This thread may be almost worn out, but, my 2 cents: I am a new owner of a used 1050, and I can compare the 1050 to the Yamaha 5250 that I now use in a second system. 90% of my use of both receivers is with movies.

I always seemed to have trouble understanding dialog with the Yamaha--the 1050 seems clearer somehow (even my wife, who thinks a one-speaker AM radio sounds pretty good [please don't share this description with her]) agrees. I also feel there is better channel separation with the 1050. True, the 1050 has only about 1/4 the audio modes of my Yamaha, but I only used a few of the Yamaha modes, and the ones I used are on the 1050. Regarding PL v. PL II, I preferred PL on my Yamaha--less delay, clearer sound. As for power, my Yamaha has 100 wpc, and my typical volume was at about 30% in a fairly large room with 35 foot ceilings. The 1050 does fine at about "65" or less.

We may all be rationalizing our purchase of the 1050, but I am very pleased with what I have. Further, try to find this kind of board and peer help with the other brands you are considering!

------------------
Michael Stano

Outlaw 1050
Klipsch KG 3.2s frt & rr
Klipsch KV 3 center
Klipsch SW 10 sub
Mitsubishi DD 8020 DVD
Mitsubishi HS U70 SVHS
Mitsubishi 46" 16:9 TV

Yamaha HRT 5250
AR PS 2052 frt & rr
AR PSC 25 center
AR PSB S108 sub
Sony DVP-C660 DVD
Sony SLV-N70 VHS
Sony 32" TV

OK, I took the plunge, ordered the new 1050, so we can see if it has the power to push my Infinity IL 50's and my old but good Sansui's..

Does anyone know anything about the new HK digital receiver coming out? I see it on their web site, but can't find anything on it. Anyone had good or bad luck with HK.

Also, with regards to DLPII, can someone explain how that is different or an improvement over DPL per Michael's comments? Thanks.

I went shopping for a new receiver last weekend. I was not too impressed with the HK, Denon, Pioneer, and Yahama..just too much plastic, low on power

Anyone had good or bad luck with HK.
Bad luck, but only on one purchase about 5 years back my son had (either?) a HK receiver doing pre-amp duty or a HK prepro and HK amp mix, but the units are long gone and I was just not paying as much attention back them to remember the year/make.
They went in for warranty 3 times, Then a bedroom 'crash' took the rec/pre out for a third time (not at ALL covered by warranty) and the son gave up.

At the time we had several friends fussing about glitchy HK purchases. But again,...years ago...as ANY manuf. can have models which launch with different versions of problems. I would not rule out a demo of any HK unit but I would watch Consumer user reviews on a new model to see how many returns and for which/what issues. (something to self debate living with or something unacceptable by any criteria).

I have always liked HK sound. But I did purchase my 950/770 over the HK 8000, Which was very temptingly available while I was on the 950-wait list. (I came into the forum looking for separates or a super-receiver and settled on the separate route after some listening out and about). I never owned the 1050 but if it sounds as the 950 after you get it settled into your setup, I can see why many have been delighted by that purchase. FOR ME, I ended by being VERY glad I waited on the 950. But these are personal choices, it should be your ears (and tradeoff list) that chose.

As regards my experience with DPLII, I think it’s a plus to have it. But as with almost all the latest SM’s offered, it has limited application. I can’t buy many DVD’s in DTS even though I often prefer it over DD. And DPLII ONLY steers certain recordings effectively, on many it makes absolutely little to none quality advance over DPL, the recording is just not encoded in a way that II can take any advantage of.

DPL decodes 4 channels from stereo DS (L/C/R/ and surround)
DPLII is more advanced matrix that derives 5 channels (L/C R/LS/RS)
The main difference being 2 full-range surrounds Vs one. Between these two. Neither matrix has a .1 channel (LFE) encoded/decoded. DPL sacrifices discreet channel separation when encoding to get music into the surrounds, unlike DD, which keeps the channel infor discreet and adds the .1 channel.
Every so often I hear some material which DPLII does an eerily close job of reproducing as if it is being decoded in DD. However, unfortunately, more often than not the material in the recording is just not there to work with, and in that (more frequent) scenario, I notice negligible improvement over DPL.
When it works it’s a plus IMO.