Yamaha RX-Z9 vs Arcam FMJ-A38 for stereo

[Thanasis]

Hi everyone!

Does any of you guys have experience with both Arcam FMJ-A38 and Yamaha RX-Z9 for stereo use, please? For various tedious reasons, I have to choose between the two (I know they are very different, but...). I am particularly interested in how they compare as stereo amplifiers. Also, how would the Z9 be as a DAC for stereo use?

I have auditioned only the Arcam and found it a very big improvement over what I am using now (Yamaha rxv 1500). Unfortunately, I cannot audition the z9 before I buy it. Would the z9 manage to reach (or surpass) Arcam's stereo quality and "musicality"?

Any input from personal experience would be more than welcome!

Thanks a lot!

Thanasis

 

[Lordoftherings]

Yamaha RX-Z9 is thee One.

Hi Thanasis,

Welcome at Audioholics Forums.
I don't have personal experience of listening to either of these in my own system. But if I may, I'll give you my impression based on readings and what I know of these two products.

First, they are totally opposite in their functions, but you knew that.
The Yamaha RX-Z9 is in a league of it's own regarding 2-channel stereo listening, plus much more than that.

Gene here at Audioholics reviewed the Z9; if you didn't have a look yet, I would highly suggest that you read his review.
Here: -> http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/receivers/yamaha-RX-Z9/

I believe that both digital and analog sections of the Z9 are first rate.
I know that it has the top of the line Burr Brown PCM-1792 Dacs for all channels. All the reviews about the Z9 are praising it for it's sound quality. The build quality is impeccable. That was an unusual departure from Yamaha, but still the part's quality and the fabulous sound remains.

The Arcam is only a stereo integrated amp with mixed reviews from some quarters.
It's a good one, but not an exceptional one.

It is very easy for you to read their reviews from several sites.

Personally, I will pick the Z9 in a heart beat for sound quality alone in a 2-channel stereo listening purpose. And of course, for multichannel listening also. As a stereo Dac, like I already mentioned, it has the very best Dac in the market (the PCM-1792). The Z9 is a state-of-the-art Dac and Digital Preamplifier. It is also a very powerful amplifier of first rate.
It does run very hot, but that does not take anything away from it's exceptional sound quality.

If you do have the lucky opportunity to purchase this exceptional A/V receiver for a good price, don't hesitate for the goal that you are searching for. I'm convinced that you'll be blown away.
And you can always bring it back for a full refund if not satisfied (which I really doubt in your personal use).

Hopefully other people can chime in to confirm my impressions, and the obvious choice between these two components.

Cheers,

Bob

 

[CraigV]

Arcam all the way

 

[Lordoftherings]

OK, sounds good, but does it really?

Arcam all the way

LOL. OK Craig, got anything else to add with this?

Bob

 

[CraigV]

I have auditioned only the Arcam and found it a very big improvement over what I am using now (Yamaha rxv 1500). Unfortunately, I cannot audition the z9 before I buy it. Would the z9 manage to reach (or surpass) Arcam's stereo quality and "musicality"?

LOL. OK Craig, got anything else to add with this?

Bob

......Nope

 

[3db]

Maybe is just the way you worded it but I hope you aren't going to choose the RZ-9 as a stero only receiver. That would be a huge waste of your money becuase you wouldn't be tapping into its list of capabilities.

I'm curious.. How did the Arcam sound better than the RX-V1500? I have the RX-V1800 and I find when listening to stereo that its very detailed and controlled in its delivery.

Hi everyone!

Does any of you guys have experience with both Arcam FMJ-A38 and Yamaha RX-Z9 for stereo use, please? For various tedious reasons, I have to choose between the two (I know they are very different, but...). I am particularly interested in how they compare as stereo amplifiers. Also, how would the Z9 be as a DAC for stereo use?

I have auditioned only the Arcam and found it a very big improvement over what I am using now (Yamaha rxv 1500). Unfortunately, I cannot audition the z9 before I buy it. Would the z9 manage to reach (or surpass) Arcam's stereo quality and "musicality"?

Any input from personal experience would be more than welcome!

Thanks a lot!

Thanasis

 

[Thanasis]

Thanks everybody!

Hi everyone!

First of all, I would like to thank you all for bothering to reply to me and tell me your opinion.

Lordoftherings, I read your reply very carefully. You are very enthusiastic about the z9 and for good reason: it is an impressively capable machine. The problem is that I have not found any reviews that praise it for its musical abilities. This may be because it does so much more, that the reviewers spend more time on this rather than it's stereo abilities. Or it may be because the z9 is simply not made for music but rather for films. It bothers me not to be able to find out by myself, unless if I pay 1800$ - non-refundable I might add

Craig, you make a valid point It's definitely safer to trust what I know than what I don't. It is however the other functions of the z9 that are making me consider it. It is an all in one solution and as much as I know how some people feel for this kind of 'boxes', I have to admit that it is very practical!

Then again, practicality is not a good term to define my musical preferences.

BUT. If it were to sound nice AND be practical, then wow!

3db, the main reason I am considering the z9 is the rest of its capabilities. After all, it was 10 times the price of my receiver when I bought mine and now I can get it at the same price as the Arcam! Does this mean it is a better amp than mine? You bet! Better than the stereo Arcam? I don't know!

Regarding your question: In stereo, the Arcam was much better defined, clear, warm and 'musical' than my 1500. The high range was in a league of its own. The mid range was more musical and the low range was much better controlled. Also, the soundstage was more deep and the instruments were more precisely located within it. The difference was so great that now I am having difficulties listening to my 1500! I find it's sound "cheap". This of' course does not mean your 1800 sounds like my 1500. Its a latter model so I would hope not!

Buying the Arcam would mean having two amps in my system - one for stereo, one for home theater. This is annoying to me. It also means that I would have to invest in a good DAC, since the Arcam is fully analog and I have recently learned not to trust my yamaha very much (would it make a good DAC? Who knows...). That's 3 machines. Plus my equalizer, 4. But I know that this setup would sound much better from my current one.

On the other hand, I get rid of everything (except the eq), I buy the z9 at the same price as the Arcam and I place my bet! Unless if someone who has actually heard the z9 in stereo chimes in...

Your thoughts?

 

[CraigV]

What about an Arcam that can do all the home theater goodness & stereo?

 

[bandphan]

The RX-Z9 had no problems keeping up with our expectations as it belted out raw power with confidence and pride. I had to keep reminding myself a receiver shouldn't sound this good. Gene DellaSala

Im not sure how much more info you need. Top notch build, plenty of power, and well reviewed. If you read the article that LOTL posted, it lists the cons for the unit, which in most cases you already know.

Im curious as to the price your getting..

 

[Thanasis]

What about an Arcam that can do all the home theater goodness & stereo?

Hi Craig!

This is definitely a valid question. I actually auditioned the Arcam AVR600 vs a Pioneer Elite (don't remember the model now), in an A to B comparison of a Batman action packed scene. The Pioneer was dry and hard. The Arcam was... musical. Not necessarily a good thing for this kind of scenes, but there you go

I also auditioned the AVR600 vs the Arcam A38. The AVR600 managed to produce a little more detail however in the mid range but the A38 was better - especially in the low range and the size of the soundstage. But I need to give the benefit of doubt to the AVR600 here, since it was a new unit, hardly ever played before and therefore not properly broken in.

To answer your question, I cannot use the AVR600 because it does not have pre-ins. This means that I cannot connect my active equalizer that comes with my speakers. I emailed Arcam and they suggested their upcoming AV888 pre-amp and P777 amp combo. At around 10,000$ for both of them, one wonders how much does a pre-in costs nowadays!!!

So, there you have it: The Z9 is the only available a/v receiver to my knowledge with pre-ins. Otherwise I need a kind of combination. Or is there something I don't know about?

Any ideas?

 

[Thanasis]

Im not sure how much more info you need. Top notch build, plenty of power, and well reviewed. If you read the article that LOTL posted, it lists the cons for the unit, which in most cases you already know.

Im curious as to the price your getting..

Hi Bandphan!

You may be right. I am not sure as well how much more info I need! Maybe someone with personal experience with both units?

I can get same price for either Arcam A38 or Yamaha Z9: around 1,800$ - 1,900$

 

[Lordoftherings]

......Nope

LOL. You are a funny guy, Craig.

 

[Lordoftherings]

Mount Everest or Mount K2?

Lordoftherings, I read your reply very carefully. You are very enthusiastic about the z9 and for good reason: it is an impressively capable machine. The problem is that I have not found any reviews that praise it for its musical abilities. This may be because it does so much more, that the reviewers spend more time on this rather than it's stereo abilities. Or it may be because the z9 is simply not made for music but rather for films. It bothers me not to be able to find out by myself, unless if I pay 1800$ - non-refundable I might add

Craig, you make a valid point It's definitely safer to trust what I know than what I don't. It is however the other functions of the z9 that are making me consider it. It is an all in one solution and as much as I know how some people feel for this kind of 'boxes', I have to admit that it is very practical!

Then again, practicality is not a good term to define my musical preferences.

BUT. If it were to sound nice AND be practical, then wow!

3db, the main reason I am considering the z9 is the rest of its capabilities. After all, it was 10 times the price of my receiver when I bought mine and now I can get it at the same price as the Arcam! Does this mean it is a better amp than mine? You bet! Better than the stereo Arcam? I don't know!

Buying the Arcam would mean having two amps in my system - one for stereo, one for home theater. This is annoying to me. It also means that I would have to invest in a good DAC, since the Arcam is fully analog and I have recently learned not to trust my yamaha very much (would it make a good DAC? Who knows...). That's 3 machines. Plus my equalizer, 4. But I know that this setup would sound much better from my current one.

On the other hand, I get rid of everything (except the eq), I buy the z9 at the same price as the Arcam and I place my bet! Unless if someone who has actually heard the z9 in stereo chimes in...

Your thoughts?

Hi Thanasis,

With everything that you are saying in your own post, you are giving yourself the best and definitive answer to your very own question.

At only $1,800, the Yamaha RX-Z9 is a sure thing, an absolute no-brainer.
I will definitively buy it if it was only for it's 2-channel music reproduction in my own system (analog and definitively digital), period!

This should be as clear as the water running from the highest mountains of the world, the Himalayas.

Bob

 

[CraigV]

One option:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Arcam-AVR350-A-V-Surround-Receiver-Absolute-Sound-2750_W0QQitemZ220425064071QQcmdZViewItemQQptZReceivers_Tuners?hash=item33525b8e87&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65:12|66:2|39:1|72:1234|240:1318|301:0|293:1|294:50

And another, with warranty

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?miscrcvr&1249156976&/Arcam-Avr350-Fantastic-amp/pre

 

[bandphan]

if its just going to be a toss up in a price range

http://cgi.ebay.com/Krell-Showcase-Processor-with-Two-Year-Krell-Warranty_W0QQitemZ330331909195QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item4ce950ec4b&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72:2075|66:2|65:12|39:1|240:1318|301:0|293:1|294:50
+ http://emotiva.com/xpa5.shtm

 

[Lordoftherings]

Are we going in another direction?

OK, now we are completely out from the original question!

But I must admit that Craig and Bandphan founded links are quite interesting to take into consideration.

About if I find you the best deal for best sound quality for both Stereo 2-channel listening as well Mutichannel Surround Sound in one system only?
And at a price lower than $1,800 with better sound quality than the Yamaha RX-Z9??? And don't forget that here we have complete amplification and preamplification in a full Surround system setup with both 2-channel and multichannel state-of-the-art sound quality.

I'll look, but I really doubt that I can come up with a better deal than the RX-Z9 at this moment.

Bob

 

[bandphan]

OK, now we are completely out from the original question!

But I must admit that Craig and Bandphan founded links are quite interesting to take into consideration.

About if I find you the best deal for best sound quality for both Stereo 2-channel listening as well Mutichannel Surround Sound in one system only?
And at a price lower than $1,800 with better sound quality than the Yamaha RX-Z9??? And don't forget that here we have complete amplification and preamplification in a full Surround system setup with both 2-channel and multichannel state-of-the-art sound quality.

I'll look, but I really doubt that I can come up with a better deal than the RX-Z9 at this moment.

Bob

Agreed about direction. If it were me Id just get the Z7 for a hair more and be done If the primary goal is two channel, Id go just that route pre and amp. Do we know what speakers? If its just the two that were in the OP, the Z9 hands down

 

[Lordoftherings]

The OP original 1st post.

Hi everyone!

Does any of you guys have experience with both Arcam FMJ-A38 and Yamaha RX-Z9 for stereo use, please? For various tedious reasons, I have to choose between the two (I know they are very different, but...). I am particularly interested in how they compare as stereo amplifiers. Also, how would the Z9 be as a DAC for stereo use?

I have auditioned only the Arcam and found it a very big improvement over what I am using now (Yamaha rxv 1500). Unfortunately, I cannot audition the z9 before I buy it. Would the z9 manage to reach (or surpass) Arcam's stereo quality and "musicality"?

Any input from personal experience would be more than welcome!

Thanks a lot!

Thanasis

Here Bandphan, the original first post by the OP.
He did not mentioned any model of speakers.
Perhaps, we should just ask him.

But it doesn't really matter with the Yamaha RX-Z9, does it?

By the way Bandphan, I really like your system with all these nice components in your living room. And your bedroom too. You definitively have some very good taste.

Bob

 

[Thanasis]

Thank you!

Hi there!

First my apologies for taking some time to reply but things in my life got a little hectic recently.

Lordodtherings, you are absolutely right in your observation. The thread is indeed starting to divert, but don't worry! The Z9 option is still alive

Craig and Bandphan, I really appreciate the time you took to find alternative solutions to my problem! I have seen your links and I have been trying to find relevant reviews to help me understand better where you are coming from.

Given that the AVR350 is an Arcam and I have auditioned and liked... an Arcam, I think that I will focus on the 350 for a start. So, I have three questions at the moment:

1) Will the 350 perform DAC and audio processing of film DVDs and then output the TWO FRONT channels via the tape loop? The manual does not say it will not, but I think I read in a forum from an owner that the 350's tape loop will work only when the amp's DSP is not working.

2) When I auditioned the A38, I played it from an Arcam CD player via RCAs. We had to crank up the volume up to 55, in order to fill my room with music, but at that level things were pretty alive (A38's distortion levels are at 60). The A38 is 100 wpc and so is the 350. Given that I will feed the 350 digitally and not via RCAs, will I need more amplification power than what I would need for an RCA fed signal? To put it more simply, do digital and RCS inputs require the same amplification to achieve the same sound levels?

3) Has anyone actually heard an A38 vs a 350??? (or a 350 vs a Z9 for that matter)

Once more, a big thank you to all of you for your willingness to help me out!

Thanasis

 

[CraigV]

What’s the reasoning for wanting the tape loop involvement?