Customer Reviews

Panasonic SA-XR55K 6.1-Channel A/V Home Theater Receiver, Black

5 star:		(29)
4 star:		(21)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

(The following is from my review on the ecoustics.com forum but you can also do a search for this model at the much bigger avsforum.com to read the massively positive feedback this receiver has won.)

Initial impressions:

1. I'd be lying if I said the Panny were as warm as my Marantz 5400 or NAD separates, but on the other hand I didn't find it "harsh," "cold," "flat," "lifelessly analytical" etc. as many anti-pure-digital audio folk have claimed. "Precise" and "neutral" would be how I'd describe it.

2. Yes, the pure-digital fans are correct about the amazing lack of noise/distortion and the jaw-dropping detail of the mids and highs. Yes, I noticed many more subtle background sounds and textures than I ever did with analog equipment.

I haven't hooked up my DVD player to it since I bought it strictly for 2-channel music but this kind of meticulous detail should be ideal for HT, one would think.

3. The Panny made me doubly appreciate the intuitive ease of use I enjoyed with my old Onkyo and current Marantz. Both setup and manual are rather convoluted. You cannot use the remote to change the setup, for one thing...argh!

4. The Panny certainly has no shortage of power...its volume goes from silent at -79 and maxes out at 0, I was easily hitting 80db at -40 and not the slightest hint of distortion. I am very curious to hear how it sounds when I get some extra speaker cable and bi-amp my Ascends, a very handy feature that I had only seen on the Pioneer Elite series in the $700 and up range.

5. The Panny doesn't provide quite the same muscular bass of the NAD, nor the aggressive fullness that the NAD achieves at high volumes (+80db)...it seems to have more of an intricate and laid-back personality best suited to moderately loud volumes of around 70db.

7. Cosmetics. I wasn't crazy about the small, crude-looking LED display which reminded me of my $65 Panasonic DVD player's display but oh well this is a $228 receiver after all. Otherwise the simple black faceplate is pretty tasteful. Should score some WAF (Wife Approval Factor) brownie points for any guy who decides to keep it. The remote is indeed a cheap POS but still a pretty minor gripe at this price.

****

After several days of listening only to the Panny, today I finally started doing some A/B listening with the Panny vs. my beloved NAD...and the "aha" moments are coming in spades right now.

Started with some Bach: a solo piano piece ("Jesu Joy of Man's Desiring") and the Brandenburg Concerto No. 3 in G Major (Allegro). The piano piece had both receivers pretty close at moderate volumes, though I could already hear a clarity advantage in favor of the Panny, which simply sounded more open and natural.

However at high volumes (90-95db) and particularly on the violin concerto, the Panny simply WIPED THE FLOOR with the NAD, which started to get thin on the highs and weak on the mids during musical peaks, with a layer of fuzz settling in around the edges. The Panny on the other hand calmly delivered the goods with perfect aplomb, didn't even get hot to the touch, stayed the same warmish temperature to the touch throughout.

Moved on to Norah Jones, "Don't Know Why" and "Seven Years"---didn't crank the volume above 80db this time, but again the Panny held a clear advantage. Wow, the midrange was just tremendous...Norah's voice seemed much fuller, her breaths more audible, when she held a note for a couple of seconds it all came through clear and effortlessly. In comparison the NAD seemd to favor certain parts of the frequency range over others, Norah's voice while still very pleasing did not have the same range.

Van Morrison, "Moondance"---a mediocre recording, but again the Panny did it with a bit more life and verve than the NAD.

Santana, "Put Your Lights On," "Maria Maria," and "Corazon Espinado." This is one of my favorite demo CDs because the songs have a variety of tempos and both simple and complex passages. There is also a lot of treble and midrange happening at the same time, all driven by a strong beat.

Once again, during complex passages (by which I mean lots of instruments, voices, percussion all happening at the same time) the Panny pulled ahead and never looked back. Separation of musical inputs was outstanding, bringing out many details that were muted on the NAD.

The NAD clearly does deliver more bass (I had my speakers set on large on the Panny, with the sub turned off) and on simpler compositions did have more of a laid back, warmish sound. However at about six times the price (an equivalent NAD amp + pre-pro today would run about $1300 compared to the Panny's $230) that's a lot of dough just for a particular sound characteristic with a particular type of musical compositions. In fact if I were buying my system from scratch today, I would choose the Panny without a second thought over both the NAD and the Marantz and spend the extra money on the speakers and sub...complete no-brainer.

What particularly surprised me was the fact that the slim featherweight Panny actually seems far more powerful than the behemoth NAD in both SPL and maintaining SQ at high SPL. It is rated at 100wpc at 6 ohms, but after today I would guesstimate that they could easily list it at 150wpc at 8ohms if they wanted to and they'd still be far more honest than 90% of their competition. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend this receiver even as a party appliance.

Wow, wow, wow..a 230 lousy bucks suddenly goes a VERY long way, indeed!

This Panny is far from perfect in terms of componentry, features, remote, and ease of use no doubt---but the performance it delivers at this ridiculously low pricepoint is simply staggering. If Panny adds another say $200 to the price tag to give it higher grade features and components, it will be extremely hard to beat.

Simply put, I cannot imagine there being too many solid-state analog receivers around 10 years from now, other than the real high end die-hard audiophile niche.

SOLD!

I purchased the Panasonic SA-XR55K to replace a Sony STR-DA4ES. I used a digital optical signal from a Sony DVD changer and a digital coaxial signal from a cable box for the sound sources. The Panasonic is powering a set of Athena Micra 6 speakers.

I wanted to evaluate the new digital amplification in the Panasonic. I watched a few DVDs, listened to some CDs and watched both standard definition and high-definition TV. While the Panasonic doesn't have all the features the Sony has, the sound quality is superb. The treble and mid-range are very detailed and the bass is precise and well-controlled. I saw no loss in picture quality by using the Panasonic to switch between two component video connections. Digital amps are definitely here to stay.

It's amazing that the Panasonic is even comparable, given that the Sony cost almost four times as much and weighs 30 pounds more. If you want great sound at a bargain price, give this unit a listen - highly recommended!

If you have searched for the review of this receiver, you must have noticed that there are lot of very polarised views. People have loved the clarity of the amp and have hated it. I used this receiver for last one month and found it quite upto the task. But, will it be my primary audio amplifier ? NO.
All of below mentioned observations were compared against NAD T743 receiver, CA 640A stereo integrated and NAD 7175 PE stereo receiver. Speakers used were Paradigm Monitor 11 and Wharfedale Diamond 7.2

Strengths:
1) Amazing clarity you can hear lot of notes that were probably mushed away while using class AB amps. Absolutely phenomenal bass. Try "Dreams" by Brooks and Srinivas. NAD and Cambridge Audio were not even close.

2) Power efficient. You can play at relatively high volume without increasing your energy bill.
3) Relatively easy to setup but would love to have an OSD based setup.
4) Love the bi-amping feature. Though unless you do an active bi-amping the improvement is miniscule.

Weakness
1) Sound quality is good only with digital inputs. Very average mid range performance. Male/Female vocals sound artificial. I can vouch for these as I have heard some of the singers live, on vinyl and CDs with other amps. This is very easy to fix with the TI amps that are used internally. I think Panasonic needs to hire some of the audio engineers from British/Canadian audio companies to tweak the output filter settings.

Re-digitising the analog inputs probably makes it worse. To check this you can play Diana Krall, "Love Scenes" DVD-Audio, Dolby digital side through Toslink output and 6 channel output. There is much more warmth in the digital signal. I think better ADC s can solve some of these issues and would certainly increase the cost. This receiver is absolutely NOT recommended if you listen to SACD and DVD-Audios.
2) Average sound quality if you listen to Chamber music. It is very hard to separate the instruments particulary the 2 violins and the viola. Violins sound shrill compared to the actual sound.
Cellos don't have the warmth that is associated with them. Cambridge Audio on the same set of speakers is absolutely fantastic with an almost 3D soundstage.
This problem should be fixed in the next few iterations. Same music played using Sonic Impact T-Amp had a much better sound stage.
3) No video up-conversion, only switching.
4) Audio switching between DVD and DVD-6 Ch is clumsy. You have to press and hold the DVD input selection button for couple of seconds. People using Universal remote controls would appreciate the problem with these kind of switches.

Overall the receiver is lot of value for people looking for an entry level receiver. I would definitely recommend this receiver for people who are looking for sub $600 Denon, Onkyos and Yamaha.
People who love warm and accurate British sound would be disappointed.
If you are looking for a receiver for mainly movies then look no further. Buy this receiver for $230 and spend rest of the hard earned cash for good quality speakers and DVDs.

I decided to get this receiver after reading rave reviews from audiophiles. I have never witnessed so much love for a $200 receiver. I remained skeptical even when UPS dropped off the box. The Panasonic weighed nothing compared to your typical 50+ pounder analog receivers. Once I hooked everything up, I was pretty amazed at the sound quality. Movies and music sounds came through clean and clear.

You really can't complain about a receiver that delivers this much quality for such little money. People complain about the remote, lack of connections, and lack of video upconversion, but come on! Look at what you get for the price.

Please note the dimension of the receiver, it is deeper than most receivers. I could not get it to fit inside my TV stand.

This little beauty has unbelievable connectivity, plenty of power and sounds fantastic. There is a definate learning curve involved as it does so many things and has so many different features and filters that aren't evident from the face of the unit, and should you ever lose that remote you are in trouble. Old guys like me may find it initially bewildering but it is very much worth the time given the eventual result. Given the surprisingly low price I would have to rate this one my best purchases in some time. Has features and capabilities that only existed in studios until very recently.

This is an impressive home theater receiver for the price. The digital amplifiers by TI contained within are a 3rd generation improvement, and they just keep getting better. For once, the specs for this unit are actually conservative. It is rated for 6 to 8 ohm speakers, however, I am using 4 Magnapan speakers.. all 4 ohms and a difficult load and they sound excellent with this unit.
The Dolby Pro Logic IIx feature is superb and, with careful tweaking, makes 2 channel CDs sound convincingly like they were engineered in surround. The handling of Dolby Digital is better than a Pioneer Elite receiver I have that cost $1200!

When I changed out my Yamaha reciever for the panny I immed noticed a diff.
CLEAN SOUND. no hiss. It is just there! In a wierd way it was like going from records to cd's but not that dramatic. I thought for sure I would go back to my more expensive Yamaha.... but i did not! I sold it. Def worth the $. I like it that it does not have a ton of features... but has excellent sound. I am using the XR-55 with Ascends all around... 340's across the front and 170's for rear surround and Ascend 200's for the rear back (I am running a 7.1 system) It sounds great! Especially with Jazz and Rock... The only things I would improve is the remote and give it a little more power (these are minor issues). I am happy!

I used Panasonic HT05 modal before, It worked great. But it has a 35watts limits!. This one functions just like HT05 with more power, My kids screamed when I went to 2/3 of the volume!, I feel filled now!. Unlike the other reviewer, I love the remote control. That is one of the reasons I wanted to go with Panasonic. You can control your Sub-Woofer level with this remote(I use Yamaha Sub), it works with my TV, VCR, audio system and DVD player.
Panasonic could have done a better work on their MULTI-CONTROL!, All you can see is a line display that is very hard to navigate. Also if you will change the speaker configuration very often(OR if you would like to set night/day mode), you will hate this multi-control system.

What really is this Panasonic machine? The manuals give no real clue. But the outside of the box says digital amplifier. So perhaps this really is a class D amplifier. High end audio newsgroups talk about it containing a Tripath chip and rave about its capabilities as does one reviewer here.

For myself I am comparing it with a Cambridge Audio 640 amp. The Cambridge has a firmer more powerful bass - but otherwise the Panasonic completely beats it for clarity. There is an astonsihing precision and clarity to the Panasonic.

Bur what is driving me nuts is deciding what I prefer. I am driving the amp into a pair of old Klipsch Heresey speakers which are very bright at the top end. Adding that to the Panasonics brightness at the top - might just be a bit too much for me. I can't define the problem - but let's call it listener fatigue. The Panasonic may just be a bit too much for my ears. So do I prefer it a bit mushy and indistinct? Hard for me to tell, or do I need to re-educate my ears. I personally associate a mellow tonal warmth with musicality and find that lacking in the Panasonic. But maybe the Pansonic is more truthful?

I am giving the Panasonic 5 stars. If other are hesitating - I'd suggest they buy it, because I would like like to read more comments on this. Oh, and I also borrowed a $2k Adcom power amp and compared it to the Pansasonic. I could tell they were different. But the Panasonic seemed to hold up surprisingly well - again its clarity shone through.

Finally, the user interface is pretty bad. I only use it in stereo mode. So if its' set and forget - then you can ignore it's UI. But if you are using it's full A/V capabilities - then it seems to have a lot there. What is really the worst is Panasonic's tech support. Clearly the people supporting you there have never ever seen or touched the product. They seem to punch up a PDF of the user manual on their computer and proceed to read it to you. If you ask a question, then they 'accidentally' disconnect you. Not worth the effort of being in the wait queue for 20 minutes or more.....

I got this unit to replace my aging Sony receiver that just wasn't cutting it anymore. After looking around at all the choices out there, and not having a large budget, I settled on the Panasonic SA-XR55S, mainly because of its practical features list and low cost.

First, it came down to needing at least three component video inputs, which the Panasonic has three of--all other receivers I looked at in the same price range ($200-350) had only two. Now, I can hook up my DVD Player, DVD Recorder, and game systems with no problem.

Second, I wanted something that didn't take up a lot of space. And, as we all know, most receivers these days stand at least five to seven inches tall. However, the Panasonic, due to its digital amp, stands just over four inches tall. Also, it weighs around nine pounds, instead of the average 30 that most conventional receivers do.

Third, I didn't want to skimp out on sound quality just because I didn't have the money. So, after reading several reviewers from all over the web recommending the Panasonic for its clear sound, I had to give it a try.

Overall, I'm happy with the unit. It does everything I need it to. It sounds great with my aging Technics speakers. And the Panasonic does not degrade any video signal I send through it. Yet, with all this said, the remote is not as solid as it could be. It lacks most of the codes needed to run other-branded equipment--such as my Samsung TV.

Pros: price, inputs, sound, size

Cons: remote