Stereo Receiver for my Paradigm Atom v7

Don't worry about the wattage. Concentrate on the features you need (or might need in the future).

If you don't have a turntable now, I'd lean toward a receiver with more digital inputs. You can always get a phono preamp (they start around $50) when you buy the turntable (and many budget turntables have them built-in). I'd also look for a subwoofer pre-out. Eventually, you're going to want more bass than those Atoms can produce (which is almost none).

The Atoms are a very small speaker systems with response down to barely lower than 100 Hz, so any reasonable plan includes providing the means for adding a subwoofer, even if its only a relatively small one and down the road.

I am constantly amazed by the fact that while we see 2 channel receivers at $270 and $440 5,1 AVRs with more capabilities and similar power can be had for as little as

$170 http://www.amazon.com/Yamaha-RX-V371BL-5-1-Channel-V-Receiver/dp/B004QQXDVC and $240 http://www.amazon.com/Yamaha-RX-V373-5-1-Channel-AV-Receiver/dp/B007JF8FD8

As counter-intuitive as this seems, its all about economies of scale and the fact that 2 channel is a niche and surround is mainstream.

It is no secret that if you configure a 5.1 AVR for 2 speakers, it makes a wonderful stereo receiver.

I suggest that you consider the Music Hall A15.2 integrated amplifier.

IMO it is the best-sounding amplifier you can get for under $800, and Music Direct has it for only $499; a great deal.

It has 75 watts per channel and also has a built-in phono preamp.

Optical digital audio inputs have repeatedly been been evaluated by professional reviewers as having lower audio quality compared to standard analog inputs. I suggest you avoid them if possible.

I believe that the above comment distracts its readers from the best possible sound quality in their system a number of different of easily quantifiable ways.

The comment about "Optical digital audio inputs have repeatedly been been evaluated by professional reviewers as having lower audio quality compared to standard analog inputs" is meaningless because somewhere someplace a professional reviewer sometime has recommended everything from soup to nuts. When abused digital can be sonic poison and when the right solution they can be like money from heaven. Equally true of analog. It is all about the right tool for the right job!

First off I don't deny that Music Hall A15.2 is a good sounding integrated amplifier as far as it goes which is like going back to about 1975. Rather, I feel that it lacks important features that just about anybody assembling a modern system needs.

(1) The recommended equipment lacks digital inputs. I've found that just about everybody who is building a modern music system today is going to be wanting to get involved with music sources that have digital outputs. The right tool for this job is a digital input and no analog input is going to beat it because going analog just adds another necessary conversion from analog to digital to the system.

(2) The recommended equipment lacks bass management. I've found that a great many people have music systems with speakers that have significant limitations in bass dynamic range.

(3) The recommended equipment lacks an automated facility for system optimization. I've found that a great many people have music systems with speakers and other components that would benefit from an automated facility for system optimization (YPAO, MCACC, Audyssey).

(4) The recommended equipment lacks the ability to be upgraded to an effective multichannel system.

What this is really all about is a traditional approach to sound quality versus a modern approach to sound quality. Your money, make your choices. However it is 2012 going on 2013 and 1975 type solutions seem to be on their way out.

The signal will have to be converted to analog one way of another.


Not if you only have 2 speakers


For a 2 channel system, using one's 2 ears is more than sufficient.


This particular forum is about 2 channel audio, right?