Upgrading my TV, should I upgrade my amp as well?

Ian Dudley

Active Member
For the last 8 years I've had a Denon 1912 receiver sitting in front of a Samsung PS59D6900 plasma TV, with my inputs (Apple TV, BD Deck and Virgin Tivo) going in to the Denon and just a single connection to the TV. (Speakers are 5x Kef T101s with a Rel Q200e sub). So I'm switching audio and video on the Denon, and use the (now very worn) Denon remote as a single remote commander for everything.

This has worked great, but sadly my Samsung TV has died and I'm likely to replacing it with a Panasonic OLED.

But, am I correct in thinking that my 1912 won't be able to pass through the 4k signal, so if I continue with my current setup I'll peg everything to HD, which seems a bit pointless?

That seems to leave me a couple of choices.

1. I connect the Apple Tv and Tivo direct to the TV, then use ARC to send audio to the Amp, accepting that I might not get all the flashiest audio modes, but the Denon is eight years old anyway so probably can't decode them anyway. The BD deck can carry on going via the Denon as it's HD only and I doubt I'll bother getting a 4K BD deck now.

Pros, I don't have to spend any money
Cons, more cables through the trunking to the back of the TV, more complex remote control management, limited audio formats via ARC

2. I buy a new receiver that is 4K compatible.

Pros, works just like the current solution, I get newer sound formats, hopefully get a new remote commander that isn't worn out.
Cons, selling my wife on a few hundred quid of new amp on top of the money we're already dropping on a TV.

Any thoughts on the above? How complex would the remote and audio management be do you think and are there any other pros and cons I'm not seeing here?

Also, if if I avoid divorce and go with option 2, what would be a good modern equivalent to the 1912?

The Denon AVRX2600 AVRX550BT has caught my eye as being a good unit for a decent price (based on Denon always being good). Doesn't have Atmos, but as I only have a fairly modest 5.1 setup I'm not sure I'd be able to tell the difference anyway?

Any other brands or models I should be considering? My last two receivers have been Denon, a 1907 before the 1912, but prior to that I had the excellent Sony DB925, so I'm open to other brands if they give more bang for my buck.

Any advice or info appreciated.
 
Last edited:

Ian Dudley

Active Member
Just had a look at the Sony DH790, which while a fairly basic receiver seems to have everything I need, plus Dolby Atmos and more power per channel than the Denon for about the same money. Looks sleek as well.
 
D

Deleted member 39241

Guest
The Denon 2600 is a much better AVR than the Sony DH790, and it does have Atmos support. I would go with that.
 

Ian Dudley

Active Member
The Denon 2600 is a much better AVR than the Sony DH790, and it does have Atmos support. I would go with that.

Sorry, I managed to quote the wrong Denon model number. It was the 550 I was looking at not the 2600. I'm trying to keep my amp budget below £300, both because I'm already dropping a bomb on the OLED screen, but also that is roughly what I paid for 1912 a few years ago which has served me well.

With just a 5.1 setup using small speakers and an active sub, and three input devices, I don't need a monster unit with many bells and whistles.
 

Dasiz

Active Member
i wouldn't drop to a lower tier model than the equivalent you already have, whilst the lower model is newer, i would be very doubtful if it will match performance
 

GAmbrose

Well-known Member
Sorry, I managed to quote the wrong Denon model number. It was the 550 I was looking at not the 2600. I'm trying to keep my amp budget below £300, both because I'm already dropping a bomb on the OLED screen, but also that is roughly what I paid for 1912 a few years ago which has served me well.

With just a 5.1 setup using small speakers and an active sub, and three input devices, I don't need a monster unit with many bells and whistles.

Maybe not, but you definitely want something with eARC and the Denons are fantastic value for money.

What about a second hand one from the members market?
 

Ian Dudley

Active Member
I've loved the last two Denons I've had, but at my price point they don't seem to come with Atmos. Equally, I'm not sure how much I would notice given I only have a 5.1 setup and it's very unlikely I'll be changing that.

What would be the current or recent equivalents of the 1912 from a quality perspective?
 

Ian Dudley

Active Member
Hmm. The 550 and the Sony are both £279 on Richer Sounds, the 2600 is £200 more and the 2700 over double. How much quality is the extra money buying, vs extra features I likely won't use?
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Hmm. The 550 and the Sony are both £279 on Richer Sounds, the 2600 is £200 more and the 2700 over double. How much quality is the extra money buying, vs extra features I likely won't use?

The discounts reflect the popularity of the models in question. On paper the Sony looks very favourable and does indeed sound rather good, but this is spoilt by numerous pecularities and operational hinderances which Sony simply fail to acknowledge or address.

The Denon models may be more expensive, but will more than likely be far less troublesome and will come with far better support.

The DEnon AVRX550BT isn't a comparable model to the Sony or the Denon models above it. You get less in terms of features, power and amplified channels.
 

Ian Dudley

Active Member
I have a soft spot for Sony as my first receiver was the old DB925, an excellent unit 20 years ago. Equally, I don't want a quality downgrade. It's frustrating though as the higher price units come loaded with features I'm never likely to use.

The Denon 1600 looks like it might be a good compromise though, and only means talking my wife into another £100....
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
I have a soft spot for Sony as my first receiver was the old DB925, an excellent unit 20 years ago. Equally, I don't want a quality downgrade. It's frustrating though as the higher price units come loaded with features I'm never likely to use.

The Denon 1600 looks like it might be a good compromise though, and only means talking my wife into another £100....


You'd not get a discount if the models didn't include those features and no one is insisting you use them. The main cost incursions are the better components, better amplification and PSU used. THis is a kill 2 birds with one stome policy adhered to by most if not all of the mainstream manufacturers. THe fact that you want a better amp or more power simply means you also get other additional extra features thrown in. THe manufactrers would need to expand their line ups four fold otherwise in order to cater for everyone.

You can get some very accomplished AV receivers sans all the bells and whistles, but you'd end up paying more for these than you;d be paying for the models being discussed here.
 

Ian Dudley

Active Member
There's a Denon 2300 going in the classifieds, how does that stand up to these? Has Atmos and 4k passthrough, so looks to be comparable.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
I'd tend to suggest something more recent, it would however be comparable to the X2600 and will indeed be both Atmos and UHD HDCP 2.2 compliant.


This side by side comparison may be of interest:


Here's basically what you'd be losing if purchasing the older model:
by default 2020-07-24 at 16.04.20.png
 

Ian Dudley

Active Member
Of all those, the only ones that would be a pest are Bluetooth headphones (weird thing not to include in a BT enabled device), DTS X (I like to be able to read as many formats as possible, but have no idea how widely used this one is), and the versions of HDCP and BT from a future proofing perspective.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Bluetooth headphones would require a Bluetooth transmitter. Bluetooth enabled devices ordinarily only include a receiver. The transmitter and the receiver are 2 seperate things so the fact a device can accept a Bluetooth signal wouldn't automatically enable that device to transmit a Bluetooth signal to a pair of headphones. The feature requires additional hardware onboard the receiver.

DTS:X is comparative to Dolby Atmos and like Atmos ia an object based 3D immersive format reliant upon metadata. This isn't as widely used as Atmos though and is very unlikely to ever match the number of titles encoded with Atmos or surpass this. It is occasionally used in conjunction with older content that has been remastered for a new release.

I'd not worry about the HDCP difference. The newer variant is simply a revision of the previous version and is very unlikely to ever impact upon you or your viewing. If you were dealing with 8K or 4K/120p then it may effect you, but the receiver cannot handle these anyway.
 
Last edited:

The latest video from AVForums

Samsung HW-S60A + LG SP8YA soundbar & KEF LS50 Wireless II Reviews: Movie & TV Show News & Reviews
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom