2. digital
  3. 161006-150037

SQ! - avr vs high end stereo preamp, who wins SQ challenge? And why

So thinking about getting a C47 McIntosh preamp for stereo listening for use in Ht bypass mode.  All this vs a mid range avr used in a home theater with high end speakers and amp.

what is it that diminishes sound quality when listening to stereo music with the “pure direct” mode selection from an avr?  

Why can’t the avr producers do a better job when designing their avr’s or maybe not a big deal in that avr SQ for stereo is comparable to a stereo preamp.  
emergingsoul

Showing 1 response by oldhvymec

Ag insider logo xs@2x
oldhvymec
5,101 posts
 
millercarbon6,268 posts10-22-2020 2:56pmThese people are being nice. My specialty is brutal honesty:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

OR honestly brutal, :-)  You are being nice though.

Most  AV gear there is a lot of "STUFF" in the same box.

I do have one that is an exceptional stereo pre amp, BUT a typical HT with a roll of the selector knob.

MX120.  It is an ok HT at best.  The thing is it had a wonderful 3.(what ever) processor.

If you like 3 channel music. There are some, that are really good. The Mac has a better 3 channel than James B. SST Trinaural analog processor..

That processor (the SST)  can make music sound really "in the room". The Mac I think is better.. Just the MX120 though. Weird. Not the 121 or 122 AND a great Mac stereo to boot.. It is a true sonic nugget, few know about.  I paid under 800.00 for one of my MX120s. Frank Zappa, come to mind, couple of old LPs.. I'm using one right now while waiting for a repair on my C2500.

Hello Hello, Hello Hello, don't go where the huskies go, don't be eatin' that yellow snow, hello , hello, LOL Frank Zappa Great stuff


Regards
More to discover