drubin, you've cited some valid reasons for using an avr; some others might include ability to biamp or availability of features like an fm tuner, xm or internet connectivity. the main selling point is value--because of rapid technological enhancements avrs depreciate extremely quickly and consequently there are incredible used deals to be had. that said, i'd agree with the above posters that a 2 channel integrated will generally sound better than a comparable avr. however if you're looking for something for tv/video, as opposed to critical music listening, a used avr is a viable way to go. personally, i think b&k sounds very close to separates; harman kardon also makes very good sounding units.
Should I Use an AVR for 2-Channel Home Theater
This is a very basic question that I’ve never been sure of. If I want a decent set of speakers to use with TV (DVR, DVD) but don’t need multichannel and don’t need video switching, what are the pros and cons of an AVR vs. a 2-channel integrated amp or receiver? Obviously with an AVR I am paying for 3 or 5 extra channels of amplification and for a bunch of switching I don’t need, but maybe it’s worth it for other reasons.
A few things I can think of that may be factors: (1) better to use the DAC in the AVR (or integrated, as some have them now) vs. the ones in the TiVo or DVD player (unless it’s a high-end DVD); (2) downmixing multichannel and Dolby stuff – should that be done in an AVR or can I let the source devices handle it?; (3) adjusting for audio-video lag; (4) potential to add a subwoofer that taps the .1 LFE channel.
What do you think?
A few things I can think of that may be factors: (1) better to use the DAC in the AVR (or integrated, as some have them now) vs. the ones in the TiVo or DVD player (unless it’s a high-end DVD); (2) downmixing multichannel and Dolby stuff – should that be done in an AVR or can I let the source devices handle it?; (3) adjusting for audio-video lag; (4) potential to add a subwoofer that taps the .1 LFE channel.
What do you think?