Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I suspect that HT receivers out-sell hi-fi amplifiers by a wide margin. To all intents and purposes the HT receiver is the new 'hi-fi' for most homes. I'm more familiar with common wisdom on how to improve a 2-channel hi-fi system and feel somewhat lost when it comes to the ins and outs of sound quality with todays HT receivers.
A typical HT receiver (for example, I currently have a Pioneer 823K) offers a lot of convenience that I want. But sound quality is limited by the budget constraints the designers had to work with. I'm sure they tried their best to make what were at the time the best engineering compromises. But I would be interested to know where the weak links are most likely to be ?
Where should the money be spent - a 'better' HT receiver ? outboard amplifiers ? a better blue-ray player/source ?
A typical HT receiver (for example, I currently have a Pioneer 823K) offers a lot of convenience that I want. But sound quality is limited by the budget constraints the designers had to work with. I'm sure they tried their best to make what were at the time the best engineering compromises. But I would be interested to know where the weak links are most likely to be ?
Where should the money be spent - a 'better' HT receiver ? outboard amplifiers ? a better blue-ray player/source ?
Member
Joined 2009
High-end receivers usually have good sound quality but are very expensive(>$1500). Their resale price however plummets after a few years so there are always second hand receivers at 1/3price on ebay and craigslist. I got a Pioneer Elite receiver for $300 that uses the ICE-Power classD amplifier modules. You can't beat that value, even if you DIY! Since they are consumer electronics many people don't know what amplifiers are inside HT receivers, they buy into the latest HDMI or Apple standard.
Take a look at your local used electronics listings and educate yourself on what amps are in the high-end brand receivers. When purchasing a receiver the owner will usually let you test it first. Bring a small speaker and audition the receiver's amplifier channels. You could even bring an audiophile amp you have and compare it against the receiver. Be up-front with the seller, tell them you want to test the sound quality before deciding to spend hundreds of dollars and ask if it will be OK to bring some equipment to compare. You should not need more than 5min of playing music to decide if you want to make a purchase.
Take a look at your local used electronics listings and educate yourself on what amps are in the high-end brand receivers. When purchasing a receiver the owner will usually let you test it first. Bring a small speaker and audition the receiver's amplifier channels. You could even bring an audiophile amp you have and compare it against the receiver. Be up-front with the seller, tell them you want to test the sound quality before deciding to spend hundreds of dollars and ask if it will be OK to bring some equipment to compare. You should not need more than 5min of playing music to decide if you want to make a purchase.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Hi,
Thanks for some good ideas.
The amplifiers are probably the one area I am confident with - so far my DIY efforts are to design and build them. I can readily modify the amplifier inside my HT receiver to significantly improve it's distortion performance (it's a simple topology). But I don't really know if this is worth the effort unless the amplifier the most common weak link ? If it is, then I'm home and dry because it's not hard to improve.
Thanks for some good ideas.
The amplifiers are probably the one area I am confident with - so far my DIY efforts are to design and build them. I can readily modify the amplifier inside my HT receiver to significantly improve it's distortion performance (it's a simple topology). But I don't really know if this is worth the effort unless the amplifier the most common weak link ? If it is, then I'm home and dry because it's not hard to improve.
The weal link is 2 channel, most AV receivers sound mediocre in two channel.
If you get a properly designed properly matched surround speaker system, the DPLII playback in an AV receiver will surpass the 2 channel playback and elevate the performance of the AV receiver into competing with audiophile 2 channel systems of similar price.
If you have a well matched speaker system, I can help you get better sound through PLIIx-z . You're stuck with a surround sound amp, So stop thinking about only 2 channels of it.
Last edited:
Does your receiver have a "pure" or "direct" or some such mode? Evaluate the differences with this mode on/off and the differences between combinations of that mode and analogue and digital inputs. This should give you an idea where the "weak links" exist. DAC? DSP? If there is a commonality in all, it may very well be the amps. It's good to isolate your variables in any way you can.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Hi DEFjammer, the front three speakers are all the same brand/family but the rear surrounds are a different brand. I should say that I use my HT receiver predominantly for movies as I do have a dedicated music system elsewhere in the house. With my music system I feel confident in optimizing it. But HT receivers are highly integrated and I really don't have a clue what kind of compromises are made in them. I value sound quality for movies and right now it's not as good as I think it should be.
Hi Thetwinmeister, good suggestion to do some experiments. It does have analogue inputs too so I'll see what I can find out.
Hi Thetwinmeister, good suggestion to do some experiments. It does have analogue inputs too so I'll see what I can find out.
I question that assertion, for the most part.
However, the weak link in most current AVR's is the room correction. Anthem's ARC is the only one that's really good, because it takes into account room gain (not neutering it as Audyssey does) and allows one to limit correction to just the modal region.
I am not so certain that a home theater receiver can be improved. The basis for this is that they are all they can be for the price. A company is not going to handicap their product, because competition is fierce in today's ultra-cheap buyer market, and thus it is survival of the fittest. If people chose to improve what they feel is not up to par, there will be size constraints and the cost can push the total investment into the range of something else that performs more to your liking. The fact is, the engineers who designed the receivers had tools and access to equipment and suppliers that DIYers do not.
I hate to see someone sink hundreds of dollars into "improving" a professionally orchestrated cumulation of knowledge in design. All to often some mentions a semiconductor or opamp that they are using and suddenly the upgrade strobe lights and alarms go off like a saturdaynight disco. While there are parts with better performance in specific aspects, many of the benefits are useless for audio reproduction. For example, the average audiophile that reads too much would jump all over a 5532 opamp and replace it with an OPA627 or what have you. This offers absolutely no audible benefit. The rise time and slew rate of redbook or even SACD is far lower than even the cheapest opamp is capable of, and distortion and noise in well thought out circuits is inaudible. Now, is a couple series stages amplify each other, then yes, hiss may be audible. I find that for many pieces of gear it is. But noise amplification and distortion are not the same. The distortion is not magnified.
To add to this, changing parts is not as straight foreard as directly replacing them with audiophile substitutions. Each chipset has strict requirements, and deviations will make them sound different, but these differences are unwanted non-linearities, not hidden details you are hearing for th first time. Many times the change is not really an improvement at all. There will be suggestions of resistors, chipsets and transformers, no doubt. However, there is much more to design than just buying more expensive or audiophile-recommended parts. The design inside that case is like a microcosm of any larger system of events. It has been chosen and layed out to be all it can be.
I hate to see someone sink hundreds of dollars into "improving" a professionally orchestrated cumulation of knowledge in design. All to often some mentions a semiconductor or opamp that they are using and suddenly the upgrade strobe lights and alarms go off like a saturdaynight disco. While there are parts with better performance in specific aspects, many of the benefits are useless for audio reproduction. For example, the average audiophile that reads too much would jump all over a 5532 opamp and replace it with an OPA627 or what have you. This offers absolutely no audible benefit. The rise time and slew rate of redbook or even SACD is far lower than even the cheapest opamp is capable of, and distortion and noise in well thought out circuits is inaudible. Now, is a couple series stages amplify each other, then yes, hiss may be audible. I find that for many pieces of gear it is. But noise amplification and distortion are not the same. The distortion is not magnified.
To add to this, changing parts is not as straight foreard as directly replacing them with audiophile substitutions. Each chipset has strict requirements, and deviations will make them sound different, but these differences are unwanted non-linearities, not hidden details you are hearing for th first time. Many times the change is not really an improvement at all. There will be suggestions of resistors, chipsets and transformers, no doubt. However, there is much more to design than just buying more expensive or audiophile-recommended parts. The design inside that case is like a microcosm of any larger system of events. It has been chosen and layed out to be all it can be.
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
One only has to watch the power supply collapse under modest load on one AVR after another to realize his assertion is more times correct than not.
An Anthem Receiver is a far cry from his Pioneer at <$300.
I also agree with Kouiky that upgrading an AVR will be difficult, they are hard to repair let alone redesign! And all the parts have been boiled down to the LCD.
To answer your original Question, speakers matter the most, then the AVR, because it is your DAC/Pre and amplifier.....then your source component which does need to be competent, but I use a PC as a transport, I will never buy a cd or any kind of player ever.
Last edited:
If I were you, I would look for a used higher end Denon or Yamaha multichannel receiver. When they were new, they could cost $2000-$4000, and the ones I had heard sounded better than a $6000 Bryston seperates system. HT falls out of fashion fast. Krell also made some and I've seem $11,000 multichannel pres go for $1000. I find that HT evolves so fast that trying to keep up with it is an endless money pit. Denon's 4308 (or something like that) absolutely floored me. Not alot of power, but if you are like me and listening is primarily at sensible levels that don't induce headaches, you will never worry about it. I hope you find the answer out there.
Last edited:
About in the quality music recordings themselves?
And after the room's acoustics and matching loudspeakers for that room,
I would get a good quality AV receiver; about $1,000 or so. Less on street ($500-600).
A quality BD player (Sony) you can get for less than hundred dollars.
And they play SACDs too (multichannel and stereo), most of them.
The Pioneer 823K, what do you find missing? Is it an inexpensive receiver?
And good advice from kouiky just above; a second-hand older Yamaha, Marantz, Denon receiver that used to sell for $2,000-3,000 and that you can get
for less than $300 today.
If it has (and it should) a multichannel analog input, then you're in high resolution audio territory no sweat.
Just match it with an Oppo universal BD player like the BDP-103 ($399 refurb, directly from Oppo - free shipping).
Total cost for a hi-res audio system (AV receiver plus source) = roughly $700.
for less than $300 today.
If it has (and it should) a multichannel analog input, then you're in high resolution audio territory no sweat.
Just match it with an Oppo universal BD player like the BDP-103 ($399 refurb, directly from Oppo - free shipping).
Total cost for a hi-res audio system (AV receiver plus source) = roughly $700.
Even today's Onkyo TX-NR818 AV receiver (THX Select2 Plus certified, Audyssey MultEQ XT32 Auto Room Calibration and EQ system, Audyssey Dynamic EQ and Volume, Internet streaming, +++++++++++++++++++++++++) you can get for $549.
...A favorite among 'audiophile connaisseurs' on a budget.
With the Oppo 103 you are still under one grand.
...A favorite among 'audiophile connaisseurs' on a budget.
With the Oppo 103 you are still under one grand.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
What I find missing is refinement in the sound. The automated room EQ sounds pretty good to my ears. But the sound is not refined. There is no issue with fatigue or nasty treble (which I am sensitive to) but the mids and highs are not clean enough. The bass could be punchier but it doesn't lack for depth (with the sub). I am starting to come to the conclusion that the weakest link right now is the amplifier.
I took off the cover. The digital board looks universal - it is used in all their models and has more channels available than there are amplifier channels in the model I have.
Does anybody know if the DAC is any good ? I have traced down the part number to this
AK4588VQ | Product | AKM - Asahi Kasei Microdevices
• ADC/DAC part
• 2ch 24bit ADC
- 64x Oversampling
- Sampling Rate up to 96kHz
- Linear Phase Digital Anti-Alias Filter
- Single-Ended Input
- S/(N+D): 92dB
- Dynamic Range, S/N: 102dB
- Digital HPF for offset cancellation
- Overflow flag
• 8ch 24bit DAC
- 128x Oversampling
- Sampling Rate up to 192kHz
- 24bit 8 times Digital Filter
- Single-Ended Outputs
It uses a Texas Instruments DSP and a Silicon Image chip at the input of the HDMI sockets.
I like AKM DACs, in general. ...They have good definition and tight and extended bass. AKM are one of my favorite DACs.
* May I suggest that you use the Tone controls with the Treble control @ +2 or +3.5dB and the Bass control @ +1.5dB or so.
* May I suggest that you use the Tone controls with the Treble control @ +2 or +3.5dB and the Bass control @ +1.5dB or so.
...And make sure you use the Stereo listening audio mode, and not Direct or Pure Direct.
And turn the MCACC EQ off to see (hear) if it makes a difference.
* For the Tone controls (Bass and Treble), look at the right bottom part on page 9 of your manual. ...On how to access them and for effective operation.
And turn the MCACC EQ off to see (hear) if it makes a difference.
* For the Tone controls (Bass and Treble), look at the right bottom part on page 9 of your manual. ...On how to access them and for effective operation.
Hi,
FWIW I'd severely look at your speakers before thinking
you can improve a typical very complicated HT receiver.
rgds, sreten.
FWIW I'd severely look at your speakers before thinking
you can improve a typical very complicated HT receiver.
rgds, sreten.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
The L & R font speakers are floor standing PMC FB1's (which are many years old but in good condition as I've had them from new) and the centre a PMC TB2 (which I got used). The rear speakers are floor standing B&W CE4's. I suppose I could go look for a pair of used PMCs for the rear speakers to get a better match between them all but given that the surrounds are less critical I don't see this as the weak link in the system.
Anyhow, I've heard better sound from these speakers with DIY amplifiers fed by the 5-ch analogue output of my blue ray player than I am currently hearing from the output of my HT receiver. This is why I suspect the receiver is the weak link and why I'm interested to know what aspect of the receiver is holding it back rather than just going out and dropping a big wad on a high-end receiver that may not have much extra inside it in terms of the cost of parts ?
Anyhow, I've heard better sound from these speakers with DIY amplifiers fed by the 5-ch analogue output of my blue ray player than I am currently hearing from the output of my HT receiver. This is why I suspect the receiver is the weak link and why I'm interested to know what aspect of the receiver is holding it back rather than just going out and dropping a big wad on a high-end receiver that may not have much extra inside it in terms of the cost of parts ?
Last edited:
I've never poked inside a HT receiver but my intuition tells me it'll be the power supplies that are the weakest link. That and the grounding - both signal and power grounding. Upgrading the power supplies within the form factor is likely impractical as the necessary additional caps will be bulky.Sortig out the grounding will likely be hugely fiddly and massively time-consuming as well as headache-inducing.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.