Topic: Choosing an AV Receiver

[aHobbit]

exactly to the 1975 FTC specifications! anything not like this you can not use, specially when you want to compare recievers of different makes and models.

These standards makes it more difficult to compare receivers/integ amps. At least subscribe to a third party audio mag (like hometheaterchoice that do test on equal footing) to get the real score.

However, in stereo mode, typical multichannel receivers can deliver their touted specs.

[av_phile1]

There is no such thing as "future proofing" lalo na sa bilis ng technology. I bought Prologic receiver nuon na-obsolete nung nagkaroon ng Dolby Digital 5.1 or DTS etc etc....  In the same manner, with computers yun XT naging AT naging Pentium III, Iv etc.etc We just have to buy what's available and enjoy it hanggang ma-obsolete.
Just my mamera.

Futre-proofing is a big risk.  Some people I know who invested on the Yamaha Z9 with 9 channels thought future proofing was another benefit of that gear.  Now that HD-DTS and Dolby True HD are just around the corner, their gears have suddenly become obsolete on the audio format decoding side.  

And that is why there's argument on the side of using separates.  You can upgrade just your players or decoder boxes.  And retain the preamps, power amps and speakers that can last a lifetime or two. But the nice thing about getting flagship receivers are their MAIN IN amp features.  So if you like their amp flavour, you can just get a new preamp/processor with the new decoding features and plug it into your receiver's Main In power amp terminals.  

[Voltraizer]

I beg to disagree ... you can ... but not on the area of pre-processing. In the amp area, you can.

Only with the likes of HT that has 7.1/9.1 external input - thus, you may stay with the amp as long as you like and just buy upgrades in players with updated DSP which has n.1 output.

Another way is invest in power amp, 5? 7? 9? 11? to your heart's content. Provided of course, that your purchase standard are those HT with pre-outs. So you just continue to upgrade the HT side, and make use of pre-outs to feed your invested amps. Marantz, being low-cost with pre-outs are good candidates for this strategy. So buy every year, and sell after 1 year - high resale value pa rin, and invest a little to keep your HT preamp updated. You can maintain your ol' good amp for the rest of your life! 

Investing in just HT equipment now because of 7.1 output implementation is not really future proofing - the DSP inside is the single point of issue.

"Futue proofing" is another techno-mumbo marketing hype. Sige mag-install ka ng windows XP home edition sa AT computer mo (exageration) or palabasin mo yun tunog ng separate chanels pag may 10.1 channel na sa dolby-prologic na receiver mo.(again an exageration).
We are talking about technology here, and the design of receiver depends on the saleability of it's feature.
And it would be less expensive to buy a new receiver, than buying additional separates that will complicate your connections and the simpler the set-up the less complication and expense.
Kung amp lang pag-uusapan, (that's not the context of my previous statement), Bumili ka na lang ng monoblock amp para walang kupas, 1 amp per channel. I'm talking about the receiver .
On the issue of receiver becoming obsolete, that's a reallity and manufacturers really want the consumer to buy and replace.

[av_phile1]

Most int. amps don't have a dB dial kase nga base sila sa audophile designs....Which are simple and no fancy whatsoever. 

There are quite a number of integrated I've seen with db markings around their volume knobs.  But they're not entirely accurate.  You might be referring to some esoteric preamps with no markings on the volume control.

Most int. amps doesn't claimed digital as what other receiver manufacturers do

Just for your info, there are also integrateds with digital processing, mostly from Yamaha, Denon, Krell and Soundfire, to mention those that I've seen.  If you visit the pier there are many old PROLOGIC integrateds from Kenwood, Technics, and Yamaha.  

(BTW, there's no such thing as digital sound, lahat 'yan analog from the time of recording hanggang sa paglabas ng sound sa loudspeakers).

I would like to think that a good playback system would be transparent as to whether you have an analog or a digital system.  But in the early days of CD, digital sound can be differentiated with analog sound.  There are still distinctions.  Between a CD and an LP, you can clearly distinguish most of the time.  One is clinically clean and bandpassed no lower than 20hz, the other has tics and pops and infrasonics below 20hz.  

About the only analog sound there is is what comes into the microphones in the recording stage and what goes into power amps in the playback stage (but if using digital power amps, the reconstitution to analog happens at the final amp stage.)  The de facto processing these days are in the digital domain.  Most mixing consoles are already digital and output to a CPU for master processing in the 96/24 or 1-bit DSD formats.  Even the guitar and bass amps of most rock stars use class D amps, not to mention the Roland and yamaha syntesizers which go into the processing console via USB.  We are in the digital age.  

Kaya sa mga int. amps, by o'clock tinitingnan at hindi kung ilang dB kase nga wala naman LCD, siguro iyong iba meron na.

Volume position is not accurate basis for comparison.  Some integrateds are already maxed at 11 o'clock and anything beyond that you go into severe clipping already.  While others can be pushed to 3 o"clock and still sound cleanly.  

Basta ang alam ko, wala akong nakita or nalaman na individual na nasa tube amplifications na lumipat sa SS or receivers, pero marami akong alam na nasa SS or receivers  na nag-switched sa tube...'yon lang kapatid and I will never argue with you kase ang sa akin ay personal experience...."Como estas senhor hobbit"[/b]

I inherited some Dynaco and Luxman tubes from my dad in the early 80s and promptly disposed of them later that decade.  It is not so much because SS sounded better.  Actually, the tubes had better vocal body.  But when I learned they have oodles of even-ordered harmonic distortions that colored their sound to make them euphonic, and that good SS designs have so little THDs even at max settings, I promptly disposed of them.  I am more into High Fidelity than Euphony.  I just can't listen comfortably knowing in the back of my head that I am listening to distorted signals, no matter how pleasant sounding.  But that's just me, ofcourse.

[oweidah]

I inherited some Dynaco and Luxman tubes from my dad in the early 80s and promptly disposed of them later that decade.  It is not so much because SS sounded better.  Actually, the tubes had better vocal body.  But when I learned they have oodles of even-ordered harmonic distortions that colored their sound to make them euphonic, and that good SS designs have so little THDs even at max settings, I promptly disposed of them.  I am more into High Fidelity than Euphony.  I just can't listen comfortably knowing in the back of my head that I am listening to distorted signals, no matter how pleasant sounding.  But that's just me, ofcourse.

minsan sa hobby na ito, mas ok kung mag-enjoy na lang maski konti kaalaman. 

[av_phile1]

minsan sa hobby na ito, mas ok kung mag-enjoy na lang maski konti kaalaman. 

True. Many times what you don't know won't hurt you.     But at other times, what you know can be liberating. It can free you from having to engage in expensive but worthless audio lies and myths.   

[Voltraizer]

True. Many times what you don't know won't hurt you.     But at other times, what you know can be liberating. It can free you from having to engage in expensive but worthless audio lies and myths.   

Liberating indeed!!!
"Ignorance is bliss" depending on the situation you are in.  If you are given a mini-component, and you are happy with the way things are meaning you pop in a music CD and listen and quite content and happy with it . Enjoy , "ignorance is bliss". But if you have a budget and your objective is to buy a good qualtiy sounding audio equipment, Would it be a plus factor, if you educate yourself with knowledge so that you won't be fooled into buying trash-hyped audio product?  Otherwise with all those audio lies, myths and hypes floating around, you might waste money invested into trash. I heard ignoramus who attribute the qualities of a good sound through a certain brand of speaker cables alone  saying it's transparent, neutral or detailed without specifying what front-end is used or what kind of integrated amp is used or what kind of speakers were used. Just by cable alone, descriptions were made. So , he may have bought a P25k CD player and P35k speaker cable and P10k of  ic. Where's the logic in that?

[hattori_hanzo]

the word "future proofing" for audio gears has no meaning, its a myth created by audophile's for audio technology... why?

if there a "proofing" for the "future", then there will be no future or upgrades for technology... it will be stagnant and stays the way it is...

it is like those cellphones and computers techology. So if you buy an existing audio gear that has the present audio technology. well expect that it wont last, there will be another that will replace those techology. thats how the audio world evolves...

if you want to "again" say "future proofing" then why not "future proofing" yourself by being contented and happy for what present audio gears you have...    

buti na lang hindi ako "future proof" hahaha!!!

[oweidah]

but if one is gonna immerse himself sa high fidelity, euphonics, audiophile, myths & lies issues etc eh walang katapusang bangayan at dakdakan lang ng matalinhagang kuro-kuro, idea at "cut and paste"  infos lang yan.

choosing a receiver lang ang topic, look where it led? susunod bose na naman?

[Voltraizer]

but if one is gonna immerse himself sa high fidelity, euphonics, audiophile, myths & lies issues etc eh walang katapusang bangayan at dakdakan lang ng matalinhagang kuro-kuro, idea at "cut and paste"  infos lang yan.

choosing a receiver lang ang topic, look where it led? susunod bose na naman?

Naku oweidah, idol!!! The source of the statement "kung san ka masaya ,suportahan kata!"...
These discussion are meant to inform. and naturally varied insights ang makikita mo.
Kakatawa no, receiver lang pinag-uusapan napunta kung saan saan. But at least lahat ng
"lies and myths" mabunyag na!!!!! ha ha ha
Cool lang !!!!!

[oweidah]

hehehe....miami heat hang-over

sensia na minsan pag-paulit-ulit discussions na pare-pareho din kuro-kuro eh paikot-ikot lang, nakakahilo para sa simpleng tao gaya ko

[Voltraizer]

hehehe....miami heat hang-over

sensia na minsan pag-paulit-ulit discussions na pare-pareho din kuro-kuro eh paikot-ikot lang, nakakahilo para sa simpleng tao gaya ko

Ito si Hanns me pakana nito, gusto pang dalhin 'tong topic sa "audio lies and myths"..
Ila-laser sword ko na yan!!!!! LAZEER SWORD!!!!!!

[bumblebee]

Gusto nyo ba, lahat ng sagot sa tanong regarding audio is "Let your ears decide."?

Pls recommend speakers.

Let your ears decide.

Good amp for stereo listening?

Let your ears decide.

Speakers for the T-amp?

Let your ears decide.

SACD vs HDCD

Let your ears decide.

Kung sa bagay, tipid sa space.

[hattori_hanzo]

Ito si Hanns me pakana nito, gusto pang dalhin 'tong topic sa "audio lies and myths"..
Ila-laser sword ko na yan!!!!! LAZEER SWORD!!!!!!

awouchhh!!! hindi tumalab yung ultra magnetic top... yari ako sa lazer sword mo? sumbong kita kay price zwardos hehehehe!!!!

[av_phile1]

Gusto nyo ba, lahat ng sagot sa tanong regarding audio is "Let your ears decide."?

Pls recommend speakers.

Let your ears decide.

Good amp for stereo listening?

Let your ears decide.

Speakers for the T-amp?

Let your ears decide.

SACD vs HDCD

Let your ears decide.

Kung sa bagay, tipid sa space.

That seems to be the easiest recommendation.  A no brainer. 

But really now,  because this hobby is so personal, what else can you say.  The trend of most answers to such questions you raised above is you cite you experience on one brand in a specific situation unique to you, then close it by saying "audition and let your ears decide."  That's probably the most common and safest statement in this forum, next to "just my 2 cents" and "that's just me." 

[av_phile1]

the word "future proofing" for audio gears has no meaning, its a myth created by audophile's for audio technology... why?

if there a "proofing" for the "future", then there will be no future or upgrades for technology... it will be stagnant and stays the way it is...

it is like those cellphones and computers techology. So if you buy an existing audio gear that has the present audio technology. well expect that it wont last, there will be another that will replace those techology. thats how the audio world evolves...

if you want to "again" say "future proofing" then why not "future proofing" yourself by being contented and happy for what present audio gears you have...    

buti na lang hindi ako "future proof" hahaha!!!

Maybe it's a good idea to define what "future-proofing" means.  Does upgradability of a receiver, in part or in whole, make it "future-proof?'  "Is being upgradeable same as "future-proof?"  If future-proofing time-bound, say 2-3 years only? 

[Voltraizer]

That seems to be the easiest recommendation.  A no brainer. 

But really now,  because this hobby is so personal, what else can you say.  The trend of most answers to such questions you raised above is you cite you experience on one brand in a specific situation unique to you, then close it by saying "audition and let your ears decide."  That's probably the most common and safest statement in this forum, next to "just my 2 cents" and "that's just me." 

Actually, dun papunta naman yun sagot to every "audio" questions. "Audition and let your ears decide."
Siyempre, hihiluhin ka muna ng technicalities including pseudo-scientific phrases then babanatan ka ng esoteric audio-descriptive phrases. But in the end, the reviewer will say. Better audition the product and let your ears decide!
By golly, it's an audio product...we really have to listen if it's pleasing to our ears according to our individual taste and standard. Yun ang ending. Duon papunta....
Of course, mas madali sumagot agad  ng , "let your ears decide"plus that's just me .......just my one cent....

[oweidah]

the answer is blowin in the wind...have a nice weekend guys.
peace

[aHobbit]

"Futue proofing" is another techno-mumbo marketing hype. Sige mag-install ka ng windows XP home edition sa AT computer mo (exageration) or palabasin mo yun tunog ng separate chanels pag may 10.1 channel na sa dolby-prologic na receiver mo.(again an exageration).
We are talking about technology here, and the design of receiver depends on the saleability of it's feature.
And it would be less expensive to buy a new receiver, than buying additional separates that will complicate your connections and the simpler the set-up the less complication and expense.
Kung amp lang pag-uusapan, (that's not the context of my previous statement), Bumili ka na lang ng monoblock amp para walang kupas, 1 amp per channel. I'm talking about the receiver .
On the issue of receiver becoming obsolete, that's a reallity and manufacturers really want the consumer to buy and replace.

O sige, hindi na future proofing the HT receiver - recycling na lang     

Ano na ba nasa pier? 

[Signal2Noise]

'yan nga ang hirap kapag pinaghalo mo ang subjectivity and objectivity eh! Kahit vintage audio amp pa yan o contemporary amp pa yan, if they are measured to be of the same specification, will be on the same rating. Kahit bakal pa ang parts ng vintage mo (I have dual mono blocks, 26kg total weight, with 8 big power caps, 4 for each channel) - configurable separate or integrated - 60 watts per ch. If I have receiver at 60wpc, preho lang power specs nila.

with regards to other specs e.g. sensitivity, dynamic headroom, loading, etc - magkakaiba talaga 'yan.

Ngayon, kung ang pangsukat e tenga lang - naku po - 'wag namang lagyan ng technical measurement kasi subjective lang yan at walang basis ng technical comparison. Mas maganda sa tenga mo, mas malakas sa pandinig mo kasi magkaiba ng ikot ng dial - shallow technicals! 

aHobbit,

Iyong basis mo ay purely "by the book", old notion of learning na ito.  Go and explore, research and evolved so that you will know what's written in the book and what are those actually happening....Ano ba ang ibig kong sabihin dito?

 I'll give you a simple analogy (Watt is Watt, Watt = Watt).......Miles/Hr = Miles/hr...OK ba?

300miles/hr Ferrari  versus  300miles/hr Corvette.  Parehong 300miles/hr speed and will run in the same speedway.  Anong result?  Ferrari wins.  Ask me kung bakit eh pareho lang naman silang tumakbo ng 300miles/hr?  Ano sagot ko, eh kahit pareho nga sila ng speed/velocity @ 300 miles/hr eh kung mas mataas at mas malakas humatak (torque) nung Ferrari, siguradong mamumuraot iyong Corvette? 

Another concrete analogy with regards to variable comparison (50W/ch tube versus 80W/ch SS or Receiver)....1000cc Suzuki Big Bike versus  880cc Harley Davidson Iron Horse.  When I was in the Mid-East, nakipag-pustahan iyong utol ko sa isang Arabo ng Drag Race.  The Arab used Suzuki SV1000 Naked Big Bike while my bro used his Harley Davidson 880 Custom-Built Sportster.  The same as what happened to Corvette, namuraot iyong Suzuki nung Arabo at halos tumagas iyong engine oil nito.  As a proof, you can view the Winning Iron Horse,  naka-display sa garden ng bahay namin dito sa Malate.

Again, ang pinag-uusapan natin dito ay POWER....

Anong relation nito doon sa Watt=Watt or Watt is Watt?  Ngayon masasagot at maiintindihan mo na iyong argumento ko, pag ito hindi mo pa naintindihan ewan ko na lang...Uulitin ko, Miles/hr = Miles/hr  or Velocity is Velocity.  Pareho 'yan kahit saan Physics Book mo tingnan pero may exemption to the rule.

Did I read from here na those Vintage Amp may sound the same or mas maganda pa sa mga new series amplifiers?  Sabi ni aHobbit, iyong claims ko walang technical basis.  You asked for it, iyong mga electronic components na ginamit sa mga Vintage Amps ay 20% tolerance-ibig sabihin -20 accuracy with reference to zero (0).  Iyong mga electronic components na gamit ngayon ng modern amps ay at most 5 to 1% tolerance....Ibig sabihin -5 to -1% accuracy (near zero).  Iyong current na dumadaloy ay dito ay almost perfect.  Ang color code nito ay GOLD (5-1%), tulad ng ginamit sa mga multi-meter testers for accuracy.  And Silver (10%)..etc.  Siguro alam mo ibig kong sabihin? Hindi galing sa internet ito, napag-aralan at natutunan lang po.

So from here, papaano mo/ninyo masasabi na mas maganda or pareho lang ang vintage sa modern amp?  NO BASIS, kuwentong Barbero 'yan.

Sa usapin ng tube & SS/Receiver, isang tinitingnan ng mga audiophiles & audio experts ay iyong Higher Voltage Drive ng tube amps for wattage versus ng SS in Current Flow.  A watt isn't necessarily a watt -  and not all watts are created equal....Remember the formular for watts? Watts = Volts x Amps.  So watts is the product of voltage and current. If an SS amp makes watts by increasing the current,  but tubes create watts by increasing the voltage more , you're going to get a different end result - because there's a different proportion of the components. Mathematical equations don't take into account the real world variables.   Uulitin ko, hindi puwedeng magkapareho ang output drive ng Tube sa SS/Receivers.


"However, overtime I began to realized that even though the sound of my system with the QUAD 405 (SS) was the same as it ever had been, the MAGIC WAS GONE.  Listening to my records began to play a smaller role in my life-until I replaced the 405 with an M&A tube amplifier two years later.

I was having to work harder to appreciate my music through amplifier, and it was this cognitive dissonance that triggered tipping point at which I changed from a hardline OBJECTIVIST into someone who recognized the value in listening" - John Atkinson (Stereophile Magazine July 2005)

[bumblebee]

Using your analogy, a kg of iron is actually heavier than a kg of cotton?

[Signal2Noise]

Using your analogy, a kg of iron is actually heavier than a kg of cotton?

Yup....Try mo ipalo sa ulo mo iyong isang kilong bulak, para ka lang hinampas ng isang unan.  Pero try mong ipalo iyong isang kilong bara ng bakal sa ulo mo, poklat & 4-6 stitches you will gonna have, baka groggy ka pa sa mag-hapon.  Again, we are talking here Kgs = Kgs...Weight is Weight.  So siguro another from here, one can differentiate Tube Power versus SS/Receiver Power.

"Kung minsan mas mahirap intindihin ang mga simpleng bagay at paliwanag"....Mang Kepweng

(This thread reminds me of my WiredState years... )

[Trauma]

weight is not rigidity.

bigat ay hindi tigas.

para makasugat at makasakit hindi mo kelangan ng bigat. Isang matigas na bato kahit maliit masakit kung tumama.

pag answer sa analogy ay "yup" , yupi yupi na siguro yung yero sa bubong.

Peace Man.

[Signal2Noise]

weight is not rigidity.

bigat ay hindi tigas.

para makasugat at makasakit hindi mo kelangan ng bigat. Isang matigas na bato kahit maliit masakit kung tumama.

pag answer sa analogy ay "yup" , yupi yupi na siguro yung yero sa bubong.

Peace Man.

Man you take my analogy very literal....even if you compressed a 1kg cotton to a certain point that it will become hard enough to hurt a person.  Still the difference it will make is not the same as with 1kg of iron/metal.  What do I mean about these, the IMPACT and EFFECT.  The same with if you ferment both 1Kg of California Grapes and Tong Shing Wa Grapes (take note both 1kg) and processed it using different method for each.  You will gonna have TWO different kinds of wine with different levels of intoxication.  Parehong 1kgs pero maaaring iyong isa ay 40% (80proof) at iyong isa 45% (90proof) alcohol content.  Kung iyong identical twins nga ay iisang semilla ang pinanggalingan, iisang magulang eh still hindi pa rin magka-pareho in so many things, 'yon pa kayang products with different designs and technology being applied to it.  Fine Watt is Watt, pero hindi ito magiging the same lalo't magkaiba ang ginamit na internal components at iba rin ang power source nito.  I don't want to become too technical about this thread, because others might not get what we are posting here, kaya ko dinadaan sa mga actual and concrete examples from real world condition and events we frequently encountered in our lives. 

[Signal2Noise]

There are quite a number of integrated I've seen with db markings around their volume knobs.  But they're not entirely accurate.  You might be referring to some esoteric preamps with no markings on the volume control.

 

Just for your info, there are also integrateds with digital processing, mostly from Yamaha, Denon, Krell and Soundfire, to mention those that I've seen.  If you visit the pier there are many old PROLOGIC integrateds from Kenwood, Technics, and Yamaha.  

That's why I said, most not all.  But those MOST  especially the better ones doesn't have dB indicator.


I would like to think that a good playback system would be transparent as to whether you have an analog or a digital system.  But in the early days of CD, digital sound can be differentiated with analog sound.  There are still distinctions.  Between a CD and an LP, you can clearly distinguish most of the time.  One is clinically clean and bandpassed no lower than 20hz, the other has tics and pops and infrasonics below 20hz.  

About the only analog sound there is is what comes into the microphones in the recording stage and what goes into power amps in the playback stage (but if using digital power amps, the reconstitution to analog happens at the final amp stage.)  The de facto processing these days are in the digital domain.  Most mixing consoles are already digital and output to a CPU for master processing in the 96/24 or 1-bit DSD formats.  Even the guitar and bass amps of most rock stars use class D amps, not to mention the Roland and yamaha syntesizers which go into the processing console via USB.  We are in the digital age.  

You're correct we are in a digital world....BUT I 'am talking about sound and you are mentioning digital processing & compression.  That's why we have DACs or D/A...Digital to Analog Converter.  Loudspeakers don't output 1s & 0s (binary) as what in those optical discs.   It's a wave form push & pull-volume amplitude.

Meron bang nag-record immediately using CDs or DVD, di ba sa mga recording studios lahat 'yan nasa reels muna before processing it and stored in optical medias.  That's why we have AAD, ADD later na lang nire-remaster but in the end we still need & used DAC or D/A to convert those compression before going out to our loudspeakers.  Hindi naman nagpo-produced ng binary code (1 & 0) ang loudspeakers para magkaroon tayo ng digital sound?  Do you know a brand at baka magustuhan at mabili ko?  YES digital sound system and digital compression/medias, BUT there's no such thing as digital sound.  Lahat ito ay magiging analog in nature paglabas sa loudspeakers kase wala namang DSP or (Dig-to-Dig) processor sa loob ng enclosures, marketing hype lang iyong digital sound lalo't sa mga Jap-Signatures.  Try to put a DSP sa loudspeakers and removed the DACs from your player or receiver, tingnan natin kung anong mangyayari sa tunog...Baka puro beep lang tulad sa mga digital equipments/analyzers. Kase walang nag-convert sa compressed data mula doon sa digital media.  Walang iniwan ito sa zipped file sa computer, can you read the data on a zipped file?  It's a BIG NO & NO, so you need to decrypt it first para ma-decompressed iyong file bago mo maintindihan iyong data sa loob nito...Bro ganoon lang kasimple 'yon.

Volume position is not accurate basis for comparison.  Some integrateds are already maxed at 11 o'clock and anything beyond that you go into severe clipping already.  While others can be pushed to 3 o"clock and still sound cleanly.  

Depende sa loudspeakers na gamit, of course kahit sabihin natin flagship receivers pa 'yan, kabitan ko ng low sensitivity loudspeakers.  Magdi-display iyong PEAK indicator nito lalo't pag hindi kaya ng loudspeakers iyong GAIN ng receivers at eventually it's either mag-distort or mag-clipped iyong sistema mo.

I inherited some Dynaco and Luxman tubes from my dad in the early 80s and promptly disposed of them later that decade.  It is not so much because SS sounded better.  Actually, the tubes had better vocal body.  But when I learned they have oodles of even-ordered harmonic distortions that colored their sound to make them euphonic, and that good SS designs have so little THDs even at max settings, I promptly disposed of them.  I am more into High Fidelity than Euphony.  I just can't listen comfortably knowing in the back of my head that I am listening to distorted signals, no matter how pleasant sounding.  But that's just me, ofcourse.

Notion ko rin 'yan before, I am very proud of my Marantz gear kase 0.4% THD @ +/-3dB.  I always looked into the THD thing kase gusto ko crystal clear sound even in low volumes....I am RIGHT with it.  But later on, na-realized ko na...Do I feel HAPPY about it?  When I was in the Mid-East, I came acrossed to auditioned Audio Research & Pathos Logos tube amps and even McIntosh Power Blocks, Jolida Tube Stuff here in the Philippines and ProLogue (Primaluna) & Manley tubes during in Hongkong.  Not-to-mentioned iyong Williamson Tube Amp na laging kinukuwento ng erpat ko during his prime.  One time me & my oldman went to an audio shop somewhere here in the metropolis, upon auditioning some SS products he then told me na "kung buhay pa sana iyong Williamson na inassembled ko noon, kayang makipag-sabayan diyan sa mga bagong labas".  From my frequent auditioning, I realized that being RIGHT is different from being HAPPY which my oldman used to tell me during our discussion while having our nightly session of on the rocks.

[oweidah]

wana share on another "touchy" issue?

d2 ==> http://pinoydvd.com/board/index.php?topic=41073.40

as to choosing a receiver,eto sakin lang
* let my ears decide 
* budget / cost
* specs & features
* i also read reviews (user, editorial or company sponsored rahrah reviews)

[Signal2Noise]

wana share on another "touchy" issue?

d2 ==> http://pinoydvd.com/board/index.php?topic=41073.40

as to choosing a receiver,eto sakin lang
* let my ears decide 
* budget / cost
* specs & features
* i also read reviews (user, editorial or company sponsored rahrah reviews)

Aiwa sadik, mumtaz!.....You're absolutely correct and I have no argument diyan sa posting mo.  Include also lab test results sa
product na gusto mong bilihin lalo't kung dumaan ito sa signal generator at oscilloscope (Square Wave Test). 
Dito mo makikita kung tama iyong frequency response na nakalagay sa specs nito...."Masfudt"!

Mah Salam

[john5479]

preference, preference sometimes even if the statement is objective one will find fault in it   any amp when driven to its limits will clip, its how you work within is limits thats the key here. its that simple.

its easy to find fault if you prefer one thing over the other. but the key thing is to respect each other's preference.

Back to the topic, this receiver should be able to take on difficult to drive speakers  http://www.sunfire.com/ultimatereceiver_II.html. I heard the previous model driving a set of dynaudio focus speakers. But its pretty spendy

[oweidah]

Aiwa sadik, mumtaz!.....You're absolutely correct and I have no argument diyan sa posting mo.  Include also lab test results sa
product na gusto mong bilihin lalo't kung dumaan ito sa signal generator at oscilloscope (Square Wave Test). 
Dito mo makikita kung tama iyong frequency response na nakalagay sa specs nito...."Masfudt"!

Mah Salam

alhamdullilah! praise the lord!

sensia na di ako bihasa interpret lab results, cant relate much but for those who are in the know, this is indeed very useful.

i just try to simplify things esp. for newbies na pinagdaanan ko din a few years back baka instead of being encouraged eh ma-intimidate akalain dami naman kailangang malamang technical para ma-enjoy ang hobby na ito. eh sa totoo lang, ilan sa atin dito ang talagang nabasa /binasa ang buong user manual ng audio/video receiver? eto ang dapat gawin ng mga newbies esp sa first owned gears nila. later on pag bihasa na sa pasikot-sikot ng mga connections at pindot functions ng remote control, use the owners manual as reference na lang.

for newbies things dont stop when you have purchased what you believe or hope to be the receiver. the tricky part is system matching it with the rest of  your gears- speakers & source (cd/dvd), using your preferred interconnects (be it analog or digital) and speaker wires. the aim is to achieve system synergy, kumbaga sa basketball teamwork, chemistry ng mga players. its not uncommon to hear- bakit ang panget ng tunog eh puro five-star award-winners ang binili ko?


yes john5479...its also all about preference & most impt. *r e s p e c t*

[av_phile1]

Meron bang nag-record immediately using CDs or DVD, di ba sa mga recording studios lahat 'yan nasa reels muna before processing it and stored in optical medias.  That's why we have AAD, ADD later na lang nire-remaster but in the end we still need & used DAC or D/A to convert those compression before going out to our loudspeakers. 

You're obviously not as informed as I thought you were.  AAD and ADD were acronyms used in the early years of CD because we are talking of masters in the large open reel format previously recorded in analog and released in LP.  So some transciption and remastering  to digital is needed to have a CD master.  That's when AAD and ADD comes in.  If you read my post more closely, I said most modern studio and live recording these days are entirely in the digital domain. The masters are in open reel Digital tape in 96/24 or 1-bit DSD format.  The synthesizers and guitar/bass amps are mixed in digital consoles, processed. compressed and mastered in PCs all in the digital domain.  The only thing analog there is mostly the vocals  before getting into the mic. Admittedly, there are still a few esoteric studios recording in analog and stored entirely in large format nalog open reels.   

BUT there's no such thing as digital sound.  Lahat ito ay magiging analog in nature paglabas sa loudspeakers kase wala namang DSP or (Dig-to-Dig) processor sa loob ng enclosures, marketing hype lang iyong digital sound lalo't sa mga Jap-Signatures.

I see what you mean.  Ofcourse, you won't hear any musicality in digits.  But you obviously did not see my point.  Audiophiles can distinguish between digital sound as sound coming from a digital source, digitally processed and whose anlog waveforms ae recovered/reconstituted prior to amplification.  As opposed to analog sound coming from an analog source without any digital processing in its path.  In that context there is such as thing as digital sound.   

But just in case you haven't heard, try listening to a burst of a DTS wave file without DTS decoding from a DTS-CD on your CD player or PC player.   And you can hear how digital sound sounds like.  It exists.  It's called digital noise.