Need new receiver...or seperates.

PHANofPHUNK

PHANofPHUNK

Full Audioholic
uploadfromtaptalk1468597011444.jpg

Tlsguy has informed me that this picture shows that my beloved Marantz sr7001 is nothing more than a board anchor now.

Bought in 2007, it has brought sooooo much joy to my ears. Used 99%of the time for music I would really like some guidance in finding a affordable replacement.

It dosent have to be brand new, used and or b stock is fine. I just want one built for music.

I would like to move towards emotiva seperates, but unless there used there a bit out of my price range.


Thanks guys and gals!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
PHANofPHUNK

PHANofPHUNK

Full Audioholic
Nice. However another example of why I want to.move towards seperates. I will never use 9 channels. I have been 2.1 for 10 years now.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Nice. However another example of why I want to.move towards seperates. I will never use 9 channels. I have been 2.1 for 10 years now.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
I don't think components are good or better just because they are "separates" or have "less".

Having 9Ch of amps inside the case doesn't adversely affect the sound quality.

To me, brand name and features are more important than the label of being "separates".
 
T

Thiel6730

Audioholic Intern
I never noticed a difference between separates or receivers until I purchased some Thiel speakers which are notorious for being difficult to drive due ohms dipping into 3's and a pretty constant 4 ohms.

I had a HK receiver which was only about 50 watts but sounded more powerful than a 100 watt mono separate from a company that's no longer in business.

I've driven my Thiel's with a Sony receiver, a parasound mono amp and a emotiva xpa-3. By far the emotiva does the best job. It feels like it has unlimited reserves. It gets much louder and the sound does not seem constrained.

I don't think this would be the case for a speaker that has a high sensitivity and its ohm rating is more in the 8 range. I think you would be happy with a receiver. I was happy with my Monitor Audio Silver speakers with several different receivers. Heck my son is still using them with a very old onkyo receiver.

I think you have to spend a lot of money to eke out that 10-15% difference separates can provide.

I've heard a Linn, audio research system that took my breath away but it was over 100k.

I've also heard a anthem separates system with Paradigm speakers that was close to 20k. It was great but I felt my system was right there for quite a bit less. I've heard many systems in the 5k range that many people would be hard pressed to tell the difference.

If you can afford it separates do provide flexibility and of course the ability to add crazy power.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Nice. However another example of why I want to.move towards seperates. I will never use 9 channels. I have been 2.1 for 10 years now.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Problem with separates is that you get much poorer performance to price ratio. A good compromise is something like the Yamaha R-S700.

http://usa.yamaha.com/products/audio-visual/hifi-components/stereo-receivers/r-s700/?mode=model

HK used to make a good stereo receiver HK3490 but I wouldn't recommend their newer versions. If you can get a HK3490 in like new condition for under $300 then go for it, otherwise the Yamaha seems like a top choice for 2 channel. Since you like your SR7001 though, I really think the SR-7009 for under $1,000 will be your best bet. You can use 4 of the channels if your speakers can be bi-amped. People will tell you it is a waste of time but at least in theory it won't hurt and you may hear a little difference thanks to Placebo.:D

I agree with ADTG, whether you need 9 channel or not, you can't beat the ex-flag ship SR7009, it has superior specs and feature set for the most part, compared to the SR7001 and probably most separates in the same price range or even 2-3X the price.
 
Last edited:
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
You seem to have a hankering for separates. I do think that good power amps have a longer life than receivers by far.

It seems you do need AV facility. If I were setting up a 2.1 set up mainly for music I would choose one of these slim line Marantz receivers.

I would use the 2.1 preouts
http://us.marantz.com/us/Products/Pages/ProductDetails.aspx?CatId=AVReceivers&SubCatId=&ProductId=NR1504
If you are patient you will get a nice Quad 909 come up on eBay and won't look back. Expect to pay around $700 to $800 for that.
 
M

Mark of Cenla

Full Audioholic
I am a school teacher, so I have been off for may weeks. I have piles of free time in June. So I have used one Sony micro stereo receiver, two different Sherwood receivers, an Onkyo integrated amp, and now a preamp / power amp in the system in my signature. All of those "amps" sounded good and clear and made my Polks sound good. The difference in the sound was subtle. Receivers are fun to buy, but they probably matter the least. Peace and goodwill.
 
Last edited:
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Nice. However another example of why I want to.move towards seperates. I will never use 9 channels. I have been 2.1 for 10 years now.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Just what is your budget?

Not much different having 7 vs 9 channels, just two more unused in your case. Bass management in two ch gear is usually more expensive than that in an avr.....my old 2ch separate pre-amps without bass management are in my least used rooms accordingly.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top