Preamp

[Mclovin]

Ahh.. shouldn't pre-amp processors be half the price of a receiver since it missing an amp? Not only is it not cheaper.. but it seems to be like 35-50 percent more. Odd.

 

[ryanosaur]

Less people pursue buying Separates, so by economy of scale, it costs more to produce fewer machines.

 

[Mclovin]

No.. You're probably right. Just frusting. If anything I would think it would be the same price. I wouldn't expect to pay more for a car without an engine. And it wouldn't cost more to produce the car without

 

[lovinthehd]

No.. You're probably right. Just frusting. If anything I would think it would be the same price. I wouldn't expect to pay more for a car without an engine. And it wouldn't cost more to produce the car without

Somewhat, the market would be extremely small for such a car and there would be a premium for special handling/marketing/shipping etc....just because you might find it convenient won't particularly count for much.....

 

[Verdinut]

No.. You're probably right. Just frusting. If anything I would think it would be the same price. I wouldn't expect to pay more for a car without an engine. And it wouldn't cost more to produce the car without

No, the answer is really economy of scale. As a matter of fact, receivers often have better more recent performing chips and other circuit designs than the pre-pros of same manufacturer. It's definitely wiser to use a good AVR as a preamp-processor and also a less costly solution. If you have money to throw away, that's a different situation.

 

[fmw]

Why not use your receiver as a preamp?

 

[highfigh]

No.. You're probably right. Just frusting. If anything I would think it would be the same price. I wouldn't expect to pay more for a car without an engine. And it wouldn't cost more to produce the car without

It's called 'economy of scale'- making a boatload of something costs less/unit than making a smaller number of something with less, partially because the cost per component can be lower. They would have to create a new assembly line and use a different case/chassis, wouldn't need the same power supply and the processor would need a different program file (among other differences).

I'm not saying that I disagree with the idea of a preamp, but it won't cost less than an AVR.

 

[PENG]

I have a slightly different opinion on this. As always, it depends.. For some manufacturers who produce only, or mainly AV Preamp/processors, it would cost them more to build AVRs that offer the same specs and features (on the preamp/proc part). For others such as Yamaha, Anthem, Marantz, Arcam, then their AVPs should cost them less to make.

Economy of scale in such cases are not going to be much of a factor because they typically share many if not most parts and circuitry. If you have seen many Marantz (or Yamaha) AVPs and AVRs service manuals, you will agree with me. Marantz actually do charge more for their AVRs than their corresponding AVPs though the difference isn't that much, simply because they know they can have a higher profit margin because AVP's potential buyers don't just opt for AVP because they want to use the balanced IOs but because they thought AVPs would "sound better".

 

[sterling shoote]

Why not use your receiver as a preamp?

I use my Marantz NR1200 in preamplifier role and I've got to tell ya, in some regards it equals or betters my Parasound P6 Preamplifier. For the most part, it supports a Sony UBP-X800Mk2 Universal Player connected to the Marantz via HDMI for stereo SACD/DSD pleasures.