High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource

Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
Rules HDTV Forum Gallery LINK TO US! RSS - High Def Forum AddThis Feed Button AddThis Social Bookmark Button Groups

High Definition Receivers, Recorders, Players, Tivos Discuss High Definition Receivers, Recorders, Players, Tivos, etc. Post reviews ask questions, etc.

Onkyo, Denon, Yamaha who gives the most bang for the buck?

Reply
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-29-2008, 12:58 PM   #31  
HD Elitist
 
hatt's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: FL
Age: 44
Posts: 6,300
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAD2 View Post
A few good facts with little supporting reasoning were mentioned here.
When did anyone ever say rating were with all channels driven? Have you been looking at Outlaw Audio's products? From the 605 manual:
Quote:
90 watts minimum continuous power
per channel, 8 ohm loads, 2 channels
driven
from 20 Hz to 20 kHz, with a
maximum total harmonic distortion of
0.08%
What are you comparing anyway? You start talking about separates, entry and elite models, Burr Brown. Yamaha uses Burr just like Onkyo and so on with some models. Burr makes many different quality DACs also, so saying BB doesn't tell the whole story.

Anyway, you are saying there is a big difference in the sound of the Onkyo 605 and the Yamaha 663(since you list those two)? This is the real question since this is a bang for the buck thread.

Last edited by hatt; 03-29-2008 at 01:07 PM..
hatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 02:06 PM   #32  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hatt View Post
When did anyone ever say rating were with all channels driven? Have you been looking at Outlaw Audio's products? From the 605 manual:

What are you comparing anyway? You start talking about separates, entry and elite models, Burr Brown. Yamaha uses Burr just like Onkyo and so on with some models. Burr makes many different quality DACs also, so saying BB doesn't tell the whole story.

Anyway, you are saying there is a big difference in the sound of the Onkyo 605 and the Yamaha 663(since you list those two)? This is the real question since this is a bang for the buck thread.
WOW!!!

Can't comprehend!!! I compared 2 of the ones mentioned and the manuals say all channels driven in one form of the other.
If you would have taken the time to finish reading the specs you would have seen that fact.
I then said people go to separates, which would include Outlaw stuff, because all power consumed is used for just one particular area and not shared is one reason.
Then I stated the difference between entry levels and upper elite models are DAC's.

So based upon the facts the Onkyo would deliver the best bang for the buck.
JAD2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 02:34 PM   #33  
HD Elitist
 
hatt's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: FL
Age: 44
Posts: 6,300
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAD2 View Post
WOW!!!

Can't comprehend!!! I compared 2 of the ones mentioned and the manuals say all channels driven in one form of the other.
If you would have taken the time to finish reading the specs you would have seen that fact.

I then said people go to separates, which would include Outlaw stuff, because all power consumed is used for just one particular area and not shared is one reason.
Then I stated the difference between entry levels and upper elite models are DAC's.

So based upon the facts the Onkyo would deliver the best bang for the buck.
You should post where Onkyo says anything about "all channels driven" and the 605. I didn't see it.

Which facts are those again? The rated power comsumption? That has a bearing on the sound quality? The DACs? The 605 doesn't have BB and might have the same ones as the 663.

Quote:
Rated Output Power (FTC)
All channels: 90 watts minimum continuous power
per channel, 8 ohm loads, 2 channels
driven
from 20 Hz to 20 kHz, with a
maximum total harmonic distortion of
0.08%
105/110 watts minimum continuous
power per channel, 8 ohm loads,
2 channels driven at 1 kHz, with a
maximum total harmonic distortion of
0.7/0.9%
110 watts minimum continuous power
per channel, 6 ohm loads, 2 channels
driven
at 1 kHz with a maximum total
harmonic distortion of 0.1%
Rated Output Power (IEC)
7 ch �� 140 W at 6 ohms, 1 kHz, 1 ch
driven

Maximum Output Power (JEITA)
7 ch �� 175 W at 6 ohms, 1 kHz, 1 ch
driven

Dynamic Power 210 W + 210 W (3 ��, Front)
180 W + 180 W (4 ��, Front)
110 W + 110 W (8 ��, Front)
THD (Total Harmonic Distortion)
0.08% (Power Rated)
0.08% (1 kHz, 1 W)
Lets compare this to Outlaws receiver

Quote:
Amplifier Section

Output Power (FTC): 65 watts per channel, 8 ohms, 20 Hz - 20kHz,<0.08%THD, all channels driven

Last edited by hatt; 03-29-2008 at 02:39 PM..
hatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 03:02 PM   #34  
How do I raise the WAF?
 
DrDre's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAD2 View Post
Not having enough power (Headroom) results in brightness.
Tones lower in frequency driving them at loud levels and not fall off in DB versus the mid and high frequency's needs alot of power and amps that can maintain the load, the result of not doing so causes mid to higher frequency's to become louder hence bright.
Headroom is the distance between my pelvis and my ssl console.
Just kidding! You are talking about consumer products jad2. If these receivers are used with the right speakers, in a room that is not to big, at a reasonable db there will be no problems at all.
DrDre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 03:04 PM   #35  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 118
Default

Power Output -
Front L/R 90 W + 90 W (8 ohms, 20 Hz20 kHz,0.08%, 2 channels driven, FTC)

Center 90 W (8 ohms, 20 Hz20 kHz, 0.08%,2 channels driven, FTC)

Surround L/R 90 W + 90 W (8 ohms, 20 Hz20 kHz,0.08%, 2 channels driven, FTC)

Surround Back L/R 90 W + 90 W (8 ohms, 20 Hz20 kHz,
0.08%, 2 channels driven

http://www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=...s=Receiver&p=s


Then if you look down power consumption total is 6.5 amps

6.5 amps is 780 watts.
7 channels at 90 watts each equals 630 max watts used to power the amplifier sections. Leaving 150 watts available for other usage.

Yamaha's max power usage is 400, do that math backwards.

The more power a amp section can sustain reflects on the overall quality and loudness you can obtain. Bass output takes alot of power hence today's addage of self powered sub woofers. If that wasn't the case, powered sub's would not be used. In HT stuff you still need to get at least good bass output to 80 hz or less and that still requires alot of power. High frequency tones take alot less power to make and maintain. So if a system lacks the power needed to drive lower frequencies, they are said to be bright sounding and thats because at the speaker the DB's of lower frequencys are lower than higher ones.

DAC's also effect the sound quality, but in a different way. Yes Burr Brown has many different ones, but there cheapest is still head and shoulders above the normal generic ones. Onkyo doesn't use cheap generic DAC's and from the 705's and up, they use the best ones Burr Brown offers.
The 300 series uses junk, it is full entry level.
500 series goes one step up
600 even better
700 begin to use good BB ones
800 use even better and so on.

Thats just the way it works, as prices increase the quality of internals do also.

You do get what you pay for with these receivers.
The Onkyo gets the nod because of its amp section.
How the Outlaw fairs, I'd have to look to see what differences internally it offered. 60 watts is fairly decent knowing Outlaw doesn't skew its power ratings. The Yamaha is barely making 40 watts per if it left a decent amount of power to operate its other operations. 40 watts is OK if the crossover to the sub is like 120, lower than that and you'd have gaps in frequency loudness. THX recommends 80 and with my mains being able to hit 40's with no problems with the receiver I have, I cross lower which adds for a better blend during music.
JAD2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 03:13 PM   #36  
HD Elitist
 
hatt's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: FL
Age: 44
Posts: 6,300
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAD2 View Post
snip.
You're just making up stuff at this point. If the 605 could do 90 x 7 with all channels driven it would say:
Quote:
90w x 7 (8 ohms, 20 Hz20 kHz,0.08%, all channels driven, FTC)
instead of:
Quote:
Power Output -
Front L/R 90 W + 90 W (8 ohms, 20 Hz20 kHz,0.08%, 2 channels driven, FTC)

Center 90 W (8 ohms, 20 Hz20 kHz, 0.08%,2 channels driven, FTC)

Surround L/R 90 W + 90 W (8 ohms, 20 Hz20 kHz,0.08%, 2 channels driven, FTC)

Surround Back L/R 90 W + 90 W (8 ohms, 20 Hz20 kHz,
0.08%, 2 channels driven
Damn, I'm not even against the Onkyo and have already stated in this thread I wanted to see some reviews of the new Yamaha line.

Last edited by hatt; 03-29-2008 at 03:16 PM..
hatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 03:31 PM   #37  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 118
Default

So listing each channel versus listing "all channels" is not the same thing????

Wow, what would happen if you saw 2 channels at 115 watts, then they list the all channels separately like above and it lowers to 90 or so.
In those cases the power to run in 2 channel stereo, some comes from the available extra not having to drive more channels.

Making stuff up, hardly.
The electronics receiver and amp market does enough on their own.
When you see @1 khz versus 20-20,000 you better be ready to know its a skewed reading. That means @ 1 khz is the only time that receiver can output said watts, anything lower than @1 khz, it drops off fast.

http://hometheater.about.com/od/home.../ampowerqt.htm
http://www.audioholics.com/education...-power-ratings
http://www.audioholics.com/education...an-equal-power

If I can find the link again there was a site where they tested receiver for actual output versus its ratings.
JAD2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 03:33 PM   #38  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 118
Default

http://www.audioholics.com/education...ratings-page-2

Another link
JAD2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 03:55 PM   #39  
How do I raise the WAF?
 
DrDre's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 132
Default

This is somewhat off topic, but an interesting link. http://www.crownaudio.com/apps_htm/d...ct-pwr-req.htm
DrDre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 04:41 PM   #40  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 625
Default

Wow, really interesting stuff. Except who cares? The difference in sound quality between all the receivers mentioned is minimal. Probably non existent to the average buyer, or even the slightly above average buyer. Bang for the buck = very acceptable sound for the masses, more features then previously available at this price point. I mean, that's really where it's at for most of us. The automatic speaker set up feature is a must, and it works.
inazsully is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 05:00 PM   #41  
How do I raise the WAF?
 
DrDre's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inazsully View Post
Wow, really interesting stuff. Except who cares? The difference in sound quality between all the receivers mentioned is minimal. Probably non existent to the average buyer, or even the slightly above average buyer. Bang for the buck = very acceptable sound for the masses, more features then previously available at this price point. I mean, that's really where it's at for most of us. The automatic speaker set up feature is a must, and it works.

I have to agree with you with most of what you said, except the part when you said "Who cares?" If none of us cared, we would not be wrting on this forum.
DrDre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 05:35 PM   #42  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 625
Default

When I said "who cares" I was referring to the technical jargon being of great importance to most of us. I think that if you are contemplating buying $2000+ receiver then maybe it would, but for $400 I doubt most of us would "care" about 90X7 at 8 ohms and all channels driven. Bottom line for me is, how does it sound, does it HDMI switch, can I play it pretty loud without distortion, can it auto adjust all of my speakers? Remember, the OP wanted to know about bang for the buck. Today I would say the Yamaha 663, the Pioneer 1018, the Onkyo 605, the new Sony, and the HK247. Forum reports suggest that the Onkyo runs hot, the Hk has had some reliability issues (but sounds really good), the Pioneer may be too expensive at retail pricing, and I don't know much about the Sony's yet.

Last edited by inazsully; 03-29-2008 at 05:41 PM..
inazsully is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 06:34 PM   #43  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
dave33ca's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hatt View Post
FWIW, years ago a friend of mine bought a comparable Denon to the Yamaha I had. After watching Flight of the Intruder on my system he returned the Denon and bought a Yamaha. So, far better than Onkyo and Yamaha, Id have to disagree with.
onkyo's tend to run hot and yamaha's are decent enough. But denon for the most part delivers bar none all the time with all of thier receivers, even the lower priced ones. Quality with denon doesn't mean expensive.
dave33ca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2008, 11:05 PM   #44  
HD Elitist
 
hatt's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: FL
Age: 44
Posts: 6,300
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave33ca View Post
onkyo's tend to run hot and yamaha's are decent enough. But denon for the most part delivers bar none all the time with all of thier receivers, even the lower priced ones. Quality with denon doesn't mean expensive.
I don't know what is so hard to understand about the story I presented. I didn't say Denon was junk. In this one case this is what happened. All the talk in the world won't change what happened in the story. Many Yamaha receivers have passed though mine and my brothers hands and we have been pleased with all of them. The one Denon I have had experience with [email protected]#king sucked, and it wasn't a $400 one, but over $1100. Does this mean all Denons suck, nope, this could have been an oddball. I've been wanting to try the new Onkyo line however no Denon product interests me in the least.
hatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2008, 01:21 AM   #45  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
dave33ca's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 327
Default

glad to hear it, I just meant that for the most part denon means more power than features. Features are nice but when all is said and done if the speakers don't perform well then features are usseless to me. JMO
dave33ca is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


to Onkyo, Denon, Yamaha who gives the most bang for the buck?
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
newbie: pls help with receiver and speakers noclue2007 Speakers & Surround Sound 15 12-10-2007 02:52 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:56 PM.



Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004 - 2018, MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands