I think Inscrutable put it in perspective best, above here. And IF you were going to use most any sort of AV receiver in the context of some semblance of a "hi-end system", using it as the pre/pro - not the amp sections - is your best bet for quality sound. (if you can get a good EQ into the mix - audyssey, etc - you're ahead of the game even futher)
What you'll find is that the smaller more essoteric receiver builders are going to offer you more refinement overall, with either direct analog or digital connection, for musicality and overall sonic refinement, likely.
I do find that, with typical mass manufactured receivers built over seas, I like the clarity and "relative" neutrality from the likes of Yamaha, Harman kardon receivers, Pioneers and Denon's bettter pieces, for their pre-amp sections.
Note that you're still are not going to get ultra high end refinement from most all of these as pre-amp's either, considering all connection modes. But, for the most parit, if you can get lots of detail, clarity, good dynamics, and a nice open sound, it's still pretty darn good with music, and excellent with movies, all-in-all.
With most typical, even higher end AV atand-alone pre/pro's, You will probably get closer to higher end refinement going the likes of Macitosh, to Krell, to Theta, to Meridian, Anthem, whatever . Yet, you're still not likely going to realize the level of refinement as what the best analog preamp's offer, using outboard sources for processing and such...all things equal. However, you're getting much much better refinement using these very same hi-end offerings in that role than typical AV receivers, used in any capacity, true!
So a good options here would be to use one of the mass market av recievers with which offer a good clear, detailed, dynamic sound for their preamp sections - that's opt #1. Next step up would be a better, more essoteric av receiver from some of the smaller companies, used as a pre/pro. Above that, you gotta escape to dedicated separates AV pre's. And beyond that, to maximize potential from high end 2 channel sources, you're probabaly going to have to loop an expensive 2 channel analog preamp into the system, or go stand-alone. - and consider higher end outboard EQ into the system to tweak the sound.
I personally go with a mid level HK AVR354 as a standalone pre/pro (has an EQ) out to a Parasound HCA1205a for my system currently. Actually, the amps are stronger and much better sounding than most at this price range, built into the HK. So I use the receiver by itself for small setups. Still, the receiver, on it's own, can't match the current delivery of the Parasound, with a load, for sure. |
I personally always thought av receivers is what made preamp features less desireable. Just a different perspective.
Not sure what any of this means really... |
Once went hunting for wild trout, while on a trip to Texas (DFW area -I think it dirrectly off Harry Heins blvd, er something like that), whilst on a biz trip to install a custom home theater for a client. Got taken by a couple of working girls, who proceeded to rip me off for $1000, got my car broken into, almost went to jail for solicitation, and the client ended up not being a "straight" shooter (if ya know what I mean). Things just couldn't have gotten much ugglier. (I'll coneed that there were a couple of nice audio shops down there, however)
Yeah, I pesonally would ALWAYS pass on any future Texas trip invitations! - take your "hunting", elsewhere!
But hey, that's just me..
Happy hunting.... |
I'm gunna be the first here to state that neither the Sunfire Ultimate Receiver II, the B&K Ref 507 S2, nor the Arcam 350, and similar ARE NOT high end audio!
Let's not loose sight here that, as nice as these pieces may be overall for sonic dubties, these are AV receivers, and not hi-end essoteric, ultra-refined pieces of audio equipment! No, not "hi-end"...fer the record. Yor Sunfire is not going to replace a world class preamp or amplifier, not by any strech. Nice try, though.
"But if I was stranded on an island with Raquel Welch and a lowly Sunfire Ultimate I could be quite content." (Coltrane1)
As nice looking as Raquel may have stayed over the years, you surely will need that Sunfire Ultimate receiver around to drown out all the cackling and complaining she'll undoubtedly be pounding your ears with, because she's stuck on some desolate island without a Tiffany's or Sachs to shop at!!
Come on, you gotta know I'm at least right on this point. lol |
As for my syntax, grammar, and or spelling prowess, let me just state for the record here that "it's not that I'm lazy, it's that I just don't care." (Damn it feels good to be a gangsta!!)
For the record, make no mistake. I have an audiophile's ear, to be certain, not an English Professors resume! Yes, pertaing to my syntax, ya know I guess if I aspired to some desk job behind a cubicle, pumping out TPS reports all day, having to anskwer to 8 different bosses, I would actually care about my grammar and spelling prowess!
You know It just never ceases to amaze me, how grown adults on an audio chat forum - when they disagree with you - are quick to go out of there way to point out how poor your grammar and puntuation cabilities are -As if any one cared, or if it actually mattered in the context of anything pertaining to pertinent knowledge or a valid opinion regarding, yes, "hi-end audio!"
For that matter, I'm going out a limb here and state that likely 95% of all former Spelling Bee champions and English teachers alike out there, actually know very little in terms of growing any real wealth! So thank you, but I'll take the CASH instead - and the pay upgrade!!! So let's just forget my future carer involving secretarial skills, and let's get back to pertinent audio chat, uuum'K?!. No offense.
Ok more importantly here, let me just state that I've had basic $5 passive volume control pots in my system, that sound FAR FAR more engaging and transparent than ANY preamp section ever produced for any Sunfire or B&K receiver- or any other AV receiver, for that matter - ever, period! And that is no joke, and I think is typical.
As good as the digital processing in todays AV technology has gotten, my position here -from almost 20 years of professional experience- is that, ANY AV receiver's basically nothing more than a bunch of "sonic compromises in a box!" -which is inevitable to make it all happen! In fact I, for one, would like to start the petition to force Wikepedia to include the word COMPROMISE, as part of the official description of "AV receiver", cause it needs to be done! Can I get an AMEN here?
I think my professional career in hi-end AV and as an audiophile hobbiest, selling, installing, and having owned some of the worlds most expensive equipment, makes my opinions and view point worthy of consideration and merit here. But then again were all just faceless audiogon posters here - so this is all just a bunch of relative perspectives here, to be true.
Back on track, my experience thus far in my audio journey is that anyone who feels that an AV receiver is a good candiate, replacement, or whatever, for a hi-end system, falls into the same catagory as those who feel that all wires and cables sound the same... all amplifiers of similar technical ratings and specifications sound the same...."a good speaker, is a good speaker" dogma practiioners, and so on! - and all these have mediocre to poor sounding systems, that are nothing special, EVERY TIME! That is fact. And their systems will never impress, are easily replaced by a good Bose system - hehe, er at least not to far from something along those lines.
So, anyone who want's to try to convice me, after all these years of experience, that their Sunfire AV receiver will replace some Levinson preamp or Boulder amp, well, you just "get on down with your bad self's!" No thanks, though. Cause I know better.
Ehem...I do enjoy a good Wilson Maxx system now and then, powered by a nice AV reciver though. I must admit... |
For the record, pertaining to all PHD's or credentials of any kind...THIS KIND OF DOCUMENTATION CAN BE BOUGHT OVER THE WEEKEND!!! (Canpick up/purchase anything over the internet these days...it's amazing, really. Has happened at few universities in the past. Just Google it). I'm not impressed.
Hey, I'm pretty certain that all those double PHD's and world renouned physicists that Albert Einstein associated with from his era thought they knew something too! Reality was Einstein figured it out all for them, and proved that the rest of them knew very little of real importance! -Their dregrees meant very little ("education is what begins when you've forgotten everything you've learned in school" - A.E) ...that's all I'm trying to say.
I, for one, like Hifihvn's position that the terminology SUPER RECEIVER is an oxymoron! Considering that any AV receiver is obsolete the following year, it's foolish to invest in such an endevor. Separates is only logical path. That and the fact that receivers will never replace hi-end gear, regardless of what PHD posers and turn of the century retiree's have to say on the matter.
Oh, and Dbphd? For the record, I didn't lose my hearing in the Second World War. So I got that goin for me...which is nice. |
Cantankerous! There is a word I've not heard in a while.
Yes! Let's all get together and ARGUE!!! Tis more fun this way...I'll coneed that, sure. Lol!
Um, my answers to the initial set of questions posted are "no" and "HECK NO!"
Av receivers?...descent. Separates?...MUCH MUCH better. Tubes?....NNNNNNNNNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIICE! Poking fun and putting Dbphd - and his PHD - in his place?...priceless.
For Arguing about all the other rediculous, near pointless, b.s. topics?...there's Audiogon!!!
Thanx, me... |
I'm wonding if most posting here can agree that, even if it was possible to build a "super receiver", from which to build your audiophile "hi-end" system around - given the ever changing digital landscape these days - it makes little sense to throw thousands(?) into a piece that will be outdated in a year ot two at best!
I think it makes far far more sense to simpy pick up a good multichannel amp (or combo's), which you know mates well and properly drives your speaker setup, from which to build your foundation upon (speakers and amp). Then, you can simply add an otherwise very good clean sounding AV receiver on the budget end as a pre/pro for the system, which does all the most up to date digital process and such! (I think you can pick up something a used AVR354, for instance, for like $200 on the net).
Let's face it, anything that even remotely approaches "hi-end" sound for an AV receiver would have to be thousands, retail! And, typically, as discussed, the amp sections in these AV receivers are typically the weakest point. Just makes much more sense to me to be able to toss a $100 to $200 range receiver, offering otherwise state of the art digital processing and feature-set wise. And then you can simply replace it ever year or two, with whatevers' new, er from the year before, for cheap! - of course still using your tried and tru amp to drive it all.
I've always said it, and I'll say it again. I'll NEVER spend $1000 for an AV receiver ever, period! What for? When I can have the same receiver for 10 to 20 cents on the dollar in a year or two, and just use it as a pre-pro if I want!
This of course is all concerned with using "receivers" in a system, basically. Otherwise, uhem...go pure separates, yeeeah. |
