Yamaha RX-V6A 7.2 channel 4K / 8K Dolby AV Receiver Review

[Shazb0t]

Curious-do you have data to back your reliability and defects claim?

Of course he doesn't! Only the Quality department employees at Yamaha would have access to what those numbers actually are and they would have many reasons not too share them publicly. He's obviously fast and loose with "facts".

 

[3dbinCanada]

Need Advice between Denon and Yamaha

Hi everyone, Happy New year to all. After hours of reading, viewing on youtube on the AV domain, I'm still struggling to decide which "environnement" to lean towards to... I currently have a 2011 AV receiver (Pioneer VSX 921), 5.1 (Focal chorus 726, sub 700, Q acoustics for central and...

forums.audioholics.com

 

[Rottmannash]

Of course he doesn't! Only the Quality department employees at Yamaha would have access to what those numbers actually are and they would have many reasons not too share them publicly. He's obviously fast and loose with "facts".

...had to ask. These inevitable claims of bullet-proof construction and reliability make me angry because they invariably bring up the HDMI issue Onkyo had many years ago. Folks need to have a bit of perspective and not deal in generalities when discussing things they can't possibly know. Everyone's experience with different brands differ and mine happens to be 100% reliability with the 3 Onkyo AVR's I've owned. Doesn't mean others have had failures, as they have but I'm certain there are Yamaha AVR's, and other brands who have issues and failures as well.

 

[Rottmannash]

Need Advice between Denon and Yamaha

Hi everyone, Happy New year to all. After hours of reading, viewing on youtube on the AV domain, I'm still struggling to decide which "environnement" to lean towards to... I currently have a 2011 AV receiver (Pioneer VSX 921), 5.1 (Focal chorus 726, sub 700, Q acoustics for central and...

forums.audioholics.com

Well that seals the deal, doesn't it? I'd take that to court.

 

[3dbinCanada]

Well that seals the deal, doesn't it? I'd take that to court.

From his knowledge of other AVRs, and considering he's an indepedent CEDA certified installer of home theater systems in a populous part of the US, there is no reason not to believe him.

 

[3dbinCanada]

...had to ask. These inevitable claims of bullet-proof construction and reliability make me angry because they invariably bring up the HDMI issue Onkyo had many years ago. Folks need to have a bit of perspective and not deal in generalities when discussing things they can't possibly know. Everyone's experience with different brands differ and mine happens to be 100% reliability with the 3 Onkyo AVR's I've owned. Doesn't mean others have had failures, as they have but I'm certain there are Yamaha AVR's, and other brands who have issues and failures as well.

No one is saying that Yamaha doesnt have failures. They just have a lower failure rate compared to anyone else. Onkyo's issue was caused by inadequate cooling which fried the HDMI boards by those who didnt pay attention to airflow. Even with adequate airflow, those Onkyo's ran very hot which is indicative of poor airflow in their chassis layout. Heat reduces the lifespan of semiconductors considerably.

 

[beagleman]

Thread descending into the frequently seen

I believe in measurements except those that make the things I own look bad Vs the measurements the measurements the measurements.

Not really.

We are talking about Actual audibility of those measurements in real world listening with actual normal source material.

I believe in measurements, and I agree SOME are mediocre. But from the people that actually own it, they are saying it is not truly audible nor deters from it sounding good.

The other guys that NEVER heard it, are saying "It must sound bad" based on just numbers.

 

[beagleman]

Of course he doesn't! Only the Quality department employees at Yamaha would have access to what those numbers actually are and they would have many reasons not too share them publicly. He's obviously fast and loose with "facts".

Actually not saying he is correct for sure, but I DO remember reading something that did back up what he said.

(By the way, there are other entities that keep track of product reliability and return and warranty repair rates, BEYOND manufacturers)

Not even caring to look it up now, but Yamaha was rated as one of or the most reliable brand.
But that is really not all that important to the discussion at hand.

 

[plampitan]

Just bought this last week. Chose the Yamaha over Denon X2700H because of the US$200 price difference (from discount) and the fact that Yamaha offer superior after sales service here.

Quite happy with it, especially for the music performance when using Pire Direct. I pair it with Elac DBR62, and will add more speakers overtime.

Btw this is my first AVR. I'm coming from Sony soundbar.

 

[NewbieAudiophileExpert]

I have a Yamaha V6A and when I turn it up to -25dbs, let alone -15dbs, it's way too loud for comfort.. so it's safe to say that the distortion is only a problem in certain contexts, i.e. if you're using it to drive massive speakers in a proper home theatre, in which case you'd probably purchase a flagship denon anyway and not the entry level yamaha.

Apart from that it offers great connectivity via spotify and airplay 2 and the 'pure direct' mode is great for driving my loudspeakers into oplaying music.

Andrew is nothing but a talking head.

I think that he's actually OK for a channel that probably makes all of his money from you know what.

This "reviewer" rarely has a problem with any gear

I actually thought the same, but then i realised that he does indeed say exactly what his problem with a piece of gear/equipment it.

For example you can watch his review on the yamaha 3200 amp and he will tell you exactly what he does not like about it, amongst many other reviews.

He did say what he doesn't like and what he thinks about the receiver - the thing that people don't understand about reviews is that some details have nothing to do with what another person might think, so they are pointless to discuss.

I recall watching a guy review the new samsung tab 8 ultra and say how he dislikes the antenna on the back - and i just sat there thinking what that has to do with anything? That's literally just his opinion and many people might not even notice that particular detail.

I feel the same way about people saying the V6A is ugly and lacks buttons on the face, when in reality i don't even touch the receiver and instead use the web-based app to make any and all adjustments - you can literally turn it on and off from the browser. The only caveat here is that you require a network/wifi or ethernet connection.

This might be surprising to somebody who is more seasoned in the field of avrs and hifi, but IMO this receiver is perfect for an entry level home theatre enthurist, especially because it can be bought rather cheap - apart from this alleged distortion, it does everything it claims, more or less.

Just bought this last week. Chose the Yamaha over Denon X2700H because of the US$200 price difference (from discount) and the fact that Yamaha offer superior after sales service here.

Quite happy with it, especially for the music performance when using Pire Direct. I pair it with Elac DBR62, and will add more speakers overtime.

Btw this is my first AVR. I'm coming from Sony soundbar.

Same here - had it for 2 months or so.

Music on pure direct is quite amazing on my wharfedale towers.

 

[beagleman]

Love the looks, loathe the performance.

I guess the average customer this product aim for will have "low" quality speakers like Klipsch RP or similar and be okay with this level of performance, but since it's possible to do better at the same or lower price this product is a disappointment.

But looks good.

You are being overly Dramatic........

I do not own this particular model, but now have 2 few year old Yamaha Receivers, in addition to a few really vintage "HiFi" receivers and a few separate Preamp/Amp combos, and have owned several more over 35 years of being into Hifi sound.

My personal experience with my 2 Yamahas, used with either Good quality or entry level speakers, is that the sound you actually "Hear", despite not measuring great as far as a few metrics, is actually QUITE good, and honestly doubt improving those metrics would do much or anything as far as actual listening quality.


You seem to be jumping to a conclusion based on seeing a measurement, but having never actually heard a product.
Would a better measurement "Seem" better? For sure....!

Would a better measurement actually translate into better subjective sound? Uh....from first hand experience, I would honestly waver between Not sure/Very doubtful.

In actual usage, this stuff really is not audible. The things that ARE audible, they get right.
If you are focused JUST on SINAD, sure it "Appears" mediocre, but fortunately that does not translate into degraded sound in actual usage.

 

[NewbieAudiophileExpert]

You are being overly Dramatic........

I do not own this particular model, but now have 2 few year old Yamaha Receivers, in addition to a few really vintage "HiFi" receivers and a few separate Preamp/Amp combos, and have owned several more over 35 years of being into Hifi sound.

My personal experience with my 2 Yamahas, used with either Good quality or entry level speakers, is that the sound you actually "Hear", despite not measuring great as far as a few metrics, is actually QUITE good, and honestly doubt improving those metrics would do much or anything as far as actual listening quality.


You seem to be jumping to a conclusion based on seeing a measurement, but having never actually heard a product.
Would a better measurement "Seem" better? For sure....!

Would a better measurement actually translate into better subjective sound? Uh....from first hand experience, I would honestly waver between Not sure/Very doubtful.

In actual usage, this stuff really is not audible. The things that ARE audible, they get right.
If you are focused JUST on SINAD, sure it "Appears" mediocre, but fortunately that does not translate into degraded sound in actual usage.

There's nothing wrong with the receiver - i read this thread and still bought it and could not be happier.

The thing about this AVR is that to hear audible distortion, you'd have to turn it up to a level that's inappropriate for regular home theatre use or even to just listen to music in the living room, etc.

I have a samsung Q70T soundbar in the living room, and even that's too much noise if turned up even slightly more than necessary.

And if you are after a bit of punch, the powered sub is going to provide that anyway...

Though i do understand that there are people who like blasting music - so i can't comment on how it sounds at say +10 Db

 

[beagleman]

It seems like mid-range DAC chips from 15-20 years ago would have had better theoretical performance than this. Are DAC sections in AVRs that much harder to implement, do manufacturers no longer have the IP to produce good results on the budget end, or are manufacturers simply restricting the performance of lower-tier models in order to justify the R&D for the $4K boxes that make up the top tier of the AVR SINAD list?

I think the Sheer number of channels involved in ANY typical AVR limits what can be spent on a DAC.

If this was merely a 2 channel stereo receiver, sure. But we are talking 7-10 channels, depending on what surround variety is available and often some fairly in depth sub, equalizer and other random controls that work separately for EACH surround channel.

In other words, a TON of digital processing power, and many channels of it.

I also wonder if trying to squeeze that much into a small space makes noise and stuff suffer also.

Not sure we can compare a built in MANY channel DAC and all the related processing to a stand alone 2-Channel DAC..........

 

[peng]

You are being overly Dramatic........

I do not own this particular model, but now have 2 few year old Yamaha Receivers, in addition to a few really vintage "HiFi" receivers and a few separate Preamp/Amp combos, and have owned several more over 35 years of being into Hifi sound.

My personal experience with my 2 Yamahas, used with either Good quality or entry level speakers, is that the sound you actually "Hear", despite not measuring great as far as a few metrics, is actually QUITE good, and honestly doubt improving those metrics would do much or anything as far as actual listening quality.


You seem to be jumping to a conclusion based on seeing a measurement, but having never actually heard a product.
Would a better measurement "Seem" better? For sure....!

Would a better measurement actually translate into better subjective sound? Uh....from first hand experience, I would honestly waver between Not sure/Very doubtful.

In actual usage, this stuff really is not audible. The things that ARE audible, they get right.
If you are focused JUST on SINAD, sure it "Appears" mediocre, but fortunately that does not translate into degraded sound in actual usage.

I agree with you on the not audible part. Aside from that, If I have to choose between two, and they both get the audible part right, I would still go with the one that gets both parts right. That's of course of on all else being equal basis only. All else are not always going to be equal, so it would be easier to choose if one has a strong preference of other RC software over YPAO.

 

[beagleman]

I agree with you on the not audible part. Aside from that, If I have to choose between two, and they both get the audible part right, I would still go with the one that gets both parts right. That's of course of on all else being equal basis only. All else are not always going to be equal, so it would be easier to choose if one has a strong preference of other RC software over YPAO.

I used to, at times, actually measure amps and receivers. It is very tedious, boring and time consuming. Things go wrong, it gets just too much to have fun doing very often....
My point......

I found out that a few amps and older receivers I assumed were better than the AVRs, were actually NOT measuring ruler flat over most of the spectrum.

The one cheap yamaha I own did though.
I kept assuming it just had a bit less punchy bass, or something, but turns out it was flat, and older stuff was mildly boosting the bass.....

 

[Sam Ash]

Holy crossover distortion batman. They must be running that output stage really lean. I get that you have to keep idle power dissipation down in an AVR, but this first watt performance is pretty lousy. Clearly they don't want you using 4 ohm speakers for good reason. (The 20 kHz hump would be even higher than 15 kHz if the 3rd harmonic didn't end up outside measurement bandwidth.) The FTC rating might just about make it to 0.1% THD with 8 ohm speakers. I guess it just about gets the job done but that's about it.

What would the outcome be of using 4 ohm speakers in a 5.1 configuration?

If impedance is frequency dependent, that means even 8 ohm speakers can dip to 4 ohms.

 

[KA7NIQ]

The companies have to cut cost somewhere.
Desktop DAC, SUPER SMALL and lighweight to ship from china to anywhere.
AVR- MUCH bigger and much heavier. packing and shipping costs are going to be a big part of what people outside of china pay.]
If the market for the product doesn't want or demand better performance then it would be stupid(for them) of them to add it.

I have a yamaha TSR7810 and I feel like it checks most the marks for me, but the DAC isn't great. TOO bad but it seems like you need to spend around $1500/$2000 to step up in DAC performance in AVR's

And Pray Tell, what is the problem with the DAC in the Yamaha 7810 ?

 

[dougi]

I am happy to report the latest firmware upgrade (1.53) to this and sister AVRs (RX-A2A, TSR700) has solved my e-arc dropouts that plagued the previous version with my Samsung TV. Not sure why as nothing about HDMI was on the changelog.

 

[beagleman]

I am happy to report the latest firmware upgrade (1.53) to this and sister AVRs (RX-A2A, TSR700) has solved my e-arc dropouts that plagued the previous version with my Samsung TV. Not sure why as nothing about HDMI was on the changelog.

HDMI issues, are across the board.

IT is more a matter of copy protection and HDMI control circuits. The slightest thing that goes wrong, and they freeze up, have dropouts, or act up and you have to unplug the power and restart TV and Receiver.

A great system when it works, but wow, it acts up a lot....!

 

[tvih]

Not really.

We are talking about Actual audibility of those measurements in real world listening with actual normal source material.

I believe in measurements, and I agree SOME are mediocre. But from the people that actually own it, they are saying it is not truly audible nor deters from it sounding good.

The other guys that NEVER heard it, are saying "It must sound bad" based on just numbers.

Yep. Some people on both sides like to take things too far. I wasn't originally very impressed with the RX-V6A measurements. Well, not that I'm impressed with them now either, but fact of the matter is that it most likely measures better than any of my current speaker amps, and the DAC likely isn't at least any worse than in my current AVR (Yamaha RX-V667) either. Especially since the measured SINAD is still quite decent at or below -10.5 dB volume setting. For comparison my current AVR never has gone above -25 dB for any actual listening, more commonly being at -35-40 dB. In fact at around 90-ish SINAD at those lower volumes the RX-V6A DAC lands at basically the same number as my miniDSP 2x4 HD does when I'm using it directly from my PC for stereo music. With a noise floor of 40-ish dB in my room, and normal listening volume with less than 60 dB average and less than 85 dB peak both the noise and distortion are effectively entirely masked even with my current gear. And I could only just barely hear 36 dB of dynamic range in web-based test using a noise signal when the output volume was at my usual levels. That's a heck of a lot of noise floor "headroom" left for flaws to hide in.

Could they strive for better numbers? Sure, but AVRs likely aren't exactly great money-makers as it is especially in the low end, so given for most people this level of performance would be enough they'll save on cost wherever they can while trying to fight off ridiculous soundbars and as such I can understand why they don't. And that also avoids cannibalizing sales of their higher-priced models by making the entry level too good. Given all the tech that goes into an AVR like this (compared to say, something like a Topping PA5 that might measure great for its limited purpose but also costs comparatively peanuts to design, distribute and manufacture) I feel people have rather unrealistic expectations compared to practical realities. In the meanwhile we have more and more brands like Onkyo going bankrupt because they can't get their costs down low enough in the cutthroat consumer audio market. But hey, I guess even better if Yamaha pays for their evil skimpiness by going under too? Now if it was just a stereo amp that measures poorly compared to their decades-old products of far lower price, like the comparison done earlier in this thread (I think)? Now that's more of an actually valid complaint to make in my books.

Regardless, for me this would be the better pick over the X1700H no matter how well that might measure (of which I have some doubts) simply because I need front pre-outs which the X1700H omits. That said this isn't the right pick for me either as only two height channels seems like not enough reason to upgrade at least in theory. But unfortunately doubling the number of height channels also doubles the cost of the receiver currently.