Denon 2803 vs 3803

Okay maybe I'm slightly off with my statement of the Denon coming close at a "fraction of the cost".

The main point that I was trying to put through is that top-of-the-line receivers have improved tremendously and offer almost comparable(if not better) performance compared to good separates. I used to have the idea that receivers are crap when it comes to sound quality in both HT and music and have always disregarded them since my main objective is getting the stereo part right. That was about 7 years ago when I owned the Yamaha DSP-990. The Yamaha was my first introduction to HT as well as my stereo rig. Since my main priority has always been music, I got rid of it and started to build my system slowly throughout the years from the modest Arcam Alpha 10 and several other amps before I ended up with the Plinius SA-100Mk3 today. Although I would like to have the best HT but the relatively high cost have deterred me from owning separates(still with the old school theory that receivers suck).

Not until I've listened to the Denon AVR-5803. This unit really changed my perception of the quality of today's receivers. I'm very much with Mborner and his write-up tells it all, although discriminating critics would beg to differ.

Just my 2 cents.

]
("Maybe... but not in my typical room set up.")

If your spending $4800 on a receiver for a "typical room set up", might I strongly suggest separates, yes! Again, Outlaw has even the Denon beat at 1/3 the cost!!!!..yes. I've sold, installed, and retailed the Denon for years. Sorry. It's a good receiver...better than most...not as good...not worth $4800 IMO. That's the deal.

("There are no entry level or even mid level processors that can even come close, processing wise.")(refering to 5803)
Sorry, you're wrong. Again, even the modest little Outlaw separates sound better, yes! Connectd Digitally or through the "dirrect analog inputs" for good analog sources.Also, even though the Denon uses good processors. All the interference that's in a receiver increases noise floor, reduces channel sep, obscures detail ultimately, and the transformer must share dubties in driving everything in the thing!..not just the output devices! It has to driver the processors, the lights, the motorized volume control(and similar), pre amp section, amoung others. Power is reduced/compromised, and current is restricted.
Again, I'd take any receiver for a heads up full range with even modest separates, most every time. Separates still smokes receivers.
I can buy anything I want in this biz at "a song!"...and I wouldn't wast my money on any $2k receiver and over!...no chance! Why? Because I know what works from over 20 years experience, and over 1000 systems under my belt!
It's all good though...people can think what they want.

(..."Do yourself a favor, flip through the recent archives of Audio/Video Interiors. Ever wonder why most of these 1/2 million dollar custom home theaters are using receivers?...Could it be that they know something that you don't? Perhaps they realize that the laws of diminishing returns for separates are absolutely ridiculous")

Perhaps they realize diminishing returns? I'm talking about a near $5k receiver!)(doi!....that's a lot) There is no diminishing returns here! That sale is about selling what's "in-stock"! That's it. It's not anything to do with selling the best performing gear for the money. Separates can be had for less than that. Even a $3k pre and $1600 amp combo is less! So there is no "diminishing returns" in respect to purchasing the Denon 5803!...none. Maybe with the 2803/3803 under $2k, but not $4800!!!
They use receivers in "Many"(not all) because these people are already spending WAY MORE THAN THEY'D LIKE on the whole house custom thing!...and probably a dedicated custom theater with all the decore,structures,cabinetry,necessary gear, etc!!! A receiver often works into a budget, or they have it in stock, yes!
I've worked in 6, that's right, 6 high end audio/video stores. I've talked to clients to no end. I've worked on $1m million dollar installs, down to a few thousand. I think I understand the clients, the game, and the compromises.
Often, receivers are a compromise, yes. Still, for best sound, receiver isn't the best bet, sorry.
I'll most all of the separates combo's up against the Denon, yes...in a second.

("so much so, that they've(receivers) become the component of choice for even the most discriminating critic.")
Sorry, critics own pre/pro's for their system, and have receivers for comparison! I know a few of them!
And, receivers are "where the markets at!"..becuase this is where consumers minds are! Receivers sell! That's it. They offer all in one performance packages, which is phsycologically atractive!...thus the prices are often low for features offered, because of competition and demand! It's marketing.
Still, if you chose to believe that receivers are where it's at, that's your perogative. For the more informed, receivers can't hang, don't sound as good, and have serious sonic compromises comparatively. Do receivers sound good, sure some do on their own. Better than separates?...not by a long shot.

Yeah (non-critical jousting only mind you...it's all good and fine) "mborner" your nowhere near the truth on this one!
Again, I've lived, eatten, and breathed custom audio video, HIgh end audio and HT for the past umpteen years, and seen and done most all of it! I've been down all the paths basically, and continue to "tinker".
The Outlaw separates(which I don't sell or endorse) blows your reciver chioces in teh dirt!...sorry to inform you.
It was the best sounding Ht system set up at last years Home Entertainment expo in San Franscisco by quite a bit! Mind you, there were other variables. Still, it was very good sounding, and better than any reciever I ever heard.
Hey listen, even the Acurus Act 3 and 125x5 that I used to sell(own as well) spanked the Denon5803, and any other flagship I've sold!
I've dealt in the Marantz SR18/14, Denon 5803, Yamaha RXZ1, and Pioneer VSX series THX stuff, as with others. None can compare, sorry. They're receivers.
Hey if anyone's trying to pitch how good receivers have gotten, they're basiclally all reading magazines designed to "sell soap!" It's marketing, that's all.
Sure there are some fine sounding receivers "for what they are." The old Nakamichi AV10, Denon AVR4802/5803, Yamaha RXZ1 and less expensive RXV800/1000 series, Arcam's $1200 piece, Marantz SR14/18, the old Sony STRD777ES receiver, some of the Past NAD's(although reliabiltiy a challenge there), maybe B&k(ok)and similiar have been excellent RECEIVER CHOICES over the years I've found. I'm not doubting that. And there are others from other brands, like Integra and HK that I'm sure have made some good gear. But were talking receivers here! In a serious HT/music playback context, they can't perform up to separates standards for driving speakers dynamicslly...bottom line! Receivers always are and always will be a compromise.
I've simply lived too long through all the "press" and "hype" to know differnt. It's what I do, it's what I know. REceivers are a substitute for separates, and those on budgets. If you wan't performance, you go separates. If you want features/value/convenience, you go receiver. That's it. All real audiophiles and experience folk all know this.

Congratulations on all your experience and accomplishments, Exertfluffer, you are indeed, a better man than I!!

I agree...Now it's settled