Separates are no better than AV Receivers, Objectively

[AcuDefTechGuy]

View attachment 5627

Based on all the lab measurements done by Home Theater Magazine, I don't see how anyone can OBJECTIVELY say that separates (pre-pros) sound better than AV Receivers, especially when used with an external amp.

An $800 Onkyo TX-SR674 has a crosstalk of -95dB, F.R. of 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.1dB, and THD+N of < 0.007%.

A $480 Onkyo TX-SR575 has a crosstalk of -92dB, F.R. of 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.1dB, and THD+N of < 0.004%.

A $300 Onkyo TX-SR504 has a crosstalk of -90dB, F.R. of 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.1 dB, and THD+N of < 0.011%.

A $10,000 Lexicon M-12 has a crosstalk of -91dB, F.R. of 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.1dB, and THD+N of < 0.025%.

A $6,000 Lexicon MC-8 has a crosstalk of -90dB, F.R. of 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.1 dB, and THD+N of < 0.026%.

I know that numbers don't tell the whole story when it comes to speakers.
But I thought electronics don't lie?

Onkyo ROCKS!!!

 

[Davemcc]

View attachment 5627

I don't see how anyone can OBJECTIVELY say that separates (pre-pros) sound better than AV Receivers

I can't recall anybody ever trying to make that case, but congratulations on your victory over the paper tiger.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I can't recall anybody ever trying to make that case, but congratulations on your victory over the paper tiger.

Being in the separates camp myself, I was really hoping that the separates would totally blow the receivers out of the water on these specs, but I was disappointed to find the contrary.

Personally, I thought I could tell the difference when I was doing my own comparison listening test, but I guess I can't really back it up with objective data.

 

[GlocksRock]

So does this mean you are going to sell all your RL-11s and get a nice HDMI switching receiver with 7.1 analog inputs?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

So does this mean you are going to sell all your RL-11s and get a nice HDMI switching receiver with 7.1 analog inputs?

The thought of buying a flagship Onkyo did cross my mind, but I have to be different, man. Gotta be different, you know?

 

[avaserfi]

I know that numbers don't tell the whole story when it comes to speakers.
But I thought electronics don't lie?

Just as with speaker specification/measurements with electronics it is necessary to understand what each measurements means and how to correlate it with human perception to get the whole story. Thus it is very possible to get the whole story with both speakers and electronics presuming one has the proper knowledge. For example if each one of your listed specifications is far beyond the threshold of human hearing then while technically some of the equipment is better than others realistically [audibly] it is all the same (this situation can happen with loudspeakers as well).

If you are interested in learning about amp/pre-amp/receiver audibility I recommend reading these articles:

Just Detectable Distortion Levels
James Moire, F.I.E.E.
Wireless World, Feb. 1981, Pages 32-34 and 38

Signal-to-Noise Ratio Requirement for Digital Transmission Systems
Spikofski, Gerhard
AES Preprint: 2196

 

[Fancypants]

I currently use an entry level A/V receiver, and would like to upgrade to some entry level separates or mid/high range receiver within the next two years. My current argument FOR separates, is ease of upgradeability, being able to upgrade my pre/pro without having to buy a new amp, whereas buying a new receiver requires me to upgrade the amplifier as well (the one built in). Even if I were to use an external amp with a receiver, I am still buying the amp inside. Expanding a separates system seems easier as well, simply add an amp or two, and you can drive more channels. Nevertheless, I do like receivers as well, so it will be a tough call either way. I currently own an Onkyo and love it, I also really like what they bring to the table ATM.

Also, aesthetically, I like the looks of separates, and I know this shouldn't play a huge role, but, I think that most people in these forums would admit that visual appeal does play a role when deciding components.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Just as with speaker specification/measurements with electronics it is necessary to understand what each measurements means and how to correlate it with human perception to get the whole story. Thus it is very possible to get the whole story with both speakers and electronics presuming one has the proper knowledge. For example if each one of your listed specifications is far beyond the threshold of human hearing then while technically some of the equipment is better than others realistically [audibly] it is all the same (this situation can happen with loudspeakers as well).

If you are interested in learning about amp/pre-amp/receiver audibility I recommend reading these articles:

Just Detectable Distortion Levels
James Moire, F.I.E.E.
Wireless World, Feb. 1981, Pages 32-34 and 38

Signal-to-Noise Ratio Requirement for Digital Transmission Systems
Spikofski, Gerhard
AES Preprint: 2196

Most of the THD+N, SNR, and Frequency Response (all 20Hz-20kHz) are excellent for most components. But it's the crosstalk or channel separation that greatly differs (20Hz-20kHz).

After reading some reviews from The Audio Critic, Home Theater Magazine, and Stereophile, I get the impression that crosstalk is the most important, follow by Freq Resp, THD+N, and SNR-- only because the later 3 specs are already so excellent.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Also, aesthetically, I like the looks of separates, and I know this shouldn't play a huge role, but, I think that most people in these forums would admit that visual appeal does play a role when deciding components.

Aesthetics is HUGE for me as well.

There is NO WAY I'm buying anything that I think looks ugly.

Receivers can serve just as well as separate pre-pros for the AV processing.
And like pre-pros, you will have to buy a new one whenever new sound technology emerges. And Receivers cost even less than most pre-pros.

The Emotiva and Outlaw Audio pre-pros and Emotiva analog stereo preamp cannot even beat the specs (crosstalk, F.R., THD) of some less expensive receivers, namely the Onkyo receivers that I read in HTMag. That is what bothers me a little.

Now when you go HIGH-END Stereo Preamps, say Mark Levinson, you get phenominal crosstalk (-135dB), F.R (20Hz-20kHz +/- 0.0dB), THD+N (< 0.001%), and SNR (-130dB).

But all the high-end pre-pros I've read about just don't beat the specs of some receivers, which is very disappointing to me because I want them to beat the specs of ALL RECEIVERS.

 

[Fancypants]

...of some less expensive receivers, namely the Onkyo receivers that I read in HTMag...

So, since I think I can safely say that you are a fan of Onkyo, as am I, I must ask (since I really like what they have to offer at the moment). Would any of their offering allow one to use a tube pre-amp? If so, how would this be done? Would I need a single channel pre-amp for each channel? Or what?

I have seen some DIY pre-amps that I really like, but don't know how I would hook them up, thus, do separates lend themselves to more easily deploy separate pre-amps? I in now way shape or form would ever want to nor believe I could create a processor capable of decoding DTS-MA, but a tube pre-amp seems within reason... but how would I hook it up?

To ensure that this post isn't misconstrued as off-topic, or dare I say a threadjacking attempt, I will ask that responses are framed within the confines of "are separates easier (better at) encorporating a pre-amp than a reciever?"

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

So, since I think I can safely say that you are a fan of Onkyo, as am I, I must ask (since I really like what they have to offer at the moment). Would any of their offering allow one to use a tube pre-amp? If so, how would this be done? Would I need a single channel pre-amp for each channel? Or what?

I have seen some DIY pre-amps that I really like, but don't know how I would hook them up, thus, do separates lend themselves to more easily deploy separate pre-amps? I in now way shape or form would ever want to nor believe I could create a processor capable of decoding DTS-MA, but a tube pre-amp seems within reason... but how would I hook it up?

To ensure that this post isn't misconstrued as off-topic, or dare I say a threadjacking attempt, I will ask that responses are framed within the confines of "are separates easier (better at) encorporating a pre-amp than a reciever?"

Actually I have never owned an Onkyo.

In fact, I don't even use a receiver.

I use 3 stereo analog preamps in a 5.1 system (6-Ch).

If you can make awesome preamps, I say forget about receivers and pre-pros altogether. Just make 6 Ch of preamps. Then get the upcoming Panasonic DMP-BD50 BD player, which can INTERNALLY decode DD, DD-EX, DD+, DTS, DTS-ES, DTS-HR, & DTS-MA, and output to your 6Ch of preamps via Analog 5.1.

 

[Fancypants]

Yeah, thanks, I was just beginning to think that I had it all wrong, and apparently I did!!!

So typically, if someone were to use that DVD player WITH a receiver, they would plug it into the 6 channel analogue audio inputs, and then just use the pre/amp section of the receiver? Altogether bypassing the processing side of the receiver?

Also, when I said fan, I just meant that you liked their offering, for example, I am a huge B&W fan, but don't own a set.

So the main down side I see to this approach (using the pre-amps straight into a power amp) is that you lose video switching capabilities as well as sub crossover settings? So I may be trying to jump too high with DIY pre-amps, because I will not have full range mains, and will want video switching as well.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Yeah, thanks, I was just beginning to think that I had it all wrong, and apparently I did!!!

So typically, if someone were to use that DVD player WITH a receiver, they would plug it into the 6 channel analogue audio inputs, and then just use the pre/amp section of the receiver? Altogether bypassing the processing side of the receiver?

Also, when I said fan, I just meant that you liked their offering, for example, I am a huge B&W fan, but don't own a set.

So the main down side I see to this approach (using the pre-amps straight into a power amp) is that you lose video switching capabilities as well as sub crossover settings? So I may be trying to jump too high with DIY pre-amps, because I will not have full range mains, and will want video switching as well.

Actually, the Panasonic BD50 will have Speaker + Bass Management!

So, you SET all FIVE Speakers (5.1 Analog Output) to SMALL.

And you set the Subwoofer to YES.

The BD Player will send all the 100 Hz - 20kHz frequencies to your small speakers, and send all the 20 Hz - 100Hz to your subwoofer (s).

Problem solved.

This is exactly what I'm doing. The only difference is that I set all five speakers to LARGE. But you don't need to.

Video switching is over-rated.

Why not just hook DIRECTLY to the TV? The BEST that any Video Switcher can do is MAYBE NOT degrade the picture. But why do you need "the middle man"? Just go directly to the BOSS (your TV).

The worse that Video Switchers can do is actually DEGRADE your picture. Why take the chance?

1080p Upscaling? The Blu-Ray disc player also upscales to 1080p perfectly, so no need for video switching. You could also buy the OUTSTANDING $100 Oppo HDMI switcher, which I will be buying since I will be needing 3 HDMI inputs.

 

[itschris]

I think back inthe day, there was a difference... now probablby not so much. However, seperates just add to the cool factor I think and give me a personal satisfication... I like to believe I'm high end... therefore I create imaginary things in my head to satisfy that need. The problem I've always had with receivers is that a $7K receiver like the new dennon, looks basically the same as a $250 receiver from anyone. It's not about bragging, to be honest... you guys are the only ones I can talk to about this stuff because no one I'm really close with could care less what I have)... but I think it's just personal pride in having whatever you personally think is the coolest.

 

[Fancypants]

Thanks for all of the help.

There are still a couple of things bothering me though. For one, the price of building all of those pre-amps is a little out of my range at the moment, but this is good stuff to know. The other problem is the crossover frequency being set at 100 Hz, if it isn't adjustable, I am less than interested. Nevertheless, this is a really cool idea, but being as young as I am, I think the receiver road is the way to go for me at the moment. If nothing else, I can build the pre-amps as I get the money over time, and plug them into the 6 channel audio inputs on the receiver.

Again, thank you for the help.

 

[3db]

View attachment 5627

Based on all the lab measurements done by Home Theater Magazine, I don't see how anyone can OBJECTIVELY say that separates (pre-pros) sound better than AV Receivers, especially when used with an external amp.

An $800 Onkyo TX-SR674 has a crosstalk of -95dB, F.R. of 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.1dB, and THD+N of < 0.007%.

A $480 Onkyo TX-SR575 has a crosstalk of -92dB, F.R. of 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.1dB, and THD+N of < 0.004%.

A $300 Onkyo TX-SR504 has a crosstalk of -90dB, F.R. of 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.1 dB, and THD+N of < 0.011%.

A $10,000 Lexicon M-12 has a crosstalk of -91dB, F.R. of 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.1dB, and THD+N of < 0.025%.

A $6,000 Lexicon MC-8 has a crosstalk of -90dB, F.R. of 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.1 dB, and THD+N of < 0.026%.

I know that numbers don't tell the whole story when it comes to speakers.
But I thought electronics don't lie?

Onkyo ROCKS!!!

Its not that simple. I didn't see the slew rate listed for any of these listed here. Slew rate is the ability for an amp to respond and track/play a very fast rising amplitude signal without distorting it or changing the shape of it. That tells a lot of the amp again.

Also, connect these receivers/amps to difficult loads and then see what happens.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Its not that simple. I didn't see the slew rate listed for any of these listed here. Slew rate is the ability for an amp to respond and track/play a very fast rising amplitude signal without distorting it or changing the shape of it. That tells a lot of the amp again.

Also, connect these receivers/amps to difficult loads and then see what happens.

Slew rate and Damping factor refer to the amplifier itself, right?

I was talking about using an External Amp with the receiver vs. pre-pros.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Thanks for all of the help.

There are still a couple of things bothering me though. For one, the price of building all of those pre-amps is a little out of my range at the moment, but this is good stuff to know. The other problem is the crossover frequency being set at 100 Hz, if it isn't adjustable, I am less than interested. Nevertheless, this is a really cool idea, but being as young as I am, I think the receiver road is the way to go for me at the moment. If nothing else, I can build the pre-amps as I get the money over time, and plug them into the 6 channel audio inputs on the receiver.

Again, thank you for the help.

Yeah, the crossover is kind of limited in the HD players. My Toshiba HD DVD is set to 80Hz, but I think my Panasonic BD is set to 100Hz. I guess it makes no difference if you have a full range speaker system, but it is kind of limited if you have a monitor speaker system. Now if they had given us the option to set to 40Hz, 60Hz, 80Hz, 100Hz, 120Hz, it would have been perfect.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I think back inthe day, there was a difference... now probablby not so much. However, seperates just add to the cool factor I think and give me a personal satisfication... I like to believe I'm high end... therefore I create imaginary things in my head to satisfy that need. The problem I've always had with receivers is that a $7K receiver like the new dennon, looks basically the same as a $250 receiver from anyone. It's not about bragging, to be honest... you guys are the only ones I can talk to about this stuff because no one I'm really close with could care less what I have)... but I think it's just personal pride in having whatever you personally think is the coolest.

Yeah, I agree completely. Just like automobiles, they just keep on making electronics better and better.

Yeah, separates are just better -- I don't care if the specs suggest otherwise.

And yeah, no way I'm spending $7,000 on a pre-pros that look almost exactly like a lower-end receiver!

 

[tricube]

chip sets and amplification

I believe the major difference between the seperates and the receivers is chipsets. as the receiver lines increase in price, the chipset for processing and such get better. you can see it in the Onkyo line easily.

The other thing to keep in mind is a receiver is a good compromise. it as to fit everything in one box so heat and humm and things like that get to be compromise issues. In the seperate world, the amplifier maker does not concerning himself with the heat of his parts warming up the processor to much or adding distortion because it is in another case.

We typically find that the major difference is in the performance of the speakers. same set up, seperates with a good amp performs better than a receiver of the same wattage. This occurs most often when all channels are driven, receivers have the tendency to roll off the power as you demand more. Seperate amps have tendency to deliver their power under load.

Just my $.02