Arcam AVR350

[greggp2]

I'd like to get some feedback on peoples' opinion on the Arcam AVR350/300 or 280. I'm looking for opinions of people who have demoed one of these units and their thoughts compared to the newer receivers with HD audio and video switching.

With Analogue inputs from Blu-ray, mostly all HD or digital sources and an HDMI video switchbox, wouldn't the SQ be better on this unit than comparable receivers from other manufacturers costing up to $3,000?

I'm really most interested in people that have heard or demoed the AVR350, but the other units will provide a good comparison as well.

Thanks....

[CraigV]

I’ve not heard firsthand one of these units, but I did do a lot of research into them. Every review I read on Arcam in general (amps, pre-amps, receivers) have lauded their sound quality as being superior to “mass market” brands in that their equipment does everything right – that is to say they come very close to the ultimate goal of making their equipment sound as neutral as possible. The ability to take the incoming signal and amplify it without adding or taking anything away sounds like it should be easy, but can be very illusive.

As for using the analog out of a BD player, that is the route I have chosen, and so far so good. I have resigned myself to the fact that I can’t afford what I really want, but that what I have is still quite good, and better than most. Ideally, you want a D – A converter & surround processor that can keep pace with the incoming signal, but do justice to the sounds by not adding or detracting any part of it. I chose the Panasonic BD55 as it is touted as having a robust D – A section. Not up to snuff with the latest offerings from the higher end manufacturers, but it still does a good job.

[tcfish19]

You may want to check out avforums.com. It's a British site and a lot more Arcam owners on it. I was headed down the ARV-600 road till I started reading on that site. I now have the RX-Z7, just received today. Basically what swayed me was how many people said the only difference in the high end Yamaha and the Arcam AVR-600 was the 2 channel presentation. There are also a few people that switched from the AVR-350 to either the Z7 or AVR-600 that thought that the upgrade was worth it.

Since with Movies it's a wash and my 2 channel listening is for enjoyment and not critical listening. Saving, for me, 3.3K was a no brainer so now I own the Z7.

One last thing, the analog section on the Panasonic 55 I didn't like. I found the Oppo to be much better. If you do get the AVR-350 do yourself a favor and spend a little extra on at least the Oppo Blu-Ray due in a month. I'm looking forward to hooking my Panasonic up HDMI and getting away from the analog.

[greggp2]

I'm with you on the Oppo... I am awaiting official release after the beta test to order, but as soon as it's available, I'm getting one. I'm going to punt my Denon 3910 when I do get it, which is what I currently use for DVD and CD listening.

I had a Yamaha RX-3900 and am returning it today. This is one step down from the RX-Z7. I also have my mains being powered by an Emotiva XPA-2. Power was never an issue, but the Yamaha made my speakers sound too bright as compared to how they sounded with my older Rotel receiver. Don't get me wrong, the Yamaha is a great receiver and the Z7 is even better. For your application, depending on your speakers, I think you did the right thing by ordering the Z7 over the AVR600. I think the AVR600 is very expensive and isn't worth spending the extra coin for video processing and HD formats over the AVR350.

Truthfully, I really am not a huge fan of running Audio through HDMI anyway. To me, it's similar to running it through Optical cables. You have to compress the data, and then uncompress it at the other end.

Optical and HDMI audio has never sounded as good to me as Coaxal and Analog Audio, so I think I'll be pretty happy with the Avr350.. At least I am hoping so...

[rnatalli]

Arcam makes fine units. Great amp sections, built like tanks... But for the money, I believe there are better options. I see you have an Emotiva XPA-2. Why not pair it with the upcoming UMC-1?

[PENG]

I have only listened to the AVR300. It sounded great with the speakers in the domo room including the Energy Veritas. I bought the Veritas, and as expected they sounded just as good (obviously not an A/B comparison) with the Denon I had at the time. I wasn't surprised because I knew this thing about some receivers are more musical or warmer than others are typically not factual if they are within the same price range. The AVR300 wasn't very heavy but it was supposedly 4 ohms capable.

[greggp2]

Arcam makes fine units. Great amp sections, built like tanks... But for the money, I believe there are better options. I see you have an Emotiva XPA-2. Why not pair it with the upcoming UMC-1?

That was an option for me, however, the UMC-1 won't be released until the summer according Emotiva. I really couldn't wait that long, so I am pulling the trigger on the Arcam for now. When the UMC-1 is released, I may try it out, depending on how things are going with the Arcam.

[dronezero]

I can't help you too much as I've never heard an Arcam, but I do remember reading a comment from a fellow (it was a long time ago on another board) who had owned both an Arcam AVR 350 and a Cambridge Audio receiver (either the 640r or 540r). He had nothing but good things to say about the Arcam, but he also said that the CA sounded quite similar and only costs a fraction of the Arcam. I know it is not, by any means, a reliable source here, but I just thought that if you were looking for another option CA may be something to look at.

[greggp2]

Thanks guys. Anyone else?

[greggp2]

Does anyone think that the Amps on the Arcam AVR350 would sound better than powering my mains with the Emotiva XPA-2 and using the Arcam Amp's for the rest?

[CraigV]

I have only listened to the AVR300. It sounded great with the speakers in the domo room including the Energy Veritas. I bought the Veritas, and as expected they sounded just as good (obviously not an A/B comparison) with the Denon I had at the time. I wasn't surprised because I knew this thing about some receivers are more musical or warmer than others are typically not factual if they are within the same price range.


But what about the people who say they can hear a difference – a real audible difference between equipment? Are they hearing something that isn’t really there, or are they more sensitive to the subtleties which most people don’t tune into?

I say this because I believe I am one of those people who is hyper-sensitive about things. I can tell when my gas tank is near empty not because of the gas gauge, but because of how the car rides & feels. I also know if one of my tires is 1 PSI too low. I can pick up my bass guitar, and know if a string is out of tune even a little just by pressing it down on the neck. I notice when a picture hanging on the wall is slightly off level. I can feel the pressure difference walking from the first to the third floor of the building where I work.
And yes, I hear a very real difference in amplifiers, pre-amps, cables…etal.

If I sound like I’m bragging, I’m not. Quite the contrary, I feel it’s more of a curse than anything. I wish I could be satisfied by a HTIB. I also wish I could be more like my wife – when we sit down to watch a movie, I’m always listening for detail I believe should be present, looking to see if a scene is properly lit, wondering if the surround effects are being portrayed properly in space, thinking about whether or not I should move my speakers, or even change my equipment for something different.
Meanwhile, my wife isn’t stressing about those trivial things – she’s into watching the film, which is as it should be. Yes, I believe I get more out of the experience with the Hi-Def display, BD player, amp, speakers…I just wish I could accept that what I have is good, relax & enjoy the movie.

[greggp2]

And I thought I was bad... :-)

So are you saying that you think the Arcam is better than other receivers?

[CraigV]

And I thought I was bad... :-)

So are you saying that you think the Arcam is better than other receivers?

I know I’ll catch flack for this, but in my experience:

Onkyo, Yamaha, Pioneer, Sony, Denon, Marantz


Harman Kardon


B&K, Rotel, Arcam, Sunfire

…and since you have the car you do pictured, remember – watts is to horsepower as amperage is to torque. I believe an amps capabilities to deliver current when & where needed is a very important consideration.

[greggp2]

Craig,

Did you list the receivers in any particular order? Are you grouping them into categories? B&K, Rotel, Arcam and Sunfire being the top? Your posting isn't clear. Or are you saying the Onkyo, Yamaha, Pioneer, Sony, Denon and Marantz are the best?

Your last comment, about Amperage, you think I'm best suited using the Arcam to power my Center and rears and the Emotiva XPA-2 to power my mains? Obviously, I would calibrate with an SPL meter...

[CraigV]

Craig,

Did you list the receivers in any particular order? Are you grouping them into categories? B&K, Rotel, Arcam and Sunfire being the top? Your posting isn't clear. Or are you saying the Onkyo, Yamaha, Pioneer, Sony, Denon and Marantz are the best?

Your last comment, about Amperage, you think I'm best suited using the Arcam to power my Center and rears and the Emotiva XPA-2 to power my mains? Obviously, I would calibrate with an SPL meter...


Sorry, I meant the Onkyo etal. are very similar, HK is a step up, and the rest are tops in their field (unless Krell has a receiver).

And no, I would not mix any two amps as you suggest. Keep the front three the same, the rears can be different (ideally, all channels should be the same)

[greggp2]

Does anyone else have an opinion in this area? There's another forum going right now that states that an Amp is an Amp and should be neutral and not affect sound. If this is the case and an SPL meter is used to level the sound from the front 3, why would it matter if you mix Amps between the fronts and center?

[CraigV]

Does anyone else have an opinion in this area? There's another forum going right now that states that an Amp is an Amp and should be neutral and not affect sound. If this is the case and an SPL meter is used to level the sound from the front 3, why would it matter if you mix Amps between the fronts and center?

The very fact that you bought a separate amp & pre-amp (as well as good speakers) says you believe there is an audible difference between equipment. If that were not the case, you would have settled for a receiver that simply had all the features you wanted, and put out a decent amount of power. So why go only half way now?

Part of the larger picture that’s being ignored is this; we’re only speaking about the latter half of the recording chain – from disc to ears. What we’re forgetting about is equally, if not more important. I remember the first test CD Stereophile put out. On it, one of the editors could be heard reading one of his past articles. At the end of every 2 sentences, he switched microphones. All gain levels were set the same, he sat at the same desk, sat equidistance from each mic…etc. The only variable was the mic itself. They did this to illustrate how different each mike made a simple human speaking voice sound. And different it was – each mic imparted a distinct difference to how the speaker’s voice was portrayed.

After hearing this, a great truth struck me – the very first link in the recording change could have a profound effect on what was finally reaching my ears at the end of the chain. Now consider some of the movies you watch. While filming, it’s important to keep the microphone out of the cameras filed of view. So, what’s a sound guy to do? Why, turn up the gain so much that you could hear the fart of a flea! Then there’s the matter of what media is being used to record onto – analog tape? Digital? What’s the digital to analog conversion being used? Then there’s sound mixing (anyone who has watched the BD version of Transformers knows the human voices are at a much lower level than the robots) add sound effects, how the whole thing is mastered onto the disc, what codec is used…all this happens before Joe Consumer can even think about how to reverse the chain, and get what he perceives as the best re-production of the original sound from his system, and within his budget.

Now, consider this. Let’s say you build a small room in your house for the purpose of recording. A friend comes over, and you record them playing a violin. How much equipment, time, money & effort would you have to spend to get the sound of the violin coming out of your chosen playback system to be faithfully re-produced as it was when you heard it being played live? Have you ever just closed your eyes while at home, or at the mall, standing on the street corner, and just listened? Aren’t these the same sounds being re-produced in the movies we watch? And just how close does your system come to being faithful to the original?

Just some food for thought.

[greggp2]

Craig,

All very good points. I actually haven't gotten the Arcam yet. I just ordered it. I had purchased a Yamaha 3900, returned it, and just ordered the Arcam. I'm using my old Rotel RSX-1056 for now. I'm just wondering if I should just use the Arcam Amps, or maybe go with the XPA-3, which isn't as powerful and doesn't have the supposed clarity or quickness of the XPA-2... I can still send my XPA back, but obviously if there isn't an audible difference, since my Center channel is different than my mains, just use the Arcam's Amp for my Center channel and rears.

I can tell you are very analytical. Which isn't a bad thing, but like you said earlier, can be a curse...

I drive my girlfriend crazy when we are watching TV, movies and listening to music. There's something to be said to just sitting back and enjoying the content, rather than analyzing it... :-)

[CraigV]

Craig,

All very good points. I actually haven't gotten the Arcam yet. I just ordered it. I had purchased a Yamaha 3900, returned it, and just ordered the Arcam. I'm using my old Rotel RSX-1056 for now. I'm just wondering if I should just use the Arcam Amps, or maybe go with the XPA-3, which isn't as powerful and doesn't have the supposed clarity or quickness of the XPA-2... I can still send my XPA back, but obviously if there isn't an audible difference, since my Center channel is different than my mains, just use the Arcam's Amp for my Center channel and rears.

I can tell you are very analytical. Which isn't a bad thing, but like you said earlier, can be a curse...

I drive my girlfriend crazy when we are watching TV, movies and listening to music. There's something to be said to just sitting back and enjoying the content, rather than analyzing it... :-)

It’s more important that your front three all share the same amp.

[greggp2]

So my question to you, if you were me... Would you get an XPA-3 instead, or pocket the money and let the Arcam do the Amp work too? I can bi-amp the mains with the Arcam with the 2 assignable amps.

[CraigV]

So my question to you, if you were me... Would you get an XPA-3 instead, or pocket the money and let the Arcam do the Amp work too? I can bi-amp the mains with the Arcam with the 2 assignable amps.

A 5 channel amp would be more desirable, but you would do well to go with the 3 channel amp & bi-wire the fronts, with the Arcam doing the work for the surround channels. Don’t try to mix-n-match bi-amping with two different amps.

[greggp2]

I wasn't going to bi-wire with two different Amps, but I'm a bit confused with your response. The XPA-3 would give me 3 more channels. Are you suggesting I bi-wire with the XPA-3 and the XPA-2? If I do that then I would be running a more powerful Amp to the upper or lower frequencies and the XPA-3 to the others. This technically would be 2 different power Amps... Wouldn't I be better off just using an XPA-3 for the Mains and Center and not using the XPA-2? Otherwise, I need an XPA-5 and could bi-wire the fronts while using the Arcams for the surrounds, or just use the XPA-5 to power all 5 of my channels...

[lsiberian]

The very fact that you bought a separate amp & pre-amp (as well as good speakers) says you believe there is an audible difference between equipment. If that were not the case, you would have settled for a receiver that simply had all the features you wanted, and put out a decent amount of power. So why go only half way now?

Part of the larger picture that’s being ignored is this; we’re only speaking about the latter half of the recording chain – from disc to ears. What we’re forgetting about is equally, if not more important. I remember the first test CD Stereophile put out. On it, one of the editors could be heard reading one of his past articles. At the end of every 2 sentences, he switched microphones. All gain levels were set the same, he sat at the same desk, sat equidistance from each mic…etc. The only variable was the mic itself. They did this to illustrate how different each mike made a simple human speaking voice sound. And different it was – each mic imparted a distinct difference to how the speaker’s voice was portrayed.

After hearing this, a great truth struck me – the very first link in the recording change could have a profound effect on what was finally reaching my ears at the end of the chain. Now consider some of the movies you watch. While filming, it’s important to keep the microphone out of the cameras filed of view. So, what’s a sound guy to do? Why, turn up the gain so much that you could hear the fart of a flea! Then there’s the matter of what media is being used to record onto – analog tape? Digital? What’s the digital to analog conversion being used? Then there’s sound mixing (anyone who has watched the BD version of Transformers knows the human voices are at a much lower level than the robots) add sound effects, how the whole thing is mastered onto the disc, what codec is used…all this happens before Joe Consumer can even think about how to reverse the chain, and get what he perceives as the best re-production of the original sound from his system, and within his budget.

Now, consider this. Let’s say you build a small room in your house for the purpose of recording. A friend comes over, and you record them playing a violin. How much equipment, time, money & effort would you have to spend to get the sound of the violin coming out of your chosen playback system to be faithfully re-produced as it was when you heard it being played live? Have you ever just closed your eyes while at home, or at the mall, standing on the street corner, and just listened? Aren’t these the same sounds being re-produced in the movies we watch? And just how close does your system come to being faithful to the original?

Just some food for thought.

I never noticed the difference in voices in Transformers. I just watched it last night. But wouldn't it make sense for a giant robot to be louder than a human.;) It also could be the product of your system.:rolleyes:

I think you have a problem if you can't stop tweaking. I have the same issue, but I know force myself not to adjust anything but the volume. I have a PJ and spent hours making sure it was perfectly aligned.

Maybe you need to relax a bit before the movie. :D

[lsiberian]

I wasn't going to bi-wire with two different Amps, but I'm a bit confused with your response. The XPA-3 would give me 3 more channels. Are you suggesting I bi-wire with the XPA-3 and the XPA-2? If I do that then I would be running a more powerful Amp to the upper or lower frequencies and the XPA-3 to the others. This technically would be 2 different power Amps... Wouldn't I be better off just using an XPA-3 for the Mains and Center and not using the XPA-2? Otherwise, I need an XPA-5 and could bi-wire the fronts while using the Arcams for the surrounds, or just use the XPA-5 to power all 5 of my channels...

I would just stick to what you have. Quit jacking around with stuff.

If you want an amp. I suggest a 3 channel. Look at audiogon. They have great deals. on good brands all the time.;)

[greggp2]

Isiberian,

It's not that I'm jacking around with stuff, but I am in the process of upgrading my system. I had a Rotel RSX-1056, powering my speakers. I have already added an XPA-2 to power my mains. I am selling the Rotel and getting an Arcam AVR-350 because it is an upgrade in terms of SQ. I was just wondering if I need to pair my center with another Emotiva Amp, or if the Arcam is adequate for the Center and Surrounds.

Otherwise, I was wondering if I should just use the Arcam Amps in the AVR350 to power everything and return the Emotiva all together. I really didn't want to spend any more money than I already have buying another Amp, but if I did, I was considering an Emotiva XPA-5. This way I will have 2 extra Amps to control a 2nd zone in the future...

[bandphan]

Does anyone else have an opinion in this area? There's another forum going right now that states that an Amp is an Amp and should be neutral and not affect sound. If this is the case and an SPL meter is used to level the sound from the front 3, why would it matter if you mix Amps between the fronts and center?

My thought is if the amp/pre amp plays to its specs and you believe you can hear differnce buy the one that specs the best for your budget. The mcintosh c33 was preceived to be one of the best pres ever made and after weeks of comparing it to a Hafler and 1/3 of its price, i could not tell a difference.

[greggp2]

Well I finally got my Arcam AVR-350 and promised feedback...

I won't go into a lengthy review of unpacking and hook up, other than I purchased a black unit and it looks great and is solidly built.

After reading review after review over the last 2+ years on this unit, I was really wondering if it could as good as everyone has been saying.

The answer....

It is!!! It is nothing short of spectacular.

Fortunately, I had a couple of receivers to compare this to, as I own a Rotel RSX-1056 and I recently demoed the new Yamaha V-3900 for 30 days. I had both of these receivers hooked up to my Emotiva XPA-2 Amp driving my 2 front speakers, so all receivers were powering just my Center and Rear speakers.

First off 2 channel stereo is fantastic. Either in stereo mode, or when in Direct mode, which switches over to Analog connections and shuts down the internal circuitry of the unit, the sound is very clear, pure, and the soundfield is very wide and deep. The speakers literally disappear in my room and the instruments are layered in a 3 dimensional field.

Male and Female vocals are locked in the center of the room, with instruments laid out to where they would be if you were listening to a performance live. So far I've listened to my Pink Floyd, James Taylor, Diana Krall, Sade, and Norah Jones CD's. I found myself wanting to listen to songs I typically would fast forward through, as I would appreciate the detail of guitars, drums or other instruments in the particular CD I was listening to..

Next, I've watched scenes from 6 different movies I own.

Spiderman Blu-Ray
Iron Man Blu-Ray
Dark Knight Blu-Ray
Star Wars Episode IV standard DVD
Gladiator standard DVD
300 from my DishNetwork DVR

The first thing I noticed with the movies is the clarity of the voices coming from my center channel. The voices seem more life like and far less hollow. Voices with the Yamaha and the Rotel at times seemed to echo a little and lack warmth. Now the dialogue is amazingly clear and precise. Every word is clearly heard and defined. The other thing I noticed is that when there is a pause in speech or noise, the sound is completely dead. In other words, the separation between dialogue and no sound is so great, that it brings further detail to the dialogue when it is produced.. I really don't know how to explain this in words, other than it is not something I've experienced before with the other AVR's. I guess it is like comparing black levels on a TV. The better the black level, the great the contrast and picture..

The same thing holds true for the main speakers. The sound is very precise and clear. It also envelopes my room much better. Before, sound would pan from left to right, or right to left, but it didn't seem to be as continuous, as enveloping, as deep. There are layers of sound now in the front soundstage that didn't exist like before. The Yamaha played loud, but it seemed to be a kind of "in your face" presentation. The Rotel was a little more refined and created a little more of a leveled sound field. The Arcam is in a different category. It is more refined, more precise and more encompassing.

The other thing I noticed is the rear speakers. They are far more involved in my movies than they were with the Yamaha or Rotel. I now get sound effects that seem to be 3 dimensional from my rears.

To give you an idea how good the surround mode is, and I know this will come under strict criticism by some, but listening to Blu-Rays in DD through bitstream ( a Coax ) connection sounds better than the Yamaha did listening to DD HD through HDMI.
The Yamaha lacked refinement in its presentation. It was loud, had a ton of effects, but it lacked the 3 dimensional sound field that the Arcam gives. I can honestly say that if I only watched movies in DD bitstream and didn't try to listen to DD HD, I wouldn't miss anything.

I do intend on hooking up a good Blu-Ray to the multichannel inputs, but right now, I have a 300 series Sony that lacks the ability to calibrate my speakers and offers no bass management. The bitstream audio through DD bitstream sounds better right now. That may change when I get a better Blu-Ray player.

In all, I am very, very impressed with this unit. For the price, I can't think of a better AVR for sound quality. You can pick up an Arcam AVR-350 for $1300-$1600 right now either open boxed, or slightly pre-owned. I was fortunate enough to find a referbed unit from Arcam with a full Warranty for $1300...

If you want to just buy an AVR and not an external Amp like I'm doing, the Arcam has more than enough juice. It has 7 channels of continuous, not peak like most of the Japanese receivers, at 100 watts per channel. When running in Stereo, that figure jumps to 120 Watts/channel. You can also bi-amp the front speakers with the extra 2 amps if you are running a 5.1 set up. I probably would have been fine doing this, but since I already have my Emotiva Amp and I have very power hungry speakers, I'll just continue using the Arcam for my Center and Rears.

I'm excited about many years of blissful audio listening. This unit is awesome..

[CraigV]

Very cool man, glad you’re enjoying the sound that the Arcam affords:D

[nitin_mehra20]

This sounds awesome!!!! :)

I am super tempted to buy. My only gripe is the low number of HDMI ports and video scaling. Otherwise for 1300-1600 this would have been an awesome deal.

I wish they came out with a setup between 350 and 600 that would have been the best :)

[greggp2]

Nitin,

My TV has 4 HDMI inputs, the Arcam 2. That gives me 5 devices that I can hook up via HDMI, as the Arcam output takes up one on the TV. Truth is, Digital cable or satellite could be hooked up using Component Video if need be, so other than a Blu-Ray, separate Playstation, DVD, Apple TV, what else could you hook up? Do you really need 5 separate HDMI connections? Unless you only intend on using a Playstation, which doesn't allow multi-channel connections, a Blu-Ray player like the Oppo is like having a DVD, Blu-Ray, CD, and SACD all in one device. And if you are using a Playstation for audio quality, it is going to be difficult to be very happy with that. The darn fan on the Playstation is so loud, that it degrades your Audio quality tremendously. The only advantage I can see by running HDMI is less cables, which are hidden anyway, and HD Audio, which is only available on Blu-Ray and can be overcome with Multi-channel analog connections. With the sound the Arcam produces, I almost could care less about the HD Audio right now, although if bitstream is this good, I really can't wait to hear how much better it is when I hook up to the new Oppo Blu-ray player.

My Dad was just over my house and he's an old 2 channel Audio Purist from the 70's and 80's. ( I blame him for my addiction to this hobby :) ) He was floored with how good the system sounded. We listened to some Earth Wind and Fire and he cranked the heck out of my system. At 90% volume, there was no distortion... He looked at me and shouted (because the volume was so loud), I don't know what you could possibly want to upgrade now. I don't think you could get better than this...

This sounds awesome!!!! :)

I am super tempted to buy. My only gripe is the low number of HDMI ports and video scaling. Otherwise for 1300-1600 this would have been an awesome deal.

I wish they came out with a setup between 350 and 600 that would have been the best :)

[nitin_mehra20]

My TV does have a Toslink Out.

Can I then use my TV as an HDMI switcher and just let everything connected the way it is in my TV and use the Toslink to connect it to my receiver??

Currently connected:
1. xbox 360 (HDMI)
2. DirecTv (HDMI)
3. Samsung DVD player (HDMI)
4. Tivo (S Video)

Will it degrade the sound quality??

[greggp2]

Nitin,

More than likely, yes. Keep your components connected to the tv via hdmi, put the volume to 0 and then connect the components directly to the AVR. The more DACs you mix in, the more the sound will be changed from its original source. You are still using your TV as a video switcher, but I would never recommend using it as an Audio switcher, which is what you would be doing...

[elleirdad]

Where can you pick up the Arcam AVR-350 for $1300 to $1600. I have been looking for a 280 or 350 from many sources. So far, no luck.

Roger