cheesehead Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 combined 2ch and ht system here as well. goodness of the 2ch amp driving the mains also helps the ht side Same here and absolutely no regrets Have actually taken it a step further as well with running the ML1s (surrounds) with mono-blocks, monoblocks are right next to the ML1s with some RCA cable runs and short speaker cables, would recommend this setup too. Really let's the AV receiver do the processing and amplify the centre speaker only, definitely getting some more punch out of the centre as a result. Maybe off-topic as i guess it's just one step away from separate pre/pro... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoggieHowser Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 I've been thinking that the ht bypass idea could be used to set up an intimate two channel, by using the rears of a 5.1 setup with a suitably sweet integrated. Just for a different listening option.Could even plonk a TT on top for the dark side lads. I'd considered that at one point but in HT it helps to have timbre matching so it makes more sense to invest more for the front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scratcher Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 I have done the full circle, starting off with a 2 channel integrated I then added an AVR with L R pre outs to the integrated then decided to loose the whole surround setup after changing to speakers with better stereo imaging and the Nad M51 I don't miss my centre channel etc. Cheers Liam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mello yello Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) Why do AVR receivers lack so much even when using them as 2 channel playback ? Not sure if Im going OT here, but its related to the general idea the OP is talking about, so I suppose the question could be to the OP, why is it that this needs to be done ? Is it a simple case of power rating specs where an AVR is rated at say 100W (as an AVR ) it only produces say 25W in real stereo terms ? or is it the AVR circuitry that lets it down when compared to a 2 channel integrated amp. Is it because the lower frequencies are "lost" or diverted to account for a sub. Would a 200W AVR for example compensate.? Is it inbuilt equalisation in an AVR ? edit: my AVR has the typical marantz direct mode, but that doesnt really affect the overall sound, I just noticed a huge hole when I switched from an integrated amp rated at 4 times less output than the AVR ( same speakers) Edited January 30, 2013 by mello yello Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joz Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Not sure Mello. I have quite a reasonable/good AVR, it would have retailed about $2.5k.(YammyRXV-3800) As a pre its not really bad but still not a patch on the dedicated pre I use. As an intergrated pre and amp it really falls short of a dedicated pre/power combo. As a ht receiver it does very well. But IMO there is too much going on within which adds some stuff and strangles other stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mello yello Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 thanks joz, possibly as close an explanation as can be made...an AVR is purpose built and an integrated amp, the same 2 different horses for 2 different courses, however the power ratings can be confusing ( at best) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 "As a pre its not really bad but still not a patch on the dedicated pre I use." I spent a lot of time going back and forth between 2 channel / surround setup with preamps, processors, AVRs, etc. (Including some reasonably expensive "audiophile" AVRs) What common theme I eventually found.... was that the quality of the preamp was much more important than the amps. I guess what I mean is that AVR amps, or large multichannel home theatre poweramps, or good stereo amps ... all when used with in their limits with middle of the road designed speakers ..... will make less of a difference between each other than The difference between preamps between say, AVRs or HT processors, VS good seperate preamps or integrated/passives (when used carefully). That being my experience, my recommendation for anyone who wants "stereo music" from a HT system .... should look for a preamp with a "HT bypass" (defeatable volume control for a specific input) ... and run their surround system into that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joz Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 That being my experience, my recommendation for anyone who wants "stereo music" from a HT system .... should look for a preamp with a "HT bypass" (defeatable volume control for a specific input) ... and run their surround system into that. As I have done, best of both worlds! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betty boop Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 Why do AVR receivers lack so much even when using them as 2 channel playback ? Not sure if Im going OT here, but its related to the general idea the OP is talking about, so I suppose the question could be to the OP, why is it that this needs to be done ? Is it a simple case of power rating specs where an AVR is rated at say 100W (as an AVR ) it only produces say 25W in real stereo terms ? or is it the AVR circuitry that lets it down when compared to a 2 channel integrated amp. Is it because the lower frequencies are "lost" or diverted to account for a sub. Would a 200W AVR for example compensate.? Is it inbuilt equalisation in an AVR ? edit: my AVR has the typical marantz direct mode, but that doesnt really affect the overall sound, I just noticed a huge hole when I switched from an integrated amp rated at 4 times less output than the AVR ( same speakers) its all the way through, starting with analog capability they usually are a bit stripped back as most avrs typically used with digital inputs. even there you'll find the dacs used will be budget affairs ie $2 8ch dac on a chip vs say more elaborate dac implementations than what will find in most disc players and standalone dacs. the pre amp stage is often in the digital domain restricted by the onboard dac or if analog very rudimentary again because typically geared for digital inputs. the power amp stage is usually constricted by internal space limitations of fitting 7 ch of amplification including power supply and cooling etc which usually are what suffer. that is not to say good avrs dont exist you just have to pay for them I think. eg the denon 4308 I owned had a decent analog capability but had 7 ! power supplies and quite an elaborate dac implementation. was a big mutha too and cost nearly $5k ! the A series avrs denon make is step up again with more elaborate amps, dacs and power stages etc an easy path if chasing good 2ch ability with an av system is just augment with some dedicated analog gear, with source and 2ch integrated or pre-pwr with ht bypass. best of both worlds indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mello yello Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 actually al I fired up my marantz SR6005 in multi channel stereo mode today and gave Brothers In Arms a loud spin, and tell you what...Im happy Orpheus Auroras with Mission M5C set at -5db, nice shake of the house, and a nice soundstage across the front i think music is an emotional appreciation sometimes, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freedom Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 I don't miss my centre channel etc. Cheers Liam What about your 'surround' left and right speakers? They deliver a more 'surround' (ha ha) stereo experience, and one which I personally find enthralling when cranking up the tunes when I really want to get a buzz! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mello yello Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 its all the way through, starting with analog capability they usually are a bit stripped back as most avrs typically used with digital inputs. even there you'll find the dacs used will be budget affairs ie $2 8ch dac on a chip vs say more elaborate dac implementations than what will find in most disc players and standalone dacs. the pre amp stage is often in the digital domain restricted by the onboard dac or if analog very rudimentary again because typically geared for digital inputs. the power amp stage is usually constricted by internal space limitations of fitting 7 ch of amplification including power supply and cooling etc which usually are what suffer. that is not to say good avrs dont exist you just have to pay for them I think. eg the denon 4308 I owned had a decent analog capability but had 7 ! power supplies and quite an elaborate dac implementation. was a big mutha too and cost nearly $5k ! the A series avrs denon make is step up again with more elaborate amps, dacs and power stages etc an easy path if chasing good 2ch ability with an av system is just augment with some dedicated analog gear, with source and 2ch integrated or pre-pwr with ht bypass. best of both worlds indeed so if you were to compare just the apples with apples, a AVR's stereo stage would basically be worth about a 1/4 in value and quality as an integrated stereo amps componentry,... I can see that my old marantz PM45 had some nice ceramic capacitors, I doubt the SR6005 would have anything as elaborate, thanks al might still dream about a Pearl though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betty boop Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 actually al I fired up my marantz SR6005 in multi channel stereo mode today and gave Brothers In Arms a loud spin, and tell you what...Im happy Orpheus Auroras with Mission M5C set at -5db, nice shake of the house, and a nice soundstage across the front i think music is an emotional appreciation sometimes, and thats the thing as long as hits the spot ! so if you were to compare just the apples with apples, a AVR's stereo stage would basically be worth about a 1/4 in value and quality as an integrated stereo amps componentry,... I can see that my old marantz PM45 had some nice ceramic capacitors, I doubt the SR6005 would have anything as elaborate, thanks al might still dream about a Pearl though dollar for dollar have always found cheaper to achieve better 2ch with dedicated 2ch gear. stands to reason I guess ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jel Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 (edited) If you had a fixed budget, and wanted good surround AND good 2ch, would it be better to invest in a better AVR? eg if you only had $2k to spend, do you buy an AVR for $1k and an integrated for $1k, or spend $2k on a better AVR? Just wondering..... ps don't bother with buy one now and then add the other, or "you don't need a centre channel', that's not the point of this hyperthetical!! Edited February 1, 2013 by jel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodice Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 If you had a fixed budget, and wanted good surround AND good 2ch, would it be better to invest in a better AVR?eg if you only had $2k to spend, do you buy an AVR for $1k and an integrated for $1k, or spend $2k on a better AVR? Just wondering..... ps don't bother with buy one now and then add the other, or "you don't need a centre channel', that's not the point of this hyperthetical!! I'd buy a second hand NAD integrated and then an AVR with the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scratcher Posted February 1, 2013 Share Posted February 1, 2013 What about your 'surround' left and right speakers? They deliver a more 'surround' (ha ha) stereo experience, and one which I personally find enthralling when cranking up the tunes when I really want to get a buzz! I only had small rears so haven't missed those and the mains crank loud enough to give the whole neighbourhood a buzzIt's been fun tinkering with surround audio and agree its enthralling listening to a good quality concert in DTSHD or TRUEHD Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mello yello Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 (edited) If you had a fixed budget, and wanted good surround AND good 2ch, would it be better to invest in a better AVR?eg if you only had $2k to spend, do you buy an AVR for $1k and an integrated for $1k, or spend $2k on a better AVR? Just wondering..... ps don't bother with buy one now and then add the other, or "you don't need a centre channel', that's not the point of this hyperthetical!! This might take you slightly over $2K but the apples for apples comparison is for you to evaluate... you can get a pretty good AVR (one that decodes all the latest HD formats including 3D ) for $850 http://www.apollohifi.com.au/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=903&category_id=44&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=80 marantz SR5005 lets stick with the same brand and supplier to keep the apples in the apple cart...add a very nice 2 channel power amp ( 140wRMS ) at $1300 rrp http://www.apollohifi.com.au/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=871&category_id=9&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=80 marantz MM7025 or http://www.apollohifi.com.au/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=886&category_id=6&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=80 marantz PM7004 or a value judgement at $700 http://www.apollohifi.com.au/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=1183&category_id=6&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=80 marantz PM6004 compare that to what approx $2k would get you in AVR value http://www.apollohifi.com.au/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=1349&category_id=7&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=80 marantz SR7007 or http://www.apollohifi.com.au/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=907&category_id=7&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=80 marantz SR7005 and (I think), most of the costing in the AVR goes into the bells and whistles and other good features where $2k would get you that (really nice) power amp and a more than adequate AVR Edited February 2, 2013 by mello yello Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jel Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Don't get hung up about the $2k, it was only an arbitrary example. The question is would you get better 2ch (and still retain the surround features) from the more expensive AVR, rather than splitting the budget between an AVR and integrated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mello yello Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 (edited) Don't get hung up about the $2k, it was only an arbitrary example. The question is would you get better 2ch (and still retain the surround features) from the more expensive AVR, rather than splitting the budget between an AVR and integrated sorry, I thought you meant you had a fixed budget ... ok, 10 20 30 40 50K ...same story, its the ratio, ...half an AVR + half an amp i reckon will be better than a full AVR, you can even go one third of an AVR with two thirds amp and it will be far better than a full AVR...its the dedicated integrated amp that adds value to the equation ( figuratively speaking ) put another way, I doubt there is any AVR that would sound better (in stereo only) than an integrated amp up to half its price, most of the AVR is decoding and other componentry and the pricing isnt based on its stereo performance so the answer is no Edited February 2, 2013 by mello yello Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry218 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 using active speakers and active sub with pre pro prob the best way to get thx reference level at home. studio monitors with 6-8" woofers usually have enough grunt for it or use higher sens speaker such as horn or waveguides speakers (econowave and variants) and use them with the AVR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattjtaylor2809 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Or buy one of these & then spend your money on power amps. http://shop.emotiva.com/collections/processors/products/umc200/ Not sure how it will handle 2 ch stereo via it's pre, but @ $599 I'm considering this to replace my Marantz SR6005. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freedom Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Or buy one of these & then spend your money on power amps. http://shop.emotiva.com/collections/processors/products/umc200/ Not sure how it will handle 2 ch stereo via it's pre, but @ $599 I'm considering this to replace my Marantz SR6005. Very impressive piece of equipment. (especially for the price). That looks like a good option for me as I would like to upgrade to a processor with HDMI. (but not spend too much). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moochy Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Here's a tough one to decide, running a set of b&w's FPM5's to a 2nd zone, my choices are run strait out of a denon avr3313 or pre out to 65wpc of early 90's rotel power amp. Thoughts are welcome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roh008 Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 This thread is right up my street.. planning my upgrade path as we speak. I need a new AVR anyway to support 3D.. don't need 4K that's just marketing hype for now (Probably looking at the Denon 3313). But do need one that has the ability to run L/R through separate amps. The music is stored digitally so will be coming in via HDMI, will therefore get processes by the AVR DACs then out the the 2Ch amp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moochy Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Yes no problem I run a 2 ch power amp off my 3313. Simply connect the unbalanced pre outs to the L&R inputs of the power amp and away you go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts