pre/pro vs AVR

[sjcguy]

Hi,
I myself and have seen many people use the receiver as the pre-amp and multichannel amp to drive speakers. Why should we pay for the amp section in the AVR that we don't intend to use? and I am very sure the pre-amp is very important too. Why didn't Yamaha, Denon release a version of AVR w/o amp. Sometimes, the receivers may cost as twice as the added on amp and it doesn't make sense to me.
I never own a Emotiva, very interested in, but I think emotiva pre + amp beats many AVR's at the same price.

Tran.

 

[m_vanmeter]

if you have tough to drive speakers which require a deep pool of reserve power to sound their best, then the preprocessor + amp is an excellent way to go.

for the rest of us with fairly efficient speakers, modern a/v receivers are more than adequate to power a home theater system.

 

[Stereodude]

I wouldn't touch an Emotiva Pre/Pro with a 10' pole.

Typically CE manufactures raise the price when they take the amplifier out. The Marantz SR7005 to AV7005 is a rare expection where they lowered the price by $100, but you can bet your last dollar that there's more than $100 worth of amplifiers in the SR7005.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Hi,
I myself and have seen many people use the receiver as the pre-amp and multichannel amp to drive speakers. Why should we pay for the amp section in the AVR that we don't intend to use? and I am very sure the pre-amp is very important too. Why didn't Yamaha, Denon release a version of AVR w/o amp. Sometimes, the receivers may cost as twice as the added on amp and it doesn't make sense to me.
I never own a Emotiva, very interested in, but I think emotiva pre + amp beats many AVR's at the same price.

Tran.

A lot of people seem to have good luck with Emotiva.

But like most brands, some people have bad luck with Emotiva.

Nobody is perfect.

The upcoming Marantz pre-pro is $100 cheaper than the similar AVR, so that makes sense.

However, some pre-pros actually cost A LOT more than their AVR counterparts.

For example, the Denon AVR-5308 is $5,500, but the Denon AVP-A1 is $7,500.

So some people buy the AVR-5308.

I think the ONLY advantage the AVR has over the pre-pro is that you could use the internal amps as BACKUP amps.

Emotiva is the exception, but usually the pre-pros cost A LOT more than the AVRs.

 

[WaynePflughaupt]

Hi,
I myself and have seen many people use the receiver as the pre-amp and multichannel amp to drive speakers. Why should we pay for the amp section in the AVR that we don't intend to use.

One very good reason to use receiver as a pre amp is because they incorporate the latest technology, while many (if not most) pre-pros do not.

It’s a matter of “economies of scale.” Often several receivers in a model line can share the same chassis and much of the internal components, and on top of that, receivers sell very well. So manufacturers can easily make their money back and upgrade features and technologies regularly on receivers. Pre-Pros, on the other hand, are not big selling items, so the manufacturers have to keep them on the market for a few years (and charge more for them) in order for them to be economically viable. Which is why pre-pros often don’t have the latest features and technology, and why it typically it makes more sense to just use a midline receiver as a pre-pro.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Conversely, there is also the scenario which exists whereby someone initially purchases a receiver because it's meeting immediate needs, but then decides to add outboard power via a multichannel (or stereo) power amp -- so it's not that they bought the receiver with the intentions of not using the amp inside it, but later on felt they could maybe "do better"...case in point is me! I purchased my Onkyo 605 when the model made its much-ballyhooed launch and its "90 watts" per channel were plenty for my previous residence. Now, in a larger living room with new large Polk RTi12 mains to drive (they can take 500 watts RMS each), I find I could definitely use more than the 605's internal amps. However, in my case, I cannot actually use the 605 as a pre/pro because it has no pre-outs...

 

[sjcguy]

How about the sound quality? internal dacs and components?
The high end receivers cost too much and I feel it's a waste for not to use the built in amp. The same way I feel when buying stuffs from Costso that for a few dollars I get as twice as much from the other places and I might not finish them. The mid to low end receivers may have pre-out but the sound quality is not quite there to worth the effort. Well, another option is to buy old receiver but then it doesn't have the latest features: Hdmi, or hdmi 1.4a ready.
tran
Let's talk about the Marantz AV7005 vs SR7005. From the outside, the AV-7005 has balance outputs but does anyone else know what changed internally to justify only $100 different?

 

[GlocksRock]

I use my main receiver as a pre/pro, and use a 2 ch. amp for my bedroom system and they both sound great. I'm sure they would sound just as good if they were being driven by the receiver, but I know with my external amps I will have enough headroom to play as loud as I will want to.

 

[KEW]

The high end receivers cost too much and I feel it's a waste for not to use the built in amp.

If I was buying such a rig, I would split the difference. Get the SR7005 (Damn, that is a nice looking receiver), and buy an Emotive XPA-3 for the mains and center.
AVR's do not have the best power reserves and this will likely be an issue if you listen loud in a large room with speakers which are not efficient and/or have complex demands.
If you have content which has loud signals on all 7 channels at the same time, the SR7005's power reserves can be topped out.

Look at the spec. for the SR7005:

Power Output (8 Ohm) 125W (20Hz - 20kHz, 0.08% THD, 2ch driven) x7

What the heck does that mean?
If the specs in parentheses are for 2 channel, then under what conditions does it provide 125Watts to all 7 channels? Can it provide 125 watts to all 7 channels at the same time? How much headroom or capacitance does it have for a sudden demand?
If they don't call out a spec for 4 ohms, it is most likely because it would be a point of embarrassment.

Now look at the specs for a dedicated amp (I chose Emotiva's UPA-7 because it is also 125W):

Power output (all channels driven):
185 watts RMS @ 4 ohm (0.1% THD)
125 watts RMS @ 8 ohm (0.1% THD)
Transformer Size: 850VA
Secondary Capacitance: 90,000uF

Emotiva goes on to provide links to the actual test data from the third party lab they use.
In loose terms, RMS means it can comfortably sustain this power level.
I don't know much about how to interpret the transformer and capacitance spec., bit those that do say this gives the amp outstanding ability to meet a short term spike in the signal which equates it to much more than the 125 watts of a AVR.

So, as AVR's go, the SR7005 amp section is pretty strong, but it is definitely not equivalent to a properly designed separate amp. It is "no brainer" that the SR7005 amp section is wholly competent at driving the 4 back speakers alone.

Thus use the receiver as pre/pro and rear channel amp and use an XPA-3 or similar for the front channel. Unless you have some extremely demanding speakers, the UPA would do the job just fine, but if you are spending $1500 for a pre/receiver, it just seems like the XPA would be a better fit.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

How about the sound quality? internal dacs and components?
The high end receivers cost too much and I feel it's a waste for not to use the built in amp. The same way I feel when buying stuffs from Costso that for a few dollars I get as twice as much from the other places and I might not finish them. The mid to low end receivers may have pre-out but the sound quality is not quite there to worth the effort. Well, another option is to buy old receiver but then it doesn't have the latest features: Hdmi, or hdmi 1.4a ready.
tran
Let's talk about the Marantz AV7005 vs SR7005. From the outside, the AV-7005 has balance outputs but does anyone else know what changed internally to justify only $100 different?

I bet they are identical in just about every single way including internal compoents/parts, except the SR7005 has the 7ch amps + speaker outputs and the AV7705 has the XLR outputs minus the 7ch amps.

The difference will be in the actual lab measurements of the SNR, FR, THD, & Crosstalk.

Pre-pros will "usually" have better measureed specs because they don't have the 7ch amps to cause any additional possible distortion.

For example, the best SNR on the best AVR out there is around -110dBA.

BUt with pre-pros, the SNR is often -120dBA or even better on some units. Check out the difference in the current Marantz pre-pro. I believe the SNR is over -120dBA, but the Marantz AVR, & even the most expensive $5,500 AVR out there, will not have as good of a SNR.

But the bottom line is, you most likely will NOT hear any difference between the SR & the AV. The difference will be only in the measured specs.

 

[sjcguy]

SNR is good but not that important to determine the sound quality?
So i did a quick test of three preamps: HK PT-2500, Marantz SR-7000 and Sony STR-DA5ES and I like the HK PT-2500 best. For a certain notes from instrument, the HK sounds more pleasure and more realistic. Both SR7000 and STD-DA5ES sound very clear but very digitized. So I am just wondering whether my PT2500 or the other AVR is more acurate?
Tran

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

SNR is good but not that important to determine the sound quality?

We're only human, and our hearing is limited.

To my recollection, these are examples of threshold numbers:

SNR: -60dB from 20Hz - 20kHz
THD: 1% from 20Hz - 20kHz
FR: 20Hz - 20kHz +/- 3dB
Crosstalk: -60dB @ 1kHz, -40dB @ 20kHz

So how can we tell the difference between a SNR of -140dB vs -80dB and a crosstalk of -140dB vs -80dB when they are beyond the "threshold"?

Of course, some folks claim they can tell the difference.

I will admit that I cannot tell the difference, but at the same time I want my gears to have SNR > -110dB, THD < 0.01%, FR 20Hz-20kHz +/- 0.0dB, and Crosstalk of < -90dB @ 1kHz.