AV processor + stereo amp vs. AV receiver

One thing to to think of is:
If you go the separates route and you find an amp you love, you only need to upgrade your processor if you must have newer technology down the road. Basically, it's the technology in your processor that changes much more rapidly than an amp. Just something to think about. . .

To first approximation, this shouldn't make a difference. Modern quality equipment sounds good in both applications. To second approximation, with a limited budget, one should invest most in quality front speakers. Left, center and right speakers should be as nearly identical as possible. The type, number and models of the two (or four) surround speakers is slightly less important unless you listen to a lot of multi-channel music mixes which place the performers all around the listening position. In that case, all of the speakers should be as nearly identical as possible.

Don't forget the need for a subwoofer, too. The presence of quality low frequencies provide a significant improvement in the listening environment. Many "full range" speakers fall off quickly even in the not-quite-so-low frequency range present in most music.


Like most modern high-end audio equipment, the amount of distortion present in the AV7005 design is so low as to be inaudible. With gain levels matched, room equalization disabled and selecting "pure direct" (no processing), and all other environmental factors identical (amps, speakers & room), you shouldn't be able to hear any difference between it and any solid-state stereo preamp of comparable or better quality. If you can hear a difference, one of the units is defective. Of course, sonic qualities are not the only reasons for choosing one piece of equipment over another.


Sadly, the licensing for HDMI capable equipment, which can provide the highest quality digital audio and video, explicitly includes an "analog sunset" provision. In the next few years, equipment which includes HDMI connectivity will not be allowed to provide high resolution analog connections.


At those prices, no. In particular, a $2000 (list) Denon 4311ci should produce a superior audible result when compared to a Marantz AV7005 plus external amps because of its more advanced room equalization firmware.

The room equalization firmware available in modern AVRs can make a significant improvement in the quality of the sound you hear. Without it, you will have to invest more time in selecting quality speakers, their placement, and in room treatments to produce comparable quality sound. Combining both methods should, of course, produce superior results.

Sadly, the version of Audyssey available in the AV7005 is not the most advanced version. In particular, it does not do as good a job equalizing subwoofers as does the XT32 version available in high-end Denon receivers or the Integra DHC 80.3. They'd be significantly more expensive, though.

Because so few pre/pros are manufactured, receivers with comparable features and quality are less expensive because of the economies of mass production. You'll pay at least a 50% premium to go with separates. For reasons other than just audio quality, though, many people find that additional expense acceptable. Construction quality, thermal design, and aesthetics all can make a difference. In particular, the aesthetics of having a high quality all-analog entertainment solution is very important to many people.

The Cambridge Audio 650R receiver is probably what you want.

It puts out 100 watts per channel with all 7 channels driven; a very rare thing.

It is also set up so you can use the spare channels to biamp the front speakers if you have a 5.1 system, which gives 200 watts per channel for the front two speakers.

Home Theater magazine did a review where they said that it is the best-sounding receiver you can buy. I suggest that you read the article and then buy one. I think it runs about $1800.

In my opinion the 650R is the Rolls-Royce of receivers when it comes to audio sound quality and power; nothing I have heard even comes close.

Sadly, Cambridge equipment does not yet include any room equalization functionality.

Get an AVR with Audyssey XT32 or ARC (Anthem) that has pre-outs. You can always add an external amp for some of the channels if you want. You can use the built in amps for the surrounds or a second zone. This is still more cost effective than a separate pre-amp. You'd have to spend at least $2500 to get a dedicated pre/pro with XT32, you can get an AVR with good room correction for no more than $1300. Add an Emotiva 2 or 3 channel amp and you're still spending less than you'd have to just for the separate pre/pro.
Put most of your money into the best speakers you can afford. Unlike electronics, you shouldn't have to replace them for many years. My L/R speakers are 25 years old. I'm on my 3rd set of electronics just to keep up with major changes in technology.

You are not getting "the most quality for the money" by discarding important features to get a "name brand." The above sentence is illogical.


As Selden explained quite well, there is no "bottleneck" here - you can pick up a ~$500 AVR and use it as your pre-amp with absolutely no problem; spending more money only makes sense if you're adding features. There is no ethereal "sound quality" variable that cost correlates with.

In terms of how you should intelligently spend your money:

- Room
- Speakers (including a subwoofer; I do get that you said "high end stereo" - a subwoofer is still needed)
- Everything else

At least half of your money should go into the top two.

If you just want to dump good money after bad and buy very over-priced and highly marked-up equipment that does not reflect the last 35 years of the state of the art, that's your own choice. But it is not a choice based on rational/logical consideration of the options.

You should spend the majority of your research time looking at speakers, not gear. Find a nice pair of speakers that you'd like as your main left/right, and see if the manufacturer makes companion speakers for surround (many manufacturers do) - those are the surround speaker to get (alternately just buy five or six or whatever of the same exact speaker). Add a subwoofer or two or four depending on how large your room is. Then you just have to find a compatible amplifier (which may be included in an AV receiver), and add that. I would absolutely not suggest any of the "hi-fi" brands that lack any sort of modern EQ suite - you can go find a surround receiver from the late 1990s or early 2000s and get the same exact effect, and spend thousands less. At least, that's the logical way to do it - again, if you have other machinations for how your money is best spent, by all means, do what delights you.

Yes.

Integrated gives the most functionality and audio quality for the money, although Cambridge is not the best example since it lacks some functionality -- i.e. room equalization.


If you want to add a stereo preamp (e.g. for a phonograph turntable), be sure to get one that provides "home theater bypass". One set of its inputs are connected to the home-theater system's L&R front channel preamp outputs. When on by itself, such a preamp drives the L&R front channels on its own. When in bypass mode, it is effectively out of the circuit and front L&R HT channels are passed through it unchanged to the external amps driving the L&R speakers.

If you decide to do this a few years from now, by that time there will be new home theater options which would make any current home theater electronics seem to be outdated, and thus might be considered a "bottleneck." The industry is working franticly to come up with the next big feature to tempt customers into believing that they need to purchase something new. It looks like the next major feature is going be 4K video: images with approximately 4Kx2K resolution. Current HD video is about 2Kx1K.


It depends on your time scale and what you mean by "upgrade". For the next few years, an AVR like the 4311, which includes preamp outputs, should be more than adequate as the heart of a high quality audio/video system. If, for example, you feel the need for more amplification or for a stereo preamp, they're easily added. If, after that, you want to upgrade to a 4K system, you'll need to upgrade both the HDMI video processing and the display device. (4K systems are actually available now, but they cost more than 10x your current budget.)

Other forms of upgrading, like enhancing network connectivity and adding compatibility with more audio and video formats, can easily be provided by other, much less expensive, components. Commodity Blu-ray players (ones costing less than $200) provide those kinds of features and are rapidly evolving to include more, for example.