# First Denon. Which one?



## Koopa (Aug 19, 2008)

Looking for a new receiver to replace a Onkyo 606 that I've had nothing but, problems with. Wanting to spend under $399. I had my eyes on an Onkyo 1712 for $299 which I thought was a of a deal for the price. I can live without analog to HDMI out. It rarely worked on the 606 so I am living without it now. I didnt' see anything I like stepping up to the 1912 but, I did find a AVR-891 available for under $399 but, I cant find anything showing features or a comparison to the 1712.

Any info/pro's cons on the 891? Other recommendations?
Speakers it will be paired with are Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE's.

**Apparently others thought that was a deal on the 1712 as well. They are sold out. : (


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

Honestly, I don't think i'd be comfortable with any of the stuff you're looking at. For $400 you're really looking at stereo receiver territory if you want quality.

If I were you, here's what i'd be looking at:

http://www.accessories4less.com/mak...-Channel-Network-Home-Theater-Receiver/1.html

or

http://www.accessories4less.com/mak...7ch-3-D-Home-Theater-Surround-Receiver/1.html


----------



## JBrax (Oct 13, 2011)

Koopa said:


> Looking for a new receiver to replace a Onkyo 606 that I've had nothing but, problems with. Wanting to spend under $399. I had my eyes on an Onkyo 1712 for $299 which I thought was a of a deal for the price. I can live without analog to HDMI out. It rarely worked on the 606 so I am living without it now. I didnt' see anything I like stepping up to the 1912 but, I did find a AVR-891 available for under $399 but, I cant find anything showing features or a comparison to the 1712.
> 
> Any info/pro's cons on the 891? Other recommendations?
> Speakers it will be paired with are Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE's.
> ...


I would also look at the Onkyo tx-nt809 that can be had for less then $700 through Amazon.


----------



## Koopa (Aug 19, 2008)

GranteedEV said:


> Honestly, I don't think i'd be comfortable with any of the stuff you're looking at. For $400 you're really looking at stereo receiver territory if you want quality.
> 
> We will have to disagree on that. I was extremely satisfied with my 606. But, design flaws are causing it to have an early death. In my experience when dealing with electronics, more money don't coincide with better workmanship, only more features.





JBrax said:


> I would also look at the Onkyo tx-nt809 that can be had for less then $700 through Amazon.


That's about $300 more than I'm paying. I don't need the features. Compared to the much cheaper 609, what extra, besides a little more power and MultEQ XT does it provide that I would benefit from?


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

Koopa said:


> We will have to disagree on that. I was extremely satisfied with my 606. But, design flaws are causing it to have an early death. In my experience when dealing with electronics, more money don't coincide with better workmanship, only more features.


Things like heatsinking, faulty/inadequate power supplies, weak preamplifier outs are most certainly related to cost.

Features, Circuitry quality, and build quality are all tradeoffs that are made in inexpensive products. Out of the three, features are what sells, and so the other two will suffer.


----------



## JBrax (Oct 13, 2011)

GranteedEV said:


> Things like heatsinking, faulty/inadequate power supplies, weak preamplifier outs are most certainly related to cost.
> 
> Features, Circuitry quality, and build quality are all tradeoffs that are made in inexpensive products. Out of the three, features are what sells, and so the other two will suffer.


All I know is I started with an old school non HDMI Yamaha that served me well for over 10 years. After I began upgrading I settled for a spur of the moment on sale Yamaha from Best Buy and just felt it wasn't giving me all my speakers deserved. Normally I'm a research freak and after much reading and some advice from a couple of people here I was lead toward my current Onkyo tx-nr809 and so far couldn't be happier. I'd rather have more than I need rather than not enough. I have that with my current AVR.


----------



## Koopa (Aug 19, 2008)

GranteedEV said:


> ...Features, Circuitry quality, and build quality are all tradeoffs that are made in inexpensive products. Out of the three, features are what sells, and so the other two will suffer.


Logically it makes since. But, I've seen tons of HTiB that won't die. Cheap TV's that stick around forever. Walmart stereo's that get snowed on in my garage and still work. But, my $450 606 has known HDMI switching issues. Buddies $1500 samsung had (again known) bad capacitors (easy fix luckily), my 1700 panny's dark levels are drastically changing over time and my much more expensive (than walmart sold) Blu-Ray player laser failed just like any others.

Whoa, I think i have bad luck with electronics... 



JBrax said:


> All I know is I started with an old school non HDMI Yamaha that served me well for over 10 years. After I began upgrading I settled for a spur of the moment on sale Yamaha from Best Buy and just felt it wasn't giving me all my speakers deserved. Normally I'm a research freak and after much reading and some advice from a couple of people here I was lead toward my current Onkyo tx-nr809 and so far couldn't be happier. I'd rather have more than I need rather than not enough. I have that with my current AVR.


I have no doubt the 809 is a great receiver and will keep you happy for years. If i had the cash it would be a toss up between the 709 and 809. Unfortunately I don't and I need a receiver ASAP. I couldn't get mine to pass any video at all this morning. : (


----------



## JBrax (Oct 13, 2011)

Koopa said:


> Logically it makes since. But, I've seen tons of HTiB that won't die. Cheap TV's that stick around forever. Walmart stereo's that get snowed on in my garage and still work. But, my $450 606 has known HDMI switching issues. Buddies $1500 samsung had (again known) bad capacitors (easy fix luckily), my 1700 panny's dark levels are drastically changing over time and my much more expensive (than walmart sold) Blu-Ray player laser failed just like any others.
> 
> Whoa, I think i have bad luck with electronics...
> 
> I have no doubt the 809 is a great receiver and will keep you happy for years. If i had the cash it would be a toss up between the 709 and 809. Unfortunately I don't and I need a receiver ASAP. I couldn't get mine to pass any video at all this morning. : (


Many of the guys here direct attention to accessories4less for factory reconditioned receivers. You may want to check them out if you want "more for less". They also come with a warranty.


----------



## Koopa (Aug 19, 2008)

JBrax said:


> Many of the guys here direct attention to accessories4less for factory reconditioned receivers. You may want to check them out if you want "more for less". They also come with a warranty.


I have been watching it daily! :T


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

I also agree the Onkyo 809 is a great choice from Accessories4less. Although Denon is a good company Onkyo out preforms Denon and other manufacturers by a fair bit. Bench tests have proven that the Onkyo all channels driven still get 90+watts per channel wher as the comparable Denon fails poorly at less than 60watts.


----------



## Koopa (Aug 19, 2008)

tonyvdb said:


> I also agree the Onkyo 809 is a great choice from Accessories4less. Although Denon is a good company Onkyo out preforms Denon and other manufacturers by a fair bit. Bench tests have proven that the Onkyo all channels driven still get 90+watts per channel wher as the comparable Denon fails poorly at less than 60watts.


Ah, see why did you have to go and tell me that! Was that across the board products or lower end or...?
I was convinced to go with Denon just because I had such a bad taste in my mouth after the Dealing with Onkyo support and the HDMI Issue. 

I'm going to have to submit to GranteedEV's arguments. After much self debate I've come to the conclusion that obviously what I'm doing is not working. I'll see if I can go pawn my daughters toys and get enough for a 809 or comparable receiver.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Koopa said:


> Ah, see why did you have to go and tell me that! Was that across the board products or lower end or...?


Its across the board it seems, This is one of the main reason Onkyo outsells the competition more than two to one. Just look at the weight of most comparable receivers. They generally weigh less than the comparable Onkyo, that means a smaller power supply thus less power available to the amps.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> Bench tests have proven that the Onkyo all channels driven still get 90+watts per channel


Do you mind linking these bench tests of the 809?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

GranteedEV said:


> Do you mind linking these bench test?


I am at work but I will have a look when I have a chance. Jack also may know where they are if he sees this thread as he has seen the tests as well.
But just look at the specifications on receivers and look at the weight. Thats a very good indication.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> But just look at the specifications on receivers and look at the weight. Thats a very good indication.


I'll have to disagree. A modern switch mode power supply, and highly efficient amplifiers that need less heatsinking but produce more power, will weigh less. And as you know I pay little mind to specifications as they don't indicate ability to double down into lower impedances, or crossover distortion from poor biasing.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

I will track a few down but have a look at Secrets of Home Theater I hold their reviews to be very detailed and unbiased.
A great example is my Onkyo 805

Ok, found one, here is a bench test on the Onkyo 609


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
With the TX-NR609 producing right at 90 Watts into 5 Channels, I think it is a more than safe assumption to think the 809 will meet or exceed the 609 Bench Test. I am only providing these Bench Tests as I have yet to see a Bench Test on the TX-NR809.

Here is the 609's Bench Test from Home Theater Magazine:
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads: 
0.1% distortion at 81.0 watts 
1% distortion at 95.1 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads: 
0.1% distortion at 77.7 watts 
1% distortion at 88.9 watts

Analog frequency response in Direct mode: 
–0.05 dB at 10 Hz 
–0.01 dB at 20 Hz 
+0.03 dB at 20 kHz 
–2.56 dB at 50 kHz

Analog frequency response with stereo signal processing: 
–0.11 dB at 10 Hz 
–0.03 dB at 20 Hz 
–0.18 dB at 20 kHz 
–62.97 dB at 50 kHz



This graph shows that the TX-NR609’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 105.6 watts and 1 percent distortion at 124.3 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 146.8 watts and 1 percent distortion at 188.6 watts.

That is fantastic measured performance for a $600 MSRP AVR. There are $1000 AVR's that do not come close to these numbers. Unfortunately, the 609 is held back by only offering Audyssey 2EQ which does not apply any EQ on the Subwoofer Channel whereas MultEQ XT places a premium on the Subwoofer.
Moreover the 609 is rated at 6.2 Amps and provided these Measurements and the 809 is specified at 7.5 Amps so I just do not see how the 809 would do even better.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
And just for comparisons sake, here is the Bench Test of the Denon AVR-2112 which retails for $50 more than the TX-NR609 and has a much higher Street Price:
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads: 
0.1% distortion at 76.6 watts 
1% distortion at 85.5 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads: 
0.1% distortion at 52.3 watts 
1% distortion at 63.2 watts

Analog frequency response in Pure Direct mode: 
–0.14 dB at 10 Hz 
–0.04 dB at 20 Hz 
–0.07 dB at 20 kHz 
–2.80 dB at 50 kHz

Analog frequency response with stereo signal processing: 
–0.42 dB at 10 Hz 
–0.14 dB at 20 Hz 
–0.77 dB at 20 kHz 
–58.65 dB at 50 kHz



This graph shows that the AVR-2112CI’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 96.6 watts and 1 percent distortion at 117.5 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 79.9 watts and 1 percent distortion at 144.4 watts. (Please note: Though unusual, the two-channel output has been double-checked, and the power at 0.1 percent distortion is higher at 8 ohms than at 4 ohms, even though the 1 percent numbers are as expected.)

While 5 Channel Performance is relatively close, the Onkyo trounces it when looking at 7 Channel Measurements.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## Koopa (Aug 19, 2008)

I was very closely looking at the Denon 2311CI. I will not, and don't see ever, running 7.1 with it. Does this look more acceptable?


Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads: 
0.1% distortion at 83.3 watts 
1% distortion at 91.5 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads: 
0.1% distortion at 66.3 watts 
1% distortion at 74.7 watts

Analog frequency response in Pure Direct mode: 
–0.13 dB at 10 Hz 
–0.03 dB at 20 Hz 
–0.07 dB at 20 kHz 
–2.77 dB at 50 kHz

Analog frequency response with stereo signal processing: 
–0.52 dB at 10 Hz 
–0.16 dB at 20 Hz 
–0.24 dB at 20 kHz 
–18.06 dB at 50 kHz

This graph shows that the AVR-2311CI’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 126.3 watts and 1 percent distortion at 154.3 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 154.6 watts and 1 percent distortion at 198.8 watts.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

I think realistically you would be happy with it but the 809 is a big step up for little money. Its always best to get one the exceeds your needs. The Onkyo lineup also uses a much better video processor on top of THX certification giving you very useful surround modes amung other things.


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
The major omission with the 2312 is the lack of Preamp Outputs for adding an Outboard Amplifier. However, it is a solid AVR and if you are turned off by Onkyo, it will work just fine. I would seriously consider stepping up at least to the 3311 or 3312 so that you have Preamp Outputs as you never know if you might choose to upgrade Speakers and truly need an Amplifier to get the most out of it.

All this being said, the x09 has really gotten rave reviews both by Owners and by Professional Reviewers. And as for QC, it really appears the x09's have been doing great in this respect. I also think the issues with the x08's has been somewhat overhyped. The actual number of affected AVR's is smaller than what it might appear by looking at one of the largest AV Forums out there. Also, Onkyo is the Number 1 in Sales in the US, Europe, Australia, and elsewhere so any issues will certainly be magnified by this.

I did purchase a Refurbished TX-NR3007 that did have HDMI Issues that were so strange and perplexing that I ended up getting a Brand New TX-NR3008 from Onkyo. And while I only use it as a Preamp or SSP, I absolutely could not be happier. Regardless, the Denon is a solid choice. I am just turned off by the premium pricing and the fact that the Amplifier Stages have gone on a diet since Denon was Sold and merged with Marantz, McIntosh, Snell, and others to form D&M Holdings. If you look at the weight of a pre D&M Denon like the classic $1200 AVR-3805, you will see that it actually weighs almost the same as the $2000 AVR-4311 while offering 2 fewer Channels. Also, the Remote Controls on the 3805 were much nicer IMO.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## JBrax (Oct 13, 2011)

I agree with JJ and Tony. I previously had never owned any Onkyo AVR's. Always had Yamaha and it's just what I was comfortable with as I'd never had any issues or problems. With the 809 I feel as though I got more receiver than I paid for.


----------



## Koopa (Aug 19, 2008)

Thanks for all the great input everyone. It does sound as if Onkyo has fixed the quality issues and as said, if not for the one flaw i loved the 606. Being this close to daughters bday, Christmas and new set of tires for my winter truck I believe I'll purchase a low end denon for now. I have to get something soon before I set fire to the 606. There's a denon 791 refurb for a little of nothing on a4l. I can get it to get me through the holidays and sell or gift to a family early next year. By then I should be able to get the 709 or 809 I know I'd love if the quality iissues are fixed as I'm finding many reporting.


----------



## RodK (Mar 30, 2011)

See if you can find a slightly used or old stock Denon. Here are the output specs for my Denon 989 (2809) as measured by Sound and Vision. It has been a great receiver for me. As long as you don't need hdmi 1.4 for 3D, it has excellent sound quality and multEQ XT. It also runs much cooler than an Onkyo.


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

I disagree with a lot of the Denon bashing going on here, too.

And I paid $600 for my 3312, although that was before the price increases (I think those increases were only $50, though).


----------



## Koopa (Aug 19, 2008)

I can see the what is being said about the power supplied when driving all channel's being considerable less than the Onkyo but, that it is still considerably more power than my 606 will output (0 watts) for the first 30-60 minutes it's on.

Bottom line is I'm on a (very) tight budget currently. I can go with the 1712, get everything I need including multeq xt. I will never use external amps anyway so that's not a factor. I have googled and found no common issues on any Denon lower model's. The only Onkyo's in the same price range have reported common issue's on all models except the 609 which has 2EQ instead.

From what I understand Multeq is a needed for subs. I have some monster subs, so I'm guessing that I'll want multeq at minimum. I'm going to try out the Denon. If I'm not satisfied it will be replaced early next year.


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

Koopa said:


> I can see the what is being said about the power supplied when driving all channel's being considerable less than the Onkyo but, that it is still considerably more power than my 606 will output (0 watts) for the first 30-60 minutes it's on.
> 
> Bottom line is I'm on a (very) tight budget currently. I can go with the 1712, get everything I need including multeq xt. I will never use external amps anyway so that's not a factor. I have googled and found no common issues on any Denon lower model's. The only Onkyo's in the same price range have reported common issue's on all models except the 609 which has 2EQ instead.
> 
> From what I understand Multeq is a needed for subs. I have some monster subs, so I'm guessing that I'll want multeq at minimum. I'm going to try out the Denon. If I'm not satisfied it will be replaced early next year.


MultiEQ XT will equalize your sub. MultiEQ XT32 is required to EQ 2 subs. Only available on the top Denon from last year's lineup, since it has not yet been replaced. (4311)


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

KalaniP said:


> I disagree with a lot of the Denon bashing going on here, too.


No Denon bashing going on at all, just the facts. Denon makes a good receiver but apples to apples Onkyo offers more for the money. One being THX certification, and its not just a badge its some very useful surround modes.


----------



## JBrax (Oct 13, 2011)

tonyvdb said:


> No Denon bashing going on at all, just the facts. Denon makes a good receiver but apples to apples Onkyo offers more for the money. One being THX certification, and its not just a badge its some very useful surround modes.


Have to agree with Tony. I always use the THX cinema mode for movies and THX music for tunes.


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

KalaniP said:


> I disagree with a lot of the Denon bashing going on here, too.
> 
> And I paid $600 for my 3312, although that was before the price increases (I think those increases were only $50, though).


Denon bashing? I am really not sure how you got that impression, but my apologies if somehow that is how it seems. My last Post a few hours back was about the 4311 and someone purchasing one and I could not be more complimentary. I do miss the Denon prior to the D&M Merger, but there really is no bashing here. I even made a Thread talking about how delighted I was that Accessories4less is now carrying Denon with a 1 Year Manufacturers Warranty.

Also, on another Post, I have read a great deal about the current x09 Series Onkyos and from all I have read spanning multiple Forums, they do seem to run cooler. It is actually, why I have been almost exclusively advocating the x09's. I have also pointed out the Serial (IDE) Cable with the past x08's when folks are debating whether to get a more expensive x08 or a current x09.

In all truth, what you actually will not see here is a great deal of Onkyo bashing which seems to be quite popular in many parts. And it truth, we really try to be supportive of anyone's preferences.


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

True 'nuff... not actually bashing, per se. Sorry if I was overly defensive.


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

KalaniP said:


> True 'nuff... not actually bashing, per se. Sorry if I was overly defensive.


No worries amigo. We as a Staff really work hard to foster a positive atmosphere and bashing is something we do not tolerate. While certainly people are going to have differing experiences and vantage points, but regardless of the Brand, it is all about what makes that Member happy. (White Van Speakers excluded)


----------



## JustaSheep23 (Jan 1, 2012)

I realize I'm a little late to this party, but you can count me among the happy Onkyo TX-NR809 owners. I "upgraded" from a $400 10yr old Denon 1700 (I think). I realize that's not at all an apples to apples comparison so I won't go into the differences. However, I'm extremely happy with the sound quality of the Onkyo, the features including analog preouts, and the bang for the buck.

I've had the receiver for about 6 months and have not had any problems with it what so ever.

I've also really been enjoying the 320 bitrate streaming of Spotify. Onkyo got on board with them to provide streaming music over a network connection. You do have to pay $10/mo. for the premium Spotify account, but it's easily worth it to me.

Was a purchase made already? How do you like it and what did you go with?

(Sorry if I missed the answer among the posts already.)


----------



## Koopa (Aug 19, 2008)

Spotify is an awesome service although I don't listen quite enough to justify the price. I went with the Denon 1712. I didn't have the funds for much more. I dont care if I get per outs so that didn't come in to play. The 1712 got me plenty of hdmi outs and Multieq xt which was nice. 

I'll upgrade eventually but, the fact is the 1712 fit my current need and fit it pretty well.


----------



## soup3184 (Nov 7, 2010)

Jungle Jack said:


> No worries amigo. We as a Staff really work hard to foster a positive atmosphere and bashing is something we do not tolerate. While certainly people are going to have differing experiences and vantage points, but regardless of the Brand, it is all about what makes that Member happy. (White Van Speakers excluded)


That's why I like this forum. I also go on the Polk forum and if you post something that disagrees with the established members, you are called a troll and worse.


----------



## JustaSheep23 (Jan 1, 2012)

Koopa said:


> Spotify is an awesome service although I don't listen quite enough to justify the price. I went with the Denon 1712. I didn't have the funds for much more. I dont care if I get per outs so that didn't come in to play. The 1712 got me plenty of hdmi outs and Multieq xt which was nice.
> 
> I'll upgrade eventually but, the fact is the 1712 fit my current need and fit it pretty well.


Yep, I totally understand. That's why I had the Denon for 10 or so years. I had it longer than I intended, but it served me well.


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

soup3184 said:


> That's why I like this forum. I also go on the Polk forum and if you post something that disagrees with the established members, you are called a troll and worse.


Anytime you go to a Forum where the Manufacturer is footing the bill for hosting the Website, there is definitely going to be questions about conflict of interest. Add in the fact that almost everyone who Posts there owns Polk Speakers and no one wants to feel like they could have gotten a better Speaker for the same money and you have a recipe for dissent being met with accusations of being a troll if you do not extol the virtues of the Brand.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

Jungle Jack said:


> Anytime you go to a Forum where the Manufacturer is footing the bill for hosting the Website, there is definitely going to be questions about conflict of interest. Add in the fact that almost everyone who Posts there owns Polk Speakers and no one wants to feel like they could have gotten a better Speaker for the same money and you have a recipe for dissent being met with accusations of being a troll if you do not extol the virtues of the Brand.
> Cheers,
> JJ


IMO, that's not the major issue with that particular forum. It has more to do with opinions on the "laissez faire subjectivity" vs "controlled-test subjectivity" debate.. a lot of "oppression".


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

GranteedEV said:


> IMO, that's not the major issue with that particular forum. It has more to do with opinions on the "laissez faire subjectivity" vs "controlled-test subjectivity" debate.. a lot of "oppression".


No doubt that plays into it as well. Part of that well might be that Polk is a stepping off point for many HT Enthusiasts/Audiophiles. That is not to say that Polk does not have some ambitious designs and make quality Speakers.


----------

