The Duck of Death

I was reading this months issue of Sound & Vision and they brought up a very interesting point. It seems that the "better" receivers are seeing major price hikes in recent years. While there are still some companies who have reasonable prices on their premier pieces such as with the Sony STR-DA777ES ($1,500) and the Harmon Kardon AVR-7000 ($1,400); most companies now have MSRP's that are quite steep. For example:

Kenwood VR-4900............$2,300
Onkyo TX-DS989.............$3,200
Yamaha RXV1................$3,300
Denon AVR-5800.............$3,800
Marantz SR-14EX............$4,700


Also consider that technology seems to be "reinventing" itself at an exponential pace with all these new sound formats. And why do many flagship receivers cost 30-50% more than their runner up models when the differences are usually minor (a little added power, and extra channel, etc.). I'd like to get some feedback. What do you guys think of all this?

...and if you NEED to know I'm running a Sony STR-DA555ES which I picked up for $600.

[This message has been edited by The Duck of Death (edited September 29, 2000).]

El Pollo

I agree, these prices are getting ridiculous... Into the good preamp/amp range. Personally, I see no need for myself to get the Denon 5800 unless I have a huge room with awesome speakers ($10000+ total). The Denon 3801 seems like a much better deal to me. Marantz is getting insane with their flagship price. It makes the Denon and Yamaha flagships look like bargains!

DigIt

Personally, I think because the economy is good and people are spending money, the companies are hiking prices because people are able and willing to spend the money.

Patman

I personally think diminishing returns plays a big part of these flagship receiver prices. I don't think any receiver is worth over $1500 (and I don't think I'd spend over $750 for a receiver).

------------------
PatCave ;HT Pix ;Pat's DVDs

tdamico

Patman: I have read these posts for about a year now, and you seem to be considerably more knowledgeable than I. I'm just a movie lover that built a system so I can watch movies the best I can at home. I'm reasonibly handy and so with reading the manuals and experimentation have put together a system that works for me. But your statement is very interesting to me. It seems to be at odds with what quite a few of the "experts" that post both here and HTF seem to preach. They preach seperate components, and the best you can afford. Your opinion is valuable to me based on the many posts I have read that you contributed too. Why do you feel that anything over $1,500 is a waste and also why would you not ever spend more than $800. Now I'm worried that that Yamaha 2095 I picked up last year for $1,000 was a waste!! (I know, if it works for me, its not a waste, but maybe I could have got the same sound for less)

Patman

tdamico, vell, I'm cheap. There, I said it.

A lot of time, these big-time receivers are like luxury cars, lots of extras, but if you wanted it to get you from A to B, any other reliable car will get you there, maybe with less style, but still functional enough to get the job done.

Just evaluate what your needs are, and whether the receiver you are looking at will fill the bill. To me, most of what I want can be had in receivers that cost no more than $1000, and the trade-off between above average quality and that 5% more of performance that cost $500 more just doesn't make sense to me. We are in a great time for HT receivers. The makers are putting in more nifty stuff, but the costs are most of the nifty stuff doesn't cost as much as it did just 3 years ago. Today, the HT gear is really good and their feature lists are abundantly packed for most HT applications.

Also, I don't believe in paying to be on the bleeding edge when it comes to home electronics. I've never been the guy on the block who had to have the latest and greatest when it comes to receivers.

I don't have a need for Component Video switching (don't plan on getting into HDTV for another 5 years or so). The EX/ES rear center channel stuff is still in its infancy, and for me, the practicality of wiring up 1 or 2 rear center channel speakers just aren't there, so that's not a priority (plus if I wanted that, I'd pick up a DPL receiver for $100 or less and use that to get the rear center channel info). I just hope that peope don't get into HT gear buying regret mode just scant months after they buy their receivers. I shake my head sometimes at folks that will upgrade their relatively new receivers at the drop of the hint that some new bells-n-whistles have been added to the new model. Upgrade-itis is a scary phenomena.

When it comes to power, I can barely stand to be in the same room when I get music playing at SPLs around 100dB, and a decent 100W/ch receiver will provide enough power to drive most speakers to get adequate SPL output. Plus off-loading the low end LFE with its own amp will give your receiver's power supply more headroom for dynamics in your audio material being played through the receiver.

So, in a nutshell, buy what you need and envision will be using. The extras tend to be a "once used" deal or a show-off, but if you don't think you'll use in daily operation, don't worry about settling for a lesser feature package.

But that's just me. Others have the money to blow, and like the peace of mind of not "missing any of the music" when they spend a lot on their HT gear. I don't begrudge them one bit.


------------------
PatCave ;HT Pix ;Pat's DVDs

DVD_O_Rama

I heartily agree with Patman (as usual), and in my humble opinion the people who actually buy these flagship receivers are one of 2 people: the person who actually can hear the differences in the sounds of these high-priced receivers (you know, the guy who sits glued to the sweet spot in his reference theater with SPL meter in hand and analytical software running in the background) and the guy with just too much damn money to waste, and probably couldn't tell the diference between a $5,000 Marantz and a $500 Daewoo.


------------------
DVD-O-Rama.com
DVD Reviews..with an attitude

Now Showing:
Spanish Pantalones

Justin Doring

$4700 for a receiver is insane, and yet my local Marantz dealer tells me he can't keep them in stock! Every yuppie has to have a flagship receiver for his new sub/sat HT system. For the same price or less, you could get any number of amps and pre-amps that would run the Marantz into its grave. I paid $1200 for decent separates, and, in my opinion, $500-$1000 is where receivers really shine. Anything more than that and entry-level separates can be had if you know where to look.

------------------
"Home is where the theater is!"

brilon

I agree that receivers are getting way out of line price wise.I also think that seperates are WAY out of line for what little improvement you gain.It all boils down to how efficient your speakers are and what features are needed.A 100 watt receiver would NOT have enough juice to drive a set of Aerial speakers or any other ineffecient speakers.6.1 or 7.1 channel inputs are a VERY nice feature to have for DVD Audio or whatever other format that comes along.A very good receiver like the Denon AVR-4800 has good features and a confirmed rating of 148 by 5 into 8ohms.It can be had for under $1400.00.There is no such thing as having to much power.

[This message has been edited by brilon (edited September 30, 2000).]

Idisappear

IMHO it boils down to the law of supply and demand. furthermore, all these companies are sort of "working together" when it comes to pricing their flagship receiver ie they price their best receivers as an industry as a whole, rather than as individual companies. I mean, let's say you are Yamaha for example, why would you price your speakers significantly less than the best receivers from say Onkyo, Harman Kardon and the likes? You might as well exploit the price hike that EVERYONE is doing. Unless if most of the big players are bringing the price down, then it is OK to lower your price too as you have to stay competitive. Just my 2 cents

[This message has been edited by Idisappear (edited October 01, 2000).]

El Pollo

I don't about $500-$1000 MSRP as the sweet spot for value on receivers. I'd go more like $800-$1600. That's where you get the #2 or #3 receivers from the quality companies. They usually have everything that the flagships have except maybe gold plate connections, champagne color. And they're around 90-100 watts per channel as opposed to 125-170 watts per channel of the flagships (which don't make much of a difference unless you've got a huge room and like playing stuff LOUD).

TDamico, you paid $1000 for a Yamaha 2095? That's a hell of a price. Mine was $1600 because I got it a couple of years ago to replace an old cheapo JVC prologic receiver. I don't regret my price, and there's no way you should regret what you got it for.

tdamico

Actually there is a pretty good audio store in Colorado called Sound Tracks. I purchased a Yamaha 795 there and was a little unhappy with it. It did not have enough S-Video connections to allow me to plug everything I had directly into the receiver. (DVD, SVHS player, Dish Satelite Receiver, TV, N64 game console) So they took it back and were going to exchange it for a 995. Only thing was, they didn't have one in stock. They ordered it and I waited 3 weeks for it. Finally I was so discouraged, they gave me a 2095 at their cost in place of the 995. I actually paid a little bit under $1,100 about a year ago. It has worked out very nicely for me. Of course in reading most the the posts in this forum, most people don't like Yamaha as they say it is too bright. I never have understood what they mean. I only use mine for movies and it sounds warm and realistic at both low and high volume.

Green Jello

I recently upgraded to the Denon AVR-5800. The unit is absolutely incredible, and worth every penny of it's $3,800 price. Yes high-end receivers are getting more and more expensive, but they are also getting better, more powerful and have more features. The 5800 is very close to the quality of good separates, and in fact with the addition of DTS-ES decoding, it can do things that no pre-amp in the world can yet. In years past, top-end receivers were a major gap away from the quality of separate components. This is no longer the case. Along with the ultra-high cost receivers, look at what you can buy now for $800. The quality in these things is expanding in both directions of the price scale.

------------------
...post game show is brought to you by,......Christ I can't find it. To hell with it!

Green Jello

P.S. The Marantz SR-14EX is a piece of junk when compared to the Denon 5800. That is one piece that the price tag IS ridiculous.

------------------
...post game show is brought to you by,......Christ I can't find it. To hell with it!

The Duck of Death

Green Jello. I'm glad you like the Denon AVR-5800, and I have to admit I'm a tad bit jealous.

But here's an interesting question for you. Why does the 5800 have an MSRP of $3,800 when the 5600 and 5700 had MSRP's of around $2,700? Did the people at Denon really shove in an extra $1,100 worth of stuff? My friend has the 5700 it's pretty stacked with options. It's hard even for me to "think up" an additional $1,100 worth of extras.

Green Jello

quote:<HR>Originally posted by The Duck of Death:
Green Jello. I'm glad you like the Denon AVR-5800, and I have to admit I'm a tad bit jealous.

But here's an interesting question for you. Why does the 5800 have an MSRP of $3,800 when the 5600 and 5700 had MSRP's of around $2,700? Did the people at Denon really shove in an extra $1,100 worth of stuff? My friend has the 5700 it's pretty stacked with options. It's hard even for me to "think up" an additional $1,100 worth of extras. <HR>

In my opinion, yes....absolutely. I had both the 5600 and 5700, and the 5800 is a major leap forward. Here are some reasons just to name a few:

170W vs 140W
7 amps versus 5
Far better sounding amps
Aktis LCD Remote
DTS-ES
Better D/A conversion
Firewire upgrade path
RS-232 control

It may look a lot like the 5700, but the 5800 is now in a league of it's own.

------------------
...post game show is brought to you by,......Christ I can't find it. To hell with it!

exm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by Green Jello:
I recently upgraded to the Denon AVR-5800. The unit is absolutely incredible, and worth every penny of it's $3,800 price. Yes high-end receivers are getting more and more expensive, but they are also getting better, more powerful and have more features. The 5800 is very close to the quality of good separates, and in fact with the addition of DTS-ES decoding, it can do things that no pre-amp in the world can yet. In years past, top-end receivers were a major gap away from the quality of separate components. This is no longer the case. Along with the ultra-high cost receivers, look at what you can buy now for $800. The quality in these things is expanding in both directions of the price scale.
<HR>

Well, how much you spend, a receiver is still a receiver. Period. If you think that the gap between receivers and seperates has been narrowed/closed, go back to the store, get a Lexicon and listen again. And again. And never listen to a receiver for the rest of your life.

Sorry to dissapoint you, but I've tested the Denon AVC-A1 and the Onkyo TX-DS939 but although movie performance was good, music performance was so-so. Why? All the electronics are still stacked up in one box, being fed by one power supply resulting in uninspired, cold and harsh sound.

There is NO WAY that a receiver can beat a seperate setup. The prices? Buy a demo Lexicon DC-1 V4 (with Dolby Digital EX/DTS ES) and 7x Marantz MA500 and you're also done for $3,800. Only one quality level above.

Mark

PS. I'm NOT saying that the high-end receivers are bad, I'm just agreeing that they are too expensive for what they offer.


[This message has been edited by exm (edited October 03, 2000).]

Green Jello

quote:<HR>Originally posted by exm:
Well, how much you spend, a receiver is still a receiver. Period. If you think that the gap between receivers and seperates has been narrowed/closed, go back to the store, get a Lexicon and listen again. And again. And never listen to a receiver for the rest of your life.

Sorry to dissapoint you, but I've tested the Denon AVC-A1 and the Onkyo TX-DS939 but although movie performance was good, music performance was so-so. Why? All the electronics are still stacked up in one box, being fed by one power supply resulting in uninspired, cold and harsh sound.

There is NO WAY that a receiver can beat a seperate setup. The prices? Buy a demo Lexicon DC-1 V4 (with Dolby Digital EX/DTS ES) and 7x Marantz MA500 and you're also done for $3,800. Only one quality level above.

Mark

PS. I'm NOT saying that the high-end receivers are bad, I'm just agreeing that they are too expensive for what they offer.


[This message has been edited by exm (edited October 03, 2000).]<HR>

I NEVER said that the gap was closed. I said that it has been greatly narrowed. I have been selling home theater for over a decade now, and I know what I am talking about. I know that separates are still the better way to go in terms of sound quality. I was simply explaining that this new generation of receivers are a lot closer, and that is why they cost more.

Also, I do not work for a Lexicon dealer, but it is my understanding that the DC-1 V4 doesn't have DTS-ES Discrete, only matrix. DTS has confimed this fact. As for the Marantz MA-500, I have done some extensive listening to this amp, and there is no way I would buy it. I my opinion that amps in the 5800 are far warmer sounding and have far more power. They don't sound any better than the crap that Marantz puts inside their SR-14EX receiver.

------------------
...post game show is brought to you by,......Christ I can't find it. To hell with it!

[This message has been edited by Green Jello (edited October 03, 2000).]

exm

GreenJello: I won't start a 'better-worse' discussion because - thank God - everybody has a different taste. Me and a lot of other hifi freaks like the MA500 for it's warm sound. The Denon I tested had really a horrible sound for music but then again, maybe I listen different than you to amplifiers (not necessarily better or worse).

If everybody liked the MA500, the world would be boring, right?

I can't comment about the SR-14 because I simply never listened to it. However, former Marantz receivers/pre-amplifiers (AV-600) were IMO always excellent performers.

You're right about the discrete vs. matrix commend on the lexicon. Just keep one thing in mind: besides 'The Haunting' ALL other released ES/EX titles are matrixed encoded.

The Duck of Death

Wow, it's great to see so many responses. Just so things don't get too heated in here; it's seems that exm feels top end receivers are overpriced, while Green Jello feels they are priced appropriately. Anyone else wish to chime in on this?

Green Jello

quote:<HR>
You're right about the discrete vs. matrix commend on the lexicon. Just keep one thing in mind: besides 'The Haunting' ALL other released ES/EX titles are matrixed encoded.[/B]<HR>

Thanks EXM. I fully realize about the availabillity of DTS-ES Discrete software. I was simply using it as an example of the fact that the 5800 can do some things that no other piece of equipment, receiver or pre-amp, can. Things like that in early generations ALWAYS drive up costs.

------------------
...post game show is brought to you by,......Christ I can't find it. To hell with it!

repstein

It can be a cheaper alternative to getting seperates. My amp and preamp cost more than any of those listed. I honestly don't think the Denon 5800 is that bad. It is a real nice receiver. It is not for some people... then again Mark Levinson compenents can easily run 10K/each. To each their own. If you have the money more power to you. I think it really depends on how much you are into HT and how much money you have. It is not a cheap hobby and that is what it is to lots of people, a hobby. I think my HT is past the 15K mark these days and I have not finished it yet. Back when I was in college I had a much less expensive setup. I had what I could afford. Anyways if you are really into it then they are worth it. If you are not then don't spend the cash. Some people drive Porsches and some drive Mustangs. They both get you to the same place, just in different ways.

++Russ

The Duck of Death

hey now, let's not rip on Mustangs now... I happen to have a cherry 1966 convertible GT .

exm

repstein: I completely agree with you
Duck of death: I don't think that they're that overpriced but some of them just don't deliver. I guess you can compare it with computer processors: if you want a Pentium 1.13 Ghz you pay 3 times the price (or so) of a 800 Mhz while the performance gain is hardly worth the money.
Finally my friend Green Jellow (We're all friends, right?): the big advantage of something like a Lexicon is upgradability: I paid $100 one year ago and was one of the first ONE THE PLANET to have EX/ES in my home theatre. A discrete ES-upgrade will follow with other possible upgrades soon (I'm sure about that!).

I guess my hole point (just like Ronald) is that in this price range, seperates ARE an option! Just go to the store with a certain budget and compare a receiver AND seperates within that budget!

PS. Nice comment about Porsches and Mustangs: why not Ferrari's and Daewoo's or so? (speaking of fast transportation: my Kawasaki Ninja 2000 Rules!)

[This message has been edited by exm (edited October 04, 2000).]

spizz

Hi. I just picked up the new Denon AVC-A1SE (AVR-5800) and IMO it is worth the money I paid for it. BTW I didn't pay RRP thats why I say that. It sounds brilliant for HT and 2 channel audio and thats what I love. IMO I also think the gap between the Denon and Lexicon has been between narrowed and closed. Why do I say this? Well I know of 2 Lexicon MC-1 owners that have changed over to the Denon and love it. You can check the post over on AVScience.

As I said I love this unit and it has everything "I" want in it. The new sound format was not my deciding factor, just the overall package.

Spero D.






[This message has been edited by spizz (edited October 05, 2000).]