# Do I need a 3D AV Receiver?



## xmaoo190 (Oct 20, 2011)

I can find much better deals on recent, but non-3D ready processors and I am trying see determine what advantage I gain by purchasing a "3D Ready" AV receiver/processor? The only 3D source I'm looking to attach is my Oppo BDP-93 which has dual HDMI. I could presumably use one for video and the other for audio through my processor.

Are there any other sources that might require a 3D receiver? Cable box, perhaps? :huh:


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

xmaoo190 said:


> I can find much better deals on recent, but non-3D ready processors and I am trying see determine what advantage I gain by purchasing a "3D Ready" AV receiver/processor? The only 3D source I'm looking to attach is my Oppo BDP-93 which has dual HDMI. I could presumably use one for video and the other for audio through my processor.
> 
> Are there any other sources that might require a 3D receiver? Cable box, perhaps? :huh:


Hello,
Personally, I would choose a higher quality HDMI 1.3 AVR over a similarly priced HDMI 1.4 AVR. That being said, there have now been 2 Model Cycles of HDMI 1.4 AVR's from almost every AVR Manufacturer. Examples being the Onkyo x08 Series, the Denon XX11 Series, Yamaha Aventage A000 Series, and Pioneer's SC-35/37.

Some Cable Boxes do indeed offer 3D Content. My Scientific Atlanta offers this. All this being said, I have an HDMI 1.4 AVR, OPPO BDP-93, and still do not have a 3D Display. Personally, I just am not that interested in 3D.
This is not an unpopular notion with 3D falling far below expectations in HT. Nowadays, 3D in Panels is more of a Value Added Feature and it is quickly reaching Commodity Pricing.

What AVR's are you considering? We could discuss the merits and find whether it is worthwhile to forgo HDMI 1.4 with you already having so many 3D Components. Also, how interested in 3D are you?
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## xmaoo190 (Oct 20, 2011)

Hey JJ, 

I've got several options in my range for open-box, closeout deals:

Anthem MX300
NAD T747 (non modular)
Integra 50.2
Arcam AVR350

I don't think I'd consider the NAD receivers unless I can get myself into a modular type 757 or higher. What are your thoughts?


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

xmaoo190 said:


> Hey JJ,
> 
> I've got several options in my range for open-box, closeout deals:
> 
> ...


Hello,
The Integra 50.2 did shockingly well when Bench Tested by Home Theater Magazine. Here are the results:
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads: 
0.1% distortion at 110.8 watts 
1% distortion at 134.1 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads: 
0.1% distortion at 107.5 watts 
1% distortion at 127.7 watts

Analog frequency response in Direct mode: 
–0.05 dB at 10 Hz 
–0.01 dB at 20 Hz 
–0.01 dB at 20 kHz 
–2.80 dB at 50 kHz

Analog frequency response with stereo signal processing: 
–0.09 dB at 10 Hz 
–0.03 dB at 20 Hz 
–0.07 dB at 20 kHz 
–69.90 dB at 50 kHz



This graph shows that the DTR-50.2’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 147.4 watts and 1 percent distortion at 172.4 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 200.4 watts and 1 percent distortion at 259.8 watts.

I am also quite fond of the Anthem, but ARC is a pretty involved procedure and the 300 did not do that great when Bench Tested. The Arcam is too long in the tooth to be interesting to me, but does offer excellent SQ. I am not crazy about that particular NAD AVR as well.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## xmaoo190 (Oct 20, 2011)

JJ, 

I can get the 50.2 for $700 at a local AV store, is that a good deal? I'm still a bit confused about the 3D capable AVR's. Do they just need to be 1.4 compliant?


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

xmaoo190 said:


> JJ,
> 
> I can get the 50.2 for $700 at a local AV store, is that a good deal? I'm still a bit confused about the 3D capable AVR's. Do they just need to be 1.4 compliant?


Hello,
$700 seems like a good deal and you get a 3 Year Manufacturers Warranty. Indeed HDMI 1.4 is necessary for 3D Passthrough, but the 50.2 is HDMI 1.4 so you are actually set.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## xmaoo190 (Oct 20, 2011)

I went to pickup the 50.2 at Definitive Audio in Seattle, but it had sold by the time I got there. . Supposedly there's one coming back from warranty in a few weeks. 

While I was at Definitive, I sampled the SC-57 and NAD T757. The SC-57 was surprisingly warm and very feature rich. 

The NAD had superior sound IMO, and I like the modular design. 

If you had to chose between these two, which would it be?


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

xmaoo190 said:


> I went to pickup the 50.2 at Definitive Audio in Seattle, but it had sold by the time I got there. . Supposedly there's one coming back from warranty in a few weeks.
> 
> While I was at Definitive, I sampled the SC-57 and NAD T757. The SC-57 was surprisingly warm and very feature rich.
> 
> ...


Hello,
Shame about the 50.2. If you like the NAD, there is certainly nothing wrong with that. I do like that it uses Audyssey whereas the Pioneer uses their proprietary MCACC. Go with what sounds best to you and the one with the most preferable Remote Control.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## Superior Audio (Feb 27, 2008)

Hands down I would choose the NAD over Pioneer if those we my only 2 choices. I am a HUGE fan of Audyssey...


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
Indeed. Audyssey or lack thereof is a deal breaker for me. The only other Room EQ that has piqued my interest in the Trinnov EQ. Shame about the Integra as I believe even the 50.2 offers the ability to be upgraded to Audyssey Pro.

Speaking of all that, how about a Integra 50.3 or an Onkyo TX-NR3009? I would personally go with the 3009 as it offers Audyssey's amazing MultEQ XT32/SubEQ HT. I cannot believe the difference these 2 Technologies have made in my HT after using MultEQ XT for 5 Years prior.
Cheers,
JJ


----------

