sorry....it was the XR50.
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|||
|
Forum Founder
sorry....it was the XR50.
-curtis
Member
I just read an article on digital receivers. Clue me in if I am missing something, please.
Benefits
-----
HQ radio broadcasts (FM=cd quality)
Ability to get 2 or 3 broadcasts from the same radio station (choice of news or classical music or whatever)
Smaller size than analog receivers
Drawbacks
-----------
Have to buy another receiver for equal sound from cds.
Prices will drop in about a year - so not a good time to buy now.
Anything else I am missing?
Junior Member
I don't think this information is very accurate. Where did you read this? In fact, the only thing that sounds correct is that digital amps tend to be much smaller than their analogue peers.Originally Posted by donkelly
I use a Panasonic XR55 with my Ascend/Hsu 5.1 system, and I am extremely impressed by this little receiver. Its sounds incredible, allows me to bi-amp my CMT-340 mains, and lists for under $300, with a street price of about $250. I really can’t imagine a better deal for a receiver/amplifier. In fact, I would recommend this thing at twice the price.
Before I purchased the XR55, I auditioned a Harman Kardon AVR435 in my home. The AVR435 is an excellent receiver, and it does have advantages over the Panasonic (e.g. a better remote, OSD, more inputs/outputs, second zone control, Logic 7). But for sound quality alone (i.e. clarity, detail, soundstaging), I vastly prefer the XR55.
I think the secret behind these Panasonic digital amps is that they are dead quiet when they’re not playing. Even if you turn the volume all the way up and place your ear against your speaker, you’ll hear nothing. (N.B. If you try this, make sure no one has the remote to start a DVD/CD and blow out your eardrums.) If you try this with a traditional analogue amps, you’ll hear some background noise. If you try this with one of the Panasonic digital amps, you’ll hear nothing. Seriously, nothing. And against this silent background, every sound/instrument/voice seems to hang in its own clearly defined space between your speakers. It’s awesome.
Matt
Member
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...88.html?sub=AR
requires registration
Maybe a digital radio receiver is different than a digital receiver.
----------
With HD Sound, the Future Is Becoming a Lot Less Fuzzy
By Marc Fisher
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, July 10, 2005; N01
We're driving along I-395 in Fairfax and the signal on ordinary FM radio starts "picket-fencing" -- radio-geek lingo for the fuzzy flashes of static that pop up as you pass a big truck or when you stop at a red light.
Jan Andrews punches the button on the car radio that switches the service from analog to digital and suddenly, all the static is gone. On WHUR, Prince's singing takes on a striking new clarity. Over on AM, an even more dramatic transformation occurs, and suddenly, on SportsTalk WTEM, we hear more of Tony Kornheiser's voice than anyone ever had reason to want to hear -- deeper, more resonant, without the light fuzz that's normally a constant presence on AM.
Andrews, an engineer at National Public Radio, and Mike Starling, NPR's vice president of engineering, have taken me out for a spin to listen to the next aural revolution, digital radio. Marketed as HD Radio by iBiquity Digital, the Columbia-based company that developed and owns digital radio technology, the new sound is already being pumped out by nine Washington stations, even though there probably aren't 100 digital radios in use in the region.
By this fall, the hype for digital radio will be omnipresent. Radio stations will run promotions giving away receivers; buying the units will still set you back somewhere from $250 to $1,700. By next year, when the industry expects to sell 2 million digital radios, prices may fall below $200.
The sales pitch will focus only partly on digital's superior audio quality, which makes AM radio sound like FM does now, and turns FM signals into CD-quality sound.
The big draw will be multicasting, the additional programming that digital technology creates: Every station now on the broadcast dial, whether commercial or public, will be able to add a second channel, and possibly a third. Tune, for example, to WAMU (88.5 FM), and you'd hear the current news and talk programming, but if you scanned forward on a digital tuner, you'd still be at 88.5, but would hear the station's second channel, which might offer the bluegrass music that once filled much of the station's airtime.
By summer's end, NPR plans to offer public stations five program streams to choose from for their second channels -- classical, jazz, folk, progressive rock and electronica. Public stations that have dropped music programming in recent years to focus on more lucrative news and talk shows might choose to offer listeners some of the music formats that have been vanishing from the free airwaves over the past decade.
Earth-based digital radio is coming a little late to save the day; the satellite radio providers, XM and Sirius, have won nearly 5 million subscribers in large part by offering dozens of digital audio channels of music you can't hear on terrestrial radio. But traditional broadcasters believe digital will put them back in contention for listeners' ears, especially since terrestrial digital radio, unlike satellite, has no monthly fee.
"Terrestrial radio with its local programming will be strengthened by multicasting, but we'll all be sharing time amongst a lot of new devices" as technologies keep evolving, said NPR's Starling.
Only a few stations have announced what they'll do with their second channels. A Chicago country station is using the outlet to broadcast tunes from new country artists. A San Francisco public station that now broadcasts primarily news and talk shows, will add Cantonese- and Mandarin-language programs. A public station in Pittsburgh that splits its time between jazz and news will counterprogram against itself, offering its music on one channel whenever the other is devoted to news.
Second channels will likely be jukeboxes at first, playing music without deejays or commercials, but Vicki Stearn, spokesman for iBiquity, expects more ambitious, local programming to evolve as the number of digital radios grows. Others aren't as optimistic. Satellite radio executives, for example, say free digital radio will appeal to listeners who are reluctant to shell out $13 a month for radio, but likely won't threaten satellite's success because radio companies won't want to spend money on the staff needed to create local new programs.
As with FM radio in the 1970s, digital radio will grow mainly in relation to its ability to attract listeners to new content; the cleaner sound alone didn't do the trick for FM, and it won't for HD Radio. But eventually, stations will broadcast only digitally -- Stearn says that point probably won't be reached for 15 years -- and every radio you now own will become a useless relic that you'll try to unload on eBay. It's called progress.
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
Member
So, digital receiver sound better than analog?
(I know - such a newbie question).
Only better if you listen loud to quiet passages?
Elite Member
That article is about XM radio or Sirius satellite radio receivers not digital amps.
On digital amps there is no background noise. It is dead quiet on pauses within a passage. No hiss whatsoever. They do it by keeping the signal digital as much as possible. On a standard analog amp a CD or DVD signal is converted back and forth from digital to analog often mupltiple times. Each of these conversions is an opportunity for signal distortion.
Last edited by Quinn; 07-11-2005 at 12:15 PM.
Elite Member
It depends. All signals are eventually analog. There are lots of folks who prefer traditional amps, digital amps, hybrid amps and battery powered amps. There is no "best." Just different. I will be joining Matt shortly in owning a Panny 55. Later this year I'll be getting a digital battery powered amp for my two channel. I already own four receivers and have owned a bunch of others in the past. I'm not getting the new amps because I know they're better. I'm getting them because they're different. Which I wind up prefering you'll hear here first.
David
Junior Member
I agree with David. It's important to listen to several amps to decide what sounds best to you. For example, if you tend to enjoy a "warm" sound, check out any Harman Kardon. If you like a clean, "forward" sound, the Panasonic digital amps might be right for you.
Just make sure to purchase from a dealer with a generous return policy.
Looking forward to your thoughts on the XR55.Which I wind up prefering you'll hear here first.
Best,
Matt
Member
Quinn posted:
That article is about XM radio or Sirius satellite radio receivers not digital amps."
I believe they differentiated between XM and Sirius and this new didgital radio - but essentially it is the same thing I guess - only local stations will all go that way. Some already have. 103.5 in Washington DC is already available in digital, with an opera 2nd station on the web for now.
Anyway, I guess this goes under the RADIO heading, not RECEIVER heading.
But soon, audio receivers will have digital radio reception and / or digital amplification as standard options. Both are already out there.
I hope I got it correct now.
Advanced Member
don,
check out this sale.
http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls....oni&1125933414
Posting Permissions
