[RnB180]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ooheadsoo Don't worry about what RnB is saying, he's merely behind the times. Audiocircle.com is another resource on panny and jvc digital receivers. The JVC are tripath like in that they are modifications to class d amps but they really sound good as well. I got rid of near $1000 of amplification for the JVC. The JVC is source sensitive while the Pannies are meant to be fed a digital input.

You my be correct, havent kept up with budget components for a couple of years. I thought the main advantage of digital amplification was the temperature. Since I received my set up all equipment I looked at are not sold in big chain stores. I restrict my store selection to dedicated home theater shops

looking at NAD, Marantz, Rotel, Arcam, and McIntosh..

Quote:

I have 6 ohm speakers and these new Panasonic units (with an upgraded power cord & a high quality transport) can compete with real stereo gear (kilobuck gear that would leave anything else mentioned in this thread in the dust).

Some of you guys are comparing this panny to 4 digit price receivers? what receivers are you comparing them too? Thats a VERY bold statement.

I seriously doubt a $300 panny will hold up to a $1300 Rotel. Thats just too good to be true, what speakers are you comaring them too? because kilo buck receivers and amps can drive Martin Logans and I seriously doubt the panny can.

I know that the brands Im stating are far out of his budget, but you shouldnt be compairng a $300 surround receiver to a $1000 receiver or pre amp amp combo.

once again what kind of speakers are you listening to? I want to check out this panny.

 

[RnB180]

Quote:

Originally Posted by swiego I have no idea why RnB would be suggesting $900 receivers when your budget is what it is.

He said he potentially could increase his budget, so I recommended some HK's or denon.

 

[Unclewai]

$$ doesn't mean anything. 4 digit price receivers will give you a sturdier built, more and better quality input/out options. However, you can't compare a $$$ analog receiver with a digital receiver, they simply are different beasts. I bought one of those Sonic Impact T-amp, it looks like a toy and cost like a toy, but the thing can amplify clear and loud. That little thing convinced me digital amplification is the future.

And from the OP's budget, I don't think there's any better way to spend his bucks than to buy one of the JVC or Pioneer digital receivers.
For speakers, $200 is not a good range to purchase. $300ish will give you more room to get good used deals from A-gon.

 

[RnB180]

you mean one of those?

anyhow, I think pennylane is better off asking this question in
www.hometheaterforum.com, www.avsforum.com and www.hometheaterspot.com

I think with a few exceptions in this particular forum, not many will be able to help you with home theater advice. the links I posted above are filled with a wealth of information that serve you better.

 

[swiego]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RnB180 Some of you guys are comparing this panny to 4 digit price receivers? what receivers are you comparing them too? Thats a VERY bold statement. I seriously doubt a $300 panny will hold up to a $1300 Rotel. Thats just too good to be true, what speakers are you comaring them too? because kilo buck receivers and amps can drive Martin Logans and I seriously doubt the panny can. I know that the brands Im stating are far out of his budget, but you shouldnt be compairng a $300 surround receiver to a $1000 receiver or pre amp amp combo. once again what kind of speakers are you listening to? I want to check out this panny.

I can't speak for a $1,300 Rotel but several friends tell me that the Panasonic XR-series compares favorably with their Meridian active loudspeakers connected to G-series processors, so long as the XR50 is paired with detailed speakers. As others have said, digital amplification will change high-end audio, although I'm certain the "names" will continue to find ways to charge 4 or 5 figure pricetags for their amps, perhaps by making the cases very heavy and putting the word "Reference" on the front bezel.

What I want to know is when we'll get digital headphone amp sections

 

[soundboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by swiego What I want to know is when we'll get digital headphone amp sections

The current lineup of Panasonic portable CD players feature digital amps.

 

[RnB180]

Quote:

Originally Posted by swiego I can't speak for a $1,300 Rotel but several friends tell me that the Panasonic XR-series compares favorably with their Meridian active loudspeakers connected to G-series processors, so long as the XR50 is paired with detailed speakers. As others have said, digital amplification will change high-end audio, although I'm certain the "names" will continue to find ways to charge 4 or 5 figure pricetags for their amps, perhaps by making the cases very heavy and putting the word "Reference" on the front bezel. What I want to know is when we'll get digital headphone amp sections

You've got my attention.

are the xr 50s avaliable at local electronic stores, I want to listen. maybe buy one and hook it up to my Mirage speakers for a test drive, what is the distortion rate of the panny. and what are the actual watts output all channels driven? would this be considered a high current receiver?
Harmon Kardon has their own line of digital surround receivers but its not as popular are as their normal line. They way you speak of this receiver you make it sound like its light years above my HK.



What kind of binding posts does it use?

 

[ooheadsoo]

Evidence stating (IMO) very conclusively that the RX-F10 can indeed drive HARD to drive speakers: http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/v...&highlight=jvc

And here is JVC vs. Panny.
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/v...&highlight=jvc

This stuff is definitely not bad and at bottom of the barrel prices. I'm thoroughly enjoying my JVC. I will probably not trade it for anything under $2000 or until I build an AKSA 55n+ power amp.

 

[dreamnid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RnB180 speakers are analog by nature, your speaker cabling is analog cabling the output plugs on the back of your receiver is analog. even if your amp is a digital amp. Am I missing something here?

Actually, the signal coming out of the speakers is still digital. It's basically a PWM signal that is running a lot faster than 20 KHz so that your speakers can't respond fast enough to the signal and will basically take the average of the burst widths.

I also have the Sonic T-Amp and it is pretty good considering it is only $30. I'm tempted to hook it up to an oscilloscope to confirm the above paragraph

Quote:

Originally Posted by RnB180 What kind of binding posts does it use?

I recall reading complaints about the accessiblity of the binding posts (too close to other components or something like that). I think they are normal five way binding posts (but don't quote me on that).

 

[BigD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ooheadsoo This stuff is definitely not bad and at bottom of the barrel prices. I'm thoroughly enjoying my JVC. I will probably not trade it for anything under $2000 or until I build an AKSA 55n+ power amp.

Although I have no direct experience with panny/jvc receivers, these digiamps are widely accepted and raved around the av world. Many here like panny/jvc, because they're very good for the price as ooheadsoo points out. RnB, I don't think Pennylane is asking for $2000+ int-amp on this thread. But mo' like $200 amp where panny/jvc would be considered seriously.

 

[lini]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamnid Actually, the signal coming out of the speakers is still digital.

Sorry, but no, it isn't - or at least I haven't seen any digital amp yet that would come without a filtering stage (usually caps or coils) for smoothing the output back to an analogue signal.

Greetings from Hannover!

Manfred / lini

 

[dreamnid]

Well, I'll admit I don't have much experience in the area.

We were taught the differences between amp classes a couple weeks back and was told it just outputs a PWM signal. Now I don't know if an audio class D would be different from a regular class D amp but I don't see why you want something to "smooth" the PWM signal into a analog signal. What's the reasoning behind a filter stage if that is the case?

 

[RYCeT]

I got a panny xr-50 connected to Paradigm Titans and Atoms, It drive them a lot better than Denon 3805 which I've auditioned from my local store. The Denon sure looks better and have more bells and whistles though. At that time, I was really hoping that the Denon will drive them better so I can justify spending the money for it (XR 50 $250 vs Denon 3805 $800) Fast forward today, Panny XR50 is still at my house

 

[RnB180]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RYCeT I got a panny xr-50 connected to Paradigm Titans and Atoms, It drive them a lot better than Denon 3805 which I've auditioned from my local store. The Denon sure looks better and have more bells and whistles though. At that time, I was really hoping that the Denon will drive them better so I can justify spending the money for it (XR 50 $250 vs Denon 3805 $800) Fast forward today, Panny XR50 is still at my house

how about sound quality, I know Denons are known for musicality and good sound for the price, the panasonics Ive listened to sound like trash.

In your experience how does the panny sound musically?

 

[RnB180]

I just did some research with the panny xr 50... you guys are kidding me...

it has a THD of .09% and rates all its power at 6 ohms in the fine print. A trick used by a lot of manufaturers to list higher wattage numbers on the box.




the receiver uses spring clips, two binding posts for L/R and spring clips for everything else... no home theater enthusiast, audiophile in his right mind uses spring clips and a $250 receiver. my speaker cabling gauge wont even fit into the back of the panny. Spring clips are used one the lowest of lowest end receivers, its the crappiest cheapest connection you can use. Just because someone decides to hook up meridian speakers to a receiver with spring clips doesnt mean that receiver is better then $1000+ amps out there
meridian speakers run a few grand per pair.. and you are going to hook them up to a $250 spring clip receiver with no seperate amp?

this is a pic of the back of my current receiver, I wouldnt even be able to use these cables on that panny. even if I removed the bananas, the wiring still wont fit in those spring clips.

even if I were to use the panny Id have to down grade everything. You are telling the panny is better then a denon 3805? the 3805 is a $1200 model BTW, not $800... are you sure you are speaking of the same model number?

the 2805 runs for $899

The panny may be a good starter receiver but dont be comparing these things with pre amps, amps and receivers past the $1k mark. its not going to happen.

the 3805 was rated at about 90-100 watts or so (if my memory serves me correctly) 5 channels driven at 8 ohms maybe more, but listed at 120 watts x 7. the panny wont even come close to those numbers let alone have terminals made with small gauge plastic spring clips, I dont even think itd be able to support that much. spring clip designs are made for low current lower power, small gauge output.