Which is better?

[madmax1]

Which is a better receiver JVC-RX-9010 or a DENON AVR-1804?
Why?
The Denon is about $70.00 dollars more. does that mean its better?
Want it mainly for movies.

[nick4433]

The 1804 is a 6.1 receiver capable of DD-EX/DTS-ES, DPL-II, ES-Neo, etc. I believe the JVC you are talking about is ony 5.1. I would take the JVC8030 over the 1804 as I have heard the JVC and it is a very good receiver.

[Bryan]

The 1804 is of a higher quality than the 9010. However, might I suggest the Marantz SR5300 (http://www.cambridgesoundworks.com/store/category.cgi?category=rec_hometheater&item=m1sr5300) as being the way to go. It is cheaper than the 1804 but is still one of the better receivers out there.

[Keith from Canada]

Which is a better receiver JVC-RX-9010 or a DENON AVR-1804?
Why?
The Denon is about $70.00 dollars more. does that mean its better?
Want it mainly for movies.

Generally speaking, Denon will offer better quality than an equivilent JVC receiver. I built a system for a friend based on the Denon AVR-1603 and it was considerably better than I expected with an entry level-receiver. I wouldn't think twice about it...go with the Denon.

[nick4433]

"The 1804 is of a higher quality than the 9010"

Why do you say that unless you have opened the hood and/or compared them side-by-side? I would be interested in knowing that. I for one am a Denon fan but only of those receivers that are 280X and higher series. I believe the lower priced models are as good or as bad as any other lower priced models.
I recently compared a Denon 1804 to a Jvc 8030 and I personally thought the JVC did great and really outperformed the Denon in 2 channel music. Nothing I heard would lead me to conclude that "denon is better than JVC on any given day" !
$0.02

[This Guy]

I second the Marantz. I bought the 2002 version of the SR5300 and its great. Go to accessories4less.com and get a refurbished unit. You'll get so much more for your warranty. Yes they are an authorized dealer as well.

-Joey

[Woochifer]

I recently compared a Denon 1804 to a Jvc 8030 and I personally thought the JVC did great and really outperformed the Denon in 2 channel music. Nothing I heard would lead me to conclude that "denon is better than JVC on any given day" !
$0.02

First, you move into two-channel separates, then you get a Yamaha, NOW you're praising JVC?! Will the real Nickster please come home! This alternate reality's not funny anymore!

[nick4433]

(lol) Wooch, I guess I am moving back to my roots(?) as far as seperates are concerned as I pretty much grew up listening to seperates but could only afford a receiver (LOLOL).
Anyway, as far as my praise of the JVC goes, I will stand behind my assertion and I have tried that JVC and did compare it to a Denon 1804 and made my conclusions based on my comparisons.
I am not going to trash a product based on brand alone. I will never give either a Thumbs-up or Thumbs-down to a product without listening to it and I have tested many a receivers.
The JVC did not only sound good but had some very sophisticated features to boot. One of the many features I liked was "volume memorisation" by input. This I found was an invaluable feature especially for night time listening.
BTW, I am still very faithful to my Proton preamp and everything else I get is either returned promptly which I got on a "loaner" basis. No Yamahas here!

[Bryan]

Unless JVC has done a dramatic quality increase their upper level receivers barely cover the entry level receivers put forth by Marantz, Denon, Yamaha, etc. My Yamaha RX-V496 easily outperformed the JVC RX-8000V I used to have and was cheaper too. (It does have fewer DSP modes and inputs/outputs.) JVC is not well known for their product quality and reliability. Five years from now the Denon will probably still be going strong while the JVC crapped out. There are exceptions to everything though I doubt this is one of them.

[nick4433]

Bryan, I don't know where you have got this reliability data from but I have always heard good things about JVC receivers in the past. Their flagship receivers are very well built and get highly praised in different reviews everywhere. It goes the same for the Kenwood "Sovereign" line or something. While it is true that the Denons and Yamahas of this world have captured the mid-level receiver market, the entry level receiver market has many a good products that will give the Denons and Yamahas of this world a run for their money.

[Bryan]

Personal experience perhaps? Ironically enough the reason I got the Yamaha was due to the fact I had to put the JVC into the shop for repairs. In terms of both quality of receiver and sound the Yamaha I have is far superior to the JVC I used to own even though it has less features. I'll take a comparatively priced Yamaha, Denon, Marantz, HK, Outlaw, or Onkyo over the Kenwoods, Sonys, Pioneers (except Elite), and JVCs of the world.

[nick4433]

The lower priced Yamahs have always come across to me as a bit underpowered but hey, this is audio and everyone has a preference and I guess you have yours. I still maintain that its pretty much an open game for receivers in the $300-500 category. Also in that category or any other category, I have yet to compare two receivers that sound "far" better than the other and please not that this is IMHO!
As I have said time and time again, sound is very relative and subjective but I will always compare everything and then comment. Peace!