# Onkyo 818, Anthem MRX500, Pioneer SC57, Denon4311 ??



## randyc1 (Jul 20, 2011)

Need new AV Reciever to replace a 7 yr old Yam (657) for a 5.1 setup
Would like to get some opinions on some of these choices ?

1st - I want SQ
2nd -I want Reliability

Onkyo 818
Anthem 500
Pioneer SC 57
Denon 4311


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Well the Denon is a nice receiver but is also the second most expensive of the ones listed under the Pioneer.
The Onkyo offers a stronger amplification section over the Denon and is less expensive. The Pioneer uses a class D (digital amp) and some dont like that as well as its own proprietary room correction thats harder to use but also lets you get your hand into the settings after its done to tweak them where Audyssey on the Denon and Onkyo will be more successful particularly on the sub channels.


----------



## HT nut (Aug 31, 2011)

what about the 
Pioneer SC-1222-K ?


----------



## snowmanick (Oct 16, 2007)

Of your list, I only have experience with the 4311 (current VR), and it has been flawless both in SQ and reliability. MultEQ XT32 with Sub EQ HT(which the 818 doesn't have), has been great at eq'ing my system with dual subs. The 4311 replaced my old Denon 4306, which is in use in a secondary system and is still working like a champ 7+ years after purchase.

Anecdotal observations and stories on this and other fora have left me somewhat concerned with the reliability of pretty much all Onk AVR's from the last few years. Granted, this is just anecdotal and by no means conclusive.

As for the Pio's, I always liked my Pio gear, but their proprietary Room EQ doesn't adjust below 63hz, so it has limited usefulness when trying to correct subs.

The Anthems are pretty well reviewed, especially their ARC room correction, but seem to have less features/dollar and require a few extra steps to get ARC going (like the serial key do-day for hooking up a laptop to do ARC). I can't comment on SQ or any other features though as I have no first hand experience.


----------



## randyc1 (Jul 20, 2011)

Thanks for responding !! 
Do you know if the EQ on the Pioneer can be limited to a certain Freq , lets say from 63hz to 250hz and not EQ the upper freq ??


----------



## nmr1723 (Nov 29, 2012)

I have the Onkyo TX-NR818. I have to say, XT32 gave me more of a performance increase than i thought it would. At the time, i only had one sub, so I was not missing Sub EQ HT. The addition of my second sub made things a little more difficult, but using REW, placement, and messing with the phase control a bit has helped a ton. On the 818, XT32 will EQ both subs as 1 even though it has two connectors (fancy Y connector). 

Prior to the 818 I was using a Pioneer VSX-1120 with Advanced MCACC. Great receiver and program, but nothing compared to XT32 in my setup. Advanced MCACC is great if you want to tweak things a little more, but XT32 is better if you want to just EQ and forget it.

Just comparing these two EQ programs, I would buy XT32 again in a heartbeat.


----------



## nmr1723 (Nov 29, 2012)

randyc1 said:


> Thanks for responding !!
> Do you know if the EQ on the Pioneer can be limited to a certain Freq , lets say from 63hz to 250hz and not EQ the upper freq ??


I'm not sure. Off of the top of my head, I don't think you can limit the frequencies. But, MCACC is easier to customize so this _may _be an option in the EQ PRO menu. There is a pretty thorough thread over at AVS regarding this EQ system. I visited it many times when trying to get the best sound from my 1120.


----------



## bkeeler10 (Mar 26, 2008)

randyc1 said:


> Thanks for responding !!
> Do you know if the EQ on the Pioneer can be limited to a certain Freq , lets say from 63hz to 250hz and not EQ the upper freq ??


I'm not sure about the Pioneer, but if you're looking for a receiver with flexible room EQ, the Anthem would be a good choice. Their ARC room correction does EQ from 20 Hz to 5000 Hz by default, but you can limit it on the high end as much as you want to.

The only disadvantage is that you do need a computer connected to the receiver to run ARC (only during the actual set up process, not permanently of course). Not a bother for most, but it does bug some people. As far as I'm concerned, if the flexibility you want is there and if the results are great, a little bit of extra effort is worth it.


----------



## fschris (Oct 31, 2009)

how about an emotiva UMC-200 and upa-5... From what I am reading the SQ is great. It is using EMOQ for sound calibration but also has options where you can change the EQ settings. 

I you are looking for an easy way to calibrate I believe the Onkyo 818 would be the way to go.


----------



## bmakel (Jan 26, 2013)

nmr1723 said:


> I have the Onkyo TX-NR818. I have to say, XT32 gave me more of a performance increase than i thought it would. At the time, i only had one sub, so I was not missing Sub EQ HT. The addition of my second sub made things a little more difficult, but using REW, placement, and messing with the phase control a bit has helped a ton. On the 818, XT32 will EQ both subs as 1 even though it has two connectors (fancy Y connector).
> 
> Prior to the 818 I was using a Pioneer VSX-1120 with Advanced MCACC. Great receiver and program, but nothing compared to XT32 in my setup. Advanced MCACC is great if you want to tweak things a little more, but XT32 is better if you want to just EQ and forget it.
> 
> Just comparing these two EQ programs, I would buy XT32 again in a heartbeat.


Does anybody with a 818 have any issues with it making the speakers WAY too bright after calibration? I ran it correctly, even tried different mics but all,had the same results.

Sent from my iPad using HTShack


----------



## bkeeler10 (Mar 26, 2008)

bmakel said:


> Does anybody with a 818 have any issues with it making the speakers WAY too bright after calibration? I ran it correctly, even tried different mics but all,had the same results.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using HTShack


Some common mistakes with Audyssey:

1. Only use the microphone that came with the AVR you have or from another AVR of the same make and model. Do not use a microphone from a different make and/or model AVR

2. Be certain that, for all measured positions, the microphone is at or very close to the level of the tweeters

3. Ensure that the microhpone is "pointed" straight up toward the ceiling


You said you ran it "correctly," which means you did these things. Just making sure we're on the same page.


----------



## nmr1723 (Nov 29, 2012)

bmakel said:


> Does anybody with a 818 have any issues with it making the speakers WAY too bright after calibration? I ran it correctly, even tried different mics but all,had the same results.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using HTShack


I definitely don't feel it's too bright on my system. Make sure you're using the exact mic that came with the 818 as bkeeler said. In fact, the harshness I used to have on my center channel has been greatly reduced since changing to XT32.


----------



## igorzep (Oct 13, 2012)

nmr1723 said:


> messing with the phase control a bit has helped a ton


Have you also noticed the 818/calibrated reverses the phase of the sub in relation to other speakers? I've also been disappointed with bass until measured combined front/sub response and found a dip at the crossover frequency... After some experiments it is appeared almost exactly 180 degree of phase mismatch there independent of what crossover frequency I set, so hardly it can be an effect of the room. I've even checked the phase of all my speakers and sub - everything is OK there.


----------



## igorzep (Oct 13, 2012)

bmakel said:


> Does anybody with a 818 have any issues with it making the speakers WAY too bright after calibration? I ran it correctly, even tried different mics but all,had the same results.


I've had. And there are three reasons.
1) It really boost's highs too much, as I've received calibrated mic recently I can confirm with it that it have about 3dB more boost at high frequencies than needed. Pretty much aligned with what I've done with Tone controls when trying to make it not so bright by ear - I usually set Treble to -2dB and it feels a little bit not enough, when I set it to -4dB - the sound is too dark already.
2) The phase of the sub do not match, so there is a deep dip on crossover frequency, once fixed the sound is much more comfortable and balanced.
3) Usually invisible thing as no-one measures that. It boost ultra-low bass on all satellite channels bellow the natural speaker rolloff to about 10dB! The only way to escape from that is to set crossover frequency higher if you have enough room to increase that. Interestingly, it affects not how the bass sounds, but makes the highs sound harsh (sometimes very harsh) in the first place, especially in presence of low notes. Also bi-amping with digital crossovers helps to workaround this problem to some extent (quite noticeable usually, I have tried it in two setups with success).

PS. I have European unit, may be this makes a difference.


----------



## yoda13 (Feb 14, 2012)

bkeeler10 said:


> I'm not sure about the Pioneer, but if you're looking for a receiver with flexible room EQ, the Anthem would be a good choice. Their ARC room correction does EQ from 20 Hz to 5000 Hz by default, but you can limit it on the high end as much as you want to.
> 
> The only disadvantage is that you do need a computer connected to the receiver to run ARC (only during the actual set up process, not permanently of course). Not a bother for most, but it does bug some people. As far as I'm concerned, if the flexibility you want is there and if the results are great, a little bit of extra effort is worth it.


Agreed, ARC as been superior over Audyssey for me (and read "for me" please, I'm not bashing Audyssey). What helped me was the ability to see how each speakers performed in my room. I was able to se a huge dip between 50hz and 70hz that I would have not necessarily noticed using Audyssey. Sure, that's what room correction is for but by moving my subs around 6784 times :yikes:, I was able to find the best locations for both of them with the flattest response. Applied ARC after that and got a super flat response.

Like bkeeler10 as mentioned, it's a tad more flexible and I am still learning about it little bits at the time. Also, if you do equal music and HT, you can configure for both if you wish (you can assign different bass management to different input)

Anywho, I don't have experience with anything else than MultEQ but I certainly wouldn't hesitate to get anything with XT32.

cheers


----------

