Dedicated Processor vs. using a receiver as processor?

Landmonster

Landmonster

Audioholic
Hi guys.


So I've always owned decent Denon receivers in my home theaters, but I've never tried a dedicated "true" home theater processor/preamp. I have added amplifiers to my Denons, with noticeable improvements in power and SQ.

Right now I'm using an Emotiva XPA-7 as my amp, while a Denon X4500h is just acting as a processor. (I don't need to connect any more speakers than 7.2 system, so please disregard the need to connect more speakers)

I am considering swapping out the Denon x4500 to a true processor, or some kind of higher-end receiver to see if that makes any improvements in Sound quality.


  1. Is there any kind of real sound quality differences by moving to a real processor from a high-end receiver?
  2. How can these differences be explained? Like, what makes the processor produce superior SQ to a receiver acting as a preamp?
  3. Is there any point in the receiver lineups, where the receivers basically match the quality of a good processor? (i.e., would a Yamaha RX-3030 or Denon x8500 be closer to a processor than RX-1080 or Denon x4500?) In this case, I may just upgrade receivers to get more flexibility.
I just want to understand what exactly makes a dedicated processor sound better than a nice receiver, or if anyone has done some A/B comparisons in the same system to see if it makes any difference.


Thanks for any explanations, or feedback from your experiences.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Generally measurements haven't backed this assumption up. Look at the Marantz pre-pros measured at audiosciencereview.com vs Denon avrs for example. Taking the amps out of the box may help with heat management/longevity, perhaps in some cases inherent noise levels. I don't worry about it myself. I do have old 2ch separates that got pushed aside by avrs, too.
 
William Lemmerhirt

William Lemmerhirt

Audioholic Overlord
I think the advantage, if any is ironically more about upgradability of the amps. More expensive processors have better room correction, but there comes a point where they are the same, although I can’t generically answer where that line is.
Also, don’t forget bragging rights...
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
But even the most expensive processors will need an upgrade at some point to keep up with the joneses for video/audio codecs of the moment...and you can get a big stinking power amp up front that can work with just about anything you care to throw at it....
 
Landmonster

Landmonster

Audioholic
I agree that amps are a better investment. I got the largest 7 channel one I could find.

I transferred my Denon to pre-amp duty. Now I'm wondering where to look next for gains in SQ. A logical step would be look at replacing the Denon with a more expensive processor or receiver
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
I have added amplifiers to my Denons, with noticeable improvements in SQ.

Is there any kind of real sound quality differences by moving to a real processor from a high-end receiver?
If you feel that adding separate amps has improved the SQ significantly, then I would also say, YES, adding separate AVP will also improve the SQ regardless of any measurement numbers.

Just like in this thread and poll about AVR vs Separates, about 50% of audiophiles believe that separates (processors + amps) sound better than AVRs. So it depends on whom you ask and what you want to believe. :D

 
Last edited:
mazersteven

mazersteven

Audioholic Warlord
I transferred my Denon to pre-amp duty. Now I'm wondering where to look next for gains in SQ. A logical step would be look at replacing the Denon with a more expensive processor or receiver
Speakers of the next logical step in gains in sound quality. But there does come a point in upgrading speakers where Diminished Returns are greater than the cost of the Up-Grade.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
I agree that amps are a better investment. I got the largest 7 channel one I could find.

I transferred my Denon to pre-amp duty. Now I'm wondering where to look next for gains in SQ. A logical step would be look at replacing the Denon with a more expensive processor or receiver
The next logical step IMO is room treatment and or better speakers rather than electronics....but if it floats yer boat to chase electronics....
 
ryanosaur

ryanosaur

Audioholic Overlord
You already have an AVR with very respectable processing capabilities. Sound Quality is really in the speakers, not the electronics. This has been discussed before. :)

The individual drivers (tranducers which convert electrical signal into soundwave), how they are integrated into the cabinet, the cabinet design, and the crossover, and how those elements all integrate together into a whole... and how that system then integrates with your room... That is 90-95% of your Sound Quality.

Your Polks are the weak link. This too has been discussed before. :)
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Hi guys.

  1. Is there any kind of real sound quality differences by moving to a real processor from a high-end receiver?
  2. How can these differences be explained? Like, what makes the processor produce superior SQ to a receiver acting as a preamp?
  3. Is there any point in the receiver lineups, where the receivers basically match the quality of a good processor? (i.e., would a Yamaha RX-3030 or Denon x8500 be closer to a processor than RX-1080 or Denon x4500?) In this case, I may just upgrade receivers to get more flexibility.
I just want to understand what exactly makes a dedicated processor sound better than a nice receiver, or if anyone has done some A/B comparisons in the same system to see if it makes any difference.


Thanks for any explanations, or feedback from your experiences.
1. In my experience with two Marantz processors, the AV7005 and AV8801, the answer is "No"

2. Imo, it can be explained by the well known "bias effect", and/or Placebo effect, can also be due to not comparing under the same conditions. When I upgraded a piece of gear, I would naturally dust things off, wipe clean everything and everywhere, picked the best quality recording contents I could think of to try the new toy; and find quiet moment to listen for any "expected" difference. Having done all those things, the gear almost always seem to sound better in the beginning, until reality eventually came back. It's like, after a full car wash, the car woulld to run smoother, definitely quieter too.

3. If you look at all the receivers and processors bench tested at ASR, the receivers actually tested/measured far better than the processors in most cases, though a couple of the processors did came close, within striking distance.

A dedicated processor should theoretically be able to achieve higher SNR due to more space available, better shielding can be done, less heat and electromagnetic interference, and the opportunity to use better parts and wiring technique. Practically speaking, they don't seem to have achieved all of those theoretically achievable things. A possible explanation could be that they don't have the sales volume to support the necessary investments required for the theoretical gains I mentioned, so they ended up basing the product on a mid range to high end receiver, just without the power amp sections, use a much smaller power supply, and add XLR connections and then sell them as preamp/processors as though they are fundamentally different, when in reality they are fundamentally the same. I cannot explain why they tested/measured worse, except perhaps the boutique brand ones don't have the resources that Yamaha, D+M has, so they ended up messing certain important things up; and the Marantz processor did worse than Denon receivers most likely because of their use of HDAMs, to create a preconception in the buyer's mind, such that those buyers/followers/fans would have something to count on, ended up with some expectation bias from the beginning. Unfortunately, in this case, more is not better, HDAM might have (just me educated guess based of things I read) resulted in higher distortions and noises, albeit low enough, that is, below the threshold of audibility.
 
Landmonster

Landmonster

Audioholic
You already have an AVR with very respectable processing capabilities. Sound Quality is really in the speakers, not the electronics. This has been discussed before. :)

The individual drivers (tranducers which convert electrical signal into soundwave), how they are integrated into the cabinet, the cabinet design, and the crossover, and how those elements all integrate together into a whole... and how that system then integrates with your room... That is 90-95% of your Sound Quality.

Your Polks are the weak link. This too has been discussed before. :)
Everyone hates on the LSiMs here :(

They are not as easily replaceable as 1 box.

I've asked it before, what would be a good improvement to SQ over the LSiM series? I truly thought they measured very respectably from people who were skilled at measuring speakers.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Everyone hates on the LSiMs here :(

They are not as easily replaceable as 1 box.

I've asked it before, what would be a good improvement to SQ over the LSiM series? I truly thought they measured very respectably from people who were skilled at measuring speakers.
If you have listened to other high-end speakers and still think your speakers sound just as good, then don't sweat it.

Everyone has a different opinion. :D
 
Landmonster

Landmonster

Audioholic
1. In my experience with two Marantz processors, the AV7005 and AV8801, the answer is "No"


2. Imo, it can be explained by the well known "bias effect", and/or Placebo effect, can also be due to not comparing under the same conditions. When I upgraded a piece of gear, I would naturally dust things off, wipe clean everything and everywhere, picked the best quality recording contents I could think of to try the new toy; and find quiet moment to listen for any "expected" difference. Having done all those things, the gear almost always seem to sound better in the beginning, until reality eventually came back. It's like, after a full car wash, the car woulld to run smoother, definitely quieter too.



3. If you look at all the receivers and processors bench tested at ASR, the receivers actually tested/measured far better than the processors in most cases, though a couple of the processors did came close, within striking distance.


A dedicated processor should theoretically be able to achieve higher SNR due to more space available, better shielding can be done, less heat and electromagnetic interference, and the opportunity to use better parts and wiring technique. Practically speaking, they don't seem to have achieved all of those theoretically achievable things. A possible explanation could be that they don't have the sales volume to support the necessary investments required for the theoretical gains I mentioned, so they ended up basing the product on a mid range to high end receiver, just without the power amp sections, use a much smaller power supply, and add XLR connections and then sell them as preamp/processors as though they are fundamentally different, when in reality they are fundamentally the same. I cannot explain why they tested/measured worse, except perhaps the boutique brand ones don't have the resources that Yamaha, D+M has, so they ended up messing certain important things up; and the Marantz processor did worse than Denon receivers most likely because of their use of HDAMs, to create a preconception in the buyer's mind, such that those buyers/followers/fans would have something to count on, ended up with some expectation bias from the beginning. Unfortunately, in this case, more is not better, HDAM might have (just me educated guess based of things I read) resulted in higher distortions and noises, albeit low enough, that is, below the threshold of audibility.


Can you provide some links where receivers measured better than processors? I'd find that interesting. Just curious... not calling you a liar here.

Are you saying that the Marantz technologies actually sound worse than Denon, because of HDAM?
 
Last edited:
mazersteven

mazersteven

Audioholic Warlord
Everyone hates on the LSiMs here :(

They are not as easily replaceable as 1 box.

I've asked it before, what would be a good improvement to SQ over the LSiM series? I truly thought they measured very respectably from people who were skilled at measuring speakers.
I like the Polk LSiM's

Here's your upgrade




 
Last edited:
Landmonster

Landmonster

Audioholic
If you have listened to other high-end speakers and still think your speakers sound just as good, then don't sweat it.

Everyone has a different opinion. :D
I have heard other speakers, but never in the same conditions. That's part of the problem.... different rooms, different music, different electronics and cables powering said speakers, etc.

I've never heard any other speakers that were lightyears ahead of the LSiMs, except maybe at Magnolia center they had a super expensive set of B&Ws powered by McIntosh separates.

I used to own NHT 3.3 speakers, which I thought were excellent.

However, that was about 18 years ago. So it is hard to compare. https://www.nhthifi.com/products/11144-3-3

I've not had the opportunity to listen to JTR, or some of the other boutique speaker brands.
 
ryanosaur

ryanosaur

Audioholic Overlord
Everyone hates on the LSiMs here :(

They are not as easily replaceable as 1 box.

I've asked it before, what would be a good improvement to SQ over the LSiM series? I truly thought they measured very respectably from people who were skilled at measuring speakers.
I’m not hating on your speakers. I save that for DefTech and B&W! :p
Seriously, though...
The Polks are not what I would consider “forever” speakers. That doesn’t mean they don’t serve a practical purpose.
More importantly is the fact you keep coming back asking how to improve the SQ by doing EVERYTHING...
BUT...
consider the speakers.

I can't tell you what will sound good to your ears. I know what sounds good to mine.

Some people are stoked to have some big Klipsch Heritage speakers and say that is the best they've heard, others buy $60K speakers every few years, constantly looking for what they are missing. Who's right?

If you dig you speakers and are totally and completely in love with their performance, then look to your room and how you have the speakers set up.

Do this before spending more money! You can rearrange your room for FREE!, and in doing so, may reap the reward you are looking for; that sweet spot where your speakers begin to disappear and leave you in musical bliss.

Beyond that, do yourself a favor and look for different gear to try out. Even if it is in a dealer's room. ;) Just look for new experiences and see what comes up. Learn to listen critically, and learn a little about room acoustics so you can maximize what you have now... and in the future. These efforts will pay endless dividends whereas a quick fix will only leave you itching for another when the shine wears off.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Will your Polks somehow benefit sound-quality wise from changing avr as pre-pro to a dedicated one? No....unless perhaps the particular flavor of dsp/roomeq utilized is different/more to your liking (like Audyssey XT32 vs Dirac). You mentioned cables, too, which aren't even on the table for sq differences....
 
T

txbonds

Full Audioholic
I like the Polk LSiM's

Here's your upgrade




I am loving the canton 596.2 set but will say that in my odd ball shaped listening area placement made a big difference too. I moved the speakers around as little as an inch sometimes and noticed massive improvements in sound quality in my room.

I’ve never heard those polks but will certainly endorse the cantons as great value.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

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