Anyone heard the RXv 657 vs the 2500? If so, what are your thoughts? I was considering the 657 but I would have to wait for a while as I have other priorities I was going to do first. I have a chance to get the 2500 brand new in a box from an authorized dealer for $699 but will have to buy one before they fly out the door. If the 657 is warmer I will not consider the 2500. Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated.
I'm not sure about the 2500 but I believe it is similar to the 1500. I listened to them both when I bought my 657 and heard little if any difference. They are both very neutral sounding but you could tell that you are working with a better power supply with the 1500. If you have an external power amp for the front 2 then all is equal. Oh and I love the XM satellite radio.
Having just spent considerable time listening to the Panny I would have to say that it is a matter of preference. I felt that it was a very poor performer. In fact I've never heard worse. Again it could be because we are listening for different things but it certainly didn't ring my bell. To be fair the Yamaha 657 has a power supply that is only suited for fairly efficient speakers (89db or better). I would say that if your speakers are of average efficiency I would look further up the Yamaha line or at HK's which have more robust power supplies.
I own the rxv 2500 and to be sure it is a great reciever. The noise floor is nil. It is quite detailed and along with my boston accoustiocs vr975's presents a great soundstage. There are two drawbacks however. If you have bookshelves this recievfer will not output sub in puredirect but if you have floorstanders with good range the bass is excellent. And it is slighty underpowered imho for a reciever of this pricerange.
That's 2 votes for a weak power supply on the Yammies. I also think that we agree that these recievers have a very neutral sound belying their price points.
Anonymous
Posted on
Got a chance to AB the Panasonic and the 657 today and there was no comparison. I walked out with the Panasonic.
I agree it's no comparison but then again I still have my hearing. The Panny is one of the worst audio components I've ever heard and I've heard a few. Enjoy.
Sorry Eddie but you know me :-). Having listened to the Panny and HK's side by side with good speakers I find it inconceivable that anyone thinks that the Panny sounds good. Maybe for HT where everything sounds bad anyway but for 2 channel listening which is what I did the bulk of my demo with, the Panny's performance was apalling. The kids who worked at the store (having heard this gear a lot) were surprised at just how wide the gulf was between the HK's and the Panny. Honestly, my Cambridge CD740's sound better balanced, then again they sound very good indeed. Nonetheless I hope all who own their gear regardless of what it is get enjoyment from it. After all that is what the hobby is about (at least partially).
Anybody who's done this for awhile has at times regretted a purchase or felt anxious about an impending transaction.
I think for some audiophile's the pursuit of "the absolute sound" becomes more about the acquisition than the music and at some point becomes more obsession than hobby. At that point I'm not sure if it is enjoyable or like smoking the next cigarette, just another act in an addictive cycle.
I have made equipment changes in the past that have left me unsatisfied for quite sometime until I rectified the situation. I have a very satisfying system now but like most of us I'm considering the next move. My new budget turntable arrives this week and I'm off to go pick up some records as soon as I'm finished with this post.
"Sorry Eddie but you know me :-). Having listened to the Panny and HK's side by side with good speakers I find it inconceivable that anyone thinks that the Panny sounds good. Maybe for HT where everything sounds bad anyway but for 2 channel listening which is what I did the bulk of my demo with, the Panny's performance was apalling. The kids who worked at the store (having heard this gear a lot) were surprised at just how wide the gulf was between the HK's and the Panny. Honestly, my Cambridge CD740's sound better balanced, then again they sound very good indeed. Nonetheless I hope all who own their gear regardless of what it is get enjoyment from it. After all that is what the hobby is about (at least partially)."
There was something wrong with that panasonic then, otherwise there is no way you could come to that conclusion.
I would have made the same supposition if I weren't already very familiar with Art's extremely fastidious eardrums, coupled with his longstanding skepticism of digital amplification, as well as his conventional skepticism of anything with a "Panasonic" nameplate and at such a low pricepoint.
In other words, I honestly believe that Art honestly believes that he is hearing what he says he is hearing.
Wrong answer Paul they had two of them and they both sounded equally awful.
Eddie, I have no idea what you are talking about relative to my "skepticism of anything with the Panasonic nameplate". My bedroom tv is a Panasonic and I generally believe that they build good value electronics. Their plasma and direct view HDTV's are particularly good. Their LCD rear projection TV not so good. Their digital receiver real bad, just my opinion.
Also don't undestand your statement about my skepticism around digital amplification. I'm not skeptical I just hadn't heard a good one until I heard the Sony. Also curious to hear the HK's.
I'm not the only one to draw this conclusion I have several friends in audio who have followed threads like this and have listened to the Panny (may have been the model before) and the JVC hybrid and have come to a similar conclusion as mine. They just aren't very good.
I have no doubt that the technology will mature and get better but for now it's about as good as listening to the first cd players.
You're right on the specifics, I guess my overall gist is that if I could disguise the Panny inside the casing of say a Denon, HK, or Arcam you'd probably be far more forgiving of it.
Also if you remember, I brought up the possibility of trying out a digital receiver many many months ago long before I actually went ahead and ordered the Panny and you were already warning me away from them without mentioning if you had ever listened to one yourself.
So I think that you might not have approached the Panny in that store with a very open mind, which is why I still would bet money that if you ever took a blind ABX test of it versus say the Yammie 657 or HK 335 the results would probably surprise you very much.
In short, I have read about far too many owners of much higher-priced analog gear raving about the Panny not to have serious doubts about your unusually strident comments about it, such as:
"Having listened to the Panny and HK's side by side with good speakers I find it inconceivable that anyone thinks that the Panny sounds good. Maybe for HT where everything sounds bad anyway but for 2 channel listening which is what I did the bulk of my demo with, the Panny's performance was apalling."
"I felt that it was a very poor performer. In fact I've never heard worse."
Come on Art, you have to admit that such hyperbolic statements are very out of character for you...these are the kinds of things I'd expect MYSELF to say, lol!
Anonymous
Posted on
Art is wacked! My boss owns Rotel separates and even he was impressed when he came over today.
"You're right on the specifics, I guess my overall gist is that if I could disguise the Panny inside the casing of say a Denon, HK, or Arcam you'd probably be far more forgiving of it."
You're wrong. Bad sound is bad sound even if it says Krell.
So I think that you might not have approached the Panny in that store with a very open mind, which is why I still would bet money that if you ever took a blind ABX test of it versus say the Yammie 657 or HK 335 the results would probably surprise you very much.
You're wrong.
"In short, I have read about far too many owners of much higher-priced analog gear raving about the Panny not to have serious doubts about your unusually strident comments about it"
I say it as I hear it regardless of the fallout.
"I felt that it was a very poor performer. In fact I've never heard worse."
You're right. I forgot to include Yorx and Lloyds.
"Come on Art, you have to admit that such hyperbolic statements are very out of character for you"
You're right, then again I rarely hear a component that bad.
"My boss owns Rotel separates and even he was impressed when he came over today."