🔥Thanks to Keeps for supporting the channel! For more info: keeps.com/AndrewRobinson ★ *CLICK 🔝 “SHOW MORE” in the description for answers to many of your questions* ★ *RULES: Please be respectful. NO OUTSIDE LINKS, URLs, email addresses, etc.*
Still struggling to get the results I want from my Anthem MRX540. PS if want to demo an MRX 540 I will be more than happy to lend you mine. All in the name of science.
I am all about A/V! My Marantz being programable for 2-channel @ Subs (145 W) or 7.2.4 (100W) theater and both with room correction meets my needs. The speakers and wiring cost a bit but it is a good reward for a retired man and wife who played by the rules and won.
Yes. You could benefit from more AV receivers review, even if using them in stereo setups. IMHO, AV receivers pack more real world benefits over stereo amplifiers in the lower end of the price range. This has likely related to the number of units sold, and how much more competitive that market is (against 2 channel amplifiers), and you usually get streaming services like Tidal, integrated DAC, bass management and a level of control of most rooms acoustics that entry level stereo amplifiers can only dream of. And interestingly enough, they usually have more power on 2 channels for euro (they only start to go down on real power when we start adding more and more channels playing at the same time). There are obvious audio performance advantages on separates when you climb the price ladder, but on entry-level stereo integrated amplifiers (these days), I rarely see the value proposition of a 500 to 750 euro stereo amplifier. Even at 1.000 euros, a lot of them are still lacking on value.
I’m leaning towards this set up it’s proven tech that works very well. I made a mistake in buying a supposedly high end sound bar for music and it has always underwhelmed me even with the average stereo set up that I had which I’m convinced sounded superior.
I can agree on this about Pioneer for owning one myself until the HDMI card died a few years ago. Not reparable. Quite a lot of AV receivers died this way. Needed to replace fast, bought a Denon. Definitely not for Hifi! And no pre out either. Learning the hard and expensive way…. So now Fosi or Wiim. Haven’t decided yet. Fosi double mono would be a way to go or wiim Amp. Not the same budget either. Aargh!
I'm a minimalist and love my AVR! It works great in my music first mixed use system. Great video Andrew & Kristi!! I hope you're enjoying your new home and everything is coming together for you both!!
Really good video. I’ve had both AVRs as well as two channel, and even have vintage Sansui and Marantz units (I just love music). I feel that the speakers make the biggest difference in any system. In pure mode, or in two-channel (or 2.1) on my Marantz, Denon, and older HK AVRs the sound is really nice. Search for an AVR with a reputation for nice stereo sound (many from Marantz, Pioneer, NAD have solid audio), and enjoy flexibility. Add great speakers to increase your fun levels. Try to get an AVR with pre-amp outs, so you can use an external power amp (if you’re really concerned about sound quality or power). As always, Andrew nails it.
One thing I have very much enjoyed is listening to 5.1 surround music. There are quite a few albums available on Blu-ray, DVD, and SACD in the 5.1 format, many of them lossless. I like the additional separation of the instruments, which makes for a much more immersive experience. I'm a bit surprised that this has not taken hold more. Like Andrew describes, I've got one room in which to watch movies and listen to music. So I bought a high end AVR with plenty of power and decent clarity for listening to music, while also handling movies. Then I tried listening to a few albums in 5.1 and fell in love with it. It's a great way to experience music.
I am totally with you on this. For this reason I started my subscription to Apple Music. They have quite a bit of spatial music titles across many genres.
Hi Andrew. I couldn't agree more. For a time I worked at Best Buy and would always recommend folks pick-up a multi-channel receiver rather than Stereo tuners or integrated amps to save money and also provide them with flexibility to expand going forward. The latter was an equally weighty argument that I made to HTIB shoppers who wanted immediate gratification and it was all that I could do to dissuade them. I usually did this by showing them the THD % of the HTIBs and then having them listen to the receivers in the Magnolia section. Though this was years back, I still make the same recommendation to folks if they happen to ask me about my opinion. You get a lot of bang-for-your-buck with receivers and most of the R&D goes into them to keep them modern. Lots of competition keeps prices lower than with separates as well. Anyone looking to potentially expand from a 2.0/2.1 to a 5.1 or beyond would be wise to look at multichannel receivers to dip their toes into Stereo then add a Center channel and Sub to improve HT/Music listening. Add AppleTV and you get the option for Dolby Atmos Audio and the arguments are even more compelling when HDMI simplifies that lossless surround experience.
You're the first audio expert l hear make this suggestion im 72 and found this out years ago , the versatility of the Avr's.what l like is the choice of sounds effect the easy switch from one setup to the other..andrew you are the best.also like the idea of you asking the first lady her opinion..keep up the good work.
Spot on for room correction. That is the #1 in my opinion and a necessity at least for low frequencies due to the inconsistency of bass performance within a room.
I use an av receiver from the early 2000 that was bought by my father back then, it sounds in stereo really good and clear, but when i use the dolby pro logic and the 5.1 channels classical music becomes just gorgeous, sounds like you are in a theather
I feel like there should be more emphasis on the fact that you can still add separates to an AVR. AVRs with pre-outs would allow external amplifiers if desired. They also have plenty of analog inputs if one should decide to go with an aftermarket DAC. The expandability isn't limited to going from stereo setup to home theater later on.
Definitely. A lot of comments here seem to be unaware that for like $100 they could add a small Bluetooth/DAC receiver for dedicated listening that will probably beat the existing DAC significantly
Some AVRs manufacturers such as Pioneer have Direct and Pure Direct modes which bypass video, EQ, and DSP circuitry for a more cleaner direct audio path. Used with an external DAC, the quality of sound is remarkable.
Some AVRs manufacturers such as Pioneer have Direct and Pure Direct modes which bypass video, EQ, and DSP circuitry for a more cleaner direct audio path. Used with an external DAC, the quality of sound is remarkable.
this past week I realized how much more convenient it is to have an av receiver. I started my audio journey a year ago and messed around with different options of amp set ups and would struggle so much with getting that stereo sound I was looking for. Today I’m enjoying my set up very much
I love my AV receivers, have them all over the house in each room, so easy to have so much flexibility when you need it. Onkyo's and Denon's in my setup .Great video as usual.
I’m doing exactly this. Picked up an Anthem MRX 540 to drive my Wharfedale Lintons and JL Audio D110 in my office 2.1 setup. Works beautifully and ARC Genesis room correction is top notch!
Yup, a very good option on a budget is to buy the flagship AVR models of yesterday. I bought a Sony STR-DA7100ES, it is from 2005 and doesn't have a lot of the newer options like streaming, bluetooth, etc, but I don't need it to. I listen to CD's and at 170w per channel, it can power most speakers out there plus you can bi-amp them. I did test this and it was more like 155w but is plenty for my new CSS Criton 1TDX speakers. This AVR is very musical, and I couldn't be happier. I have Infinity Kappa 8's and have my separates for that, but yeah, great idea!
The new bumpers are just fantastic andrew. Production and look are pure excellence. That little audio snippet in the background with that little hit of bass is divine. Choice of topic is more educational than looking to stir up the trouble. Fantastic video, straight to the point and doesn't sound like a lecture. Keep it up and congrats on the house.
Exactly what I did ~10 years ago. I always ran my TV over the HiFi, because of the awful sound quality of TV speakers 15-20 years ago. And when I replaced the old system in 2011/12, the only option, that could connect and do everything the way I wanted it, was an AVR. I'm now bi-amping my ELAC floorstanders with ~190 Watts per channel, I used Audissey for years (currently using a self made EQ profile for testing), I have upgraded my old TV with an Amazon Fire TV stick, so I can stream not only video, but also (Amazon) music and I recently replaced my BluRay player with a new one, that can also stream video and music and play SACDs, FLAC and DSD. So far I am happy with the sound quality, the possibilities, the connectivity and the overall performance of my system.
One thing I like about newer av receivers is the sound fields you can experiment with on 2 channel music. Music sound fields like “Dolby pro logic IIx music”, “Neo 6 music”, “concert” etc. add a greater sound field in my opinion. I prefer those to the “ pure direct” function as it sounds crisper and clearer to me.
I have an entry level Yamaha RX-V385 for a 5.1 setup. A big part of the purchase was how little money it took to get excellent results. Bluetooth for streaming my Spotify. But the overriding reason was for really excellent 2 channel performance. Great soundstage, separation & imagining. Give it some power and its a dynamic amp with superb tonality. This is my second Yamaha amp and its light years better than Yamaha RX-V361 from circa 2009. I've opted for AV receivers since 1998 for both listening and viewing pleasure and haven't been disappointed.
I'm using the NAD T778 for 2-channel music with Klipsch RF7 IIIs and additionally an RC-64 III and SVS SB4000 sub for 3.1 home theater watching. It's heaven!
100% agree. I picked up an older AVR with the 'base' Audyssey system and I'm blown away by how well it works. It gave my setup a new life. Imaging & sound stage improved dramatically. If I'd buy new I'd get the cheapest Denon with Audyssey ($500).
@@andrewrobinsonreviews I'd go ahead and say game changing. My speakers are not considered to be anything special at all. They are old late 80's JBL TLX-8 "party boxes". The room correction made them sound VERY good. Balanced, detailed, the party bass profile completely gone. It's amazeballs! I'd be very curious what it can do for budget bookshelf speakers for example.
Good points raised in this video, I regularly use my Yamaha RX-V483 in 2 channel stereo or direct mode, with Wharfedale Diamond 9.5 towers & 2 active subwoofers. I have the option to bi-amp from this budget 5.1 receiver at the expense of my rear channel tower speakers, but I believe some music just sounds better in 5.1, with proper speaker placement through the DD+, Pro-logic IIX Music, or Yamaha 3D Cinema surround modes, especially; Hendrix Little Wing and tunes by artists like Yelawolf and Stick Figure.
Andrew and Kristi, this video idea is really good, I’m so glad y’all addressed this topic. This is my favorite audio channel and I can’t wait for the new home build content
I gave away a perfectly good Onkyo stereo receiver and replaced it with an Onkyo 5.1 that I only use for a 2.1. I get way better sound than I could otherwise get by having individual volumes for both speakers and sub and most of all, having an ADJUSTABLE CROSSOVER. I cannot believe it isn't more common to find a stereo receiver with these features. Don't come near me with a stereo amp with a fixed frequency subwoofer out jack, and don't tell me to "turn down the crossover on the back of the sub" like that's the same thing. It isn't the same because the speakers will still be playing full range and the sub will sound more closed with the frequency turned down. All the magic happens when you remove the unplayable lower frequencies from going to your speakers and let your sub remain completely open and only playing below what the speakers are getting. And while I'm on my soapbox, stop telling me to set my crossover at 80 when my speakers easily play down to 60. Everything sounds so much better when I set the crossover to 60. (End of rant) 🐸
Crossover boils down to different speakers, different subs, and preference. Having said that, I actually prefer my crossover at 60hz as well ;) Also, I feel that those variabilities in speakers and subs reinforces your argument in that an AVR crossover gives you greater flexibility in that regard. It seems like it'd be totally doable to make an integrated 2 channel amp that has a similar frequency split/crossover since integrated amps have a dac and dsp capabilities. For whatever reason though there are plenty of amps that don't do that.
I agree. Purists don't like it but I've long since ceased giving af what they think (if I ever did). Those people live to tell you how everyone else's opinions suck except theirs. Certain kinds of music like live performances and orchestral are an amazingly immersive experience on a good surround set-up.
All the stuff I watch on RUclips you guys are the only ones I wait to sit and watch on the big screen through the hifi. Look forward to it every week. Really happy for you two with your journey, great stuff guys 👌🏻
Here's my take - as long as the avr has a direct / pure direct mode where it does not process the incoming analog signal then an avr is fine. I paid for my turntable's sound signature and my external dac's sound signatures. I don't want them converted to digital and back to analog.
Hi Andrew, I’ve been an AVR connoisseur since the mid/late 90s. My first purchase was a Yamaha to complement a pair of B&W CDM 7 SEs, then moved on to an Integra and have now settled onto a Marantz. Although I have an SR 7013 I use the AVR strictly for processing and power my speakers with a 7-channel Marantz MM8077. One of the benefits I love about the AVR is the ability for it to duplicate stereo via multi-channel. I am not referring to Dolby or DTS, I am referring to replicating the stereo channels via multiple pairs of speakers. In addition to my AVR and power amplifier I am also running a Marantz TT-15 and 6 pairs of Bower and Wilkins tower speakers (804S, CDM 7 NT, CDM 7 SE) and 2 Bowers and Wilkins subs (12” and 15”). All are forward facing in a 24’ X 18’ room with the 804s toe-ed in toward a “sweet spot”, and the other 4 B&Ws toed-in toward a second “sweet spot” approximately 8 feet behind the first. My son, who is partially on the autism spectrum and has an amazing musical talent and ear, accidentally discovered that peculiar set up and it sounds incredible in terms of depth (holographic) and width (soundstage). I can get detailed in the specifics of speaker placement, distance settings, crossover settings, level settings, flat versus reference, mdax, whether or not to use Audyssey, etc …. However more importantly, I would like to know your thoughts on multi-channel stereo. To most audiophiles, I understand the anathema. And when I heard it myself I was immediately put off simply due to the cacophony of congested sound waves. However with advancements in AVR technology and a little willingness and patience to trial a nearly limitless combination of audio settings, It is amazing what one can do to achieve the the presence of a symphony within the walls of their own home. Look forward to reply, Thank you.
@@andrewrobinsonreviews Absolutely! I pretty much dismissed going the AVR route until this video. I currently have a Sony STR-DH190 paired with Elac Debut 2.0 6.2 stand mounts, with a Schiit Modi 3 DAC. I was thinking my next step would be to upgrade the Sony 2-channel receiver to an integrated amp (like an IOTAVX SA3 perhaps). Decisions, decisions… 😁
Agreed! I'm realizing that I watch TV way more than I sit down and listen to my stereo... I really need a center channel to reduce that compressed vibe from my 2 channel setup.
After doubting about the quality of the phono stage of my Yamaha reciever, I upgraded with a separate phono preamp (not even high end) and the sound improvement was HUGE! I can finally hear the vinyl properly. Then I coupled the reciever with another stereo amp via the pre out of the reviever. The stereo amp sounds way more musical and alive. I fully agree on the top 5 benefits of AV recievers but musicality does not seem to be AVR's first strength to say the least. Great video by the way :)
I've tried to replace my separates with a quality AVR but truth is that they just sound flat and cannot compare to the sound of a quality amp. The newer AVR's can be used as a pre if you're on a budget but the amp section is just not up to pair.
For several years, an Anthem MRX-700 served as the centre piece for both home theatre and music in my setup. One of the primary reasons for going with the Anthem (according to all the reviews at the time), was how good it sounds with music and it did not disappoint. I actually preferred using Anthem Logic Music , a listening mode which disables the centre channel and utilizes the 2 rear surround speakers, sort of like 4 channel stereo. The speakers were all B&W 600 series with an SVS 13 Ultra sub. It sounded amazing to my ears. I eventually added and Anthem MCA-20 (2 X 200 watts), to power the front speakers as the receiver has pre-outs but does not support bi-amping. Really great topic for this video Andrew. You are one of the few on RUclips whose opinion I respect and it is always interesting to hear Kristi's perspective. Keep up the good work!
I have a Denon AVR. When I upgraded my turntable, I also got a good phono stage for it. That plugs into one of the regular component inputs of the AVR. I think that small box is the most important thing to add to an AVR if you want to improve overall musicality. Also, learn how to use something like a pure direct setting that turns off most AVR circuitry when you wish to listen to two channel stereo.
@@rdroid2438 I love my Moon 110LP v.2. It will handle any MM or MC cartridge. It plugs into any line-in RCA connections on your AVR. You do not use the phono connection. You connect the turntable ground to the ground on the phono preamp.
I went with an AVR for my new shop building over a cheap stereo amp mainly to control multiple inputs and subwoofer connection. TV, AVR and speakers were free from a friend moving out of the country. Bought a rolling cart for the TV so I can move it to the patio for football watching and moving around the 26x40 shop. Very happy with my set up!
I could not agree more. Every manufacture has made some very special AV receivers over the years. Find one with Phono input and enjoy the music. Thank you for a great video!
Certainly wouldn’t be afraid of placing my NAD T778 running Monitor Audio Platinum 200’s, using Dirac, against any separates or integrated amps out there. Simply mesmerizing.
@@dalmd I’ve had different Marantz AVR’s that I’ve used over the years. Then I bought a used NAD M3 integrated and loved the sound so I figured why not get that sound over my other speakers for movies etc and bought the 778 and got the NAD sound for both stereo and multi channel. Great AVR
I admire your bravery to speak out on this publicly. Expect heavy blowback from the traditional audiphiles. This is the route I went when I downsized my home, mothballed my 5.1 system back to strictly 2-channel audio. I'm running a 12-year old Onlyo AVR because it has so many different audio inputs and I have several different sources from the cable box to a PS4. If I used a respectable pre-amp, I would run out of the inputs.
I drove my stereo pair with an AVR for about ten years and I think it works phenomenally well if your loudspeakers are easily driven, and you have a high quality subwoofer. _My speakers were built to be driven by AVRs._ Recently I put together a system of separates to drive the same speakers and yeah, I prefer the sound of my separates; but to anyone except a hardcore hobbyist with difficult speakers, I would strongly recommend taking a serious look at today's AVRs.
Something to beware of if setting up an AV receiver in a music listening area….some of them need a connection to a TV to access basic functions like tone control. I’ve ordered a Marantz NR1200 for my listening area because it had both physical tone controls and a phono preamp. It’s going to be driving a pair of Klipsch Ref II speakers and two 10” Klipsch subwoofers. It’s been on order for a month now. Really hard to get. It doesn’t need a TV to access all its features.
Back in the 70's prior to having surround, we used receivers such as Sansui, Pioneer, and National(Panasonic). My family would listen for hours on end. It was quite satisfying to listen in stereo especially from vinyl records. Music was warm and alive.
AVRs tend to get replaced more quickly because of constantly changing specs, like 4K, HDR, eARC, etc. You may find a used higher performance AVR for the same price as a new 2 channel system.
You might not be old enough to remember this, but back when everyone bought stereos, they often sold them all in once package. So no work required for the customer unlike now where you have to assemble all the parts yourself. I remember buying a Sony stereo system in the mid 90's from.....I don't know......JC Penny!? It was definitely some store in the mall. It had a CD player, tape deck, amp, floor standing speakers, and sub. And the cabinet. All in one.
My family bought a Fisher Stereo the same way. But ironically.. it had an AV receiver with 5.1 surround sound that was never used. You could turn it off and on with a button as well as set the surround level so you could use it with two speakers for stereo and multiple for surround.
Yay finally someone’s opinion that I actually care about is singing the simple praises of AVRs. Putting all of my listening gear in the same space as my TV makes that room the entertainment hub of my home.
My question is is can you compare avrs with integrateds. How would a mid range avr compare with a mid range integrated, what benefits would one expect between a power node with a denon or something like that
I totally agree. I use a Mcintosh MHT100 (AVR) for my dedicated music listening room and it works perfectly. The unit has eight channels so it gives me eight channels of Mcintosh sound so I can bi-amp four separate speakers in two different rooms and sub out to run the dedicated woofers on my Klipsch horns and la scalas. The sound is incredible and for a fraction of the cost of buying four different separate mcintosh amps. For less than a couple of grand you can pick up a older McIntosh AVR unit and drive many speakers for the same/similar sound that would cost 10k if using separate amps.
I got a used $200 Pioneer Elite VSX-91TXH 7.1 with new demo $1400 Wharfedale Lintons and sometimes it's just as satisfying as my other system, HiFi Rose RS201E ($2200) currently paired with used ZU Omen DW ($1300). I fell into the snobbery of 2 channel hi-end and although the Rose has a great DAC streamer, I struggle justifying the diminished cost. AVRs are plenty for most audiophile music listeners and they offer more versatile settings for real world usage. They are big and clunky though.
I can't agree more with this MOST of this video. I have a dedicated listening room that I use for 70% music and 30% movies. That being said I still needed a few extra channels for surround and center channels. My Yamaha A2A is more than enough to drive my BW 683s in bi-amp configuration and having 2 REL subwoofers only sweetens both the music and theater experience. In regards to your opinion on AVRs not being able to drive speakers like BW 702s I would not agree. AVRs in the sub $1500 range put out close to 150w per channel @ very low THD and are bi-amp compatible. I've listened to a set of 702s on a bi-amped Yamaha A6A and was blown away with the sound quality. Not quite as good as a tube audio research or McIntosh but for far less cost was acceptable. Very good video and agree with many of your points!
For 500 USD you can find quite good integrated 2.0 amplifiers. 5.1 AV Receivers in the 500 USD pricd range, they are just not that great. But I do agree that a GOOD AV Receiver is by defenition good in doing stereo. A lot of the bad reputation of AV Receivers is people spending 500 USD not just on a AV Receiver, but actually on a Home Theater in a Box set: a ultra downmarket Sony, Yamaha, Pioneer or Onkyo AV Receiver with 5 plastic speakers and a 6 inch 'sub' that looks from a distance like it's a serious setup. If you have only 500 to spend, go for a stereo integrated amp and a pair of good bookshelf speakers, that will sound much better than a Home Theater in a Box set.
QOTD: I grew up with using AVR’s for over two decades. As I moved from watching movies to listening to music, I wanted an improved two channel listening experience. So I sold my AVR and acquired a a Cambridge Audio CXA81. I was amazed about how much detail I was missing. No regrets for sure. Yes I wholeheartedly agree you can get good two channel listening from an AVR, but, if you are looking for something special from your music, hard pressed to beat a solid two channel setup. (Also, with audio input, you protect yourself from technology upgrades). I’ll get an AVR someday but for now, I plan to enjoy my Cambridge Audio receiver for years to come. 👍🏻. Keep up the good work guys.
In my opinion the only way you can replace a decent 2 channel system with an AV receiver is if you go with the flagship models. Pretty much anything below them just has very weak 2 channel performance even if you spend up to 1500 on them. I have owned many mid tier and many flagship AV receivers, including Yamaha, Denon, Pioneer and Arcam and there is just something different about the flagship models they have a significant bump in power, clarity and soundstage. Arcam may be an exception but they start at a premium anyway.
Hello Andrew. I am always appreciative of your gear reviews and perspective. I have sat in front of many a receiver, amplifier, monitors, speakers, etcetera. I used to change them out every several months looking for that perfect and sweet combination. The one thing I have learned through those years can be filtered to one major contributor. I have found that the parts that contribute the most to higher quality sound are in the amplification section: No matter what component you get, ensure the power production is from a clean and well designed amplifier. I have had many ‘Hi-Fi’ units that were designed well with options and DAC’s up there with the best but the amplifier section was limited and weak. It reduced the potential of the other components. I have also used many entry level ‘sleeper’ units with stellar amp sections that sang so sweet. Let’s just say that most new AVR sound good, even entry level, up to about 30% volume and every percent past that increases distortion level to parallel it. That is why so many separate component system with big, beefy, quality amplifiers sound so nice. Put an entry level receiver behind them and one may be surprised how nice it actually sounds. Just my 7 cents worth. Thanks for all the content, keep it coming.
The critical components of a HiFi system are the source and the speakers+room combo. Receivers are so good today that so few people could tell the difference.
I bought an AV receiver in 2006. In the same room, with the same speakers, I compared it with a much more powerful and expensive 2 channel amp. The only difference I noticed is that the powerful amp had a slight background noise before the music started. When instead I swapped the speakers, the sound changed dramatically.
I think that AVR's are a great option for a general audio/music enthusiast however the reason many, myself included, buy dedicated 2 channel ampliers is because they tend to produce better over all sound quality for a similarly priced AVR. I've owned several AVR's and not many have been on par with the level of range, dynamics, clarity and sound stage that a good 2 channel can deliver. To that end, I understand the point you're driving at, for many people an AVR is a good alternative to trying to build a system of separates which can quickly become overwhelming with options and price.
I used to own modern separates in the lower five-figure range (when new), but through a very long and extremely eye-opening process of buying and trying different gear of all kinds, of all eras and price points, I settled on a 2000s-era Yamaha A/V receiver (that I bought in near-mint condition for the ridiculous price of $40, I might add) as the main amplification device for my main system. The amp and preamp separates I used to own have been sold off for nearly 7 years now and I'm happier with the sound of my system than I've ever been. Seriously. With that said, there's an insane synergy thing going on with my system, so your results may vary. My audiophile journey is somewhat like Andrew's in that my system became more and more expensive and complex as the years passed, but once I started expanding my audiophile horizons into different (and even cheaper) gear, I began to find even more overall enjoyment from it. And in my case, even better results. All I can say is if you never broaden your horizons to include ALL types of gear (or eras of gear), you'll never truly discover all the things there are to discover as a listener. By never broadening your horizons, you prevent yourself from discovering things that not only have the potential to open your eyes, but blow your mind as well. By pushing my own boundaries, nearly all of the preconceived notions I used to have as an audiophile, and that were fed to me through the many biases and common stereotypes within the community, have been pretty much obliterated over time. If you're willing to look and listen, and have a completely open mind about new things, you'll more than likely be very surprised what you can find. Just some food for though.
OK having spent the last 11 years selling Hifi and AVR equipment here are 5 reasons you should never consider an avr over a hifi amplifier 1. Sound quality. You are spending money on circuitry you will never use and you are paying for licenses you don't require for music, i found a well sorted £200 2 channel amp the equivalent of an £800 avr. 2. Avr's have terrible resale value because the technology ages very quickly expect to lose 80% in 3 years check ebay for evidence. 2 channel maybe 30% 3. In my retail experience Avr's are notoriously unreliable whist 2 channel very rarely gets returned to store 4.Avr's are unpleasant and unintuitive to use for just quick music playback 5. Avr's are bulky and are built to a price so they are generally ugly and have extensive use of plastic rather than metal, ie: Plastic glossy fronts rather than brushed aluminium.
I completely agree with Andrew. With a few exceptions, AVR’s are an excellent choice. My AVR is the Sony STR-ZA3100ES. It’s second only to Sony’s flagship 5000ES. I run my 3100ES with a Def Tech speaker setup, and couldn’t be happier with the Home Theater performance and the Stereo music playback is exceptional. The only caveat regarding Sony’s ES lineup is the absence of a phono stage. However, that’s an easy-to-fix situation with plenty of affordable Phono preamps from Schiit, Fluance, U-Turn, Fosi Audio & even Pro-Ject. It’s all about balancing personal preference with your budget without getting OCD and find yourself over-spending. But that’s just me.
Five years ago I setup Pioneer VSXLX101 7.2 Channel Networked AV Receiver ($399.00) paired with Klipsch R-28F Reference 5.1 Channel Home Theater Speaker Package ($1,475.00) in our living room and never looked back. Can this be done better for under $2000? maybe it can, but as far as we concerned this is good enough.
I was never able to divert money from raising my kids into buying separates so I have a Yamaha AVR and use it 90% for music use. It sounds fantastic. My speakers are efficient and do have built-in powered subs but I have also used this AVR on smaller bookshelves that were not as efficient and it still sounded great. I would prefer separate components because I love audio equipment but to keep it real within a real budget, which is not a big budget, an AVR works great for me. And as often as things change with sound processing, I don't know that it would be any less expensive to upgrade a separate preamp processor as opposed to upgrading an AVR.
Separates are for single people. Totally agree that an AVR is the best value for anyone who has to use most of their money to do everything else but audio.
AVRs are totally doable. But I would only purchase one where I could bypass any sort of digital processing and have a pure analogue pathway from source to speaker.
Many years ago, I bought a Yamaha RX-A1010 AV/receiver to replace my old all-in-one system. That was the start of my new setup and my hunt for an audiophile system. I recycled the speakers I had to start with, but every year I added another (separate) element to it. I've used this receiver for years now with a pair of Q Acoustics 3020 bookshelve speakers in combination with a subwoofer. I do select the 'pure direct' function, which bypasses the internal equaliser/sound program settings and just amplifies the sound of the source that's fed into the receiver. This gives me the most satisfying result for stereo listening. Last month I found a cheap pair of Mordaunt-Short 906 speakers in a thrift shop. I replaced the Q Acoustics with those and bi-amped them on the receiver. The sound they deliver exceeded my expectations. Airy, open and detailed sound. The bass is snappy and has some punch, but it goes less deep than the subwoofer. It is more lively and rhythmic though. The result is so enjoyable that I'm not thinking of replacing my AV/receiver by a dedicated stereo amplifier yet. The Q Acoustics 3020's now function as surround loudspeakers for movies, where they've replaced some old satellite speakers I had. It's nice to get some confirmation by this video that AV/receivers can provide some good stereo sound.
Thanks for the great info. Not that I've had buyers remorse for the recent purchase of the Marantz SR6015, but the crazy overload of "Too much information", and snobbery of audiophiles, can leave a person wondering about a leap of faith into a $1700.00 receiver. Especially the "Separates only" crowd. Not that I regret it, because every time I turn it on, and listen to music, I just grin with amazement over how well it sounds. Even with two channel movie viewing, it's quite the sweet machine.
Great points! Thank you ! Now that I'm confirmed it's a serious and viable option, and considering I will stick to a 2 channel system, I have the following question. I plan to get the Klipsch RP-8000f or the KEF Q750 (loved your reviews) and to pair them with the Onkyo RZ-50. Is the Marantz Model 40 a better choice (as it does also everything) ? Does the price difference translate in a significantly better sound quality ?
If you know, I MEAN KNOW that you are not going to expand to home theater or mult-channel anything and you do not need or want room correction, get the Marantz. BUT, if you want to spend less and get more, the RZ50 will power 8000Fs no problem and do just fine with KEF too.
I wanted more then my current soundbar w/subwoofer could deliver but also wanted to keep things pretty minimal. Now that I have all my components I will be putting together my 3.1 system built around some products that you have positively reviewed.
I've been using a Sony AVR for two channel listening for a few years. It's connected to the TV with eARC so we have sound when we watch movie & TV, as well as when we play video games, and now I have a Node connected with stereo RCA for streaming music. It works great! I'm also able to bi-amp my tower speakers for some extra power and sound quality. In the future I plan on adding a center channel, and a subwoofer.
I have an old Sony AVR (STR-DE315) capable of only analog inputs. I've kept it around because to does do stereo so well. In my opinion it has always been a much better at being a "stereo" than an AVR.
I had always been under the impression that receivers not only makes 2-channel music sound a little tinny but can also make the audio sound a little digital too, but that impression was blown out the window once I tried the arcam avr20. I actually preferred the sound of the arcam avr20 standing alone then the Denon 6500 helped out with a poweramp 😯
Hey butty boy donkey dicker. My fellow Welshman I can’t decide on wether to get an AVR for my pro-ject speaker box 5 s2 or stick with a stereo receiver. I want to future proof in case I decide to home theatre but not at the cost of loss of quality of music. Also plan on getting some keg LS50meta . I can’t spend more than £1000 on either a stereo receiver or AVR . What do you recommend?
@@rhysholley8289 what's happening butty 😄 if I was you I'd persevere and carry on saving rather than taking the risk and living with regret! Besides doing the research to buy a new set up can be an enjoyable journey in itself. One thing you should take into account, if you was to go with the ls50 metas for home theatre, what would you use as a centre channel? And of course quality speakers like the meta's are not gonna be able to truly sing with a mid-priced standing alone AVR. If you're looking for any more advice, I'd be happy to help... click on our red dragon
I totally agree with you, I use a Yamaha RXA-1000 Receiver driving 7;Energy Veritas speakers and two Energy subs. I have connected to the receiver a Technics SL-J1 Turntable, Sony TC RX77ES Cassette Deck, Mitsubishi U50 VHS, X Box360 Gaming console (don’t judge me harshly), a Yamaha DV-C6480 5 disc DVD/ CD player and finally a Sony UBP-X800M2 4K bluRay player. I have bought all these items new over the last 4 decades. My next and final purchase will be a Cambridge Audio MXN-10 digital Network Streamer in 2025, as I have outgrown the separate iPod dock the receiver originally came with. Whether I play my old Audiophile LP’s or a cd thru 2 channel stereo to the Top Gun Maverick BluRay thru all 7 channels and 2 subwoofers, it sounds amazingly clear and precise, it even up converts my old VHS tapes for a better picture sent thru to the Sony XBR65HX950 TV . The depth of features and power of the Yamaha RXA-1000 is so impressive and is a perfect match to efficiently drive the Veritas speakers. I picked it up in 2010 with the speakers, and so far I haven’t seen or heard anything out there that would make me want to change it.
Wonderful review - and exactly the way I want to go. My audiophile friends will snub me forever, but with Apple Music going dolby surround sound with some good mixes coming out, I’m installing ceiling speakers and two Kef LS50 meta (easy to run) with a Kef center. Where I spend most is on high end headphones. I’m still not certain on which receiver to go with.
Love that you tackled this subject, needing something 4ohm capable is a great point and the reason I went this route. Congratulations on finally buying the new house, I can't wait to see the new living room setup.
I’m playing everything through Apple device on my TV, connected through eARC to WiiM Amp that has a room correction now. What would I gain from moving to let’s say Marantz Cinema 70s? If there any reason to do that if I’m staying in 2.1?
No, the WiiM is an all in one streamer (DAC), amp and DSP. The amp has plenty of power, and it has a sub out. Also, a HDMI for eARC. All of these are benefits over traditional systems, so in your case, there is no further benefit unless you want to do things like add a turntable - an AVR (albeit the 70s being slim so is excluded from this criticism) will just take up more space and potentially add complexity.
I have a Marantz multi channel AV receiver paired with Paradigm Monitor 11 speakers. The Marantz has a set up that bi wires it and pulls the various dedicated amps for the channels together. It sounds fantasma gastical!! I have been in love with the sound for several years.
Good Vid! Kristi's right, and I vote stereo for the win. I've tried 4 different 5.1 systems (Polk, Bose, Sony, Yamaha) but keep going back to my old 90's Optimus Professional Series stereo. I use it for music only, so the 5.1 doesn't sound right to me. Recently I inherited a heavy 110lb. (90's) Theta Dreadnaught amp that puts out 5 channels at 240 watts each, Theta Casanova preamp with 5 channel sound, along with 4 Vandersteen Series 3 (4ohm) speakers, 2 Vandy Series 1's, and 2 300 Watt Vandy Subs. Testing them, I noticed the lights dim when I turn it, and it is drawing 425 watts at Zero Volume! Afraid to turn it up, it will probably throw a breaker. This thing could power a church! Definitely going back to my old Stereo ;)
I was glad to make the move to an AVR over my Kenwood stereo receiver at 200 watts . I will say though adding a Amp to the AVR is definitely a good thing. The Amp gives the high power performance when your listening to 5 channel stereo at the reference level . I like my music loud and the Amp gives you clarity without effort at higher levels. But I have no regrets using a AVR for music until you want to drive your speakers and then that's where the added Amp comes in .
I’ve been down this rabbit hole a couple of times in the last 20 years and always ended up chucking the AVR and going back to two channel equipment for these reasons: 1. I get better build quality, no cheap noisy pots after a few years and they’re easier to get service done should the need arise. 2. I can take it home for a week and try it out, Best Buy won’t let you do that. 3. I haven’t yet found an AVR that does a good job with the Chesky imaging or soundstage tests 4. Simplicity, turn it on, select the source and adjust the volume. All the energy and build cost goes to one thing and for me the better sound is worth it. I prefer to spend a little more money and buy equipment that will last for 30-50 years, and use standard components that can be replaced from multiple sources. Like everything, put your money towards what’s best for you.
In my case I've always had AVRs because that's what was presented to me in 1998. I started with a DENON which lasted me a long time until someone else needed it more. Then I replaced it with a Yamaha which I absolutely love and still own. More recently I added a newer Yamaha (RX-A780) which is even better because it has a phono amp. We've been listening to vinyl a lot these past couple of years so we upgraded our speakers to the Paradigm 800Fs and oh boy... I'm certain there are better ways to listen to music but we are just so happy with our set up (plus it was kind of over budget for us) that we don't need anymore. We love movies and our receiver works really well for for our music and movie needs. Also I confess that I was always ignorant about hi fi and felt intimidated when going to high end stores.
I totally get this! First from a home real estate perspective, who has the room? You buy a place as big as you can afford and at some point down the road, you're looking for space for this or that. A room just for listening, for some, ok sure. But generally I like the home filled with music in the background far more often than sitting in a room alone enjoying two channel. Not that I don't immensely enjoy that, but it's not often I'm sacrificing my time to do only that. So a dedicated room to be used so little, doesn't make sense. That said, I want a place I can sit down with my wife, a bottle of wine, cheese & crackers and some incredible vinyl. The living room is the best bang for the buck space in the whole house considering its multiple use. And considering this is the place I'm generally entertaining guests, why not have a decent investment into "entertainment" in this space. My solution is having a very good (not necessarily flagship) AV receiver running 7.2.2, but preamping out the front left and right to a very good power amp and towers. I really feel like room dimensions and textures aside, I'm getting what I want out of my living space with very little compromise. And for the audiophiles out there confining themselves to two channel only, boy are you missing out on concert dvds. Let's face it, one of the best ways to enjoy music and all that it is to our psych, nothing beats the live experience at a great venue. While a concert dvd is not there, it sure is great to enjoy bringing there to right here as best as possible. Multichannel puts us in the crowd. Some of the best times I've had with friends has been a night of cocktails, conversation and concert dvds creating that almost at the venue experience, except with better seats for the show than you can normally afford. With all the options available to us all, it sure is a good thing we don't all want the same thing.
@@KristiWright I live in the desert 🏜 as well / high Sierra Nevada's watch those rattle snakes on walks with Katie. I never let my Ridgeback off leash!
@@KristiWright Me too. I see a lot of folks taking their dogs off leash into BLM / open space Desert during the Spring & Summer. Fools dogs shove their noses in holes and often times rattle snakes will hide within sage brush. Your looking at possible death and a $5-$7k vet bill. Happy for the new home purchase for the Robinson's!
I often use my Yamaha avr for two channel listening. Many of the people in the forums actually recommend avr’s Because they are generally less expensive than equivalent integrated amps. One advantage of separates (especially if using an integrated amp) is that you could actually end up with a smaller footprint than an avr since avrs tend to be large so they can hold all the individual components and have proper ventilation.
Great presentation. For me, Denon AVR 4700. Love it. Drives my Klipsch Forte II’s, Klipsch Center Channel and in ceiling speakers perfectly and movies on the LG UHD Blu Ray are excellent. Fluance Turn table for vinyl. Teac CD player rounds things out. Love the streaming capability too. AVR def the way to go.
I have a high end Sony ES AV receiver that has no problem in the stereo direct mode holding its own with many respected integrated 2 channel amps. Good sounding solid state amps are much easier to build these days due to surface mount components and super clean op amps that keep the cost down without sacrificing audio quality. A dedicated power amp is still the way to go for speakers that are hard to drive but the premise that there is no such thing as a good sounding AV receiver is just rubbish.
![💿 ¡Los 5 MEJORES Tocadiscos de Vinilo BARATOS en AMAZON 2024! [Calidad Precio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3dOCAiUgJ-g/mqdefault.jpg)
🔥Thanks to Keeps for supporting the channel! For more info: keeps.com/AndrewRobinson
★ *CLICK 🔝 “SHOW MORE” in the description for answers to many of your questions*
★ *RULES: Please be respectful. NO OUTSIDE LINKS, URLs, email addresses, etc.*
Props for throwing up the side by side. Takes guts!
@@swingkat No shame here.
Still struggling to get the results I want from my Anthem MRX540. PS if want to demo an MRX 540 I will be more than happy to lend you mine. All in the name of science.
I am all about A/V! My Marantz being programable for 2-channel @ Subs (145 W) or 7.2.4 (100W) theater and both with room correction meets my needs. The speakers and wiring cost a bit but it is a good reward for a retired man and wife who played by the rules and won.
@@bullpup33 I just picked up a 740. Lots of settings to play with.
Great video. I’ve been pondering this very thing since I’ve had time with the pioneer and just how good it is with music.
What pioneer is this? I’ve just bought some pro-ject speaker box 5s2 and amp but don’t want to rule out home theatre in future and can’t afford both.
Best cameo ever!!!
Yes.
You could benefit from more AV receivers review, even if using them in stereo setups.
IMHO, AV receivers pack more real world benefits over stereo amplifiers in the lower end of the price range.
This has likely related to the number of units sold, and how much more competitive that market is (against 2 channel amplifiers), and you usually get streaming services like Tidal, integrated DAC, bass management and a level of control of most rooms acoustics that entry level stereo amplifiers can only dream of.
And interestingly enough, they usually have more power on 2 channels for euro (they only start to go down on real power when we start adding more and more channels playing at the same time).
There are obvious audio performance advantages on separates when you climb the price ladder, but on entry-level stereo integrated amplifiers (these days), I rarely see the value proposition of a 500 to 750 euro stereo amplifier.
Even at 1.000 euros, a lot of them are still lacking on value.
I’m leaning towards this set up it’s proven tech that works very well.
I made a mistake in buying a supposedly high end sound bar for music and it has always underwhelmed me even with the average stereo set up that I had which I’m convinced sounded superior.
I can agree on this about Pioneer for owning one myself until the HDMI card died a few years ago. Not reparable. Quite a lot of AV receivers died this way.
Needed to replace fast, bought a Denon. Definitely not for Hifi! And no pre out either. Learning the hard and expensive way…. So now Fosi or Wiim. Haven’t decided yet. Fosi double mono would be a way to go or wiim Amp. Not the same budget either. Aargh!
I'm a minimalist and love my AVR! It works great in my music first mixed use system. Great video Andrew & Kristi!! I hope you're enjoying your new home and everything is coming together for you both!!
I'm a dedicated two channel guy, but I appreciate your open-mindedness. The hobby needs a lot more of that.
Really good video. I’ve had both AVRs as well as two channel, and even have vintage Sansui and Marantz units (I just love music). I feel that the speakers make the biggest difference in any system. In pure mode, or in two-channel (or 2.1) on my Marantz, Denon, and older HK AVRs the sound is really nice.
Search for an AVR with a reputation for nice stereo sound (many from Marantz, Pioneer, NAD have solid audio), and enjoy flexibility. Add great speakers to increase your fun levels. Try to get an AVR with pre-amp outs, so you can use an external power amp (if you’re really concerned about sound quality or power).
As always, Andrew nails it.
One thing I have very much enjoyed is listening to 5.1 surround music. There are quite a few albums available on Blu-ray, DVD, and SACD in the 5.1 format, many of them lossless. I like the additional separation of the instruments, which makes for a much more immersive experience. I'm a bit surprised that this has not taken hold more. Like Andrew describes, I've got one room in which to watch movies and listen to music. So I bought a high end AVR with plenty of power and decent clarity for listening to music, while also handling movies. Then I tried listening to a few albums in 5.1 and fell in love with it. It's a great way to experience music.
I am totally with you on this. For this reason I started my subscription to Apple Music. They have quite a bit of spatial music titles across many genres.
Hi Andrew. I couldn't agree more. For a time I worked at Best Buy and would always recommend folks pick-up a multi-channel receiver rather than Stereo tuners or integrated amps to save money and also provide them with flexibility to expand going forward. The latter was an equally weighty argument that I made to HTIB shoppers who wanted immediate gratification and it was all that I could do to dissuade them. I usually did this by showing them the THD % of the HTIBs and then having them listen to the receivers in the Magnolia section. Though this was years back, I still make the same recommendation to folks if they happen to ask me about my opinion. You get a lot of bang-for-your-buck with receivers and most of the R&D goes into them to keep them modern. Lots of competition keeps prices lower than with separates as well. Anyone looking to potentially expand from a 2.0/2.1 to a 5.1 or beyond would be wise to look at multichannel receivers to dip their toes into Stereo then add a Center channel and Sub to improve HT/Music listening. Add AppleTV and you get the option for Dolby Atmos Audio and the arguments are even more compelling when HDMI simplifies that lossless surround experience.
You're the first audio expert l hear make this suggestion im 72 and found this out years ago , the versatility of the Avr's.what l like is the choice of sounds effect the easy switch from one setup to the other..andrew you are the best.also like the idea of you asking the first lady her opinion..keep up the good work.
Spot on for room correction. That is the #1 in my opinion and a necessity at least for low frequencies due to the inconsistency of bass performance within a room.
I use an av receiver from the early 2000 that was bought by my father back then, it sounds in stereo really good and clear, but when i use the dolby pro logic and the 5.1 channels classical music becomes just gorgeous, sounds like you are in a theather
I feel like there should be more emphasis on the fact that you can still add separates to an AVR. AVRs with pre-outs would allow external amplifiers if desired. They also have plenty of analog inputs if one should decide to go with an aftermarket DAC. The expandability isn't limited to going from stereo setup to home theater later on.
Definitely. A lot of comments here seem to be unaware that for like $100 they could add a small Bluetooth/DAC receiver for dedicated listening that will probably beat the existing DAC significantly
Yup second this. I haven’t had to use the pre-outs yet but good to know I have the option if I want more juice.
Agree
Some AVRs manufacturers such as Pioneer have Direct and Pure Direct modes which bypass video, EQ, and DSP circuitry for a more cleaner direct audio path. Used with an external DAC, the quality of sound is remarkable.
Some AVRs manufacturers such as Pioneer have Direct and Pure Direct modes which bypass video, EQ, and DSP circuitry for a more cleaner direct audio path. Used with an external DAC, the quality of sound is remarkable.
this past week I realized how much more convenient it is to have an av receiver. I started my audio journey a year ago and messed around with different options of amp set ups and would struggle so much with getting that stereo sound I was looking for. Today I’m enjoying my set up very much
I love my AV receivers, have them all over the house in each room, so easy to have so much flexibility when you need it. Onkyo's and Denon's in my setup .Great video as usual.
Thanks Ron, appreciate you tuning in!
I’m doing exactly this. Picked up an Anthem MRX 540 to drive my Wharfedale Lintons and JL Audio D110 in my office 2.1 setup. Works beautifully and ARC Genesis room correction is top notch!
Yup, a very good option on a budget is to buy the flagship AVR models of yesterday. I bought a Sony STR-DA7100ES, it is from 2005 and doesn't have a lot of the newer options like streaming, bluetooth, etc, but I don't need it to. I listen to CD's and at 170w per channel, it can power most speakers out there plus you can bi-amp them. I did test this and it was more like 155w but is plenty for my new CSS Criton 1TDX speakers. This AVR is very musical, and I couldn't be happier. I have Infinity Kappa 8's and have my separates for that, but yeah, great idea!
The new bumpers are just fantastic andrew. Production and look are pure excellence. That little audio snippet in the background with that little hit of bass is divine. Choice of topic is more educational than looking to stir up the trouble.
Fantastic video, straight to the point and doesn't sound like a lecture.
Keep it up and congrats on the house.
I totally, 100% agree! Because it being the centre of your entertainment in the living room, you can do so much more with an AVR vs just an amp
Exactly what I did ~10 years ago. I always ran my TV over the HiFi, because of the awful sound quality of TV speakers 15-20 years ago. And when I replaced the old system in 2011/12, the only option, that could connect and do everything the way I wanted it, was an AVR. I'm now bi-amping my ELAC floorstanders with ~190 Watts per channel, I used Audissey for years (currently using a self made EQ profile for testing), I have upgraded my old TV with an Amazon Fire TV stick, so I can stream not only video, but also (Amazon) music and I recently replaced my BluRay player with a new one, that can also stream video and music and play SACDs, FLAC and DSD. So far I am happy with the sound quality, the possibilities, the connectivity and the overall performance of my system.
One thing I like about newer av receivers is the sound fields you can experiment with on 2 channel music. Music sound fields like “Dolby pro logic IIx music”, “Neo 6 music”, “concert” etc. add a greater sound field in my opinion. I prefer those to the “ pure direct” function as it sounds crisper and clearer to me.
I have an entry level Yamaha RX-V385 for a 5.1 setup. A big part of the purchase was how little money it took to get excellent results. Bluetooth for streaming my Spotify. But the overriding reason was for really excellent 2 channel performance. Great soundstage, separation & imagining. Give it some power and its a dynamic amp with superb tonality. This is my second Yamaha amp and its light years better than Yamaha RX-V361 from circa 2009.
I've opted for AV receivers since 1998 for both listening and viewing pleasure and haven't been disappointed.
I'm using the NAD T778 for 2-channel music with Klipsch RF7 IIIs and additionally an RC-64 III and SVS SB4000 sub for 3.1 home theater watching. It's heaven!
The T778 is great!
100% agree.
I picked up an older AVR with the 'base' Audyssey system and I'm blown away by how well it works. It gave my setup a new life. Imaging & sound stage improved dramatically.
If I'd buy new I'd get the cheapest Denon with Audyssey ($500).
Room correction software is AMAZING isn't it!?
@@andrewrobinsonreviews
I'd go ahead and say game changing.
My speakers are not considered to be anything special at all. They are old late 80's JBL TLX-8 "party boxes".
The room correction made them sound VERY good. Balanced, detailed, the party bass profile completely gone. It's amazeballs!
I'd be very curious what it can do for budget bookshelf speakers for example.
Good points raised in this video, I regularly use my Yamaha RX-V483 in 2 channel stereo or direct mode, with Wharfedale Diamond 9.5 towers & 2 active subwoofers. I have the option to bi-amp from this budget 5.1 receiver at the expense of my rear channel tower speakers, but I believe some music just sounds better in 5.1, with proper speaker placement through the DD+, Pro-logic IIX Music, or Yamaha 3D Cinema surround modes, especially; Hendrix Little Wing and tunes by artists like Yelawolf and Stick Figure.
Andrew and Kristi, this video idea is really good, I’m so glad y’all addressed this topic. This is my favorite audio channel and I can’t wait for the new home build content
So glad you enjoyed it!
I gave away a perfectly good Onkyo stereo receiver and replaced it with an Onkyo 5.1 that I only use for a 2.1. I get way better sound than I could otherwise get by having individual volumes for both speakers and sub and most of all, having an ADJUSTABLE CROSSOVER.
I cannot believe it isn't more common to find a stereo receiver with these features.
Don't come near me with a stereo amp with a fixed frequency subwoofer out jack, and don't tell me to "turn down the crossover on the back of the sub" like that's the same thing. It isn't the same because the speakers will still be playing full range and the sub will sound more closed with the frequency turned down. All the magic happens when you remove the unplayable lower frequencies from going to your speakers and let your sub remain completely open and only playing below what the speakers are getting.
And while I'm on my soapbox, stop telling me to set my crossover at 80 when my speakers easily play down to 60. Everything sounds so much better when I set the crossover to 60.
(End of rant) 🐸
Crossover boils down to different speakers, different subs, and preference. Having said that, I actually prefer my crossover at 60hz as well ;) Also, I feel that those variabilities in speakers and subs reinforces your argument in that an AVR crossover gives you greater flexibility in that regard. It seems like it'd be totally doable to make an integrated 2 channel amp that has a similar frequency split/crossover since integrated amps have a dac and dsp capabilities. For whatever reason though there are plenty of amps that don't do that.
I found a Denon AVR at a used bookstore for $40. I use it to power some old NHT SuperOnes mounted on my back porch.
I’m super happy with this.✌🏻
Watching concerts with surrounds is a whole new experience in listening to music.
I agree. Purists don't like it but I've long since ceased giving af what they think (if I ever did). Those people live to tell you how everyone else's opinions suck except theirs. Certain kinds of music like live performances and orchestral are an amazingly immersive experience on a good surround set-up.
All the stuff I watch on RUclips you guys are the only ones I wait to sit and watch on the big screen through the hifi. Look forward to it every week. Really happy for you two with your journey, great stuff guys 👌🏻
Here's my take - as long as the avr has a direct / pure direct mode where it does not process the incoming analog signal then an avr is fine. I paid for my turntable's sound signature and my external dac's sound signatures. I don't want them converted to digital and back to analog.
Hi Andrew, I’ve been an AVR connoisseur since the mid/late 90s. My first purchase was a Yamaha to complement a pair of B&W CDM 7 SEs, then moved on to an Integra and have now settled onto a Marantz. Although I have an SR 7013 I use the AVR strictly for processing and power my speakers with a 7-channel Marantz MM8077.
One of the benefits I love about the AVR is the ability for it to duplicate stereo via multi-channel. I am not referring to Dolby or DTS, I am referring to replicating the stereo channels via multiple pairs of speakers.
In addition to my AVR and power amplifier I am also running a Marantz TT-15 and 6 pairs of Bower and Wilkins tower speakers (804S, CDM 7 NT, CDM 7 SE) and 2 Bowers and Wilkins subs (12” and 15”).
All are forward facing in a 24’ X 18’ room with the 804s toe-ed in toward a “sweet spot”, and the other 4 B&Ws toed-in toward a second “sweet spot” approximately 8 feet behind the first.
My son, who is partially on the autism spectrum and has an amazing musical talent and ear, accidentally discovered that peculiar set up and it sounds incredible in terms of depth (holographic) and width (soundstage).
I can get detailed in the specifics of speaker placement, distance settings, crossover settings, level settings, flat versus reference, mdax, whether or not to use Audyssey, etc …. However more importantly, I would like to know your thoughts on multi-channel stereo.
To most audiophiles, I understand the anathema.
And when I heard it myself I was immediately put off simply due to the cacophony of congested sound waves.
However with advancements in AVR technology and a little willingness and patience to trial a nearly limitless combination of audio settings, It is amazing what one can do to achieve the the presence of a symphony within the walls of their own home.
Look forward to reply,
Thank you.
This actually was more thought provoking than I expected! It may influence my audiophile direction moving forward. Thanks a lot Andrew! 😎
I would encourage folks to give it a try. It's okay if you don't ultimately decide it's right for you, but I believe it's worth consideration.
@@andrewrobinsonreviews Absolutely! I pretty much dismissed going the AVR route until this video. I currently have a Sony STR-DH190 paired with Elac Debut 2.0 6.2 stand mounts, with a Schiit Modi 3 DAC. I was thinking my next step would be to upgrade the Sony 2-channel receiver to an integrated amp (like an IOTAVX SA3 perhaps). Decisions, decisions… 😁
Agreed! I'm realizing that I watch TV way more than I sit down and listen to my stereo... I really need a center channel to reduce that compressed vibe from my 2 channel setup.
After doubting about the quality of the phono stage of my Yamaha reciever, I upgraded with a separate phono preamp (not even high end) and the sound improvement was HUGE! I can finally hear the vinyl properly. Then I coupled the reciever with another stereo amp via the pre out of the reviever. The stereo amp sounds way more musical and alive. I fully agree on the top 5 benefits of AV recievers but musicality does not seem to be AVR's first strength to say the least. Great video by the way :)
I've tried to replace my separates with a quality AVR but truth is that they just sound flat and cannot compare to the sound of a quality amp. The newer AVR's can be used as a pre if you're on a budget but the amp section is just not up to pair.
Yep, same here. All cheap class d chips, limited current output. Nothing beat the value proposition of an AB amplifier IMO.
For several years, an Anthem MRX-700 served as the centre piece for both home theatre and music in my setup. One of the primary reasons for going with the Anthem (according to all the reviews at the time), was how good it sounds with music and it did not disappoint. I actually preferred using Anthem Logic Music , a listening mode which disables the centre channel and utilizes the 2 rear surround speakers, sort of like 4 channel stereo. The speakers were all B&W 600 series with an SVS 13 Ultra sub. It sounded amazing to my ears. I eventually added and Anthem MCA-20 (2 X 200 watts), to power the front speakers as the receiver has pre-outs but does not support bi-amping.
Really great topic for this video Andrew. You are one of the few on RUclips whose opinion I respect and it is always interesting to hear Kristi's perspective. Keep up the good work!
I have a Denon AVR. When I upgraded my turntable, I also got a good phono stage for it. That plugs into one of the regular component inputs of the AVR. I think that small box is the most important thing to add to an AVR if you want to improve overall musicality. Also, learn how to use something like a pure direct setting that turns off most AVR circuitry when you wish to listen to two channel stereo.
Which phono stage recommend? Where on the Denon does it plug into
@@rdroid2438 I love my Moon 110LP v.2. It will handle any MM or MC cartridge. It plugs into any line-in RCA connections on your AVR. You do not use the phono connection. You connect the turntable ground to the ground on the phono preamp.
I went with an AVR for my new shop building over a cheap stereo amp mainly to control multiple inputs and subwoofer connection. TV, AVR and speakers were free from a friend moving out of the country. Bought a rolling cart for the TV so I can move it to the patio for football watching and moving around the 26x40 shop. Very happy with my set up!
One additional reason: AVRs have HDMI inputs. You can play SACDs through your Blu-Ray player (if it supports HI-Res).
I could not agree more. Every manufacture has made some very special AV receivers over the years. Find one with Phono input and enjoy the music. Thank you for a great video!
Now do 2 channel stereo for TV and Movies. If you prioritize music reproduction, this is the way to go.
Certainly wouldn’t be afraid of placing my NAD T778 running Monitor Audio Platinum 200’s, using Dirac, against any separates or integrated amps out there. Simply mesmerizing.
Was the T778 the only AVR on your list? I’m currently looking at one for my next AVR but of course nothing is available so I have time to browse lol
@@dalmd I’ve had different Marantz AVR’s that I’ve used over the years. Then I bought a used NAD M3 integrated and loved the sound so I figured why not get that sound over my other speakers for movies etc and bought the 778 and got the NAD sound for both stereo and multi channel. Great AVR
@@lloydmetcalf2593 wow that’s awesome! Now if I could just get my hands on one lol
I admire your bravery to speak out on this publicly. Expect heavy blowback from the traditional audiphiles. This is the route I went when I downsized my home, mothballed my 5.1 system back to strictly 2-channel audio. I'm running a 12-year old Onlyo AVR because it has so many different audio inputs and I have several different sources from the cable box to a PS4. If I used a respectable pre-amp, I would run out of the inputs.
Yes just bought an AV receiver and I am thoroughly enjoying the experience. Thanks Andrew, keep up the great work . . .
So glad to hear that! Thanks for sharing!
Also with the right AVR you get preouts so you can have more fun down the road and maintain multiroom zones and play with new amps.
I drove my stereo pair with an AVR for about ten years and I think it works phenomenally well if your loudspeakers are easily driven, and you have a high quality subwoofer. _My speakers were built to be driven by AVRs._ Recently I put together a system of separates to drive the same speakers and yeah, I prefer the sound of my separates; but to anyone except a hardcore hobbyist with difficult speakers, I would strongly recommend taking a serious look at today's AVRs.
@Noni ps hell yeah. Let ‘em know!
Something to beware of if setting up an AV receiver in a music listening area….some of them need a connection to a TV to access basic functions like tone control. I’ve ordered a Marantz NR1200 for my listening area because it had both physical tone controls and a phono preamp. It’s going to be driving a pair of Klipsch Ref II speakers and two 10” Klipsch subwoofers. It’s been on order for a month now. Really hard to get. It doesn’t need a TV to access all its features.
Back in the 70's prior to having surround, we used receivers such as Sansui, Pioneer, and National(Panasonic). My family would listen for hours on end. It was quite satisfying to listen in stereo especially from vinyl records. Music was warm and alive.
Welcome to the joy of the loudness wars.
AVRs tend to get replaced more quickly because of constantly changing specs, like 4K, HDR, eARC, etc. You may find a used higher performance AVR for the same price as a new 2 channel system.
I've never had a problem with using an AVR to listen to 2 channel music. I actually love what it sounds like in that particular environment.
You might not be old enough to remember this, but back when everyone bought stereos, they often sold them all in once package. So no work required for the customer unlike now where you have to assemble all the parts yourself. I remember buying a Sony stereo system in the mid 90's from.....I don't know......JC Penny!? It was definitely some store in the mall. It had a CD player, tape deck, amp, floor standing speakers, and sub. And the cabinet. All in one.
My family bought a Fisher Stereo the same way.
But ironically.. it had an AV receiver with 5.1 surround sound that was never used. You could turn it off and on with a button as well as set the surround level so you could use it with two speakers for stereo and multiple for surround.
Yay finally someone’s opinion that I actually care about is singing the simple praises of AVRs. Putting all of my listening gear in the same space as my TV makes that room the entertainment hub of my home.
My question is is can you compare avrs with integrateds. How would a mid range avr compare with a mid range integrated, what benefits would one expect between a power node with a denon or something like that
I totally agree. I use a Mcintosh MHT100 (AVR) for my dedicated music listening room and it works perfectly. The unit has eight channels so it gives me eight channels of Mcintosh sound so I can bi-amp four separate speakers in two different rooms and sub out to run the dedicated woofers on my Klipsch horns and la scalas. The sound is incredible and for a fraction of the cost of buying four different separate mcintosh amps. For less than a couple of grand you can pick up a older McIntosh AVR unit and drive many speakers for the same/similar sound that would cost 10k if using separate amps.
I got a used $200 Pioneer Elite VSX-91TXH 7.1 with new demo $1400 Wharfedale Lintons and sometimes it's just as satisfying as my other system, HiFi Rose RS201E ($2200) currently paired with used ZU Omen DW ($1300). I fell into the snobbery of 2 channel hi-end and although the Rose has a great DAC streamer, I struggle justifying the diminished cost. AVRs are plenty for most audiophile music listeners and they offer more versatile settings for real world usage. They are big and clunky though.
I can't agree more with this MOST of this video. I have a dedicated listening room that I use for 70% music and 30% movies. That being said I still needed a few extra channels for surround and center channels. My Yamaha A2A is more than enough to drive my BW 683s in bi-amp configuration and having 2 REL subwoofers only sweetens both the music and theater experience. In regards to your opinion on AVRs not being able to drive speakers like BW 702s I would not agree. AVRs in the sub $1500 range put out close to 150w per channel @ very low THD and are bi-amp compatible. I've listened to a set of 702s on a bi-amped Yamaha A6A and was blown away with the sound quality. Not quite as good as a tube audio research or McIntosh but for far less cost was acceptable. Very good video and agree with many of your points!
For 500 USD you can find quite good integrated 2.0 amplifiers. 5.1 AV Receivers in the 500 USD pricd range, they are just not that great. But I do agree that a GOOD AV Receiver is by defenition good in doing stereo. A lot of the bad reputation of AV Receivers is people spending 500 USD not just on a AV Receiver, but actually on a Home Theater in a Box set: a ultra downmarket Sony, Yamaha, Pioneer or Onkyo AV Receiver with 5 plastic speakers and a 6 inch 'sub' that looks from a distance like it's a serious setup. If you have only 500 to spend, go for a stereo integrated amp and a pair of good bookshelf speakers, that will sound much better than a Home Theater in a Box set.
QOTD: I grew up with using AVR’s for over two decades. As I moved from watching movies to listening to music, I wanted an improved two channel listening experience. So I sold my AVR and acquired a a Cambridge Audio CXA81. I was amazed about how much detail I was missing. No regrets for sure.
Yes I wholeheartedly agree you can get good two channel listening from an AVR, but, if you are looking for something special from your music, hard pressed to beat a solid two channel setup. (Also, with audio input, you protect yourself from technology upgrades).
I’ll get an AVR someday but for now, I plan to enjoy my Cambridge Audio receiver for years to come. 👍🏻.
Keep up the good work guys.
In my opinion the only way you can replace a decent 2 channel system with an AV receiver is if you go with the flagship models. Pretty much anything below them just has very weak 2 channel performance even if you spend up to 1500 on them. I have owned many mid tier and many flagship AV receivers, including Yamaha, Denon, Pioneer and Arcam and there is just something different about the flagship models they have a significant bump in power, clarity and soundstage. Arcam may be an exception but they start at a premium anyway.
Hello Andrew. I am always appreciative of your gear reviews and perspective. I have sat in front of many a receiver, amplifier, monitors, speakers, etcetera. I used to change them out every several months looking for that perfect and sweet combination. The one thing I have learned through those years can be filtered to one major contributor. I have found that the parts that contribute the most to higher quality sound are in the amplification section: No matter what component you get, ensure the power production is from a clean and well designed amplifier. I have had many ‘Hi-Fi’ units that were designed well with options and DAC’s up there with the best but the amplifier section was limited and weak. It reduced the potential of the other components. I have also used many entry level ‘sleeper’ units with stellar amp sections that sang so sweet. Let’s just say that most new AVR sound good, even entry level, up to about 30% volume and every percent past that increases distortion level to parallel it.
That is why so many separate component system with big, beefy, quality amplifiers sound so nice. Put an entry level receiver behind them and one may be surprised how nice it actually sounds.
Just my 7 cents worth.
Thanks for all the content, keep it coming.
The critical components of a HiFi system are the source and the speakers+room combo. Receivers are so good today that so few people could tell the difference.
I bought an AV receiver in 2006. In the same room, with the same speakers, I compared it with a much more powerful and expensive 2 channel amp. The only difference I noticed is that the powerful amp had a slight background noise before the music started. When instead I swapped the speakers, the sound changed dramatically.
I think that AVR's are a great option for a general audio/music enthusiast however the reason many, myself included, buy dedicated 2 channel ampliers is because they tend to produce better over all sound quality for a similarly priced AVR. I've owned several AVR's and not many have been on par with the level of range, dynamics, clarity and sound stage that a good 2 channel can deliver. To that end, I understand the point you're driving at, for many people an AVR is a good alternative to trying to build a system of separates which can quickly become overwhelming with options and price.
Spend the most of your money for very good speaker and you will have a smile each time, no matter what receiver you have
I used to own modern separates in the lower five-figure range (when new), but through a very long and extremely eye-opening process of buying and trying different gear of all kinds, of all eras and price points, I settled on a 2000s-era Yamaha A/V receiver (that I bought in near-mint condition for the ridiculous price of $40, I might add) as the main amplification device for my main system. The amp and preamp separates I used to own have been sold off for nearly 7 years now and I'm happier with the sound of my system than I've ever been. Seriously. With that said, there's an insane synergy thing going on with my system, so your results may vary.
My audiophile journey is somewhat like Andrew's in that my system became more and more expensive and complex as the years passed, but once I started expanding my audiophile horizons into different (and even cheaper) gear, I began to find even more overall enjoyment from it. And in my case, even better results.
All I can say is if you never broaden your horizons to include ALL types of gear (or eras of gear), you'll never truly discover all the things there are to discover as a listener. By never broadening your horizons, you prevent yourself from discovering things that not only have the potential to open your eyes, but blow your mind as well. By pushing my own boundaries, nearly all of the preconceived notions I used to have as an audiophile, and that were fed to me through the many biases and common stereotypes within the community, have been pretty much obliterated over time. If you're willing to look and listen, and have a completely open mind about new things, you'll more than likely be very surprised what you can find. Just some food for though.
OK having spent the last 11 years selling Hifi and AVR equipment here are 5 reasons you should never consider an avr over a hifi amplifier
1. Sound quality. You are spending money on circuitry you will never use and you are paying for licenses you don't require for music, i found a well sorted £200 2 channel amp the equivalent of an £800 avr.
2. Avr's have terrible resale value because the technology ages very quickly expect to lose 80% in 3 years check ebay for evidence. 2 channel maybe 30%
3. In my retail experience Avr's are notoriously unreliable whist 2 channel very rarely gets returned to store
4.Avr's are unpleasant and unintuitive to use for just quick music playback
5. Avr's are bulky and are built to a price so they are generally ugly and have extensive use of plastic rather than metal, ie: Plastic glossy fronts rather than brushed aluminium.
I completely agree with Andrew. With a few exceptions, AVR’s are an excellent choice.
My AVR is the Sony STR-ZA3100ES. It’s second only to Sony’s flagship 5000ES. I run my 3100ES with a Def Tech speaker setup, and couldn’t be happier with the Home Theater performance and the Stereo music playback is exceptional.
The only caveat regarding Sony’s ES lineup is the absence of a phono stage. However, that’s an easy-to-fix situation with plenty of affordable Phono preamps from Schiit, Fluance, U-Turn, Fosi Audio & even Pro-Ject.
It’s all about balancing personal preference with your budget without getting OCD and find yourself over-spending. But that’s just me.
Five years ago I setup Pioneer VSXLX101 7.2 Channel Networked AV Receiver ($399.00) paired with Klipsch R-28F Reference 5.1 Channel Home Theater Speaker Package ($1,475.00) in our living room and never looked back. Can this be done better for under $2000? maybe it can, but as far as we concerned this is good enough.
No need to upgrade if you're happy with what you've got :)
I was never able to divert money from raising my kids into buying separates so I have a Yamaha AVR and use it 90% for music use. It sounds fantastic. My speakers are efficient and do have built-in powered subs but I have also used this AVR on smaller bookshelves that were not as efficient and it still sounded great. I would prefer separate components because I love audio equipment but to keep it real within a real budget, which is not a big budget, an AVR works great for me. And as often as things change with sound processing, I don't know that it would be any less expensive to upgrade a separate preamp processor as opposed to upgrading an AVR.
Separates are for single people. Totally agree that an AVR is the best value for anyone who has to use most of their money to do everything else but audio.
AVRs are totally doable. But I would only purchase one where I could bypass any sort of digital processing and have a pure analogue pathway from source to speaker.
Many years ago, I bought a Yamaha RX-A1010 AV/receiver to replace my old all-in-one system. That was the start of my new setup and my hunt for an audiophile system. I recycled the speakers I had to start with, but every year I added another (separate) element to it. I've used this receiver for years now with a pair of Q Acoustics 3020 bookshelve speakers in combination with a subwoofer. I do select the 'pure direct' function, which bypasses the internal equaliser/sound program settings and just amplifies the sound of the source that's fed into the receiver. This gives me the most satisfying result for stereo listening. Last month I found a cheap pair of Mordaunt-Short 906 speakers in a thrift shop. I replaced the Q Acoustics with those and bi-amped them on the receiver. The sound they deliver exceeded my expectations. Airy, open and detailed sound. The bass is snappy and has some punch, but it goes less deep than the subwoofer. It is more lively and rhythmic though.
The result is so enjoyable that I'm not thinking of replacing my AV/receiver by a dedicated stereo amplifier yet. The Q Acoustics 3020's now function as surround loudspeakers for movies, where they've replaced some old satellite speakers I had.
It's nice to get some confirmation by this video that AV/receivers can provide some good stereo sound.
I have a AV Receiver with my mains hooked up to a power amplifier to makes a huge difference
Thanks for the great info. Not that I've had buyers remorse for the recent purchase of the Marantz SR6015, but the crazy overload of "Too much information", and snobbery of audiophiles, can leave a person wondering about a leap of faith into a $1700.00 receiver. Especially the "Separates only" crowd.
Not that I regret it, because every time I turn it on, and listen to music, I just grin with amazement over how well it sounds.
Even with two channel movie viewing, it's quite the sweet machine.
Great points! Thank you ! Now that I'm confirmed it's a serious and viable option, and considering I will stick to a 2 channel system, I have the following question. I plan to get the Klipsch RP-8000f or the KEF Q750 (loved your reviews) and to pair them with the Onkyo RZ-50. Is the Marantz Model 40 a better choice (as it does also everything) ? Does the price difference translate in a significantly better sound quality ?
Super good question! I would love to know the answer to that as well.
If you know, I MEAN KNOW that you are not going to expand to home theater or mult-channel anything and you do not need or want room correction, get the Marantz. BUT, if you want to spend less and get more, the RZ50 will power 8000Fs no problem and do just fine with KEF too.
@@andrewrobinsonreviews That makes sense. Thanks!
@@andrewrobinsonreviews Thanks a lot Andrew! Super looking forward for your new type of content coming in! Keep up the amazing work :)
I wanted more then my current soundbar w/subwoofer could deliver but also wanted to keep things pretty minimal. Now that I have all my components I will be putting together my 3.1 system built around some products that you have positively reviewed.
One reason I like receivers is they have full equalizers rather than simple base/trebble adjustments as most 2 channel amps only have.
I've been using a Sony AVR for two channel listening for a few years. It's connected to the TV with eARC so we have sound when we watch movie & TV, as well as when we play video games, and now I have a Node connected with stereo RCA for streaming music. It works great! I'm also able to bi-amp my tower speakers for some extra power and sound quality.
In the future I plan on adding a center channel, and a subwoofer.
I have an old Sony AVR (STR-DE315) capable of only analog inputs. I've kept it around because to does do stereo so well. In my opinion it has always been a much better at being a "stereo" than an AVR.
I had always been under the impression that receivers not only makes 2-channel music sound a little tinny but can also make the audio sound a little digital too, but that impression was blown out the window once I tried the arcam avr20.
I actually preferred the sound of the arcam avr20 standing alone then the Denon 6500 helped out with a poweramp 😯
Hey butty boy donkey dicker. My fellow Welshman I can’t decide on wether to get an AVR for my pro-ject speaker box 5 s2 or stick with a stereo receiver. I want to future proof in case I decide to home theatre but not at the cost of loss of quality of music. Also plan on getting some keg LS50meta . I can’t spend more than £1000 on either a stereo receiver or AVR . What do you recommend?
@@rhysholley8289 what's happening butty 😄 if I was you I'd persevere and carry on saving rather than taking the risk and living with regret! Besides doing the research to buy a new set up can be an enjoyable journey in itself. One thing you should take into account, if you was to go with the ls50 metas for home theatre, what would you use as a centre channel? And of course quality speakers like the meta's are not gonna be able to truly sing with a mid-priced standing alone AVR.
If you're looking for any more advice, I'd be happy to help...
click on our red dragon
I totally agree with you, I use a Yamaha RXA-1000 Receiver driving 7;Energy Veritas speakers and two Energy subs. I have connected to the receiver a Technics SL-J1 Turntable, Sony TC RX77ES Cassette Deck, Mitsubishi U50 VHS, X Box360 Gaming console (don’t judge me harshly), a Yamaha DV-C6480 5 disc DVD/ CD player and finally a Sony UBP-X800M2 4K bluRay player. I have bought all these items new over the last 4 decades. My next and final purchase will be a Cambridge Audio MXN-10 digital Network Streamer in 2025, as I have outgrown the separate iPod dock the receiver originally came with. Whether I play my old Audiophile LP’s or a cd thru 2 channel stereo to the Top Gun Maverick BluRay thru all 7 channels and 2 subwoofers, it sounds amazingly clear and precise, it even up converts my old VHS tapes for a better picture sent thru to the Sony XBR65HX950 TV . The depth of features and power of the Yamaha RXA-1000 is so impressive and is a perfect match to efficiently drive the Veritas speakers. I picked it up in 2010 with the speakers, and so far I haven’t seen or heard anything out there that would make me want to change it.
Wonderful review - and exactly the way I want to go. My audiophile friends will snub me forever, but with Apple Music going dolby surround sound with some good mixes coming out, I’m installing ceiling speakers and two Kef LS50 meta (easy to run) with a Kef center. Where I spend most is on high end headphones. I’m still not certain on which receiver to go with.
Love that you tackled this subject, needing something 4ohm capable is a great point and the reason I went this route. Congratulations on finally buying the new house, I can't wait to see the new living room setup.
I’m playing everything through Apple device on my TV, connected through eARC to WiiM Amp that has a room correction now. What would I gain from moving to let’s say Marantz Cinema 70s? If there any reason to do that if I’m staying in 2.1?
No, the WiiM is an all in one streamer (DAC), amp and DSP. The amp has plenty of power, and it has a sub out. Also, a HDMI for eARC. All of these are benefits over traditional systems, so in your case, there is no further benefit unless you want to do things like add a turntable - an AVR (albeit the 70s being slim so is excluded from this criticism) will just take up more space and potentially add complexity.
Have a look at the new Marantz Model M1
I have a Marantz multi channel AV receiver paired with Paradigm Monitor 11 speakers. The Marantz has a set up that bi wires it and pulls the various dedicated amps for the channels together. It sounds fantasma gastical!! I have been in love with the sound for several years.
Which brand receivers do you think produce the best sound quality for music and movies ?
Arcam
@@TheEchelonany budget ones?
there are many, Denon is good, Sony is beast, Marantz is also good, Yamaha good!
Only your ears can answer that !
Why not? I'm currently rocking a 30-yr old Pioneer AV receiver with my Klipsch floor speakers and Bluesound Node 2i. Sounds great to me!
Most people can't tell the difference on sound quality
Good Vid! Kristi's right, and I vote stereo for the win. I've tried 4 different 5.1 systems (Polk, Bose, Sony, Yamaha) but keep going back to my old 90's Optimus Professional Series stereo. I use it for music only, so the 5.1 doesn't sound right to me. Recently I inherited a heavy 110lb. (90's) Theta Dreadnaught amp that puts out 5 channels at 240 watts each, Theta Casanova preamp with 5 channel sound, along with 4 Vandersteen Series 3 (4ohm) speakers, 2 Vandy Series 1's, and 2 300 Watt Vandy Subs. Testing them, I noticed the lights dim when I turn it, and it is drawing 425 watts at Zero Volume! Afraid to turn it up, it will probably throw a breaker. This thing could power a church! Definitely going back to my old Stereo ;)
Very good suggestion, now please make a video on mid to low price AVR with Bluetooth and wifi and great sounds
I was glad to make the move to an AVR over my Kenwood stereo receiver at 200 watts . I will say though adding a Amp to the AVR is definitely a good thing. The Amp gives the high power performance when your listening to 5 channel stereo at the reference level . I like my music loud and the Amp gives you clarity without effort at higher levels. But I have no regrets using a AVR for music until you want to drive your speakers and then that's where the added Amp comes in .
I’ve been down this rabbit hole a couple of times in the last 20 years and always ended up chucking the AVR and going back to two channel equipment for these reasons:
1. I get better build quality, no cheap noisy pots after a few years and they’re easier to get service done should the need arise.
2. I can take it home for a week and try it out, Best Buy won’t let you do that.
3. I haven’t yet found an AVR that does a good job with the Chesky imaging or soundstage tests
4. Simplicity, turn it on, select the source and adjust the volume. All the energy and build cost goes to one thing and for me the better sound is worth it.
I prefer to spend a little more money and buy equipment that will last for 30-50 years, and use standard components that can be replaced from multiple sources. Like everything, put your money towards what’s best for you.
Any equipment recommendations, may be looking for something similar.
I love the intensity with which you listen to your spouse / partner. You seem like a good duo!
I have a Yamaha surround sound receiver from 1993 that still works...mostly.
In my case I've always had AVRs because that's what was presented to me in 1998. I started with a DENON which lasted me a long time until someone else needed it more. Then I replaced it with a Yamaha which I absolutely love and still own. More recently I added a newer Yamaha (RX-A780) which is even better because it has a phono amp. We've been listening to vinyl a lot these past couple of years so we upgraded our speakers to the Paradigm 800Fs and oh boy... I'm certain there are better ways to listen to music but we are just so happy with our set up (plus it was kind of over budget for us) that we don't need anymore. We love movies and our receiver works really well for for our music and movie needs.
Also I confess that I was always ignorant about hi fi and felt intimidated when going to high end stores.
Especially if they have preouts for a power amp. It's what I've been doing for years.
Same here. Running fronts from separate amp. Best solution for my audio-videophile needs
I wanted to buy a pair of speakers and AVR but bought keeps for my hair, now I can truly enjoy my life with long hairs.
lol good one. I'm too late for the keeps.
Which 7.1 AVR’s produce the Best Sound Quatity for 2.1 Music and which do you prefer ?……
I totally get this! First from a home real estate perspective, who has the room? You buy a place as big as you can afford and at some point down the road, you're looking for space for this or that. A room just for listening, for some, ok sure. But generally I like the home filled with music in the background far more often than sitting in a room alone enjoying two channel. Not that I don't immensely enjoy that, but it's not often I'm sacrificing my time to do only that. So a dedicated room to be used so little, doesn't make sense. That said, I want a place I can sit down with my wife, a bottle of wine, cheese & crackers and some incredible vinyl. The living room is the best bang for the buck space in the whole house considering its multiple use. And considering this is the place I'm generally entertaining guests, why not have a decent investment into "entertainment" in this space. My solution is having a very good (not necessarily flagship) AV receiver running 7.2.2, but preamping out the front left and right to a very good power amp and towers. I really feel like room dimensions and textures aside, I'm getting what I want out of my living space with very little compromise. And for the audiophiles out there confining themselves to two channel only, boy are you missing out on concert dvds. Let's face it, one of the best ways to enjoy music and all that it is to our psych, nothing beats the live experience at a great venue. While a concert dvd is not there, it sure is great to enjoy bringing there to right here as best as possible. Multichannel puts us in the crowd. Some of the best times I've had with friends has been a night of cocktails, conversation and concert dvds creating that almost at the venue experience, except with better seats for the show than you can normally afford. With all the options available to us all, it sure is a good thing we don't all want the same thing.
Appreciate you sharing your personal experience!
Awesome content!
😊
@@KristiWright I live in the desert 🏜 as well / high Sierra Nevada's watch those rattle snakes on walks with Katie. I never let my Ridgeback off leash!
@@8474Starscream keeping her close by and always on leash. I’m paranoid AF about snakes.
@@KristiWright Me too. I see a lot of folks taking their dogs off leash into BLM / open space Desert during the Spring & Summer. Fools dogs shove their noses in holes and often times rattle snakes will hide within sage brush. Your looking at possible death and a $5-$7k vet bill. Happy for the new home purchase for the Robinson's!
I often use my Yamaha avr for two channel listening. Many of the people in the forums actually recommend avr’s Because they are generally less expensive than equivalent integrated amps. One advantage of separates (especially if using an integrated amp) is that you could actually end up with a smaller footprint than an avr since avrs tend to be large so they can hold all the individual components and have proper ventilation.
If you want to listen to Spatial Audio/Atmos Music then AVR it is.
Great presentation. For me, Denon AVR 4700. Love it. Drives my Klipsch Forte II’s, Klipsch Center Channel and in ceiling speakers perfectly and movies on the LG UHD Blu Ray are excellent. Fluance Turn table for vinyl.
Teac CD player rounds things out. Love the streaming capability too. AVR def the way to go.
I have a high end Sony ES AV receiver that has no problem in the stereo direct mode holding its own with many respected integrated 2 channel amps. Good sounding solid state amps are much easier to build these days due to surface mount components and super clean op amps that keep the cost down without sacrificing audio quality. A dedicated power amp is still the way to go for speakers that are hard to drive but the premise that there is no such thing as a good sounding AV receiver is just rubbish.
Congratulations on your new home to the two of you !
Thank you so much 😀