You are here

Log in or register to post comments
renjith
renjith's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 4 months ago
Joined: Feb 20 2012 - 3:12am
Comparison of AVR and integrated stereo amp

Hi Experts,

 

    I have one question regarding the performance of integrated stereo amp and good AVR for stereo performance.

  For the same dedicated CD player and cd,AVR like Marantz 7005 and Denon 3312/Denon 4312 will give better sound quality for music or integrated amp like music fidelity m3i or NAD C375BEE will give better sound quality?

Or for same transport and audio source, best AVR or best stereo amp will give better sound quality?

Thanks in advance.

Renjith

jackfish
jackfish's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 1 month ago
Joined: Dec 19 2005 - 2:42pm
The stereo integrated amp will outperform a home theater

receiver in every case. Home theater receivers have superfluous audio and video circuitry and 5 to 7 channels of amplification share the same, often inadequate power supply. I would add the Anthem 225 Integrated amplifier to your list of integrated amplifiers to consider.

renjith
renjith's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 4 months ago
Joined: Feb 20 2012 - 3:12am
Thanks, Jackfish. I will

Thanks, Jackfish. I will check the antehm amp mentioned by you.

 

Regards

Renjith

nikodine
nikodine's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 7 months ago
Joined: Apr 11 2012 - 11:24am
I know that Marantz receivers

I know that Marantz receivers have very better sound than Denon, everywhere I ask, the answer is same.

Yes, Marantz and Denon are made by same company but the things are that- Marantz for music, Denon for video and sources (DVD, CD players)

I realy think to get in this summer Marantz SR5006 + Focal Chorus 826V and for source... :D dont know, I dont want to spend a lot of money, that I will looking for some DVD player by Panasonic or Sony. The source arent the most important think in one system, the most important are the speakers. Difference vs Marantz 5006 and 7005... look, it's no use to get receiver with a lot of features as airplay and other, if you wont use them. This advise was said to me, now I say to you :)

jackfish
jackfish's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 1 month ago
Joined: Dec 19 2005 - 2:42pm
I can't recommend a AV receiver for a two channel music

system. I agree, why have unneeded audio and video processing you won't use, inferior amplification that will be used, and 3 or 5 channels of amplification that won't be used? Get a good stereo integrated amplifier or receiver. The source is very important, some say the most important, followed by speakers. Yes, ultimately the speakers are the final presentation. Yet, if what is being fed into very good speakers isn't that good, then all those good speakers are going to do is reveal how bad the rest of the system is. Good Luck!

nikodine
nikodine's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 7 months ago
Joined: Apr 11 2012 - 11:24am
You know, I want to tell you

You know, I want to tell you somethink if you understand me :). One day I bought  Adidas sneakers for soccer play about 250$. Sooo they tore after 3 weeks plaing. After that I bought sneakers for 15$ and I wear them yet from 4 mounts. U understand me what I want to say? In everything is having one think- "POPULISM" and it brother- "MARKETING"

I want to say that the int. amplif. are product on populism and advertising. Everyone say that their product and brand are number 1, but the some product for less money are such better than their, only that the cheeper product dont have such powerful atention and publicity. The amplifier in the Marantz SR5006 are the same as Marantz PM 6003 (some people say and 6004) soo you have very good amp. in the case of receiver box. Just you have more Wats and more features like bass managment, tuner, DAC.

The source.... Its important if you watch movies, not for music. If you tell me what is the different in sound between Panasonic or Nad dvd/CD players you will have one beer by me :D  Now, if you use PC for source, you have to get better cables and the music for example has to be in flash or audio format (tracks) if you want to have good sound :)

This is my opinion, not charging enyone with it.

jackfish
jackfish's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 1 month ago
Joined: Dec 19 2005 - 2:42pm
nikodine, believe what you want.

I'm done.

jgossman
jgossman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 hours 16 min ago
Joined: Aug 18 2011 - 6:21am
Jackfish

+1

Lots of nonsense here.  Get a real preamp and amp.  New or used.  Whatever.  It'll be better than an AVR.  If you want a real theater, get a AV processor and a 3 good stereo amps or 2 good 3 channel amps, like the ones Rotel, Proceed, Linn, etc. make.   Or just act like it's all the same.  

renjith
renjith's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 4 months ago
Joined: Feb 20 2012 - 3:12am
Hi

I agree with you. Most of the time they just ass minor features and release a new version which may not be important to all. They dont change the core things like power supply etc. Some AV receiver will have some feature which is not needed. For eg my receiver upscales video to 4K resolution which is not supported by 90% of Tvs. So there is no use of that. Manufacturer just bost such things.

 

Thanks

Renjith

renjith
renjith's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 4 months ago
Joined: Feb 20 2012 - 3:12am
hi

Hi Jackfish,

   Marantz PM6004 is having 2*45W at 8 ohms.Spec for SR 5006 shows like this       at 8 ohms 100W (20Hz - 20kHz, 0.08% THD, 2ch driven) x7.

I think from PM6004 they are mentioning continuous power and for SR5006 is it continuous power?  Not sure how they say 100W at 8ohms. So they are using same peramp and amplified to 100W?? I dont know, just trying to understand.

 

Marantz PM8004 spec is like this 70W (8 ohms).

Cost of PM6004 is 999$ and cost of SR5006 is 799$.

AV receivor has to do many other things, like upscaling, bass managment etc.

So I am surprised how they are selling it at 799$?

They have less margin in that or just that spec is not correct , like the wattage is applicable at lower bandwidth??

 

Thanks

Renjith

jackfish
jackfish's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 1 month ago
Joined: Dec 19 2005 - 2:42pm
There is more of a mass market for the AV receiver which

brings the cost down. Also, once a video or audio circuit is designed it doesn't take a whole lot to bring it to market. If you look at the FTC amplifier ratings rule, an AV receiver only has to report power ratings with two channels driven. So, while the AV receiver power supply is adequate to get the rated power from two channels at a time, power wil necessarily be less with more channels driven. I would venture a guess that the amplifier sections (including the power supply) of good integrated amplifiers are better designed, with better components than those in the typical AV receiver. There are many design compromises involved with the typical AV receiver which adversely affects sound quality, while the integrated amplifier is designed with sound quality foremost in mind.

renjith
renjith's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 4 months ago
Joined: Feb 20 2012 - 3:12am
Hi Jackfish,   Mass market

Hi Jackfish,

  Mass market is making that price drop, I got your point. Again the power rating is confusing. I generaly used to see only the continuous  power rating only and used to prefer the model with higher continuous  power rating. Recently I understood that to make a system  to sound twice than another system the power required is 100 times. So power rating is not that important. We need to see the THD, S/N ratio etc.

So any time good integrated amp will give better quality for stereo listening compared to an AV receiver.

Thanks for your time.

 

Regards

Renjith

  • X
    Enter your Stereophile.com username.
    Enter the password that accompanies your username.
    Loading