Review: Yamaha R-N803 Network Stereo Receiver

Manufacturer & Model

Yamaha R-N803 Network Stereo Receiver

MSRP

$799

Link

https://usa.yamaha.com/products/audio_visual/hifi_components/r-n803/index.html

Highlights

Robust Amplifier Section, ESS Sabre DAC, High build quality, High Fidelity Sound, Extensive musical options through MusicCast app, Less then effective YPAO

Summary

The Yamaha R-N803 Network Stereo Receiver is, in many ways, all many need. A high-quality 2-channel amplifier with high-resolution DAC, high fidelity amplifier section, and feature-rich MusicCast app. It is astounding how good a sound can be achieved with just this receiver and a pair of high-end speakers. It could make an excellent centerpiece for an excellent 2-channel system, a really nice bedroom or office system, or anything in between. My biggest complaint was the DSP section and associated YPAO automatic setup and room correction often made things worse.

Two-channel receivers seem like a relic left over from a bygone era. In a world where every major home theater electronics manufacturer seems to offer so many receivers with so many options at every price point that a stereo receiver for $799 probably seems like a lost product. Why does it exist, and who is it for? Many music lovers primarily listen to music in just 2 channels. Experts in the home audio world will tell you that getting 2 channel right is far better than getting multi-channel wrong. Many rooms cannot support a properly setup home theater system, and if your needs lean more toward music, a stereo receiver may be a smarter buy. I have often found myself longing for an easy to use modern stereo receiver that allows for app control and a full suite of streaming services. The Yamaha R-N803, Yamaha’s flagship stereo network receiver with built-in MusicCast is this receiver. After more than six months of hands-on experience with this product, I can give you a true long-term introspection. After reading my review you will be reassured of Yamaha’s reliability and customer support.

Features
The Yamaha R-N803 network stereo receiver looks like a classic Yamaha. In fact, If I didn’t tell you it was a feature-packed network receiver, you might mistake this for a 30-year-old product, with classic Yamaha bar-style knobs and slab styling. To my eye, Yamaha has cast a nice balance between retro and modern style in providing an elegant piece of electronics. It isn’t minimalist by any means, but in that many of these knobs give you direct access to useful controls, rather than buried in a menu somewhere. There are knobs for input, bass and treble tone controls, balance, loudness, a multi-function selector knob, volume, and a pure direct button.

Inside the Yamaha, I noticed a massive transformer. No, it isn’t the toroidal transformers we lust after in audiophile products, but hey, what matters is how much current it delivers, and it’s clear this transformer has what it takes. In addition, I saw two large heatsinks running down the middle, large capacitors, and good quality parts. In fact, compare this to other mid-priced surround receivers and you will notice just how heavy this receiver is for having just two channels (24lbs, similar HT receivers come in at 20-30lbs). There are no HDMI boards, no 13 channels of amplification, large digital processors, that’s all amp baby! Its power rating won’t seem impressive, but unlike a lot of receivers that tend to be wishfully rated, this product seems to be the opposite. It’s rated at just 100 watts per channel at 8 ohms, but that’s at less than .02% THD. The Amplifier is of Yamaha’s ToP-ART Total Purity Audio Reproduction Technology, which is said to provide better fidelity. ToP-ART, from their description, seems to refer to a design philosophy more than anything. An amplifier circuit with short signal paths, symmetric layout, and a vibration-absorbing base. Some of the less obvious parts adding to the good sound include a top-notch DAC chip from ESS Sabre, the 9006AS 24 bit/192khz with 120dB’s of dynamic range. A variety of digital and analog inputs, including a phono preamp input are included.

One of the unique features the Yamaha has, at least for a stereo receiver, is YPAO, Yamaha’s Parametric Acoustic Optimizer and Reflected Sound Control, or Automatic room compensation. I was excited to try Yamaha’s current version of YPAO. I had hoped it might provide a flatter/smoother bass response and make set up easy. In addition, it has a dedicated subwoofer output, along with bass management including distance controls for proper time alignment. I did not find YPAO particularly effective with any of the speakers I tried it on, and I ended up turning its EQ function off for all my listening. The distance control didn’t seem to work quite right for me, I found it inaccurately detected the amount of delay the subwoofers introduced and set the distance too low. I ended up using REW for my measurements and setup instead.

Finally, let’s focus on Yamaha MusicCast. The entire reason I asked Yamaha for this receiver is that I had been looking for a simple 2-channel receiver that I could use to review small bookshelf speakers, as well as something that would give me easier access to my favorite streaming apps. I spend most of my time listening to music stored on hard drives, streamed from Tidal, or played from my laptop. I previously reviewed NAD’s BlueSound BlueOS system and loved it. So much so I missed it and wished I had kept that wonderful integrated amp. I wanted to try a product that might provide similar fidelity at a lower price point, and honestly, wanted to see what the competition’s multiroom network streaming OS was like. I’ve used Sonos as well, but they didn’t offer a product that has the power nor to meet my needs. I could have gone with Denon HEOS, but I’ve used their system in the past and was unimpressed. I was excited to see what MusicCast could do. In the case of the Yamaha R-N803, the MusicCast app allows you to fully control the receiver, all its inputs, volume, settings, along with control over the available streaming services. At the time of this article, the only app I really missed was Qobuz. This only recently launched in the United States as a beta, so its absence is understandable. As I’ve noted in numerous other reviews, I do most of my stereo listening with Tidal. I find the sound quality more than acceptable and love the access to 100’s of thousands of tracks. I found the MusicCast app to have sharp modern graphics, an intuitive layout, and a comprehensive feature set.

Setup
As I noted earlier, the Yamaha was easy to set up. It came packaged in a robust box identical to the boxes that Todd Anderson noted in his two prior Yamaha reviews. Once removed from the simple packaging and separating out the accessories, I got to setting it up. It came with a quick start guide, I glanced at it, and setup was a cinch. First, I put the Yamaha on an amplifier stand, hooked up the Outlaw Audio BLSv2 speakers, and powered everything on. I downloaded the Yamaha controller app, The MusicCast app, and worked on adding the Yamaha to my network. There are a number of ways to do this, with Direct WiFi being one of the simplest. This method connects the Yamaha directly to your phone temporarily, and then allows your phone to connect the Yamaha to your WiFi network. Once this is done you might want to consider using YPAO. As I will discuss later, I didn’t like it. It got the subwoofer distance wrong and was unable to compensate for delay in the subwoofer. The EQ didn’t seem to do much that I could measure, especially in the bass where it matters most. I could clearly hear the difference it made, but it wasn’t desirable and I chose to leave it off.

As for the review system, I used this product for quite a while before writing this review, so the speakers I had at my disposal were significant. Normally when a reviewer gets a product, they test it for a month or more, they test it out with their reference speakers and maybe one or two others. In my case, I had various speakers at my disposal that this became a neat opportunity to really see what the Yamaha can do. I’ll describe it’s sound later, but the speakers I tested included my Geddes Abbey 12’s, Outlaw Audio BLSv2, Klipsch Reference Premiere RP-280F, Philharmonic Audio BMR Philharmonitor, and the absolutely gargantuan JTR Noesis 212RT. The sensitivity and electrical load of all these speakers are all so different that it provided a great opportunity to really test the ability of the Yamaha amplifier to drive good speakers. The reality, for me at least, is that most good amplifiers sound the same. Whatever differences in sound may exist are often swamped by everything else going on. I paid the greatest attention to things like the amplifier's noise floor and the ability to drive a speaker without clipping too easily.


How did it sound
The Yamaha R-N803 in use was an absolute joy. First, MusicCast was nearly flawless. If my WiFi signal was strong or I used a wired network connection I rarely if ever experienced any dropouts. I did occasionally run into problems where the App wouldn’t log into my Tidal account, but typically resetting the receiver fixed it. and Some recent software updates seem to have permanently resolved this issue. Comparing the sound quality of the built in apps and Sabre DAC against my laptop as a source with high-end studio DAC’s, I found no loss of fidelity using MusicCast and spent most of my time listening in this way. The Yamaha’s amplifier was clearly potent, never noticeably clipping, and easily driving all my speakers. Before delving into some specific examples of how the speaker sounded with each of the speakers, I’ll note that the Yamaha was frequently the center of a lot of fun listening sessions. I often invited friends, including other reviewers I know, over to listen and we always had a great time getting lost in the Yamaha’s sound and the app’s expanse of music. I used a lot of different speakers but will just mention a few here (if you would like to know more, just comment on this review and I’ll be happy to share).

Philharmonic BMR Philharmonitor
Using the Yamaha with these BMR speakers was a really fun experience. What is most notable is that this setup consisted of the BMR speakers, a Martin Logan Subwoofer, and the Yamaha receiver, nothing else. That is just 3 components, and out of that, I had created a system that I felt provided stupendous fidelity, full bandwidth, wide dynamic range, neutral tonal balance, and reach out and touch it imaging. We are talking about $3,248 in retail worth of equipment providing sound that is nearly as good as it gets. The kind of systems that give me this level of sound often cost many times that amount.

The first album I really explored on this setup was the recently released Celebrating John Williams performed by the Los Angeles Philharmonic and conducted by Gustavo Dudamel. Many of you know John Williams as the brilliant composer behind the soundtrack to E.T., Star Wars, and countless other films. In this case, I focused on the E.T. track, “Adventures from Earth.” It’s a powerful piece with huge dynamics but also a real delicacy about it. By four minutes into the track the piece begins to slow down projecting a kind of sadness and wonderment. Through the BMR’s I felt the full scale of the orchestra was being well presented. Dynamics seemed more than adequate, though maybe not the equal of the best systems I’ve ever heard. I wouldn’t fault the Yamaha too much, the BMR’s are very inefficient and can’t handle a ton of power.

After that, I cued up the Theme from Jurassic Park. The composition was better than I realized musically, and I had great fun listening to it. Much like E.T., this is a very dynamic performance with big crescendos, while also having many delicate moments presenting just the horn section or string section here and there. The Yamaha/BMR combination was great, tonally accurate, imaging was strong, the scale was right on for the most part. The only distraction was that a slight loss of dynamics.

After this I put on one of my favorite classical guitar pieces, Suite Espanola, Op. 47: No. 4, Asturias (Leyenda) performed by John Williams. The quality of the DAC and amplifier in this receiver were good enough to give some of much more expensive gear a real run for their money. Presenting this song piece with as much tonal truth and dynamic realism as I have ever heard it. The Yamaha amplifier has a very clean and neutral presentation. Some might even call it warm, especially if they are used to listening to some of the new Class D amplifiers around.

JTR Noesis 212RT
These speakers are special too. Jeff has become a friend of mine through this industry and his products are among the best value in the business. His speakers are big black boxes, not the gloss paint and wood veneer we are used to seeing with audiophiles. Yet these speakers do some things as well or better than any speaker I’ve heard. Their dynamics and imaging are second to none. With more than 100dB at 1 watt/1-meter sensitivity, they sure better be dynamic. While these speakers are very large and capable of handling a ton of power, their high sensitivity makes them an easy load to drive. You might think the Yamaha R-N803 is a strange pairing with the JTR, but there was great synergy. While the JTR can take more power, and some may want it, this setup was more than capable of producing volume levels that nobody should be listening at. A quick calculation of this setup suggests it is capable of more than 110dB of output at the listening position for each speaker. Meaning that at the end of the day, this little 100 watt per channel receiver with MusicCast and these giant Dual 12” MTM tower speakers created an all in three system capable of very loud and realistic volume levels. I could recreate any large orchestra piece, any organ piece, any rock concert with the realism I am used to hearing at live events. Further, I loved how simple this setup was. Just three components and three wires (Power and two speaker cables) are all I needed to create one of the best sounding systems I’ve ever heard in my life. I played the same tracks as I mentioned with the BMR’s and found much of the same. The Yamaha and JTR combination simply provided a larger presentation with even greater dynamics.


What about YPAO?
This receiver has Yamaha Parametric room Acoustic Optimizer with reflected sound control. I had hoped this newer version of YPAO would address my past negative feelings, but unfortunately, Yamaha still has work to do. This system, both measurably and subjectively, made things worse. I wanted to believe in YPAO. I tried setting it up and engaging it repeatedly. But I never did find found that it made things sound better. Sometimes it would help improve the bass a little and tame some of the greater room effects. But it always made things worse in the midrange and treble. It is not comparable with Dirac and in my opinion, is best left off.

Competition
In some ways the competition for this receiver is vast. First, for it’s selling price, any number of mid-range home theater receivers provide similar features, power, and networking capabilities. What differentiates the Yamaha from these products is the high-end DAC and the high-quality amplifier. The Yamaha has a power supply that is easily as large or larger than any I have seen in a modern 7+ channel receiver, but it is only powering two channels. When comparing it to my own Onkyo receiver, I found the Yamaha never audibly clipped nor had any trouble driving any of my speakers. The Onkyo occasionally had some hiccups, with noticeable hardening, compression, and audible clipping during some dynamic music and movie moments. As such, I don’t really consider home theater receivers to be true competition. They might offer better value, but there is a compromise in sound quality.

Which brings us to one of the few products on the market that is true competition. The Outlaw Audio RR2160. I haven’t had this receiver in my own system yet, but I have used it a handful of times. What I can say is that the Outlaw is an over-achiever. At $849 you get a lot of amplifier for the money, even compared to the Yamaha which sells for $749. While rated at a similar 110 watts, I think the Outlaw is more conservatively rated than the Yamaha. The main difference is that the Outlaw Audio is not a networked receiver with app control. It doesn’t have built-in apps like Tidal. It is expensive and difficult for small companies to develop these systems, which is a big loss. I have found such features so central to my musical enjoyment that I consider it them indispensable. Bluesound, Sonos, Yamaha MusicCast, and even Dayton Audio all sell products that could be added to the Outlaw, but it’s total price would be that much higher, and it wouldn’t be as integrated. Ultimately, you the reader, need to decide which is more important to you: the value and simplicity of an all in one system or the better technical and subjective performance of the Outlaw audio.

What about the NAD C-368 I previously reviewed? The NAD is better. Sorry Yamaha, but it’s true. It is better in every way. It is smaller, better built, is just as powerful, has an equal or better DAC, and superior streaming software. I like Blue Sound better. Additionally, I like the interface, usability, and available streaming apps. Plus, the Yamaha can’t stream Tidal at HD quality (MQA), but Blue Sound can. However, the NAD is $1199 when equipped with the BluOS module, making it quite a bit more expensive. The NAD is not twice as good as the Yamaha. Both can serve as the centerpiece of an amazingly high-fidelity system at a surprisingly low total cost. Some of you may think these comments are out of touch, that $749 is a lot of money for a stereo receiver and that $1199 is an insane amount of money for an integrated amplifier. I understand where you are coming from, this is still a lot of money. But gear has gotten to a point today where its technical and subjective performance rivals what used to cost more like $10,000.


Conclusion
I’ve really enjoyed my time with the Yamaha R-N803. It’s a great network connected receiver offering a compelling set of features, high build quality, and good sound. The receiver always acquitted itself well amongst the many different speakers I tried it with and became the centerpiece of many wonderful listening sessions. The Yamaha R-N803 Network receiver is supremely neutral in tonal balance. What you get with the Yamaha is an all in one audiophile package. The quality of the DAC, amplifier, preamplifier, and most importantly, MusicCast system is among the best I have seen for this price point. For more than half a year it was the centerpiece in many speaker shootouts and listening sessions. It put a smile on the face of many jaded reviewers, including myself. I love how easy it is to put together a truly outstanding high-resolution system from such a simple set of products. This receiver connected to the Philharmonic BMR Philharmonitor’s is probably among the best sounding systems I have ever heard. Yet the total cost of entry and lack of complexity was astonishing. For those looking for a network-connected two-channel receiver, I truly recommend the Yamaha.
Yamaha R-N803 Network Stereo Receiver Specifications

• RMS Output: 100 watts per channel (8 ohms, 20hz-20khz, .019% THD)
• Signal to Noise Ratio: 100 db
• Audio Input/output: 10/2
• Input Type: Optical digital, Coaxial digital, RCA, USB, Phono
• Output: Subwoofer
• Digital Media Formats: DLNA v1.5, MP3, WMA, MPEG4, AAC, WAV, FLAC, AIFF, ALAC, DSD, Bluetooth (SBC/AAC)
• WiFi: Yes with direct mode
• Dimensions: 17 1/8" x 15 7/16"
• Weight: 24.3 lbs

 

[philip vasseur]

I had one of these for about a month; the YPAO as stated is worse than useless and shame on Yamaha. I won't comment on the "sound" because that is dependent on so many variables as to be meaningless. I will comment on MusicCast; it was buggier than most of these type of apps and because it frequently had to be "rebooted" by restarting the receiver and/or my phone I sent the unit back. My wireless network is strong and was not the issue; I have used PlayFi via my Anthem AVM60 and it also requires an occasional reboot but it has been far more reliable than MusicCast, at least for me.

 

[Todd Anderson]

YPAO as stated is worse than useless and shame on Yamaha.

Details?

 

[philip vasseur]

Hi Todd. Firstly, while I come from an academic research and strong science background, I am not an electrical r acoustical engineer. So just another opinion but in this case I think the argument that YPAO is awful is easy to make. I recently took in a couple podcasts from Audioholics, and they mentioned that YPAO was "terrible" and those folks are more qualified than I.
I have used Anthem's room correction many times, and a little less experience with Dirac Live. With those programs you have a quality microphone and take sweeps from a minimum of 5 (ARC) positions, and many more with Dirac, with specific guidelines on where to position the mic. After each speaker is tested with multiple sweeps from multiple positions you get the data shown on your laptop. You see in detail the level correction, crossover, etc and can make changes if desired. Multiple profiles can be established for using subs in mono/stereo etc. After uploading to my various systems, I have always noticed a change and I must say for the better. At least with ARC, not sure about Dirac, you can turn the corrections on/off on the fly and listen for differences.
Contrast that with what I experienced with the 803 (it may differ with their more high end products). You are given a throw away microphone, little to no guidance, the system took ONE measurement from ONE position, and when done you either saved the changes or not, depending on whether or not you got an error message on the tiny screen. I spent a little time trying to find out what the program had done (crossover etc, as I had a 2.1 system) and could not find it. Perhaps it's there but clearly not worth the search. My bass response was even more boomy than before and I ended up with YPAO off and adjusting the crossover at the sub.
So those are my reasons for declaring YPAO an embarrassment for Yamaha.
happy listening
phil
ps- although commenting on the "sound" of a component is fraught with subjectivity, after I sent the Yamaha receiver back, I brought out my anthem str pre and anthem mca225 amp from the house as a temporary measure and the sound was dramatically better. And of course it should have been given the cost differential, but it was of value to me because it showed me that the little Dynaudio bookshelf speakers were capable of much better sound than I had heard from the Yamaha. Calling the 803 anything close to a hi fi audiophile type component is IMO not correct.

 

[Matthew J Poes]

Hi Todd. Firstly, while I come from an academic research and strong science background, I am not an electrical r acoustical engineer. So just another opinion but in this case I think the argument that YPAO is awful is easy to make. I recently took in a couple podcasts from Audioholics, and they mentioned that YPAO was "terrible" and those folks are more qualified than I.
I have used Anthem's room correction many times, and a little less experience with Dirac Live. With those programs you have a quality microphone and take sweeps from a minimum of 5 (ARC) positions, and many more with Dirac, with specific guidelines on where to position the mic. After each speaker is tested with multiple sweeps from multiple positions you get the data shown on your laptop. You see in detail the level correction, crossover, etc and can make changes if desired. Multiple profiles can be established for using subs in mono/stereo etc. After uploading to my various systems, I have always noticed a change and I must say for the better. At least with ARC, not sure about Dirac, you can turn the corrections on/off on the fly and listen for differences.
Contrast that with what I experienced with the 803 (it may differ with their more high end products). You are given a throw away microphone, little to no guidance, the system took ONE measurement from ONE position, and when done you either saved the changes or not, depending on whether or not you got an error message on the tiny screen. I spent a little time trying to find out what the program had done (crossover etc, as I had a 2.1 system) and could not find it. Perhaps it's there but clearly not worth the search. My bass response was even more boomy than before and I ended up with YPAO off and adjusting the crossover at the sub.
So those are my reasons for declaring YPAO an embarrassment for Yamaha.
happy listening
phil
ps- although commenting on the "sound" of a component is fraught with subjectivity, after I sent the Yamaha receiver back, I brought out my anthem str pre and anthem mca225 amp from the house as a temporary measure and the sound was dramatically better. And of course it should have been given the cost differential, but it was of value to me because it showed me that the little Dynaudio bookshelf speakers were capable of much better sound than I had heard from the Yamaha. Calling the 803 anything close to a hi fi audiophile type component is IMO not correct.

hey Phillip, as you know I didn’t like the Yamaha’s correction suite either. I found it sounded worse with it on vs off.

as for the subjective sound quality, I am wondering if you were having issues with a bad unit. I only once had a problem with MusicCast, it was otherwise rock solid.

I found the DSP suite built into the Yamaha to be noisy and low fidelity. The AD converter is one of the main culprits. I found if you simply use the direct mode, which fully bypasses this, the sound is much better. I also have some measurements that I took on the unit. The Yamaha noise increased about 20 decibels when the A/D converter was in the signal path. Yamaha confirmed that whole the DAC is state of the art, the A/D is not.

the anthem you used is significantly better than the Yamaha. You get what you pay for. I compared the Yamaha against similar priced conception and didn’t find anything to be substantially better. As I noted, the similar priced Outlaw audio receiver is a much better amplifier, but under most conditions I don’t think someone could reliably pick out which they were listening too. I found the Yamaha to be high fidelity as long as you avoid using YPAO.

I did do some listening against a much more expensive setup using a Cherry Dac Dac and Cherry Megachino Stereo amplifier. That is 3 times the power, two orders of magnitude lower noise and distortion, and 10 times the price (not including a preamplifier). I originally included it in the review but ultimately I and the folks who helped edit the article felt that was a silly comparison. Obviously that rig sounded better. It was quieter and more dynamic. However under many circumstances I felt I and others would be hard pressed to tell them apart.

 

[Matthew J Poes]

I had one of these for about a month; the YPAO as stated is worse than useless and shame on Yamaha. I won't comment on the "sound" because that is dependent on so many variables as to be meaningless. I will comment on MusicCast; it was buggier than most of these type of apps and because it frequently had to be "rebooted" by restarting the receiver and/or my phone I sent the unit back. My wireless network is strong and was not the issue; I have used PlayFi via my Anthem AVM60 and it also requires an occasional reboot but it has been far more reliable than MusicCast, at least for me.

I had some minor initial hiccups with MusicCast but over about 90% of my year long time with it, it was fine. It is very sensitive to wifi quality so it may have been that. If the unit didn’t have a strong WiFi signal, it didn’t work as well.

I used Playfi early on and found it awful. I think all of these systems have been maturing rapidly over the years. At this point my experience with MusicCast is that it’s reached parity with the best of them, as long as you have good strong WiFi. I didn’t blame the Yamaha for this because in my house none of my devices work well in certain parts of the house.

I meant to ask, how did you feed a source into this receiver? Was it a digital or analog connection? Did you engage pure direct?

mid you do not engage pure direct and use an analog input you are going through a low quality AD converter. If you use MusicCast or a digital input, it bypasses the AD stage and should be better.

 

[Sonnie Parker]

YPAO is what keeps me away from Yamaha. I've had several of their receivers over the years... and the CX-5100 processor (I believe that was the model)... but the YPAO was horrible in comparison to Audyssey and Dirac Live. All other things being somewhat equal (features, power and sound quality)... the auto-EQ/processing system is what makes or breaks any AVR/processor in my opinion (at least it would be the determining factor in whether I purchased it or not).

 

[Matthew J Poes]

YPAO is what keeps me away from Yamaha. I've had several of their receivers over the years... and the CX-5100 processor (I believe that was the model)... but the YPAO was horrible in comparison to Audyssey and Dirac Live. All other things being somewhat equal (features, power and sound quality)... the auto-EQ/processing system is what makes or breaks any AVR/processor in my opinion (at least it would be the determining factor in whether I purchased it or not).

Dirac is the only room correction I had used to date that I found tolerable. At this price point there just aren’t any stereo receivers that offer that capability. The NAD surround receiver is probably the closest thing, and it’s still $500 more expensive.

I was using really good speakers with this and typically found that just the bass needed adjustment for the system to sound really good. I have an ML subwoofer with ARC that I found addresses the problems fine. I actually tried the Yamaha with Dirac through my laptop. If the bass was already corrected, I didn’t find the Dirac to make as great a difference. With speakers like those BMR’s, I really didn’t feel they benefited from Dirac all that much.

 

[Ataraxia]

What about the NAD C-368 I previously reviewed? The NAD is better. Sorry Yamaha, but it’s true. It is better in every way. It is smaller, better built, is just as powerful, has an equal or better DAC, and superior streaming software. I like Blue Sound better. Additionally, I like the interface, usability, and available streaming apps. Plus, the Yamaha can’t stream Tidal at HD quality (MQA), but Blue Sound can. However, the NAD is $1199 when equipped with the BluOS module, making it quite a bit more expensive. The NAD is not twice as good as the Yamaha. Both can serve as the centerpiece of an amazingly high-fidelity system at a surprisingly low total cost. Some of you may think these comments are out of touch, that $749 is a lot of money for a stereo receiver and that $1199 is an insane amount of money for an integrated amplifier. I understand where you are coming from, this is still a lot of money. But gear has gotten to a point today where its technical and subjective performance rivals what used to cost more like $10,000.


Conclusion
I’ve really enjoyed my time with the Yamaha R-N803. It’s a great network connected receiver offering a compelling set of features, high build quality, and good sound. The receiver always acquitted itself well amongst the many different speakers I tried it with and became the centerpiece of many wonderful listening sessions. The Yamaha R-N803 Network receiver is supremely neutral in tonal balance. What you get with the Yamaha is an all in one audiophile package. The quality of the DAC, amplifier, preamplifier, and most importantly, MusicCast system is among the best I have seen for this price point. For more than half a year it was the centerpiece in many speaker shootouts and listening sessions. It put a smile on the face of many jaded reviewers, including myself. I love how easy it is to put together a truly outstanding high-resolution system from such a simple set of products. This receiver connected to the Philharmonic BMR Philharmonitor’s is probably among the best sounding systems I have ever heard. Yet the total cost of entry and lack of complexity was astonishing. For those looking for a network-connected two-channel receiver, I truly recommend the Yamaha.[/float_left]

Seems like you preferred the NAD due to features... Do you prefer the NAD sound to the Yamaha also?

 

[Ataraxia]

You are given a throw away microphone, little to no guidance, the system took ONE measurement from ONE position, and when done you either saved the changes or not, depending on whether or not you got an error message on the tiny screen. I spent a little time trying to find out what the program had done (crossover etc, as I had a 2.1 system) and could not find it. Perhaps it's there but clearly not worth the search. My bass response was even more boomy than before and I ended up with YPAO off and adjusting the crossover at the sub.
So those are my reasons for declaring YPAO an embarrassment for Yamaha.
happy listening

Running YPAO 8 position measurements and 2 channel music in "FLAT" mode with my A2080 AVR is a big improvement IMO. I wonder if the 803 has the same version of YPAO. From advert specs look like it should having RSC and up to 8 position measurements. Are you saying it does not allow up to 8 position measurements?

Edit: I just read the manual and indeed only one measurement. That's too bad. I've run many sweeps with YPAO and my A2080 and it's definitely necessary to do all 8 measurements to get the best result. Any less and I'd agree that not using YPAO is better.

 

[Todd Anderson]

Hi Todd. Firstly, while I come from an academic research and strong science background, I am not an electrical r acoustical engineer. So just another opinion but in this case I think the argument that YPAO is awful is easy to make. I recently took in a couple podcasts from Audioholics, and they mentioned that YPAO was "terrible" and those folks are more qualified than I.
I have used Anthem's room correction many times, and a little less experience with Dirac Live. With those programs you have a quality microphone and take sweeps from a minimum of 5 (ARC) positions, and many more with Dirac, with specific guidelines on where to position the mic. After each speaker is tested with multiple sweeps from multiple positions you get the data shown on your laptop. You see in detail the level correction, crossover, etc and can make changes if desired. Multiple profiles can be established for using subs in mono/stereo etc. After uploading to my various systems, I have always noticed a change and I must say for the better. At least with ARC, not sure about Dirac, you can turn the corrections on/off on the fly and listen for differences.
Contrast that with what I experienced with the 803 (it may differ with their more high end products). You are given a throw away microphone, little to no guidance, the system took ONE measurement from ONE position, and when done you either saved the changes or not, depending on whether or not you got an error message on the tiny screen. I spent a little time trying to find out what the program had done (crossover etc, as I had a 2.1 system) and could not find it. Perhaps it's there but clearly not worth the search. My bass response was even more boomy than before and I ended up with YPAO off and adjusting the crossover at the sub.
So those are my reasons for declaring YPAO an embarrassment for Yamaha.
happy listening
phil
ps- although commenting on the "sound" of a component is fraught with subjectivity, after I sent the Yamaha receiver back, I brought out my anthem str pre and anthem mca225 amp from the house as a temporary measure and the sound was dramatically better. And of course it should have been given the cost differential, but it was of value to me because it showed me that the little Dynaudio bookshelf speakers were capable of much better sound than I had heard from the Yamaha. Calling the 803 anything close to a hi fi audiophile type component is IMO not correct.

I'm wondering if some settings were engaged (or disengaged) post-YPAO, sending your system into the gutter.

My experience with AVRs is, generally, room correction deficiencies are in the LFE range. Of course, rooms have a huge impact on impressions. I wouldn't disagree that YPAO is substandard in that regard.

 

[welldun]

Hey Matthew, glad to see you are still here. I sent you a few Messages a while back, when you have a moment, please check your inbox. Thanks!

 

[Coy Ramsey]

Disappointing about YPAO. I'm using basic version YPAO on Aventage RX-A660 avr and haven't been very impressed. One of reasons for lusting for avr upgrade is improved YPAO.
However, I use MusicCast extensively and, for me, it works well. Takes some time to learn/get used to but after a few months I'm very happy with MC across distributed 5 zones. I don't ever recall having a drop-out. My dealer/installer on new house tried hard to sell me another integrated system (@ more $$) with more bells and whistles but I stuck with MC and am glad that I did.

 

[SteveE]

Any help/advice is greatly appreciated. I am debating between the Pioneer R-N803 receiver and the NAD C368 bluos-21 amp. will use one of these to stream spotify music to from android phone. Will also connect a cd player and will use just to listen to streamed music and cds. The unit will power a old pair of Klipsch KG4.2's (If I am not happy with the kg's i will likely upgrade to a forte). I currently use a yamaha home theater receiver with hsu research speakers and am happy with those. so do i pay the extra and try NAD, or do I stick with the less expensive and more familiar Yamaha?

Thank you

 

[BSS]

I have this unit now. Just did some measurement, and i notice few thing on this YPAO, would like to share to all.

1) when YPAO is turn on, it seem to flatten the freq around 4k region, and lower the high freq (8k to 20k). See picture 1 attached
2) The biggest impact is on the bass region around 70hz to 250hz, where it lifted the freq by a lot. possible this will create a more boomy and warm vocal sounding , i assumed. See picture 2 attached.
3) Also the circuitry in it seem to share the amp session, where even turning on and off the speaker A, B, A+B will alter the subwoofer freq response. See picture 2 attached

For audio beginner, this is a choice though. One thing i like about it, its very reliable. you can turn it on 24 hours for a years and it still dont feel warm or break down. I also have the Aventage A3080 , and that unit has way better sounding that this. bass is tigher, vocal so appealing, sound clarity is much better. But that is on another level, cant compare directly like that.