JVC v. Pannie

wshuff · « **on:** 6 Apr 2005, 03:01 pm »

Hey Wayne... I know several others have compared the JVC vs. the Pannie but just wondered what your impression of them is vs. each other -seeing as you’re modding both. Thanks.

Wayne1 · « **Reply #1 on:** 6 Apr 2005, 04:30 pm »

Mods are STILL not finished on the JVC.

A lot depends on what you are planning to use the receiver for and what the rest of your system is made up of.

For HT the Panny is the out and out winner.

For direct digital input, I would go with the Panny.

For 2 channel with primary analog inputs, the JVC might be the one to go with.

So far, there is no one unit that does everything perfect

CornellAlum · « **Reply #2 on:** 6 Apr 2005, 06:40 pm »

Get a panny, have it modded, be happy

jswallac · « **Reply #3 on:** 6 Apr 2005, 07:33 pm »

I have owned both, and still own the JVC. I suppose that tells how I feel about the respective ranking. Neither have been modded, so my comments only apply to the stock units. For 2 channel analog inputs, no contest IMO. The JVC just sounds so much more musical. I am not even sure I would give the nod to the Panny for HT. Each seems to do a very respectable job with bullets, bombs, and all the other noise we love in our movies. The Panny seems a little to sterile to me in 2 channel music. Perhaps that is the "accuracy" others like. Quite possible a top modification such as what Wayne does improves this. I can only speak to what I hear with the stock units.

jswallac · « **Reply #4 on:** 6 Apr 2005, 07:34 pm »

Forgot to mention, if anybody wishes to copy and use my Avatar, please feel free!

gongos · « **Reply #5 on:** 6 Apr 2005, 08:32 pm »

I owned a stock F10 and a XR10. Kept the F10. The panny sounded lifeless. The F10 sounded as good, if not better, than my Teac Tripath and Response Audio modified Ming-Da preamp. Personally, for 2 channel I don't think it's even close, and I'm not that picky for HT.

brj · « **Reply #6 on:** 6 Apr 2005, 11:24 pm »

For those that have owned both a Panny and a JVC, you might want to specifically mention what speakers you were driving with them when making your comments. From everything I've read, each receiver tends to prefer a different type of speaker load. That can make all of the difference...

gongos · « **Reply #7 on:** 7 Apr 2005, 12:05 am »

SPeaker used - VMPS 626r's

Mudjock · « **Reply #8 on:** 7 Apr 2005, 03:33 pm »

I have used both the Panny XR-25 and JVC RX-ES1SL with Ellis 1801's and some DIY 2-way monitors. The short of it is that the JVC has stayed in my system - replacing (at least temporarily) a Continuum Audio Stage 200 WPC beast and Sim Audio Celeste pre.

Like many others, I think the JVC has a certain magic - maybe striking an ideal balance between warmth and detail. It is just easy to listen to with a variety of speakers. The Panny will sometimes wow me with the detail it can extract form a certain passage, but it can also irritate me. If I had voiced my speakers with the Panny rather than the JVC, I would have definitely padded down the tweeter a couple extra dB's or added more of a BBC dip.

Horizons · « **Reply #9 on:** 7 Apr 2005, 04:03 pm »

Speakers: Maggie 1.6QR

Tried the Panny 45 and now have the JVC F10. The Panny just can't drive inefficient 4 ohm speakers whereas the JVC F10 can. Plus, the JVC has a warmish tonal balance vs. the Panny which is more accurate but a little colder. The JVC sounds as good or better than many muli-kilobuck amps that I have tried.
All IMHO.

CornellAlum · « **Reply #10 on:** 7 Apr 2005, 04:16 pm »

I have to disagree, but what would the world be like if we didn't. The panny is extremely detailed, and will bring out the best, and also show you the worst parts of your system. If your system is lacking in one way or another, it will show, whatever component that may be. If you like warmer sound, get the panny modified, as it is heads and tails better than stock. I haven't heard the jvc.

fabaudio · « **Reply #11 on:** 7 Apr 2005, 04:25 pm »

Horizons, Gongos, Chairguy, Dmason et al
I echo your views.
Speakers I use- Von Schweikert VR 2's

mcgsxr · « **Reply #12 on:** 7 Apr 2005, 06:33 pm »

It all comes down the the ears I guess - I had the ES-1 JVC for a while, but found the stock Teac better, and a Bolder modded Teac best of all...

Probably just my ears, in my system etc - wish I had the $$ for some balanced power, but just bought a new house, and my wife is due for our second child this year...

All in good time!

jswallac · « **Reply #13 on:** 7 Apr 2005, 08:34 pm »

Speakers: Meadowlark Audio Kestrel2. A pretty reason load to drive with a 1st order crossover. Actually the one constant in my system. In the last year alone the speakers have seen 6 amps (both tube and solid state) a couple of differenct preamps (again both tube and SS) and a couple of different sources (yes, even one of those had a tube in it). The Meadowlarks have stood the test of time. Not sure the JVC will, but it is still here for now.

AphileEarlyAdopter · « **Reply #14 on:** 9 Apr 2005, 02:49 am »

The Panny is not able to drive all speakers very well. If there is too much peaks/dips in impedence then the Panny gives up. It sounds harsh in this case.
Otherwise, it does really fine, as long as the digital input is also very good. I dont think, I have a problem with 'fullness' in my system, even though the whole ground floor in my 1800sq ft home is interconnected - living, kitchen, family room etc. I never believed my Sonatinas can do such hard and tight bass (the SoundStage reviewer called its sound 'light') I place a lot of value in ChairGuy, Dmason's opinions but the sound of the Panny in my setup (w/ efficient Silverline Sonatina speakers) is so good that I am not at all tempted by the JVC and am only going to upgrade to a newer model of the Panny, probably the XR55.
After the Panny, other amps sound distorted, flabby and congested. Also, after I changed to the Zu Ash digital cable, I dont think I need power conditioning for the Panny. It is now connected directly to the wall. I gained a little bit of dynamics this way (vs connecting to my Blue circle MR1200). I just want to let everybody know that this jitter is really a big monster. Dont underestimate it. Reducing jitter, goes a long way in improving the sound of the system. After all this, the sound of the system is like watching the scenery through recently Windexed glass. Extreme clarity. The instruments are so well separated, it is almost uncanny. Again, if you do not have a topnotch DAC/CD player and have stable load of a speaker, the Panny is the way to go.

timbley · « **Reply #15 on:** 9 Apr 2005, 07:12 am »

With my Klipsch RF-7s, I've used the Panasonic XR25 and the XR50. I was highly impressed by both of them, thinking they sounded "cool", not cold, and very highly detailed, with solid imaging. I was overwhelmed by the detail at first. OTH, the Panny's didn't really pack a lot of punch. The RF-7 is a pretty tough load at some frequencies, so the bass wasn't all that fleshed out, although it was there, and quite strongly at the room modes. I even tried passive biamping with the 50's for a while, didn't do much.

More recently I tried a Behringer active crossover. This firmed the bass up and added clarity to the midrange. Didn't add a lot of oomph, but still a tremendous improvement, despite having to use the Panasonic's analog inputs.

Since the Behringer requires me to use analog outputs, and since the JVC is said to be better with analog sources and with tough impedance speakers, I decided to try the F10. Truely it does sound warmer, and seems to be filling out the bass much better. So far I prefer it to the Panasonic with my RF-7s and analog crossover source.

Last night I tried using 4 of the channels on the JVC to let each 10" mid-woofer have it's own amp, while the Panasonic ran the tweeters. This is not practical for long term use because it requires me to manually keep the volumes synchronized, and I don't like fussing with it all the time. But the bass and midrange sounded really, really good. Clear, full, smooth, lots of impact, with a sense of expansiveness. It brought me flashbacks of when I used to sit in the high end room at the hifi store in Silverdale, WA, and listen to the Wilson Grand Slamms and high end Theil speakers run by giant Krell, foundation cracking amplifiers. I'm not saying it sounded as good as those systems, but it reminded me of their sound. The Panny on the horn tweeter sounded a bit strange to me, although still good. I think it's too much of a different sound from the JVC to work really well together with it.

I plan on picking up another F10, (I can hardly wait till tomorrow!) and using both of them to run my RF-7s, with each F10 using 3 of it's channels to run a speaker. That way the volume control will keep them synched, and I'll be a happy camper!