$200 rcvr beats $11k separates

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 105970 times.

TheChairGuy

Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #100 on: 27 Apr 2011, 03:23 pm »
Folks - please keep some civility in this thread - it has wandered into nasty territory from time-to-time in this now multi-page opus.

Let all be heard on the issue, please and debate it's merits - not belittle the participant(s)

Thx, John / co-Fac, Critic's Circle

wushuliu

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3301
  • “Forget it, Jake. It’s Internet-town.”
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #101 on: 27 Apr 2011, 03:33 pm »
I, for one, am rooting for the Pioneer!

cloudbaseracer

Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #102 on: 27 Apr 2011, 05:25 pm »
This is exactly why I haven't posted a full review yet.  Everyone wants to jump the gun to be first in line to flame the unwary.   

My question on the Nak was simply because that is what you had mentioned in a previous post.  I am excited about the Pioneer and in no way plan on flaming you.  I was simply looking to see what you were comparing against.

I have Geddes speakers on order and believe the man is intelligent enough to design a good system.  If you are in agreement with the OP then all the better.

Please let us know your thoughts when you feel it is appropriate.

trackball02

Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #103 on: 27 Apr 2011, 07:30 pm »
Do the current Pioneer receivers also have a similar amplifier design as the older models in this discussion. Would the results be similar if I buy a new one at Best Buy?

cloudbaseracer

Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #104 on: 27 Apr 2011, 07:46 pm »
Trackball02,

That has been a lot of the discussion of this thread and no-one seems to really know the answer to that question.  I have tried but cannot get confirmation one way or the other.

I think it is the tricky marketing department at Pioneer using flashy naming architectures.

wushuliu

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3301
  • “Forget it, Jake. It’s Internet-town.”
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #105 on: 27 Apr 2011, 07:48 pm »
Do the current Pioneer receivers also have a similar amplifier design as the older models in this discussion. Would the results be similar if I buy a new one at Best Buy?

This has been discussed earlier in the thread. There's no definitive source explaining which recent models use which topology. Geddes has personally used the 912 and the 919. I would assume the -19 models to all use the same chip, but beyond that it's not clear. Amazon has a chart for all the -19 models if you look one of them them up.

wushuliu

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3301
  • “Forget it, Jake. It’s Internet-town.”
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #106 on: 27 Apr 2011, 07:50 pm »
Trackball02,

That has been a lot of the discussion of this thread and no-one seems to really know the answer to that question.  I have tried but cannot get confirmation one way or the other.

I think it is the tricky marketing department at Pioneer using flashy naming architectures.

A good resource would probably be a Pioneer Authorized repair center technician. Hmm...
« Last Edit: 27 Apr 2011, 08:59 pm by wushuliu »

BobRex

Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #107 on: 27 Apr 2011, 08:49 pm »
Ummm, just to pick on you.... Why would a Panasonic tech know anything about a Pioneer product?  :duh:

Freudian slip?

wushuliu

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3301
  • “Forget it, Jake. It’s Internet-town.”
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #108 on: 27 Apr 2011, 09:00 pm »
Ummm, just to pick on you.... Why would a Panasonic tech know anything about a Pioneer product?  :duh:

Freudian slip?

oops, yeah. corrected. :D I've owned a lot of Panasonic gear.

fredgarvin

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1226
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #109 on: 27 Apr 2011, 09:23 pm »
oops, yeah. corrected. :D I've owned a lot of Panasonic gear.
I remember when the Panny xr sries was introduced and some people were very loud about their skepticism concerning it's 'above price' sound and surpassing a lot of expensive ht amps and processors.

cloudbaseracer

Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #110 on: 27 Apr 2011, 09:32 pm »
I have said XR-700 from Panasonic currently. Too bad it does not have a pre-amp out to compare against the Pioneer 919 if I go that way.


wushuliu

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3301
  • “Forget it, Jake. It’s Internet-town.”
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #111 on: 28 Apr 2011, 02:35 am »
I had the Panny XR55 for a time and it did sound very good but ultimately fatiguing, just a touch too much digititis but then that was when i knew next to nothing about audio so other factors may have played a part.

Anyhoos not gonna lie it would be wonderfully poetic if I ended up falling for one of these Pioneers seeing as how I started my audio journey with a HT receiver. And the GF would be happy. OH would she be happy...

Letitroll98

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 4037
  • Too loud is just right
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #112 on: 28 Apr 2011, 03:34 am »
My question on the Nak was simply because that is what you had mentioned in a previous post.  I am excited about the Pioneer and in no way plan on flaming you.  I was simply looking to see what you were comparing against.

I have Geddes speakers on order and believe the man is intelligent enough to design a good system.  If you are in agreement with the OP then all the better.

Please let us know your thoughts when you feel it is appropriate.

Sorry sir, I was jabbing at my friend werd, I'm sure he was bantering at me, I should have separated my reply to you with a paragraph.  For those who don't recall, cloudbaseracer is the one we have to thank for resurrecting this thread and perhaps revamping my system, maybe yours. 

For those interested in how this works, seems like a good time to revisit some stuff posted recently here, Occam posted a couple of links to where Geddes explains a bit of the theory and test procedures, however I think they should be read in chronological order so rather than quote him, I'll reverse the order he posted them:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/109147-geddes-distortion-measurements.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/151376-homster-how-i-learned-how-fix-horn-5.html
You need to read through four or five pages of posts so block out a few minutes.  I'll get on my high horse here and express my opinion that anyone commenting without reading these threads should reconsider, but I'm old and ornery.  You may not agree, but you should understand what the man is saying.
 
jhm posted a list of receivers that have the PAC011A chip amp the 912 uses, the newer products (919 and above) use the same topology with I believe a different chip, not sure how different they might be but the specs are slightly different.  The current production and I think last years, again I'm only recalling the series, but 920 and above, have way different specs so could be completely different.  Here's his list:

owner and service manuals can be found at:

http://www.hifiengine.com/

Looks like the PAC011A amplifier modules are also used in these models:

Pioneer VSX-D209
Pioneer VSX-D409
Pioneer VSX-D414
Pioneer VSX-D509
Pioneer VSX-D510
Pioneer VSX-D511
Pioneer VSX-D514
Pioneer VSX-D710
Pioneer VSX-D712
Pioneer VSX-D714
Pioneer VSX-D810
Pioneer VSX-D811
Pioneer VSX-D812
Pioneer VSX-D814
Pioneer VSX-D912

wushuliu

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3301
  • “Forget it, Jake. It’s Internet-town.”
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #113 on: 30 Apr 2011, 02:48 am »
A very quick update, receiver arrived today and installed tonight.  I don't want to draw any conclusions this early, nothings been switched back for comparison, but I gotta say, I'm pretty impressed.  Cold out of the box it sounded pretty good, and after a few hours seems to be trouncing my separates in clarity with instruments and voices sounding more real.  I have a few reservations and need way more time, but from expecting a cold, lifeless, brittle sound at startup, I'm quite frankly stunned.  Certainly worth the $100.

obligatory 'any updates?' poke.

Letitroll98

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 4037
  • Too loud is just right
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #114 on: 30 Apr 2011, 12:29 pm »
obligatory 'any updates?' poke.

Yeah, the internal DAC sucks.  I thought wow, I could really make this whole thing very simple and run the Oppo into the receiver, well, not so much.  I need to actually download and read the manual to see if there is a better input or setting or something, but grabbing the Monster 1000 and plugging it into the first thing that said digital input resulted in a flat, lifeless sound with all the detail squashed.

I also have a problem with what might be high frequency emphasis.  I want to say it that way cause there's nothing harsh at all here, just more HF than I'm used to.  So far the amp seems to give you whatever you feed it and I have very bright sounding cables installed, Tuan's Sweet Spot Reveal, that "reveal" every bit of detail and musical texture, along with every single bit of both high and low frequency info you could want or need.  So I put some more "relaxed" cables in, Zu Wylde, which did tame the HF, but took away the glorious low level detail that makes this amp so engaging.  This is similar to what the internal DAC did, lowered the HF output but ruined the sound.  So back in go the SSR's and the amp goes back to sounding wonderful.  Caveat with all of the above, all just preliminary getting used to the amp (receiver) and it all may be subject to a change of opinion, but it's what I hear so far.

Speaking of which, how does it sound?  (Isn't that what you asked a while ago, hmmm)  Anyway, rather like a class A amp, clean and detailed.  I can only guess that it has to do with the low switching distortion, which would be the thing common to both, and with single ended tube amps.  Why do SET's sound so great despite their ostensibly horrible standard specs?  Low crossover distortion maybe.  Please forgive (and correct) any technical gaffes in my description, I understand this to be a reduction of the distortion at the zero crossing point in class AB push pull amps.  The end result is extraordinary revelation of low level details, brilliantly fast attack with fully resonant decay.  Everything is more easily and clearly heard, with bad recordings sound worse and good recordings sounding better.  With the work week over I'll have more time to compare and switch things around throughout the weekend.

Another short note, the OP had some reservations about ultimate output power when driven hard, in my albeit small listening room I cranked it up as high as I would want to hear anything and heard no compression.  In fact the amp sounds very dynamic at all listening levels, something I wasn't expecting with a receiver and it's puny power supply compared to my big amp.

I was going to give a one paragraph reply.  :lol:   

rollo

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 4146
  • Rollo Audio Where Home demo rules
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #115 on: 30 Apr 2011, 02:13 pm »
letitroll98, interesting so far keep it going. Now the SET thing. No phase splitiing, no feedback and nice even order distortion make it happen.  :thumb:. If you ever have a chance to listen to a GM70 based SET, bring your checkbook. :P. Well back on subject.


charles

wushuliu

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3301
  • “Forget it, Jake. It’s Internet-town.”
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #116 on: 30 Apr 2011, 07:05 pm »
As an FYI, I found some internal pics of some of the different recent models and the latest -20 series does appear to use discrete chips for each channel. The -17, -18, and -19s only use a couple of chips and are listed as using the 'hybrid' amp technology along with the 912. An exception is the 819 which does use discrete chips (and says so on Pioneer site). There may be other exceptions in the lower models (that start with 4,5, and 8 ) so may want to check Pioneer site to be sure and see if it says discrete or hybrid amplification (Pioneer.eu seems more informative than US site).

The more recent hybrid models do not use the exact same chip as the 912, but since Earl is using the 919 I assume he tested those and found the performance to be on par.

Some pics on this site

http://www.hifi-regler.de/testberichte/pioneer/pioneer_av-receiver_2009_1.php

wilsynet

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1213
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #117 on: 1 May 2011, 12:16 am »
Looking at the 2011 models, the Pioneer VSX-1021, VSX-921, VSX-821, and VSX-521, I cannot find any reference to hybrid amp technology.  I assume Pioneer is no longer making amplifiers of this type, is that right?

wushuliu

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3301
  • “Forget it, Jake. It’s Internet-town.”
Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #118 on: 1 May 2011, 01:08 am »
Looking at the 2011 models, the Pioneer VSX-1021, VSX-921, VSX-821, and VSX-521, I cannot find any reference to hybrid amp technology.  I assume Pioneer is no longer making amplifiers of this type, is that right?

No one knows for sure exactly what Pioneer is and is not using for these amps - they're not telling. However based on the pics I've seen and the specs on the Pioneer site it's best to stick to the -19 and older models until someone proves otherwise.

ThomDP

Re: $200 rcvr beats $11k separates
« Reply #119 on: 1 May 2011, 01:49 am »
This video is on the Pioneer UK website. They talk about their recievers use of ICE amps @1:22.


http://www.pioneer.eu/uk/page/products/av-receiver/home.html