High End Receiver dilema ?

[Lexmark3200]

And they usually exceed the specs, as opposed to the lower end units where there's a lot of fudging going on.

I know in the lower end models they "fudge" those wattage numbers a bit (so the real test is if it powers someone's listening room good enough FOR THEIR purposes not to look at the wattage numbers), but is that really true that with high-end flagship products, the specs are actually EXCEEDED? Meaning if Denon claims on their flagship receiver that it pumps out 170 watts x 7, it's actually putting out more?

[Geoffcin]

I know in the lower end models they "fudge" those wattage numbers a bit (so the real test is if it powers someone's listening room good enough FOR THEIR purposes not to look at the wattage numbers), but is that really true that with high-end flagship products, the specs are actually EXCEEDED? Meaning if Denon claims on their flagship receiver that it pumps out 170 watts x 7, it's actually putting out more?

But I've seen tests done where the HK flagship receiver delivered over 320 watts in to mains before clipping. That's big power, and allows for totally uncompressed dynamics.

[Lexmark3200]

So there's actually an increase in stereo mode output on these flagship models?

[Lexmark3200]

So what would you say the right way to go would be if someone HAD five or six grand to spend----would you recommend these flagship receivers for that money, or would you lean them towards separates ---- or perhaps HIGH END receiver models at that point from the likes of NAD, Integra, etc?

[Geoffcin]

So there's actually an increase in stereo mode output on these flagship models?

But the flagship models have huge power supplies, so the can slew a lot more current when called upon. And not just in stereo mode.

[topspeed]

So what would you say the right way to go would be if someone HAD five or six grand to spend----would you recommend these flagship receivers for that money, or would you lean them towards separates ---- or perhaps HIGH END receiver models at that point from the likes of NAD, Integra, etc?

It depends on what you want to do. The Denon 5805 has earned the rep as the Big Daddy of flagship AVR's with sound quality to rival separates, yet this beast can drive two different 5.1 rigs at the same time! Consider how much that would cost if you were to buy separates for two rigs.

Ouch.

[N. Abstentia]

It depends on what you want to do. The Denon 5805 has earned the rep as the Big Daddy of flagship AVR's with sound quality to rival separates, yet this beast can drive two different 5.1 rigs at the same time! Consider how much that would cost if you were to buy separates for two rigs.

Ouch.

At first I was like 'Wow..you've got a point if you want to drive two seperate 5.1 rigs...' but then I did indeed consider how much that would cost:

1 Denon 5805 = $6000 that rivals seperates

or

2 Outlaw 900 Preamp $1100 each
2 5 channel amps from B&K/Rotel/Adcom/Acurus $600 each (I'll go on the high end) that IS seperates.

So to run dual 5.1 rigs you could get 1 $6000 receiver or two preamps and two amps for $3400. Nearly half the price, and you'd have SEPERATES all around.

Give me the seperates at half price, personally. Two totally independant systems and you're not bound to the limitations of that one receiver. And please don't use 'but space is a consideration' as an arguement. If you've got room for two totally seperate 5.1 speaker systems, you've got 17" of space to put a preamp/amp rig.

[mixadude]

Yeah that's a better deal if that's what you want. If I wanted two 5.1 rooms I'd want different systems in them anyhow, with maybe some tie lines between em.

My system plays TV 95% of the time anyhow like now; I'm not even paying attention to it. I went with a big receiver, it's just easier and more compact. As far as the SQ it's pretty good, but I guess I'm just not that great a home listener to care beyond what I have. I have some really big amps, the extra heat just isn't worth it to me, even if the SQ gets a modicum better.

[MyThingIs23InchesFlacid!]

Ain't no dilema HOLMES - get yo' a---s----s a Denon!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Lexmark3200]

Now some observations about all this if I may because this has become a very interesting and popular matter of subject for some time around enthusiast/audiophile circles....

It seems to me the only real benefit those 6 thousand dollar flagship receivers offer (because the $500 models all decode every audio soundtrack you would POSSIBLY need right now---DTS, DTS ES, DD, DD EX, etc albeit with less power output, sure) are these aforementioned "dual room" powering situtaions which I would PERSONALLY have no need for whatsoever-----my philosophy is, you have guests over that are watching a film in 5.1 surround? They stay in the MAIN home theater room with you-----no need to power two 5.1 systems in a house as it seems kind of ludicrous to me; I mean, if you have a HT in a secondary room, why not power THAT system with another $500 good unit from Onkyo or Denon or perhaps Yamaha? To feed two 5.1 systems AND allow for stereo listening in another room, plus all the other internet gizmos these flagship models offer is just too much and overkill in my opinion.

Yet, that still leaves us with this dilemma, folks: once you start going into the $4,000, $5,000 and $6,000 (which is what I believe the new Denon flagship receiver sells for in Crutchfield if I am not mistaken) range, when you have that kind of cash to spend.....is a RECEIVER the way to go at that point? Besides all the multiroom powering, what are these models offering for six thousand dollars over the ones we can buy for $500 that feel very sturdy and are made well (depending upon who they come from-----not talking JVC or Kenwood or Sony of course)? Are these units REALLY putting out 170 WATTS X 7 or X 8 or whatever they are advertising? THAT'S the essential question here.....how do we know when to step up into separates? Would a multichannel amp and home theater preamp make sense at that price point?

[GMichael]

Now some observations about all this if I may because this has become a very interesting and popular matter of subject for some time around enthusiast/audiophile circles....

It seems to me the only real benefit those 6 thousand dollar flagship receivers offer (because the $500 models all decode every audio soundtrack you would POSSIBLY need right now---DTS, DTS ES, DD, DD EX, etc albeit with less power output, sure) are these aforementioned "dual room" powering situtaions which I would PERSONALLY have no need for whatsoever-----my philosophy is, you have guests over that are watching a film in 5.1 surround? They stay in the MAIN home theater room with you-----no need to power two 5.1 systems in a house as it seems kind of ludicrous to me; I mean, if you have a HT in a secondary room, why not power THAT system with another $500 good unit from Onkyo or Denon or perhaps Yamaha? To feed two 5.1 systems AND allow for stereo listening in another room, plus all the other internet gizmos these flagship models offer is just too much and overkill in my opinion.

Yet, that still leaves us with this dilemma, folks: once you start going into the $4,000, $5,000 and $6,000 (which is what I believe the new Denon flagship receiver sells for in Crutchfield if I am not mistaken) range, when you have that kind of cash to spend.....is a RECEIVER the way to go at that point? Besides all the multiroom powering, what are these models offering for six thousand dollars over the ones we can buy for $500 that feel very sturdy and are made well (depending upon who they come from-----not talking JVC or Kenwood or Sony of course)? Are these units REALLY putting out 170 WATTS X 7 or X 8 or whatever they are advertising? THAT'S the essential question here.....how do we know when to step up into separates? Would a multichannel amp and home theater preamp make sense at that price point?

Maybe.

That seems to be the final answer. Did you look at the link I started? (receivers vs. separates.)

In my opinion separates would be better at that price point. Most people seem to agree, but not everyone.

Receivers vs. separates?

[Lexmark3200]

Maybe.

That seems to be the final answer. Did you look at the link I started? (receivers vs. separates.)

In my opinion separates would be better at that price point. Most people seem to agree, but not everyone.

Receivers vs. separates?

Yes G, Im going to look that link over and take the conversation to that more appropriate thread. Thank you!