Yamaha 2015 Aventage AV Receiver Line-up detailed

Discussion in 'AV Receivers & Amplifiers' started by hodg100, Jun 16, 2015.

Tags:

    1. hodg100

      hodg100
      Reviewer & News Writer

      Joined:
      Aug 8, 2005
      Messages:
      14,105
      Products Owned:
      3
      Products Wanted:
      4
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +4,468
    2. dante01

      dante01
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Mar 5, 2009
      Messages:
      46,611
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +11,232
      I'm a little sad to say it, but I think Denon and Marantz are going to sell a lot more receivers than Yamaha this time around, not just at a level below where the Adventage models are targeted, but also all the way up to the flagship receivers. The Yamaha receivers are going to have to sound out of this world to compete with the offerings from D&M. I think D&M are on a roll and everyone else is playing catch up? You've no option to expand beyond 9.2 with any of the Yamaha receivers and no DTS:X or Atmos option at all for under £1K being that the 7 channel RXA1050 is the lowest model Yamaha make to include Atmos and DTS:X processing.
       
      Last edited: Jun 16, 2015
    3. mbmapit

      mbmapit
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Feb 15, 2005
      Messages:
      1,908
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      86
      Location:
      Stansted
      Ratings:
      +446
      Both the 2050 and 3050 have 11.2 preouts though?
       
    4. dante01

      dante01
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Mar 5, 2009
      Messages:
      46,611
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +11,232
      Yamaha make no mention of 11 channel processing though. What do the pre outs relate to? Not only does the receiver need the pre outs, it requires the processing to deal with the additional channels. Most of the high end Denon models have 13.2 pre-outs but only 11 of them excluding the sub pre outs can be used simulraneously as part of a main room setup. It could be the case that the additional 2 preouts on the Yamaha models you mention relate to a pre out connection to a second stereo audio zone? The actual presence of pre-outs or the number of them isn't an indication of the potential processing and main room capabilities.

      The RXA3050 can add an external two channel amp to give it 7.1.4 capabilities, but the 2050 cannot and is limited to 7.1.2 or 5.1.4 max. You can find this out be reading the specs in relation to Surround Sound Processing where it gives the exact possibilities in relation to Dolby Atmos.

      [​IMG]


      [​IMG]


      The Marantz SR7010 will be about the same price as the RXA2050, but unlike the Yamaha will have the ability to add external amplification and has the processing power to facilitate 7.1.4. The RXA2050 is going to have to sound pretty special to compete with the SR7010.
       
      Last edited: Jun 16, 2015
    5. waltiesantos333

      waltiesantos333
      Novice Member

      Joined:
      May 4, 2014
      Messages:
      17
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      6
      Location:
      Belo Horizonte, Brazil
      Ratings:
      +1
      Any chance of an upgrade of the CX-A 5000, 2.0, 2.2, dolby atmos and dts:X?
       
    6. river123

      river123
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Jul 13, 2006
      Messages:
      496
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      18
      Ratings:
      +18
      Will the RX-A3050 have 5.1.4 without needing an external amp?
       
    7. dante01

      dante01
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Mar 5, 2009
      Messages:
      46,611
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +11,232
      Yes, it is only if you want a 7.1.4 setup that you'd need an external 2 channel power amp. You can have either a 5.1.4 or a 7.1.2 setup without external amplification. Both the RXA3050 and the RXA2050 have 9 channels of amplification built in so either can do 5.1.4, but only the RXA3050 allows you to add a further 2 channels in order to enable it to do 7.1.4.
       
      Last edited: Jun 16, 2015
    8. MarkHell

      MarkHell
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Oct 5, 2014
      Messages:
      1,007
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      86
      Location:
      Barnsley, South Yorkshire
      Ratings:
      +430
      Leaving money out of the equasion.......

      Who's looking sweetest?

      D-M-Y......?
       
    9. MarkHell

      MarkHell
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Oct 5, 2014
      Messages:
      1,007
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      86
      Location:
      Barnsley, South Yorkshire
      Ratings:
      +430
      Money included in the question this time...........

      The RX Range........ an £800 top of the range RX machine or a £800 Mid to lower end Adventage range machine...?

      How confusing?

      Expensive "Cheap" model.............. or a cheap "Expensive" one....? o_O
       
    10. dante01

      dante01
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Mar 5, 2009
      Messages:
      46,611
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +11,232
      It depends upon exactly what you are after? If after Atmos and DTS:X then you can forget both the lower level Adventage and the upper level RXV models. The base level Adventage model wont give you much if anything more than you'd expect from the RXV679 apart from better build quality and the fifth foot anti resonance measures. In fact the RXA550 is only a 5.1 receiver so you'd be getting 2 less channels when compared to the RXV679's 7. The RXV779 is not that much different from the RXV679 and would only be a better option if wanting more than one HDMI output and or an inbuilt phono stage? If you made direct comparisons between the RXV779 and the RXA850 then you'd be hard pushed to distinguish between them. I'd personally take a look at the Marantz SR6010 if you've about £800 at your disposal. If looking at the RXV679 then I'd have to say that the Denon AVRX2200W looks a better receiver for less money. After saying this, I think it still better you go demo the receivers when you are able to prior to making a decision.
       
      Last edited: Jun 16, 2015
    11. Lesmor

      Lesmor
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Jul 25, 2007
      Messages:
      5,715
      Products Owned:
      2
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      167
      Location:
      Aberdeenshire
      Ratings:
      +3,499
      Wow what a disappointment from Yamaha
      I don't know if it is the way the article is written compared to the Denon and Marantz ones but.
      There is nothing in that announcement that excites me at all.
       
    12. markymiles

      markymiles
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Nov 4, 2005
      Messages:
      6,137
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      Caterham
      Ratings:
      +2,660
      Yeah agreed, Yamaha seem to have lost their way. All seem overpriced compared to the competition.
       
    13. dante01

      dante01
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Mar 5, 2009
      Messages:
      46,611
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +11,232
      I'd have to be honest and say there is some interesting developments in terms of better components being employed, but these components are going to have to make the Yamaha models sound drastically better than what D&M have on offer for anyone to be persuaded to not buy a Marantz or DEnon model instead.

      As far as the RXV models go, Yamaha have lost that battle to the Denon AVRX2200W before the battle has even begun. The AVRX2200W is going to outsell every similarly priced model.
       
    14. Mincho

      Mincho
      Standard Member

      Joined:
      Jun 27, 2014
      Messages:
      39
      Products Owned:
      2
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      11
      Location:
      Exeter, Devon UK
      Ratings:
      +7
      11.2.4... Really?? Perhaps Yammie are actually concentrating on quality rather than quantity?
       
    15. MarkHell

      MarkHell
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Oct 5, 2014
      Messages:
      1,007
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      86
      Location:
      Barnsley, South Yorkshire
      Ratings:
      +430
      Maybe the ESS SABRE DACs add to the cost too?

      ....dont they go a long way to making OPPO 105's 500 quid more than OPPO 103's?

      I'm no expert....... (even novice is pushing it)..... but there seems to be a distinct leaning towards

      quality iin the audio dept.
       
    16. waltiesantos333

      waltiesantos333
      Novice Member

      Joined:
      May 4, 2014
      Messages:
      17
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      6
      Location:
      Belo Horizonte, Brazil
      Ratings:
      +1
      For what I see, it seems nobody knows yet if the well acclaimed separate CX A 5000 (I have one and I know what it's capable of with the right speakers and amplifiers) will be upgraded with the bells and whistles that new Yamaha's advantage line shows. Maybe, later on (it means next year, with more channels than the present 11:2 configuration.
       
    17. hifix

      hifix
      Distinguished Member AVForums Sponsor

      Joined:
      Mar 7, 2006
      Messages:
      12,284
      Products Owned:
      2
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      Coventry, West Midlands
      Ratings:
      +2,432
      Ah, the usual nonsense. Slag off a manufacturer before the models have even reached UK shores...

      I'm guessing Yamaha feel it is not worth putting Atmos or DTS:X on a sub £1k receiver - and I have to agree 100% - if you're trying to build yourself a top quality home theatre set up with up to the minute audio formats, it is the Aventage price point that should be the starting point. Sub £1k receivers are being forced to carry every possible "convenience" feature going, all in the name of making it into your living room, but the more features are added (and licenses that need to be paid), the less of the budget will have been spent on quality amplification/processing/DACs etc etc.

      The average home theatre buyer doesn't want any more than 5.1 - most buyers struggle to fit that in once the other half sees the size of the speakers and sub that are about to dominate their living room. People are already paying way more than they need to for superfluous features that most of them won't use. Some might see this as a big faux par on Yamaha's side, but now people have an option that is better for them, as they're not interested in doubling the amount of their speakers or even moving over to UHD broadcasting.

      Most people should be more concerned with getting the basic 5.1/7.1 right first - quality speakers, quality amplification and processing, and getting the most out of it in the set up. Adding more speakers to an already mediocre system or a system that is already lacking isn't going to improve anything, and will eventually end up with a wish to upgrade the system because it isn't performing as expected. This will cost more money in the long run.

      For any given budget, less speakers, better quality. More speakers, lower quality.

      I'm not saying Atmos/DTS:X isn't worth it - it clearly will be in the right size room if it can be accommodated. People just need to work out which route they want to take and audition.
       
      • Agree Agree x 5
      • Useful Useful x 2
      • List
    18. dante01

      dante01
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Mar 5, 2009
      Messages:
      46,611
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +11,232
      For a retailer you are very elitist. Not everyone has a few thousand to spend on home theatre and there's technically no reason why someone with a limited budget shouldn't have the option of DTS:X and or Atmos should they want it. I think Yamaha are gojng to struggle to compete with Denon. Please report back on the sales you make this time next year :)
       
      Last edited: Jun 19, 2015
    19. hifix

      hifix
      Distinguished Member AVForums Sponsor

      Joined:
      Mar 7, 2006
      Messages:
      12,284
      Products Owned:
      2
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      Coventry, West Midlands
      Ratings:
      +2,432
      Not elitist in the slightest. Everyone is free to pursue any avenue they wish to take. If someone wants 11.2.4 for as little as a suitable receiver will allow then that's fine, it's their call. All I'm saying is that with a budget of less than a few thousand, 5.1 is the best option (in my opinion), and will maximise sound quality, making for a better Atmos/DTS:X system further down the line when there is more software around to enjoy it. It's a case of either going for a Monitor Audio Bronze Atmos package or a Silver series 5.1 package - or KEF Q Atmos package or R series 5.1 - I know which I'd choose.

      On another note, most sub £1k AV receivers are ideally suited to the likes of B&W M1/KEF E305/MA Mass or Radius type packages, as well as entry level hi-fi speaker packages like MA Bronze/B&W 600/KEF Q. The likes of CM S2/R series/Silver/Apex packages are best driven by receivers in the price bracket of the Aventage, where amplification gets a decent step up.

      I'll gladly help anyone one out to get them the best system I can, whether they're looking for standard 5.1 or the likes of Atmos - it just needs a bit of common sense to configure the system around the end user's requirements, and not just presume that more speakers will bring a more rewarding experience.
       
    20. dante01

      dante01
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Mar 5, 2009
      Messages:
      46,611
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +11,232
      I think you missed my point? DEnon have included both Atmos and DTS:X without compromising their receivers and they leave it to the consumer to decide. THe new receivers that include it are just as capable as those they replace and actually cost less. Yamaha have neglected to fascilitate it as an option below the level of the RXA1050. Just because it is included isn't to say the consumer has to use it, but why deny a consumer the option?
       
    21. hifix

      hifix
      Distinguished Member AVForums Sponsor

      Joined:
      Mar 7, 2006
      Messages:
      12,284
      Products Owned:
      2
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      Coventry, West Midlands
      Ratings:
      +2,432
      Have you compared them all back to back already then?

      Neglected. Deny. All negative words. We can obviously see which side you're on. As I have already said, despite some on this forum trying to get into Atmos with £200 receivers, the majority of people buying an AV system to include a receiver under £1k aren't looking at Atmos or DTS:X - most of them aren't aware it exists, or they can't accommodate it.

      I'm not coming down on either side here, just sticking up for the usual guff manufacturers get accused of. I'm the first one to point out what manufacturers leave off (like Pioneer and their universal crossover point! Been on at them for years about it), but there comes a time where someone just has to stand up to those that just dismiss new products for whatever reason before they're even released.
       
    22. dante01

      dante01
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Mar 5, 2009
      Messages:
      46,611
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +11,232
      Read the specifications. I can't obviously audition them, but I bet the new Yamaha RXV679 sounds no different to the model it replaces? You appear to be indirectly suggesting the new Adventage models will have a superior sound without listening to them so maybe critise yourself prior to picking fault with my analysis :) The Main specifications of this year's receivers are no different to those associated with the models they replace. Consumers are not losing anything if buying a model that includes both Atmos and DTS:X, they are in fact if buying a DEnon receiver getting it in association with the same receiver that would have cost them more last year without including DTS:X or Atmos.

      I'm by no means anti Yamaha, but I'm disappointed they didn't embrace DTS:X in the same way as Denon (D&M) appear to have done.

      If you maintain it as being a preserve for the elitists then DTS:X is going to die a slow and painful death.
       
      Last edited: Jun 19, 2015
    23. hifix

      hifix
      Distinguished Member AVForums Sponsor

      Joined:
      Mar 7, 2006
      Messages:
      12,284
      Products Owned:
      2
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      Coventry, West Midlands
      Ratings:
      +2,432
      Presumptive, but a safe bet seeing as very little new has been added to them.

      They may, they may not. I haven't personally commented on their quality other than to say that receivers in the £1-2k price bracket generally outperform those under £1k, and are usually more capable when it comes to more demanding speakers.

      They have embraced it, they've just chosen not to include it on receivers that most people are buying for 5.1. Would you have bought a sub £1k Yamaha receiver if they had included it? If not, then stop unnecessarily worrying about it and let others in the position of buying make their own choice.

      More end users have 5.1 than 7.1. More end users have 2.0 than 5.1. More end users use their TV speakers than a 2.0 set up. Atmos/DTS:X will kick in with UHD, and in my opinion, UHD is going to be an elitist video format with regards to Bluray, which will quite quickly become the modern day equivalent to Laserdisc. UHD from a streaming point of view will be far more popular than UHD Bluray - it remains to be seen whether these new audio codecs will be adopted by UHD broadcasters. And then if they do, will they be compressed or full fat? Another aspect that will affect the end result of everyone's system.
       
    24. dante01

      dante01
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Mar 5, 2009
      Messages:
      46,611
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +11,232
      Well, if things go your way then DTS:X is dead and those who are spending large sums of money on it are wasting that money. The studios are not going to invest time, money and energy into it if their market for it is restricted to a a small niche audience at the top end of the home cinema fraternity. Those spending thousands should be applauding the likes of Denon for further propagating the format and making it more accessible because this only helps the format take more hold than it would have had it been made less accessible to the majority. Or are those spending thousands just wanting DTS:X to demo the DTS:X demo disc with?

      Again, how are you being penalised if DTS:X is included and why shoudn't it be left to the consumer to decide whether to utilise it or not if available to them on their receiver? The inclusion of DTS:X on the lower end receivers doesn't mean consumers have to use it if they buy those receivers, but they do get the option if they want it.

      Your appraisal of broadcast UHD applies as much to HD formats as it does to object orientated audio. In fact you're more likely to get Atmos than TrueHD or DTS-HD Master Audio via Netflix and the such.
       
      Last edited: Jun 19, 2015
    25. hifix

      hifix
      Distinguished Member AVForums Sponsor

      Joined:
      Mar 7, 2006
      Messages:
      12,284
      Products Owned:
      2
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      Coventry, West Midlands
      Ratings:
      +2,432
      I'm not going on and on, as you never stop, but here's my last post as I've got plenty of other stuff to do, and I'm watching films tonight...

      "My way"? There is no "my way". Studios are investing in both formats, as they're both wanting theirs to be the default audio format - as always, both will exist anyway. By the end of next year, virtually every AV receiver will have DTS:X and Atmos, so no one will be "excluded" or will feel left out (not that anyone is now), and everyone will be free to buy any sub £500 AV receiver they like to go with their £4k speaker package.

      The consumer already currently decides if they want to use 5.1, 7.1, or 9.1 with their AV receivers - I'll guarantee you the majority of AV receivers out there are currently running 5.1 (and probably a number dumped in favour of a soundbar). People buy the top end receivers more for quality and certain functionality, not because it has more channels.

      I had heard that Netflix were going to be using Atmos, but a quick Google search brings up nothing - in fact, there's very little if no mention about audio at all. Do you have any links as to what Netflix are currently using? Or any concrete links as to what they will be using?
       
    26. hifix

      hifix
      Distinguished Member AVForums Sponsor

      Joined:
      Mar 7, 2006
      Messages:
      12,284
      Products Owned:
      2
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      Coventry, West Midlands
      Ratings:
      +2,432
      They currently use Dolby Digital I believe, meaning you'll get anything from Dolby Digital 5.1 down to two channel stereo. The obvious step for Netflix would be Atmos, but I can't see the audio format being an important aspect of their introduction of UHD.
       
    27. dante01

      dante01
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Mar 5, 2009
      Messages:
      46,611
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +11,232
      Your point for not including DTS:X on lower level receivers make no sense. Why does denying the consumer the choice result in a better outcome? You suggest it shouldn't be available as an option and appear to be suggesting only high end kit can deal with it? I hope you are not selling 7 channel receiver to anyone with less than £700 at their disposal, heaven forbid they use more than 5.1 when that is all that the majorty use. WTF?

      Atmos can be conveyed via DD+ and Netflix use DD+. DTS have proprietary tech to address broadcast object orientated sound , but is less likely to get DTS:X for broadcasts adopted because it cannot be conveyed via the existing audio capabilities employed within TV sets.

      As to an article:
      Why 3D audio on Netflix will cement the internet as the home of 4K | TechRadar
       
      Last edited: Jun 19, 2015
    28. hifix

      hifix
      Distinguished Member AVForums Sponsor

      Joined:
      Mar 7, 2006
      Messages:
      12,284
      Products Owned:
      2
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      Coventry, West Midlands
      Ratings:
      +2,432
      I'm out, as you're now just fabricating. I highly recommending understanding a viewpoint/opinion before commenting on it.
       
    29. dante01

      dante01
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Mar 5, 2009
      Messages:
      46,611
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Ratings:
      +11,232
      Maybe you should stop selling entry level AV receivers altogether then? Most consumers want a soundbar so where do you draw the line at what options the manufacturers give to a consumer based upon what the majority do already?

      Again, why would Yamaha including DTS:X on lower level receivers be a bad move for consumers? The debate has sod all to do with what the majority are likely to do with their kit and everything to do with what options they are given to do with it. Your point of view suggests they shouldn't have an option and be denied access to DTS:X unless spending at least £1K on a receiver?

      You're never going to get the majority of consumers to even consider DTS:X or Atmos if you set the bar so high that the vast majority will never buy into it. They are not going to say "I want DTS:X so I'll spend money I've not got". They'll simply say"Sod that" and forget about it. There's no reason for penalising people because they've not the money other people have at their disposal. They are far more likely to dip their toes in the water and give it a go if it is affordable and within their means. It may even stimulate them into buying a more ample setup next time around to fully reap the benefits after hearing some of the benefits via a more affordable and accessible entry level receiver?

      Wouldn't it be hilarious if after having this debate Yamaha went and released entry level receivers with DTS:X next year? But wouldn't that suggest they are purposely staggering its deployment to propagate new sales of lower level receivers next year? Maybe I'm just cynical?
       
      Last edited: Jun 19, 2015
    30. AusyMike

      AusyMike
      Novice Member

      Joined:
      Jun 19, 2015
      Messages:
      14
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      4
      Location:
      Australia
      Ratings:
      +0
      Hi all, I've got a pair of Snell type B's as my front on a DSP AX1 so can't afford to run more. Have done the 9.1 setup and it's not really any good unless you have a dedicated room and the variances of Dvd's is ridiculous so have gone back to 5.1 too, for the moment. Just to kill the Denon and Yamaha thing I've had both and depends on the year models and the speakers too.
      I do have a big problem now that you two may be able to help with which is balancing out the settings for the outputs on my Ax1 using seperate Amps. I want to run a Yamaha 2602 for my snells for the pwr, since my Snells are so hungry but the AX1 can't handle such adjustments. I do have three of the 2602 that I could run, but do I go and buy a Cx-a5000 to fix the imbalance limitations Ax-1 or am I going to have the Same problem? Fronts Snells type b, Kef ref centre, JBL tlx18 rear and a yst300 sub.
      Thoughts?
       

    Share This Page

    Loading...