# Panasonic SA-XR55,57,etc. class D receivers: Weaknesses?



## infinitesymphony

Do the Panasonic digital receivers (XR55, XR57, etc.) have any weaknesses? I have seen so much positive press for these class D amplifiers that my interest has been piqued.

 Has anyone done A-B'ing with mid-fi or hi-fi equipment? It just seems unbelievable that these $200 receivers could approach multi-thousand dollar class AB receivers.

 Is this another case of people drinking the budget Kool-Aid?


----------



## spacemanspliff

The only weakness I have heard is a bit of brightness. There have been complaints of female vocals being a little sharp but overall I would say it stacks up to any HT receiver under $1000 no problem. Additionally, it is very light and produces very little heat.

 For the $$ it is simply the best bang for the buck ever. The SQ is like a modded T-amp but with POWER. This is especially true in bi-amped mode.

 I can compare it to NAD, Onykyo, Denon and Sony. There really is no contest except for the SQ of the NAD and Denon but the price difference gives the edge to the XR-57. That and heat production lol.. It's easy to use and it pumps out serious sound. I feel lucky to have one.

 Soundstage is accurate. I was listening to NiN "With Teeth". The last track, I forget the name, Trent starts out singing just slightly right middle, then he shifts to left center then strongly comes into focus in the center. The level of his voice changes with each section and can be distinctly "seen" in the soundstage. In other words, get one.


----------



## Max F

I can think of two:

 1. The analog inputs aren't that great. My old Technics receiver sounded better on SACDs than my Panny xr55. As you may know, SACDs required analog input into an amp. For digital signals, the XR-55 and its brothers and sisters kick ass!

 2. I just found out last week that the Headphone out pretty much sucks. My Zune sounded quite a bit better with MP3 versus the Panny with lossless. I was using the Alessandro MS-1s. I bet that the headphone amp is NOT class D. Its probably some cheap DAC + Opamp.

 Great receivers - highly recommended. Just remember to keep it digital all the way. If you already have a sweet DAC then don't bother with these. Their main benefit is their use as a power DAC.


----------



## infinitesymphony

I've read about the receiver's PCM => PWM conversion. Very interesting technique. It's hard to compare something like that to a normal DAC, especially if the analog inputs aren't pure (i.e. analog gets converted to PWM anyway).

 I already have two sources, one with Burr-Brown PCM1738 DACs and the other with Cirrus CS4398 DACs, so the analog section needs to be decent...

 spacemanspliff, have you compared the XR57 to a good source feeding one of the receivers/amplifiers you mentioned?

 Max F, which speakers are you using?


----------



## Jon L

Panny SA-XR series is just phenomenal value. 

 One thing I don't like is the puny stock 16 AWG (?) power cord. Easy to rectify with an adapter and a real power cord.

 Also, the overall SQ will be determined by the quality of the digital signal/transport feeding it. Feed it really clean, low-jitter digital signal and power your 2-channel speakers with the dual-amp function, and prepare to be amazed!


----------



## plaidplatypus

I didn't find the Panasonic to be very musical. It was perfect for movies though.


----------



## spacemanspliff

atm my transport SUCKS so I can't make any real judgments beyond it having as good a level of detail and soundstage as anything NAD or Denon puts out. 

 I have had excellent sources in the past such as the iMod and the PS audio GCHA dac/amp w/ a NAD 330 watt component amp but not these speakers. I had some Paradigm monitior 9s with that setup.

 It is not burned in yet and my source is a crappy Soundblaster NX playing lossless so until I get a real transport....

 It has crazy quick transients and precise soundstage right now. 

 Just a bit hard and glaring at the upper registries. Makes up for it with a very clear sound. It is perfect for movies, games and does well with music but if you are looking for warm and fuzzy look elsewhere. 

 For low to medium level music listening I have ZERO complaints for the $$. When it gets loud, mind you it nor my Ushers are burned in yet, there is a harshness to it which makes me turn it down but it may just be too damn loud lol.


----------



## ooheadsoo

It's probably the speakers+acoustics, not likely to be your source.


----------



## spacemanspliff

Huh? Are you referring to the harshness? It has been mentioned by other folks. 

 I am comparing this amp to the iMod b/c that is what it sounds most like to me. 

 Detail and separation are prominent here. I am really pleased with those aspects while the only letdown is really minor but if I am being very critical I must say it can be less than natural sounding. More on the cold and clinical side but still very, very good for games and movies but maybe not for critical music listening.

 However, for the money, even at twice the price it's better than anything else I have heard music or otherwise.


----------



## tbonner1

spacemanspliff How does the bass of the Panny 57 sound compared to another speaker amp?


----------



## Jon L

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *spacemanspliff* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_atm my transport SUCKS ..

 Just a bit hard and glaring at the upper r_

 

Most cheap, consumer DVD players make horrible transports for 2-channel music. Some are actually pretty good, but you kind of have to find one by accident.

 Oh, the stock power cord is either 16 or 18 AWG and unshielded, which is providing power flow for all your 6.1 channels of amplification 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Change that puny cord for at least some decent shielded >14-12 AWG cord and listen as the "glare" and "strain" disappear at higher volume levels. You'll need a C8 to C14 adapter (Polarized) like this one:

http://www.elementcable.com/catalog/...products_id=54


----------



## VicAjax

i set my father-in-law up with an XR55 and a pair of Athena bookshelves about 2 or 3 years ago... for about $300, he has a seriously sweet sounding setup. i honestly couldn't believe it when i first heard it.

 when i first set it up, i dialed down the treble -3dB. every time i came back (a few months between visits), i'd give the system a listen, and dial up the treble one more dB. the second or third time i visited, the treble went to 0dB and there it has remained.

 whatever harshness i heard is gone, even though the Athenas are notably starchy in the upper frequencies.

 the soundstage could be bigger, and the music could perhaps be lusher, but every time i visit the in-laws, i try to set aside an hour or so to listen... and i always pat myself on the back for getting him a great budget rig.


----------



## ooheadsoo

I'm talking about your system playing loud.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *spacemanspliff* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Huh? Are you referring to the harshness? It has been mentioned by other folks. 

 I am comparing this amp to the iMod b/c that is what it sounds most like to me. 

 Detail and separation are prominent here. I am really pleased with those aspects while the only letdown is really minor but if I am being very critical I must say it can be less than natural sounding. More on the cold and clinical side but still very, very good for games and movies but maybe not for critical music listening.

 However, for the money, even at twice the price it's better than anything else I have heard music or otherwise._


----------



## infinitesymphony

Well... I don't doubt that for the money, these are fine and interesting receivers. However, Athena AS-B1 and Usher S-520 bookshelves aren't exactly reference monitors. I wonder if someone with more high-end listening experience could chime in.

 Jon L, which speakers have you heard with the XR57?


----------



## yo2tup2

what would you consider to be reference monitors? its all relative. with some budget bookshelfs, the panny's would be great. with my totem mani-2's, the panny's would be garbage.

 if your strictly concerned about two channel performance, don't get too caught up in the good reviews for these receivers. for the money its great, for HT its great, for a serious two channel rig... not so great. if you have some reference quality speakers, these receivers are not going to be as good as a decent multi-thousand dollar amps, no matter what any reviewer says.


----------



## yo2tup2

here's a subjective shootout between digital amps using reference quality speakers. http://www.stereomojo.com/SHOOTOUT2007INTEGRATEDS.htm

 the SA-SR55 placed somewhere in the bottom.


----------



## jrosenth

I use one with some fostex, actually have used it with several pairs of fostex-based speakers (and some maggies) and it has slaughtered any mid-fi amp stuff. Really apparent with the fostex stuff.

 It is very sensitive in that, for those who believe, a good digital cable (better cables) and power strip (naim recommended wiremold/wireworld thingy) made audible differences as did going using a jelly fish power cord (with adapter) and magnet wire speaker cables over any of the canare or even cardas stuff.

 headphone jack is no good and analogue inputs aren't either - other than that I prefer it to some serious arcam and McIntosh stuff - not as "warm" but way more detailed (granted that's not side by side a/bing and knowing how little the panny costs causes me to "root" for it I'm sure). 

 Never heard the trends but if you want a remote and a sub out I can't imagine anything that comes close in that price range.


----------



## Jon L

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yo2tup2* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_here's a subjective shootout between digital amps using reference quality speakers. http://www.stereomojo.com/SHOOTOUT2007INTEGRATEDS.htm

 the SA-SR55 placed somewhere in the bottom._

 

Unfortunately, this shootout did NOT utilize Panny's digital input, only analogue input, basically bypassing Panny's raison d'être. 

 After this objection was raised, the author of this shootout did say he would try to do a followup using Panny's digital input, which I haven't seen yet. 

 Panny's not going to replace somebody's $5-10K reference tube monoblocks, but if you have good speakers that can't play loud with T-amps, Panny really is the only game in town. 

 Also realize that Panny doesn't really have much jitter suppression built-in. Once again, the quality of the digital signal input WILL determine whether one gets reference quality sound or not.


----------



## spacemanspliff

Oh it certainly should be considered the best receiver under $1000 for sure. Sorry to be a budget-phile and not have some higher end speakers. However, if you have the $$ for high end equipment then the Panny is a negligible cost item. In other words, go get one and try it already! Might just put a smile on your face.


----------



## yo2tup2

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Jon L* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Unfortunately, this shootout did NOT utilize Panny's digital input, only analogue input, basically bypassing Panny's raison d'être. 

 After this objection was raised, the author of this shootout did say he would try to do a followup using Panny's digital input, which I haven't seen yet. 

 Panny's not going to replace somebody's $5-10K reference tube monoblocks, but if you have good speakers that can't play loud with T-amps, Panny really is the only game in town. 

 Also realize that Panny doesn't really have much jitter suppression built-in. Once again, the quality of the digital signal input WILL determine whether one gets reference quality sound or not._

 


 point taken! i was trying to answer the op's question about if the panny's have any weaknesses and how it performs with "reference quality speakers. yes the panny has weaknesses and are not the end to all recievers like some reviewer may make it out to seem....but is an incredible value! i've actually been meaning to pick up one for a HT setup but haven't got around to it yet.


----------



## Max F

For those interested, my system would be considered budget, but you should come over cause it sounds pretty sweet!

 Squeezebox 3 with linear PS --> Behringer DEQ2496 --> Panny XR55 --> Monitor Audio B4 + Parts Express Subwoofer (EQ with a Behringer FBD)

 The DEQ2496 is an excellent compliment to the Panny as it is used as a digital EQ and no conversion of the digital signal to analog is made. I use the parametric EQ to bring down room nodes (bass peaks) and the graphic EQ for tweeking the sound. I like a BBC dip and some rolloff at the upper frequencies to deal more with the speakers and a hard room than to deal with any brightness in the Panny. The Panny really can pump out a lot of power and barely get hot! You do need to have speakers that are not difficult to drive though.


----------



## infinitesymphony

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *spacemanspliff* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_However, if you have the $$ for high end equipment then the Panny is a negligible cost item._

 

Not exactly... I love assembling great systems on a budget, and I'm looking for deals even among high-end stuff. That $200 could be the difference between one generation of receivers and the next. I plan on making my next receiver my last big audio purchase for quite a while.

 It's just a matter of temptation, I guess... Waiting for deals on high-end stuff takes a long time, and while it's rewarding, I could really use an upgrade right now. *shrug*


----------



## tbonner1

I am with you infinitesymphony. I love the challenge of finding little known products that produce outstanding sound for the money.


----------



## VicAjax

you're looking for multi-channel, right?

 if not, you may want to check out the Onkyo A-9555. it's 100 watts/channel of class d power, and it seems to be getting rave reviews. i think it can be found for less than $600.

 it came in 2nd (behind a 15-watt, single-input T-Amp) in stereo mojo's big digital amp face-off.


----------



## infinitesymphony

Yes, it has to be multi-channel. Otherwise, I'd probably go nuts and get a bunch of vintage receivers or separates and have crazy amounts of amplification (and wasted space) for cheap 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





. Or, I'd stick with my current integrated amp, which has been a huge overachiever.

 I'm growing less and less inclined to trust publications' reviews of either super-budget or super-high-end equipment. Different people have different needs and preferences in an audio system. For example, some people are perfectly happy with the Sonic Impact T-Amp. However, it can't adequately drive some speakers, and to the speakers it does drive, it introduces a significant amount of distortion and clipping, especially as the volume is increased.

 Almost every system has some particular weakness, so I was just curious about what differentiated these class D amplifiers from the common AB amps found in most equipment.


----------



## wae5

Sorry to bring this thread back from the dead but I'm listening to Diana Kroll on the RS2is using the Panasonic SA-XR55 receiver's HP out & in no way is this a second class ride.


----------

