Anybody else using AV880x as 2 channel preamp?

What are you trying to accomplish here? Are you trying to add a dedicated stereo preamp with HT bypass for your 2ch music listening into the mix? 

I am sending the two channel signal through the AV 8801–using it as my preamp, two channel.  To my ears, sounds as good or better than when I used the Cambridge network player as the preamp. Wondering if anyone else have done the same thing. Not trying to add a dedicated two channel preamp. 

I used my AV8801 for two channel listening for quite a while, then added a Modwright LS100 preamp with HTBP.  Wish I would have done that a long time ago, I didn't realize how much of the music I was missing with the AV8801.  Not that it sounded bad by any measure, but it doesn't let the details through in the way the Modwright does.

I had a 8801 then a 8802 and never liked my dac going through it even in pure direct. Always went dac direct to amp. I now have the av8805 and it is much better as a preamp. I can use it in pure direct and not miss much. Direct to amp still sounds better but the marantz is now good enough I usually dont. 

I use the av8805 as both a 2ch preamp and multichannel.  Have to say it sounds pretty nice.  Was planning on getting a dedicated 2ch preamp soon but no longer feel the rush to do so.  Nice to save the space until we have more room.

While the Marantz AV8802 is great when used as a surround processor for surround sound movies or HT but its stereo performance for 2ch music playbacks are lacking compared to high end AV preamp surround processor such as the Classe SSP 800, Classe Sigma SSP, Cary Cinema 12, Bryston SP3/SP4, McIntosh MX160, Meridian Reference 861 v8, Krell Foundation, Krell S1200U, Krell Evo 707, Audio Control M9/M7. 

I haven't heard the AV8805 though. 
If you really care about 2ch performance for music playbacks I suggest that you get a dedicated stereo preamp or stereo integrated amp that has HT bypass. 

Or if you want a single AV pre pro that can perform really well in stereo I would get something like a used discontinued Classe SSP 800, Classe Sigma SSP, Bryston SP4/SP3, Cary Cinema 12. 
These processors will perform better in stereo than the Marantz. 

@tomaswv , I use multichannel pre with success in my main system. It's a McIntosh MX-120. The analog section is essentially a C46 preamp, so it offers the flexibility for HT and critical 2-channel listening. I've since moved away from HT altogether, but kept the 120 for its sound quality.
You can find this and the MX-119 and 134 fairly cheap since they're shunned by both line stage purists and HT geeks ( not intended as a jab) who want the latest codecs. 

The classe 800 unit mentioned above also gets high marks for 2-channel use.

@yakbob  

I think the McIntosh's flagship AV preamp surround processors (eg MX150, MX151, or MX160) share very similar analog audio circuitry as the McIntosh stereo preamp such as the C46 preamp, not the McIntosh's entry level AV processors such as the MX120, MX121 or MX122..

To clarify, the MX-119 and MX-120 are the same analog circuit as found in the C45 (when used in analog mode) since both lack the C46 equalizer function. RonC has mentioned this in a few threads on audiokarma, where there is some great discussion on the benefits of these units in 2-channel systems. They're a relative bargain in the Mc world in that they're built as stereo pre's with the added benefit of a DAC (if you choose to use it) or output multi-channel.
The value, or better yet, performance to value of the later "flagship" processors is debatable since units like the MX-150 are more akin to the Denon units they're based off of. The MX-121 even has some Marantz parts inside. It's not a bad thing if you must have the look or later codecs, but in tomaswv's case (2-channel stereo use), the 119, 120 or even 134 would present a better value and 2-channel performance. For decoding digital multichannel or latter HDMI standards the 150 and newer units would be a better choice.

Both the MX122 (entry level) & MX160 (flagship) support and decode the latest formats and codecs eg 4K HDR Dolby Atmos DTS-X Auro 3-D. 

The MX122 was based on Marantz AV8802 processor whereas the flagship MX160 is pure McIntosh all the way. The MX160 performs and sounds way better than the MX122 in both stereo and surrounds (HT) and is equipped with much better room correction (Room Perfect) as opposed to Auddysey found in the MX122. 

I've heard that the MX160 shares same analog audio circuitry with the McIntosh stereo preamp but not sure which model I think it's a newer model.