[yo2tup2]

here's a subjective shootout between digital amps using reference quality speakers. http://www.stereomojo.com/SHOOTOUT2007INTEGRATEDS.htm

the SA-SR55 placed somewhere in the bottom.

 

[jrosenth]

I use one with some fostex, actually have used it with several pairs of fostex-based speakers (and some maggies) and it has slaughtered any mid-fi amp stuff. Really apparent with the fostex stuff.

It is very sensitive in that, for those who believe, a good digital cable (better cables) and power strip (naim recommended wiremold/wireworld thingy) made audible differences as did going using a jelly fish power cord (with adapter) and magnet wire speaker cables over any of the canare or even cardas stuff.

headphone jack is no good and analogue inputs aren't either - other than that I prefer it to some serious arcam and McIntosh stuff - not as "warm" but way more detailed (granted that's not side by side a/bing and knowing how little the panny costs causes me to "root" for it I'm sure).

Never heard the trends but if you want a remote and a sub out I can't imagine anything that comes close in that price range.

 

[Jon L]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yo2tup2 /img/forum/go_quote.gif here's a subjective shootout between digital amps using reference quality speakers. http://www.stereomojo.com/SHOOTOUT2007INTEGRATEDS.htm the SA-SR55 placed somewhere in the bottom.

Unfortunately, this shootout did NOT utilize Panny's digital input, only analogue input, basically bypassing Panny's raison d'être.

After this objection was raised, the author of this shootout did say he would try to do a followup using Panny's digital input, which I haven't seen yet.

Panny's not going to replace somebody's $5-10K reference tube monoblocks, but if you have good speakers that can't play loud with T-amps, Panny really is the only game in town.

Also realize that Panny doesn't really have much jitter suppression built-in. Once again, the quality of the digital signal input WILL determine whether one gets reference quality sound or not.

 

[spacemanspliff]

Oh it certainly should be considered the best receiver under $1000 for sure. Sorry to be a budget-phile and not have some higher end speakers. However, if you have the $$ for high end equipment then the Panny is a negligible cost item. In other words, go get one and try it already! Might just put a smile on your face.

 

[yo2tup2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L /img/forum/go_quote.gif Unfortunately, this shootout did NOT utilize Panny's digital input, only analogue input, basically bypassing Panny's raison d'être. After this objection was raised, the author of this shootout did say he would try to do a followup using Panny's digital input, which I haven't seen yet. Panny's not going to replace somebody's $5-10K reference tube monoblocks, but if you have good speakers that can't play loud with T-amps, Panny really is the only game in town. Also realize that Panny doesn't really have much jitter suppression built-in. Once again, the quality of the digital signal input WILL determine whether one gets reference quality sound or not.

point taken! i was trying to answer the op's question about if the panny's have any weaknesses and how it performs with "reference quality speakers. yes the panny has weaknesses and are not the end to all recievers like some reviewer may make it out to seem....but is an incredible value! i've actually been meaning to pick up one for a HT setup but haven't got around to it yet.

 

[Max F]

For those interested, my system would be considered budget, but you should come over cause it sounds pretty sweet!

Squeezebox 3 with linear PS --> Behringer DEQ2496 --> Panny XR55 --> Monitor Audio B4 + Parts Express Subwoofer (EQ with a Behringer FBD)

The DEQ2496 is an excellent compliment to the Panny as it is used as a digital EQ and no conversion of the digital signal to analog is made. I use the parametric EQ to bring down room nodes (bass peaks) and the graphic EQ for tweeking the sound. I like a BBC dip and some rolloff at the upper frequencies to deal more with the speakers and a hard room than to deal with any brightness in the Panny. The Panny really can pump out a lot of power and barely get hot! You do need to have speakers that are not difficult to drive though.

 

[infinitesymphony]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacemanspliff /img/forum/go_quote.gif However, if you have the $$ for high end equipment then the Panny is a negligible cost item.

Not exactly... I love assembling great systems on a budget, and I'm looking for deals even among high-end stuff. That $200 could be the difference between one generation of receivers and the next. I plan on making my next receiver my last big audio purchase for quite a while.

It's just a matter of temptation, I guess... Waiting for deals on high-end stuff takes a long time, and while it's rewarding, I could really use an upgrade right now. *shrug*

 

[tbonner1]

I am with you infinitesymphony. I love the challenge of finding little known products that produce outstanding sound for the money.

 

[VicAjax]

you're looking for multi-channel, right?

if not, you may want to check out the Onkyo A-9555. it's 100 watts/channel of class d power, and it seems to be getting rave reviews. i think it can be found for less than $600.

it came in 2nd (behind a 15-watt, single-input T-Amp) in stereo mojo's big digital amp face-off.

 

[infinitesymphony]

Yes, it has to be multi-channel. Otherwise, I'd probably go nuts and get a bunch of vintage receivers or separates and have crazy amounts of amplification (and wasted space) for cheap

. Or, I'd stick with my current integrated amp, which has been a huge overachiever.

I'm growing less and less inclined to trust publications' reviews of either super-budget or super-high-end equipment. Different people have different needs and preferences in an audio system. For example, some people are perfectly happy with the Sonic Impact T-Amp. However, it can't adequately drive some speakers, and to the speakers it does drive, it introduces a significant amount of distortion and clipping, especially as the volume is increased.

Almost every system has some particular weakness, so I was just curious about what differentiated these class D amplifiers from the common AB amps found in most equipment.

 

[wae5]

Sorry to bring this thread back from the dead but I'm listening to Diana Kroll on the RS2is using the Panasonic SA-XR55 receiver's HP out & in no way is this a second class ride.