.
...er, um, ah....I think I'll pass on the hunting invitation. I seem to recall a hunting incident in the news a few years back on a Texas ranch involving a Mr. Cheyney. Since then, I've retired my rifle and hunting boots.
. |
Factory links I missed above.[http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/ephox/StaticFiles/PUSA/Files/SC-27.pdf] [http://www.sherwoodusa.com/prod_rd7503.html][http://usa.denon.com/us/product/pages/Product-Detail.aspx?Catid=3d9614d1-8000-4106-ab91-8192242cab83&SubId=40b5820d-83c2-4e93-9909-60aae60e0bdd&ProductId=14c37b13-44c8-4d7b-9b5d-5316e646e7b7] |
Some examples of the power ratings they use for receivers.
Marantz,$1250. Their rating 110watts.[http://us.marantz.com/Products/2980.asp]
Tested [http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/marantz_sr6004_av_receiver/index4.html]Pioneer Elite.$2200,140watts.Tested About 107 watts.[http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/pioneer_elite_sc-27_av_receiver/index4.html]Denon $3000,140 watts.[http://usa.denon.com/us/product/pages/Product-Detail.aspx?Catid=3d9614d1-8000-4106-ab91-8192242cab83&SubId=40b5820d-83c2-4e93-9909-60aae60e0bdd&ProductId=14c37b13-44c8-4d7b-9b5d-5316e646e7b7]Tested 31 watts![http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/denon_avr-4810ci_av_receiver/index4.html]Sherwood,only$450,Sounds like 110 watts,Tested,5 watts![http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/sherwood_rd-7503_av_receiver/index3.html]Replace high end? Its getting more common. |
I have a Jackalope mounted on the wall of our ranch in Benchley, TX. Well, it may actually be a Chupacabra, I was really drunk on Lone Star beer and tequila when I shot it. We were just shooting anything that moved, then took what was on the ground to the taxidermist. Who knows what that thing is?
Glad hunting season is starting, anyone want to come down and go hunting with us in South Texas? |
.
Macdadtexas, I conceed you might have seen a few jackalopes in Texas, but I'm pretty certain that everything else on that list is a myth.
. |
Mithch4t, what are saying about the Jackalope?
I started in this hobby in 2004 with an NAD AV reciever, that I then used as a preamp. Went to seperate amps with a processor (first B & K, then Parasound, then Anthem) and was shocked by the improvement, it was still all multichannel.
Finally, I bought a 2 channel preamp with HT Passthrough (first a McIntosh C2200, then an ARC LS26, and finally a Cary SLP98p F-1) and there is just no comparison. I got rid of the multichannel stuff, bought a Denon AV reciever for the HT stuff, but even my wife does not listen to music through the reciever. Even though she must physically turn on the Cary preamp, and switch inputs. The fact that she went to the trouble to learn how to do that versus just hitting "Play Music Server" on the remote and running the sound through the reciever, tells you the difference. |
10-18-10: Aberyclark
I always thought all the preamp features is what made a/v receivers less desirable When you find out your 100 wpc receiver only puts out 30-70 wpc,and won't drive your speakers,at least you have the option of hooking up a real amp to it.That way everything is not lost.Research,and read reviews before buying. |
I personally always thought av receivers is what made preamp features less desireable. Just a different perspective.
Not sure what any of this means really... |
I always thought all the preamp features is what made a/v receivers less desirable |
I think Inscrutable put it in perspective best, above here. And IF you were going to use most any sort of AV receiver in the context of some semblance of a "hi-end system", using it as the pre/pro - not the amp sections - is your best bet for quality sound. (if you can get a good EQ into the mix - audyssey, etc - you're ahead of the game even futher)
What you'll find is that the smaller more essoteric receiver builders are going to offer you more refinement overall, with either direct analog or digital connection, for musicality and overall sonic refinement, likely.
I do find that, with typical mass manufactured receivers built over seas, I like the clarity and "relative" neutrality from the likes of Yamaha, Harman kardon receivers, Pioneers and Denon's bettter pieces, for their pre-amp sections.
Note that you're still are not going to get ultra high end refinement from most all of these as pre-amp's either, considering all connection modes. But, for the most parit, if you can get lots of detail, clarity, good dynamics, and a nice open sound, it's still pretty darn good with music, and excellent with movies, all-in-all.
With most typical, even higher end AV atand-alone pre/pro's, You will probably get closer to higher end refinement going the likes of Macitosh, to Krell, to Theta, to Meridian, Anthem, whatever . Yet, you're still not likely going to realize the level of refinement as what the best analog preamp's offer, using outboard sources for processing and such...all things equal. However, you're getting much much better refinement using these very same hi-end offerings in that role than typical AV receivers, used in any capacity, true!
So a good options here would be to use one of the mass market av recievers with which offer a good clear, detailed, dynamic sound for their preamp sections - that's opt #1. Next step up would be a better, more essoteric av receiver from some of the smaller companies, used as a pre/pro. Above that, you gotta escape to dedicated separates AV pre's. And beyond that, to maximize potential from high end 2 channel sources, you're probabaly going to have to loop an expensive 2 channel analog preamp into the system, or go stand-alone. - and consider higher end outboard EQ into the system to tweak the sound.
I personally go with a mid level HK AVR354 as a standalone pre/pro (has an EQ) out to a Parasound HCA1205a for my system currently. Actually, the amps are stronger and much better sounding than most at this price range, built into the HK. So I use the receiver by itself for small setups. Still, the receiver, on it's own, can't match the current delivery of the Parasound, with a load, for sure. |
I've had a fair number of higher end receivers (excuse the oxymoron), and in all cases found they performed better as preamps* than amps. Always found a not-subtle improvement when using an outboard dedicated amp (regardless of speaker character/efficiency, but certainly more pronounced with demanding loads), and varying degrees of more subtle improvement when using outboard preamp and HT passthru. The nice thing is that it provides a nice incremental upgrade path if you are so inclined.
*Excepting for the phono preamp if it happens to be built-in, which are universally pretty lousy. |
Artmaltman
My Theta Casablanca III was the best that I could find when I got into HT.
As good as it is, it's not even close to my 2 channel set up.
So my answer to you is no.
Take care, |
10-04-10: Aberyclark
I believe a $500 a/v receiver will sound just as good as a $500 2 channel receiver or amp.
How may can you find that will drive 4 ohm speakers.A lot of mid-fi,and high end speakers are 4 ohms. |
Correction for my last post.I should have said,true Class A at 20 watts per channel,all channels driven.Not some form of Class A whatever that is. |
Arcam may be ok for a receiver.It would be nice if they would give you the true power ratings at 20-20k all channels driven.A 80 watt amp is not going to drive a lot of speakers
that fall into the high end category.I don't believe it can give true class A at 30 wpc. Nobody listens to 1 khz only. A telephone does better than that.Arcam link.[http://www.arcam.co.uk/products,fmj,av-amplifiers,AVR600.htm#]Link to test specs.[http://www.hometheatermag.com/receivers/arcam_avr600_av_receiver/index3.html] |
.
Yeti
Bigfoot
Loch Ness Monster
AV Receiver good enough for high end audio
Unicorn
Jackalope
Centaur
Tooth Fairy
Fire breathing dragons
. |
The Arcam AVR600 is certainly the best sounding receiver I ever heard and is also better than many separates I have heard too. The audio section is simply unbelievably good. It is probably the only receiver that operates in Class A up to 20 watts, which is where most music is listened to. This piece of kit is an astounding example of great engineering and Arcam is to be applauded in making a receiver the equal of many of the best separates and superior to all other receivers. |
I believe a $500 a/v receiver will sound just as good as a $500 2 channel receiver or amp. |
as a non-techie, i've never fully understood why a well-engineered, no-compromise avr couldn't sound as good as comparably priced separates. now, i know in the real world manufacturers do make compromises, esp. in the amp sections, and that single-box components present challenges with power supplies and internal signal interference. however, i've owned or heard some avrs--most recently arcam avr 600 which sounded awfully good for 2ch music. |
I have an older Elite 7.1 A/V receiver. I now only listen to 2 channel. I considered going with a $1,000 or so integrated amp and some new speakers ($1200 or so for a bookshelf sized pair. I would have to probably shell out closer to $2000 for an integrated to start to hear a major QUALITY difference to justify the purchase(I'm not talking bias characteristics like warm, tubey etc). I decided to place the money all in the speakers first and worry about the amp later. |
IIRC the reviewers at Stereophile Ultimate AV claimed the 5800 series Denons sounded as good as most good separates. Of course, the tube/vinyl guys will never agree, but I'm surprised they're not urging a return to a windup victrola with a cactus stylus just to be pure -- electricity gets between you and the waveform.
db |
In fact, I'm willing to bet that other components in your system would provide the weaker link before the high end receiver (unless you have ultra high end speakers, transports, etc) I don't think it would be high end if it didn't cost more.A lot of receivers don't give you true power ratings anymore either.And to compare to tube gear.... |
If you purchased a high end A/V receiver, I'm sure you would have to get into a much more pricey 2 channel system to hear an improvement. In fact, I'm willing to bet that other components in your system would provide the weaker link before the high end receiver (unless you have ultra high end speakers, transports, etc) |
I love my Rotel RSX-1057 AVR boosted by a Rotel RMB-1075 120watt/ch multi-channel amp. I don't use the tuner but play CDs, SACDs, DVDs, and Blu-ray DVDs. Sound is fabulous as far as I'm concerned. For music, Rotel is one of the best values for the money (mid-fi) IMO. I really don't need the receiver itself since I'm not using the tuner or the amp inside the AVR but it's what I started with. I used the AVR on its own first (75 watts/ch into 8 ohms all channels driven) and that was fine. I then upgraded to the B&W 683 loudspeakers and wanted to drive them with more power. NAD would be another great choice. |
i thought you were trying to be heard ;) |
THE BEST A/V RECEIVER I EVER HEARD, AND I'VE HEARD A LOT OF THEM UNFORTUNATELY, WAS THE LEXICON RV-8. IT WAS ESSENTIALLY THEIR SEVEN CHANNEL POWER AMP AND THE MC-8 PRE/PRO IN ONE CASE. I ACTUALLY GOT TO HEAR IT DIRECTLY AGAINST THOSE VERY SEPARATES AND THERE WAS NO DIFFERENCE, SOUND WISE ,THAT I COULD HEAR. Having said that I still don't think that this receiver would hold it's own against high end two channel separates in the same price range, but neither would any separate pre/pro power amp combos I've heard either. One other thing, lexicon has taken a serious hit to their rep recently when it was discovered that they took a five hundred dollar blu=ray player, put it it one of their cases virtually un-changed, and then decided to charge eight times as much for it.
Sorry about the all caps in the first part of my response. My daughter always leaves the caps lock on and I didn't notice it until some way into my response, and I didn't feel like deleting it and starting again. |
No
Not one made currently.
Some early ones were reportedly good but don't have the mandatory features you would need.
Let me add that. I have heard the big AV manufacturers claim outstanding audio but it seems they alone actually believe it. The modern hi fi cottage/boutique 2 channel guys that go into mulichannel imperil their fingernail grip on survival. At one recent Retailer/Manufacturer demo for my audio group. The rep for a successful firm was asked about multichannel and retorted with a "we just can't afford 50 or 60 programmers" developing price plummeting obsolescence every few months. And he added consumers simply will not buy dated technology in this area. He then recited a list of companies who had gone under or nearly were destroyed trying to enter the frey. |
|
|
