Think they should have left out Atmos

rpf65

https://www.audioholics.com/av-receiver-reviews/onkyo-atmos-receivers

First couple of paragraphs explains it. Just letting everybody know about this. Read this a while back, and it seems some people may not know.

Dennis Gardner

I don't get your concern. The lower priced units do less channels whether you want Atmos or not. You have to give a reason for someone to pony up for more features, similar to dating and marriage in the old days......cow/free milk?

rpf65

Seems to me that most people looking at an AVR will probably use it for multi channel listening. When people ask/give advice on speakers for multi channel set ups the normal advice is the front three are the most important. There is the occasional person that feels the sub is most important, but those are the exception.

Many people also advise that the front three should be timbre matched, given even more importance to the front three.

Those are my observations, so I personally think it's pretty important to calibrate the front three, and not just the center channel. I could be wrong, not being a sound engineer.

At the very least I think Onkyo should at least tell the public that as great as Accu-EQ is at making your movie watching experience as close to real as possible, it pays no attention to the front left and right speakers. Kind of ironic if you think about it. You by Atmos enabled tower speakers, and it will calibrate the speakers that bounce sound off of your cieling. For some reason the speakers that give you the vast majority of you sound information just aren't important enough to bother calibrating.

Dennis Gardner

Ok, I see what your concern is, and it is valid, they had to cut somewhere. What Onkyo knows is the dirty little secret that most buyers don't even calibrate in the first place when buying at that level. I don't. I have two receivers in my house that I've never run the EQ on. I am more concerned with preouts so anything less than the 838 would never get my suggestion.

I have found that most auto EQ on multichannel setups don't do much at all unless your room is a nightmare. I did use it on a Marantz AV 7005 that I installed in a 300 seat theater a couple years back with nice results.

F1nut

There was a guy just the other day complaining that his new L/R speakers in his HT didn't sound good. Turns out he has one of the lower end Onkyo AVR's that doesn't calibrate them. There's no excuse for that.

rpf65

F1nut wrote: »

There was a guy just the other day complaining that his new L/R speakers in his HT didn't sound good. Turns out he has one of the lower end Onkyo AVR's that doesn't calibrate them. There's no excuse for that.

Your comment is the reason I posted the link. Just wanted people to be aware of the issue. Thought it could help with trouble shooting or decision making.

F1nut

Excellent!

I have no doubt that this is going to bite Onkyo in the rump.

Nightfall

I can't think of a popular AVR brand I'm less interested in. Maybe Sony.

mikeyb128

nbrowser wrote: »

And yet another handful reasons my TX-NR717 even though fully repaired...got bumped from the big rig by a Marantz...sure the 717 was the last of the 7x7 series to sport pre-outs and it does happen to have Audyssey of some sort and does lack ATMOS...the SR5010 just outclasses it in every respect.

I just pushed my buddy over the marantz edge. He ditched his emotiva and went with a 7702. He is ecstatic and has been texting/thanking me for days.

tonyb

nbrowser wrote: »

Wasn't it you that pushed me over the cliff too?

Fixed that for ya pal.

mikeyb128

tonyb wrote: »

nbrowser wrote: »

Wasn't it you that pushed me over the cliff too?

Fixed that for ya pal.

He does live in the mountains..

halo

I have Marantz and Denon. Neither is as good as the HK that they "replaced."

Sometimes it's not an upgrade just because it's newer.