# A 4.1 (would like digital out) receiver



## audionub65 (Jun 12, 2010)

I have an Onkyo Ht-RC260 and love it. Issue is I need a 4.1 . My money can be better spent since I just use it for music that is connected to my PC and NEVER HT use.

I can build a kit (would love to do this) or I can buy one. Budget is under 500.

Thanks!


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

I am honestly a tad bit confused as to your intensions, so I'd appreciate it if you could clarify them. If i'm understanding you correctly, you can get an excellent 7.1 receiver right here

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

Just use it with the rear surround and center channels disconnected if you don't need them. :T


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
The Marantz would be a great choice.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## audionub65 (Jun 12, 2010)

Will do. I don't need all this fancy HDMI, upscaling, all the features you get with a receiver. I need something that can put out at least a fair amount of power that is geared towards music. If anything a 2.1 receiver would work but I like to keep my options open. Why I'm asking is I can't find anything like this. All I find a stereo receiver but never a 2.1 or a 4.1 receiver. I keep thinking that less channels will make it a cheaper unit then say a unit that does 5.1 or more since that IS HT receiver.

Hope that makes more sense.


----------



## nova (Apr 30, 2006)

You could use something like the Outlaw Audio RR2150 stereo receiver. An excerpt from the manual;

The RR 2150 allows you to connect two pairs of speakers, each of which will be sent the same output signal. Four options are available, depending on where you set the Speaker Selector Switch (FP14).
Set the switch to the “A” position to listen to speakers connected to the “A” speaker output terminals only.
Set the switch to the “B” position to listen to speakers connected to the “B” speaker output terminals only.
Set the switch to the “A+B” position to listen to both sets of speakers.

There is also a subwoofer output and bass management. This would get you a 4.1 system.
I'm sure there are other products out there to fit your needs but, a good 5.1 home theater receiver will do what you need as well and probably for less money.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

audionub65 said:


> Will do. I don't need all this fancy HDMI, upscaling, all the features you get with a receiver. I need something that can put out at least a fair amount of power that is geared towards music. If anything a 2.1 receiver would work but I like to keep my options open. Why I'm asking is I can't find anything like this. All I find a stereo receiver but never a 2.1 or a 4.1 receiver. I keep thinking that less channels will make it a cheaper unit then say a unit that does 5.1 or more since that IS HT receiver.
> 
> Hope that makes more sense.


Gotcha. 
The truth is, economies of scale dictate price. Right now, stereo receivers don't SELL the way surround receivers do, just like separates processors don't sell the way a receiver does.

So electronics companies can actually afford to put out surround receivers better than they can afford to put out a good stereo receiver.

But there's a problem with a cheap 7 channel receiver. They're going to skimp on the output stages, the heatsinking, the power supply. In essence, like you say, mostly useless features like upscaling and never-used EQ modes dominate over the hard circuitry that a music oriented electronic won't deal with. On paper, a "dedicated" 2.1 receiver seems optimal dollar for dollar, but because less people buy it, it won't be as cheap as you're thinking.

So I agree with you that for music, sometimes a surround receiver can have many useless features. Certainly, none of them have the robust amp sections of a good stereo receiver. 

So you're left with the following options

1) A dedicated pre-amp and amp combo. For example, the Emotiva USP-1 and Emotiva UPA-2. This does in fact have a bass management system and that amp is robust. It's a pricey endevour though.

2) A more-advanced-than-ordinary stereo receiver. Your best bets would be to look into the Outlaw RR2150 and Harman/Kardon 3490. I believe the former has some level of bass management. 

3) A true high end stereo receiver. In my opinion, there is only one - the Harman/Kardon HK 990 is exactly what you're looking for - minus it's price  - but that's what you need to pay if you want REAL performance in one box.

4) A better-than average surround receiver, marked down. Yamaha receivers, for example, are known to have reliably good amplifier sections in the mid levels and higher. Same with the Marantz I linked. Here are some measurements of its amp performance. At that price, I think it's a great deal. And if the amps ultimately prove insufficient, you can always add a higher end separates amp, thanks to the world class pre-out sections.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

nova said:


> You could use something like the Outlaw Audio RR2150 stereo receiver. An excerpt from the manual;
> 
> The RR 2150 allows you to connect two pairs of speakers, each of which will be sent the same output signal. Four options are available, depending on where you set the Speaker Selector Switch (FP14).
> Set the switch to the “A” position to listen to speakers connected to the “A” speaker output terminals only.
> ...


A+B would imply that the amp channels are driving two sets of speakrs with the same signal, in parallel. This is not 4.1 because the rears will never get a discrete signal unless the fronts are off. It's more of a "zone" switch than anything.

Also, driving an amp channel with two speakers in parallel effectively changes the load it is presented with. Hooking up two of your average nominal 6-ohm speakers will give you an effective nominal 3-ohm load, and most speakers of this type dip down to at least 4 ohms if not lower at certain frequencies - you could easily be looking at the amp seeing a 1.6 etc ohm load at times after phase angles.

A+B can be used with higher impedance loudspeakers, but in my opinion is a bad idea for 90% of loudspeakers out there.


----------



## audionub65 (Jun 12, 2010)

Thank you for your help, I will be looking into what i will do!


----------

