Digital amps - the Panasonic SA-XR50

[bcass]

Consumer Reports' December 2004 issue rates this receiver second only to the Onkyo TX-SR701, which sells for almost 3 times as much. The Panasonic is one of the newer receivers with a "digital" amp. People say this runs cooler and more efficiently, and can rival analog amps that are more expensive. Does anyone have any experience with this receiver or the others in this line (SA-XR25, SA-XR75)? It sure sounds like an inexpensive but decent receiver for home theater and for music!

Thanks,
Bryan

[royphil345]

I didn't know the Panasonic had a digital amp. Judging by the size of the unit, it probably does.

I have heard that the Panasonic's amp seems a little underpowered to some people. Sony is mostly ditching digital amplification in their next line of ES receivers except for the flagship model. This year's digital models seemed to be plagued by problems.

What looks like a great bargain in a home theater receiver is the Pioneer VSX-1014TX mentioned recently in another thread here.

I usually put a little stock in Consumer Reports findings, but I have their report on stereo receivers and it is a joke. Sound quality is not even considered in the rating. Rating audio equipment with no regard to how it sounds or even if the power rating and specs are accurate? Absolutely the worst, most useless work I've ever seen from Consumer Reports.

[ericl]

I haven't listened to it too much, the little I have sounds good. Sounds better with the Aperion surround package i got for review than with my Klipsch Cornwalls - but like I said, I haven't had it very long. People have been raving about the sound quality over at audioasylum.

-Eric

[bcass]

I haven't listened to it too much, the little I have sounds good. Sounds better with the Aperion surround package i got for review than with my Klipsch Cornwalls - but like I said, I haven't had it very long. People have been raving about the sound quality over at audioasylum.

-Eric

Thank you, Eric. How do you feel about the build quality of the receiver? Does it seem solid and fairly well put-together? I am wondering about the amp's dynamics and "punch." Does it seem responsive to sudden sounds, like drums, gunshots, brass passages? Of course, your speakers have a lot to do with the sound of the amp... but just your subjective opinion is fine. Maybe I'll go to a stereo shop and do some A-B comparison with the Panasonic vs. Onkyo, Yamaha and Pioneer.

Bryan

[royphil345]

Didn't see anything about distortion having anything to do with the rating. Or dynamics, or performance at higher volumes. No measurements of any kind for amplifier performance. Only Tuner performance and noise (background I assume).. oh and "crispness".

The Pioneer is rated exactly the same as the Panasonic if you look at the breakdown. Is it down the list because it's more expensive? (Though it does have more power and features) Their whole rating system just doesn't make sense this time.

However, The Pioneer IS listed as one of the quick picks for those who desire more power and features. I couldn't live with a receiver that lacked preamp outs. The auto-calibration on the Pioneer seems like a nice feature.

I really didn't mean to bash the Panasonic. I was just saying that you can pick up the Pioneer for close to the same price now. Seems like it may have a little more juice and features for the $.

And if someone offered to trade me the Sony receiver that made the middle of the list for my Harman Kardon that didn't make the list at all, I'd tell them to.... well, I'd tell them no. Wouldn't you?


http://www.t3.co.uk/reviews/default....bsectionid=687

[bcass]

Didn't see anything about distortion having anything to do with the rating. Or dynamics, or performance at higher volumes. No measurements of any kind for amplifier performance. Only Tuner performance and noise (background I assume).. oh and "crispness".

The Pioneer is rated exactly the same as the Panasonic if you look at the breakdown. Is it down the list because it's more expensive? (Though it does have more power and features) Their whole rating system just doesn't make sense this time.

However, The Pioneer IS listed as one of the quick picks for those who desire more power and features. I couldn't live with a receiver that lacked preamp outs. The auto-calibration on the Pioneer seems like a nice feature.

I really didn't mean to bash the Panasonic. I was just saying that you can pick up the Pioneer for close to the same price now. Seems like it may have a little more juice and features for the $.

And if someone offered to trade me the Sony receiver that made the middle of the list for my Harman Kardon that didn't make the list at all, I'd tell them to.... well, I'd tell them no. Wouldn't you?


http://www.t3.co.uk/reviews/default....bsectionid=687

You're right -- they seem to cater to the average consumer of electronics, not the audiophile. So NAD, HK, Denon, etc. are left out of the list. My situation is that I have a limited amount of money, and my top priority and money allocation is for speakers, which I plan to build the AR.com DIY speakers and build a sub (maybe Tempest?). The hardware will take a back seat and less fundage, so I'm looking at bargains, I guess. After the speakers are purchased and built, I will have about $400 left for stands (DIY), a receiver/amp and a DVD player. The Panasonic fits into that budget and appears to have some good reviews (and some bad ones too, granted).

Still, I should probably go to a stereo shop and demo the Panasonic next to some analog amps and see what the difference is. I already have an Onkyo HT-R510 receiver that I'm happy with - so maybe another Onkyo is the way to go - like the SR502 or something. This system I'm building with be mostly for music, so if that makes a difference between digital and analog amps, hopefully it will be apparent.

Thanks,
Bryan

[ericl]

Hi Bryan

The build quality is nothing to write home about. the back panel is not all that glorious. the speaker binding posts are quite flimsy. Only the front channels have binding posts whereas the center and surrounds have tiny little clip sockets that will only accomodate pins or 16ga bar wire. The thing is quite light, you can hold it in one hand. It does sound pretty good though!

-Eric

[bcass]

I didn't know the Panasonic had a digital amp. Judging by the size of the unit, it probably does.

I have heard that the Panasonic's amp seems a little underpowered to some people. Sony is mostly ditching digital amplification in their next line of ES receivers except for the flagship model. This year's digital models seemed to be plagued by problems.

What looks like a great bargain in a home theater receiver is the Pioneer VSX-1014TX mentioned recently in another thread here.

I usually put a little stock in Consumer Reports findings, but I have their report on stereo receivers and it is a joke. Sound quality is not even considered in the rating. Rating audio equipment with no regard to how it sounds or even if the power rating and specs are accurate? Absolutely the worst, most useless work I've ever seen from Consumer Reports.

Well, when you talk about sound *quality*, you're talking about a pretty subjective measurement. I would guess that Consumer Reports wants to be as objective as possible. But you're right, it could be done -- get some audiophiles in a room and do an A-B comparison on all the models.

Anyhow, they do include some measure of sound quality in the ratings. The overall score includes "performance," which they define as "lack of noise and distortion in the amplifier, plus AM reception [...] and FM reception [...]." The other criteria in the overall score were features and ease of use, but performance had the heaviest weighting.

One caveat with the XR50 though, is that it has only a one-year warranty, rather than the normal two. This might say something about their confidence in the unit. I have also heard that the build quality is somewhat low -- plastic parts, etc. Still, if its performance is on par with the $800 Onkyo SR701, it could be an affordable alternative.

By the way, the Pioneer VSX-D914K ($400) ranked 6th in overall score. I would assume that it's just a step or two under the 1014TX that you mentioned.

Bryan

[Feanor]

Well, when you talk about sound *quality*, you're talking about a pretty subjective measurement. I would guess that Consumer Reports wants to be as objective as possible.
...
One caveat with the XR50 though, is that it has only a one-year warranty, rather than the normal two. This might say something about their confidence in the unit. I have also heard that the build quality is somewhat low -- plastic parts, etc. Still, if its performance is on par with the $800 Onkyo SR701, it could be an affordable alternative
....
Bryan

For sure, Consumer Reports likes "objectivity". Also, I have an XR25 and it's true that the build quality is not outstanding.

Nevertheless its sounds is quite good. I recently A/B's it with my 10x more pricey Bel Canto eVo2i, also a "digital" amp and one that is very close to the state-of-the art for that technology. The XR25 held up pretty well in direct comparison, that is, it didn't have any disagreeable qualities such as raunchy top end, flabby bass, muddy mid-range, or the like.

[bcass]

For sure, Consumer Reports likes "objectivity". Also, I have an XR25 and it's true that the build quality is not outstanding.

Nevertheless its sounds is quite good. I recently A/B's it with my 10x more pricey Bel Canto eVo2i, also a "digital" amp and one that is very close to the state-of-the art for that technology. The XR25 held up pretty well in direct comparison, that is, it didn't have any disagreeable qualities such as raunchy top end, flabby bass, muddy mid-range, or the like.

I did a search for XR50 and XR70 on AudoCircle.com and there was quite a lot of discussion of these units there. It seems that most of the members on that site are audiophile-level, not afraid of "modding" their new receivers right out of the box. Some even put $700 into internal modifications of the XR25 and XR45 to get better performance. The cheapest modification is upgrading the power cord, although I'm not sure why this would help the sound output.

I'm leaning toward the XR45 or XR70 models, which supposedly have some better components and a better power supply than the XR25 and XR50. The power supply apparently can have a lot of effect on how the amp performs.

Bryan

[royphil345]

"To complete our listening sessions, we compared the XR45 with the full-size Onkyo TX-SR601, using a Philips 963SA DVD player as a source. The bigger box produced more life and detail; the XR45 mellowed out the sound. When we pushed the volume fairly high, we detected some dynamic shrinkage from the XR45, but its audio improved once we backed down to moderate levels. The Panasonic's 100-watt-per-channel rating is a tad optimistic (the Onkyo claims 85 watts), so don't expect this skinny receiver to pump out the oomph of a full-size model". - CNET

Even people who praise it talk about harsh sound when using the analog inputs.

It's a fad. It has a nice little sound to it and was alot cheaper than most of the competition, now it really isn't.

If I was looking for an AV receiver now, I'd pick up that Pioneer with the MOSFET amp for $360.00 in a heartbeat. Try to find a negative comment in any review of the Pioneer VSX-1014TX.

[Feanor]

...
The cheapest modification is upgrading the power cord, although I'm not sure why this would help the sound output.

I'm leaning toward the XR45 or XR70 models, which supposedly have some better components and a better power supply than the XR25 and XR50. The power supply apparently can have a lot of effect on how the amp performs...

I "upgrade" my XR25's power cord to a PS Audio xStream Power Punch. Granted, this is a relatively cheap PC (US$50), but I heard no difference at all.

The older X45 or new X70 are more expensive versions of the XR25 and XR50 respectively, and are reputed to have significantly better power supplies. Yes, the power supply is very important to the performance of the amp.

[theaudiohobby]

I'm leaning toward the XR45 or XR70 models, which supposedly have some better components and a better power supply than the XR25 and XR50. The power supply apparently can have a lot of effect on how the amp performs.

Bryan

The power supply is especially important in any component that depends on a clock for sound quality, since Class D amplifiers fall under this category, the power supply is very important, a poor power supply will introduce spurious noise into the clock circuit and compromise clock precision and as result adversely affect sound quality. If a power cord has good mains filtration functionality, probably more cheaply implemented with an actual main filtration circuit, it may have a beneficial effect of components with less than adequate power supply circuits, IOW noisy power supplies.

On a side note, I heard an SM SX100 with a Quad ESL 57 recently, this amplifier is something very special, It is a giant in its own right i.e. its costs mucho money new and sounds so, however it costs a lot less used/graded , it is best described as having an effortless delivery, to these ears at least grain and etch are very conspicuous by their total absence! I will suggest that you look at for some of the cheaper Sharp digital amplifiers, and see if they deliver some of the sonic magic of their big brother.