ismail Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 for a small room what is better in terms of sound quality and detail seperate amp or av receiver how much difference will be in sound quality? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 For any size room separates are generally "better". You just can't fit everything in one box and get the same quality. Separates also give you some flexibility to upgrade later (keep the amp and upgrade the processor...). That being said, the difference depends on a lot of other factors - like what speakers you have. You can get some very nice AV receivers - not meaning to put those down. But in a head to head comparison, separate normally win out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JewishAMerPrince Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Separates begin in quality (and price) at the point where high end receivers end. There is some overlap. When comparing with a more run-of-the-mill everyday receiver, say something in the $500-$1000 range, there is no comparison. Of course the commitment of $$ is much greater with a stack of separates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruinsrme Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 AS I am moving from teh pioneer 49txi to a pre/pro I am find out that av receivers have more features and seem to support the latest in technologies more so than a pre/pro. Items include, firewire, usb, hdmi video switching, and the latest formats. Digging around at various units the av receivers may give up a little in amp quality but if there are certain features you are looking for it will most likely be affordable in the av rcvr units. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doudou Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 but you can use a receiver as a preamp/processor and use some separate amp. so you will have the gadgets and all the features of the receiver and the quality for the amp. but i ve a question now: is the processor of a receiver as good as a separate pre/pro? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 like in almost any other area..... try to avoid the entry level units.... you can buy an entry level pre/pro for about $800.... an $800 receiver will generally sound better because it is a mid-level unit compared to the entry level pre/pro.... the level of features and cutting edge technology is much higher among receivers as well.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meuge Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 ---------------- On 2/4/2005 8:54:22 AM minn_male42 wrote: like in almost any other area..... try to avoid the entry level units.... you can buy an entry level pre/pro for about $800.... an $800 receiver will generally sound better because it is a mid-level unit compared to the entry level pre/pro.... ---------------- That's sort of like saying that a top-of-the-line Mazda is better than an entry-level Lexus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 ---------------- On 2/4/2005 1:04:52 PM meuge wrote: ---------------- On 2/4/2005 8:54:22 AM minn_male42 wrote: like in almost any other area..... try to avoid the entry level units.... you can buy an entry level pre/pro for about $800.... an $800 receiver will generally sound better because it is a mid-level unit compared to the entry level pre/pro.... ---------------- That's sort of like saying that a top-of-the-line Mazda is better than an entry-level Lexus. ---------------- it might not be true in the car arena...but it does apply to this discussion of receivers and pre/pros... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 ---------------- On 2/4/2005 8:54:22 AM minn_male42 wrote: like in almost any other area..... try to avoid the entry level units.... you can buy an entry level pre/pro for about $800.... an $800 receiver will generally sound better because it is a mid-level unit compared to the entry level pre/pro.... the level of features and cutting edge technology is much higher among receivers as well.... ---------------- I don't know that I could agree with that, minn. Remember, when buying a receiver you're paying for an amplifier as well, so an $800 pre-pro is still going to have more of what you want vs. an $800 receiver... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 ---------------- On 2/4/2005 2:53:31 PM Griffinator wrote: ---------------- On 2/4/2005 8:54:22 AM minn_male42 wrote: like in almost any other area..... try to avoid the entry level units.... you can buy an entry level pre/pro for about $800.... an $800 receiver will generally sound better because it is a mid-level unit compared to the entry level pre/pro.... the level of features and cutting edge technology is much higher among receivers as well.... ---------------- I don't know that I could agree with that, minn. Remember, when buying a receiver you're paying for an amplifier as well, so an $800 pre-pro is still going to have more of what you want vs. an $800 receiver... ---------------- case in point that illustrates where i'm coming from.... the outlaw pre/pro - entry level pre/pro.... sounds so-so.... the pioneer elite receivers - 52tx and 54txi are in the same price range... they have more features and IMHO a much better sound than the outlaw... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Fair enough. I haven't auditioned those two, although I've definitely heard mixed reviews about the Outlaw pre/pros... The farther beyond the $1K mark you move, however, the wider the gap gets between pre/pro and receiver. The shortcomings of stuffing an amp into the same box as the processor start becoming more and more audible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 ---------------- On 2/4/2005 3:02:16 PM Griffinator wrote: Fair enough. I haven't auditioned those two, although I've definitely heard mixed reviews about the Outlaw pre/pros... The farther beyond the $1K mark you move, however, the wider the gap gets between pre/pro and receiver. The shortcomings of stuffing an amp into the same box as the processor start becoming more and more audible. ---------------- i agree.... but my basic premise in everything that i buy.... avoid the cheapest model... always buy at least one or two steps up in quality.... although - some of the flagship receivers DO sound very nice! an elite 59txi receiver as a processor is an excellent choice!... but it is not cheap! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 ---------------- On 2/4/2005 3:15:36 PM minn_male42 wrote: i agree.... but my basic premise in everything that i buy.... avoid the cheapest model... always buy at least one or two steps up in quality.... although - some of the flagship receivers DO sound very nice! an elite 59txi receiver as a processor is an excellent choice!... but it is not cheap! ---------------- I won't argue that point. The Yammy RX-Z series receivers are sweet. However, for $3000, Sherbourn is about to release a pre/pro (I've gotten a sneak peek at it - Sherbourn is definitely separating themselves from Outlaw) that will literally destroy any receiver in its price range - and I already know of several pre/pros that will embarass any receiver in that range. I guess it's a simple matter of what point someone wants to pick as the "high end"... The top-of-the-line receivers don't stand a chance against similarly priced pre/pros... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottscay Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 Just got to hear an ARCAM AVR300. $2000. Get one if you can find it. Best frickin' reciever I've ever heard. Ever. Scott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 "i agree.... but my basic premise in everything that i buy.... avoid the cheapest model... always buy at least one or two steps up in quality...." This is an interesting theory. One, I must say, I generally follow myself. However, I had an MBA course that talked about marketing and some common ways they "steer" us to what they want us to buy. Many companies will introduce low and high end products to steer us to their middle model (which will normally be the one with the highest mark-up). When I read the research on this, I really felt like a sucker. There were studies where they would take the same unit and sell them as the "high" or "low" end. They would then take the same unit and bracket it to make it the middle unit. Sales would jump dramatically - 3 or 4 times what they had been. Pretty interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 Darren, Some of the marketing strategies that you describe are fraudulent in addition to being unethical. One contact lens manufacturer sold the same lenses in three different "grades" that were supposed to last for different periods of time. The Federal Trade Comission sanctioned the company. There are lots of examples of legal rip offs as well. For example, the larger size candy bar is frequently more expensive per ounce than the smaller bar. As always, caveat emptor. Separate processors are not always better than the processor section of receivers. They frequently lag behind the technology of the better Japanese receivers. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted February 6, 2005 Share Posted February 6, 2005 ---------------- On 2/5/2005 12:40:42 PM MrMcGoo wrote: Separate processors are not always better than the processor section of receivers. They frequently lag behind the technology of the better Japanese receivers. Bill ---------------- Jeez, Bill. I guess we'll never agree on anything... Technology aside, dollar for dollar, a mid-shelf pre/pro is going to give you better sound quality than a similarly priced (i.e. near-top-of-the-line receiver. SNR will be higher, crosstalk will be lower, DSP will be cleaner and more precise, the list goes on and on. The final investment will yield a vastly superior product in terms of overall sound quality. The question for the prospective buyer, then, is simple: Do you want better sound quality, or do you want more bells and whistles? Toys like I-link, MCACC and other equalization schemes, 5 million reverb/delay presets that you'll probably never use, extra "effects" channels that are in no way supported by any Dolby surround format - this is what you buy when you buy an integrated receiver as a front end - oh yeah, and you still pay for an internal amplifier that you'll never use. Frankly, I'll take the sound quality of a top-shelf pre/pro over the bells-and-whistles technology of the "better Japanese receivers". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted February 6, 2005 Share Posted February 6, 2005 Griffinator, I doubt that you have ever seriously listened to an i.link system playing SACDs and DVD-As. I doubt that you would infer that i.link it is a gimmick, if you had seriously listened. Pioneer's sales have caused many manufacturers to redesign their systems. The DACs in my processor are better than most stand alone processors. They are Burr-Brown PCM 1704s that are individually tuned by BB. They were the highest quality DAC that BB produced at the time. I have a RTA of a Pioneer 49TXi on RF-7s. There is a substantial improvement in the room response with MCACC. I hear the benefits in my room every day. The room has more impact on the sound than any factor other than speakers. Dr. Floyd Toole and PWK have written about it. Pioneer is the first company to do something about it that ordinary people can benfit from with no access to specialized equipment. The reason that I publically disagree with you is that I believe that you sometimes mislead folks that are underinformed. Your business seems to produce a conflict of interest that colors your views. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverSport Posted February 6, 2005 Share Posted February 6, 2005 So I am listening to just so-so from my new ($699 by the way now, $649 for B-Stock) Outlaw Audio Pre-Pro??? I disagree...I listened to MANY different receivers before going back to "separates" ...I liked some Marantz and a Rotel but it was more than the Outlaw. I find the Outlaw Audio 950-7100-LFM-1 and Klipsch Heresy-Academy-KSF-C5s very nice...I listen to 2 channel in 2 channel through the Heresys with the LFM-1 to round out the bass...very nice and not just so so...can only compare in my home with my Nakamichi (also through Heresys) stereo "Tuner-Amp" Just my experience. I find that anything built to a price point will get you exactly that (with a few exceptions)...sometimes you find the winner from some manufacturer that is the "best buy" for its market but to say that most all (or ALL) mid line receivers beat ANY low line separate is preposterous...some separates manufacturers would never use the parts that come in a low line receiver and sometimes mid level is just that...mid level be it receiver or separates... Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottscay Posted February 6, 2005 Share Posted February 6, 2005 Hey, guys, Arcamm AVR300. Not kidding, you can tweak it until it sounds as good as a midrange pre/pro. Go listen, I'm serious. Plus, you get fantastic surround performance when you aren't listening to music. I did listen to i.link, and it does make an audible improvement, not to mention it beats the pants off of all the analog connections needed for SACD otherwise. I don't know about those other things you are discussing, so have at it again. Just my two cents... Scott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.