AV receiver vs Stereo amplifier. Advice requested.



I decided to buy a Denon AVR-2805, to be used for a while only as a *stereo* receiver (with possible zone 2 capability).

A friend insists that, for strictly (classical) music listening, an audio amplifier (even a from a budget line) would be superior.

His arguments:

1- Audio fidelity isn't a prime target for designers of AV receivers.

2- There is so much that an AV receiver has to do, on 6 or 7 channels, that there is no way an average receiver (such as the Denon above) can match a decent stereo amplifier on strictly stereo material.

Any informed opinions? I have to make a decision soon. Thank you.


AV Receiver/Stereo Receiver

I seriously doubt that there is any audible difference between the two when the AV receiver is running in the stereo only mode. A dedicated stereo amp is most likely fast becoming a dinosaur.


Audioholic Overlord
"for a while"

That puts a whole new slant on the discussion.

If all you ever wanted was a 2 channel system, then I would recommend a 2 channel integrated, perhaps from NAD or Rotel, that would set you back about the same as the receiver. They would be a little better overall.

But, since you forsee multi channel in your future, the Denon does not lack for musical abilities. I own a 2802 and most of the time it's in the good old two channel mode and I don't feel a lack of enjoyment.

The speakers are the most important link in this chain. Choose these first. Then look for something to drive them to the levels you want. Then, as long as you have enough clean power to drive them, you're prety much home free.

FWIW, my first love is music. When I went shopping for speakers and a receiver, I used music as my main criteria. I would up with Athena AS F1's as my main speakers. The center and surrounds are also from the same series.

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