i agree with much of the foregoing--as hifihvn's data evidences, most mass-market avrs have wussy amp sections with woefully overhyped power ratings which won't effectively drive audiophile-grade speakers. (in fairness, i do think hk and nad are considerably better than their peers in this regard). when you get to the more rarified air of b&k, arcam, krell etc. (can't speak to sunfire), the ground rules are different--their amps are really good and, i believe, they use substantially the same components as their well-regarded separates. it's not clear whether the skeptics have actually compared them to similarly spec'ed separates--not expensive tubes or $15k worth of elite megawatt gear, but $5k worth of reasonably powered ss gear. i keep returning to the arcam avr500/600 which, at least in 2ch mode, puts out a legitimate 120w/ch and purports to be stable down to 2 ohms. from what i heard, it sounded very "high-end" paired with the type of speakers that most people would pair with $5k worth of electronics. granted, it wouldn't be the choice of someone looking to pair his $50k wilsons, but i sense that a discriminating listener playing in a more attainable realm would be very satisfied.
AV Receiver good enough for high end audio?
Have any of you found a modern AV receiver whose sound quality is so good that you are satisfied using it as your high end audio system? Did you toss aside your tube amp and just equip the front of your HT with a finer pair of speakers, a high end DAC, and done?
- ...
- 79 posts total
- 79 posts total