# Old high end vs new low end



## Cazten (Nov 1, 2011)

Im curious as to your opinions one some gear for my application.

I'm looking to get a A/V receiver.

At the base level I need it to perform 2 functions.

1. Be a am/fm tuner
2. Play stereo and home theater audio with the highest Audiophile grade i an get for the price.

I'm not particularly worried about lossless formats as I can decode in via htpc or bd player, and analog out it via 7.1 inputs. And while it's always nice, I'm not particularly worried about hdmi. While its nice feature I can completely bypass it by plugin in directly to my tv setup. As long as I can run the audio through the receiver then technically it's serving it's purpose. Right? I have nothing to upscale.

So bearing that in mind would I be better off with a low budget new system or used high end gear?

With a budget of 300ish I can find systems like the Sherwood r965, marantz sr8500, rotel 1057, ect. How do you feel these would stack against a typical budget 300 receiver off the shelf?

I would assume its better, especially the amp components? But I thought I'd ask, sometimes technology moves wuick


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

*Old high end*. Hands down. But if you insist on the new end, go for Emotiva: Its champagne on a beer budget.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

The issues with going with older receivers is that some are pre HDMI and without HDMI you loose out on being able to use any of the new audio formats. You also then need to consider that older does not mean better when it comes to the ability to use any sort of room correction that comes with many of todays receivers.
This Onkyo 609 is an excellent receiver and was bench tested to do better than 85 watts per channel all channels driven.


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

My old Integra DTR-7.6 didn't accept the new HD Dolby and DTS formats. It only does DTS 96/24 and Dolby Digital as well as all the various PCM rates. But it really didn't matter much since I choose to let your player do the decoding and then use multi-channel analog input for the unsupported stuff and. the end result is going to be more or less the same. Personally, I wouldn't let the lack of DTS- HD or Dolby TrueHD make or break your purchase; since 95% of us on these forums do not have speakers of a high enough caliber to discern a difference between DTS 96/24 and DTS HD Master Audio.

A good used high end amp and pre-amp-dac will make a much bigger difference for your sound than some mid to low end receiver with the latest format support. Hands down, in this case good hardware wins over software.


----------



## Cazten (Nov 1, 2011)

8086 said:


> My old Integra DTR-7.6 didn't accept the new HD Dolby and DTS formats. It only does DTS 96/24 and Dolby Digital as well as all the various PCM rates. But it really didn't matter much since I choose to let your player do the decoding and then use multi-channel analog input for the unsupported stuff and. the end result is going to be more or less the same. Personally, I wouldn't let the lack of DTS- HD or Dolby TrueHD make or break your purchase; since 95% of us on these forums do not have speakers of a high enough caliber to discern a difference between DTS 96/24 and DTS HD Master Audio.
> 
> A good used high end amp and pre-amp-dac will make a much bigger difference for your sound than some mid to low end receiver with the latest format support. Hands down, in this case good hardware wins over software.


The entire point of the A/V processor is to be a pre-amp/Dac correct?
- I can bypass from my HTPC straight into analog out, which would require a better DAC on my computer end for the short 1foot cable run into the A/V. However I dont even have a speaker setup to utilize it yet so im unworried atm. I know I can always get it via onboard soundcard and update to a nice one later if needed. HDMI Unnecessary, just convenient.

- I run HTPC, so ALL sound processing can be done onboard for lossless formats, even though I wont be using them yet.
- Also I can do room correction, and all sorts of awesome goodies from HTPC as well. Even though alot of what I look at still does that to some degree.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

8086 said:


> Personally, I wouldn't let the lack of DTS- HD or Dolby TrueHD make or break your purchase; since 95% of us on these forums do not have speakers of a high enough caliber to discern a difference between DTS 96/24 and DTS HD Master Audio.


I dont agree at all, as long as your system is capable of doing 20-16,000Hz with a decent sub there is a noticeable difference.



> A good used high end amp and pre-amp-dac will make a much bigger difference for your sound than some mid to low end receiver with the latest format support. Hands down, in this case good hardware wins over software.


The DACs in most receivers are far better than anyone can hear now a days it still boils down to the quality of the speakers and keeping the amps from distortion where you will hear all the difference. I would not call any of the used receivers above high end and i would challenge anyone to actually hear a difference in the DACs used to say whats in the Onkyo I listed above if the source and all things down stream are the same. 

I can also say that you wont get the same room correction abilities from any software at a reasonable cost that will do what Audssey will achieve as its more than just an EQ. 

The issue with letting the HTPC do all the video and audio processing is that you wont get the quality that is available now including upconversion of non HD.


----------



## Cazten (Nov 1, 2011)

tonyvdb said:


> The issue with letting the HTPC do all the video and audio processing is that you wont get the quality that is available now including upconversion of non HD.


What do you mean by this? I know dedicated hardware still upscales better than most HTPC software can. However I dont watch anything except extremely high quality MKV Remux and BD Rips to begin with so I never need upscaling.

Is there anything else I'd be missing? I could potentially see loss in audio quality having the computer do processing and sending out via analog as your using the computer DAC, but that would be it right?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

With HTPC having so many different configurations its hard to say, I will vary from PC to PC. I know people who have great success and others that have issues. personally I see it as a big headache when a receiver can do all of it and at the price of the Onkyo 609 its going to be tough to beat.

Here is the review and bench test I mentioned of the 609


----------



## Cazten (Nov 1, 2011)

tonyvdb said:


> With HTPC having so many different configurations its hard to say, I will vary from PC to PC. I know people who have great success and others that have issues. personally I see it as a big headache when a receiver can do all of it and at the price of the Onkyo 609 its going to be tough to beat.
> 
> Here is the review and bench test I mentioned of the 609


Understood. Kinda just depends on application.

Its the ever sliding slope... But I just noticed the Sherwood r972 for $600 bucks. Thats looks pretty friggin good deal as well.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Yes, I have one of the 972s but it has its quirks so you need to be patient with it.


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

I know others may disagee. But at $300-ish, a receiver is just going to be a box full of necessary compromises to fulfill a pricepoint. Going high end used circumvents many of those issues and ensures your speakers have enough power, your dacs will be of a good quality, etc. But I think many of us will agree the Sherwood R-972 with Trinnov Room Correction might be a wise choice here and will settle many arguments.



Cazten said:


> The entire point of the A/V processor is to be a pre-amp/Dac correct?
> - I can bypass from my HTPC straight into analog out, which would require a better DAC on my computer end for the short 1foot cable run into the A/V. However I dont even have a speaker setup to utilize it yet so im unworried atm. I know I can always get it via onboard soundcard and update to a nice one later if needed. HDMI Unnecessary, just convenient.
> 
> - I run HTPC, so ALL sound processing can be done onboard for lossless formats, even though I wont be using them yet.
> - Also I can do room correction, and all sorts of awesome goodies from HTPC as well. Even though alot of what I look at still does that to some degree.


As you know, going DTS and Dolby HD audio via the analog bypass would all depend on his source equipment. If he's got a decent blu-ray player from Pioneer (elite), Oppo, etc then it's okay. But if hes got some Colby DVD player he bought at wal-mart for $30, then he's better off with a new receiver.



Cazten said:


> What do you mean by this? I know dedicated hardware still upscales better than most HTPC software can. However I dont watch anything except extremely high quality MKV Remux and BD Rips to begin with so I never need upscaling.
> 
> Is there anything else I'd be missing? I could potentially see loss in audio quality having the computer do processing and sending out via analog as your using the computer DAC, but that would be it right?


If you have a GPU from AMD, Nvidia, or a recent Intel IGP; then your video processing is done in hardware, not software.* 


*your video player must support hardware decoding


----------



## Cazten (Nov 1, 2011)

8086 said:


> I know others may disagee. But at $300-ish, a receiver is just going to be a box full of necessary compromises to fulfill a pricepoint. Going high end used circumvents many of those issues and ensures your speakers have enough power, your dacs will be of a good quality, etc. But I think many of us will agree the Sherwood R-972 with Trinnov Room Correction might be a wise choice here and will settle many arguments.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My main htpc player is jRiver 18, which can decode everything perfectly. Really kick but software. It is running a AMD APU

- However im thinking that $600 dollar deal for the R-972 is quite a looker right now. Its more than i wasnt to spend, but it looks like a downright steal. Is there anything any of you would consider better for the same or less money? With the exception of the possible audio quirk I dont really see a downside or anything it cant do. All new codecs, good dac, trinnov, HDMI and 3d Passthrough. Kinda seems like all the checkmarks.


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

Cazten said:


> My main htpc player is jRiver 18, which can decode everything perfectly. Really kick but software. It is running a AMD APU
> 
> - However im thinking that $600 dollar deal for the R-972 is quite a looker right now. Its more than i wasnt to spend, but it looks like a downright steal. Is there anything any of you would consider better for the same or less money? With the exception of the possible audio quirk I dont really see a downside or anything it cant do. All new codecs, good dac, trinnov, HDMI and 3d Passthrough. Kinda seems like all the checkmarks.


Your media player may decode the av files. But does the media player support hardware decoding or software decoding? Both Cyberlink PowerDVD and Corel WinDVD support hardware playback, enhancement, and decoding (GPU acceleration).


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
Given the application and budget, it really seems like going with a pre HDMI 1.4 AVR is the only direction possible. At this stage, fewer and fewer current AVR's are even offering multichannel analog inputs and those that do are far over $300. That being said, 99% of my needs were covered with 1.3 and 1.4 is rarely used in my rig.

Personally, I would split the middle and go with an HDMI 1.3 AVR like the Onkyo TX-SR805, Denon AVR-3808CI, and Marantz AV6005. This way you have a decent chance of finding one of these relatively close to your stated budget, but still have MCH Inputs and benefit from RoomEQ and can decide to take or leave HDMI.

I do find it unfortunate that when using strictly HT gear that HDMI is literally being forced on us and have often referred to it as a trojan horse offering a great deal more simplicity at the cost of any fair use of the physical media that you have purchased. Worse still, handshaking issues, HDMI Board failures, and constant firmware updates are the price of admission to view Blu-rays and receive the lossless codecs.
Best,
J


----------



## 3dbinCanada (Sep 13, 2012)

My advice to you is to get a new AVR and try to increase your budget if possible to the point where teh AVR you choose will provide Prea-amp outputs so that you can connect a power amp to it for the main left/right and center channels.


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

3dbinCanada said:


> My advice to you is to get a new AVR and try to increase your budget if possible to the point where teh AVR you choose will provide Prea-amp outputs so that you can connect a power amp to it for the main left/right and center channels.


The Sherwood-Newcastle R-972 has Pre-outs. 

http://www.noydcom.com/press_release/sherwood/R-972/sherwood_newcastle_r-972_back.jpg


----------



## vann_d (Apr 7, 2009)

I made an attempt at the HTPC analog out to multi channel amp. I was all ready to get a high end sound card but realized that a basic modern AVR performs all the functions of a high end sound card but does it more seamlessly and with better performance. Granted, the DAC in some of the ultra high sounds cards are better but the better useability of the AVR trumps it in my opinion. 

Take a hard look at the functionality you get with a $200-$300 sound card. Forget on board sound because it is way too noisey analog. It's just not gonna compare with the features you get with on board digital out and an AVR. If you don't want HDMI, that's fine. HTPC does great video. Send that straight to tv. Send digital audio to AVR and you'll be much happier. I am with my setup.


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

It really depends on the sound card, you are right about the dacs. But some sound cards offer DSP audio processing modes which rival or beat those found in a Modern AVR. Creative's new ZXR card and Almost any Asus XONAR are good examples. It is the reason why I still keep my AVR connected to my older X-Fi via SPDIF. And having a good DAC on your sound card lets you have the AVR on the digital out and a dedicated headphone amp on the analog side.


----------



## vann_d (Apr 7, 2009)

8086 said:


> It really depends on the sound card, you are right about the dacs. But some sound cards offer DSP audio processing modes which rival or beat those found in a Modern AVR. Creative's new ZXR card and Almost any Asus XONAR are good examples. It is the reason why I still keep my AVR connected to my older X-Fi via SPDIF. And having a good DAC on your sound card lets you have the AVR on the digital out and a dedicated headphone amp on the analog side.


Yes, they do have good DSP modes but implementing them with a universal remote was too challenging for me. I didn't like having to open the soundcard software all the time to change DSP modes. An AVR makes the 10' interface thing much easier to manage IMO. Plus, an AVR can often be setup to automatically switch DSP modes depending on source signal. I dunno, to me that was a big deal.


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

Some creative cards (and other brands) come with their own remote which contains DSP specific buttons. I'm sure you can find the creative hexcode online somwhere (remote central?). And for what it's worth, I should also mention you don't get that wonderful EAX support with a standard integrated audio chip.


----------

