A) Anthem MRX 510 (with Amp added later) or B) Outlaw 975/Emotiva UMC 200 with Outlaw 7125

[PENG]

subjectively?

ive compared a $200 sony to a $500 denon and the sound quality was immediately noticeably better.

then i upgraded the denon receiver to a rotel 1069 and had another improvement in sound quality.

its funny you seem to be leaning towards the all amps sound the same yet you are running separates, no?

I think he was just having fun messing with you.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

subjectively?

ive compared a $200 sony to a $500 denon and the sound quality was immediately noticeably better.

then i upgraded the denon receiver to a rotel 1069 and had another improvement in sound quality.

its funny you seem to be leaning towards the all amps sound the same yet you are running separates, no?

Okay, seriously, I do favor separates.

I think there is general improvement going from a low-end to high-end.

But I think the salient improvement is from Audyssey Dynamic EQ in all classes of components and among speakers.

The improvement from comparing components all in Direct Modes is not as significant when level matched.

 

[big O]

hey thanks for saying that
so ill say this. i favor separates too but ive heard some receivers sound very good with high sensitivity speakers. i heard my 99 db sensitive speakers through an old receiver and i was quite impressed with the sound quality.

i also agree with your point about room eq. i traded the rotel 1069 off and bought the umc 200 just for its eq section , which is unmatched by any other units out iirc. the fellow i traded the rotel 1069 to also has a umc200 and we both agree that while the umc 200 is very transparent, the 1069 wins for absolute sound quality but, with umc200 you can change the sound with eq, if anything needs changing.

audyssey is powerful. in the right hands, umc 200 with REW is downright deadly.

 

[PENG]

It's okay to disagree 100%. But don't accuse people of lying for their own experiences. It's a 2 way street.

Perhaps you can hear the differences with your Klipsch and Emotiva. I couldn't hear the day-and-night astronomical unequivocal unbiased level-matched improvements among amps, preamps, pre-pros, and AVR in DIRECT MODE when I owned Revel Salon2, B&W 802 Diamond, KEF Reference 201/2, Linkwitz Orion 3.2.1, Philharmonic 3, etc.

Everyone may have a different experience. Every situation may be different.

Maybe. Just saying.

Well, you and I and Cos all seem to favor, and own separates for our own reasons, so I guess we naturally (doesn't mean really/totally) are not so biased. We also seem to be suggesting the MRX and D&M AVRs in the same price range should sound as good as the typically more expensive separates for the OP's speakers. We are not going to convince big O but the OP should now be more (wanted to say better) informed as he has been provided with opinions on both scenarios. I am curious about Anthem's ARC but if I had an 1K budeget I would still go with a Denon X4000, 4520, or Marantz SR7008, 7009 mainly for the XT32 and Sub EQ HT features but also for their more powerful internal amps. If I had an absolutely extra 1K to spend then I may consider picking up a MRX310 just to play with Anthem's RC software, plot some graphs for fun. It will just be another toy.

Should the OP decide to go the AVR route, below are my summarized points that may or may not help him decide on going with the more expensive (Values) MRX. Obviously some are of subjective nature, this is an AV forum after all.

• Anthem ARC may in fact be better (Cos, your thoughts?), but could also be just "different"?
• Audyssey XT32/SubEQHT are known to do well in setting up subs, even multiple subs.
• How well XT32 does on frequencies above 200 Hz would depend on other factors. In my room it did very well as shown in REW graphs I posted before, yet Gene couldn't get as good results in his recent AH review of a Denon AVR.
• The smart thing about D&M products is that they allow you to bypass L/R, leaving Audyssey (including DEQ) in place for the subs and surrounds.
• In pure direct mode with ARC disabled, MRX will most likely not sound better than D&M products in the same price range. This is my subjective view based on comparing my AVRs with and without my Anthem power amp in the loop.
• MRX likely cost more because they don't have the volume that D&M, Yamaha and others have. It does not mean they represent better quality just because of the much higher price.
• In the US, the price gap should have shrunk by now due to the higher USD to CAD.
• No doubt Anthem makes excellent products, I only have an Anthem amp in my HT system and I have no reason to believe an Anthem MRX unit will sound audibly better or even different than the other AVRs mentioned, when all RCs, EQs are turned off.
• Internet hearsay of subjective nature should not to be trusted, unless back up with unbiased tests, bench tests and/or other scientific facts.
• Separates can sound better than entry level AVRs (e.g. big O's $200 Sony) even when not driven beyond their limits, but as Cos and ADTG mentioned, the MRX and other AVRs mentioned in this thread so far are not poor or weak components for the Tritons.

If the OP really prefers separates, for his $1,500 budget I would say go "used", accept bare bone features; and ask big O for further inputs.

 

[big O]

@PENG.

not to derail the test from subjective amp comparisons but i havent seen you REW graphs and would love to. could you kindly link me to that thread.

thanks.

 

[PENG]

@PENG.

not to derail the test from subjective amp comparisons but i havent seen you REW graphs and would love to. could you kindly link me to that thread.

thanks.

No problem, hopefully our OP won't mind another slight derail.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/threads/denon-avr-x5200w-dolby-atmos-av-receiver-reviewed.92427/page-2

See post#21, then you can read Gene's review:

http://www.audioholics.com/av-receiver-reviews/denon-avr-x5200w/FrontAudmeasure.JPG

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If I had an absolutely extra 1K to spend then I may consider picking up a MRX310 just to play with Anthem's RC software, plot some graphs for fun. It will just be another toy.

I think any true comparison will require about a full year or more. I don't think a few days or even a few weeks is enough to truly compare. I think the more you live with the components, the more bias is removed.

That's why when we get new toys, our first reaction is to love the new more than the old. It's natural. Newer is just more exciting.

But after about a year, they all become "old" and favoritism/bias is diminished.

 

[big O]

No problem, hopefully our OP won't mind another slight derail.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/threads/denon-avr-x5200w-dolby-atmos-av-receiver-reviewed.92427/page-2

See post#21, then you can read Gene's review:

http://www.audioholics.com/av-receiver-reviews/denon-avr-x5200w/FrontAudmeasure.JPG

thanks for sharing. cool stuff. in your graph, audyssey definitely created a flatter graph.

 

[big O]

That's why when we get new toys, our first reaction is to love the new more than the old. It's natural. Newer is just more exciting.

i have to agree with that completely.

also, add- if it doesnt sound better upon first using it, you know its TRULY bad lol.
and if after a year you still love it, you know its truly good.

i know a guy who has been running the same speakers since 1992 and still to this day refers to them as "sweet"