OK, Here is what I found:
I went to my local home entertainment store and had a chance to listen to the Rotel & Denon 4800 (they did not have the 3802) side by side on some B&W speakers. The M&L's I would like to get are in another room.
The Denon seemed to have one up in the Home theater category. The Rotel seemed better in the music category especially the classical and slower music. So I would have to say I would at this point go for the Denon 4800, but the only one left was a floor model. I still would like to hear the 3802 next to the 4800, but I think I am still floating toward the Denon.

Thanks,
Don

... so my Onkyo rep tells me that it's true, there is no such thing as "discrete 7.1' yet; all modes of so-called "7.1' are really 6.1 with a matrix centre0rear signal being split out into two; so that two center-rears actually operate in a fashion similar to the original Pro Logic concept (only it's one channel intow two, instead of two channels into three).

So, ttiger, your prediction of 8.1 is probably right on the money. ... Mike

I'd be willing to guess that, by that time, we'll have 8.2 channels, with there being a stereo sub-bass signal on the .2, or maybe separate front and rear bass channels. With increased and/or better low-loss compression, there's theoretically no limit. I've read about the possibility of separate upper and lower (ceiling and floor) channels, for separate up and down directivity!

16.4 anybody???!

Larry

This message was edited by Larry Fine on 09/03/01 21:00.10.

This sort of reminds me of the IDE hard drive spec... they kept running into limits, then upping the spec a little bit. Instead plan for the next 10 years. Come out with an audio spec with practically no theoretical minimum or maximum bitrate, say 32.8 possible channels, etc. :-)

... I'm thinking that, with no theoretical limit, the only thing standing in our way is the room itself! So, all four walls should be converted into thinly-covered drivers, with the floor as the subwoofer and the ceiling as overhead surround... ... Mike

"Sounds" good to me!!!

Larry

Mike,

"if you build it they will come" or at least I will!

Don

I'll put it this way: I might not buy a 16 channel sound system, but I'd sure like to hear one!!!

Larry

Who knows where it will go?? Tomlinson Holman (the "TH" in "THX") thinks it will 10.2. It is an incredible demo...read about it at [Link: audiorevolution.com]

BTW, I am a firm believer in separates, being an avid Meridian and Lexicon fan. At the lower end, Rotel, Marantz, B&K, etc. still offer greater flexibility and, yes, if set up properly, better sound.

I am NOT a big fan of Rotel because of the way they run their business, but I find it hard to believe that it was a fair comparision (things not set up correctly) if it lost to a Denon. Now don't get up in arms, Denon, Marantz and Onkyo have seemed to risen to the top in receiver sound quality so I am not singling Denon out as a "bad" unit; I just prefer separates! Sorry Mike!

randy

Hi Randy,

Interesting article-is this something that they can tunr into mainstream "for the masses" though?

What is it aout Rotel and the way the business is run that you don't like? I have owned Rotel for about 4 years now and have had to use their warranty support once and had no problems (Of course this was done through my dealer so I had no dealings directly with Rotel). Also, I find their price/performance hard to beat.

I agree 100% that separates will sound better than any reciever *if setup correctly*....Tony

When you say separates sound better then any receiver are you also of the opinion that "lower" end separates sound better then a "higher" end receiver? Also I was under the impression that an Receiver such as the Denon 5800 was basically separates "in the same box" is this the case?

One last comment, I did get the 3802! I love it so far and got a GREAT deal on it, under $1000 with tax and all from a local dealer. Thank you all for the help.

Don

Hi Don

Glad you are happy with your choice! Yep that is my opinion that lower end seperates sound better than the high end recievers...for the simple reason that the lower end pieces are still higher end than receivers.

At one point I owned a Rotel RSX 965 their highest end receiver (which, at the time, competed with B&K's highest end receiver). I picked the Rotel after audtioning it against Denon, Yamaha, and Marantz. When I upgraded to seperates it was head and shoulders above the receiver.

Also, don't forget that the high end seperates can be in the 10s of thousand range per piece. My Rotel seperates 1K a piece aren't in the same league as say Krell, Lexicon...etc so they are "low" end in the seperates world...Tony

It's two-cents time again.

Yes, a receiver is a "box containing separates", a pre-amp/processor, a tuner, and a power amp. Theoretically speaking, there ought to be no difference, ASSUMING the components are the same.

However, electrically speaking, there are good reasons for the difference:

First and foremost is the sharing of a single power supply, even though the preamp section should have its own voltage regulation and filtering. The high-end equipment that have the power supply in a separate box do so for a reason.

Second, with the advent of digital processing, even pre/pros would benefit from the analog and digital sections being in separate cases, but separate power supplies are the best compromise; actual separate chassis would require an incredible amout of inter-connections, which might produce more noise and connection problems than it would solve.

Larry

I agree that the shared power supplies is the biggest reason separates start out with an advantage, but there are many other reasons.

A few that come to mind follow, but let me qualify that today's recievers are INCREDIBLE compared to those just a few years ago and when viewed with the task given! They have come a long way and do rival entry level separates (from quality companies). Would I let one in my home? NO, but it is probably due more to the fact that I am older and set in my ways than just pure sonic differences.

Remember, a receiver is a preamp, processor, tuner and multi-channel amplifier. Amps put out heat and need large heat sinks and/or fans to cool them. Few receivers have the physical space for proper heat sinks, nor do many have fans.

All electronic components change their electrical characteristics when they run outside of their designed operating range. Heat can cause power supplies to get noisy, add distortion and output unstable voltages that affect the entire food chain. Sonic characteristics are no longer the same.

Digital Signal Processors (DSP) are basically sophisticated computer chips that must not be subjected to too much heat or noise. Think about your PC and the heat sink and fans on just the processor chip. You don't get that luxury in receivers due to space compromises.

Cramming so much in to so little real estate creates physical separation limits forcing the video to be too close to the audio, the analog too close to the digital section. And then we put a tuner (RF device)close to the DSP and D/A converters (which we just raised the bandwidth on to support new formats!) just because we like challenges! Basic shielding principals have not changed since tuners were huge, separate boxes.

The solution? Put the hot, noisy amps in their own box with lots of cooling and their own power supply. Get ANY RF out of the box (tuners, RF modulators, demodulators) into their own. OK, now we have at least 3 boxes. Life is good. Life is separates! Hey, let's go to an extreme and take the video section and isolate it by having it's power supply turn off when in audio only processing. Or better yet, put it in it's own box! Now thats a system!

randy

Yeah, but I still can't hear the difference at home... ;-) ... Mike