Receiver Question Again What Are you paying for? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Receiver Question Again What Are you paying for?



hershon
01-19-2005, 02:56 PM
After being on this board about a year, I still do not grasp or understand why anyone would want to pay more than $400 for a new sealed receiver & perhaps someone can explain it to me. By my definition, a receiver is a tool for which your DVD's & CD's go through to your speakers to make the sound as good as possible. But what I'm getting from everyone here is that there are only minor not night in day differences in the sound quality of your DVD's, CD's & TV sound, when you have good speakers in the first place. IE, if you have good speakers, if the same speakers would hoooked up to a $400 and say a $1,500 receiver you would not notice that much difference in the sound quality. For the sake of this thread, assume you are listening in an average size living room in an apartment building not in a huge room. Thus what is the purpose of putting so much into a receiver if the net sound difference is minor?

drseid
01-19-2005, 04:39 PM
What is the purpose of putting so much into a receiver if the net sound difference is minor?


Who said it is minor? To be honest, I would not recommend a receiver *at all* if someone has high quality speakers (as a general rule). I would go with high quality separates (a separate pre/pro and multi-channel power amp) for higher-end speakers that have demanding loads.

As for receivers, they do not all sound the same (at least not to me). I would say that a lower-end receiver such as the ones generally found in the price range you have mentioned will probably get the job done on some less revealing speakers, but the flaws in their amplification and DACs will become all too apparent on more revealing speakers (usually the more expensive ones). Also, the amplifier section may be lacking to drive some demanding speaker loads (that are quite common on some of the high-end brands).

I would argue that few receivers are really up to the task without a separate power amp to drive the 4 ohm and lower impedances of some of the more demanding high-end speakers out there...

Also, keep in mind that if you have a revealing speaker, then it is *more* likely to reveal a poor front-end source (not less as you seem to imply). That makes ensuring the best electronics are powering them all the more important.

So bottom line is that yes, there is good reason to pay more (assuming the particular model really does offer higher quality components for the higher price)... But anything above about $1500, and I would look to separates. That is just me though...

---Dave

hershon
01-19-2005, 05:05 PM
Assume the speakers are 5 satellites & a sub, in my case we're talking about Orb Mod 1 speakers & a Supereight sub. When I posted a similar thread people indicated I would not notice that much difference in the sound quality.


Who said it is minor? To be honest, I would not recommend a receiver *at all* if someone has high quality speakers (as a general rule). I would go with high quality separates (a separate pre/pro and multi-channel power amp) for higher-end speakers that have demanding loads.

As for receivers, they do not all sound the same (at least not to me). I would say that a lower-end receiver such as the ones generally found in the price range you have mentioned will probably get the job done on some less revealing speakers, but the flaws in their amplification and DACs will become all too apparent on more revealing speakers (usually the more expensive ones). Also, the amplifier section may be lacking to drive some demanding speaker loads (that are quite common on some of the high-end brands).

I would argue that few receivers are really up to the task without a separate power amp to drive the 4 ohm and lower impedances of some of the more demanding high-end speakers out there...

Also, keep in mind that if you have a revealing speaker, then it is *more* likely to reveal a poor front-end source (not less as you seem to imply). That makes ensuring the best electronics are powering them all the more important.

So bottom line is that yes, there is good reason to pay more (assuming the particular model really does offer higher quality components for the higher price)... But anything above about $1500, and I would look to separates. That is just me though...

---Dave

bargainseeker
01-19-2005, 05:52 PM
Assume the speakers are 5 satellites & a sub, in my case we're talking about Orb Mod 1 speakers & a Supereight sub. When I posted a similar thread people indicated I would not notice that much difference in the sound quality.In speaker talk, "revealing" and "forgiving" are opposites. Because of their high cross over frequency, small full range drivers and no tweeters, your Orb speakers would be considered forgiving. Their sound quality will not be impacted by the quality of the amplification as much as the sound quality of more revealing speakers. I am not criticizing your speakers. There are acoustic advantages to single driver full range speakers (e.g., no crossover distortion). Furthermore, you seem to be very happy with the way they sound which is the most important thing.

Back to your original question. What you get with a more expensive receiver is more and better video inputs and outputs, better speaker connectors, converters between video formats, on screen menus, a more "universal" remote control, manual or automatic room equalization, better amplifiers capable of supplying more current and driving lower impedances, lower noise and distortion throughout and a variety of bells and whistles of varying value. In my opinion, there is a significant jump in flexibility and sound quality from an entry level receiver to an mid-range receiver. After that, diminishing returns set in.

drseid
01-20-2005, 02:51 AM
In speaker talk, "revealing" and "forgiving" are opposites. Because of their high cross over frequency, small full range drivers and no tweeters, your Orb speakers would be considered forgiving. Their sound quality will not be impacted by the quality of the amplification as much as the sound quality of more revealing speakers. I am not criticizing your speakers. There are acoustic advantages to single driver full range speakers (e.g., no crossover distortion). Furthermore, you seem to be very happy with the way they sound which is the most important thing.

Back to your original question. What you get with a more expensive receiver is more and better video inputs and outputs, better speaker connectors, converters between video formats, on screen menus, a more "universal" remote control, manual or automatic room equalization, better amplifiers capable of supplying more current and driving lower impedances, lower noise and distortion throughout and a variety of bells and whistles of varying value. In my opinion, there is a significant jump in flexibility and sound quality from an entry level receiver to an mid-range receiver. After that, diminishing returns set in.

I agree 100% with this. Sorry Hershon, I did not realize that you were referring to a specific set of speakers... Just as Bargainseeker states, with the Orbs you probably will not notice much of a difference going to a more expensive receiver (or separates for that matter). They are very efficient speakers, so the high current abilities of the more beefy amp sections in some of the more expensive receivers (and many separate power amps) are not required for the Orbs.

Happy listening,

---Dave

midfiguy
01-20-2005, 04:11 AM
By my definition, a receiver is a tool for which your DVD's & CD's go through to your speakers to make the sound as good as possible. But what I'm getting from everyone here is that there are only minor not night in day differences in the sound quality of your DVD's, CD's & TV sound...

Well, by definition, a car is made to take you from one place to another, so why spend more than what it would cost for a decent basic transportation vehicle? Why pay for a Jag, Mercedes, BMW, etc when something like a Corolla is extremely reliable, and serves its purpose of taking you to where you want to go? It could be argued that the Mercedes is uneccessary vs. the Corolla and has nothing to do with the intended purpose.

By definition, pants are made to cover your legs and thighs, so why buy any that cost more than the cheapest pair at Walmart? It could be argued that the difference in a $100 pair of slacks and a cheap pair is marginal and has nothing to do with the intended purpose...


If you can make a point for any of the above examples, one can be made for a receiver. People hold different values in different things, and don't mind paying extra for better quality, quantity, etc, even if it is marginal. For example, some women pay $1000 for a Prada pocketbook, something no man can understand since we don't hold something like that important to us. Afterall, doesn't any Sears pocketbook do the same thing? Likewise, expect that woman to understand why someone spends $3000 on a pair of speakers. However, the owner of those speakers can easily justify how they are better than the $2000 pair...

kexodusc
01-20-2005, 04:54 AM
There are acoustic advantages to single driver full range speakers (e.g., no crossover distortion).


What specifically is "crossover distortion"?

bargainseeker
01-20-2005, 06:09 AM
What specifically is "crossover distortion"?There are a variety of problems that occur when you put more than one driver in a box and try to get them to crossover both electrically and acoustically. An electrical crossover adds distortion (e.g., THD, IMD) and can also alter the phase response and transient response of the loudspeaker. As to acoustical crossover, consider a simple two way loudspeaker. The spacing between the woofer and the tweeter on the front baffle remains constant. However, the wavelength of the sound produced gets shorter as the frequency goes up. Therefore, the sounds coming from the woofer and tweeter are in-phase at some frequencies and out-of-phase at other frequencies. When in-phase, the sound produced by the loudspeaker at that frequency is louder. When out-of-phase, the sound produced is softer. These effects vary depending on where (what angle) the listener is relative to the front of the loudspeaker. All of these problems get worse with more than two drivers.

None of these problems occur in a loudspeaker that uses a single full range driver.

kexodusc
01-20-2005, 06:25 AM
What you get with a more expensive receiver is more and better video inputs and outputs, better speaker connectors, converters between video formats, on screen menus, a more "universal" remote control, manual or automatic room equalization, better amplifiers capable of supplying more current and driving lower impedances, lower noise and distortion throughout and a variety of bells and whistles of varying value.
Bargainseeker pretty much lists everything here you pay for be

Bargainseeker really does a good job in pointint out how you pay mostly for the bells and whistles added as you jump up the receiver ladder. Some might be absolutely necessary to you, but most don't add any benefit to the sound quality (ie:speaker connectors, larger power supplies, video conversion, remotes). Actually, you often find with brands like Denon, H/K, and Yamaha that there's a trickle-down effect, where the high quality components are used mostly through all tiers.


In my opinion, there is a significant jump in flexibility and sound quality from an entry level receiver to an mid-range receiver. After that, diminishing returns set in.

I'd take it a step further...operated within their design capacities I find a very minimal improvement in sound quality, if any, of the raw amplifiers in receivers...the speaker connectors and lower noise benefits are mostly inaudible differences, and a lot of the so called "entry-level" receivers can power 4 ohm loads fairly well too these days. If you buy the appropriate size amp for the speakers you have, the diminishing return law definitely applies. As you crank the volume to really high levels you'll get to take advantage of that extra head-room though, but even mid-level receivers won't do as well as an inexpensive external power amp.

I look at my RX-V1400 and the RX-V650's as examples. Open these two up and you'll see an aweful lot of the same stuff inside, and what's different is of the same quality, only smaller. If it's too small for you, you might want to jump up in receiver size, but IMO you're probably better off to add a separate power amp. At about a $250 price difference, I would have been further ahead to wait and buy the 650, I think, because I don't take advantage of the component video up-conversion, the better remote or the THX crap, and the 10 "real" watt advantage (all channel driven) by itself isn't worth the money in my case (I have 3 power amps connected to pre-outs anyway). My results with the Parametric Eq'ing have been mixed and inconsistent at best, so I'm not sure this is all the rage I thought it was...so some "entry-level" receivers and mid-level receivers overlap, and I'm sure the same happens at the next tier as well.

But I will agree that you can really add audible benefit is in the bells and whistles "auto-calibration/setup/ eq'ing" (apparently just not in MY room), better bass management, processing, etc...more tweaking than anything. These compounded though can make a significant difference if you can't find other ways to accomplish the same thing.
And there's nothing wrong with paying for connections and flexibility, my last 2 receiver upgrades were the result of me being cheap and not buying enough the first time.

kexodusc
01-20-2005, 06:46 AM
There are a variety of problems that occur when you put more than one driver in a box and try to get them to crossover both electrically and acoustically. An electrical crossover adds distortion (e.g., THD, IMD) and can also alter the phase response and transient response of the loudspeaker.
True, but it's not nearly as hard as you might think...I'm definitely no expert, but having built and measured a few 2-way xo's the THD is certainly not audible in comparison the the THD of the driver, amp, and source player.


As to acoustical crossover, consider a simple two way loudspeaker. The spacing between the woofer and the tweeter on the front baffle remains constant. However, the wavelength of the sound produced gets shorter as the frequency goes up. Therefore, the sounds coming from the woofer and tweeter are in-phase at some frequencies and out-of-phase at other frequencies. When in-phase, the sound produced by the loudspeaker at that frequency is louder. When out-of-phase, the sound produced is softer. These effects vary depending on where (what angle) the listener is relative to the front of the loudspeaker. All of these problems get worse with more than two drivers.
This is mostly correct...I see what you're saying now...this is why setting the right xo point, slope, and driver separation is important...never really heard it referred to as "crossover distortion" before...


None of these problems occur in a loudspeaker that uses a single full range driver.
Disagreee here though...I'm building a single driver satellite/sub system that incorporates a popular inexpensive Tang Band driver....still need to compensate with some filters for impedence swings and baffle step somewhat to really make use of it...the circuitry is not a crossover technically, but just an example that full range drivers aren't necessarily free of these problems either.

hershon
01-20-2005, 08:08 AM
II understand part of the point your making- ie. there's a difference between a Jag & an Oldsmobile, but don't understand what point you're making in regards to receivers. Again for the sake of this thread go under the hypothesis that the speakers will be 5 Orb satellite speakers & 1 Supereight Sub played in a normal sized living room in an apartment. If there is very minor difference in the sound between say a $2,000 receiver & a $400 receiver, what exactly are you paying for, other than the name brand of the expensive receiver?


Well, by definition, a car is made to take you from one place to another, so why spend more than what it would cost for a decent basic transportation vehicle? Why pay for a Jag, Mercedes, BMW, etc when something like a Corolla is extremely reliable, and serves its purpose of taking you to where you want to go? It could be argued that the Mercedes is uneccessary vs. the Corolla and has nothing to do with the intended purpose.

By definition, pants are made to cover your legs and thighs, so why buy any that cost more than the cheapest pair at Walmart? It could be argued that the difference in a $100 pair of slacks and a cheap pair is marginal and has nothing to do with the intended purpose...


If you can make a point for any of the above examples, one can be made for a receiver. People hold different values in different things, and don't mind paying extra for better quality, quantity, etc, even if it is marginal. For example, some women pay $1000 for a Prada pocketbook, something no man can understand since we don't hold something like that important to us. Afterall, doesn't any Sears pocketbook do the same thing? Likewise, expect that woman to understand why someone spends $3000 on a pair of speakers. However, the owner of those speakers can easily justify how they are better than the $2000 pair...

N. Abstentia
01-20-2005, 08:24 AM
Higher quality components it what you're paying for. The power supply is beefier, the filter caps are bigger, the parts like resistors, caps, and output transistors are higher tolerance and much better quality. Other than the obvious stuff like a more expensive reciever sounding better and having more inputs/outputs/features, it's a lot of little things. The pots don't get scratchy. The LED screen does not dim during loud passages (meaning the power supply is poor). The volume knob feels smooth.
The signal path is cleaner. Another intangible is reliability. Those quality parts equal longevity.

Pick up a $400 receiver. Notice you can do it with one hand. Now go try to pick up a $2000 receiver. You'll need some help. Now go pick up a $7000 AMP (not receiver..just an AMP). You'll need a forklift. It does not stop with $2000 receivers. It just keeps getting better and better.

Will this make your system sound better? It all really just depends. You have to find the magic point of diminishing returns.

woodman
01-20-2005, 08:46 AM
II understand part of the point your making- ie. there's a difference between a Jag & an Oldsmobile, but don't understand what point you're making in regards to receivers. Again for the sake of this thread go under the hypothesis that the speakers will be 5 Orb satellite speakers & 1 Supereight Sub played in a normal sized living room in an apartment. If there is very minor difference in the sound between say a $2,000 receiver & a $400 receiver, what exactly are you paying for, other than the name brand of the expensive receiver?

I do believe that you just answered your own question (without realizing it of course). The answer lies in just one word ... needs. You decided that your needs would be adequately met with a $400 receiver. It would not be a rational decision to spend more for "benefits" that would not add anything to your pleasure. Others however, have different needs than you do. So for them, there are many good reasons to spend more than $400 for a receiver. Doesn't that pretty much sum up and answer your original query?

Just two more things -

1. I think you're selling the receiver way too short in calling it "just a tool" to get your signals from the source component to the speakers, and -

2. The receiver plays THE most important part in the sometimes overlooked area of "user-friendliness" of a system.

midfiguy
01-20-2005, 10:05 AM
Hershon,

First off, I was replying to your original post, where it didn't state what speakers you were using. You simply asked why go for a reciever that is x times more expensive. I couldn't reply to it in relation to having Orb speakers if I didn't know that fact.

Secondly, you missed the point of the analogy entirely. In your original post, you stated in your own words that the existence of a reciever is to have your "DVDs and CDs go through your speakers", so why should it make a difference which reciever you get, if they all do the job they were intended for? Likewise, it can be argued that a car exists for the primary purpose of taking you somewhere. So, why should it make a difference what car you get, as long as it serves the primary purpose?

That argument seems quite clear because in both cases, the cheaper is still doing the main intended purpose. However, we all still opt for usually better than the Toyota Corolla of cars, recievers, etc.

"If there is very minor difference in the sound between say a $2,000 receiver & a $400 receiver"

That's where my point came in. You can argue, why buy any car beside a cheap Corolla if it still gets you from Point A to Point B if the main purpose is being served?

And that leads me to the answer, because people value things differently. While some will pay for leather, better ride, more options, likewise, some will pay for more inputs, outputs, advanced component video switching, on-screen display, more surround formats, etc.

The phrase "very minor difference" is VERY relative.

Stu-r
01-20-2005, 06:56 PM
After being on this board about a year, I still do not grasp or understand why anyone would want to pay more than $400 for a new sealed receiver & perhaps someone can explain it to me. By my definition, a receiver is a tool for which your DVD's & CD's go through to your speakers to make the sound as good as possible. But what I'm getting from everyone here is that there are only minor not night in day differences in the sound quality of your DVD's, CD's & TV sound, when you have good speakers in the first place. IE, if you have good speakers, if the same speakers would hoooked up to a $400 and say a $1,500 receiver you would not notice that much difference in the sound quality. For the sake of this thread, assume you are listening in an average size living room in an apartment building not in a huge room. Thus what is the purpose of putting so much into a receiver if the net sound difference is minor?

It depends on your hearing and tastes. There is one point at which you either can't hear a difference or the difference isn't worth the cost to you. And another at which you can hear a great deal of difference and will pay whatever is necessary to satisfy you. Hearing too well can be a curse that sends you in search of the audio "holy grail" ... $100,000 speakers, hand made amplifiers, etc. Who is to say what one person hears or thinks he hears, if he can afford to indulge his addiction?

hershon
01-20-2005, 09:27 PM
I agree with you on the point of diminishing returns but I still think there's a pont where there will be a significant difference in sound & I guess I'm trying to see if I reached my relative apex or not. For instance, my first receiver was a cheap piece of crap KOSS Home Theater in a Box with their crappy speakers & sub too. A few months later I got my Orb Mod 1 speakers & sub and noticed a significant difference in the sound. A few months after that, I bought a new receiver, a JVC RX-DV31SL, that was recommended by the owners of Orb Audio that retailed for about $475 that I managed to get online new for about $240 new including shipping and once again I noticed a significant improvement in the sound. From what I'm gathering from some of the responses, that because of the nature of Orb Mod 1 speakers, I've probably reached my peak in sound quality as better more expensive recievers won't produce that much noticeable improvement in the sound, which I am already happy with but always strive to improve.


It depends on your hearing and tastes. There is one point at which you either can't hear a difference or the difference isn't worth the cost to you. And another at which you can hear a great deal of difference and will pay whatever is necessary to satisfy you. Hearing too well can be a curse that sends you in search of the audio "holy grail" ... $100,000 speakers, hand made amplifiers, etc. Who is to say what one person hears or thinks he hears, if he can afford to indulge his addiction?

Eric Z
01-21-2005, 08:28 AM
hershon-

Are you asking because you're curious about upgrading or just looking to learn more about receivers? If you're looking to upgrade, go to your local audio store and demo a $1000 or $1500 receiver to see if you notice a difference. I thought about doing it with my set up, but then I thought otherwise since I don't have any complaints with my sound. However, it is interesting to learn about how much better your system can sound- I guess that's why a lot of us visit this site, right?

Of course, tons of personal tastes go into if someone likes/dislikes the sound of speakers. I agree with a lot of people saying that the overall quality of the receiver will be better (hence mostly likely last longer, but then again I sometimes think I would be interested to get a newer receiver because of better technology by the time my receiver craps out).

Good luck and have fun!
Eric

hershon
01-21-2005, 10:08 AM
Both Frankly getting something demonstrated in an audio place is for me a nightmare. Plus I only want to hear a receiver with the speakers I'd be using which are Orb.
hershon-

Are you asking because you're curious about upgrading or just looking to learn more about receivers? If you're looking to upgrade, go to your local audio store and demo a $1000 or $1500 receiver to see if you notice a difference. I thought about doing it with my set up, but then I thought otherwise since I don't have any complaints with my sound. However, it is interesting to learn about how much better your system can sound- I guess that's why a lot of us visit this site, right?

Of course, tons of personal tastes go into if someone likes/dislikes the sound of speakers. I agree with a lot of people saying that the overall quality of the receiver will be better (hence mostly likely last longer, but then again I sometimes think I would be interested to get a newer receiver because of better technology by the time my receiver craps out).

Good luck and have fun!
Eric

divot
01-21-2005, 12:24 PM
Just pack the softball size and weight Orbs back into their shipping box along with the matching Supereight sub and bring them to a good local audio shop and audition them with various receivers...I do think that you need to be genuine about your intent to possibly upgrade and not just fighting off a sudden case of JVC buyer's regret...the small Orb desktop stands take less than a minte to attach...have the shop consultant locate an auditioning room, set the receivers side by side and attach your 16-gauge speaker wire and then you're off and running...I did this once I finally narrowed down my final three receiver choices (Yamaha 2500, Pioneer Elite 54 and Rotel 1055)...do all your objective research at home first and then bring in your favorite DVD's and CD's and let the subjective part of the brain make the final decision...I don't think that the majority of mid-range receiver buyers are looking to spend any more $$$ than they have to in order to meet their respective viewing, listening and budgetary means...however, there are very obvious reasons why some things in life are more expensive than others...just remember that one of life's great ironies is that sometimes what you really want isn't what you really need...

markw
01-21-2005, 02:16 PM
No offense but face it, while the Orbs might be nice speakers within their design limits, they are currently the limiting factor in your system.

You can put $6,000 wheels and tires on a Hyundai and give it a $3,500 paint job and drop it 4" but, in the end, it's still a Hyundai.

BTW, they actually do this crap out here.

topspeed
01-21-2005, 03:10 PM
You can put $6,000 wheels and tires on a Hyundai and give it a $3,500 paint job and drop it 4" but, in the end, it's still a Hyundai.

BTW, they actually do this crap out here.
And here I thought this was merely a West Coast phenomenom :). Great, they're multiplying!

Hershon,
There have been a number of excellent responses to this thread. The only thing I would suggest is that if you are happy with your current set-up, consider yourself blessed and just enjoy the music. Mario Andretti once said that a in order to win a race, you have to go as slow as possible. It's the same in audio. The goal is to achieve sonic bliss for as little money as you can. I don't care if you're A-Rod yanking down $25.5mil a year, no one wants to pay more than they have to.

You've told us many times how great your Orb/JVC combo is so stop worrying and enjoy!

hershon
01-21-2005, 03:41 PM
I am really happy with my system and have no regret about the receiver or buyers remorse but I figure from reading all these threads and posts about more expensive receivers, maybe I'm missing out on something, but from everything I've read, for my purposes being that I want to stick with my Orb speakers, I'm missing out on nothing, as the only reason I'd get another receiver was to improve even more on sound quality and sound quality alone.
And here I thought this was merely a West Coast phenomenom :). Great, they're multiplying!

Hershon,
There have been a number of excellent responses to this thread. The only thing I would suggest is that if you are happy with your current set-up, consider yourself blessed and just enjoy the music. Mario Andretti once said that a in order to win a race, you have to go as slow as possible. It's the same in audio. The goal is to achieve sonic bliss for as little money as you can. I don't care if you're A-Rod yanking down $25.5mil a year, no one wants to pay more than they have to.

You've told us many times how great your Orb/JVC combo is so stop worrying and enjoy!

Eric Z
01-23-2005, 02:47 PM
earlier in this thread i was actually talking about demostrating a more expensive receiver in your home- not the audio store. it's always funny to listen to to audio equipment in the stores- even if you have the same receiver and speakers, it's still not in your house with your walls, furniture, etc. i've asked audio stores if i can demo products in my home- usually it comes down to me putting it on my credit card and then i will return it the next day or so (as long as i am very clear with their return policy and restocking fees). these stores usually are okay with it as well because they should know how audio equipment differs from room to room.

Anyway, have fun regardless!

markw
01-23-2005, 03:22 PM
i've asked audio stores if i can demo products in my home- usually it comes down to me putting it on my credit card and then i will return it the next day or so (as long as i am very clear with their return policy and restocking fees). these stores usually are okay with it as well because they should know how audio equipment differs from room to room.To expect a store to simply "loan" someone their merchandise is absurd. Unless you are a well known customer (not a browser), your chances of getting gear like that is slim to none.

Stores need some assurance that their gear will be returned in good shape. Generally, they will take an impression of your cc and hold it for a few days, which should be understood up front. When the gear is returned, they rip up the receipts in front of you. If, after that set period of time the gear is not returned or it's damaged, you bought it.