Receivers? Are they catching up?

[rollo]

  With todays advances in Receivers are we overlooking something as staunch Audiophiles? I think they are catching up. What do you think?


  rollo

[LKdog]

Any examples?
Been out of loop on them for awhile and still use a 6 year old Denon for HT duty.

I have a buddy whom needs to upgrade his pre/power setup and he might really like a decent DTS receiver if there is one that can do 2 ch.

[richidoo]

On the SS end they are getting better all the time, but still no new tube receivers. I'm not holding my breath!

Kal Rubinson reviewed Denon 4806 last year, and refrained from critiquing the amplifier section, even though he loved the processing. He said the amps were adequate. Mid fi speakers and ignorance of the high end possibilties are probably necessary to fully enjoy a reciever. The Lexicon is supposed to sound pretty darn good ($6k+).

Nice topic. I used to love reading about the big iron receivers, lots of specs and features to compare!
Rich

[biglou]

anyone heard the Magnum Dynalab receiver? its damn expensive, but i imagine they make a decent product.

[WEEZ]

As a matter of fact, I've heard the Magnum Dynalab receiver. It sounded very nice. The guy had it running with a pair of Snell K7 speakers and an Arcam cd spinner.

The amplification in this receiver (and the integrated) is said to be made by Sim. It is based on the Celeste series of amplifiers. Maybe not up to Moon sonics, but far from shabby, IMO.

If I lived in an area where I had some good FM stations to listen to, I'd have a Magnum Dynalab tuner in my system in a heartbeat. But such is not the case

WEEZ

[Carlman]

I just bought an Onkyo TX-8522 for my bedroom and bathroom in-ceiling speakers... does that count?
The reviews on Amazon look very promising, I'm hoping it's at least 'good'.  I don't expect it to replace my Mc gear, though.   Speaking of, McIntosh does make some beefy-looking receivers but I've never heard them.

I think the future may be more suited to using digital/chip/switching amps in the receivers like the Sharp's and Panasonic's of yesteryear.  Are they going to blow me away? no.  But, will they sound really good for a couple-hundred?  Yes!

[Bigfish8]

I have a Denon 3806 AVR which serves as my amp for the CC and rear speakers and preamp for HT Processing.  Prior to compiling my current 2 channel system I used the Denon on occasion to play a CD while driving Monitor Audio 9is.  The 3806 is a pretty highly respected HT Receiver (120 Watts/channel) in the mid-price range and I was really happy with HT Movie Sound.  However, as happy as I was with HT, I was equally unhappy with the receiver for 2 channel. 

While building my current system I have learned and am continuing to learn more and more about 2 channel systems.  I do not believe any manufacturer can put a tuner, 5 to 7 amps and a preamp into one box without making compromises.  Arcam makes some really high-end HT receivers but I believe they are really targeted at HT Sound Reproduction, not 2 channel. 

If you could have the rich sound quality from an all inclusive box, what a deal that would be?  No ICs, no preamp, wow what a savings!!  Oh well, I guess everything is about choices.   I have made mine and I am not going back regardless of what the manufacturers claim.

Ken

[richidoo]

Mid fi speakers and ignorance of the high end possibilties are probably necessary to fully enjoy a reciever.

Well now there's another stupid snobby statement from me. 2 in one day. I don't know what I was smoking today - Sorry. I started with an Onkyo 601, and got a ton of pleasure out of it, so much that I decided to venture further into this great hobby. It still serves TV duty and sounds great on that too. Receivers are the gateway to the high end for most people, and are very enjoyable.

I think what I meant to say was that once you go into higher performance components, it is hard to go back to a receiver as the main listening system, because you're spoiled by the precision sound and your brain will be trained  to notice the difference. But if you haven't spent much time with a high end audio system, then the receiver will be very enjoyable, especially when matched with appropriate speakers in same price bracket. Ultra high resolution speakers might be a little too revealing of the reciever's compromises and therefore a waste of money where good mid fi speakers would be just as rewarding, maybe more.
Thanks for the 2nd try..
Rich

[Hantra]

anyone heard the Magnum Dynalab receiver? its damn expensive, but i imagine they make a decent product.

It's a fantastic receiver.  It sounds warm, clean, and surprisingly powerful at the same time.  The tuner is dead quiet, and one of the best I've heard (as it should be).  It's easily the best receiver I've ever heard, but if you want theater too, look at Arcam.  They make a fine receiver with the best 2 channel performance for a receiver in its price range. 

[rollo]

Well for me its the EL34 based VAC Avatar at $4000 which leads the pack. Steve Rochlin did a review in 2000. Give it a read.


  rollo

[Black Sand Cable]

I do a fair number of HT installs for people I know (at least one a week for the last few months) and as a result I get to try out a lot of stuff using other peoples money.

Based on the above, I would say that some receivers have in fact caught up and can be considered on par with many separates. The separates crowd won't like to hear that but I honestly believe it. Don't believe me?.....check out the Arcam AVR-350, NAD T-773, Sunfire TG3, Denon 4806ci. I have installed all of the those models recently and they are all scary good. Onkyo's 2007 line up is also scary good and in particular the TX-SR805. I have a friend of mine who wants me to put together a system for him using this receiver but to date I haven't been able to find one at a decent price. I have auditioned it already and I thought it was a very nice receiver. However if I don't get my hands on one soon I may switch him over to the 4806ci if he can swing the extra cash. If he didn't need HDMI switching, I would use the NAD T-773 in a second as the sound it provides is as good as my current McIntosh pre and has power to burn.

The funny part for me is that some of the receivers I listed above are not all that expensive especially when compared to separates. When you get into the more expensive stuff, you get even better results. B&K to name one...makes nice shit.

Just my two cents.....

[Black Sand Cable]

I have a Denon 3806 AVR which serves as my amp for the CC and rear speakers and preamp for HT Processing.  Prior to compiling my current 2 channel system I used the Denon on occasion to play a CD while driving Monitor Audio 9is.  The 3806 is a pretty highly respected HT Receiver (120 Watts/channel) in the mid-price range and I was really happy with HT Movie Sound.  However, as happy as I was with HT, I was equally unhappy with the receiver for 2 channel. 

While building my current system I have learned and am continuing to learn more and more about 2 channel systems.  I do not believe any manufacturer can put a tuner, 5 to 7 amps and a preamp into one box without making compromises.  Arcam makes some really high-end HT receivers but I believe they are really targeted at HT Sound Reproduction, not 2 channel. 

If you could have the rich sound quality from an all inclusive box, what a deal that would be?  No ICs, no preamp, wow what a savings!!  Oh well, I guess everything is about choices.   I have made mine and I am not going back regardless of what the manufacturers claim.

Ken

If I may make one suggestion....add a Parasound HCA-1500A into the mix to power your Monitor Audio Silver 9i's. Trust me you won't regret it and it's a cheap upgrade. The 3806 does a very good job of powering 9i's but the Parasound will give you some better control in the bottom end that the entire Silver line loves.

[Bigfish8]

If I may make one suggestion....add a Parasound HCA-1500A into the mix to power your Monitor Audio Silver 9i's. Trust me you won't regret it and it's a cheap upgrade. The 3806 does a very good job of powering 9i's but the Parasound will give you some better control in the bottom end that the entire Silver line loves.
[/quote]

John:

I loved my Denon Driven HT System - Monitor Audio Studio Series Center Channel, Monitor Audio Silver 9is for L&R, M&K 750 Sub and Axiom 8Qs for rears driven by the Denon 3806 with an Oppo DVD Player.  I was very satisfied with movie playback.  Currently, the Denon 3806 L and R outs are connected to the Candela Preamp which sends the signals to the Mono SEs that drive the current L&Rs which are the Timepieces.  I am not as happy with HT performance but it is most likely due to a great need for room treatments (most likely a room rearrangement will occur first).  I am currently trying to decide what to do with the Monitor 9is.  I guess I could integrate them into a 7.1 set-up but I am not so keen on that idea.  Just really concentrating on getting the 2 channel system in more or less of a finalized state --- not there yet!!

Ken

[steve]

If I may make a slight correction, all integrates, receivers etc have a preamplifier built in.
Over the last several years, some companies have just changed the name of the stage. I.e. I saw one string on audiogon where some was advertizing an integrated amplifier and stated they use a passive preamplifier stage, thus giving the impression they eliminated a stage. Actually they did not, but just renamed it as the first amplifier stage. Marketing, marketing.

Hope this helps.