Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Why Denon Receivers?

I've been comparing the current receivers from Pioneer, Yamaha, HK, and Denon. For a given price point, it seems that Denon doesn't provide as many features (or bells and whistles) as Pioneer and Yamaha. For example, for $1300, the Yamaha RX-V2600 and Pioneer VSX-82TXS/VSX-72TXV look better on paper than a Denon AVR-3806. Yet, a previous poll about which brand of receivers people on this forum owned showed Denon ahead of everyone else. So, what about the Denon receivers led people to buy them? Are they more reliable, use better electronic components, provide cleaner power, etc? Or has Denon been on the scene longer and built up a larger user base?

I don't want this to turn into a flame thread of Denon vs. other brands. I'm just curious what I'm missing when I compare these different brands on paper. I've seen all these different models in the local Fry's and Tweeter, and they all look very aesthetic pleasing and well-built. Thanks.

Hey Dennis,

I'm not sure what "Bells & Whistles" the other models have over the Denons? Most AVR's in the same price range are fairly comparable. Sure, one manufacturer may call their technology something different (for ex. YPAQ, AutoSetup/RoomEQ, MCACC, etc). For the most part they do the same thing. They all handle the same surround decoding for the most part: DD, DTS, PLIIx, DTS Neo, etc... They may have their own unique built in DSP options: Widescreen, Concert Hall, Stadium, etc.... however, in my experience I don't use those features anyway.

Many people that have 4ohm speakers like the m80ti's like to use Denon, HK, NAD, Onkyo, Seperates, etc...this is because they have been proven to have no issues driving a 4ohm speaker.

Historically, the "Guts" of the Denons have been very beefy and they are a High Current Full Bandwidth design. However, many other receivers like Onkyo are also very well built and use top quality amps, for example.

I think some of the newer high end Pioneers and Yamahas may now have no problems either, but there was a time when people had issues, especially when trying to drive 4 ohm speakers.

If your talking about 80watts versus 100watts, that really is not a issue either.

I would say purchase an AVR that is in your budget, and has the "Bells & Whistles" you think YOU need, and you'll be fine.

If you get a chance to do any In-Home demo's in your area, that is even better. Check the audition thread in the "Hearing Things" section to see if anyone will help ya out....

I think Randy covered it well. HK and Denon (along with Rotel) have always tended to have beefier power supplies and power amplifier stages -- not necessarily more watts, but more "headroom" at the same wattage and more ability to drive that wattage into difficult loads -- rather than spending $$ adding features.

One way to put it is that HK, Denon and Rotel receivers have been felt to be a bit closer to the construction and design you would get with separates. Some people believe this makes a difference in sound quality under certain conditions (the beefier power supplies etc, not the "separate"ness) while others believe that is just placebo effect, and nobody knows for sure.

In the last year or so Pioneer seems to have been making some really nice receivers -- the 1015 was the first to get noticed -- and the latest crop of Yamahas are rumored to behave better with 4 ohm loads, so in some cases it would be fair to say the gap is narrowing.

My personal view is that Pioneer, Yamaha and Sony all offered a couple of different ranges of products, where the top range was pretty good and the bottom range had lots of features but often very lightweight amplifier design, whereas Denon and HK took a different approach, where their low end products had fewer features and less advertised power but maintained the design quality and would often seem to outperform units which appeared much better on paper. As a result, people who were really into audio tended to spend their money on the HK and Denon products, even if they got fewer features they felt they were getting a better designed product.

As Randy said, once you get into the upper midrange receivers the difference in features at a price point pretty much goes away. It's only at the low-midrange price points where you trade off features for "beefiness".

Well, this post should upset just about everyone on the board somehow. I hope it helps answer your question

SirQuack and Bridgman, thanks for your answers. That was the kind of info I was looking for. What I meant by bells and whistles is that, as a whole line, the Yamaha and Pioneer receivers appear to have more features on paper. For example, their high-end receiver lines are THX Select2, have more HDMI inputs (on average), have video scalers, etc. compared to the similarly priced Denon or HK receivers. I'm not arguing about whether these features are desirable or useeful, as different people have different needs. Rather, I had noticed that, despite these additional features, people on this forum still seemed to prefer Denon and HK, so I was wondering what I wasn't seeing by looking at the receivers on paper.

When I was shopping for receivers (and before finding these boards) I found that H/K offered the most features for the price, and Denon was pretty far behind that. I don't know if that's changed recently, but I know what you mean.

Personally, I would not purchase a Denon, after trying to work with one (and understand the manual) a few times. No offense intended to those who have them and like them.

Actually, I'm not sure I would purchase a H/K again, either... Maybe I'm just picky.

Bridgeman,

I thought that was a great summary. For me it was a close call between Yamaha and H/K but I ended up going with H/K for some of those reasons. The Yamaha did seem to have more "bells and whistles" and more advertised wattage. I think what did it was that the H/K had more digital inputs and a good reputation amonge music lovers. I enjoy the Logic 7 processing for music. It gives electronic music a great ambiance in my opinion. Very happy with my purchase.

Cheers,

J

I have a very strong opinon that your audio receiver just doesn't need to perform video functions!!!! Let your video gear do video functions and save a few $$$$.

My Sony SXRD just doesn't need an audio receiver to do any video scaling or adjusting.

As for HDMI, I just have to wonder when they will finally establish a version that "really" works???

For a regular TV a receiver handling video might not be necessary, but for those with or who plan to get projectors it can be a big help. WAF might not allow 3-4 sets of cables running 20-30', but one small hidden HDMI cable may not be a problem. Otherwise I agree, I want my video to be as pure as possible from source to output device.

As far as HDMI, it still has its quirks but if you get devices that all support at least 1.1 or later there shouldn't be any problems. The majority of the headaches comes from older devices like cable boxes that 'support' HDMI but haven't had any firmware or hardware revisions since the format was first released.

Hey Dennis,

There are many Denon models that carry THX certification also. However, I would not get all caught up in the THX thing. Manufacturers have to pay extra to have THX give them that certification. Most good receivers without THX, will give you just as good performance. I think the ones that have it may offer a few extra technical features or bells and whistles, but I would not lose any sleep over it. Evan the ones that don't carry the badge, most likely are capable, the mfg. just wants to keep the prices down.

Also, the HDMI or Component conversion is nice if you have lots of equipment to make use of it and combine into one cable to your TV or projector. Lets say you only have a DVD player and/or sattelite, not sure it would be worth the extra cost to get this feature. If you have say 3-5 video products, then it might make sense to combine into one channel.

Hey man, we need to talk about speakers for you, not AVRs.

I'll second the THX thing. It's great to have a standard for sure, and it's a good standard to reach for. But the fact is that most quality receivers match that standard even if the manufacturer won't pay the price to have their receivers certified. Some manufacturers feel they need to pay the price on the theory that they will recoup their investment due to whatever marketing cache THX gives them. Just like the iPod accessory vendors that pay Apple for the right to put the "Made for iPod" logo on their merch.

Really, all you have to do is read about the THX specs and compare them to the specs of the receiver(s) you are
considering. That will tell you what you want to know.

As far as video switching, I like it. Do I need 3 or 4 HDMI inputs? Considering I have no components that push HDMI, no. When HD-DVD has more than 2 available titles and there are more than a handful of HD channels on air I will start to worry about HDMI. Right now I don't feel it necessary. I don't want to be a "bleeding-edge" guinea pig paying the early adopter tax on tech that just doesn't deliver the variety of content my current setup can. Not that it what's available doesn't look great, but there's not enough available to make the kind of capital expenditure it would take to update my entire setup.