I would definitely keep ahold of the two channel stuff for the stereo listening and then get a midrange receiver for the HT. I recently did just that. For a while I anguished over getting good HT separates (had narrowed it down to either the Lexicon, the Proceed, or maybe the Bryston along with a Classe CAV-75 bridged to three channels at 150 to drive the rears and center) when I eventually came to the conclusion (and my senses?) and decided that I really only needed that quality of gear for two channel listening. So, I did some listening and a lot of reading and had things narrowed down the Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo, and Marantz in the around $800 range. In the end, I got the Marantz (SRS-7000, or something like that). I run the main channels from the preout on the Marantz to the processor loop an my preamp, so the main speakers are always being driven by my main amp. However, the center and surrounds are being driven directly by the Marantz (which puts out 100wpc, if I am not mistaken). The Marantz has a single master volume control for all channels, but allows for individual volume adjustment for each channel up to +/- 10db from the baseline of the master volume control (which I found to be more than enough to equalize all channels, despite the fact that the fronts are seeking 400wpc into an average 4ohm load and the rears are seeing 100wpc into an efficient 8ohms). I have found that this setup works great for me. Even among the brands I considered, each one certainly offers far more expensive models than the one I ended up with. However, I found the $800 range to be the reasonable cutoff point above which it started making more sense to begin considering separates again because, much more than that and I might as well just give it up and get the good stuff. I’ve found the Marantz to be pretty darn ok. Don’t get me wrong, when I am listening to music I it turn it off. But when it’s time for a DVD it sounds great and now I’ve got all of the whistles and bells of proper HT without breaking the bank. What more, if I decide that I want better amplification for any of the other channels, I can always thrown on a new amp, as the Marantz has preouts for all channels. Long post, I know, but, in sum, I’d suggest looking into receivers at around $800. You can spend a lot more with no problem (and you could spend less, too) but, considering the beast that I had chosen, I found this to be the window in which everything I wanted done was getting done right just below the point of diminishing returns.
Any mid-priced Receivers Worthwhile???
I auditioned an Onkyo Integra DTR-5.1 receiver today, driving small Paradigm satellites with an M&K subwoofer. The system sounded quite good spacially and in terms of its frequency range, but it had a little too much lower-treble presence for my liking. I'd like to take the plunge into surround sound, but so far, all the low and mid-priced receivers I've heard have exhibited this flaw to varying degrees. Right now I have good 2-channel sound using the venerable NAD 3020 integrated amp. I don't want to regret going to 5-channel surround. Perhaps the treble zing was in the speakers and not the Integra, I can't say for sure. So, my question is: are there any mid-priced receivers that won't bore holes through my skull during the length of a 2-hour flick, or can I only achieve natural sounding HT with high-priced gear?? Thanks in advance for any and all insight!