: Pioneer Advanced MCACC, Yamaha YPAO, Audyssey MultEQ XT Pro).

10. Solid build with clean interior, and circuit's isolation (no messy wirings), and heavy weight.

))) All of this with great implementation, of course.

__________________________________________


11. Maybe Audyssey DSX ( Dynamic Surround Expansion).

12. Maybe Audyssey Dynamic EQ, and Audyssey Dynamic Volume, or Dolby Volume*.

13. Maybe ABT2010 ot HQV Reon Video Processor, with ISF certification, and individual input's adjustments.

14. Maybe Yamaha DSP audio programs for Music & Movies.

15. Maybe a good Phono* input, and a full illuminated remote control.

17. Maybe an Ethernet port.

18. Maybe i-Pod ready and music & video streaming.

19. Maybe one or two USB ports (front & rear). 

20. Maybe THX certified (Ultra2* Plus preferably), with THX Loudness Volume.

))) The last 10 are only extra non-necessary features, only for people that demands it (* I like those ones).


-> Mmm... that's about all of I can think right now.


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

Thanks, Bob, that's quite a list! Still hoping for a few features that are the kind I'd regret not having but might not think of.


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

paulspencer said:


> Thanks, Bob, that's quite a list! Still hoping for a few features that are the kind I'd regret not having but might not think of.


Hey Paul, I just go with what really matters for me: The Sound. :bigsmile:

* And beyond all those features, I will put these two as the most essential ones:

#1. Quality speakers with the exact proper frequency and power responses.

#2. Room acoustic treatments.

Cheers,
Bob


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

Hi Bob, I agree with you. This is why I've been running 2 channel for so long. But those two aren't features of a receiver!

I'm not overly concerned with the "sound quality" of a receiver. Why not? I'll only be using the power amps for the surrounds, but the main channels will run on separate power amps with a great deal more power and more substantial power supplies than you will find in affordable receivers. Used in this way, blind tests show that you can't tell the difference between affordable and high end receivers. I don't want to get into a debate here, but I consider any half decent receiver to be transparent enough to not worry about when used like this. There's a lot more to worry about with the speakers and room ... which comes back to why I'm interested in features - they are the basis of my choice here.


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

But in a receiver, a good preamp section is important; and from the preouts, you want a good output impedance, so you can match it with various outboard amplifiers. Not all receivers do.
* This is an important aspect that many people omit, don't think about, or simply don't know about.
And you want a good RMS Voltage gain from the preamp outputs, so it can drive these external amps to full power capability with enough gain (say 3V RMS or more). No all receivers do.

Don't forget Paul, when using your receiver in that situation, the preamp section becomes even more important.

Cheers,
Bob


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

Good point. What output impedance and voltage gain do you suggest I should look for? I'm using Behringer Europower EP2500 for my main amp and will probably use Behringer A500 when I go active, or a pro amp.

I currently have a diy preamp where I can change the gain to various settings, but I would be able to do that with a receiver!


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

Well, if you can adjust the gain, you're fine then. Just choose the one that gives you maximum volume over your preamp's volume control.

And no, you cannot do that with a receiver, but if the receiver has enough gain from its preouts to start with, then you're just fine also.


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

When I get a receiver I won't be using the current diy preamp. So now I'm wondering if I'm going to be able to find the info I need in the specs, and what numbers I should be looking for.


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

Which receiver are you thinking off?

* It is impossible to find this out just at looking at the specs, it has to be tested in the lab.

But most receivers above a certain price point range are usually up to it.

Denon is usually good about this, they make nice preamps. Not all Yamaha does. Onkyo, is OK I believe.
Marantz, not sure, higher range, probably.


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

I don't have a particular one in mind right now. I'm inclined to look at Denon, Marantz, NAD, Pioneer. I'd like to pick up something second hand - a receiver that would probably cost around $1k AUD (quite a bit less in USD) ... around the price point of Denon AVR1709


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

paulspencer said:


> I don't have a particular one in mind right now. I'm inclined to look at Denon, Marantz, NAD, Pioneer. I'd like to pick up something second hand - a receiver that would probably cost around $1k AUD (quite a bit less in USD) ... around the price point of Denon AVR1709


I see. Here in Canada, or USA, the Denon AVR-1709 does not have preouts. In the Denon line, preouts only start to appear with the 28XX (i.e., 2809) series (for the North American market only).
The Marantz line start much earlier (good). Nad & Pioneer, about in the mid line.
From what I learned over time, Denon receivers in general makes great preamps (i.e., the 28XX series and up). Also some Yamaha models (i.e., RX-V2600), but not all models. Some Yamaha models from some years are not up to the task, you have to be digilent & do some research. Marantz receivers seem to be fine, as well Onkyo receivers. NAD should also be fine. As for Pioneer, I believe that you have to be more vigilant. But like I already said before; usually the higher models in any brand should have the requisite preamp section, but not always, there are some exceptions, and it's up to us to find out.
Because a receiver has preouts does not mean necessarely that they are up to their task, right Paul?
A little care and money has to be put in that very important section of a receiver. Nowadays, quality is taking a hard dive, for the sake of more features. Buyer beware.

* Paul, to learn more about the preamp section on certain receivers, there are many reviews that mentioned these aspects from various sources (UltimateAvMag, Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity, Audioholics, ...). I suggest you check out at Audioholics, there are several reviews on receivers, and usually they do lab tests on the preamp section, where output impedance from the preouts are discussed, as well RMS voltage output gain, damping factor, THD+N, and others. There are even several good articles in these subjects.
[Just remember, not all receivers are created equal. And you can find some fabulous deals on the used market for one with an examplary preamp section, that could be matched with any power amplifiers on the market; and that Paul, it's something to look for.]

Cheers,
Bob


----------



## lsiberian (Mar 24, 2009)

I'd suggest you try to find a Yamaha RX-v2600 this is a top notch pre-amp section. They went all out on this. Another is the *05 series from Onkyo. 

Beyond that I bid you luck in finding something.


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

Thanks Bob, that's good advice. I'm in no hurry. I'll be doing a fair amount of reading up. I realise that Denon doesn't have preouts (I mentioned it only as an indication of price point). 

I had a look at that Yamaha and it did look good, although I'm slightly wary of Yamaha based on many comments that the sound is a little bright. I'm very big on getting a laid back sound and while I tend to think preamps aren't at fault when the sound is bright, the possibility doesn't inspire me!


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

Laid back sound, uhm... ok, you're from Australia, I can relate, I'm from Canada, pretty laid back myself. :bigsmile: 

* Here's my personal opinion Paul. If you have speakers with an extended treble (metal dome tweeter, aluminum...), that is on the bright side; a Denon or Marantz receiver is a good choice.

And if you have some smooth speakers, with already a laid back sound (soft dome, cotton textile or silk tweeter), that has a downward slope in the high frequencies; a Yamaha or Onkyo receiver is a good match.

And Pioneer, Rotel, NAD & Harman Kardon can pretty much match with any of these speakers, considering that you toe them properly, according to the reflectivity and absorption of your room's surfaces.

))) Remember, that's my personal opinion, based on owning all these receivers and type of speakers.
... And I'm only talking in general here.

Cheers,
Bob


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

Funny you mention that as I have metal dome tweeter AND laid back sound! I first thought my Vifa D25s were bright, I padded them and they mellowed. May have also been break in. Now I use eq to bring them down 2 db shy of flat and that works for me. Mids are polycone and overall the sound is laid back. Any amount of edginess takes me away from enjoying the music/movie, however, I think the way I've set up the speakers and their sonic characteristics makes them a little forgiving.

I do plan to turn the mains into surrounds and build new mains with pro driver based open baffles, but I'll still be aiming for a laid back sound. Probably AE Speakers TD12M and B&C DE250 compression driver on a waveguide - actively driven.


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

Hi Paul,

You seem to have a good experience and knowledge about the sound you like, that's great. :T

As you well know, the sound you hear is mainly from your speakers interacting with your room.
And the off axis sound from your speakers is as important as the on axis one, if not more.

The Receiver, or amp/preamp combo is just the rendering by amplifying those signals, no more. 
Now, some manufacturers indeed tweek the frequency response in their electronics.
Also, if the amp section is not up to driving low impedance speakers (at low or high frequencies), what you'll hear at higher volume levels is gross distortion. So an amp with good current delivery on fluctuation of various impedances is a must for hard to drive speakers.
And from the preamp section, a good output impedance is important (low and consistant) all across the range. And a low level of THD+N will ensure a low level of second harmonics distortion.

To conclude, these are the most important features for me in a Receiver.
After all, a Receiver is a preamp/amp combo, plus a tuner of course, first and foremost.

Everything else, like i-Pod, Ethernet, music streaming, USB port, and all these extra enchiladas won't mean zip if the ditto Receiver is not up to it from its main primary goals.

There are two type of people in this world; those after the truth, and those after the illusion.

To reproduce the illusion of a full live orchestra in your living room is not an easy task.

Regards,
Bob


----------



## lsiberian (Mar 24, 2009)

paulspencer said:


> Thanks Bob, that's good advice. I'm in no hurry. I'll be doing a fair amount of reading up. I realise that Denon doesn't have preouts (I mentioned it only as an indication of price point).
> 
> I had a look at that Yamaha and it did look good, although I'm slightly wary of Yamaha based on many comments that the sound is a little bright. I'm very big on getting a laid back sound and while I tend to think preamps aren't at fault when the sound is bright, the possibility doesn't inspire me!


There is no credible research that shows that statement to be true. It is pure speculation based on psychoacoustics. Level matched double blind tests have consistently shown amp audibility to be a myth. Speakers and speaker placement effect sound not the receiver selected.


----------



## glaufman (Nov 25, 2007)

In terms of amps providing a flat response, yes, but...
It IS important to make sure the AVR you buy is capable of supplying the load the speakers present.


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

And some people have their preference for their electronics, and that you have to respect (lsiberian).
Also some receivers are a better match with certain type of speakers.

And besides, Yamaha is going down in their build quality recently, in favor of more superflous features.
I still love my 2092 though. :T

[The true research is in the personal experience.]


----------



## lsiberian (Mar 24, 2009)

glaufman said:


> In terms of amps providing a flat response, yes, but...
> It IS important to make sure the AVR you buy is capable of supplying the load the speakers present.


It's important to make sure the amp you use is capable of supplying the load to your speakers. In situations where impedance dips low I suggest the use of an external amp. However most amplifiers are capable of handling limited input of lower impedance loads.

I suggest an external amp when the situation warrants a load below 4 ohms(3 or more drivers in the low range.


----------



## lsiberian (Mar 24, 2009)

Lordoftherings said:


> And some people have their preference for their electronics, and that you have to respect (lsiberian).
> Also some receivers are a better match with certain type of speakers.
> 
> And besides, Yamaha is going down in their build quality recently, in favor of more superflous features.
> ...


I know we like the same receiver brands so this is a an unnecessary argument.

Though I wonder if you are aware of a gentleman that basically got the shaft from Onkyo CS on his warranty at AH recently. For the moment I'm suggesting folks don't go with Onkyo.


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

lsiberian,


> There is no credible research that shows that statement to be true. It is pure speculation based on psychoacoustics. Level matched double blind tests have consistently shown amp audibility to be a myth. Speakers and speaker placement effect sound not the receiver selected.


You stole my line! lol ... it's usually me saying things like that. Suggestion is a powerful thing, as well as personal preference. For no particular reason, I've never been keen on Yamaha receivers. I believe there are two exceptions on amp audibility. One is solid state vs valve, the other is when amps are at their limits and one is clipping while the other isn't. 



> It's important to make sure the amp you use is capable of supplying the load to your speakers. In situations where impedance dips low I suggest the use of an external amp. However most amplifiers are capable of handling limited input of lower impedance loads.
> 
> I suggest an external amp when the situation warrants a load below 4 ohms(3 or more drivers in the low range.


My amp (Behringer EP2500) is stable into 2 ohm loads and can drive my 4 ohm speakers with 650w each. It can cook my speakers in it's sleep. I think it's up to the task! I bought it to drive power hungry subs that my old NAD didn't like (it went up in flames but more related to not being repaired properly). I like having the extra power in reserve and have never felt it is lacking finesse. 

I have a few options in mind intended to active drive the tweeter. One is Behringer A500, a studio amp which is pure bang for buck. Another is a cheap pro workhorse that I might find on ebay. A third option I'm considering is a valve amp which I think would work well for my intended application (compression driver in waveguide). 

Bob, any thoughts on how these options are going to impact my choice of receiver?


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
There are always going to be stories on the web of someone getting treated badly by Customer Service.
Onkyo truly offers the best price/performance ratio going right now. Furthermore, the vast majority have proven to be quite reliable. To steer people away from a Company which really offers excellent products and the most up to date feature sets at great prices is unfortunate. 

I understand not recommending a receiver because you do not like the way it sounds or there is a better value out there, but that does not seem to be the case here.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

paulspencer said:


> My amp (Behringer EP2500) is stable into 2 ohm loads and can drive my 4 ohm speakers with 650w each. It can cook my speakers in it's sleep. I think it's up to the task! I bought it to drive power hungry subs that my old NAD didn't like (it went up in flames but more related to not being repaired properly). I like having the extra power in reserve and have never felt it is lacking finesse.
> 
> I have a few options in mind intended to active drive the tweeter. One is Behringer A500, a studio amp which is pure bang for buck. Another is a cheap pro workhorse that I might find on ebay. A third option I'm considering is a valve amp which I think would work well for my intended application (compression driver in waveguide).
> 
> Bob, any thoughts on how these options are going to impact my choice of receiver?


Wow Paul, at this stage, why just not go with a good quality preamp? I'm sure you are aware of the good ones for the right price on the market. Does Onkyo PR-SC886P rings a bell?
Why get a receiver for your preamp? Because you can get a used one for cheaper?
Or is it because you want to use some of it's internal amps to drive some of your surrounds?
If it's the case then, for you, according to your personal taste, I recommend the Denon AVR-2809CI or the newer AVR-3310CI.
You get an excellent preamp section, a laid back sound, Audyssey MultEQ XT, and the Denon sound & name. :bigsmile:

Regards,
Bob


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

lsiberian said:


> I know we like the same receiver brands so this is a an unnecessary argument.
> 
> Though I wonder if you are aware of a gentleman that basically got the shaft from Onkyo CS on his warranty at AH recently. For the moment I'm suggesting folks don't go with Onkyo.


What do you know about what I like?

Like Jack just said...


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

Lordoftherings said:


> Wow Paul, at this stage, why just not go with a good quality preamp? I'm sure you are aware of the good ones for the right price on the market. Does Onkyo PR-SC886P rings a bell?
> Why get a receiver for your preamp? Because you can get a used one for cheaper?
> Or is it because you want to use some of it's internal amps to drive some of your surrounds?
> If it's the case then, for you, according to your personal taste, I recommend the Denon AVR-2809CI or the newer AVR-3310CI.
> ...


Right now I have a DIY 2 channel preamp, but it involves manual volume control and a manual source switch. I want a receiver for:

* remote volume control
* source switching and video upconversion for simple cable runs
* multi channel preamp
* surround decoding
* capable amps to drive my surrounds
* a few extra bonuses like network capability and perhaps multiroom

Yes only one of those things requires an actual receiver. Crazy isn't it - costs more to get less?! Take the amplifiers out and you pay more, and then have to get another power amp! Budget is my reason for looking at receivers.

Denon 2808 looks good, and Marantz SR7300. I like entry level NADs which have preamp inputs as well, but lacking component video upconversion last I checked. The Onkyo is a budget killer. Buying new the Emotiva looks impressive, but an easy to come by ebay receiver seems like a good value option. If I were buying new, I'd probably get the Emotiva for around the same cost as a receiver that meets my requirements. 

By the way, just want to say I appreciate your input Bob. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.


----------



## Lordoftherings (Feb 8, 2009)

Hi Paul, this is my pleasure to exchange ideas and thoughts with you, or anyone else with a genuine interest.

You mentioned video upconversion, do you need a good video processor? Or is it for simple upconversion from Components to HDMI, for example?

* One thing I know for sure, the Denon AVR-2808CI that you mentioned is a very good receiver, and many people in the know, used it as a top notch preamp. But as you know it is a couple years old now.
I don't think it has Network capability. And the video processor is not the very best (Faroudja FLI-2310).
But still, this is a fantastic receiver with top notch performance from both the amp and preamp sections.

A newer Denon receiver will have a better video processor (AVR-3310CI with the ABT2010), and also Network feature. By the way Paul, the AVR-3310CI is the replacement of the AVR-2809CI.

Now, the Marantz receivers. I know one thing from them, they don't have enough DSP processing to add Audyssey MultEQ in top of the newer high resolution audio codecs (Dolby TrueHD & DTS HD MA).
Also the Marantz receivers have only Audyssey MultEQ, not the much more desirable MultEQ XT variety, which is much more sophisticated in its much higher resolution in the bass region; a very important point for a much more accurate bass in your room.
So, for me, the Denon receivers have a big advantage here.

Onkyo, that's another receiver to have a serious look at too. Anything higher and including the 7XX series, has preamp outputs. But for a good video processor, you'll have to look at the SR876, NR3007 & NR5007. The SR875, with some reservations (has to do with the implementation of it's HQV Reon video processor). 
Now, for Network feature, you have to look at the NR906, NR807/NR1007/NR3007/NR5007.
Again, the NR905, with some reservations.
* My personal favorites, for your personal use, the SR876 (without Network though), the NR906, the NR1007, the NR3007 (more money), and also the NR807. And my top choice is the NR5007, but you don't need that one, and it is more money too.
** Oh, I almost forgot, if you can find an SR705, that would be a very good score too, but without Network. Still, it has preamp outputs for all channels, Audyssey MultEQ XT, and THX Select2 certification. And the price should be quite low. Same think with the SR805, but now this one adds THX Ultra2 certification, and better Dacs too. 
*** And by the way Paul, I own Denon, Yamaha, Marantz, Pioneer and a bunch of other receivers, including the Onkyo TX-SR876 and TX-SR805. And I love them all, equally, at their time and for the pleasure they provide me over the years.
Like I said previously in another post, if you match the right receiver with the right set of speakers, you're on your way...
Same with power amps, preamps, integrated amps, and anything else in life... 
And the proof is always in the listening, in the doing.

NAD, well, you already mentioned that it is missing the Component video upconversion.

Rotel, great analog section, wish I can say the same from the digital section though...

You are probably talking about the new Emotiva Pre/Pro, right?
I will wait to see reviews on it before I commit. Besides, you need to add an additional amp too.

So, here it is, that's my take. You can do a lot yourself too by checking reviews, etc.
And because you're from Australia, the deals over there are different than in the USA.

* Paul, tell me, honestly, you must knew these facts already, didn't you?
If not, well, you do now. 

Anything else you wanna know, just ask me, always a pleasure mate.

Regards,
Bob


----------



## paulspencer (May 11, 2007)

Crikey! Sounds like you've dealt with a few receivers before!

Nope. I'm not really up with the latest in receivers, that's why I'm asking.

I'm not much of a videophile, but I'd still like decent video. I'll be upgrading the wimpy tv at some stage (projector or plasma), but I'm more fussy about the audio. 

Since I use Behringer Ultracurve and Ultradrive together, I'm not fussed about the digital eq features. That aspect of my system is a priority and it's going pretty well. Two diy subs (possibly a third on the way to improve modes even further).


----------

