Upgrade receiver?

[dougy]

Hello,

I have asked a few friends this question but I want to ask you guys/gals as well.
Currently I have a Yamaha HTR-5960 receiver in my bedroom. I was thinking of upgrading to a Denon AVR-1909 or the AVR-1709. My question is, should I just keep the Yamaha or get a Denon? I thought of the Denon because I love the one I have and also the hdmi capability is nice as well. Is my Yamaha as good, worse or better than the Denon?

Thank you ahead of time for your suggestions and ideas!
Doug

[Audiophile_At_Birth]

Originally Posted by dougy

Hello,

I have asked a few friends this question but I want to ask you guys/gals as well.
Currently I have a Yamaha HTR-5960 receiver in my bedroom. I was thinking of upgrading to a Denon AVR-1909 or the AVR-1709. My question is, should I just keep the Yamaha or get a Denon? I thought of the Denon because I love the one I have and also the hdmi capability is nice as well. Is my Yamaha as good, worse or better than the Denon?

Thank you ahead of time for your suggestions and ideas!
Doug

If you have the money, I would definitely upgrade to the Denon 1909. It's a very good receiver and I believe you would hear the benefits with that AVR over your Yamaha. You will be able to hear all the new audio codecs that come with Blu-ray and enjoy a new sound that comes with getting a Denon.

[Blu-Raider]

I'm a huge Denon fan -- currently on my third receiver over the years. Every time I've upgraded I've auditioned other brands and stuck with Denon.

[SammyG]

I agrree pull the trigger, the new codecs are great!

[got rice]

Originally Posted by dougy

Hello,

I have asked a few friends this question but I want to ask you guys/gals as well.
Currently I have a Yamaha HTR-5960 receiver in my bedroom. I was thinking of upgrading to a Denon AVR-1909 or the AVR-1709. My question is, should I just keep the Yamaha or get a Denon? I thought of the Denon because I love the one I have and also the hdmi capability is nice as well. Is my Yamaha as good, worse or better than the Denon?

Thank you ahead of time for your suggestions and ideas!
Doug

Your receiver has multi channel inputs, so it is possible to get the Lossless audio without an HDMI connection. I personally would try this first it doesn't cost that much all you need is a decent set of RCA audio cables from either Monoprice or Blue Jean Cables.

there is a sticky by Crackin heads "Old school receiver and want lossless audio" Read this and it will give you a better understanding of how to set it up. They are very helpful on that thread.

Use the money for something else, like upgrading your speakers or get some surrounds.

Good luck with that..

[dubldown]

I just recently upgraded from a Yamaha 5790 to a Denon 889 and I can definitely recommend the upgrade

Besides the HDMI inputs and new codecs, the overall sound is much improved in my opinion

I love Yamaha, still do, I put the 5790 in my bedroom but definitely noticed a huge upgrade in sound quality when I went with the Denon

[swifty7]

how about Marantz over Denon...all I know that my SR8400(an older model receiver) sounds truly amazing. However it does not incorporate hdmi inputs/out but has everything else. It has 7.1 inputs for external decoders.

[dougy]

Much appreciated on the posts! Sounds like someone is interested in my receiver. If I do decide to upgrade, it won't be as expensive as I thought.

[aramis109]

Originally Posted by got rice

Your receiver has multi channel inputs, so it is possible to get the Lossless audio without an HDMI connection. I personally would try this first it doesn't cost that much all you need is a decent set of RCA audio cables from either Monoprice or Blue Jean Cables.

there is a sticky by Crackin heads "Old school receiver and want lossless audio" Read this and it will give you a better understanding of how to set it up. They are very helpful on that thread.

Use the money for something else, like upgrading your speakers or get some surrounds.

Good luck with that..

Looks like the OP has already decided, but I agree with this as well. Try the analog outs first and see what you think. However, if you're set on upgrading Denon's a great company so you can't go wrong that way either.

[kingofgrills]

I agree as well. I had the HTR-5960 receiver, until I upgraded to the HTR-6080 this past year. The 5960 is a great receiver, and the amplifier section in it is better than what is currently used in Yamaha's new units below the RX-V1900. If you can find a Blu-ray player built in lossless decoding with 7.1 channel analog outputs, you'll have 7.1 channel lossless audio with this unit.

The only reason I changed my unit was because I use the PS3 for Blu-ray, media streaming, and SACD playback. I needed an HDMI connection since PS3 doesn't have multichannel analog output.

If you absolutely need HDMI inputs and built-in decoders, I would suggest looking at the Denon, a newer Yamaha, or Marantz.

[efesbe]

Since this is an Upgrade Receiver thread I will not create a new one and just continue on with this with my own issues.

I have a Pioneer Elite VSX-72TXV receiver (this avr does not support the HD codecs) and a PS3 for blu ray.

My question is, that if the ps3 is set to PCM, doing all the conversions, and connected via HDMI, will there be a noticeable difference if I get an AVR with the supported HD codecs. If I understand it, with PCM, the ps3 is doing all the conversions and the receiver is only accepting the converted signal from the ps3. If the receiver doesn't have to do any conversions of HD codecs from the PS3 at PCM, do I even need to think about upgrading the receiver with HD codec support? I am only running 5.1 for now but can run 7.1 if I want.

[aramis109]

Originally Posted by efesbe

Since this is an Upgrade Receiver thread I will not create a new one and just continue on with this with my own issues.

I have a Pioneer Elite VSX-72TXV receiver (this avr does not support the HD codecs) and a PS3 for blu ray.

My question is, that if the ps3 is set to PCM, doing all the conversions, and connected via HDMI, will there be a noticeable difference if I get an AVR with the supported HD codecs. If I understand it, with PCM, the ps3 is doing all the conversions and the receiver is only accepting the converted signal from the ps3. If the receiver doesn't have to do any conversions of HD codecs from the PS3 at PCM, do I even need to think about upgrading the receiver with HD codec support? I am only running 5.1 for now but can run 7.1 if I want.

There would be no difference. Both would just take the already-decoded signal and play it back.

[kingofgrills]

Originally Posted by aramis109

There would be no difference. Both would just take the already-decoded signal and play it back.

Plus, your PS3 cannot bitstream the raw HD audio codec to a receiver with built in decoders, so it would be money wasted. Your PS3 has to do the decoding.

I was in a similar situation when I upgraded my receiver, and that is why I bought my Yamaha HTR-6080 (RX-V861). It has everything I need, including HDMI upscaling from all video sources, but it didn't have built-in decoders for Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD-MA. My PS3 decodes all the lossless source, so I didn't need to pay for redundancy. Although people will debate this endlessly, there is no difference in sound quality.

[Audiophile_At_Birth]

Originally Posted by kingofgrills

Plus, your PS3 cannot bitstream the raw HD audio codec to a receiver with built in decoders, so it would be money wasted. Your PS3 has to do the decoding.

I was in a similar situation when I upgraded my receiver, and that is why I bought my Yamaha HTR-6080 (RX-V861). It has everything I need, including HDMI upscaling from all video sources, but it didn't have built-in decoders for Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD-MA. My PS3 decodes all the lossless source, so I didn't need to pay for redundancy. Although people will debate this endlessly, there is no difference in sound quality.

But louder equals better!

[efesbe]

So the only reason for a receiver with the HD codecs (MA and TrueHD) is if I decide to buy a standalone BD player with bitstream capability? I did read somewhere here that there was a difference when bitstreamed to a receiver and have the receiver decode. Is the difference really that significant? Not only will I have to buy a receiver, but also a BD player capable of bitstreaming. I was hoping on not spending anything if people here can talk me out of it and that I will not hear much of a difference.

[Zman2k2]

You will not hear much of a difference. I have had both a PS3 and a standalone that bitstreams, and the sound difference isn't noticeable, if at all. The only reason I changed is I sold my PS3 because I'm not really a gamer anymore, and like the way a standalone looks on my HT rack.

[JunkBoy]

Speaking from experience, there was a considerable difference when I made the switch from my Pioneer Elite 84 to the Elite SC-07. I just made the switch earlier this week and it was a unanimous decision in our household that the sound was vastly improved! With the Elite 84, for some reason, the lossless PCM, Dolby THD & DTS MA just lacked the oomph, the kick, the life that I expected to get from those lossless codecs. I don't know if the reason was the lack of HDMI 1.3 support from the 84 series but in all honesty that's what I was pinning my hopes on. Having to use an optical cable from the PS3 to the 84 AVR to get lossless sound (and not being overly impressed with those results) while others raved about those same lossless codecs while they used compatible HDMI 1.3 AVR's hooked up to their PS3's really had me irked. Fortunately for me, my concerns were completely answered with the switch to the SC-07! Those lossless codes have exceeded my expectations and my HT has never put out sound like it is now (almost too much bass now)! And the only difference between the 2 Elite AVR's has been that optical cable...

[Riff Magnum]

Are you sure the only difference between your old 84 and your new SC-07 is the optical cable?

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by JunkBoy

Having to use an optical cable from the PS3 to the 84 AVR to get lossless sound (and not being overly impressed with those results...

You can't get lossless multichannel over optical. If set to bitstream, the PS3 sends the lossy DTS core or companion DD 5.1 track instead of lossless. If set to PCM, the PS3 decodes the lossless tracks, but downmixes them to stereo.

So, you actually made two changes - a better receiver and access to better sound tracks.

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by efesbe

So the only reason for a receiver with the HD codecs (MA and TrueHD) is if I decide to buy a standalone BD player with bitstream capability? I did read somewhere here that there was a difference when bitstreamed to a receiver and have the receiver decode. Is the difference really that significant? Not only will I have to buy a receiver, but also a BD player capable of bitstreaming. I was hoping on not spending anything if people here can talk me out of it and that I will not hear much of a difference.

I suspect you read that on a bulletinboard somewhere. There's certainly no foundation for such claims. The decoded PCM output of a lossless source will be identical no matter where the decoding takes place. If one sounds better, it's usually a simple matter of different volume levels. Or, perhaps the receiver processes incoming PCM differently than the PCM produced by its own decoding.