Best receiver for PS3 et al

[NRP]

I had an Onkyo 605, and I currently have an Onkyo 705. Both are fantastic receivers - easy to setup/use and fantastic sound quality. I upgraded to the 705 only because I needed more HDMI inputs. I can recommend either of these receivers without hesitation.

 

[KOF]

It doesn't take a cutting edge processor to decode a format which is lossless to begin with. It's not Dolby Digital/DTS days anymore so the possibility of bitstreaming to be superior to player decoding is even slimmer.

Some people are too hung up on HD audio that they forget there are far more important factors when it comes receivers like DAC and amplification. There was someone in AVSForum who believed just because Onkyo605/606 supported HD audio, they would beat older Rotel models outright. It simply is not true.

What I look for in a receiver are the quality of DAC, amp, preouts so that I can later use dedicated amps in the future. Onkyo605 doesn't have a pre-out and I believe the 606 doesn't either. Budget conscious buyers especially should not dismiss a non bitstreaming HD receiver because chances are the other components are beefed up instead of paying loyalty to Dolby and DTS. Harman Kardon 247/347 and Marantz 4001 are such products that sound great without bitstreaming support.

I would also be weary of receivers that have scalers. Some of them can't be completely turned off. (Harman Kardon receivers are such) It wouldn't really matter to me since I currently do not have a high end external scalers, but once I get DVDO VP50 or something, it could be problematic.

 

[eastmen]

Hey guys . I'm currently running just stock tv speakers but i want to move to a 7.1 system. I'm looking at the onkyo 606. I'm going to be running this with speakers from an old 5.1 all in one home thearter system for now. But i'm going to upgrade as money allows to better speakers.

I have two quests

when it says video upscaling to 1080i. thats just for upscalling corret , it will still pass through a 1080p signal ?

also is $400 a good price on these or can i find them cheaper?

I'm going to be using it with a 360 , ps3 and a fios hd cable box

 

[Arwin]

Hey guys . I'm currently running just stock tv speakers but i want to move to a 7.1 system. I'm looking at the onkyo 606. I'm going to be running this with speakers from an old 5.1 all in one home thearter system for now. But i'm going to upgrade as money allows to better speakers.

I have two quests

when it says video upscaling to 1080i. thats just for upscalling corret , it will still pass through a 1080p signal ?

Yes, that is correct. The 1080i upscaling quality is apparently quite pants though, just so you know.

also is $400 a good price on these or can i find them cheaper?

You probably can, but not by much.

I'm going to be using it with a 360 , ps3 and a fios hd cable box

I think you should be fine.

Personally, I'm still looking seriously at the Sony 820, though I'm probably going to wait until the black version is back in stock everywhere (somewhere in March probably) as that will probably be a new revision. Also, newer versions of the receivers are probably going to come out later this year making the current batch cheaper again.

My reasons for going with the 820: the sound quality is rated really well for this price class, both in surround and in stereo mode (especially the latter gets honorable mention). I don't want upscaling, as everything I'd want that on can do it itself and better. Should I be using component for something (my 360 is the only component only device I have, but that one isn't likely to make it to the livingroom).

Even then I already have both HDMI and Component cables running from my TV and I wouldn't want to mess with anything that takes a component signal and outputs it over HDMI anyway. I can find the 820 pretty cheap too (almost 100 euro cheaper than the 606).

Big advantage of all that is that the device needs less power / less cooling (runs cheaper and lighter). This matters to me because I always have the sound of anything over the speakers, never on the TV - I guess I'm spoilt that way. The 606 doesn't have a good reputation for this, and it has too many 'runs hot' issues for my liking.

I could still change my mind though and I'm not in a hurry - vowed to no longer spend money before I've earnt it and my current rather humble Dolby Surround (1992) amp still sounds great. It's just starting to show signs of wear and a recession year, should you have the money to spare, is often a good time for buying equipment like this. But it is very likely it will happen this year, that's for sure. I've been bravely holding off a proper 5.1 or better setup for a long time, and I don't think I can manage much longer!

 

[Asher]

I'm constantly bemused by the accusations that the 606 runs hot. I own one, several of my colleagues own them and they don't get anywhere close to hot. Part of the reason it's so heavy is because they have massive heatsinks, better than those on others like the Sony.

It seems to be an old wives tale. There's kill-o-watt results in the AVSForums threads that also kill the assumption that it uses a lot of power.

Does anyone have any sources to people who actually claim it runs hot? I've only seen it mentioned by "fans" of other products in the AVSforums threads, which was always suspicious to me.

 

[Arwin]

Does anyone have any sources to people who actually claim it runs hot? I've only seen it mentioned by "fans" of other products in the AVSforums threads, which was always suspicious to me.

I read most of the 606 owners threads, and there are several owners in there who actually installed a custom fan to keep the receiver cool! A lot of Onkyo reviews (of various models, als the 576 for instance) also mention it runs hot compared to the others. I also saw Kill-o-watt figures for the 606 showing 70-80 watt ratings for volume levels 30-50.

That's not to say that in most cases it will be fine of course, and I think the 606 would be fine in my house as well, considering the amp's current location. I just don't like it.

It sure would be interesting to know if the 606 was twice as heavy as the 820 because of the heatsinks (which it apparently needs) or because it has such superior components. Either way, the 606 seems burdened by a lot of features I don't need, and that's both a plus and a minus I guess. The 820 also has a bunch of stuff I don't need, but less, and it has a bunch of features I would miss in a lighter model (e.g. the 720).

Mind you I'm not going to argue that we're talking relatively small differences here, because we are! This is just my personal conclusion so far based on hours (hours!) of reading everything I could find on the two beasties (and a bunch of others - there's a well rated Yamaha too, the 763, but it's not available over here so it's just not an option).

 

[Asher]

It's just very odd -- what are these people doing that I am not?

Or maybe the yield on some of the components vary wildly, and run excessively hot?

I don't understand how there can be such a variance.

One thing you should be aware of is the peak numbers of wattage (660W for the Onkyo, IIRC) are theoretical numbers that will never come close to being reached in practice. It means the Onkyo is more capable in power output, which is why it's heavier as well. In tests I've seen, the Onkyos are significantly more efficient than the Sonys which means -- in practice -- they are likely to use LESS juice.

Onkyos consistently come close to their advertised specs, while Sonys tend to put out less than half.

 

[RudeCurve]

Heavy amps usually means big transformers. Heat sinks usually don't add much to the overall weight from one amp to another since they're made of aluminum and fairly light even big ones.

 

[RobertR1]

I have an Onkyo 705 hooked up to a 360 Elite, PS3, HD DVD player all on HDMI. The HD DVD player and PS3 do internal decoding and out put via PCM and then the Audessy curve is applied. I got my Comcast DVR HDMI to the TV with an optical out to the receiver. It all works well and the Onkyo's are very nice receivers. The only issue I had with the Onkyo was some bright traits with my Paradigm 5.1 setup and a bit of sibilance. Both were pretty much cured with proper speaker positioning, room changes and PROPERLY using the Audessy setup. I've recommended the Onkyo x05 series to a few friends and all have been happy with their purchases.

Other good brands include Denon, Integra (high end Onkyo), Rotel and Pioneer Elite series.

Eventually, when I upgrade my system I'll go with seperates (amps + pre pro).

 

[joker454]

Onkyos consistently come close to their advertised specs, while Sonys tend to put out less than half.

Do you mean the entry level Sony's or the ES line? My current Sony 5300ES replaced an ancient Pioneer VSX-09TX that I bought around 1996, it did around 100w/channel whereas my current Sony is 120w/channel. The Sony clearly goes louder than my old Pioneer.

My only complaint with the Sony is the volume control. It's a bit odd...you hold say volume up and it will increase for a second and then stop, delay for about a second, and then start non linearly increasing the volume based on some bizarre scale. I hate that compared to my old Pioneer which was simple, hold a volume button and volume instantly changes in a linear fashion. I don't know if all Sony's do this, but it is a bit irritating.

 

[Tim Murray]

I just bought some KEF IQ90s and an Integra DTR-7.8 (floor model on sale from a super-high-end audio store doesn't really bother me...), will complete the setup next month, probably. Works great--I kind of doubted that lipsync worked over HDMI, but boy oh boy it does.

 

[SG79]

I read most of the 606 owners threads, and there are several owners in there who actually installed a custom fan to keep the receiver cool! .

I've read about those a lot before I got mine, and thankfully I ignored them. It certainly runs a bit more hot than my ancient Pioneer one, but it's nothing out of the ordinary. My launch 360 gave out more heat for example.

Here's where I keep it:

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y92/Umon/DSC05435.jpg

So I'm wondering it's typically a case of poor ventilation.

 

[SonComet]

Do you mean the entry level Sony's or the ES line? My current Sony 5300ES replaced an ancient Pioneer VSX-09TX that I bought around 1996, it did around 100w/channel whereas my current Sony is 120w/channel. The Sony clearly goes louder than my old Pioneer.

My only complaint with the Sony is the volume control. It's a bit odd...you hold say volume up and it will increase for a second and then stop, delay for about a second, and then start non linearly increasing the volume based on some bizarre scale. I hate that compared to my old Pioneer which was simple, hold a volume button and volume instantly changes in a linear fashion. I don't know if all Sony's do this, but it is a bit irritating.

I have a denon 2808Ci and it does this too. I sometimes just want 3 clicks up or down and I end up with almost no or insanely loud volume. I have to be very careful when changing the volume.

 

[eastmen]

think you should be fine.

Personally, I'm still looking seriously at the Sony 820, though I'm probably going to wait until the black version is back in stock everywhere (somewhere in March probably) as that will probably be a new revision. Also, newer versions of the receivers are probably going to come out later this year making the current batch cheaper again

Thanks for the info , you think there will be any price drops on the sony by May/June. That is most likely when i'm going to buy as I get a nice raise in July. I'd love to be able to get that sony for $300 or so if possible.

Also does it have any features for autmaticly raising the voices in the sound track ? I like that it has the built in mic and the calibration feature though.

 

[Arwin]

So I'm wondering it's typically a case of poor ventilation.

What seems most likely is that it was an issue affecting the first revision especially. Apparently (if I'm not mixing things up) we're up to revision D now, and the issue was mostly fixed by revision B. It still runs comparatively hot I think (and also see the kill-o-wat figures), but comparatively is the key word here.

I like the Denon which can pass-through HDMI without using power. Most receivers seem to waste energy even if they only pass-through everything to the TV. I'll always be using Audio through the amp, but still.

I still need to find exact kill-o-watt figures for the Sony amps for the various modes though - will report on these when I find them.

 

[RobertR1]

Do you mean the entry level Sony's or the ES line? My current Sony 5300ES replaced an ancient Pioneer VSX-09TX that I bought around 1996, it did around 100w/channel whereas my current Sony is 120w/channel. The Sony clearly goes louder than my old Pioneer.

My only complaint with the Sony is the volume control. It's a bit odd...you hold say volume up and it will increase for a second and then stop, delay for about a second, and then start non linearly increasing the volume based on some bizarre scale. I hate that compared to my old Pioneer which was simple, hold a volume button and volume instantly changes in a linear fashion. I don't know if all Sony's do this, but it is a bit irritating.

You need to look at actual measured specs to see what receivers top out for all channels driven, 2 ch, 5 ch and such. That will give you a real world indication of how loud you can play. Also remember that for brief moments there can be major spikes in content which your receiver might not handle well. Also your speaker ohm rating and sensitivity level will determine how much power they really need.

 

[Arwin]

Well, I caved and finally went for the str-dg820, for 330 euro delivered. I didn't see much movement in price and don't trust the new model enough - it takes too long to get here, and I'm worried the old model will be mostly gone by then (it's not widely available anymore - all the other good offers I could find were sold out already with prices now starting near 400 euros, and with the DH700 already out at 300 euro, I'm thinking the new model will be at least 400 euros as well).

I really have been wanting a proper surround system (vs pro-logic I) for a looooooong time now. I'm very interested in finding out the differences. I've been listening more closely lately and trying the different modes, and noticed that when I turn on dolby surround I clearly lose some of the upper sound range. I'm also interested in finding out how bad my original rear-speakers are in terms of range. (and how good my ancient Wharfdales hold up).

The things I'm looking forward to:

- proper 5.0 surround (personally I don't care much about subwoofers, and it may be a while before I use 7.0 rather than 5.0, considering the space I use the receiver in is - unfortunately - rather small, about 10 m2, though I may still go for it anyway). While I have had surround since 1992 which is way longer than anyone I know here, its decoded from 2 channels which loses some sound quality, rear speakers only get a limited range, and they are not stereo - it's just one rear channel. When you think about it it's still amazing how good that sounds! The really big thing is that the center speaker does wonders for positioning speech near the tv properly, and that the rear speakers do a great job in creating believable reverb which really greatly improves the spatial soundscape. So big cudos for that early surround!
- and so with that, being able to get the ultra-high quality sound from the games and the bluray discs over the separate channels to the separate speakers without having been da'd and mixed into 2 channels and then back - probably converted back to digital, and then again back to analog to four channels over 5 speakers. I'm really, really curious how much difference this makes (and whether my speakers / hearing is good enough to tell ).
- being able to plug in the hdmi cables into the receiver and then one cable from there to the TV. My TV's second HDMI port somehow has some kind of slight interference or something causing me to currently plug in my HD cable box using Component
- being able to have music on without having the TV on. Technically this was possible already but not without confusing my wife too much (she'd have to switch channel on the tv as well as the receiver - now it's receiver only). I can stream music through PS3 (DNLA), have a fair number of CDs ripped to it, and the cable box has a lot of music channels as well (will definitely get the PS3 slim when it gets here at some point just to save power though - I'll take the other to the study )
- not have to go through the ext1 and ext2 when switching inputs from HDMI to Component on my TV as I couldn't find a way to disable these altogether and I don't use them - in fact, I won't have to switch inputs on my tv anymore)
- have separate digital audio inputs on my receiver, so that I can for instance plug in my Roland XV5050 or mixing panel into one of those directly should I want to (probably not too often in the living room, but still)
- do more with just the one remote (hopefully saves me from getting a Harmony or something similar, although I know this remote isn't the best)
- replace my 17 year old and slightly weary STR HD515, which has one or two inputs that are a bit loose (I guess I could fix it but ... ), the remote is starting to get old, etc.

Not looking forward to:
- all modern amps are deeper than my current, and won't fit easily into my cupboard. However, personally I've always wanted to put my PS3 upright next to the tv, as that's more convenient especially now that we put a cover over the cupboard to prevent the devices from being molested by my son, and the PS3, although it's fine where it is, can use the extra ventilation when it's hot in the summer.

 

[Jugix]

Well, I caved and finally went for the str-dg820,

Welcome... to the real world! --Morpheus

The things I'm looking forward to:

- proper 5.0 surround (personally I don't care much about subwoofers, and it may be a while before I use 7.0 rather than 5.0, considering the space I use the receiver in is - unfortunately - rather small, about 10 m2, though I may still go for it anyway).

I'd like to point out couple of thoughts. First and foremost 5.1 Vs. 7.1 (or 5.0/7.0) is only noticeable if you have big room. I mean BIG. Not large living-room but BIG Home-theater room. Think bigger... BIGGER... good!

I have actively been shizzling with home-theater equipment about ten years now and tried about everything. Including comparsions between 5.1 and 7.1. I know speaker manufacturers etc want you to believe there is a difference but there is not. Atleast not in small 'normal' home-theaters. Major HIFI/HT-magazines pretty much agree. So when talking about 10m^2 room, forget 7.0.

And about subwoofers: I definitely suggest to get one. I mean real subwoofer, not those petty 600€ cans, but real subwoofer. Better yet, build one yourself to truly nail those two lowest octaves for cheap (~1000€ range).

It is common misconception to believe large floor standing speakers are enough, but when you get the information to your body from LFE channel like it is meant to be... wow. I am not talking about ridiculously high SPL levels. Only 115dB (very short time dolby reference MAX-SPL) @ 10 Hz -30 Hz really brings new dimension to HT. Don't rule away good and correcly calibrated subwoofer.

Daymn, I could write all day about this subject but this is wrong forum for that.

 

[green.pixel]

Better yet, build one yourself to truly nail those two lowest octaves)

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/thor-intro.htm

Something like this.

 

[Jugix]

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/thor-intro.htm

Something like this.

There are lot's of DIY based subwoofer packets. Just google DIY subwoofer and pick yours. This is what I did. link.

But yeah, enough off topic.

-- jugix