I need a new 7.1/7.2 receiver because my very very old rx-5000v will die. Onkyo, Yamaha, Denon...?
If you had an option of those 3? Yamaha.
If anything? Mcintosh.
>>51973024
>Mcintosh
I'm not a billionaire but thanks, I'll take yamaha
>>51973024
You know, I know they're the shit, but I think they look like trash. Even if I had the money, it would stop me buying one.
Have they ever sold anything subtle?
Anyway, Yamaha.
onkyo, I vote onkyo yamaha is going down the home theater in a box route
>>51973234
yeah, onkyo are the best but yamaha is good price/quality
>>51972860
Denon for sure, Ive used Denon forever and its the best of those 3 for sure,,, Marantz is also good
>>51972860
pro-tip: a ten year old Cambridge Audio Azur will serve you just as well as any modern AVR if you don't need HDMI, and for about one thousand dollars less
>>51973655
Agree but op want a theater receiver not a high end receiver
>>51973726
you can have both with certain brands that use higher end components and circuitry
>>51973821
hmmm, it's sexy
bump for interest
decent receiver under 200?
>>51972860
>buy cheap 5.1 amp from craigslist
>like the aesthetic
>plug it all in
>it sounds decent
>fuck_yeah.jpg
>go to plug in headphones
>it doesn't have a headphone socket
Well fuck.
Denon by far will give you the best quality
Yamaha is the king of price/quality, but still very good quality
Onkyo is having problems, you could get a good reciver or a air one hard to say
Been using a Pioneer VSX-454 for around twenty years now. Was thinking of getting a mate of mine to build me something similar to what he made for himself to replace it.
>>51976338
>VSX-454 for around twenty years now
>>51976712
What? It's a good little unit for my needs. Running quadraphonic and it's never let me down.
>>51976732
Nothing, it's good. Dolby Prologic 1
>>51976100
some denon models are good, but to say that all denon models "are the best by far" requires some citation (that happen not to exist)
whether or not yamaha is king of anything is highly debatable
onkyo has a low end and a high end, much like denon and yamaha -- there's not much difference between the three as brands -- each unit has to be looked at on an individual basis
these aren't Mark Levinson or Jeff Rowland devices
>>51975770
what's your wattage requirement and what kind of speakers will you be running
>>51976884
I don't use the Dolby stuff on it sounds a bit congested to me. It's been on almost all day every day for most of its life. It's really done well. Showing no signs of dying either.
Most low end popular brand-name receivers look like this, regardless of onkyo denon or yamaha.
>>51976712
I've had a VSX-456 for probably about twenty years as well. Damn good amp, never had a problem with it.
>>51977453
DPrologic I (the 1st version) was fucking nice when I watch movie from a stereo sauce but terrible in music
>>51977524
Yeah I almost only use it for music. I don't think I've turned the Dolby stuff on for ten years. Maybe I'll try it again for movies at some stage.
>>51977458
I don't care of the ''composante beauty'' if it not affect the reliability or the sound quality. If it work, have good sound, no noise, good dsp (eq, auto compressor, dolby/dts surround decoder and other feature), power, good picture converter, it's correct. The human eyes is a big placebo maker
>>51977933
Ideally having both
