Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Playback Forum => Topic started by: Genghis Cougar Mellen Khan on November 11, 2005, 06:25:33 PM
-
http://www.ultimateavmag.com/avreceivers/1005sony/
:-\
Highs and Lows
Highs
• HDMI and component-video switching/processing
• Ample input/output matrix with assignable digital and component-video inputs
• Attractive and user-friendly front panel display and controls
• Knobs and buttons have great tactile feel
Lows
• HDMI upconversion feature accommodates only 480i component-video signals
•Digital amplifier produces flat, uninvolving soundfield, restrained bass, and compressed dynamics
•Confusing menu navigation and quirky remote make setup an exercise in aggravation
The Soundtrack Speaks Volumes
In my review of the Arcam AVR250 receiver, I noted, "When reproducing a well-engineered stereo recording of acoustic musical instruments or voices—still the acid test for a receiver, in my view—the Arcam produces a realistic sense of air around the instruments. You feel that you are listening in on musicians performing within an actual acoustic space, rather than just hearing a flat representation coming out of a speaker. To me, this is what high-end audio is all about."
Sadly, the Sony failed this acid test on 2-channel material. Although never actively unpleasant to listen to, the STR-DA7100ES sounded homogenized and colorless, even when reproducing the most outstanding recordings in my collection. The soundfield never seemed to extend beyond the boundaries of the speakers, and in fact seemed to be trapped between and behind them.
My notebook is also sprinkled with comments about the bass, which I found "tight but restrained, with little body and a lack of roundness."
Multichannel DVD soundtracks are better served by the Sony, though even here the dynamics struck me as a bit flat and constrained. This is surprising given the unit's ample 170Wpc output.
-
Sounds like a reviewer who hasn't goten used to class d technoilogy or doesn't want to embrace it. The review of this unit in hifi+ out of Britain was prety favorable.
Might have been hifi news on second thought, but they liked it at it's price!
D~
-
Sounds like a reviewer who hasn't goten used to class d technoilogy or doesn't want to embrace it. The review of this unit in hifi+ out of Britain was prety favorable.
Might have been hifi news on second thought, but they liked it at it's price!
D~
Do you have a link? I couldn't locate it.
Or a reviewer who thought it sounded homogenized and colorless, even when reproducing the most outstanding recordings in his collection. With a soundfield that never seemed to extend beyond the boundaries of the speakers, trapped between and behind them.
Sound is sound, is it not?
TJN (whoever the hell he is) follows up with a more favorable word.
But the sound? For whatever reason, my impressions couldn't have been more different than Larry's. I did find that, compared to sweeter, warmer-sounding receivers like the Denon AVR-5805 (review soon), the Sony can sound a little cold and matter-of-fact. It also didn't conceal problems in the program material. Yes, dare I say it, some listeners may find it "digital" sounding, though I'd argue that it does no more and no less than pass along all the other digital things going on in any home theater system, from the program material to the soundfield processing. Devotees of tube sound, however, or of forgiving solid-state gear—might want to look elsewhere. Larry didn't say anything about brightness in his review; I suspect that it was less evident through his speakers than mine.
My setup and system does differ from Larry's in several important ways. I currently use Revel speakers (Performa F32, C32, M22, and B15 subwoofer). I nearly always drive them with the subwoofer engaged and all the other speakers rolled off below 80Hz, even the floor-standing F32s. Larry uses no subwoofer and drives his big front left and right B&W 801s full range. My room is larger, which allows my front speakers to be moved further out from the wall behind them, giving the system a head start in creating a wide, deep soundfield. Such a setup may even enhance that soundfield to the point where it is more likely to survive compromises elsewhere in the system.
-
huh.
Doug says it sounds nicer than the old 9000es
-
huh.
Doug says it sounds nicer than the old 9000es
My room is larger, which allows my front speakers to be moved further out from the wall behind them
I nearly always drive them with the subwoofer engaged and all the other speakers rolled off below 80Hz, even the floor-standing F32s. Larry uses no subwoofer and drives his big front left and right B&W 801s full range.
When I demoed the B&W's (poor man choosing between 705/805) I tried out the 803's and 801's for fun (plus the sales rep wanted a reason to crank my choice in cd's on them), they had them set up very close to the back wall, when pulled out the soundstage appeared to double (maybe 3' - 4' off the wall). The 705's didn't seem to gain as much of a difference, perhaps because of the cabinets top angle, the 8XX series tweeters placement and encloseure design are much different in that reguard. Perhaps he would have benefitted by pulling them out a little to breathe, reguardless if he thought the Arcam sounded better (assuming the setup was the same) it still leaves me wondering. ^-^
As Doug said, If it works and you like it then it is perfect!, I can't find anyone that carries anything over the 3100 in stock, for now I'll hold off until I can listen to one..
-
While sound is very subjective, I am willing to guess that one of the probelms may have been that the receiver is very revealing. It does not mask anything in the program material. I know my 3000es lets it al shine through. Many guest who have come to my house find that very objectionable. For example, there are always clipped microphones in movie dialogue. With the Sony digital receivers, these clips stand out. It really bugs people who are not used to it. Just a thought.
Or maybe he just didn't like it..... ;D
-
While sound is very subjective, I am willing to guess that one of the probelms may have been that the receiver is very revealing. It does not mask anything in the program material. I know my 3000es lets it al shine through. Many guest who have come to my house find that very objectionable. For example, there are always clipped microphones in movie dialogue. With the Sony digital receivers, these clips stand out. It really bugs people who are not used to it. Just a thought.
Or maybe he just didn't like it..... ;D
How do you get used to clipping dialogue?? If this ever happened in my setup it would be out the door in 2 seconds flat.
Also, what is getting used to Class D amplification supposed to mean?? If it sounds bad, it sounds bad. One should have to get used to what they think is bad sound. That is why many people make gear sound a little different. I know I don't like tubes, so I stay away and I don't think I'll ever try and get used to it.
Ultimate AV usually tell it like it is and I respect them for that. I will say though, I haven't seen many reviews by this individual.
-
While sound is very subjective, I am willing to guess that one of the probelms may have been that the receiver is very revealing. It does not mask anything in the program material. I know my 3000es lets it al shine through. Many guest who have come to my house find that very objectionable. For example, there are always clipped microphones in movie dialogue. With the Sony digital receivers, these clips stand out. It really bugs people who are not used to it. Just a thought.
Or maybe he just didn't like it..... ;D
How do you get used to clipping dialogue?? If this ever happened in my setup it would be out the door in 2 seconds flat.
Also, what is getting used to Class D amplification supposed to mean?? If it sounds bad, it sounds bad. One should have to get used to what they think is bad sound. That is why many people make gear sound a little different. I know I don't like tubes, so I stay away and I don't think I'll ever try and get used to it.
Ultimate AV usually tell it like it is and I respect them for that. I will say though, I haven't seen many reviews by this individual.
Your right, you do not get used to clipping. I did not word that very well. It just brings out everything - the good and bad. And, yes, you hear those clips for sure. I guess I like listening for production flaws. It is interesting how much more effort seems to go into the visual end of film and not the aural.
-
Also, what is getting used to Class D amplification supposed to mean??
Class D amplification refers to use of a (very high speed) switching power supply to generate a Pulse Width Modulated (PWM signal). This PWM signal acts as a carrier for the audio signal, which modulates it to drive the output stage. These amps sometimes get the misnomer "digital amps." Digital refers to the nature of the switching - either 100% on or 100% off. Unlike class A, B, and AB amps, there is no gradual increase to maximum or decay to zero when the current is switched. This allows for a very high energy efficiency in the amplifier.
Some of the earlier Class D amps didn't sound very good. I suspect manufacturers didn't figure out how to design around the new technology right away. The amp I own (PS Audio HCA-2) is of this type and I have been very happy with its performance. At $800 used, it was a good buy for me as well.
-
I know what the various amp classes are, I guess my question was unclear. If I were reviewing a piece I would not care whether it is Class A, AB, D, etc... If the sound wasn't to my liking or I thought that it sounded one way verses another amp it would be noted. I don't think the reviewer was comparing class d amplification. The sound of class D should be the same as all the others. Now, from the cheaper ones I've heard they have leaned to the brighter side of the spectrum. The Spectron Musician was the best sounding class D I've heard thus far.
-
My bad. I'm the one who didn't read "getting used to" in your previous comment. Carry on.
-
I know what the various amp classes are, I guess my question was unclear. If I were reviewing a piece I would not care whether it is Class A, AB, D, etc... If the sound wasn't to my liking or I thought that it sounded one way verses another amp it would be noted. I don't think the reviewer was comparing class d amplification. The sound of class D should be the same as all the others. Now, from the cheaper ones I've heard they have leaned to the brighter side of the spectrum. The Spectron Musician was the best sounding class D I've heard thus far.
I have heard upwards of 10 class d amps of various $$ amounts, and they certainly have charchteristics in common. That was my only point there S.
D~