Yamaha RX-V2400 vs. Yamaha RX-V2095

[stevos2005]

I am looking on opinions with for the following. I currently have a Yamaha RX-V2095. I have recently purchased an RX-V2400 that's on it's way for $700 for a friend of mine, but he doesn't need all the features and is willing to give me $450-$500 for my old RX-V2095. So, it'd be like spending $200 to go to the RX-V2400. I do like Yamaha processing, etc. The 2400 has all the new DD EX, DTS ES, THX, etc., excellent bass management, and utilizes newer 24-bit DAC's than the 2095's 20-bit ones.
The only thing I'm concerned about is the amplifier quality. I've never heard the 2400 in action. The 2400 is rated at 120wpc vs. the 2095's 100wpc. But the 2095 is rated at 0.02% THD with a damping ratio of 200, while the 2400 is rated at less than 0.04% THD with 150 DR. I'm really not sure how that'd affect the sound.
Good news is that I'm planning to purchase an external quality amp in a few months, so the 2400 would be used as a processor/pre-amp. I'll be using the B&W CDM series speakers, so would there be much difference in using the 2400 or the 2095 in sound quality, if anyone's familiar with both receivers.

Thanks!

[kexodusc]

I've read some studies that claim the human ear cannot notice THD below as high as 3 or 4%. I seriously doubt you could tell below 1%. When you get as low as 0.1% the number becomes absolutely meaningless.
The 0.02% difference between the two amplifiers matters as much for sound quality as the look of the remote control. Your speakers will be the weak link as far as distortion goes, not your receiver. A few years back, the manufacturers really started to boast about THD numbers, before that most people I know rarely considered it when comparing two amplifiers.

Don't worry about the 2400's sound quality...it's got plenty of reserve power and sounds great...I have the 1400 model, it replaced an older 795a model. Same thing as the 2400 basically, and I was quite surprised at how much better Yamaha's newer receivers sound. I'm sure you'll be impressed with it.

I use a couple of Adcom power amps to run 4 of my 7 speakers right now, as my room is quite large (26 X 22) and the extra power helps, but in most setups I imagine the receiver would do fine on its own. If you're going to buy some separate power amps, the THD becomes even less meaningless.

[kelsci]

My brother recently sold his 2095 on Ebay. He replaced it with a Marantz 5400. Personally, I thought the sound from the 2095 was better than the Marantz. The Marantz had more up to date processing and features similar to the 1400 and 1400 Yamahas. That did make a difference. The current Yamahas are using a more advanced chip then what was found in the 2095. Most people writing reviews on AUDIOREVIEW.COM appear to be pleased with sound quality of both units which might be better than the 2095 regardless of the distortion ratings which are still rather low.

[woodman]

I am looking on opinions with for the following. I currently have a Yamaha RX-V2095. I have recently purchased an RX-V2400 that's on it's way for $700 for a friend of mine, but he doesn't need all the features and is willing to give me $450-$500 for my old RX-V2095. So, it'd be like spending $200 to go to the RX-V2400. I do like Yamaha processing, etc. The 2400 has all the new DD EX, DTS ES, THX, etc., excellent bass management, and utilizes newer 24-bit DAC's than the 2095's 20-bit ones.
The only thing I'm concerned about is the amplifier quality. I've never heard the 2400 in action. The 2400 is rated at 120wpc vs. the 2095's 100wpc. But the 2095 is rated at 0.02% THD with a damping ratio of 200, while the 2400 is rated at less than 0.04% THD with 150 DR. I'm really not sure how that'd affect the sound.
Good news is that I'm planning to purchase an external quality amp in a few months, so the 2400 would be used as a processor/pre-amp. I'll be using the B&W CDM series speakers, so would there be much difference in using the 2400 or the 2095 in sound quality, if anyone's familiar with both receivers.

Thanks!

Don't give this quandry the time of day! To be able to "move up" from a 2095 to a 2400 for only about $200 is the DEAL of the decade. As Kexodusc told you, the distortion figures are virtually meaningless, as is the difference in power rating.

Also, unless your listening room is VERY large, you can save your money on the external power amps ... they won't improve the sound quality in anywhere near a correlation with money spent, IMO. The 2400 will do quite well all by itself, without the need for external amps ... try it and see for yourself. People that try to tell you that you NEED external power amps in order to get "good sound" are looking to spend YOUR money - not their own. Don't get misled by false promises of sonc nirvana ... it's mostly snake-oil, smoke and mirrors exhibitions of ABEs at work!

Hope this helps you