Pre-amp worthwhile? Denon AVR-4311 with B&W 703's

[uoaou]

Hey fellow audio enthusiast!

I am very happy with my system (Denon AVR-4311 with B&W 703's). I have built my own sub and sub amp which I think sounds great too. I also have two rear speakers (DynAudio Image 3's) because I like the 5.1 sound for movies, but mainly I love to listen to high quality music of all persuasions.

Question:
I keep reading about pre-amps and how they can really improve the sound quality. Firstly, if so what pre-amp would you recommend I try considering my current setup and secondly, how can a pre-amp improve the sound?

 

[ryanosaur]

I think the main benefit you get from separating the Amp stage from the processing is cooler electronics in the processor section. Does it change the sound quality... many say no. When coupled with the added cost of separates, it seems to really be a matter of personal preference. If you have preouts and think your speakers can benefit from more power, run your mains through some good amps. (Outlaw monoblocks are on sale right now!)

 

[KEW]

If you are looking for a change in your sound, look to room treatments or changing speakers!
The Denon 4311 has a competent and modern design pre amp section. I will not say you absolutely positively could not discover some miniscule change in sound, but on the scale of things you're not going to get it out of a pre unless there's something screwed up about the one you are currently using.
Edit: Ryan's comment about more power is also a consideration. I have no idea how efficient the B&W 700 series is.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Short quick answer: adding a preamp to your AVR or AVP won't do anything good for you.

And you will continue to hear a bunch of hearsay years from now about how a preamp will improve your sound - you know give you bigger soundstage, better imaging, and smoother sweeter sound, blah, blah, blah.

 

[uoaou]

Short quick answer: adding a preamp to your AVR or AVP won't do anything good for you.

And you will continue to hear a bunch of hearsay years from now about how a preamp will improve your sound - you know give you bigger soundstage, better imaging, and smoother sweeter sound, blah, blah, blah. :d

This is what I generally have understood but is there any 'science' to support the idea that a pre-amp really does impove sound (given my configuration).

 

[Leemix]

This is what I generally have understood but is there any 'science' to support the idea that a pre-amp really does impove sound (given my configuration).

There could be less noise and interference in a separate pre amp compared to an AVR but if you were to send that signal into an AVR before it going to a power amp then it would be pointless. Apart from a possible voicing some components may have but then its about preferance and not neccessarily improvement as such.
A separate pre amp with home theater bypass before a power amp on the other hand may provide a benefit, but that way you dont involve the processor/AVR at all for 2 channel music.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ryanosaur]

If there was, we'd all be telling you you need to buy one, and you'd know we had that set up too.

There's nothing wrong with separates, but they don't magically improve your sound quality. As KEW said above, SQ is a function of how the transducers in your speakers convert electricity to soundwave, the interaction of the transducers (the individual drivers) with the cabinets they are in, and the interaction of that system with the acoustics of your room.
Most modern electronics at the level we are discussing do what they are asked to do fairly well... to deliver a clean signal to the speaker with out adding any distortion... coloration, smell or flavor... to the signal chain.

 

[uoaou]

If there was, we'd all be telling you you need to buy one, and you'd know we had that set up too.

There's nothing wrong with separates, but they don't magically improve your sound quality. As KEW said above, SQ is a function of how the transducers in your speakers convert electricity to soundwave, the interaction of the transducers (the individual drivers) with the cabinets they are in, and the interaction of that system with the acoustics of your room.
Most modern electronics at the level we are discussing do what they are asked to do fairly well... to deliver a clean signal to the speaker with out adding any distortion... coloration, smell or flavor... to the signal chain.

If this is so, then why do so many 'audiophiles' rave about the difference of having a pre-amp?

What is the pre-amp supposed to do that the intergrated amp is not already doing?

Why would you need to do anything to the source audio anyhow, surely a large powerful amp like the Denon AVR-4311 has sufficent power to amplify the sound and drive the speakers?

 

[ryanosaur]

A separate pre amp with home theater bypass before a power amp on the other hand may provide a benefit, but that way you dont involve the processor/AVR at all for 2 channel music.

I've seen cat's talk about doing this... but to be clear, you are usually talking about a stereo preamp (for 2 channel listening), an AVR/AVP with a bypass feature, and amplifiers for at least the stereo pair... if not more. This to me is a boutique lifestyle solution to a problem that seems fairly minimal IMO. (Some people have mentioned having a completely separate stereo rig for music set up around the HT rig: separate speakers even!)

(I wish I could afford to choose to have that problem.)

Is my Marantz DEAD silent? My Amps? I would say no... In fact, I don't think I've ever heard a dead quiet system. I don't hear it when there is any activity, be it music or talking, so its not that loud. It truthfully does not bother me. Hell, I have recordings... usually older analog recording converted to digtal well after the fact that have more hiss, and am strangely more sensitive to that than whether my tweeter might have a teeny weeny bit of Amp Hiss.

*shrugs

 

[Leemix]

I've seen cat's talk about doing this... but to be clear, you are usually talking about a stereo preamp (for 2 channel listening), an AVR/AVP with a bypass feature, and amplifiers for at least the stereo pair... if not more. This to me is a boutique lifestyle solution to a problem that seems fairly minimal IMO. (Some people have mentioned having a completely separate stereo rig for music set up around the HT rig: separate speakers even!)

The stereo pre amp would have the home theater bypass. The processor/AVR wouldnt know that another box is between it and the power amplifier.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ryanosaur]

If this is so, then why do so many 'audiophiles' rave about the difference of having a pre-amp?

I'm only guessing, but there is this common phenomena: "Mine is Bigger." Also, "he with the most toys."

I'm not the electrical engineer it seems you want some answers from. @PENG might chime in and share his thoughts and experiences, but in short, he will likely tell you pretty much the same thing. He reads schematics. He knows about the effects of capacitance on an amplifier... He has done both AVRs and AVPs... and he chooses AVRs over separates.

Being an audiophyle means different things to different people. I have no desire to spend $20-$45K on speakers. I couldn't if I did. I struggle with how to upgrade my AVR in a couple years because it doesn't do 1 or 2 things I want it to do... but it's not about sound quality that I want to change. It's more about overall system management and how the amps are utilized and how I can choose which channels I want to use and where.

Why would you need to do anything to the source audio anyhow, surely a large powerful amp like the Denon AVR-4311 has sufficent power to amplify the sound and drive the speakers?

Other than having a clean signal chain, you don't want to do anything to it! For most common usage, your DENON is probably absolutely fine, as is my Marantz. I put Amps on my Marantz because my speakers are a little lower sensitivity and I wanted to have the headroom to clear Reference Level Dynamic Peaks. Do I often push my system that far? Not even close. But as I've used to illustrate the situation... I know that when the Death Star blows up, my system won't.

Most of this is marketing gimmicks to get people to spend more, buy more. You already said you are happy with your system as it is. So if its just a matter of having an EE explanation vs some guys that just enjoy really good sound, I get it. Maybe one of our other friends will chime in and be able to explain it in those terms.

Cheers!

 

[ryanosaur]

The stereo pre amp would have the home theater bypass. The processor/AVR wouldnt know that another box is between it and the power amplifier.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Absolutely correct Leemix. Thanks for the correction!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

This is what I generally have understood but is there any 'science' to support the idea that a pre-amp really does impove sound (given my configuration).

You mean actual measured SNR, THD, FR, and Crosstalk to show that a stereo preamp has better objective measurements than AVR and AVP?

The only stereo preamp I can recall that has better measurements would be something like the $20,000 Mark Levinson preamp. Most preamps I've seen do not have better measurements than the best AVR and AVP.

AVRs and AVPs these days have fantastic measurements that are usually at least as good as stereo preamps or better.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The big thing in this hobby and probably any hobby is HEARSAY and BIAS.

I bought a $5K preamp so it MUST SOUND better. Therefore, it does sound better. Who's going to argue with my very SUBJECTIVE opinion?

We have so many threads on AVR vs. Separates.

Personally, I've used or heard just about all types of components over the years.

Personally I still prefer to use "separates" - pre-pro + amps.

But I'm not going to say that it sounds better. I just like it better. Just like I prefer to use my Kimber Kable speaker cables, but it doesn't sound any better than cheap-a$$ cables.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

why do so many 'audiophiles' rave about the difference of having a pre-amp?

They will say pre-pros, preamps, amps, DACs, and a lot of things will sound better than AVRs.

We have long threads talking about separates (preamps and pre-pros) vs AVR. I think about 50% of people think separates sound better than AVR.

 

[Paul DS]

Many people don't appreciate what a wonderful thing digital audio is. It completely removed the dozens and dozens of different sounds that each different phono cartrdige made and removed all surface noise from the vinyl. I have had turntables since the 1960's and still use mine fairly frequently. In regards to your question, you really shouldn't have to add anything between the turntable and the Denon.

 

[uoaou]

Sorry, much of the terminology is new to me so I just want to clarify some things.

Is a multi-channel amp just an amp that has more than stereo channels?

What is an integrated amp and how is different to an AVR? Is an intergrated amp a device with both an amp and pre-amp?

If we have digital input signals (in theory no noise loss), why is there any need for a pre-amp (assuming you do use phono input)?

If you have a good input source CD/SACD etc, why would you need to do anything to the source prior to input into the amp?

What is a pre-pros?

 

[uoaou]

I'm only guessing, but there is this common phenomena: "Mine is Bigger." Also, "he with the most toys."

I'm not the electrical engineer it seems you want some answers from. @PENG might chime in and share his thoughts and experiences, but in short, he will likely tell you pretty much the same thing. He reads schematics. He knows about the effects of capacitance on an amplifier... He has done both AVRs and AVPs... and he chooses AVRs over separates.

Being an audiophyle means different things to different people. I have no desire to spend $20-$45K on speakers. I couldn't if I did. I struggle with how to upgrade my AVR in a couple years because it doesn't do 1 or 2 things I want it to do... but it's not about sound quality that I want to change. It's more about overall system management and how the amps are utilized and how I can choose which channels I want to use and where.


Other than having a clean signal chain, you don't want to do anything to it! For most common usage, your DENON is probably absolutely fine, as is my Marantz. I put Amps on my Marantz because my speakers are a little lower sensitivity and I wanted to have the headroom to clear Reference Level Dynamic Peaks. Do I often push my system that far? Not even close. But as I've used to illustrate the situation... I know that when the Death Star blows up, my system won't.

Most of this is marketing gimmicks to get people to spend more, buy more. You already said you are happy with your system as it is. So if its just a matter of having an EE explanation vs some guys that just enjoy really good sound, I get it. Maybe one of our other friends will chime in and be able to explain it in those terms.

Cheers!

Would my Denon-AVR4311 be sufficiently powered to run the B&W 703's. I have another older top of the range Denon amp, would it be worth using this to seperately power my main speakers?

 

[Leemix]

Sorry, much of the terminology is new to me so I just want to clarify some things.

Is a multi-channel amp just an amp that has more than stereo channels?

What is an integrated amp and how is different to an AVR? Is an intergrated amp a device with both an amp and pre-amp?

If we have digital input signals (in theory no noise loss), why is there any need for a pre-amp (assuming you do use phono input)?

If you have a good input source CD/SACD etc, why would you need to do anything to the source prior to input into the amp?

What is a pre-pros?

1. Yes

2. An integrated amp usually consists of a DAC, preamp and power amps (2). An AVR is an integrated amp for more then 2 channels and also consists of DACs, preamp and power amps in the same cabinet, same as a 2 channel integrated but with more channels/amps/inputs etc.

3. Main parts of a pre amp is volume control and input selections which are needed in both integrated and AVRs. Modern pre amps often contain DACs also to be able to receive and process digital signals.

4. You need to control the volume and select the right inputs since most dont only use one source. If you get the signal digitally you need a DigitalAnalogueConverter.

5. Pre-pro is short for pre amplifier-processor, which is an AVR without the power amplifier parts. A multichannel surround pre amplifier.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[uoaou]

Thanks so much for your reply Leemix

Sorry some more questions! See below...

3. Main parts of a pre amp is volume control and input selections which are needed in both integrated and AVRs. Modern pre amps often contain DACs also to be able to receive and process digital signals.

4. You need to control the volume and select the right inputs since most dont only use one source. If you get the signal digitally you need a DigitalAnalogueConverter.

Q 3-4. Why is it necessary to control volume of inputs prior to the AVR unit if the digital signal has no 'volume' but is rather a series of 0's and 1's? How can each source input have a 'volume' that needs to be regulated? Does that make sense?

Thanks Leemix for clarifying those points.