VSX-LX505 11.2 Channel AV Receiver

As the title suggests, for the better part of a year now, the Pioneer Elite VSX LX505 A/V Receiver has acted as the beating heart of our recently completely upgraded, and future-proofed home theater system. And being 100% transparent, and straightforward, I could not be happier with the performance of this awesome device, as well as the overall aesthetic. In the beginning, it was not only the Pioneer name I have trusted since my days of installing car audio systems back in High School, but the amber LED display of the VSX LX505 too, that caused me to gravitate toward it, upon realizing that I would need to upgrade again, following my earlier purchase of an Onkyo TX-NR6100 receiver, which I realized too late in the game, would not be able to be upgraded at any time to 7.1.4, or even 5.1.4, from the 5.1.2 channels that it would process. I guess it was more an issue of me thinking that 5.1.2 would suffice, upon purchasing the Onkyo receiver, than not researching enough to know that it could not be upgraded.At any rate, as you can see from one of the pics I have included with this review, there is also an Integra DTA 70.1 multi-channel (9 channels) integrated amplifier, sitting just below our Pioneer Elite VSX LX505, which I purchased through a killer deal I found on EBAY, which I have used since about 3 months after purchasing the receiver itself, to power all 9 channels of audio that our receiver is set to process. Without going too far into it - because this is about the receiver after all, not the power amp - I will just say that at 40 years of age (and after being a home theater enthusiast since I was just a kid watching my Dad always fiddling with all his home theater devices, and always going with him anytime he'd ask if either me, or my two brothers wanted to go with him anytime he'd be going shopping to possibly bring home something new), I just now realized the indefinite value of separates, upon purchasing my 1st separate, quality, analog power amplifier. I cannot stress enough, the overall improvement this one device has made in our home theater experience as a whole, since purchasing, receiving, and integrating it into our system. It cannot be put into adequate enough words, just how much more immersive, and phenomenal all together, the home theater experience in our home has become thanks to the added consistent, all analog power that the Integra DTA 70.1 has introduced into our system. The Pioneer Elite VSX LX505 is indeed, a very capable receiver. And upon purchasing it, I had fully intended to use it, along with a Russound P75 2-channel integrated amplifier, to achieve a full Atmos 7.1.4 home theater system. After realizing I would need to upgrade, in order to get the 4 height channels (as anyone experiencing Atmos for the first time should be able to easily tell you... you NEED all 4 height channels, to truly be able to appreciate the 3D nature of the Atmos - and DTS:X for that matter - object based audio codec) I would need to be able to have a true Atmos experience, I decided after doing some research, that this time, I would need to spend a significant amount more, in order to get us into a receiver that is capable of a full 7.1.4 system. (Its worth noting here, for anyone who is maybe not too versed in home theater, that Atmos and DTS:X audio tracks for film, are recorded in a studio using a 7.1.4 channel mix/setup. That said, it is possible to purchase 13 and up, channel receivers, capable of producing 6 or more channels of height audio, and plenty more base, or bed layer channels. Even receivers that have 2 to 4 discreet LFE channels - meaning, the LFE channels each receive different/separate audio from one to the next, provided of course, that the track they are rendering to audio, supports as many channels. And as of yet, there is just no Atmos film recording being done with anything over the ONE single LFE channel being recorded/mastered, and included in any given mix. Therefore, all these receivers advertising to be 7.2.4 or higher, are mostly really only 7.1.4 by nature, based upon their technical specifications. Because the vast majority of receivers advertising themselves this way, actually are using one channel, but splitting the signal into 2 parallel channels, NOT two separate, discreet channels. Meaning that the two or more LFE/sub outputs, are in actuality, playing back the exact same audio, and not acting as channels with separate audio from one to the next, which would be considered "discreet channels" not parallel. In order for a unit to truthfully be advertised as anything above 7.1.4 (i.e.- 7.2.4, 7.4.4, etc), it MUST have more than one LFE output, and those outputs MUST also be DISCREET outputs, NOT parallel outputs. If a receiver has 2 outputs, or even 4 outputs, on the LFE channel(s), and they are parallel, it means that every one of those outputs is producing the exact same audio as the others, and therefore, is still only a 7.1.4 capable receiver. So, when you are doing your research, its just important to recognize what a receiver is actually capable of, as opposed to whatever any particular company selling the product may feel like including within their own take of the receiver's specs. Additionally, it is very helpful to understand the nature of Atmos in general, as a codec, and the way in which Atmos tracks are recorded/mastered upon the making of any film in particular. I am sure that a day will come, when multiple LFE tracks will begin to be used in some movies, once the technology is made available to film-makers. But as of yet, 7.1.4 is the Atmos recording standard, and the surface has barely begun to be scratched, in regard to what can be achieved recording tracks in 7.1.4, so rest assured, it will be quite some time before anything else is brought into use. And even after the capability is available to film-makers, it's still a matter of them choosing to go above 7.1.4, and that is unlikely to occur very much. Especially when you consider the fact that still today, there are many film-makers who choose to record their films using the Dolby TrueHD codec, which tops out at 9.1, but more often than not, is most commonly recorded in 7.1. And often times, film-makers opt to go with a 5.1 TrueHD codec, minimizing their surround sound tracks to 5 channels of audio, and 1 LFE channel. Many times, this is a choice that ends up being based upon the limitations of the media upon which the films we watch are recorded, as there is only so much data/bandwidth that exists on any given 4K bluray disc. And even less on a regular bluray. So depending on the resolution used upon filming (which is typically 4K these days, but sometimes still 1080p, and then converted to 4k after the fact, as rendering in 4K by upscaling from 1080p can save some bandwidth), and the length of the film from start to finish, there may or may not be enough bandwidth left upon the medium being used to record the film to start with, to record the films dialogue, sound effects, and score in an Atmos codec. The length and resolution of any given film, can very easily be long enough, and high enough, that it will require the people responsible for recording the film's audio tracks, to record it all in Dolby True HD 7.1, or possibly even a lesser 5.1 codec. Take 'Oppenheimer' for example, Christopher Nolan's latest release, involving the invention, engineering, and finally the creation of the first atomic bomb the world had ever known. This is a fantastic film, which I purchased on disc, because I knew it would be a film I would want to enjoy in the future, and watching films on physical discs, even on regular Bluray at 1080p, is still MUCH MUCH better than watching the same film over a streaming network/device. And audio is just as much a reason for this as the video signal. Discs are just BETTER, even now. Anyway, this film is recorded in Dolby TrueHD 5.1 format. I suppose this is due to it's longer run time, but it could just be a decision made by those in charge of making such decisions, in order to keep within a budget, or simply because Atmos is not something that they are too excited about just yet. Regardless of why, the film audio is recorded in Dolby TrueHD 5.1. Which means, that you can watch it using the Atmos codec... But doing so would be nothing more than your receiver's "brain" deciding which sounds get sent to the height channels, and any other channel for that matter. And this is not only a far cry from the film-makers intended method of playing back the audio for the film, but additionally, it would be relying on the processing capability of whichever particular Atmos receiver one might be relying upon to provide the film's audio, and that sort of capability can vary from being something half-way acceptable, to something that winds up sounding as terrible as the introduction of that bomb, into the world in which we, as human beings, are all just trying to LIVE in, and sometimes, even to merely just survive in, from one day to the next! And that truly was a terrible day for mankind, and the seemingly inherent need for some, to struggle over power, and over land, which history has proven time and again, breeds nothing more in the end, but chaos, war, and the unnecessary ending of so very many perfectly good, perfectly valuable, human lives... Each one of whom was special, and meaningful to this world in some way, even if only to the other human souls they left behind, who loved them, and cared for them, and who recognized the actual HUMAN soul that existed beyond the face and name that the rest of the world associated them with... War is a terrible thing. Necessary at times, I know. But terrible, and horrid nonetheless. Much like watching a film about war, which was recorded using Dolby TrueHD, but which one might choose to attempt to enjoy using a more advanced codec, such as Atmos, essentially allowing a big black box to decide how the audio should be rendered to viewers, instead of sticking with the original choice of the individual responsible for making the film in the first place. This is a valuable lesson in "bigger is not ALWAYS better", and it is one of many reasons why manufacturers include a "direct" and "pure direct" listening mode within the menus and/or sub-menus of their devices! These such modes ensure that whatever an individual, or group of individuals may choose to watch, or listen to, that they are able to view, and/or listen to their content of choice, in the very same manner which was intended by the artist who made the film, or recorded the music originally. They basically remove any unnecessary/unwanted/additional processing, and playback the audio of any given film or music, precisely the way it was recorded onto whichever medium may be in use, be it 4K Bluray Disc, or SACD, or whatever. I purchased 'Oppenheimer', in regular Bluray, as opposed to 4K Bluray Disc (which is typically my medium of choice, even in light of the astronomical pricing... if one searches, and is patient enough, decent enough prices can be found, even on 4K Bluray Discs. i am proof of that fact, as I own many many films on 4K Bluray Disc, and I am FAR from wealthy. just an average guy, who is invested, and overly involved with his home theater!) because it was not recorded in Atmos, and I didn't see it as being a film which would hugely benefit from being viewed in 4K resolution, so I saved close to 10 bucks, and purchased the Bluray version, for $17. And it is magnificent!Back to the Pioneer Elite VSX LX505 though... This receiver is a fantastic, and now, even more affordable means of getting EVERYTHING one can possibly get out of the most recently filmed and recorded, movies and music. And if I had to guess, I would put my money on the fact that this won't change any time soon. At least certainly not to any extent that this receiver would even come anywhere close to being "obsolete", in the next 5 years, or even as far out as the next ten years! I am absolutely confident in my purchase, as well as that statement, and I believe wholeheartedly, that this Pioneer Elite VSX LX505, represents a line of well thought out products, which include ALL of the best of what is available in today's audio/video market, in regard to receivers, processors, and other similar devices, and very little of the additional and more specifically, over the top and unnecessary BS that many higher priced units might advertise/offer, that quite literally NO ONE would use anyway. And even assuming they did, this does not at all make such features a necessity, nor are they any type of "improvement" or true/actual "upgrade" over anything and everything that is included in this receiver you are considering RIGHT HERE! This receiver is essentially the exact same thing as the Onkyo RZ-50, in terms if it's build and included hardware. The ONLY differences, are strictly in the OS used in either unit. I would put my 5.1.4 system, consisting of all Monolith Encore series speakers (T6 towers for front l&r mains, C6 center, and six B5 bookshelf speakers in the satellite positions), my Monolith M12 v2 powered subwoofer, my Integra DTA 70.1 amplifier, and lastly, this amazing Pioneer Elite VSX LX505 receiver, and its global crossover setting, processing all the audio, up against the first person willing to admit that they passed on this receiver, and spent who knows how much more, on the RZ-50, specifically due to the issue of the crossover settings, and whatever speaker setup they might be running - even if their setup consists of speakers that cost double what my Monolith setup did - and I would bet my entire system, that if we picked out 10 different pairs of people, and had them listen to each system, without telling them anything before hand, about the components included in either system, that the VAST majority of the couples, if not 10 out of 10 all together in the end, would pick my setup, hands down, as the one that maintained a more consistent, more dynamic, and more immersive sound stage as a whole, but that also produced audio within which dialogue was never drowned out or over taken by the other audio being played back along with that dialogue, so that everything that was being said throughout any given film the couples may have chosen to watch, was always produced by the system clear enough, and forward enough, that at no point was any bit of dialogue impossible to hear, or to make out, but rather, remained consistently audible, and easily understood, while at the same time, never seeming too forward that it might seem separate in any way, from the rest of the audio included in the film. Additionally, I would reason that my LFE would blend better with my audio as whole, and never become boomy or overpower any audio separate from the LFE. And I have the upmost confidence in this presumption of mine. And why?? Because I understand my system, and I purchased each and every component which is included within the system, with all the consideration in the world for the other components which would inevitably accompany them. Each and every choice, for each and every component was made, not based upon which pair of towers is "the best", or which set of bookshelf speakers was "the best", or which center channel speaker was "the best"... Nor did I leave any components from the previous system, and attempt to integrate newly purchased, and completely different sounding components, with the pre-existing components from our previous home theater, no matter how great my previous system may have been. And my previous speaker array consisted of all B&W 6 series speakers, save the center, which was a Nautilus 800 HTM-2, and arguably one of the very best center channel speakers obtainable by the "average Joe" to this very day. Many would argue my old speakers would trump my current Monolith setup, which is considered "budget" by comparison. And that may very well be true, IF, and this is a BIG "if"... IF you were to remove the Integra DTA 70.1 amplifier from the equation... In which case, the B&Ws would be much more efficient speakers, being run off of the power available from this Pioneer Elite VSX LX505 alone. This receiver, along with the Russound P75 I mentioned earlier, powered my Monolith speaker setup for several months prior to my purchasing the DTA 70.1, and they did an outstanding job at it, considering the 4 ohms impedance of each of the Monoliths, along with their seemingly inefficient sensitivity rating (at least, on paper). And, I was running a full 7.1.4 system then, where I am now running only a 5.1.4, simply because of the fact that the system sounds superior without the additional two speakers which would be under-powered compared to the rest, seeing as they are not being fed with the same 300w of consistent power, as the other speakers which can be fed by the DTA 70.1. 4 ohm speakers can typically be powered by modern receivers, provided they are not bottom of the line equipment. 100w of power per channel, could power a 4 ohms speaker array. But it would sound much better, if one were to recognize the limitations of their equipment, and opt to run a 5.1 system (or better yet, 3.1) as opposed to anything larger, like 7.1, or 5.1.2, on up to 7.1.4. It is not only the power available from a source, but more importantly, the power that is readily available, and which can be provided to speakers on a consistent basis. And receivers just do NOT have the same ability to power speakers (no matter their impedance or sensitivity) as a separate analog power amplifier. Period! Bigger is not always better. More is not always superior. And this goes for the amount of speakers in any given setup, just as it goes for the ability to independently control one's crossovers. If someone NEEDS, or otherwise relies upon such a typically redundant, and realistically unnecessary feature, it is more often than not, if not always going to be the case, that they are relying on this feature, as a means of power distribution/management, in a sense that they are manually selecting different crossover levels, in an effort to get any one pair of speakers to sound "right", or "proper" in combination with other speakers in the system which are not a great timbre match for the odd pair, or set. This is most often, if not always, due to the fact that people try to run speakers with different impedance ratings, along side one and other, and this not only causes unnecessary strain and confusion for the equipment powering the speakers (even separate amplifiers), but an obvious mismatch, which should be avoided all together, rather than attempting to compensate for it by relying on individual crossovers.

This is an excellent AVR with processing from 1 (mono) through 7.1.4 (Atmos/dtsX) channels. It has 9 channels of internal amplifiers, meaning, for a full 7.1.4 system you will need an external two channel amplifier for the surround back speakers. I initially used the AVR with an external power amp for the front channels plus surround back but ultimately settled on using the internal amplifiers, much simpler with a perfectly fine result. Perhaps for someone listening a high volumes in a large room an external amp would be needed, but for me, the internal amplifiers are fine.This AVR is fully featured - there is a detailed manual available for download at Pioneer’s website - yet it is relatively easy to set up for anyone who doesn’t want to get into the various features for customization. Here are a few features that I found outstanding, and are not entirely obvious (the manual is quite good, but does miss some detail):Dirac Live speaker/room EQ - full version - while you can use the included mic connected to the unit for a basic set up, using the Mac/PC version of Dirac with a third-party calibrated mic provides more control. To do this the AVR and your computer must both be connected to the same local network and the internet. After launching Dirac on your Mac/PC, it will automatically find and connect to the Pioneer. One nice feature is that there are slots available for three sets of Dirac filters, so if you want to try different target curves (such as one of the Harman curves), you can store up to three.MONO! Yes, you can listen to monaural recordings (or older films with mono soundtracks) played back through your center channel speaker, for a coherent sound, eliminating the problems and distortions caused by playing a mono recordings through a pair of speakers. Very few AVR’s or processors have this obvious, excellent feature. The only inconvenience is having to manually select it, but there is an available shortcut, by using the personal settings feature; with this you set up a mono playback, say from an attached USB drive, and memorize your settings with can be selected with a single button. The only negative is that Pioneer only provides three personal settings.Pioneer Remote App - this is an iOS (and Android, which I did not try) app that controls all aspects of the AVR, and in some cases eliminates the need to have your monitor on. For example, if you have a connected USB device for music playback, you can access the entire disc, rapidly, without bothering with the monitor. Use of the app requires that the AVR is connected to your local network. The app is reasonably responsive, although there is some minor lag time when changing the volume.Implementation of Direct mode is excellent - the signal goes through the Dirac filters, but otherwise complies with the channel arrangement of the multichannel source (i.e. stereo, 5.1, 7.1 etc.). In all cases, mono must be manually selected, otherwise it will play through the L/R speakers, but mono is a Direct mode.This AVR will upmix most recordings, and has the usual DSP effects (action, sports, rock, unplugged, etc.). I am sure that they are decently implemented, but I don’t use them at all. I prefer music as it was intended by the artist/producer/engineer team.The combination of features, quality of audio, and ease of use make this AVR an excellent 7.1.4 choice.