JVC RX-ES1sl

mcgsxr · « **Reply #320 on:** 21 Sep 2004, 01:00 am »

Not to turn this into a Teac thread...

But, the A-L700P (the 3 channel Tripath based amp in question) does have a gain pot per channel, that can be used as a make-shift volume control - BUT the quality of these items is suspect. My comments in my thread (Teac Tripath - thoughts to date) speak of a shift tonally with these gain pots not fully on, and they are routinely removed during modding.

I know that Wayne pulled that whole board, and others, while poking around the one he is modding for me...

But, well worth the investment, and I might want a 3rd if it does not appeal to you....

Mark in Canada

ixeo · « **Reply #321 on:** 23 Sep 2004, 06:58 pm »

hi, new here. looking for an integrated amp to drive some bookshelves (stereo only) and a friend told me to look into the JVC RX-ES1SL/JVC RX-F10.

i looked at the specs and my main concern is this ->
100 W per channel, min. RMS, both channels
driven into 8 ohms ; at 1 kHz with no more than
10% total harmonic distortion.

isn't that like.. awful? my old amp, a technics x101 from the 80s has
40 W per channel 8 ohms ;, THD @ 1kHz < 1%

im not a real techie guy but afaik the lower the THD the better, after all the D stands for distortion and we dont really want that..anybody here did measurements etc.? i'm sorry if i brought up a topic that has been discussed before but i searched for THD to no avail. kindly enlighten me.

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #322 on:** 23 Sep 2004, 07:06 pm »

Hey ixeo. I think the bottom line is that you can't hear that distortion - at all. People try to play numbers games these days. The receiver has excellent sonics for the money. I would suggest you go and read all the negative remarks that were made about the JVC. They are valid - this amp isn't some giant killer that slays $2000 amps. But IMO, you can't do better for the same money, maybe even double or triple (including the used market.) Right now on the US side of ebay, I think some seller's selling the es1sl for $149!!

ixeo · « **Reply #323 on:** 23 Sep 2004, 07:17 pm »

Quote from: ooheadsoo

Hey ixeo. I think the bottom line is that you can't hear that distortion - at all. People try to play numbers games these days. The receiver has excellent sonics for the money. I would suggest you go and read all the negative remarks that were made about the JVC. They are valid - this amp isn't some giant killer that slays $2000 amps. But IMO, you can't do better for the same money, maybe even double or triple (including the used market.) Right now on the US side of ebay, I think some seller's selling the es1sl for $149!!

possible, but 10% is awfully high when the rest of the market (of integrated amps) are going at below 1%. and 10% is a really big difference in the audio world (IMO). one may not notice 1% in change, but 10% i bet they do..since they notice change when replacing power cables, interconnects etc.

oh and thanks for recommending me the jvc

being a poor student and all, better to find out for sure before getitng one!

EDIT: 5:20am now, i'll ask more questions after i read all 33 pages of this thread and the 30 odd pages of the other F10 thread..

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #324 on:** 23 Sep 2004, 07:21 pm »

I don't think the distortion is an issue for anyone who has actually heard the unit. Not at all.

Dmason · « **Reply #325 on:** 23 Sep 2004, 07:32 pm »

Two things to be considered:

--Digital amps are being measured by conventional test parameters; this doesn't tell the true story, and I believe somehow that newer and more appropriate methodologies need to be explored. - all "digital" tend to measure terribly on a bench. When tested with ears, using music as a substitute to sine waves, the result is different. Especially with the JVC.

--At normal in-room listening volumes, only the first five-ten watts likely are being used. These do not suck in the least.

I personally have found that as you increase the overall quality of the driver(s) being used, so does the sound quality increase. The JVC readily responds to changes, tweaks and upgrades, a sign of a "good" amplifier.

8thnerve · « **Reply #326 on:** 23 Sep 2004, 09:31 pm »

Quote from: ixeo

hi, new here. looking for an integrated amp to drive some bookshelves (stereo only) and a friend told me to look into the JVC RX-ES1SL/JVC RX-F10.

i looked at the specs and my main concern is this ->
100 W per channel, min. RMS, both channels
driven into 8 ohms ; at 1 kHz with no more than
10% total harmonic distortion.

isn't that like.. awful? my old amp, a technics x101 from the 80s has
40 W per channel 8 ohms ;, THD @ 1kHz < 1%

im not a real techie guy but afaik the lower t ...

Many mass market digital amp technologies use the spec that give the highest power rating. Many companies will show this number, even Tripath. For instance:

"Uncompromised Sound Quality" typically:
0.03% THD+N @ 200W 4Ω
0.03% IHF-IM @ 30W 4Ω
High Power:
400W @ 4Ω, 10.0% THD+N
1000W @ 4Ω, bridged outputs

So expect actual USEABLE power to be more in the 50 watt neighborhood for that amp in particular. You would CERTAINLY hear 10% THD, any of us would, but most users don't keep turning up the volume when the sound starts distorting wildly. Just don't expect to get anywhere near their "rated output".

ixeo · « **Reply #327 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 05:52 am »

okay i read all 33 pages here.

assuming if i run analog IN to the ES1SL, the signal will be converted from analog to digital and back to analog again, then to the speakers. is that correct?

and if i run digital into the ES1SL, it will be decoded then send out to the speakers in "direct" mode, right?

so i am assuming with the above scenario, in the event the signal is analog in, converted to digital and back to analog, then there is where the <10% THD comes in, since the signal is getting changed back and forth = bad.

someone do correct me if i'm wrong..but thats what i understand so far... source will be a computer.. running either analog or spdif/co-ax...depending on whats better..for stereo use.. pairing with a b&w dm303 or an aegis evo one

Jay S · « **Reply #328 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 06:09 am »

don't get hung up on the distortion measurements or the connotation about whether distortion is good or bad. tube amps have lousy distortion measurements but can sound simply divine. SS amps have low distortion ratings but can sound really bad nonetheless. i think even vs odd order distortion harmonics is part of it but another question is if we are measuring the right things.

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #329 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 06:09 am »

No, what you're describing is only true on the panasonics digital receivers, not the JVC. The digital part is describing the switching of transistors, not the signal. Most people are saying that the analog in on the JVC sounds far superior to the digital in. Everyone says that the analog in on the Panasonic sounds

I'm with Jay S. Don't getting hung up on that distortion figure. It doesn't mean anything at all as far as I'm concerned.

ixeo · « **Reply #330 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 07:07 am »

fair enough. cause at the moment i have a choice between this and the integrated amp.. i guess to put it in a way.. digital audio is something new to me ..and trying to learn as much as i can before making a purchase.

http://www.puredigitalaudio.org/glossary/index.shtml
help me out here..the JVC is a D2D+ or an A2D? im assuming an A2D since you guys are calling it a hybrid.

so if it is an A2D

"These devices are inherently impure because the digital input or source signal must be converted to analog before it can be output or amplified digitally."

before anybody misunderstand me, i'm trying to learn the device before i buy it, and i'm not doubting its capabilities.

Jay S · « **Reply #331 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 07:36 am »

A2D has the disadvantage of having an A-D conversion step but what complicates these discussions is that the most important factor is the implementation of the technology within the audio component.

That said, a superficial lay-man assessment of theoretical technical limitations could be misleading, all else being equal, since we don't know the details of either the science of the technology. My digital amp uses iCEpower technology. There are 2 versions of iCEpower - digital and analog. You would think that digital would sound better than analog but it doesn't -- the high end iCEpower amps use analog.

ixeo · « **Reply #332 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 08:22 am »

Quote from: Jay S

A2D has the disadvantage of having an A-D conversion step but what complicates these discussions is that the most important factor is the implementation of the technology within the audio component.

That said, a superficial lay-man assessment of theoretical technical limitations could be misleading, all else being equal, since we don't know the details of either the science of the technology. My digital amp uses iCEpower technology. There are 2 versions of iCEpower - digital and analog. You would th ...

wait, just to clear matters up

PC -> Analog out -> JVC Analog in -> amplified -> speakers
so in this scenario there is no A-D or D-A convesion?
or does the JVC takes the analog in, converts it to digital format, amplifies in and converts it back to analog?

PC -> Digital Out -> JVC Digital in -> D-A conversion -> amplified -> speakers

i wrote out the sequence so its easier to depict whats going on..now someone correct me....

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #333 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 08:26 am »

We don't know if the JVC uses tripath technology - some think it is proprietary JVC tech, but if it's like tripath, then there is no "digital" conversion. The digital tech in this case refers to the digital-like switching of transistors. It's an improvement to some of the inherent flaws of class D.

gary · « **Reply #334 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 10:00 am »

Quote from: ixeo

wait, just to clear matters up

PC -> Analog out -> JVC Analog in -> amplified -> speakers
so in this scenario there is no A-D or D-A convesion?
or does the JVC takes the analog in, converts it to digital format, amplifies in and converts it back to analog?

PC -> Digital Out -> JVC Digital in -> D-A conversion -> amplified -> speakers

i wrote out the sequence so its easier to depict whats going on..now someone correct me....

If you use a regular analog input into the JVC, I'm almost certain there's an A -> D conversion that happens. I know this because when my turntable is connected that way it sounds dead and lifeless. If you use the DVD analog input and set the receiver to DVD/Multi it bypasses the DSP and therefore the A -> D conversion. When I run my turntable this way the magic is there again.

If you have just a decent cd player, the JVC DAC may not be much worse. In fact, I think it sounds pretty damn good. If you have a high-end source (or especially a turntable), it's better to stick with DVD/Multi.

Gary

gary · « **Reply #335 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 10:01 am »

Quote from: ixeo

wait, just to clear matters up

PC -> Analog out -> JVC Analog in -> amplified -> speakers
so in this scenario there is no A-D or D-A convesion?
or does the JVC takes the analog in, converts it to digital format, amplifies in and converts it back to analog?

PC -> Digital Out -> JVC Digital in -> D-A conversion -> amplified -> speakers

i wrote out the sequence so its easier to depict whats going on..now someone correct me....

If you use a regular analog input into the JVC, I'm almost certain there's an A -> D conversion that happens. I know this because when my turntable is connected that way it sounds dead and lifeless. If you use the DVD analog input and set the receiver to DVD/Multi it bypasses the DSP and therefore the A -> D conversion. When I run my turntable this way the magic is there again.

If you have just a decent cd player, the JVC DAC may not be much worse. In fact, I think it sounds pretty damn good. If you have a high-end source (or especially a turntable), it's better to stick with DVD/Multi.

Gary

ixeo · « **Reply #336 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 10:04 am »

Quote from: gary

If you use a regular analog input into the JVC, I'm almost certain there's an A -> D conversion that happens. I know this because when my turntable is connected that way it sounds dead and lifeless. If you use the DVD analog input and set the receiver to DVD/Multi it bypasses the DSP and therefore the A -> D conversion. When I run my turntable this way the magic is there again.

If you have just a decent cd player, the JVC DAC may not be much worse. In fact, I think it sounds pretty damn good. If yo ...

so what you're saying is that when i do this
PC -> Analog Out -> JVC DVD Analog In -> amplified -> speaker
there will be no conversion taking place.

curious, if its set to DVD/Multi mode, will it work with Stereo? stereo in -> 2.0 speaker setup.

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #337 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 04:24 pm »

Yes, in DVD/Multi mode it will work with 2.0 stereo, but it won't work with 2.1 stereo

Unfortunately, I've got a sub...

GUNN · « **Reply #338 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 07:38 pm »

Will you get 2.1 if you use the digital inputs? I haven't got a subwoofer yet..

driggity · « **Reply #339 on:** 28 Sep 2004, 04:03 pm »

I get 2.1 if I use the optical connection from my DVD player with redbook audio. And I can get 2.1 using SACDs and the DVD Multi input. Unfortunately I can only get 2.0 using redbook audio on the DVD Multi input. Does anyone know if there are universal players that output 2.1 sound on the multichannel output for redbook CDs?

And I just got the JVC and really like it so far. It doesn't even have much time on it yet so it seems like it will just get better. Admittedly I was coming from a very low-fi setup before but this is great for the money.