DSP-A3090 - Replace or Continue Use

[lucky2041]

I have a Yamaha DSP-A3090 amplifier that I currently am using for my 5.1 channel home threater.

It is quite outdated, however, doing some research, it appears that it continues to stand the test of time. It does not however, have some of the new features, for example, HDMI, that new receivers have.

Not being an audiofile by any means, and not having the thousands of dollars to throw towards a new high end amplifier - should I just continue to use the DSP-A3090 or replace it for a receiver that I could pick up for say, $600 dollars?

Just for reference, the speakers currently connected to it are as follows:

BIC America Venturi DV62CLR-S Center channel
Polk T15 for the Rear Channel
JBL 325A Floor standing speakers (possibly replace these too)
Polk PSW 505 Subwoofer

Thanks for any help!

 

[DesiPower]

Why would an amp have HDMI input? is it a receiver or just AMP? I mean do you have a preamp that goes with it?

 

[NutBucket]

What is your source material? IMHO the only reason to upgrade to new receiver would be if there would be some gain in sound quality. So unless you're using Blu-Ray or something with high bitrate codecs there won't be a lot of gain.

Now, some may argue that a receiver with Audyssey-type room calibration will have a noticeable improvement...but only you can determine the value there.


EDIT: OP has a hybrid of sorts. It seems to be an amp/pre-amp combo. So it's a receiver minus AM/FM tuners from what I can tell.

 

[lucky2041]

Why would an amp have HDMI input? is it a receiver or just AMP? I mean do you have a preamp that goes with it?

I am very much uneducated about amplifiers. I have done some research specifically on the DSP-A3090 but outside of that, my knowledge of them limited. It looks very similar to many of the receivers I have found strolling through best buy, except it is about 50 lbs.

According to the research I did, it was top of the line 2,500 dollar amplifier when it came out in the early 90's. It does not have options like HDMI inputs though that, I am guessing from your post, is much more common, if not exclusive, to receivers.

That's why I am posting, I don't know these things. I want the best quality sound. When I hear it, I can tell it sounds good, I just don't always know how to get there.

 

[DesiPower]

I am also a rookie in this field but it sounds like you have a good solid amp, instead of getting a new AVR you can get just a pre-amp and use the current Amp's analog inputs. Your setup will be of a much higher quality than getting just a $600 AVR. This is a very popular one

 

[lucky2041]

Here are the spec:

Specifications

Minimum RMS Output Power per ChannelMain (20 Hz -20 kHz 0.015% THD 8ohms = 80W + 80W Center (20 Hz - 20 kHz 0.015% THD 8 ohms = 80W Front Effect (1 kHz 0.05% THD 8 ohms = 25W + 25W Rear Effect (20 Hz -20 kHz 0.015% THD 8 ohms = 80W + 80WDynamic Power per Channel(by IHF Dynamic Headroom Measuring Method) MAIN L/R (8 ohms/6 ohms/ 4 ohms) = 100W/120W/160WDynamic HeadroomMAIN L/R (8 ohms) = 0.97 dBDamping FactorMAIN L/R, CENTER (20 Hz -20 kHz 8 ohms) = 200Input Sensitivity/ Impedance(100W/8 ohms) CD/TUNER/TAPE/LD/TV-DBS/VCR/VIDEO AUX = 150mV/47k-ohms PHONE MM = 2.5mV/47k-ohms MAIN IN = 1V/47 k-ohmsMaximum Input Signal(1 kHz 0.05% THD, EFFECT ON) CD/TUNER/TAPE/LD/TV-DBS/VCR/VIDEO AUX = 2.3V PHONO MM = 130mVOutput Level/ ImpedanceREC OUT = 150mV/1 k ohms (PRE OUT) MAIN, CENTER, REAR EFFECT, FRONT EFFECT = 1V/1.2k-ohms SUBWOOFER (SPLIT L, R) MAIN SPEAKERS: SMALL) = 2.0V/1.2k-ohms SUBWOOFER (MONO) (MAIN SPEAKERS: SMALL) = 3.4V/1.2k-ohmsMaximum Voltage Output(20 Hz -20 kHz, 1% THD) PRE OUT (MAIN L/R) = 3VHeadphone Jack Rated Output/ImpedanceOutput Level (CD Input 50mV, RL= 8 ohms) = 0.2V Impedance = 100 ohmsFrequency Response(20 Hz - 20 kHz) CD/TUNER/TAPE/LD/TV-DBS/VCR/VIDEO AUX to MAIN L/R SP OUT 0+/-0.5 dBRIAA Equalization Deviation(20 Hz - 20 kHz) PHONO MM = 0+/-0.5 dBTotal Harmonic Distortion(20 Hz - 20kHz) CD/TUNER/TAPE/LD/TV-DBS/VCR/VIDEO AUX to PREOUT (MAIN L/R), 1V 0.005% PHONE MM to REC OUT, 3V = 0.01% MAIN IN to SP OUT (MAIN L/R, CENTER), 40W/8 ohms = 0.005%

Being completely honest, I do not know how to read a lot of this. Are there receivers at these price points that can even compete with this? This looks fairly powerful.....

 

[NutBucket]

In terms of output power most $500 receivers these days will "match" it. But all amplifiers will sound slightly different. Honestly I don't see any benefit in buying a pre-amp and continuing to use your current amp. I would buy a new receiver...if you really need one. Do you really want/need HDMI or are you just wondering if your setup will sound better?

 

[razel]

Your receiver is stuck in the Dolby AC-3 analog surround world. It doesn't even have basic Dolby Digital decoding. However if you are happy, I'd leave it be, save that money until you can't stand it or something outright breaks.

If you go with a modern HDMI receiver your A/V connections and remote control habits will change. I've found with family/friends that that is enough for them to keep what they have.

 

[lucky2041]

In terms of output power most $500 receivers these days will "match" it. But all amplifiers will sound slightly different. Honestly I don't see any benefit in buying a pre-amp and continuing to use your current amp. I would buy a new receiver...if you really need one. Do you really want/need HDMI or are you just wondering if your setup will sound better?

I don't "need" it, however it would be convenient to have all of the HDMI inputs go into the receiver as opposed to the TV.

I would like to know if it will sound better and as this one is stuck in the AC-3 stage, as stated above, I would assume Dolby digital would, indeed, sound better.

If I were to replace it with a receiver, are there any you would recommend in the $500 range that would at least match this one and perform well?

@ Razel - What do you mean by remote control habits will change?

 

[razel]

Chances are you have your TV/DVD/etc... connected analog to your receiver. I'm sure after all these years of pleasant ownership you gained a habit of how to turn things on and off. Before most of my friends and family went with a digital receiver, everything was connected to the TV then one analog output to the receiver.

Unfortunately with HDMI, if you want to extract and process digital surround sound perfectly, you will want to connect everything to the receiver. Then connect an output from the receiver to the TV. That means you have to turn the receiver on and do your switching of sources there instead of the TV. Most receiver now do a HDMI pass-through when the receiver is off. Meaning the last input chosen will pass through to the TV when the receiver is off. If it's not the right input, you have to turn it on and switch.

Obviously this can annoy family... especially the feminine ones.

 

[lucky2041]

Chances are you have your TV/DVD/etc... connected analog to your receiver. I'm sure after all these years of pleasant ownership you gained a habit of how to turn things on and off. Before most of my friends and family went with a digital receiver, everything was connected to the TV then one analog output to the receiver.

Unfortunately with HDMI, if you want to extract and process digital surround sound perfectly, you will want to connect everything to the receiver. Then connect an output from the receiver to the TV. That means you have to turn the receiver on and do your switching of sources there instead of the TV. Most receiver now do a HDMI pass-through when the receiver is off. Meaning the last input chosen will pass through to the TV when the receiver is off. If it's not the right input, you have to turn it on and switch.

Obviously this can annoy family... especially the feminine ones.

My amplifier is never off. We literally never use tv sound. So yes, everything is plugged in through my yamaha and we change the inputs on it as opposed to the tv. I have trained my kids and wife and they are learning well .

I am just not sure if there are any benefits to buying a new receiver as opposed to my amplifier hybrid I currently use. For example, our Xbox 360 is connected HDMI to tv, sound via optical cable to the amplifier. It would be easier if I could just plug the HDMI straight into a receiver - cut down on wires too - plus isn't HDMI sound better than optical? I just want to know if I will actually loose sound quality by buying a receiver at that price point or if my amplifier is old enough now - like still running AC-3 sound - that getting a receiver would benefit me.

 

[razel]

I don't think you'll be cutting down on wires. You'll just be changing them from optical to HDMI.

HDMI sound is not 'better' than optical. HDMI will offer you discrete surround sound where each speaker has it's own channel or signal. You currently are stuck using AC3 to guess-timate surround information. However in real life only time that would really matter is in 3D video games where if you had a character speaking in front of you and you turn your character 360 degrees you'll easily hear the voice go around the room. In your case, the surround will be mono instead of stereo. In movies surround is mostly ambient, so it usually seems mono anyways.

The decision is yours. I already made my suggestion earlier. It honestly sounds like you're looking for a reason to upgrade. I don't blame you.

 

[marincounty]

That Yamaha 3090 was a $2500 amp back in 80's dollars. It is very heavy I'm sure, with a much heavier duty power supply than any $600 dollar receiver you will find. The amp section is likely far better than any cheap receiver.
I like the idea of upgrading to a better processor and using the analog? inputs. Or maybe buy a Yamaha Dsp-a1 for cheap on craigslist or ebay.(similar to the 3090 but newer)

 

[lucky2041]

I decided to buy a receiver. I probably was looking for a reason to upgrade .

I went with a pioneer vsx-1123-k as it was on sale in store at best buy for $250 (more than half off). Seemed like a good deal and has all of the features I cared about. The box says it has 165 watts per channel and my old DSP-A3090 has 80 watts per channel. Doesn't that mean it produces more power? Either way it does what I need for the size of the room it's in.

Thanks for all of the info everyone!! The Yamaha has been relegated to bedroom duty

 

[Number1]

I decided to buy a receiver. I probably was looking for a reason to upgrade .

I went with a pioneer vsx-1123-k as it was on sale in store at best buy for $250 (more than half off). Seemed like a good deal and has all of the features I cared about. The box says it has 165 watts per channel and my old DSP-A3090 has 80 watts per channel. Doesn't that mean it produces more power? Either way it does what I need for the size of the room it's in.

Thanks for all of the info everyone!! The Yamaha has been relegated to bedroom duty

I looked at the spec for your new receiver and it is rated at 90W per channels into 8 Ohm, basicaly the same as your old one.
Most importantly, how do you like the sound and the features?

 

[lucky2041]

I looked at the spec for your new receiver and it is rated at 90W per channels into 8 Ohm, basicaly the same as your old one.
Most importantly, how do you like the sound and the features?

It sounds great. I haven't really had a chance to put it through its paces yet but preliminary use has shown that it is a competent receiver so far. One thing I like - and this is probably because I didn't know how to correctly set up the Yamaha - is that when playing a game, as I turn my character around I can hear the voice of the opposite person go all the way around the room. The Yamaha could do this too but whenever it hit the main speakers it was inaudible a lot of the time. I think this one is much better suited to my skill level. Teh Yamaha is just outputting basic stereo sound to bookshelf speakers in the bedroom so that was easily to set up.

The only thing I have left to do is replace my JBL 325A main speakers and my 5.1 system will be where I want it

 

[NutBucket]

Dang. If you weren't in Maine I'd take those JBLs off your hands.

 

[DesiPower]

my 2 cents, return the pioneer, they are cheap and entry level. You get what you pay for, that wattage dont mean shit. You downgraded when it comes to overall sound quality. If you want to upgrade from you existing one, you should wait and save for a $500+ one. With HDMI 2.0 none the less.

 

[lucky2041]

Dang. If you weren't in Maine I'd take those JBLs off your hands.

I'd have them shipped if ya paid for it... Got an offer?

 

[lucky2041]

my 2 cents, return the pioneer, they are cheap and entry level. You get what you pay for, that wattage dont mean shit. You downgraded when it comes to overall sound quality. If you want to upgrade from you existing one, you should wait and save for a $500+ one. With HDMI 2.0 none the less.

It normally is a 550 dollar one, it is just last years model so it was on clearance. To be quite honest, I can't tell the difference, maybe I'm hard of hearing :hmm:

I do still have the option to return it of course; for that same price, do you have any recommendations?

 

[razel]

To be quite honest, I can't tell the difference, maybe I'm hard of hearing :hmm:

I do still have the option to return it of course; for that same price, do you have any recommendations?

I couldn't tell much difference in sound quality either when I went from a quality 200 watt amp to a quality 600 watt amp. Actually the most obvious difference was bass, but when your crossovers kick in for the front speakers, the difference became more of a feeling.

Recommendation... keep what you have until it breaks or you find a better deal.

 

[NutBucket]

I'd have them shipped if ya paid for it... Got an offer?

I don't have a good spot for them anyway. It'd only be worthwhile if I could pick them up. I'm in CA.

 

[Muadib]

my 2 cents, return the pioneer, they are cheap and entry level. You get what you pay for, that wattage dont mean shit. You downgraded when it comes to overall sound quality. If you want to upgrade from you existing one, you should wait and save for a $500+ one. With HDMI 2.0 none the less.

I agree with this. The only upgrade you will see with the pioneer you bought is that you can now go digital with the rest of your equipment. The sound will be about the same with what you had with the 3090. If you just have to upgrade something now, it should be your speakers. Get a center channel & back channels that come closer to matching your JBL speakers. You should notice a difference then.

If you want to hear a difference with a new receiver, then you need to come up with more cash. I'm pretty sure the 3090 listed for $2500, back in 1990,91 when I bought mine for $1700. Even with the improvements made in the audio world in those years since, it's gonna cost you more than $250.

 

[lucky2041]

My JBL speakers are quite old and those were actually the only speakers I would look to replace. I have a BIC Venturi center channel that seems to work quite well and Polk T15's in the rear that do just fine given what rear channels need to do. It was my understanding that speaker quality degrades with time and as these are 20-30 years old, I figured those would be the speakers that would need to be replaced.

Is that not correct?

 

[lucky2041]

I am going to stick with the Pioneer receiver. It is doing well plus it has the inputs that I want. Sound quality is the same or differences are inaudible to me. It is doing just what I need it to do