Need Quality Advice!!

[Andreas]

My HT system in the works.

HT Receiver--------YAMAHA DSP-A1 A/V DOLBY DIG/DTS INTEGRATED ????
CC--------------------PMC DB1M-C
Front L/R------------PMC DB1
Rear------------------PMC DB1
Subwoofer-----------Paradigm Seismic 10
DVD/CD/SACD-----Denon 2200

My family room is 16'x13'x9'h
WAF is in full swing hence the smaller speakers.

My question is on the receiver.
My budget is $800 to $1000us.

I'm looking at the Marantz 7400, Denon 3805, and the Yamaha 2400.
I'm also seriously looking at a YAMAHA DSP-A1 in mint condition that is available to me for about 600us.

Though this is an older unit, I believe the amp section will smoke the above mentioned units in sound quality. I'm I mistaking?

The PMC speakers are higher quality and can really benifit from a better amp section.
Along with Bryston (which I can't afford at this time), engineers most likely used PMC to master the movies we listen to. (http://www.pmcloudspeaker.com/intro.html)

I'm interested in the best sound quality at my given budget.
I plan on staying with 5.1 and am not interested in the latest DSP modes.


Any advice or suggestions would be appreciated.

Andreas

[kelsci]

All of the above receivers can be used in 5.1 mode if you choose. The closest comparison to what you want that I have heard was a Marantz 5400 versus a Yamaha 2095 on a NHT system. I though the 2095 had rather fine sound quality vs the Marantz. The Marantz possed the most current chips that process D.D. and DTS and seemed to leave the Yamaha in the dust at that end. I believe that the other receivers mentioned may also possess the best chips available for 5.1 processing that might be better than than the DSP-A1. It is possible that you might be right that ampwise the DSP-A1's amp might smoke the others. I think I would try to audition the receivers you are interested in. The Yamaha 2400 contains the YPAO auto set-up which might make it a better buy than the DSP-A1 by giving you the sound quality and processing one pays for on current receivers and in particular if you want Yamaha sound and reliability. I do not know if the Denon you seek has the auto set-up function. I am not familiar with their performance. If the Marantz 7400 sounds like a big 5400, I do not think the sound quality would be up to strutt. That unit does not offer an auto set-up like YPA0 or MCACC.

[mtrycraft]

My HT system in the works.

HT Receiver--------YAMAHA DSP-A1 A/V DOLBY DIG/DTS INTEGRATED ????
CC--------------------PMC DB1M-C
Front L/R------------PMC DB1
Rear------------------PMC DB1
Subwoofer-----------Paradigm Seismic 10
DVD/CD/SACD-----Denon 2200

My family room is 16'x13'x9'h
WAF is in full swing hence the smaller speakers.

My question is on the receiver.
My budget is $800 to $1000us.

I'm looking at the Marantz 7400, Denon 3805, and the Yamaha 2400.
I'm also seriously looking at a YAMAHA DSP-A1 in mint condition that is available to me for about 600us.

Though this is an older unit, I believe the amp section will smoke the above mentioned units in sound quality. I'm I mistaking?

The PMC speakers are higher quality and can really benifit from a better amp section.
Along with Bryston (which I can't afford at this time), engineers most likely used PMC to master the movies we listen to. (http://www.pmcloudspeaker.com/intro.html)

I'm interested in the best sound quality at my given budget.
I plan on staying with 5.1 and am not interested in the latest DSP modes.


Any advice or suggestions would be appreciated.

Andreas

You need to place your emphasis on speakers, room acoustics. Amps are over hyped as much in audio is.
Make sure the amp can drive the speaker load and sensitivity and is flexible enough to meet your listening needs.

[Andreas]

Thats why my Speaker budget is 5x my Amp budget.

I'm now working on the amp section and thought this was the best way to go about it without spending alot and getting good quality.

I think all the extra DSP modes is mostly wasted.....better off spending money on the amp section.

Andreas

[mtrycraft]

Thats why my Speaker budget is 5x my Amp budget.

I'm now working on the amp section and thought this was the best way to go about it without spending alot and getting good quality.

I think all the extra DSP modes is mostly wasted.....better off spending money on the amp section.

Andreas


In that case, you need to know the speakers sensitivity, its nominal and minimum impedance rating, and how loud will it play before it seriously distorts; this is never advertised though. Then, you can look for an amp. I am sure that Yam will drive it very nicely if it has all the modes and flexibility you need

[kexodusc]

I can't seriously imagine you hearing a difference in the amp sections of the two Yamaha units, but the processing and built in parametric equalization of the RX-V2400 will be noticeable. Don't make the mistake I made a few years back, and convince yourself you don't care about bells and whistles as far as features go.
Either way, both are pretty nice receivers. Wish I had your problems.
Cheers

[RGA]

PMC feels that Bryston is well suited to their products and Bryston feels PMC is a great speaker - they know more than the folks who say all SS amps sound the same.

You can buy a used Bryston power amp cheaper than the all of the receivers you list and a 7-10 year old Bryston will still have at least 5 more years on the warranty than all the receivers you mention. From a measurement and design and build quality perspective are vastly superior to any receiver currently built with the possible exception of Magnum Dynalab - but that is possible exception no gaurantee.

As for the receivers they pretty much sound the same across the board in that at similar prices there is a mild difference in my sighted auditions - apparently in blind conditions there are much greater differences so it's something to consider I suppose.

Hi fi choice magazine listens to receivers with a panel of listeners in a Blind level matched environment - then they go over the unit sighted to discuss features and build etc and evaluate the product overall. It's interesting that even manufacturers sit in on the blind sessions and don't always choose their own product as being best. It is a good way to keep listeners a bit honest because if Yamaha is best for 5 years in a row you might just assume they're best this year - these listening sessions rule out name brand and price bias - which really is all that is required.

The web-site discusses older models because they want you to buy the magazine which is fair enough. But it gives you an idea since the receiver's basically only change cosmetics and DSP modes - maybe improve the remote or add 5-10 watts or a face change. It is doubtful that the power amp/preamp sections - the part that has to do with creating sound - has changed in 5-10 years.

I would buy a cheaper receiver and a used Bryston power amp that combined would be cheaper than many stand alone receivers - and the Bryston is technically a much better amp...depends on what features you can live without. http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_list.asp?category=AMP&subcategory=MULTI&Scrollaction=2

[kexodusc]

(drooling.....)Yeah, if you've got the cash, by all means buy a Bryston!!!
Get the cheapest Yamaha or Marantz (I'm biased to both) receiver that has the inputs you need, and find the sweetest sounding Bryston you can afford...
Bryston amps are statistically proven to last longer than marriages!!!

[mtrycraft]

PMC feels that Bryston is well suited to their products and Bryston feels PMC is a great speaker - they know more than the folks who say all SS amps sound the same.

A bland statement with no specific meaning. What other amps are well suited? Only Bryston? Hardly possible. Only the PMC speakers are great speakers? Hardly possible.



Hi fi choice magazine listens to receivers with a panel of listeners in a Blind level matched environment -


Ah, but can they tell audible differences? That is not what they check for. Never published any such data, have they?

It's interesting that even manufacturers sit in on the blind sessions and don't always choose their own product as being best.



How could they, it is a guessing game, nothing more. You mean they can pick the best 9 of ten guesses in a test? Is that what they do? Or something different?

[RGA]

PMC feels that Bryston is well suited to their products and Bryston feels PMC is a great speaker - they know more than the folks who say all SS amps sound the same.

A bland statement with no specific meaning. What other amps are well suited? Only Bryston? Hardly possible. Only the PMC speakers are great speakers? Hardly possible.

Read it again you seem to have missed well suited to mean only suited

Hi fi choice magazine listens to receivers with a panel of listeners in a Blind level matched environment -

Ah, but can they tell audible differences? That is not what they check for. Never published any such data, have they?

A testing environment is psychologically a distraction it is listening for preference besed ONLY on sound - presumably the panel liked or disliked some units over others judging by different star atings solely based on sound.

It's interesting that even manufacturers sit in on the blind sessions and don't always choose their own product as being best.

How could they, it is a guessing game, nothing more. You mean they can pick the best 9 of ten guesses in a test? Is that what they do? Or something different?]

Don't always is not ever - some obviously have picked their componants out every single time - you can send an email to Hi-fi CHoice and ask them if they are willing to state which manufacturer could or could not pick out his or her product.