Receivers for hifi stereo setup?

[gevorg]

How good are highend receivers against separates (DAC + amp) in terms of sound quality for hifi stereo? Does the gap between receivers and separates shrinks over the years as technology improves? Are highend receivers a good choice for an audiophile who wants both, hifi stereo setup and home theater in one system?

For example, a $1500 Denon or Marantz receiver against ~$2000 DAC and amp. Will the difference be significant?

 

[agarwalro]

Assume you spend the $2000 in a 50-50 manner, $1000 each for the pre-pro and dedicated amp.

In the $1000 price range, a dedicated amp will have significantly better power handling and low impedance drive when compated to a $1500-2000 receiver's amps. In terms of other performance stats like IMD, THD+N, etc. they will be more or less comparable.

In terms of features, the $1000 pre-pro will do pretty much equal to what a $1500-2000 receiver will do.

Emotiva makes a very cost effective pre-pro+dedicated 7 ch amp combination for only $1400. The amp is well reviewed and regarded good. The pre-pro is feature packed, but needs to be evaluated for performance.

 

[gevorg]

Assume you spend the $2000 in a 50-50 manner, $1000 each for the pre-pro and dedicated amp.

In the $1000 price range, a dedicated amp will have significantly better power handling and low impedance drive when compated to a $1500-2000 receiver's amps. In terms of other performance stats like IMD, THD+N, etc. they will be more or less comparable.

In terms of features, the $1000 pre-pro will do pretty much equal to what a $1500-2000 receiver will do.

Emotiva makes a very cost effective pre-pro+dedicated 7 ch amp combination for only $1400. The amp is well reviewed and regarded good. The pre-pro is feature packed, but needs to be evaluated for performance.

I understand that a dedicated amp would be more powerful, but it seems a highend receiver would be just as good in small to medium size systems. For example, a speaker setup I'm considering is a 5.1 setup with Paradigm Studio 20 for fronts and Studio 10 for surround. All of them are bookshelf speakers with 90db sensitivity (in room). In this case, I don't really see how a more powerful amp would be better (unless its better by sound quality, not just by being more powerful). One major feature I'm looking for in a receiver or pre-pro is Audyssey room and volume eq. I don't think this is available on pre-pros and amps for under $2000 (like Emotiva).

 

[WmAx]

You have to evaluate quality on a model/make specific level. Performance varies widely. Take for example the now discontinued Yamaha RX-V2600: it has a pre-amp section as good as any high end audiophile pre-amp; incredible measured performance. It also had very stout stereo performance - easily comparable to an average 120 x 2 watt 'audiophile' amplifier.

Now, after the RX-V2600, for whatever reason, Yamaha lowered performance in the pre-amp section (???), but the amp section was still comparable, I believe. The 2600 was an initial product presentation though, the 1st in the modern line revised, so performance and build quality was probably increased up a bit just to win accolades for the first introduction(which it in fact did accomplish with high success). However, successors took a cost savings approach and depended much on the reputation the 2600 had set.

This is just one example, above, to make it clear that you have to determine quality/performance on a SPECIFIC model/make, and that even 'successors' in the same line may not have the same performance as a past model.

Personally, I use outboard amplifiers only, though I have no problem using a receiver with a high quality pre-amp section as a pre-amp.

-Chris

 

[lsiberian]

You have to evaluate quality on a model/make specific level. Performance varies widely. Take for example the now discontinued Yamaha RX-V2600: it has a pre-amp section as good as any high end audiophile pre-amp; incredible measured performance. It also had very stout stereo performance - easily comparable to an average 120 x 2 watt 'audiophile' amplifier.

Now, after the RX-V2600, for whatever reason, Yamaha lowered performance in the pre-amp section (???), but the amp section was still comparable, I believe. The 2600 was an initial product presentation though, the 1st in the modern line revised, so performance and build quality was probably increased up a bit just to win accolades for the first introduction(which it in fact did accomplish with high success). However, successors took a cost savings approach and depended much on the reputation the 2600 had set.

This is just one example, above, to make it clear that you have to determine quality/performance on a SPECIFIC model/make, and that even 'successors' in the same line may not have the same performance as a past model.

Personally, I use outboard amplifiers only, though I have no problem using a receiver with a high quality pre-amp section as a pre-amp.

-Chris

Onkyo's did the same thing with their *05 series. the *06 isn't the same.

The 705/805 where very well done recievers.