A/V Receiver Q

[TN]

Hi Folks -

Newbie question. I'm exploring a few medium high end ($1,000 - $1,500) A/V
receivers - namely the NAD T773 A/V, and the ONKYO TX-NR901.

As I look at these two machines, it appears the NAD is the die hard
audiophile choice, but the ONKYO appears to be the convergence gek choice!

If I could, I wanted to ask a few Q's about the Onkyo's latest features ...

First, the Onkyo has "digital upsampling" and the NAD doesn't. I have a lot
stuff like an three year old dvd/vhs combo deck, an huge tube based but
fairly modern flat screen 36" TV, and other non-digital non-hdtv stuff....
so does that make "digital upsampling" a value for me? Does it reduce wire
clutter?

Second, what this with the Onkyo's ethernet, and Net Tunes feature which
includes up to 30 Internet Radio presets and advanced MP3 support. OK, this
sounds like you can play MP3's from your hard drive... but how does the
music get from your PC to the receiver? The ethernet? or via regaulr RCA
jacks? Has anyone had any experience with Net Tunes? Is it crap?

Thanks for the help folks. While I realize the NAD has slightly better
sound, as i look at this stuff, I cant help but be attracted to the
additional features of the Onkyo.

Any help, comments appreciated.

Tom

[Pagan]

"TN" <thnewton@removethis-optonline.net> wrote in message
news:cthpjo$n9q$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...
> Hi Folks -
>
> Newbie question. I'm exploring a few medium high end ($1,000 - $1,500) A/V
> receivers - namely the NAD T773 A/V, and the ONKYO TX-NR901.
>
> As I look at these two machines, it appears the NAD is the die hard
> audiophile choice, but the ONKYO appears to be the convergence gek choice!
>
> If I could, I wanted to ask a few Q's about the Onkyo's latest features
....
>
> First, the Onkyo has "digital upsampling" and the NAD doesn't. I have a
lot
> stuff like an three year old dvd/vhs combo deck, an huge tube based but
> fairly modern flat screen 36" TV, and other non-digital non-hdtv stuff....
> so does that make "digital upsampling" a value for me? Does it reduce wire
> clutter?

There isn't much that's going to reduce the snake pit behind your gear,
unfortunately. In fact, the fancier the gear, the more wires you get to
play with.

> Second, what this with the Onkyo's ethernet, and Net Tunes feature which
> includes up to 30 Internet Radio presets and advanced MP3 support. OK,
this
> sounds like you can play MP3's from your hard drive... but how does the
> music get from your PC to the receiver? The ethernet? or via regaulr RCA
> jacks? Has anyone had any experience with Net Tunes? Is it crap?
>
> Thanks for the help folks. While I realize the NAD has slightly better
> sound, as i look at this stuff, I cant help but be attracted to the
> additional features of the Onkyo.
>
> Any help, comments appreciated.

Just curious, but you don't seem to plan on upgrading anything else other
than your receiver. While a fancy receiver might shine some for DVD
playback, assuming you have a digital out jack, preferably optical, it's not
going to do much with a bunch of old equipment.

It just might make more sense to shoot lower on the receiver, and put some
of that cash into better gear.

What are you using for speakers?

Pagan

[Tom Newton]

Pagan -

Thanks for your response.

Okay, I appreciate your advice, but as I said, I'm looking for a mid-high
end receiver ($1,000 - $1,500).

I tried to explain my current less-than-state-of-the-art setup because I
want to understand what benefit any of these new features will have now
(such as upconversion) etc...

But not to worry Pagan, my future plans include all the latest stuff. Within
a 5 year or so time frame I expect to gradually get the good stuff.

So, what I'm extremely interested in, and would appreciate is any insight
on, is insight into my TWO questions:

Question ONE - First, the Onkyo has "digital upsampling" and the NAD
doesn't. I have a lot
stuff like an three year old dvd/vhs combo deck, an huge tube based but
fairly modern flat screen 36" TV, and other non-digital non-hdtv stuff....
so does that make "digital upsampling" a value for me? Does it reduce wire
clutter?

Question TWO - What's with the with the Onkyo's ethernet, and Net Tunes
feature which
includes up to 30 Internet Radio presets and advanced MP3 support. OK, this
sounds like you can play MP3's from your hard drive... but how does the
music get from your PC to the receiver? The ethernet? or via regaulr RCA
jacks? Has anyone had any experience with Net Tunes? Is it crap?

If anyone in this group has expertise, experience, preconceived notions,
etc... in the current features I point out in the Onkyo versus the NAD and
can shed some light on them I'd appreciate it.

Tom

[soinie]

On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 23:59:19 -0500, "TN"
<thnewton@removethis-optonline.net> wrote:

>Hi Folks -
>
>Newbie question. I'm exploring a few medium high end ($1,000 - $1,500) A/V
>receivers - namely the NAD T773 A/V, and the ONKYO TX-NR901.
>
>As I look at these two machines, it appears the NAD is the die hard
>audiophile choice, but the ONKYO appears to be the convergence gek choice!
>
>If I could, I wanted to ask a few Q's about the Onkyo's latest features ...
>
>First, the Onkyo has "digital upsampling" and the NAD doesn't. I have a lot
>stuff like an three year old dvd/vhs combo deck, an huge tube based but
>fairly modern flat screen 36" TV, and other non-digital non-hdtv stuff....
>so does that make "digital upsampling" a value for me? Does it reduce wire
>clutter?
>
>Second, what this with the Onkyo's ethernet, and Net Tunes feature which
>includes up to 30 Internet Radio presets and advanced MP3 support. OK, this
>sounds like you can play MP3's from your hard drive... but how does the
>music get from your PC to the receiver? The ethernet? or via regaulr RCA
>jacks? Has anyone had any experience with Net Tunes? Is it crap?
>
>Thanks for the help folks. While I realize the NAD has slightly better
>sound, as i look at this stuff, I cant help but be attracted to the
>additional features of the Onkyo.
>
>Any help, comments appreciated.
>
>Tom
>

http://soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=1&article_id=596&page_number=1&preview=

Onkyo TX-NR901
Digital Surround Receiver
By Daniel Kumin
Photos by Tony Cordoza
April 2004

It’s a Web, Web, Web, Web world out there, so it’s no surprise Onkyo’s
latest A/V receiver, the TX-NR901, joins that company’s family of
Net-Tune products, which currently include another surround sound
receiver and a compact desktop “client” stereo receiver. Net-Tune lets
you stream audio from the Internet over a home network to a
conventional audio system or home theater instead of having to listen
on a computer sound system — a double-edged sword if ever there was
one, given the quality of most Web radio. More significant, it also
enables the TX-NR901 (and other Net-Tune clients) to treat any Windows
PC on the network as a music server so you can stream MP3 or WMA
(Windows Media Audio) files from its hard drive.

Except for a couple of significant upgrades, the TX-NR901 is virtually
identical to the Onkyo TX-NR900 that I dissected in a three-receiver
comparison last year (“Giving Receivers,” June 2003). That means it’s
a very capable 7.1-channel receiver with a full menu of Dolby Digital
and DTS modes, plenty of power, an intelligent selection of features,
and valuable flexibility, all detailed in our “fast facts” and “key
features” boxes.

FAST FACTS
RATED POWER 110 W x 7, channels driven independently, into 8 ohms from
20 Hz to 20 kHz with no more than 0.08% THD
DIMENSIONS 17 1/8 inches wide, 6 7/8 inches high, 18 inches deep
WEIGHT 42 1/2 pounds
PRICE $1,500
MANUFACTURER Onkyo USA, www.onkyousa.com, 201-825-7950

About those upgrades: Besides some internal ones, like updated,
higher-resolution digital-to-analog converters, there are two main
enhancements. First, the TX-NR901 can upconvert composite- and S-video
input signals to component video before they’re output — and it routes
its onscreen menus and displays to the component output, too. This
means that whatever motley array of sources you have connected to the
receiver’s video inputs, you can connect the receiver to your TV using
just the component output and never once have to switch inputs on your
TV. Hallelujah!

The TX-NR901’s second major enhancement is packed with it in the box:
an all-new remote control. Its predecessor’s button-pusher was
lackluster. But the new model comes with a larger, more sophisticated
preprogrammed/learning remote with a scroll-wheel selector and a small
two-line LCD readout showing both the receiver’s currently selected
input and the component the remote is set up to control. The remote
can even be switched between infrared (IR) and radio-frequency (RF)
modes — the latter is useful not only in a second-room setup but also
if the receiver is installed behind a cabinet door.

Like its predecessor, the TX-NR901 will pump out more-than-ample
real-world power for any multichannel challenge liable to come down
the pike. In my tests, it delivered outstandingly accurate, dynamic
surround playback from virtually any source, whether it was
multichannel digital or two-channel analog.

Case in point: the playful yet exciting Pirates of the Caribbean, with
one of the better-produced surround soundtracks I’ve come across in
the last year or two. The opening 10 minutes is a smorgasbord of
surround and Foley effects — hell, the entire film is! — and the Onkyo
served them up fresh, hot, and delicious. The yard*arm-to-yard*arm
engagement in Chapter 11 involves a lot of simultaneous activity in
every channel — cannonfire, musketry, swelling music, splintering
masts, pirates yelling “Har!” — but every element came through clearly
in its proper place in the sound field. And the TX-NR901 had enough
oomph to play this demanding soundtrack over my power-hungry speaker
array at fully cinematic levels and even a tad louder.

This receiver gives you unusually complete control over its surround
modes, which include the full range of Dolby Pro Logic II and DTS
Neo:6 parameter adjustments and a decent range of adjustments for
Onkyo’s own ambience modes. There’s also an option to set relative
channel delays individually for the center, surround, and back
surround speakers over a +6/–4-millisecond range — endless amusement
for any surround sound geek.

onkyo tx-nr901 back

I evaluated the Net-Tune feature by jacking the receiver’s rear-panel
RJ-45 port into my home network, which assimilated it without
complaint. The whole process took only a few minutes.

KEY FEATURES
• Dolby Digital EXand DTS-ES 6.1-channel decoding
• THX Select-certified; THX Cinema/ Surround EX modes; THX Re-Eq
• Dolby Pro Logic II, DTS Neo:6, and Logic 7 (6.1) processing for
5.1/6.1-channel playback from two-channel or matrixed four-channel
sources
• 7 DSP-surround modes, including virtual surround for two-speaker
playback
• Net-Tune streams Internet radio via broadband connection over a home
network and can stream music files from a networked Windows PC
• 2 assignable HDTV-compatible component-video inputs, 1 output;
onscreen menus and displays routed to component output
• 6 A/V inputs, 3 outputs, all with S-video; can be upconverted to
component video for output
• 5 optical, 3 assignable coaxial digital audio inputs (1 optical on
front panel);
2 optical digital outputs
• 3 stereo audio-only analog inputs (including phono); 1 record output
• Multichannel analog audio input
(8-channel) and preamp output
• 6 selectable subwoofer-output crossover frequencies
• Preprogrammed/learning IR/RF system remote can control up to 16
components; 8 macros with up to 8 steps each
• User-definable input and preset labels
• Multiroom A/V capability (composite-video only) with independent
source and volume; back surround amp channels can be redirected to
second-room stereo
• 12-volt trigger output; IR-control input and output

The TX-NR901’s Internet radio arrives subscription-free from the
XiVA-Net service (xiva.com), which provides several dozen streams of
widely varying quality. Much as I found last year, one jazz and two
classical “stations” streamed at 64 kilobits per second (kbps) from
Radio Denmark (though in Danish, these appear to originate at the BBC)
sounded much better than the rest. The rock and pop stuff was strictly
hit or miss, and far too many streams were 20-kbps WMA — the aural
equivalent of a root-canal without Novocain.

Net-Tune’s ability to stream music from a networked PC will prove more
useful to those who routinely rip their music CDs onto a computer’s
hard drive. Onkyo’s Windows interface is crude even by Windows 98
standards (especially if you’re an iTunes user), but it covers the
basics, searching your networked hard drives for MP3 or WMA music
files, creating a database, and sorting it by album, artist, or genre.
You can then create playlists by simply dragging and dropping.

Playlists can be called up onscreen via the TX-NR901 and then played
just like CDs: play/pause, fast-search, skip, and all the rest
functioned normally, if with a slight delay. I ripped some tracks to
my PC in 128-kbs WMA, and they sounded very good indeed via the
TX-NR901.

Overall, using the TX-NR901 was a pleasure. Its onscreen menus and
displays are simple and informative, and most controls and functions
are easy and intuitive to use. But the new remote control, while in
many ways an improvement over the old, is designed around a
source-selection scheme that’s, well . . . bizarre. To change the
receiver’s input, you spin the remote’s scroll wheel, rolling forward
or back through the list of 12 possibilities. As you scroll, the
receiver cycles through each input, relays clicking merrily — but if
you happen to land on, say, Tuner by mistake, you might get hit by a
burst of sound. How Onkyo came up with this scheme mystifies me.

The scroll wheel can also select which source component the remote
will control (you must first hit the Mode key). But usually you’ll
want both the input and the controlled source to change together — so
when you scroll to the DVD input, for example, the remote will control
the DVD player. Push-clicking the scroll wheel puts the remote in its
receiver-control mode, but to get back to the component you were
controlling before, you have to tap the Mode key and scroll back to it
again. It would be nice if you could get back to the previous
component by simply push-clicking the scroll wheel. Otherwise, the
remote is well laid out and its buttons generously spaced. It’s also
fully backlit — a big plus, though the LCD window is far too dim.

PLUS
Excellent sound.
Superb technical performance.
Upconverts composite- and S-video inputs to component video.
Onscreen displays on component output.

MINUS
Bizarre input-selection scheme on remote.

The TX-NR901 is a superb A/V receiver. The network-audio stuff is
really just a bonus, but a potentially useful one. If I did the
PC-music thing, running an Ethernet cable to my A/V rack would be my
first step after basic hookup. (Now, if Onkyo would serve up a Mac OS
X version of Net-Tune, or at least give it hooks to iTunes . . . .)
When it comes to centralized A/V signal management, surround sound
decoding and processing, and audio amplification, the TX-NR901
provides flagship-class receiver performance at a fair price.

[RicSeyler]

Don't overlook the Denon 3805 as an possible option.
That is the one I'm leaning toward, FWIW.

TN wrote:

>Hi Folks -
>
>Newbie question. I'm exploring a few medium high end ($1,000 - $1,500) A/V
>receivers - namely the NAD T773 A/V, and the ONKYO TX-NR901.
>
>

--
Ric Seyler

--------------------------------------
"Homer no function beer well without."
- H.J. Simpson

[Steven Sullivan]

TN <thnewton@removethis-optonline.net> wrote:
> Hi Folks -

> Newbie question. I'm exploring a few medium high end ($1,000 - $1,500) A/V
> receivers - namely the NAD T773 A/V, and the ONKYO TX-NR901.

> As I look at these two machines, it appears the NAD is the die hard
> audiophile choice, but the ONKYO appears to be the convergence gek choice!

?

First, NAD is considered entry-level stuff by audiophiles.

Second, don't go by what audiophiles think, since a lot of what they
think tends to be imaginary at worst and lacking good evidence at best.
Buy the receiver that has the *power* and *features* you need. Power
requirement is determined by the size of your room, how loud you play music, and
what speakers you'll use. Don't worry about the sound otherwise -- if you were
to compare receivers level-matched to 0.1dB blind, you'd likely find they
sound the same, whether they cost $500 or $10,000.


> Thanks for the help folks. While I realize the NAD has slightly better
> sound,

Don't jump to this conclusion.

[Severian]

"Steven Sullivan" <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message
news:ctm9g0$21i$2@reader1.panix.com...
> First, NAD is considered entry-level stuff by audiophiles.
>
> Second, don't go by what audiophiles think, since a lot of what they
> think tends to be imaginary at worst and lacking good evidence at best.

Truer words were never spoken! Anyone who'll buy a green magic marker for
$25 to mark up their CDs with will believe just about anything...

> Buy the receiver that has the *power* and *features* you need. Power
> requirement is determined by the size of your room, how loud you play
music, and
> what speakers you'll use. Don't worry about the sound otherwise -- if
you were
> to compare receivers level-matched to 0.1dB blind, you'd likely find they
> sound the same, whether they cost $500 or $10,000.

Excellent advice, you sound like an "objectivist" not a "subjectivist."

I own an integra 7.4, which is the same as an Onkyo 801 except for a few
styling features and the 901 is practically the same except for 125 watt
amps instead of 100 watters, get the 801 and save a bit of money
The nettune needs an onkyo box as far as I can tell, and a broadband
connection to the net, also you'll need a router to controll traffic, split
your broadband between your computer and your nettune.
I havent messed with this because most of what you get off the net is hughly
compressed, and sounds like crap on a decent system(mp3's are NOT CD
qualilty) so why bother?
As for the rest of the receiver the amps are okay but run outta gas at the
highest vollumes, I would rather have five decent amps instead of seven
crappy ones but there you go. ALL of the rest of the features of this
receiver are first rate, the component switching is actually usefull as the
bandwidth is 70mhz, but setting it up for the first time can be a bit
confusing as you have to turn on the upconversion feature on the video, and
some combinations turn the video off, leaving you to the front panel. I
didnt care about the amps in this one, I got it to eventually be the pre-pro
of a seperates system, so the amps didnt matter to me, and they are good,
just limited a bit at high vollume levels(REALLY HIGH VOLLUME LEVELS)
Go to audioreview.com if you want my full report, its under the Integra 7.4
reviews
"TN" <thnewton@removethis-optonline.net> wrote in message
news:cthpjo$n9q$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...
> Hi Folks -
>
> Newbie question. I'm exploring a few medium high end ($1,000 - $1,500) A/V
> receivers - namely the NAD T773 A/V, and the ONKYO TX-NR901.
>
> As I look at these two machines, it appears the NAD is the die hard
> audiophile choice, but the ONKYO appears to be the convergence gek choice!
>
> If I could, I wanted to ask a few Q's about the Onkyo's latest features
....
>
> First, the Onkyo has "digital upsampling" and the NAD doesn't. I have a
lot
> stuff like an three year old dvd/vhs combo deck, an huge tube based but
> fairly modern flat screen 36" TV, and other non-digital non-hdtv stuff....
> so does that make "digital upsampling" a value for me? Does it reduce wire
> clutter?
>
> Second, what this with the Onkyo's ethernet, and Net Tunes feature which
> includes up to 30 Internet Radio presets and advanced MP3 support. OK,
this
> sounds like you can play MP3's from your hard drive... but how does the
> music get from your PC to the receiver? The ethernet? or via regaulr RCA
> jacks? Has anyone had any experience with Net Tunes? Is it crap?
>
> Thanks for the help folks. While I realize the NAD has slightly better
> sound, as i look at this stuff, I cant help but be attracted to the
> additional features of the Onkyo.
>
> Any help, comments appreciated.
>
> Tom
>
>

[Uptown Audio]

110wpc driven "independently"!...
OK then
--
www.uptownaudio.com
Roanoke VA
(540) 343-1250


"soinie" <soiniie@hotmailll.com> wrote in message
news:2m8qv0hnfreeemrd235rpftcju8nse301p@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 23:59:19 -0500, "TN"
> <thnewton@removethis-optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>Hi Folks -
>>
>>Newbie question. I'm exploring a few medium high end ($1,000 -
>>$1,500) A/V
>>receivers - namely the NAD T773 A/V, and the ONKYO TX-NR901.
>>
>>As I look at these two machines, it appears the NAD is the die hard
>>audiophile choice, but the ONKYO appears to be the convergence gek
>>choice!
>>
>>If I could, I wanted to ask a few Q's about the Onkyo's latest
>>features ...
>>
>>First, the Onkyo has "digital upsampling" and the NAD doesn't. I
>>have a lot
>>stuff like an three year old dvd/vhs combo deck, an huge tube based
>>but
>>fairly modern flat screen 36" TV, and other non-digital non-hdtv
>>stuff....
>>so does that make "digital upsampling" a value for me? Does it
>>reduce wire
>>clutter?
>>
>>Second, what this with the Onkyo's ethernet, and Net Tunes feature
>>which
>>includes up to 30 Internet Radio presets and advanced MP3 support.
>>OK, this
>>sounds like you can play MP3's from your hard drive... but how does
>>the
>>music get from your PC to the receiver? The ethernet? or via regaulr
>>RCA
>>jacks? Has anyone had any experience with Net Tunes? Is it crap?
>>
>>Thanks for the help folks. While I realize the NAD has slightly
>>better
>>sound, as i look at this stuff, I cant help but be attracted to the
>>additional features of the Onkyo.
>>
>>Any help, comments appreciated.
>>
>>Tom
>>
>
> http://soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=1&article_id=596&page_number=1&preview=
>
> Onkyo TX-NR901
> Digital Surround Receiver
> By Daniel Kumin
> Photos by Tony Cordoza
> April 2004
>
> It's a Web, Web, Web, Web world out there, so it's no surprise
> Onkyo's
> latest A/V receiver, the TX-NR901, joins that company's family of
> Net-Tune products, which currently include another surround sound
> receiver and a compact desktop "client" stereo receiver. Net-Tune
> lets
> you stream audio from the Internet over a home network to a
> conventional audio system or home theater instead of having to
> listen
> on a computer sound system - a double-edged sword if ever there was
> one, given the quality of most Web radio. More significant, it also
> enables the TX-NR901 (and other Net-Tune clients) to treat any
> Windows
> PC on the network as a music server so you can stream MP3 or WMA
> (Windows Media Audio) files from its hard drive.
>
> Except for a couple of significant upgrades, the TX-NR901 is
> virtually
> identical to the Onkyo TX-NR900 that I dissected in a three-receiver
> comparison last year ("Giving Receivers," June 2003). That means
> it's
> a very capable 7.1-channel receiver with a full menu of Dolby
> Digital
> and DTS modes, plenty of power, an intelligent selection of
> features,
> and valuable flexibility, all detailed in our "fast facts" and "key
> features" boxes.
>
> FAST FACTS
> RATED POWER 110 W x 7, channels driven independently, into 8 ohms
> from
> 20 Hz to 20 kHz with no more than 0.08% THD
> DIMENSIONS 17 1/8 inches wide, 6 7/8 inches high, 18 inches deep
> WEIGHT 42 1/2 pounds
> PRICE $1,500
> MANUFACTURER Onkyo USA, www.onkyousa.com, 201-825-7950
>
> About those upgrades: Besides some internal ones, like updated,
> higher-resolution digital-to-analog converters, there are two main
> enhancements. First, the TX-NR901 can upconvert composite- and
> S-video
> input signals to component video before they're output - and it
> routes
> its onscreen menus and displays to the component output, too. This
> means that whatever motley array of sources you have connected to
> the
> receiver's video inputs, you can connect the receiver to your TV
> using
> just the component output and never once have to switch inputs on
> your
> TV. Hallelujah!
>
> The TX-NR901's second major enhancement is packed with it in the
> box:
> an all-new remote control. Its predecessor's button-pusher was
> lackluster. But the new model comes with a larger, more
> sophisticated
> preprogrammed/learning remote with a scroll-wheel selector and a
> small
> two-line LCD readout showing both the receiver's currently selected
> input and the component the remote is set up to control. The remote
> can even be switched between infrared (IR) and radio-frequency (RF)
> modes - the latter is useful not only in a second-room setup but
> also
> if the receiver is installed behind a cabinet door.
>
> Like its predecessor, the TX-NR901 will pump out more-than-ample
> real-world power for any multichannel challenge liable to come down
> the pike. In my tests, it delivered outstandingly accurate, dynamic
> surround playback from virtually any source, whether it was
> multichannel digital or two-channel analog.
>
> Case in point: the playful yet exciting Pirates of the Caribbean,
> with
> one of the better-produced surround soundtracks I've come across in
> the last year or two. The opening 10 minutes is a smorgasbord of
> surround and Foley effects - hell, the entire film is! - and the
> Onkyo
> served them up fresh, hot, and delicious. The yard*arm-to-yard*arm
> engagement in Chapter 11 involves a lot of simultaneous activity in
> every channel - cannonfire, musketry, swelling music, splintering
> masts, pirates yelling "Har!" - but every element came through
> clearly
> in its proper place in the sound field. And the TX-NR901 had enough
> oomph to play this demanding soundtrack over my power-hungry speaker
> array at fully cinematic levels and even a tad louder.
>
> This receiver gives you unusually complete control over its surround
> modes, which include the full range of Dolby Pro Logic II and DTS
> Neo:6 parameter adjustments and a decent range of adjustments for
> Onkyo's own ambience modes. There's also an option to set relative
> channel delays individually for the center, surround, and back
> surround speakers over a +6/-4-millisecond range - endless amusement
> for any surround sound geek.
>
> onkyo tx-nr901 back
>
> I evaluated the Net-Tune feature by jacking the receiver's
> rear-panel
> RJ-45 port into my home network, which assimilated it without
> complaint. The whole process took only a few minutes.
>
> KEY FEATURES
> . Dolby Digital EXand DTS-ES 6.1-channel decoding
> . THX Select-certified; THX Cinema/ Surround EX modes; THX Re-Eq
> . Dolby Pro Logic II, DTS Neo:6, and Logic 7 (6.1) processing for
> 5.1/6.1-channel playback from two-channel or matrixed four-channel
> sources
> . 7 DSP-surround modes, including virtual surround for two-speaker
> playback
> . Net-Tune streams Internet radio via broadband connection over a
> home
> network and can stream music files from a networked Windows PC
> . 2 assignable HDTV-compatible component-video inputs, 1 output;
> onscreen menus and displays routed to component output
> . 6 A/V inputs, 3 outputs, all with S-video; can be upconverted to
> component video for output
> . 5 optical, 3 assignable coaxial digital audio inputs (1 optical on
> front panel);
> 2 optical digital outputs
> . 3 stereo audio-only analog inputs (including phono); 1 record
> output
> . Multichannel analog audio input
> (8-channel) and preamp output
> . 6 selectable subwoofer-output crossover frequencies
> . Preprogrammed/learning IR/RF system remote can control up to 16
> components; 8 macros with up to 8 steps each
> . User-definable input and preset labels
> . Multiroom A/V capability (composite-video only) with independent
> source and volume; back surround amp channels can be redirected to
> second-room stereo
> . 12-volt trigger output; IR-control input and output
>
> The TX-NR901's Internet radio arrives subscription-free from the
> XiVA-Net service (xiva.com), which provides several dozen streams of
> widely varying quality. Much as I found last year, one jazz and two
> classical "stations" streamed at 64 kilobits per second (kbps) from
> Radio Denmark (though in Danish, these appear to originate at the
> BBC)
> sounded much better than the rest. The rock and pop stuff was
> strictly
> hit or miss, and far too many streams were 20-kbps WMA - the aural
> equivalent of a root-canal without Novocain.
>
> Net-Tune's ability to stream music from a networked PC will prove
> more
> useful to those who routinely rip their music CDs onto a computer's
> hard drive. Onkyo's Windows interface is crude even by Windows 98
> standards (especially if you're an iTunes user), but it covers the
> basics, searching your networked hard drives for MP3 or WMA music
> files, creating a database, and sorting it by album, artist, or
> genre.
> You can then create playlists by simply dragging and dropping.
>
> Playlists can be called up onscreen via the TX-NR901 and then played
> just like CDs: play/pause, fast-search, skip, and all the rest
> functioned normally, if with a slight delay. I ripped some tracks to
> my PC in 128-kbs WMA, and they sounded very good indeed via the
> TX-NR901.
>
> Overall, using the TX-NR901 was a pleasure. Its onscreen menus and
> displays are simple and informative, and most controls and functions
> are easy and intuitive to use. But the new remote control, while in
> many ways an improvement over the old, is designed around a
> source-selection scheme that's, well . . . bizarre. To change the
> receiver's input, you spin the remote's scroll wheel, rolling
> forward
> or back through the list of 12 possibilities. As you scroll, the
> receiver cycles through each input, relays clicking merrily - but if
> you happen to land on, say, Tuner by mistake, you might get hit by a
> burst of sound. How Onkyo came up with this scheme mystifies me.
>
> The scroll wheel can also select which source component the remote
> will control (you must first hit the Mode key). But usually you'll
> want both the input and the controlled source to change together -
> so
> when you scroll to the DVD input, for example, the remote will
> control
> the DVD player. Push-clicking the scroll wheel puts the remote in
> its
> receiver-control mode, but to get back to the component you were
> controlling before, you have to tap the Mode key and scroll back to
> it
> again. It would be nice if you could get back to the previous
> component by simply push-clicking the scroll wheel. Otherwise, the
> remote is well laid out and its buttons generously spaced. It's also
> fully backlit - a big plus, though the LCD window is far too dim.
>
> PLUS
> Excellent sound.
> Superb technical performance.
> Upconverts composite- and S-video inputs to component video.
> Onscreen displays on component output.
>
> MINUS
> Bizarre input-selection scheme on remote.
>
> The TX-NR901 is a superb A/V receiver. The network-audio stuff is
> really just a bonus, but a potentially useful one. If I did the
> PC-music thing, running an Ethernet cable to my A/V rack would be my
> first step after basic hookup. (Now, if Onkyo would serve up a Mac
> OS
> X version of Net-Tune, or at least give it hooks to iTunes . . . .)
> When it comes to centralized A/V signal management, surround sound
> decoding and processing, and audio amplification, the TX-NR901
> provides flagship-class receiver performance at a fair price.
>
>
>
>

[T]

Steven Sullivan wrote:
> TN <thnewton@removethis-optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>Hi Folks -
>
>
>>Newbie question. I'm exploring a few medium high end ($1,000 - $1,500) A/V
>>receivers - namely the NAD T773 A/V, and the ONKYO TX-NR901.
>
>
>>As I look at these two machines, it appears the NAD is the die hard
>>audiophile choice, but the ONKYO appears to be the convergence gek choice!
>
>
> ?
>
> First, NAD is considered entry-level stuff by audiophiles.
>

I'm glad somebody mentioned this because I wanted to tack on a follow up
question: Who is the same name brand under the skin of NAD equipment?


TBerk

[TH]

"TN" <thnewton@removethis-optonline.net> wrote in
news:cthpjo$n9q$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com:

I just bought a Pioneer Elite 56xi and am thrilled with it. I'm a novice
also but did a little bit of research before I purchased. I can't believe
the sound difference vs my old Sony (only 2 years old).

TH

[Steven Sullivan]

TH <th0093spamstinks@comcast.net> wrote:
> "TN" <thnewton@removethis-optonline.net> wrote in
> news:cthpjo$n9q$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com:

> I just bought a Pioneer Elite 56xi and am thrilled with it. I'm a novice
> also but did a little bit of research before I purchased. I can't believe
> the sound difference vs my old Sony (only 2 years old).

well, if you're using he MCACC autosetup/EQ of the 56txi, of
course it's going to sound
different from another receiver. That's not quite a fair
comparison



--

-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.

[Mike]

You guys don't know crap, and generalizations like $25 marker comments just
drive it home. If you have decent speakers you hear a big difference in
receivers. And power ratings are crap too, most cheaper lines test power
with only one channel driven and with low current draws.
Learn a bit before you give your crap advice. Or at least listen to
recievers on decent speakers.

Mike

"Severian" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:8xyLd.4376$S3.396@newsread2.news.atl.earthlin k.net...
>
> "Steven Sullivan" <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:ctm9g0$21i$2@reader1.panix.com...
>> First, NAD is considered entry-level stuff by audiophiles.
>>
>> Second, don't go by what audiophiles think, since a lot of what they
>> think tends to be imaginary at worst and lacking good evidence at best.
>
> Truer words were never spoken! Anyone who'll buy a green magic marker for
> $25 to mark up their CDs with will believe just about anything...
>
>> Buy the receiver that has the *power* and *features* you need. Power
>> requirement is determined by the size of your room, how loud you play
> music, and
>> what speakers you'll use. Don't worry about the sound otherwise -- if
> you were
>> to compare receivers level-matched to 0.1dB blind, you'd likely find they
>> sound the same, whether they cost $500 or $10,000.
>
> Excellent advice, you sound like an "objectivist" not a "subjectivist."
>
>

[David B.]

Mike wrote:
> You guys don't know crap, and generalizations like $25 marker comments just
> drive it home. If you have decent speakers you hear a big difference in
> receivers. And power ratings are crap too, most cheaper lines test power
> with only one channel driven and with low current draws.
> Learn a bit before you give your crap advice. Or at least listen to
> recievers on decent speakers.
>
> Mike


Mike,
Have you ever posted under the name steve99?

David

[Severian]

Another kool-aid drinker heard from!

I bet you typed this with your fingers stained with ink that only the
constant fondling of old copies of Stereophile and Absolute Sound can
produce...

"Mike" <mikepos1@YAHOO.COM> wrote in message
news:yvbOd.228475$Np3.9495986@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> You guys don't know crap, and generalizations like $25 marker comments
just
> drive it home. If you have decent speakers you hear a big difference in
> receivers. And power ratings are crap too, most cheaper lines test power
> with only one channel driven and with low current draws.
> Learn a bit before you give your crap advice. Or at least listen to
> recievers on decent speakers.
>
> Mike
>
> "Severian" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:8xyLd.4376$S3.396@newsread2.news.atl.earthlin k.net...
> >
> > "Steven Sullivan" <ssully@panix.com> wrote in message
> > news:ctm9g0$21i$2@reader1.panix.com...
> >> First, NAD is considered entry-level stuff by audiophiles.
> >>
> >> Second, don't go by what audiophiles think, since a lot of what they
> >> think tends to be imaginary at worst and lacking good evidence at best.
> >
> > Truer words were never spoken! Anyone who'll buy a green magic marker
for
> > $25 to mark up their CDs with will believe just about anything...
> >
> >> Buy the receiver that has the *power* and *features* you need. Power
> >> requirement is determined by the size of your room, how loud you play
> > music, and
> >> what speakers you'll use. Don't worry about the sound otherwise -- if
> > you were
> >> to compare receivers level-matched to 0.1dB blind, you'd likely find
they
> >> sound the same, whether they cost $500 or $10,000.
> >
> > Excellent advice, you sound like an "objectivist" not a "subjectivist."
> >
> >
>
>

[1shado1@sbcglobal.net]

Mostly hangs out in computer forums. For a second I thought he might
be Steve's evil triplet (the other having died laughing).

Jeff

Severian wrote:
> Another kool-aid drinker heard from!
>
> I bet you typed this with your fingers stained with ink that only the
> constant fondling of old copies of Stereophile and Absolute Sound can
> produce...
>
> "Mike" <mikepos1@YAHOO.COM> wrote in message
> news:yvbOd.228475$Np3.9495986@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> > You guys don't know crap, and generalizations like $25 marker
comments
> just
> > drive it home. If you have decent speakers you hear a big
difference in
> > receivers. And power ratings are crap too, most cheaper lines test
power
> > with only one channel driven and with low current draws.
> > Learn a bit before you give your crap advice. Or at least listen
to
> > recievers on decent speakers.
> >
> > Mike

[Severian]

<1shado1@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1107924085.287487.164640@l41g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Mostly hangs out in computer forums. For a second I thought he might
> be Steve's evil triplet (the other having died laughing).
>
> Jeff

LOL! It's really funny to get this type of subjectivist audiophool rant from
someone over receivers of all things. A "high end" everything sounds
different rant for a mid-fi product! Talk about delusions of adequacy...

>
> Severian wrote:
> > Another kool-aid drinker heard from!
> >
> > I bet you typed this with your fingers stained with ink that only the
> > constant fondling of old copies of Stereophile and Absolute Sound can
> > produce...
> >
> > "Mike" <mikepos1@YAHOO.COM> wrote in message
> > news:yvbOd.228475$Np3.9495986@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> > > You guys don't know crap, and generalizations like $25 marker
> comments
> > just
> > > drive it home. If you have decent speakers you hear a big
> difference in
> > > receivers. And power ratings are crap too, most cheaper lines test
> power
> > > with only one channel driven and with low current draws.
> > > Learn a bit before you give your crap advice. Or at least listen
> to
> > > recievers on decent speakers.
> > >
> > > Mike
>

[Steven Sullivan]

Mike <mikepos1@yahoo.com> wrote:
> You guys don't know crap, and generalizations like $25 marker comments just
> drive it home. If you have decent speakers you hear a big difference in
> receivers.

If you listen sighted and not level matched, you certainly will. However,
Tom Nousaine among others have conducted blind trials of people
who made such claims -- and in every case so far, they've been
unable to verify those claims when elementary controls are put in place.



> And power ratings are crap too, most cheaper lines test power
> with only one channel driven and with low current draws.
> Learn a bit before you give your crap advice. Or at least listen to
> recievers on decent speakers.

Learn about perceptual bias. Learn about scientific method.
Learn what actual, reputable audio component engineers have to say
about 'amplifier sound'. Then come back and apologize.

You can start here:

http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/ampins/pseudo/subjectv.htm