2. home-theater
  3. 1088225724

Please help- Arcam AVR-300 or B&K AVR507

Well, I've narrowed it down to these two receivers for my entry into the world of multi-channel music and movies. Each has essentially what I'm looking for, but some features do vary. I'll list my main pluses and minuses and would love to hear from any owners of either.

B&K AVR 507:
Pluses:
Nice build quality/looks (made in U.S.A.)
Nice remote (SR10)
Flexible bass management, crossover, eq setting abilities
Rated power (true ability)
Can rename inputs for front panel display
Can adjust speaker levels (trim) on the fly without the OSD
Minuses:
Routes all signals through DSP if bass management is used (I think)
Cost about $1000 more than the Arcam

Arcam AVR300
Pluses:
The one available review I've read says it is very musical for two channel music only listening (an important feature for me)
You can use the sixth and seventh channels of amplification to "Bi-Amp" the two front (main) speakers
Has a cool turn-on volume level setting (so the wife and kids don't blow up any speakers)
Very extensive bass management, eq, speaker settings, though maybe not as extensive as the B&K.
Price, $1000 less than the B&K
Minuses:
Build quality (Made in China?)
Pretty basic remote
Can't rename front panel display names

Notes:
I realize that B&k has the 505 which has five channels of amplification and is a little cheaper, but I fear that the resale value on a 505 would be much less than a 507.
If I were to go with the Arcam that would leave about a grand for other h/w or s/w... namely an upgraded aftermarket remote and SACDs, DVD-As etc.
Any help, comments will be very much appreciated!

Best Regards & thanks in advance,
Dennis
lps2cd
flrnlamb
508 posts
 
At the price, the Arcam will be the best sounding, I have no doubt. I sold the old Arcam 100, and it was the best sounding $1200 piece at the time, hands down! It was still a receiver, and lacking ultimate power and control, but bass managment helped that. Dynamics were better on good separates as well. Yet the Arcam was pretty, musical, and rather resolved for a receiver. Only the Denon 5803 was as well balanced like that from what I remember, the B&K being close behind, maybe more powerful driving full range however.
If you have $2k for a receiver, the Arcam is good for running speakers as "small" with a sub. Most will like the sound just fine.
Denon's are great bang for the buck mostly, especially at lower price points. I can think of not much else that's better lower down. The HK's maybe for current product.
NAD...you take your chances with Quality control, sadly. Infact, my experience from selling at 6 stores say's that the China made stuff is more reliable than the NAD gear!
Still, the NAD stuff always sounded good from what I remember.
NAD used to be joked about as standing for "Not Another Deffective!" I'm not sure if it's changed any.
c123666
871 posts
 
I purchased an Arcam AVR200 a couple of years back. Being rather dense I decided almost immediately I wanted 7.1 channel capability should I ever decide to use it (which I almost certainly will not). I returned the Arcam and replaced it with an Onkyo Integra 7.3. Both receivers are very good.
But, the Arcam is definitely superior is sonics in both home theatre and stereo only mode. Both receivers have a real phono section; the Arcam is superior.

Both of these receivers are superior in stereo to the Denon 3801 that was replaced; sold it to my neighbour who is not really an audiophile and he loves it.

I'd go with the AVR300 in a heartbeat. The runner up to this choice, which is more expensive, would be the Audio Refinement Pre2DSP and a quality 5 channel amp (Audio Refinement, Krell, Pass, or a Parasound HCA 1206 which has to be the used bargain at around 750 and six channels at 135wpc at 8 ohms.....300 bridged).
slingshot
55 posts
 
I have had the AVR-300 for about 3 months. I am currently using it as a preamp only in my stereo system to drive Art Audio PX-25 amp not for HT and it is very good as the reviewers have said. It is not good with 4 ohm loads like my Sonys in the HT system. It seems to run very hot. I will probably have to buy a separate amp for the Sonys. The sound quality of four rear channels much, much better than my Fosgate FAP T-1. It is excellent in fact.

The remote control is the weakest link. You need two or three steps for most changes and you have to keep scrolling through everything. It is hard to get out of the menu but if you don't you won't be able to use the volume control or anything else.
choiceaudio's avatar
choiceaudio
62 posts
 
I think they are both great choices. Having owned the Denon 3804, B&K 307 and 507, (Classe SSP30,Classe SSP60)- both driven with Legacy/Coda amps, I would have to go with the Arcam AVR 300. For music 2 channel and music concert DVDs it is the best sounding receiver I have ever heard. Very open sound stadge and good definition and localization of all instruments and voices. In fact,the sound stadge it really is not too far of a drop in quality from the SSP-60

The AVR-300 is the closets thing that I have heard to separates. Actually it smokes the Outlaw Pre/Pro with the Codas. To me the B&K was a nice step up from the Denon, but it did not sound as musical as the Arcam AVR300.

The 300 is great reciever if you are into music and music videos. It's great for movies as well, but I'm not sure you would hear as much diffence between the AVR300 and the B&K watching movies? Its been a while since I did an A/B comparison. But, needless to say I now use the AVR-300 in my system.
rackon
301 posts
 
If a receiver is what you want, I think the Arcam is in another league from the B&K.

If music is at all important to you, I'd definitely go for the Arcam. It has the best sound quality - open, dynamic, airy - of any HT receiver I've ever heard. The pre-pro section is excellent, so even if you eventually acquire insanely power hungry speakers down the road, the AVR300 will be still be an excellent processor and you can get a separate amp.

You'd have to spend mucho dinero for separates to equal or better the the Arcam's performance.

The B&K is nice enough for the $$ but you'll end up replacing it much sooner.
More to discover