AV Receiver good enough for high end audio?

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

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.

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 believe a $500 a/v receiver will sound just as good as a $500 2 channel receiver or amp.

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.