Separates are no better than AV Receivers, Objectively

[Harrison476]

Question

I just got a new onkyo receiver 850 ( I believe). What would you guys think about the onkyo receiver verses Emotiva DMC-1, MPS-1. Also Has anyone listened to their speakers?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I just got a new onkyo receiver 850 ( I believe). What would you guys think about the onkyo receiver verses Emotiva DMC-1, MPS-1. Also Has anyone listened to their speakers?

Well, seeing how the lowly $300 Onkyo 504 has better crosstalk, F.R., and THD+N than any of the Emotiva pre-pros, I suspect the Onkyo 805 should be at least as good even without a separate amp. If you use a separate amp (200wpc), I think you may possibly even get cleaner sound from the Onkyo 805 than from the DMC-1 IMO.

Heck, the onkyo receivers have better specs than even the analog preamp of Emotiva, especially the crosstalk.

 

[rnatalli]

I go with separates simply for the upgradability. Switch out the preamp every few years and you're good. Receivers also tend to get a bit hot compared to separates so if you're rack is really tight, separates make more sense.

 

[mtrycrafts]

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.

Well, you'd have to do a cost analysis whether it mattered replacing the amp in the receiver too, vs buying just a pre/pro. It may not matter cost wise.

Expanding a separates system seems easier as well, simply add an amp or two, and you can drive more channels.

Only if your pre/pro has the additional channels. If not, or if you need another pre/pro, you get the extra amps with the extra processing channels in a receiver.

 

[mtrycrafts]

...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

Yes, perhaps. But, can you point to a soundtrack that has all channels at max signal level AT the same instant in time? If not, you will not have that dilemma.

 

[mtrycrafts]

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.

Difficult loads can be an issue with separates as well if that amp is not rated for such loads, or, not an issue with receivers that are rated for some difficult loads.
As to slew rate, I have read in the past where beyond a certain amount, it is useless like some other specs beyond a point.

ps:

not sure how well this will work but..

here is a ling to Richard Pierce, another audio pro to listen to, on his postings about slew rate.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=author:DPierce@world.std.com+slew+rate&qt_s=Search

 

[mtrycrafts]

...
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.

I think you can toss stereophile.

You should check out Doug Self web site on this. He is an audio expert:

http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/ampins/pseudo/subjectv.htm

"Monobloc construction (i.e. two separate power amplifier boxes) is always audibly superior, due to the reduction in crosstalk."
There is no need to go to the expense of monobloc power amplifiers in order to keep crosstalk under control, even when making it substantially better than the - 20dB that is actually necessary. The techniques are conventional; the last stereo power amplifier I designed managed an easy - 90dB at 10kHz without anything other than the usual precautions. In this area dedicated followers of fashion pay dearly for the privilege, as the cost of the mechanical parts will be nearly doubled.

 

[chadnliz]

This is almost like the arguement of Digital music vs Analog, Digital measures perfect and therfoer many say it is a perfect medium yet many...and I mean many prefer the Analog (flawed) sound. Last time I checked nobody listens to measurements, its about what performs best. Seperates offer more flexibility, and what many agree to be better performance.

 

[bandphan]

boy im really sorry i made a comment about the another day. this aurgument could lead to a synapse i prefer not to have.

I listen to music more than watch movies, i would perfer a seperate pre and amp for several reasons, of which one being seperating the stages. But since I do not have the luxury of two seperate pres, one for music and one for movies, im in the middle with my setup. I was running a freinds c33 as my pre a few years back, and all be it probably only my ears but the sound was warmer than using my yama or pio as my pre. The op makes good points about relavent information, but if its truly going to be objective the entire picture must be benchmarked.

 

[fmw]

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?"

No, generally receivers do not have a preamp input. A tube preamp would replace the pre/pro entirely leaving you with a two channel setup. The best way to get the "sound" of a tube preamp (assuming they have a sound at all) would be to add an equalizer between the preamp and amp. Most receivers have manually adjustable EQ programs so you can just it to roll off the high frequencies and add a mid bass bulge. That should do it for you.

 

[fmw]

boy im really sorry i made a comment about the another day. this aurgument could lead to a synapse i prefer not to have.

I listen to music more than watch movies, i would perfer a seperate pre and amp for several reasons, of which one being seperating the stages. But since I do not have the luxury of two seperate pres, one for music and one for movies, im in the middle with my setup. I was running a freinds c33 as my pre a few years back, and all be it probably only my ears but the sound was warmer than using my yama or pio as my pre. The op makes good points about relavent information, but if its truly going to be objective the entire picture must be benchmarked.

That is most likely because the EQ program restored high frequencies that your room rolled off. You should be able to roll them off manually in the receiver's EQ setup.

 

[Audioholics]

Cool post. For many many moons we've said that it's often best to get an AV receiver with the preamp functions you want and add an amplifier to get more power and control from your speakers.

Several of our reference systems do just that.

 

[mouettus]

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.

I think this is the most honest post I've ever seen.

Those who say that stages should be done separately, do you really think a receiver does it all at once? Same thing different box. The only reason I could see that separates sound better is that I've never seen a receiver with 150-200 raw rms watts per channel. That's why it sounds better in most cases.

When I go to my local audio dealer, I don't even care about crosstalk (heck I don't even know what it is). I just know that this damn Rotel pre-pro and amp combo looks fabulous and sounds holy good on those 703s. It's got lots of headroom and I can feel it. Smooth all the way up.

Don't get me wrong. I'd love to have separates. But shelling at least 4k for getting a great result instead of a good result is not worth it IMO. I've plugged my RC-70s on my TX-V1800 and it seems powerful enough for me. I've seen the difference between that one and my old yamaha receiver (HTR-5740) and THAT is quite a difference.

Finally, I don't know for you but I'd hate to pay 1500-2000$ for HDMI 1.1 (Rotel RSP-1069) with still no power for the babies. Pre always seem to fall behind in terms of technology.

 

[bandphan]

quote "Those who say that stages should be done separately, do you really think a receiver does it all at once? Same thing different box"


So not true, and not all at once, but seperated, do you think the input stage is shut off during the output stage? this is why integrateds of higher quality put so much effort into internal design, to seperate the stages as much as can be done.

 

[cbraver]

No offense to anyone, I think you guys are all great... but... I think it might be time for some of you to spend a little more time watching movies/listening to music. I know it's interesting to figure out what's snake oil and what's not, but, how you approach determining that is largely what determines the conclusion....

"Separates are no better than AV Receivers, Objectively," pft. Based on those specifications...which are all good enough on that list where blind folded you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the amps if everything else what the same between them. Seperates are nice for some not so obvious reasons (like cheaper upgrades, cool factor, etc.), but the big reason people go to seperates is power. Sure, buying a seperate that makes 150wpc might not be the best way to spend your money when you can get a receiver that does about the same, but for those that have hard to drive speakers, want a lot of headroom, have a large room and/or listen at high levels ... the 300 and 400wpc big *** amplifiers make sense. We spend too much time talking about little things that don't make much of a difference. If you need/want big juice, then you go seperates. Only because there aren't receivers that offer it. *shrug* SNR, crosstalk and all that is negligible if you are buying from a company that makes decent stuff. I mean, both Onkyo and Lexicon make a good product. But, those specs aren't what would make me prefer a Lexicon. Is it worth the upcharge in terms of performance? I donno, who cares?! Anyone worrying about that can't afford one anyways. So get the Onkyo then. The reason you don't see a lot of people on here with Lexicons or Meridians and other high end processing stuff is because they are WORKING.

PS. Don't take this post the wrong way, I'm making fun of myself too.

 

[bandphan]

ahhh listen to Tchaikovsky's The Tempest in F minor while posting, the best of both worlds

 

[mouettus]

Easy to say for someone who has a Crown XLS402 amp!! lol

 

[Pyrrho]

This is always a funny discussion, though here people are being more civil than I have typically seen at other forums.

I can make a receiver out of a bunch of separates, and then it will sound exactly like the separates. I simply make a big box, and put all of the separates in it. I can even use connecting wires that are the same as what the person with the separates use, and use a fancy surge protector so that I can turn it on and off with one switch (and can even use a 'magic' power cord, blessed by the Pope, if anyone imagines it matters). Now, any receiver manufacturer can do the same kind of thing, only much less expensively. Of course, they will not be able to do the same combinations that I can do (using different brands for everything if desired), but they can put in their one box electronics of any quality they want. The same holds for whatever they choose to put into separate boxes.

It is ridiculous to count the number of boxes the manufacturer put the equipment into and judge the quality based upon that. Some receivers are better than some separates, and some separates are better than some receivers.

Now, as a matter of fact, no one seems to put the most powerful power amps into receivers. However, there is no reason why they could not do so if they wanted to. It would probably be impractical, because the receiver would likely end up being so big it would take a couple of strong people to lift it, and it would likely draw too much power for the typical home electrical circuit. This explains why it is not done. But it could be, if they only wanted to do it. As for the preamp/processor/tuner, that can be of any quality they want, whether it is in a receiver, or made without a power amplifier, or in several different boxes (e.g., a video processor box, an audio processor box, a preamp box, a tuner box). Counting the number of boxes is a silly way to judge quality.

 

[bandphan]

This is always a funny discussion, though here people are being more civil than I have typically seen at other forums.

because we all like grey poupon, and sporting clays

 

[mouettus]

because we all like grey poupon, and sporting clays

GREY POUPON! Haven't heard that for a while! lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmannAYiwh0