help with receiver decision

[araratjan]

Hi all,

I have a choice of getting a previous year (but brand new) Yamaha HTR 5790 for $450. However, I am also consdeiring Onkyo 702. I will be using mostly for classical music/classic rock and some movies. Any opinions?

Thanks.

[L.J.]

I'm sure they're both good recv. How much are you looking to spend on the 702?

[araratjan]

Onkyo 702 is @ $100 more.

[GMichael]

I cast my vote for the Yamaha. But they are both good units. You really can't go wrong with either.

[L.J.]

GMichaels right, you can't go wrong either way. I had the considered the 702 about a year ago. If possible listen to both units. I'd save myself $100 and if the Yammy is not what you thought take advantage of the 30 day return policy.

[accastil]

Hi, i do not have any experience with Onkyo..as for yamaha, yes it sounds excellent for HT but is actually pathetic for CD stereo music listening. i recommend you try either harman kardon or Marantz if you like something which is good for both HT and music listening.

[GMichael]

as for yamaha, yes it sounds excellent for HT but is actually pathetic for CD stereo music listening. .
This is just incorect. The Yammie sounds great for CD stereo music.

[accastil]

sorry, i should have elaborated more..yes, yamahas sounds good for stereo music listening. but this is only true for slow, mellow music..music with a lot of low frequencies and punching bass seem to sound awful when played on a yamaha. to cutshort, yamahas seem to have a problem with the bass reproduction. theirs are boomy..which is always good for HT by the way but is pathetic really for disco music where it has to be rich, full and punchy.

[GMichael]

OK, when I get home tonight I'll tell my stereo to knock off sounding so good. Doesn't it know that it's supposed to sound awfull. I mean really. What is it thinking?

[L.J.]

OK, when I get home tonight I'll tell my stereo to knock off sounding so good. Doesn't it know that it's supposed to sound awfull. I mean really. What is it thinking?

Wow it thinks! If it can make coffee in the morning I'm gettin one :D

[GMichael]

Wow it thinks! If it can make coffee in the morning I'm gettin one :D
Coffee? That's easy. You should see what it does for me each morning. I never start a day without my morning eye opener.

nuf said?

[L.J.]

Coffee? That's easy. You should see what it does for me each morning. I never start a day without my morning eye opener.

nuf said?

If thats the case, im grabbin 2 :rolleyes:

[accastil]

OK, when I get home tonight I'll tell my stereo to knock off sounding so good. Doesn't it know that it's supposed to sound awfull. I mean really. What is it thinking?
hi Gmichael, i used to be a yamaha brand fanatic especially with their A/V receivers. there was a sudden change however when i heard the marantz for the first time. have you heard one already? you know what i think now? i think yammies spend too much on advertisements while brands such as marantz focus more of their resources in development and innovation. that is why they sound so far superior than more "famous" brands like yamaha, denon, onkyo, etc,etc...try reading yamaha brochures and visit their shops..they made it look so good dont they? well, i think its just a mindset.

[GMichael]

hi Gmichael, i used to be a yamaha brand fanatic especially with their A/V receivers. there was a sudden change however when i heard the marantz for the first time. have you heard one already? you know what i think now? i think yammies spend too much on advertisements while brands such as marantz focus more of their resources in development and innovation. that is why they sound so far superior than more "famous" brands like yamaha, denon, onkyo, etc,etc...try reading yamaha brochures and visit their shops..they made it look so good dont they? well, i think its just a mindset.

I have been out to a few shops in the NYC area. Got to hear them all. My mind was made up with my ears. Yamaha used to make "bright" receivers but this has changed. There isn't a whole lot of difference in sound quality between brands at this price.
Marantz makes very good receivers. So does HK, Pioneer, Denon, Onkyo and even Yamaha. What Yamaha does not make good are speakers. They seem to make them as an after thought.

I listen mostly to hard hitting rock, but some jazz now and then. I have been listening to music sence the 60's. My older sister was a huge Beatles fan and I got to hear music 24/7.

[kexodusc]

Hi, i do not have any experience with Onkyo..as for yamaha, yes it sounds excellent for HT but is actually pathetic for CD stereo music listening. i recommend you try either harman kardon or Marantz if you like something which is good for both HT and music listening.
You keep saying this, but all the measurements and real world observations of many people contradict it. I've owned many brands of receivers, and have yet to find one that sounds any better than similarly priced units.
Bass punch isn't a trait receivers should be associated with anyway. That implies an artificial hump in the midbass region. Not flat = not good.
People buy receivers for all sorts of reasons. Listening tests play a big role for sure, but are too unreliable in most cases.
Making claims such as yours is unfair, and irresponsible though, and contradicts the testimony of thousands of people who have previously bought Yamaha receivers because they felt them to be good for all types of cd music relative to other brands.

[accastil]

You keep saying this, but all the measurements and real world observations of many people contradict it. I've owned many brands of receivers, and have yet to find one that sounds any better than similarly priced units.
Bass punch isn't a trait receivers should be associated with anyway. That implies an artificial hump in the midbass region. Not flat = not good.
People buy receivers for all sorts of reasons. Listening tests play a big role for sure, but are too unreliable in most cases.
Making claims such as yours is unfair, and irresponsible though, and contradicts the testimony of thousands of people who have previously bought Yamaha receivers because they felt them to be good for all types of cd music relative to other brands.
hi kexodusc...as i was saying, i used to be one of you guys ( a yamaha brand fanatic). but all that changed when i heard the sound of Marantz. it is far more superior than yammies and denons...by the way, have you tried listening to any other receiver besides yamahas?

[kexodusc]

hi kexodusc...as i was saying, i used to be one of you guys ( a yamaha brand fanatic). but all that changed when i heard the sound of Marantz. it is far more superior than yammies and denons...by the way, have you tried listening to any other receiver besides yamahas?

Well, as a matter of fact if you do a search here at this site and go back far enough, you'll find a few threads of mine posting about my 2 old Marantz receivers. I was a die hard Marantz fan for a few years. Still like their stuff.

I've owned a lot of receivers...old Prologic Sony, Technics (early in College) then later H/K and Marantz...and one NAD (briefly)...I still have my Marantz SR-580 receiver...it's boxed up doing nothing. I'm also ready to pull the trigger on a new receiver soon and Yamaha isn't the front runner right now (neither is Marantz, though).

There just aren't substantial differences across receivers at these price-points. Most of what you're paying for is features and HT flexibility, not sound quality.

"Far more superior" is a gross exaggeration. My NAD, Adcom, and Rotel amps are "far superior" to my A/V receivers.

[3db]

sorry, i should have elaborated more..yes, yamahas sounds good for stereo music listening. but this is only true for slow, mellow music..music with a lot of low frequencies and punching bass seem to sound awful when played on a yamaha. to cutshort, yamahas seem to have a problem with the bass reproduction. theirs are boomy..which is always good for HT by the way but is pathetic really for disco music where it has to be rich, full and punchy.

I think disco would suck eggs no matter what receiver or amp its being played on. But hey, thats just me I guess

[kexodusc]

I wonder which model Yamaha he's compared to which model Marantz? That could explain a lot as well. I will concede, that certain speakers will respond a bit differently to certain amplifiers too. But to say one receiver is superior to another, comparably equipped one is a bit much....to much subjective influence there.

[3db]

I wonder which model Yamaha he's compared to which model Marantz? That could explain a lot as well. I will concede, that certain speakers will respond a bit differently to certain amplifiers too. But to say one receiver is superior to another, comparably equipped one is a bit much....to much subjective influence there.

Too eek out the differences would take considerable concentration I would think and Ideal test conditions ; not running from one room to another as they do in audio stores. Plus level matching blah blah blah

[GMichael]

Too eek out the differences would take considerable concentration I would think and Ideal test conditions ; not running from one room to another as they do in audio stores. Plus level matching blah blah blah

He did state in another thread that he bought several Yamaha receivers and then brought them back after he heard how bad they sounded. I'm sure that he says what he says because he believes it to be true. But with a Yamaha at home, slamming out great music at very high levels every day, I know that it's a good product. Not saying it's better than everything else, just another quality unit. He likes the Marantz. Nothing wrong with that. They make great stuff too.

Sorry for whatever his bad experience with Yamaha was. Wait till he hears seperates. Then, all receivers will be thin and lifeless.

[markw]

Wait till he hears seperates. Then, all receivers will be thin and lifeless.I'm sittin' here listening to a Marantz 2270 that just might convince you otherwise... ;)

note. - This is NOT to say t hat current marantz/yamaha are not closely matched. I'm just saying that a lott has to do with exactly what receivers you're talking about. For pure, unadulterated two channel music, vintage rules!

[GMichael]

I'm sittin' here listening to a Marantz 2270 that just might convince you otherwise... ;)

note. - This is NOT to say t hat current marantz/yamaha are not closely matched. I'm just saying that a lott has to do with exactly what receivers you're talking about. For pure, unadulterated two channel music, vintage rules!

I was really just picking on him. Once he finds something he likes, then eveything else will be (in his view) weak and thin.

I'm sure your Marantz sounds great. All the ones I've heard did also.