Arcam, NAD or Integra

Did the Arcam 600 click and pop when you audition it? Mine didn't seem to that much when I used it on its own, maybe 1-2x. I now have an Onkyo 818 as a processor feeding the Arcam's MCH inputs so I get Audyssey MultEQ XT32 (it's THE thing to have around here) and other features lacking in the Arcam - best of both worlds.

I got my Arcam only a few months old as 'used' for half price so with the Onkyo it comes to about $4K, which is NAD's MSRP but NAD only has Audyssey MultEQ. I wouldn't pay even 25% off full price for the Arcam which is getting dated in features. I had NAD back in 2001 and now it is too expensive. NAD has its fair share of problems too.

Integra is just Onkyo with a higher price.

There ARE differences between Integra and Onkyo, especially for custom installs. You can find better power supplies and toroidal transformers on some models, and some more esoteric (if minor) features at times. Moving up to the high end of the Onkyo line will get you into Integra territory for the most part.

NAD has always provided a lot of bang for the buck, but they've had a history with reliability issues. I've had an integrated amp and 2 CD players all give me problems. I don't know how they're doing these days, but they've got me spooked for life.

If you start a Blu-ray disc, it goes through various silent screens, previews and menu before the movie. So you would have encountered different audio formats. Previews and menu are usually DD or 2CH.

Yes but do the differences improve SQ?

My NAD AVR's power on LED went and the CD player's drive wouldn't close.

If I pay $4k for the NAD787 I would actually go up to the M15HD. I've not heard anything bad around here. Problem with non-mass market brands is they don't have the best room correction and they have a fair share of bugs. If you want more reliability then Integra or Denon would be a better bet. Onkyo has a bad reputation here and currently the 818 has the 24p bug and there is uncertainty if it's present in other Onkyo, or Integra for that matter.

I'm confused. You say a few thousand... To me that means not more than 2k. So why are you looking at 3k, 4k, and 6k receivers?

I like my NAD 747. I've had no issues. If I had to do it again, I would probably upgrade to a 757. They are on sale now.

The new Cambridge Audio 651R receiver is what you might want to consider.

It is the Rolls-Royce of receivers IMO; the only thing I can recommend if you want the BEST sound quality in your system.

It is available for $1999 from a couple of retailers, and is a bargain at that price.

The Arcam is very good also, but way overpriced by comparison.

You have a lot of time until next fall. Perhaps you could take a turn towards separates:D. Lots of new processor's hitting the market which might mean prices may come down a little, and you can shop for more power in a separate power amp. I love my Arcam AVP700 every time I power it on. It's an older processor, so I miss some of today's desirable features. It's been a flawless piece of equipment for me. Processors today come in many different price ranges.and features.

If money was no factor then I would go with the Arcam. One of the best AVR's I've ever heard. The 600 is long in the tooth and probably will be updated or totally replaced in the line at some point. You might also have a look at the 400 as it has much of the SQ as the 600, minus the rail switching amps of course so it may have trouble driving some speakers with a full 5 or 7.1 arrangement. Though Arcam is honest when it comes to power specs so you will get wpc for all channels driven. The only Arcam model I would stay away from would be the 360. I had to return two of them, both with defective HDMI boards. Even the ones at the showroom did exhibit problems anytime a blu-ray was loaded. Screen would go black and you would have to cycle through inputs to get the picture to come back. The dealer I bought the 360 from knew about this issue, but sold them anyway without telling the customers, a very douche move. Anyway with the exception of that particular model, I would choose Arcam over the brands you have listed.

Have not heard the Cambridge though. So it might also be worth demoing.
Edited by Matts - 1/23/13 at 11:10pm

Sadly I think Arcam payed little notice to the video side of things in their newer, lower end line of AVR's. Arcam's roots are grounded in the old analog days, they have had some minor problems adjusting to the whole digital revolution. Even some of their updates to the 400 and 600 lines have lacked some basic digital surround codecs and when they finally do get around to a hardware update, it tends to have a lot of bugs that take another few months to get the necessary firmware update. Heck they just this past year finally got around to adding 3D support for the 600 and that is their flagship, wowzers.

But if you can ignore the minor side effects, the audio quality they produce is extraordinary.

If I were in the market for a new AVR for primarily HT purposes, my short list would be Denon 4520ci, Onkyo NR 5010, or Pioneer Elite SC67/68.

Any one of those would easily perform as well if not better than the NAD or Arcam, IMO. And all are more feature-filled.

The distinction between music and HT is arbitrary, when there are concert videos, operas and music only Blu-rays. I just watched one concert video BD with 5.1 24/96 lossless audio, which DVD-Audio and SACD could match in audio spec over 10 years ago. I've always felt what's good for one is good for the other. Now with lossless audio on Blu-ray the boundary between pure music and movie track is blurred. Movie music can be real music often played by an orchestra. The new features that work with movie tracks such as room correction and dynamic EQ work with MCH music too.

There is no need to be forced to choose one to the exclusion of the other. A receiver coupled to a stereo amp for the main front speakers can be a way to improve 2CH music with little compromise. Or better, a receiver coupled to a stereo integrated amp with HT bypass: this gives you the additional flexibility of using a pure 2CH analogue source such as vinyl or a CD player with good analogue outputs, etc.

Rather than soliciting brand names randomly, you have to decide apart from subjective SQ, do you actually need any other features in a modern receiver, such as video processing, the new digital processing modes, streaming, room correction, USB etc. Here on AVS people overwhelmingly choose AVRs based on features and budget. If you need some of these new features then you're not likely to find many of these outside the mainstream mass market brands.

If you don't then why would you need to update your old Integra for HT, just because of new speakers? Not enough power? Add power amps. If it's back to just subjective SQ, then it's back to square one and with non-mass market brands it never a case of bang for the buck compared to the mass market ones.

Just about every brand, mainstream or otherwise has its problems one way or another at some time. Pioneer, Denon and Onkyo all have dissatisfied customers just as NAD, Arcam, Cambridge Audio and Anthem. Well the Bryston SP3 users are very happy but it costs $10k. The new Arcam successor to the AVR600 will no doubt cost more than the 600 so it's not likely a viable option. Also trying a newly released AVR is risky especially given Arcam's track record and your particular bad luck with the 300 (I've heard no one else complaining about the 300).

To throw out another suggestion, Audiolab processor (about $2k) plus MCH power amp of whatever brand you fancy, bare features, no video, good review of SQ and plenty of power.