AVR vs Integrated amp stereo production - when do they become comparable?

hiphopopotamus

Prominent Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
2,088
Reaction score
121
Points
438
Location
London
I'm sure this is a difficult question to answer, but this would defnitely be the place to ask it, so here it goes:

Take a good ~£300 integrated hi-fi amp (for the sake of argument, lets say the CA 650a, Marantz PM6003, or the Nad C326BEE).

At what price point would an AVR be comparable performance-wise in stereo mode to these integrated amps?

I know some AVRs will be much better performers at 2ch stereo than 7ch movie surround (and vice versa), but lets say we are looking at AVRs that are known to perform equally well with multi-channel movie and 2-channel music (the perfect amp :smashin:).

Can anybody get the ball rolling with amps/prices?

:thumbsup:
 
Just add a nought to the end of the price of the integrated stereo amp and you may get lucky :D

You'll have great trouble in matching the musical abilities you get from some of the benchmark stereo amps with a comparably priced AV amp. If you are hoping to have a system that is accomplished with both music and movies then a pre/processor and power amplification combo is probably your best bet, but this solution comes with a hefty price tag attached.

Integrated AV amps have to compromise in orde to fit all the extra gubbins inside of them. They've not the space to accommodate the isolated power supplies commonly found inside the more musically accomplished integrated stero amps and room also needs to be made for the various digtal DACs and other processors. Signal paths cannot be as easily shortened to give a clean pathe. Production costs of AV amps is far more likely to be expended on the additional interfaces that are expected to be found on AV amps than the actual quality of the components used.

One solution is to buy an AV amp with pre outs and use a dedicated stereo amp as a power amp for the front stereo pair. This will go some way to provide you with the kind of musical performance you'd expect from a dedicated stereo amp.
 
Last edited:
Option 1: Arcam avr600 which cost £3500.

option 2: A dirt cheap AV amp with pre outs coupled with a quality stereo amp.
 
option 3: a second hand high end non hd processor (lexicon/tag/arcam/parasound halo ect) into a separate power amp with analogue in to the processor from a hd decoding (to analogue)bluray player-like my pioneer 51fd for example.

-if my speakers wernt all at different distances id be doing this one myself, but due to this problem ive punted for option2.:smashin:
 
Option 1 is arguably the best av amp in the market right now within its price range.

With option 2, if one uses a "cheap" av amp to drive the centre and rear speakers and through the pre out add a stereo amp like the Arcam A38 to drive the fronts, the end result could outclass Option 1 with considerable savings.
 
Option 1 is arguably the best av amp in the market right now within its price range.

With option 2, if one uses a "cheap" av amp to drive the centre and rear speakers and through the pre out add a stereo amp like the Arcam A38 to drive the fronts, the end result could outclass Option 1 with considerable savings.

In this option, who drives the sub? I suppose it's the AV ...
With a configuration like this, does the possibility of having a bad combination of amps exists?

And, because of the different music quality of the stereo and the AV, couldn’t the end result become unbalanced?
 
In this option, who drives the sub? I suppose it's the AV ...
With a configuration like this, does the possibility of having a bad combination of amps exists?

And, because of the different music quality of the stereo and the AV, couldn't the end result become unbalanced?

That's why I created Option 1. Go for this option then your above problems will be solved.
 
Hi, I have been wondering how the Arcam AVR 600 compares to he Arcam A38
for stereo performance. Has anyone done a comparison.
 
My experience:

I used to have a Yamaha DSP-A5 which is a 5.1 amp and was about a £400 machine although I paid less, as you do. I used the front pre-outs to a Technics SU-A900 integrated amp (also about £400 and highly regarded), so whenever I was listening to music I only used the "better" power amp in the Technics.

However, the sound from a CD was better using only the Technics amp, with the Yamaha out of the loop completely. This is because the pre-amp is just as important as the power amp so I would always be limited by the Yamaha.

I replaced them both with a Sony STR-DA2400ES and I have to say the sound with music is better. No question, it's much better to my ears. More clarity and definition. This could be because the auto setup has optimised my speakers for the room. Or it could be because amps have got better.

It could also be that my ears are rubbish! That may well be true, but I do much prefer the Sony sound over my previous setup. I use just the front 2 speakers without the sub for music (B&W 603 S2 floor standers.)

So in summary, go to a decent hi-fi shop and compare a decent integrated versus a receiver at a similar price point and see if you can hear much difference. Also, if you going to be listening to compressed music - mp3 etc. - then you really are not discerning enough to warrant a separate integrated amp. Just my opinion.
 
I refuse to believe that you have to pay £3500 for an avr in order to get similar music capability as the £300 integrated amps I listed above.

Onkyo 905 comment from John - that sounds interesting - have you compared it musically to any £300ish integrated stereo amps?
 
Hiphopopotamus, not at the same time. But on memory I wouldnt change for anything South of £500. Bass management, speaker distance( ie delay ) etc, not to mention Audysee just gives me more freedom in setup and at thsi time I get alot of enjoyment out of my system.
 
Hi, I think some people on here too have high expectations for how equipment should perform. My current 6 year old Pioneer VSX-AX3 is the weakest link in my system and it is due for replacement.
I listen to it for stereo from my Arcam CD37 with MA GS 20 fronts. To my ears it still manages to produce very decent stereo sound.
It is excellent with multi-channel SACD I know there is better out there but at a much higher cost and possible inconvenience.
I had a Yamaha VSX-3800 which was a bit better than the Pioneer. I think that despite their short commings AV amps with decent sources and speakers can still give a decent sound especially if you concentrate on the music and not too much on the equipment.
I was so impressed with the Yamaha that I upgraded my speakers and CD player.
I had to return the Yamaha 3800 so I will replace my trusty Pioneer VSX-AX3 sometime next year.
Stereo performance is important so I am thinking I may get a Yamaha Z7 based on reports and my experience with the VSX-3800.
I am considering adding an Arcam A38 stereo amp to partner the Yamaha if I am not happy with the stereo sound. Alternatively I may just go for the expensive one box Arcam AVR 600.

As is always stated you really have to listen for yourself and see what you like and can justify in terms of expense.
Most people I know are amazed how good a system like mine sounds whilst others may find it not to thier liking.
By the way I still have my 20 year old stereo Rotel BX840 amp.
regards stasis.
 
Thanks john, I'll have a read up on the 905 and the other Onkyos around that model. Does anyone else have any opinions on this/other similarly specced models for music performance?

Stasis, thanks for the info on the yamahas. I do understand about going and hearing the things for yourself, but this is going to be a long term project, so it's going to take me a while before I get to that stage. And I don't want to turn up at a hifi store and ask to try every single combination they have - I'd definitely like to have an idea of whether I want a single avr for everything, or a cheaper avr + stereo amp. And if I didn't know that, then I'd like to have it narrowed down to a few combinations. And if I couldn't do that, then..... :suicide:
 
Hi, You are right to take your time to find out what suits your requirements and budget.
What speakers and equipment are you going to be using with the system?
You might get suggestions from the speaker forums if you already have speakers.
You probably need a budget to work to and take the component allocation from there.
A word of warning it is easy to get carried away and spend more than you budget for.:eek:
Still a well reaserched system should give you a lot of pleasure and last for years.
regards stasis.
 
Thanks john, I'll have a read up on the 905 and the other Onkyos around that model. Does anyone else have any opinions on this/other similarly specced models for music performance?

I'd not rate Onkyo with music. You're better off looking at the more laid back AV amps and combining them with clinical speakers. This type of combo is more conducive with conventional audiophile music combos than the clinical approach Onkyo take with their AV amps. Onkyo perform better with movies than with music and I'd not recommend them as being a good foundation for a system that performs well with both. If looking for musical performance then Onkyo wouldn't be the first thought to pop into my head.

Cambridge Audio, Marantz, Denon, Arcam, Nad, Rotel and even Yamaha would be better.
 
Last edited:
Stereo performance is important so I am thinking I may get a Yamaha Z7 based on reports and my experience with the VSX-3800.
.

The DSPZ7 is certainly worth an audition - especially with 'Pure Direct' option on for listening to music.
It was playing in this configuration at the demo that got my attention & finally purchase.
Obviously only relevant if you like the style of sound out of the amp.
 
I refuse to believe that you have to pay £3500 for an avr in order to get similar music capability as the £300 integrated amps I listed above.

Onkyo 905 comment from John - that sounds interesting - have you compared it musically to any £300ish integrated stereo amps?

Tend to agree. I think 10 times the price is a bit OTT. My Yamaha RX-V3800 is certainly much better than my (admittedly aged) Arcam Alpha 7. Maybe 3 to four times the price to get equivalent performance might be a better "ball park"?
 
My experience:

I used to have a Yamaha DSP-A5 which is a 5.1 amp and was about a £400 machine although I paid less, as you do. I used the front pre-outs to a Technics SU-A900 integrated amp (also about £400 and highly regarded), so whenever I was listening to music I only used the "better" power amp in the Technics.

However, the sound from a CD was better using only the Technics amp, with the Yamaha out of the loop completely. This is because the pre-amp is just as important as the power amp so I would always be limited by the Yamaha.

I replaced them both with a Sony STR-DA2400ES and I have to say the sound with music is better. No question, it's much better to my ears. More clarity and definition. This could be because the auto setup has optimised my speakers for the room. Or it could be because amps have got better.

It could also be that my ears are rubbish! That may well be true, but I do much prefer the Sony sound over my previous setup. I use just the front 2 speakers without the sub for music (B&W 603 S2 floor standers.)

So in summary, go to a decent hi-fi shop and compare a decent integrated versus a receiver at a similar price point and see if you can hear much difference. Also, if you going to be listening to compressed music - mp3 etc. - then you really are not discerning enough to warrant a separate integrated amp. Just my opinion.

So did you have your CD player connected to your AV amp? Surely the benefit of using a stereo amp from the preouts is that you put all the stereo sources direct to the stereo amp. The preouts are then used to transfer the front sound from 5.1 sources from the AV reciever to the stereo amp. The signal from the CD player should never have seen the yamaha.
As far as costs go a stereo amp is a 2.0 channel with most AV being 7.1 so you need to spend at least 3.5 times the cost of the stereo amp to have the same level of amplifier components in it. You then have the extra cost of processing circuits etc. to add on. So this puts you at least 4 times the cost. You then need to factor in how close all these components are together and how they are controlled. This again means you probably need to go slightly better in terms of quality etc. to get the same performance. So at least 5 times the cost is a easy figure to arrive at. So at least £1500 would be needed and probably more as there are probably other factors/costs I have not considered.
 
So did you have your CD player connected to your AV amp? Surely the benefit of using a stereo amp from the preouts is that you put all the stereo sources direct to the stereo amp. The preouts are then used to transfer the front sound from 5.1 sources from the AV reciever to the stereo amp. The signal from the CD player should never have seen the yamaha.

I don't think generally that's how people do it, because you run into problems balancing the audio, if you change the volume on your stereo amp, while listening to a cd, then it is no longer balanced with the rest of your system, by sending everything thru the AV amp, you set the system up with say 50% volume on the stereo amp, and then just use the AV amp to adjust the volume for all cases.
 
I'd not rate Onkyo with music. You're better off looking at the more laid back AV amps and combining them with clinical speakers. This type of combo is more conducive with conventional audiophile music combos than the clinical approach Onkyo take with their AV amps. Onkyo perform better with movies than with music and I'd not recommend them as being a good foundation for a system that performs well with both. If looking for musical performance then Onkyo wouldn't be the first thought to pop into my head.

Cambridge Audio, Marantz, Denon, Arcam, Nad, Rotel and even Yamaha would be better.

guess we all have different tastes, rooms and speakers :) Ive had marantz & yamaha AV amps, Rotel pre/pro, have heard cambridge audio (is that a serious suggestion?), denon and arcam and I am happy to stick with the 905
 
So did you have your CD player connected to your AV amp? Surely the benefit of using a stereo amp from the preouts is that you put all the stereo sources direct to the stereo amp. The preouts are then used to transfer the front sound from 5.1 sources from the AV reciever to the stereo amp. The signal from the CD player should never have seen the yamaha.
As far as costs go a stereo amp is a 2.0 channel with most AV being 7.1 so you need to spend at least 3.5 times the cost of the stereo amp to have the same level of amplifier components in it. You then have the extra cost of processing circuits etc. to add on. So this puts you at least 4 times the cost. You then need to factor in how close all these components are together and how they are controlled. This again means you probably need to go slightly better in terms of quality etc. to get the same performance. So at least 5 times the cost is a easy figure to arrive at. So at least £1500 would be needed and probably more as there are probably other factors/costs I have not considered.

Hi, I had the CD player connected to both amps - twin phonos to the integrated and optical to the multichannel amp. That way I could either use a pure 2 channel system or run it via the 5.1 amp. It was good fun for comparison purposes and it also meant, as another poster said, that for convenience I did not have to mess about with balancing the channels again if I just wanted to casually play a CD.

As for component cost, I believe there are other things at play here. I take on board your comments, although there are two other factors - sales volumes and marketing niches:

Integrated amps sell in tiny amounts these days compared to receivers, so the economies of scale are not there. the fixed cost of design and tooling up production have to be shared amongst a lower volume of sales. This will make receiver better value in terms of "what's in the box."

As for marketing, every manufacturer wants a killer receiver at the £500 RRP mark, selling for about £400 retail (or whatever price point you want) so they will put a lot of the "good stuff" present in their top models into these lower amps, just missing out a feature or two here and there to encourage upgraders to go for more expensive models. Again this can mean that the price bears little relation the quality of the components within.

All this can mean that the multichannel amps really can do a good job with all sources. Theory is good but to anyone serious about music get a demo and see what you think!
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom