If you care about sound quality then you need to know the lowest component at the very bottom of the audio food chain is the AVR. Next up from that is the stereo receiver. All these things cram way too much stuff in way too small a box and with way too cheap parts to be work well at all. Take your money, which obviously if you are even considering one of these things you worked hard for, and buy a stereo integrated amp. Vast improvement.
Or forget sound quality and get the AVR with the most features that looks the prettiest.
Thank you, and by the way I am not apposed to any opinions on how best to do a multi-component setup and i know there are way better speakers out there but I have to work with what I have for now!
NAD and Anthem are my only two realistic choices right now. Anthem is in the middle of a product change, so you may find the MRX line at a discount as they roll out their latest.
I wouldn't put any consideration into "8K" stuff. It's really just the next marketing gimmick to "sell" consumers into buying new equipment. Realistically, in some situations, you really don't even need 4K.
Am I doing something wrong? I have a 65" 4k TV and tube amps in 2 channels with a sub...
Another way to go would be to get separate pre amp processor and multi channel amps. I use a Parasound 5 channel amp in one system and the Anthem MRX 520 is basically a preamp. In my other HT system the Anthem 520 drives all speakers. Miller’s remark that a receiver might have to much going on under one bonnet is an extension of the same philosophy that in two channel, separates work better than an integrated amp or amp/DAC; there is something to that but in practice there are excellent sounded integrated amps and AVRs
Separates DO work better! Its just that you have to go very, very far up the food chain for that to be the case. Where money and value are concerned, that is where integrateds really shine.
The main difference is that with a stereo integrated amp you can at least achieve higher performance with separates as long as you are willing to spend a lot more money. Where with multichannel there is no amount of money that will buy you as good quality sound as you can get from something as relatively affordable as say a $3k Raven Blackhawk.
With a setup like the OP has, and assuming a very limited budget, the smart thing to do is first answer the all-important question: What matters most to me, really? And I mean REALLY???!
Because if it really is sound quality then the answer is stereo and the value answer is an integrated amp. But if it is "Surround! I must have surround! And 7 channels! I want HOME THEATER!!!" Then in that case forget about it. Might as well stick with the AVR. Do Whatever. Just don't kid yourself about sound quality being a priority. Its not. Its for movies. Its a visual medium. And everyone making components for HT knows this, they know their market, and they pay just enough lip service to dupe buyers into falling for what they all want to believe, that they can have it all.
The first 5 channels are probably the most important in a home theater. Actually, the front 3 channels are the absolute most important (center channel being the primary). The surround channels are not necessarily required, but they definitely add an ambience to the experience and they will make the sound bigger. Beyond that, it becomes almost a gimmick game. I have been in Atmos theaters with tons of speakers all over the place. It's interesting to have sounds flowing above you, but I can still hear the flaws in their speakers/amps/electronics. I'd much rather have the absolute best 5 channel system I could do instead of a 14 speaker immersive setup.
Is stereo listening important to you? If so, what % do you use system for movies vs. music? How do you like the sound with the Marantz, and is there anything specific you’d like to improve upon?
Tjl441. You came to wrong place. This whole site is the same 20 guys fighting with each other. It’s like lunch at a retirement home. I know, I lived at one for 6 months after my accident. The craziest one at the table is MC
This whole site is the same 20 guys fighting with each other. It’s like lunch at a retirement home. I know, I lived at one for 6 months after my accident. The craziest one at the table is MC.
On New Year’s Eve 2020, truth is spoken.
Happy New Year, Ray.
Well, thank you sirs...(tvad and ps)
Happy New Years to all!
It depends on what one wants a Surround Sound system to do. Many people use a two channel system for music and use their HT systems primarily for Video.
Then if their tastes in Video run to action movies with lots of explosions, etc. they will have different requirements from their system than, say, myself.
I listen to music primarily in my 2 channel system. One of my HT systems (living room) is primarily my wife’s domain, and we watch shows there. We don’t do action films as a rule but I enjoy the enhanced ability to appreciate dialogue and ambience. My other HT system in the basement I originally cobbled together for millennials that were living there, but now that they’re gone for years I have been steadily upgrading and there are certain recordings that simply sound better in multichannel. I listen to Classical, and there are many SACDs and Blu Rays that are tastefully done. The rears provide ambience, and many of the recordings from labels such as Pentatone and BIS do a wonderful job of simulating the reflections that one would get from the rear walls of a Concert Hall. For example, try the Brahms Symphony Cycle on Pentatone with Marek Janowski conducting the Pittsburgh SO. The superb sense of atmosphere elevates it from just being a very good Brahms Cycle (in two channel) to top of the class in MC. I’ve been listening to and watching my Blu Ray of the Nutcracker, Rudolph Nureyev choreographed, from the Vienna Staatoper, and the surrounds enhance the sounds of the dancers and the audience applause. Both my HTs are 5.1, btw; the architecture of my house won’t accommodate Atmos.
Have you asked this question over on the AVS forum? You might get answers more to your liking.
Good afternoon and Happy New year to all, 1st I want to thank you all for ur input, like I said I am not very well versed in this stuff and I definitely don’t know all the technical aspects of these components, I had never heard of NAD or anthem until I posted in this forum, looks like there are a few Anthem fans, and after doing a little checking, I really like the fact that the company is in Canada and tech support is English speaking, HUGE plus for me, to answer some of the questions, I would say I watch way more movies than listen to music and as much as I would like to have the best of both worlds, I’m not willing to spend the money, sooo if I can stay at the 5K or so I would be happy, I misspoke in my initial comment, I actually have the Vienna acoustics that I mentioned I also have (2) Martin Logan tower speakers with a Martin Logan sub @raysmb1, I’m good with the same 20 guys in the nursing home arguing :) over the same basic concepts over 20,000 opinions! Now I just have to decide on which AVR to go with but think I am leaning towards the anthem so I’m going to find a local dealer and check out their stuff! Thank you all again!!
I forget to mention, this setup is in a great room setting the listening area is about 18X20 and I have 16foot ceiling, not necessarily the prefect theater room!
Yeah, given your requirements if you can afford $2700 I’d go with the Anthem MRX 740 and call it a day. Frankly you’d probably be almost as happy with the Yamaha RX-A2080 at $1000 less, but if this is a long-term purchase and it’s in your budget, just go with the Anthem.