Uniti , Evo, NAD, etc. vs a high-end AVR??



Hi all - with Cambridge Audio latest to bring out these Evo models this last month here in the UK, I went to the store and auditioned one against a slightly newer version of my Yamaha Aventage receiver. Same speakers, AV in pure direct, same source streaming tracks from Tidal. Perhaps my ears aren't as sharp as they once were but I'll be damned if the Yam didn't do a better job on balance. I preferred it 5 times out of 6 which surprised me given all the guff written about these one-box streamers - the Yam had more headroom, better separation and frankly more room fill. I thought the whole audiophile argument was that too much circuitry in one box interfered with signal quality, yet the write-ups from stereo magazines makes me wonder if they've conveniently forgotten anyway - they are paid to write to shift electronics after all. Apart from being smaller with funkier designs and a big screen to admire your album artwork, I'll be interested to hear from anyone else who actually compares a humble AV (which has frankly been doing the one-box job for years) against a one-box amp/streamer critically in terms of sound quality. After all, that's the thing we want, right? My emerging hypothesis is that audiophile arguments junking AVRs for bad stereo quality are historic, and that the higher end models being produced now are so well designed with good components are every bit as good as these new things, with heaps more flex if you want surround for movies and also a fraction of the cost. Wondering what you all think...Thanks!

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