Recommendations for Stereo Receiver or Integrated Amp?

[PearlcorderS701]

Phono stages in most receivers are somewhat of an afterthought most of the time. It's not important to most people, and the people who are serious about vinyl will be using an outboard phono stage. Companies know this so they don't put much effort into implementing a really good one.

A good quality phono stage can be had for about 100 to 150.

You're the one that steered me towards the 8555 initially -- do you think its phono stage is really this poor? I haven't had a chance to test it yet...

 

[anamorphic96]

I realize this, when I purchased my nad, I also purchased a cambridge audio 640p that suits me quite well... but that still doesn't explain the NAD hate that was goin' on in this thread

From what I recall there has been no NAD hating going on. In fact I have owned several pieces of there equipment. There is nothing wrong with disliking something.

There was one other person who didn't care for NAD equipment. The OP has not owned there equipment and I really liked the 2 channel gear until the prices became way to high on most pieces. They have some of the best amp sections in the business. Especially dealing with tricky speaker loads.

NAD on the other hand has never had a good handle on there HT receivers and video sources. They have been notoriously problematic and prone to failures. They look nice and sound great but have to many issues.

 

[anamorphic96]

You're the one that steered me towards the 8555 initially -- do you think its phono stage is really this poor? I haven't had a chance to test it yet...

I don't know what the phono stage sounds like in the Onkyo. But it would not surprise me if it wasn't all that great. Phono sections are not very important to the manufacture. Especially with the lower end models.

This is why people who are serious about vinyl get an external phono stage.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

From what I recall there has been no NAD hating going on. In fact I have owned several pieces of there equipment. There is nothing wrong with disliking something.

I didn't think there was "NAD hate" going on in the thread, either; there were some folks that "voiced" their opinions in the thread regarding the fact that they felt the non-Master Series stuff wasn't all that great in their opinion when I asked, and I took that into consideration, but I believe that's as far as the discontentment went...

The OP has not owned there equipment

That's true, but how does that play into what Fatty was saying about the NAD hate?

NAD on the other hand has never had a good handle on there HT receivers and video sources. They have been notoriously problematic and prone to failures. They look nice and sound great but have to many issues.

Now that I didn't know -- I suppose I would stay away from their HT/multichannel/video stuff then...

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I don't know what the phono stage sounds like in the Onkyo. But it would not surprise me if it wasn't all that great. Phono sections are not very important to the manufacture. Especially with the lower end models.

This is why people who are serious about vinyl get an external phono stage.

Well, if this is something I would have known before I purchased the 8555, I may have looked elsewhere, as vinyl will become important to me in time...

 

[anamorphic96]

I was trying to establish some of the primary people in this discussion and there positions. You where obviously not a hater since you where considering there products.

 

[anamorphic96]

Well, if this is something I would have known before I purchased the 8555, I may have looked elsewhere, as vinyl will become important to me in time...

Just use another input. It's not a big deal. Many people due this when there phono stage isn't so hot.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I was trying to establish some of the primary people in this discussion and there positions. You where obviously not a hater since you where considering there products.

I see. At any rate, I did indicate to him that I never heard their products for myself.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Just use another input. It's not a big deal. Many people due this when there phono stage isn't so hot.

Another input can't be used because the "Phono" input includes the RIAA equalization curve necessary to boost the turntable signal...

 

[anamorphic96]

Another input can't be used because the "Phono" input includes the RIAA equalization curve necessary to boost the turntable signal...

That's why you buy an external phono stage.

http://www.audioadvisor.com/products.asp?dept=74

 

[PearlcorderS701]

That's why you buy an external phono stage.

http://www.audioadvisor.com/products.asp?dept=74

Oh, yes, I understand that -- I thought you were saying to plug the turntable into another input on the receiver as-is!

I wish the 8555 had an "AUX" input, as this would come in handy for my mixing console or perhaps an external phono preamp hookup, but all it has is video-oriented input names such as "VCR" or "CABLE"...

I can't STAND that...I'm beginning to think I should have gone with the A9555 integrated amp because it was more audiophile/audio oriented...

 

[anamorphic96]

Oh, yes, I understand that -- I thought you were saying to plug the turntable into another input on the receiver as-is!

I wish the 8555 had an "AUX" input, as this would come in handy for my mixing console or perhaps an external phono preamp hookup, but all it has is video-oriented input names such as "VCR" or "CABLE"...

I can't STAND that...I'm beginning to think I should have gone with the A9555 integrated amp because it was more audiophile/audio oriented...

You can still use those inputs like any other aux. I see no reason the receiver can't work as you have two sets of loops. Tape and video. As well as two other misc inputs. There named different but thats all.

This receiver gives you more flexibility than the other Onkyo would have.

 

[Seth=L]

Thanks everyone, for all your suggestions so far...I appreciate all of them. And thank you Anamorphic for providing that link for the Marantz; it looks tempting except for the claimed 40 watts X 2.

Here's the breakdown of the situation; I don't really want to get into the complexity of a stereo power amp and preamp combo (not that anyone suggested that but I'm just pointing it out), so that leaves me either a stereo receiver or integrated amp.

I would prefer an integrated amp because I don't really want or need to use a tuner for this application. I understand I can just "ignore" the tuner section of a receiver, but I feel an integrated would just be a bit more "serious" for this room.

Now, given these criteria, I could select:

-The Onkyo stereo receiver recommended by Anamorphic
-The Onkyo integrated digital amp I provided the link to (seems awfully expensive though)
-A Marantz stereo receiver
-A Marantz integrated amp
-A Yamaha integrated amp or stereo receiver
-The Outlaw integrated amp (or was it a receiver?)
-A Denon stereo receiver, maybe? (don't know how good these are)
-NAD amp or receiver

Or perhaps a handful of higher-end "boutque" brand models that anyone could suggest (Cambridge, PeachTree, etc.).

The Marantz PM5003 inside.

Power consumption, 110 watts. Stereophile measured it's output, 22 watts RMS per channel. Based on the layout, it's a Sherwood factory creation. It's measured performance syncs up with that assumption.

 

[anamorphic96]

The Marantz PM5003 inside.

Power consumption, 110 watts. Stereophile measured it's output, 22 watts RMS per channel. Based on the layout, it's a Sherwood factory creation. It's measured performance syncs up with that assumption.

From what I could tell it met it's specs but at a rather high THD.

 

[Seth=L]

From what I could tell it met it's specs but at a rather high THD.

I guess the 22 watts was at what they deemed a more acceptable distortion value. Don't get me wrong, that thing would be enough for most people's day to day listening habits. The A-H500 integrated, luckily, exceeds that for me. I'd beat myself up pretty bad if I let it get away from me.

 

[anamorphic96]

I guess the 22 watts was at what they deemed a more acceptable distortion value. Don't get me wrong, that thing would be enough for most people's day to day listening habits. The A-H500 integrated, luckily, exceeds that for me. I'd beat myself up pretty bad if I let it get away from me.

The NAD C32#BEE of any generation looks to be a much better amp after looking inside the Marantz. The NAD will definitely deal with tougher speaker loads and hold up better under pressure.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

You can still use those inputs like any other aux.

I know that -- what I'm saying is I don't like the names of the inputs Onkyo gives to them, in that they're really video-oriented (VCR/DVD, Cable, etc.)...and they're not re-namable...

I see no reason the receiver can't work as you have two sets of loops. Tape and video. As well as two other misc inputs. There named different but thats all.

Well, I am going to be using the TAPE loop soon once I get a turntable and need to run my CD recorder through the receiver's TAPE loop in order to record from vinyl -- so that eliminates the "TAPE" input being used for anything else. As for the video inputs and their names, that is exactly what I don't like about the unit is what I'm saying -- even though they're just names, I don't like the fact that I am running audio equipment through the receiver, not video, and it's coming up on the display as "VCR/DVD" when I use my mixing console, for example...I just hate that.

This receiver gives you more flexibility than the other Onkyo would have.

No doubt the 8555 is a better unit -- and otherwise I am very happy with it -- but I just don't like the input assignments.

 

[anamorphic96]

I know that -- what I'm saying is I don't like the names of the inputs Onkyo gives to them, in that they're really video-oriented (VCR/DVD, Cable, etc.)...and they're not re-namable...



Well, I am going to be using the TAPE loop soon once I get a turntable and need to run my CD recorder through the receiver's TAPE loop in order to record from vinyl -- so that eliminates the "TAPE" input being used for anything else. As for the video inputs and their names, that is exactly what I don't like about the unit is what I'm saying -- even though they're just names, I don't like the fact that I am running audio equipment through the receiver, not video, and it's coming up on the display as "VCR/DVD" when I use my mixing console, for example...I just hate that.



No doubt the 8555 is a better unit -- and otherwise I am very happy with it -- but I just don't like the input assignments.

Fair enough. I can see your frustration. If it helps the other Onkyo used MD instead of Video for the second set of loops.

It would be nicer if we could name them or they just used an input # instead of trying to name the input.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Fair enough. I can see your frustration. If it helps the other Onkyo used MD instead of Video for the second set of loops.

A "Mini Disc" input instead? Does anyone still have a Mini Disc recorder??

It would be nicer if we could name them or they just used an input # instead of trying to name the input.

They do this on many of their upper-tier HT receivers, where you can custom name inputs, but they should do this on ALL units IMO.

 

[KEW]

As for the video inputs and their names, that is exactly what I don't like about the unit is what I'm saying -- even though they're just names, I don't like the fact that I am running audio equipment through the receiver, not video, and it's coming up on the display as "VCR/DVD" when I use my mixing console, for example...I just hate that.

Jeesh!

From pg 22 of your owners manual:

For the TAPE and VCR/DVR buttons, the input display
name can be changed in the sequence as shown below.
When the input display name has been changed for one
of the buttons below, the display name for the other
button cannot be changed.
• TAPE button : TAPE→MD→CDR→DOCK
• VCR/DVR button : VCR/DVR→DOCK

Yeah, it isn't perfect, but thinking of your mixer as being "docked" to your system would work for me.