|
Bronze Member Username: JawPost Number: 21 Registered: Mar-06 | Yamaha turned the corner 2 years ago with their new amps starting with the RXV1200. I ran a RXV1300 with 4 ohm speaks in my "smaller" medium size room with a minimum of strain; the brightness plague is completely gone while the sound was smooth, balanced and punchy. No, they are not rated to drive 4 ohms in the Louvre. The new RXV2600: http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=1486&page_n umber=6 http://www.cnet.com/Yamaha_RX_V2600/4505-6466_7-31642004.html?subj=Yam aha+RX-V2600&tag=feed&part=ecoustics-cnet http://www.audioholics.com/productreviews/avhardware/YamahaRXV2600receiver1.php |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4282 Registered: Mar-05 | Funny, I was just in Tweeter yesterday listening to speakers, then decided to do a couple of quick comparisons of their AVRs: Pioneer Elite, Denon, Yamaha. Maybe I should've gotten someone to blind-test me, but I could've sworn the Pioneer Elite did sound fuller and more pleasing for 2-channel music especially at high volumes. Not a night and day difference mind you, and the Yamaha (2600) and Denon (2807, 2105, 3806) didn't sound "BRIGHT" as is sometimes said of their entry level models. Just kind of "blah." |
|
Bronze Member Username: JawPost Number: 22 Registered: Mar-06 | Eds, we know predetermined brand bias is a big part of it. And, I agree, "breaking a component in or the component breaking you in" is a part of it. So, showroom auditions are a tough go. Spin your credit card on a rxv2600 or rxv1600 and live with one in your system, room acoustics, and many listening moods for a week; then take it back. Your impressions might now be better served. Yamaha now makes some great AVR's with maybe the best QC in the business (please, no great debates on this subject). Myself, will probably be looking at either 1600 or 2600. I've still got a Parasound outboard 5-channel and can use the Yamaha as a feature-current(oxymoron) pre/pro; their pre/pro has also been reivewed favorably. Then, will decide which amps sound best in my room. Either way, I should have it covered. FWIW, the 2600 and Denon 3806 were rated as equals http://www.cnet.com/Denon_AVR_3806_black/4505-6466_7-31559300.html Wonder if the silver sounds better than the black? |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4287 Registered: Mar-05 | LOL "predetermined brand bias" cuts both ways...what makes you so sure "Yamaha now makes some great AVR's with maybe the best QC in the business?" Your impressions seem to be based entirely on reading reviews, which is hardly any more reliable than the "predetermined brand bias" that you speak of. Until either of us does a blind listening test of these receivers, our opinions are just that...opinions. |
|
Bronze Member Username: JawPost Number: 23 Registered: Mar-06 | Still not a believer. Reviews are a good place to start down the road of opinions. As I recall, they are constantly cited as reference. No, said I lived with a predecessor in my system; have you? The showroom floor is the ideal environment to determine if it sounds blah. Blind Tests are much too stressful for common folk, anyways. Yes, no intention to be an I Gotcha' post. Ahem, in my opinion, Yamahas make great AVR's and have the best quality control in the business which is why they are getting great reviews by the reviewers and their opinions. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4288 Registered: Mar-05 | heh well how many of those reviewers giving the Yammies glowing reviews have really "lived with" the products they reviw for more than a few days at most? How do you know the reviewers are also not pushing the business agenda of their publications, which often carry lots of lucrative advertising by the same manufacturers whose products they choose to review? Most of those reviews spend 90% of their print gushing about gadget-geek features, DSPs and connections anyways...not real high on my priority list and not real confidence-building in terms of the reviewer's discernment. As for "the best QC in the business"---the only time I'd take that assertion seriously is if it came from an audio dealer or two that I've known for some time and who carries a range of different receivers. |
|
Bronze Member Username: JawPost Number: 24 Registered: Mar-06 | Like you said and I admitted, it must be, then, just a matter of opinion and the same would apply to Denon, Marantz, Outlaw, Panasonic and everybody else. Yes, all these angles and issues have been discussed before with little resolution. Maybe, it's just too much of a grey area. Que sera, sera. |
|
Bronze Member Username: JethroLansing, Mi Post Number: 99 Registered: Jan-06 | Grey areas don't exist if you listen for yourself. You're bound to "hear" differences. For me, the pioneer elite is more musical and fuller sounding than the 2600 and 3806. But this was an isolated test done in a showroom. The pioneer was a PE74 and was $1500, whereas the denon and yamaha were $300 less. I've learned from reading reviews and dinking around on forums that everything is subjective. I don't think its a conspiracy or anything like that, but i do believe that some companies like denon and yamaha get "better" reviews by some publications and internet sites because they will make more money in the process. This is just my parnoid delusional thought process, not to be taken seriously, just listen and be the judge. Don't let stereophile or ecoustics be your ears. |