Does an A/V receiver have "sound qualities" unique to it's brand?

[Iguana Man]

Thanks to brttlt I had a thought...yes indeed! Can A/V receivers have a "sound" characteristicly unique unto themselves?

I've read many a forum, grasped a bit, and have always wondered how true this is: Receiver "A" doesn't match speaker "X". "It will highlight the 'good/bad' (opinion) of speaker X."

In your experience, how much water does this hold?

For instance, I've "heard" that Yamaha receivers tend to sound "bright". Meaning that if you match them with metal dome tweeters (as in your speakers) it will accentuate the highs, and possibly give a "harsh upper treble". On the other hand, I've heard that Denon receivers tend to emphasize the lower mid/bass and would not be sutible for "bass heavy" speakers.

Sorry to pick two of each that many probably own...sorry! But do you get my drift on what I'm asking?

Curious.....

[Chromy]

I think that they do, however the differences in sound get very small; to the point where most people... myself included, wouldn't be able to hear the difference in a double blind test.

There is/can be a difference, but not nearly as big of a difference (by a long shot) as what you get when you switch speakers.

[Iguana Man]

Originally Posted by Chromy

I think that they do, however the differences in sound get very small; to the point where most people... myself included, wouldn't be able to hear the difference in a double blind test.

There is/can be a difference, but not nearly as big of a difference (by a long shot) as what you get when you switch speakers.

Then wouldn't it be prudent to "match" them correctly to attain the best possible sound?

Not trying to nitpick, and I do understand where you're coming from, but optimizing the "synergy" would be a good thing no?

[snipsnapsappy]

There are so many factors in the sound of a reciever that I can not fathom whether or not that different companies really have that much different of a sound. If a Denon is bass heavy, you can turn down the bass, if a Yamaha is treble heavy, you turn down the treble.

There are also so many factors such as delay, crossover, channel Level, DSP processing, room accoustics, THX etc. that comparing recievers is very difficult.

Case in point, my friend, who bought Axiom M50's, VP150, and QS8's recently, invited me to his place in San Francisco, I listened to his system, and thought it sounded pretty bad (both music and HT).

Was it because his brand new Harmon Kardon 430 reciever is that much worse than my Denon 2802? Likely not

The Axiom M50's are believed to have slightly less midrange performance than my M22's but the difference should not be the alarming change I heard.

So the reason is likely in the little set up areas and/or his room accoustics. That is what matters most, I think, not the slight differences in recievers.

[Sycho]

burn in some times makes a big difference. run it hard for bout 6 hours will usually do it

[mrkeeling]

I disagree.

True, room acoustics have more influence on sound quality than anything else does, but there can be a significant sound quality difference as a result of different electronics. Especially with A/V receivers, which have a lot more stuff implemented that can colour the sound than analog premp/amp.

Of course what “sounds good” is personal preference, but the difference is there and it is not subtle.

[RedBaronF2001]

I agree with room acoustics being the most influencial factor of system's sound characteristic. Case in point - a customer of mine had B&W Nautilus 805s and an HTM 1 center all hooked up to an older Harman/Kardon AVR-7000 all stuffed in a very small room with hardwood floors (no rug) and lots of windows. It sounded terrible. He agreed. He couldn't understand why my "cheaper" system sound so much better.

Well, he finally moved all that gear down to the basement (which was drywalled in and carpeted) in a much larger room (24 x 12). The sound got much, much better. Still, he wasn't satisfied. We upgraded him to Rotel separates and all is well.

This is not to say a small room with windows won't work. I'm also not saying Harman/Kardon is not good. My point is that you should buy and match equipment according to your room and basically your "sonic" budget. Source equipment (dvd player, cd player, turntable) is often overlooked. I believe these to be most important next to amplification and then speakers.

[Iguana Man]

Originally Posted by mrkeeling

I disagree.

True, room acoustics have more influence on sound quality than anything else does, but there can be a significant sound quality difference as a result of different electronics. Especially with A/V receivers, which have a lot more stuff implemented that can colour the sound than analog premp/amp.

Of course what “sounds good” is personal preference, but the difference is there and it is not subtle.

I'm sorry....do we know you? It's been a while since I've seen you post, and it's good to see ya back.

I'm well aware of the room syndrome everyone (I happen to suffer from it with my 12'x12' room ). However, my initial post asked if A/V receivers have their own sound qualities, so I'd like to focus on that. I know all sorts of stuff comes into play, but I asked the question based on initial purchases and trying to "match" the front end with the speakers. Plus, I was curious to know if others heard "generalizations" like I mentioned with the Yamy's and Denons (for example only! ).

Perhaps this question would be better: Has anyone switched A/V receivers (all else being the same - speakers/room/etc) and noticed a difference? Reduced "brightness", less bass "bloat", etc...??

And MrKeeling, I remember that linked post of yours...but that don't count! You were talking seperates

[mrkeeling]

Originally Posted by Iguana Man

I'm sorry....do we know you? It's been a while since I've seen you post, and it's good to see ya back.

Well, what can I say – I don’t talk (post) much. :p

Originally Posted by Iguana Man

And MrKeeling, I remember that linked post of yours...but that don't count! You were talking seperates

That’s exactly the point. If there can be so much difference in separates, there has to be even more in receivers considering that there is a lot more elements involved in sound producing game and a lot more interaction between them - one box, one power supply (in most cases), etc.
Or they all sound equally BAD.

There is definitely common perception that Yamy’s are bright and Denons are worm, but I never heard them in controlled environment so I can't really judge them.

The only three I can talk about is my old H/K AVR100, NAD T763 and my current Arcam AVR200.

IMO H/K and NAD sounded pretty similar in up/mid range with NAD having more controlled low end. In other words I was pretty disappointed with sound improvement that NAD brought – but keep in mind that both units that I had in my home for a short while (couple of days) ended up being faulty (one was popping like crazy every time I switched source and the other one was shutting off at its leisure). Then came Arcam. Things improved noticeably. Soundstage opened in both wideness and depth, a lot more detail and refinement. NAD may have more pronounced bass, but Arcam is not lacking and it sounds more balanced all across the frequencies, more natural.

The thing that I noticed not so long ago when listening to Buena Vista Social Club DVD-a. On one of the songs there is a distinguished castanets sound (or some other very similar instrument) that is now clearly coming from my dining room! That is front-left/surround-left imaging with incredible depth! My old H/K was never able to pull that off!

[Iguana Man]

Originally Posted by mrkeeling

Well, what can I say – I don’t talk (post) much. :p

It's ok....I still lov....uhmmm, enjoy it more when you finally do post!

Originally Posted by mrkeeling

That’s exactly the point. If there can be so much difference in separates, there has to be even more in receivers considering that there is a lot more elements involved in sound producing game and a lot more interaction between them - one box, one power supply (in most cases), etc.

Now that is something I didn't consider....thanks for getting this feeble mind working again.