The Panny with "high end" speakers?

jjb · « **Reply #40 on:** 3 Feb 2004, 02:55 am »

For quite some I been reading various postings regarding the Panny new reciever (XR something) and finally had to go to the Panosonic web site to see what its all about My jaw hit the floor, everybody must be drinking as I find it unbelievable that a $400 reciever can preformed as everyone describes. This thing looks like a Walmart special !!!!8)

JLM · « **Reply #41 on:** 3 Feb 2004, 03:10 am »

Yep, jjb that's our boy and the wonder of digital amplification coupled with Henry Ford's development of the assembly line. Sony has a digital receivers as well as combination DVD/receivers too.

And the next mind blower will be audio PCs that playback via the hard drive for more dynamic, jitter free output that compares with the best available players for much, much less using internet downloads. Dedicated audio PCs will be designed to be quiet and extremely convenient with full remote source menus. Early examples already exist with prices dropping in the past 6 months from $12,000 to $4,000. DIYers can do it for a grand. And these first ones still have analog output. Just wait for cheaper/better digital outputs feeding a modded Panny!!

Carlman · « **Reply #42 on:** 3 Feb 2004, 03:13 am »

I think the Panasonic is a steal for the price but, it hasn't bested anything I already had... not by a long shot.

I think a lot of the reviews are very glowing because it is the best $200-400 you could spend on a receiver. I think it's in the league of some $1,000 receivers I've heard from Onkyo and HK. Panasonic's regular receivers sound really good as well. I'd be interested to see a Panny vs. Panny comparison... you could call it a 'compannyson'!

sfdoddsy · « **Reply #43 on:** 3 Feb 2004, 01:52 pm »

The thread seems a tad side tracked. And I have posted similar thoughts before. But I have owned very high end speakers (Wilson, Genesis, Martin Logan etc) so what the heck.

I now have a kind of variation of the Linkwitz Orions, which are by most opinions pretty good. I think they are obviously better than my Wilsons, Genesis, M-L etc. Actually, I think they are the best I've heard except the maximum volume Wilson/Alon/Pipedreams.

I started, silly me, the very long Krell thread at AVS as a bit of a gag. But then I bought a couple of the XRs to play against my current very large amps. My speakers are 3 way active dipoles, with 2 way active fronts and rears. My old amps were Fosgate 4200s which I thought (and think) were the biggest bargain in audio, selling for $4K new and $1.2K used for the 8 channels I need. Great amps.

The Pannies are as good through my very revealing speakers. If you are a tubie, especially a SE tubie you mightn't like 'em as much. But having owned amps costing from $8K plus - I use to use Rowland monos, plus Quicksilvers, AR etc - I cannot see that these silly little things will be a weak link.

I'll save amp money, cable money etc and fix my room, do EQ, fiddle with subs more etc. I'd suggest you do the same.

If I could find a digital crossover/EQ with digital ins and outs, and feed that to the Pannies then straight to the speakers.... hard to beat.

Ooops... drinkin' talk... but true.

Steve

AphileEarlyAdopter · « **Reply #44 on:** 3 Feb 2004, 07:25 pm »

Gateway has a connected DVD player. It uses wireless connectivity to the PC in the house, to download video, music, pictures. I think the digital out should be working while playing musics. Add a DAC of your choice and you are only limited by the hard disk space on your PC.
I think digital amplifiers are the way to go, especially the ones with digital input. The current analog amplifiers will go the way of dinosaurs. High end companies have not innovated. It is the big corporations that are still leading the way (unlike in software, where small companies innovate and big companies assimilate them).

Carlman · « **Reply #45 on:** 3 Feb 2004, 08:15 pm »

Quote from: sfdoddsy

etc.......I'll save amp money, cable money etc and fix my room, do EQ, fiddle with subs more etc. I'd suggest you do the same...... etc.

I don't know if this was aimed at me (and I don't know if you're joking about the Panny beating your other gear) but, it's very funny if so. Because that's just what I've been doing for the past 2 months every day... hahaha I wish I could 'fix' my tiny room by magically making it bigger. How much more work and money will be enough?

I don't know what kind of room I'd need to make that receiver sound better than my amp/preamp combo but, it'd have to be something very special... practically magical in fact.

If you're insinuating that the Panasonic bests Rowland... modified or not.... well now I know you're joking... or haven't heard them together... or your speakers are turned in the wrong direction... ????

jackman · « **Reply #46 on:** 3 Feb 2004, 08:25 pm »

Quote

I think the Panasonic is a steal for the price but, it hasn't bested anything I already had... not by a long shot.

I think a lot of the reviews are very glowing because it is the best $200-400 you could spend on a receiver. I think it's in the league of some $1,000 receivers I've heard from Onkyo and HK. Panasonic's regular receivers sound really good as well. I'd be interested to see a Panny vs. Panny comparison... you could call it a 'compannyson'!

I'm totally with Carlman on this one. I have the Panny and have put hundreds of hours on it. In digital mode it sounds very good for the money. If someone is on a budget it's a no-brainer, however I would not want to imply in any way that it's in the same league as my other gear. I'm looking forward to testing the modded version but the unmodded version (although it does a lot of things well) does not sound natural and "real" on my system. It's better than I ever thought a $300 player could be and may even compete with receivers in the $1,000 category but when I hear people throwing names like Rowland around it makes me scratch my head. The Panny (in unmodded form) is nowhere near my AVA in sound quality on my system. I hope the modded version is a MAJOR improvement because the Panny needs a major improvement to come close to the AVA gear.

Just one guy's opinion.

Cheers,

Jack

Tyson · « **Reply #47 on:** 3 Feb 2004, 10:03 pm »

I agree with Jackman, the stock panny is very "ho-hum" sounding compared to my AVA T7R and 550exr. One reason I've held off on selling all my AVA gear is I want a re-match to verify my initial impressions. I'm sure my initial impressions will hold up, since 3 other people verified it at the time, but when one is considering selling over $4k worth of gear, having more than a single data point is a good idea

maxwalrath · « **Reply #48 on:** 3 Feb 2004, 10:06 pm »

Jackman and tyson, just to be clear, are you comparing the panny using the digital in to other gear where the d/a converter is used?

Tyson · « **Reply #49 on:** 3 Feb 2004, 10:14 pm »

In my AVA setup I use a Mensa DIO to do the D/A conversion.

With the panasonic I use the direct digital coaxial input.

jackman · « **Reply #50 on:** 3 Feb 2004, 10:16 pm »

Max,
The Panny sounds good (to me at least) ONLY through the digital direct connection. It sounds absolutely dreadful (again, IMO) through the analog section. I've got a transport hooked up directly to the panny, using a digital coax and it sounds pretty good. Tried it with an external DAC and it sounded very low-fi.

I don't want to fan any flames and haven't heard the modded version. If it's as good as many people believe (people I trust like Tyson), I'll buy it. Several people on AA are completely smitten by the Panasonic and I'm happy for them because there are few bargains in this hobby, however, my experience with the unmodded Panasonic was not the same. It's good for the money and fun to use but not hifi in unmodded form.

J

ABEX · « **Reply #51 on:** 4 Feb 2004, 12:20 am »

Jackman
It is the best affordable receiver out there. Not for everyones system or taste,but for $300 it is a fine piece if one is on a budget in stock form.

I do not recall a $300 piece being as clean in my experience. I had to go into CC main showroom to make certain if what I was hearing was real. It took a few seconds when I knew it was as clean as what I was hearing compared to the class A\AB receiver going for 3X the price.

While I will use another amp and Passive Controller for reference I will be keeping the Panasonic for HT and general listing and I will have it modded sometime this year.

Just thinking

DeanSheen · « **Reply #52 on:** 4 Feb 2004, 12:34 am »

ABEX love your posts but ummm you are the defender of the faith.

Yes, I have read your stuff at AVS Forum.

In the intrest of full disclosure I should state that I have just placed an order for a 45 to be used in a budget application. They will be running a pair of Eros MK II in a bar so I'll finally get to hear what this unit sounds like.

What I wanna know is what cap gets replaced on the PS?

Happy day.

jjb · « **Reply #53 on:** 4 Feb 2004, 12:58 am »

Hate to rain on everyones parade, but a 0.9 THD is not a very clean power source, I would not want to hear this system with middle of the road speakers and certainly not high efficency speakers.

DeanSheen · « **Reply #54 on:** 4 Feb 2004, 01:09 am »

JJB, cut it out man.........shhh.

Your spoiling it for those of us that want to buy these guys equiptment!

jjb · « **Reply #55 on:** 4 Feb 2004, 01:54 am »

sorry, now I understand the game

Wayne1 · « **Reply #56 on:** 4 Feb 2004, 03:19 am »

Quote

What I wanna know is what cap gets replaced on the PS?

ALL of them

ABEX · « **Reply #57 on:** 4 Feb 2004, 03:33 am »

R&R main power supply cap
R&R other electrolytic PS caps
R&R about 20 caps in the signal path
R&R the digital input jack
R&R speaker output connectors and the IEC jack
Rewire the output, power supply and digital input

Those are the X\O's that I am aware of.The Analog section is something I hope can be improved upon as for those having good TT's and Phono Amps.

I did read of one person using an ARC Phono Amp with success so it is not impossible to get adequate to good performance from the unit.

One thing that I find unique that pro reviewers have said is that the unit runs out of gas.I have moderately efficient 3-ways speakers and will be picking up my 2-ways after having them retuned tomarrow. I have driven the 3-ways hard almost to the full output of the thing and there did not seem to be a problem with it running out of gas to me. It is clean all the way to full output with my speakers is what I am getting at.

ABEX · « **Reply #58 on:** 4 Feb 2004, 03:45 am »

Seems we are getting into the spec game again. If the midrange is clear without glare or veiling I consider it clean. Most receivers have a signature that is veiled to me.There are exceptions of course as I do thinkl Rotel, B&K and a few others are clean sounding,but most I have experienced from the far east to my ears are not.

As a few people that have written to me about X\O wires have experienced singers sound like they real and are right here between the speakers.That is a trait I look for without it sounding like they are singing through a fog horn. That is what I liked about the Panasonic and what I mean when I say clean. Bass is outstanding as one might expect from a Digital Amp and High Frequency are slightly rolled off,but hey I think they are more then exceptable for a $300 piece.

Maybe transparent is the trait find most appealing using the Panny.For $300 bucks it is not a miracle receiver as it has it's faults like the analog section. I like the fact that it can be modified to bring it to higher level of performance. I would much rather buy something that can be modified then pay 7X's the cost for a SOTA piece of gear which shall lose it's market value after a few years if not sooner.

JMO

Code Chemist · « **Reply #59 on:** 6 Feb 2004, 01:19 pm »

What IS the reason for the Panasonic's high THD value, anyway? Will Wayne's mods lower it?