how about some reviews for receivers?

[Joshua_j]

Hi,

I hope that I am not alone in wanting to have a review of some receivers and how they interface with computer input……

So, what I would like to see is….. Pioneer just came out with a "network" receiver… how is it? does it succeed? is it worth buying and using the new apple controller with it? Or does marantz have a better interface? How about Denon or Lexicon? Can I easily use them at this point to access my music and use them and their DACs?

 

I am not concerned about how the receivers play video, but I am concerned about how they fit in with the rest of my system and are we closer to reaching the goal of full integration?

I think that a round-up and a listening session, by Chris , would be great!!!

Thank you,

Joshua

 

[jfrye]

There are a number of people with receivers who would like to improve their system around it and/or supplement it with CA.

 

[Terry]

I would assume that the Arcam receivers would be highly thought of and the new anthem may well be. I think the Cambridge 650r is a nice unit/ I am not to sure out of that small group where to tell you to look.

 

[mwheelerk]

If you are not concerned about video playback then why have an AVR and all the related video circuitry at all? I remember that the most recent AVRs I owned had 'Pure Direct' mode which shut down video circuits so as not to interfere with audio playback. That acknowledgement by manufacturers of an issue is one of the reasons I moved away from AVRs for music playback and especially for computer based audio playback.

 

[Joshua_j]

I mean no offense, but I think that you missed the point of my query. I think that the video players themselves have better processing power than any of the current avr's. So my point was how do the current avr's play with the networks and computers in the house. Many are there as "network ready" and many have ipad apps… so I am wondering how they really are… and how they compare to an apple tv and how they integrate the airport express etc…..

Everyone has the same chips to use and the price of the chips to the big guys is very cheap. You know, Denon is not evil and neither is Marantz…. nor is Pioneer…. but they are really never mentioned on this site. Really only Apple and then Weiss and Berkeley…. but the truth is that many people use other systems and integrate and it would be nice to know how things have progressed. I want my wife to be able to switch between YO GABBA GABBA and Coleman Hawkins….. and I would like it as well considering I have only one listening room….also, since I am busy with work (many of us have lives outside of our audio dreams) I cannot sit and listen to every piece of equipement or every company so I rely on sites such as this for expert advice…

That is where this request came from. Thank you for your time.

Joshua

 

[mwheelerk]

I think I did understand your basic question about the network functionality of some current AVRs but I was responding to your comment regarding the video playback and the potential for sound degradation. I knew I was off track from your primary inquiry.

 

I have nothing against those brands and have owned products from each you mention. I think there is not a lot of discussion of them here because many may choose other than AVRs for computer based system and one reason may be the video issue.

 

[santar]

I am a receiver user for hi-res computer audio playback.

 

There, I've admitted it. In my shame I have tried to keep this a secret but always knew that someday I could be outed. How did I sink to this? Well I have to confess to certain addictions..

- I love surround sound music. Especially for live and classical music. I have a large collection of hi-res 5.1 audio files.

- I also like to watch music concerts, especially from Blu-ray with hi-res sound.

 

Having separate amplification/speakers for stereo and video/surround playback is just not practical. I connect a Mac Mini to my Arcam AVR600 via hdmi and find the experience quite acceptable. I know that I am fooling myself because the jitter is too high but I just don't care.

 

Of course advice and discussion on how to improve this experience is always welcome!

 

Santar

 

[realhifi]

I can't speak of every receiver out there although we have tried just about all of them. I will say that the Denons mentioned by you are pretty darn good at just about everything. They do Airplay, decent processing, ease of use, ease of setup, networkable, Pandora, UpNP, Internet Radio, very nice iPhone app for control and quiet honestly with the right speakers I think they sound quite pleasant.

 

[Stevef]

I have a Denon 5.1 I purchased about six years ago that everything is connected through; CD, blu ray, cable box, TV and HRT DAC from my laptop. While not audiophile, it does sound good in all it's various duties, and I've had no technical problems in this time. Plus, it was marked down at the time (Magnolia) to about $250 or so, so when it fails (if it does) I will be tempted to look at another

 

[Paul R]

I have a NAD T747 that I absolutely love. There is no compromise in it's sound just because it happens to do video as well. The DACs in it sound very good to me as well - better in fact that a DacMagic when fed with a V-Link or Halide Bridge. And though the video is a bit behind the times, it looks fantastic.

 

I've recently been enjoying a conversation on a different forum about this receiver, and it is quite amusing to watch people there attack the receiver, and pointing out that most of their criticism is false or misleading can result in PMs with threats of bodily violence.

 

In any event, the convenience factor of an AVR in regards to connecting up multiple video sources (computer, blu-ray, AppleTV, Cable, etc.) is not to be belittled. It makes watching video a whole lot more fun.

 

And though people whose opinions I respect around here will state that no AVR can possibly have as good a sound as separates, I disagree. I submit this copied post of mine for your enjoyment. I was informed a little later that the combination I enjoyed here is about $8K worth of NAD gear. I have not verified that. A T747 can be picked up right now for $599, and provides 65wpc to 7 speakers, or 110wpc in stereo mode. Not too shabby for anything!

 

NAD M25 amp and MD15 HD Preamp

My buddy brought this over to hear with the little Maggies, and boy did it sound great. He is going to use it to power an all Magnepan surround system.

 

What amazed both of us is that the MD15/M25 pair clearly had the same sound as the T747 - just a whole lot more of it. The amp was quicker, bass was cleaner, and sound I didn't realize was at all muddy from the T747 was crystalline with the MD15/M25 pair.

 

I did not ask what he paid for the set, and he didn't volunteer it, but when Gary recognized the same sound - albeit less of it - in the T747, he was amazed.

 

Me- I know now what the T747 aspires to be like. Wow.

 

-Paul

 

[EuroChamp]

In future, I hope they will release more BluRay discs with HiRes music und top-notch video quality.

E.g.: It's a really nice experience to watch a opera at home!

 

But there's no need for "surround sound" - i select the stereo track.

My solution is a HTPC with J.River installed and HDMI output for video only.

The audiostream goes to my async USB converter and to the stereo system :-)

 

But I appreciate these freaks out there with their home cinema systems - amazing!

 

reg.

Bernhard

 

[RobbieC]

I have been using a Pioneer Elite SC-09TX receiver for two years now and have found it quite enjoyable. I originally bought it (and a matching Elite plasma monitor) solely for home theater use but then discovered that it actually sounds fairly good for two-channel. Incidentally, I use Martin Logan Clarity speakers all around with Synergistic Research Alpha speaker cables and Velodyne DD-18 subs with AudioQuest Alpha Snake interconnects. I am currently experimenting with a combination of DD-12 and Polk LSi bookshelf speaker in place of each Martin Logans.

 

Maybe the discussion of some newer high-end receivers is warranted—after all, these receivers are not the overly compromised econoboxes of old. For instance, my SC-09TX is a network receiver, has a built-in DAC comprised of six Wolfson WM8741 chips that are 24/192 and handle DSD input natively, has a USB input (but it doesn't work in the usual sense—i.e., it can only read files off of certain USB drives), has a Firewire input (but implemented in a proprietary manner), has plenty of S/PDIF inputs both optical and coax, and also incorporates a proprietary jitter rejection scheme (as mentioned by Charles Hansen in the Berkeley Audio Design Alpha USB Asynchronous Interface thread where he posted about the proprietary nature of Audio Rate Control implementations by Sony and Pioneer versus the open format compliant Ayre player. The SC-09TX implements its jitter rejection scheme, however, over Firewire vice HDMI while newer Pioneer receivers do implement it over HDMI).

 

We all know a receiver is no less than a DAC, a preamp, an amplifier, and often an SSP and video processor stuffed into one chassis (who cares about the AM/FM tuner), so realistic expectations should be exercised when discussing receivers in the context of audiophile components. Proponents of receivers, such as me, must admit that that is a lot of stuff to cram into one chassis let alone get right. Design-wise, there are power supply needs to consider that typically involve sharing one or more supplies amongst several sections at once while trying to maintain some sort of "galvanic" isolation solution between differing sections. The amplifier section, perhaps the most sensitive to cost-cutting pressure, contributes arguably more toward the sound of the receiver than any other section. Consider that a receiver with a single 15A IEC cord must draw no more than 12A in the US in order to be UL Listed and the fact that amplifiers are far less than 100% efficient. How likely is it then that the amplification specifications of a receiver in comparison to those of a dedicated amplifier of similar spec are apt to be "optimistic"? And then there is cost. What does it cost to provide all those functions well? The SC-09TX listed for $8000 when it debuted (I got mine new for $4500 back then—lol, back then!) but I'd have to say that that is probably how much it's going to take to do all those functions well.

 

The SC-09TX with its 10 channels of Class-D amplification is very flexible and does do audio well but it still isn't quite as good as some of the well sorted systems I hear in my local dealer's listening rooms (JS Audio in Bethesda, MD). Sure, those other systems are "better" but considering that the SC-09TX gets me about 90% of what I hear from those 6 figure "better" systems, I don't see much value in upgrading this component. It's that good. I have estimated that I would have to spend about another $5,000 in addition to the cost of the SC-09TX (so about $10,000) in separates just to get slightly better sound and all the functionality I have with the SC-09TX.

 

FWIW, I didn't originally intend for the SC-09TX to be a permanent fixture in my system as I originally believed no receiver could possibly provide the sound I desired after having experienced the 6 figure audiophile systems I mentioned but it seems that well designed receivers today can come close. That's why I've abandoned consideration of separates for now and am instead evaluating speakers with Wilson, KEF, and Magnepan on my to do list.

 

[James1776]

All built in DAC's are also not equal...does anyone make a receiver that has a good internal DAC?

 

[CharlyD]

I'm a lifelong audiophile who has previously spent significant portions of my disposable income on systems that provided some great sonic experiences. Due to many circumstances, I no longer have sufficient resources or space to assemble a dedicated two channel system in addition to a home theater system.

 

Last year, I assembled a home theater system around an Onkyo TX-NR807 which is a UPnP player that supports a very large set of formats and includes 192kHz/24-bit DACs. The front L/R speakers are ML Mosaics whose midrange and highs are covered by ribbon drivers with the lows delivered by a metal cone woofer.

 

I don't miss my previous monster systems in the least. This setup has all the dynamics, imaging, tonal accuracy and other sonic attributes to deliver great experiences. And, in reference to another posting in this thread, there are many operas on Blu-ray that sound (and look) just fantastic.

 

[Audio_ELF]

Arcam and Rotel along with the aforementioned NAD all perform well in 2 channel mode including their DAC stage.

 

The other way is to combine separate preamp/processor and power amp.

 

Eloise

 

[wgscott]

I think one-channel mono receivers clearly are being discriminated against.

 

[Terry]

I think the idea of what is good is with the listener and I myself if I had to use a receiver would try the Arcam, the Cambridge and the Anthem. I myself think of Rotel as mid-fi and not top of mid-fi or the lower part of hi-fi, That is just my opinion and sure as heck does not make me right.

 

[Joshua_j]

For what it's worth, My System thus far is based on Dali Euphonia 5.1 MS5 LF/RF, CS4 center, RS3 rears and AS2 for sub duty.

Sony PS3 fat boy for blu ray, OPPO DV983H for sacd, Marantz AV8003 as the av receiver, mcintosh mc2300 as a preamp with passthrough mode for tv and movies, used for 2 channel direct from the oppo, Sunfire Cinama Signature 5 channel amp for power, with Furman and panamax, FIOS with Motorola cable box, APPLE TV all viewed on a 60 inch Pioneer Plasma Kuros

In the bedroom I have a 5.1 system as well, with a Vienna Acoustic speakers- the Weberns around the TV and the Bergs on the wall behind the bed with a REL sub under the nightstand. All of the audio equipment was wired out of site under the bed with plenty of breathing room. Pioneer is the AV receiver and powerhouse,FIOS motorola box, Samsung generic BDP,and Samsung LCD 50 inch with panamax.

 

So, I have spent a good amount on audio and video, and would like to integrate the audio better. So I asked the initial question because now everyone and their mother has come out with net friendly receivers, the ones I have are not friendly in any way shape or form, and I would love to see if the functionality of the receivers is up to par with what we are dealing with in terms of computer audio, because in the end aren't they just specialized computers? So, I appreciate all of the comments thus far and it is nice to know that I am not the only one interested in such things.

 

In the end, almost all of the manufacturers are using the same chips (almost) and the circuitry is a bit different so the sound will be different and it is personal choice, but the user interface is the most important aspect. Have we reached the time that Apple TV is obsolete and I can just surf through my collection using the receiver I already have without adding another layer? I would love that... to just turn on the system with my Universal remote and have bit perfect playback through the system, using the specialized circuitry in the system and the superior DACs.

Joshua

 

 

 

[Paul R]

Something like the Perfect Wave DAC with it's optional Bridge unit maybe.

Just expanded to handle all the A/V chores as well.

 

-Paul

 

 

[bleedink]

This is not quite the all in one solution that some were speaking about above but I have found this combination to give one pretty exquisite sound when streaming from an NAS. Granted it is "one more box" but I have almost entirely stopped using my mac mini after listening. I was also one of those folks who seldom mentions that he uses an AVR on this forum but no more!!!! HAHA! Seriously though, after auditioning equipment that goes for many times the cost of my kit, I am convinced I got pretty good bang for my buck. Even over HDMI I just have yet to hear a system that requires the extra 0's from my budget. I think it just may be possible that some of these AVR solutions have gotten so good as to be almost indistinguishable from higher-fi sources. Then again my hearing may already be fried from the years when I couldn't afford good sounding equipment!!!

 

[Christopher]

I recently upgraded a secondary system with the Pioneer Elite SC-37 receiver to replace an older Marantz AV receiver.

 

My Marantz SR-8000 has always performed very well for the last 10 years. Even though I never had a problem with the unit, I decided to upgrade primarily because it does not support HDMI and, as a secondary consideration, it only supports 24/96 audio.

 

Enter the SC-37...

 

Pioneer’s SC-37 supports 24/192 audio with a built-in Burr Brown DAC (32 Bit). The SC-37 also has six HDMI inputs. In addition, the SC-37 has ICE amps delivering 140 watts per channel (7.1). For me, ICE amps are a plus.

 

First impressions...

 

At first, I was impressed, but not wowed with 2 channel music. Initially, I thought my old Marantz receiver sounded better in stereo mode. After some break-in, I could hear a clear and noticeable improvement over my old Marantz receiver. Btw, I consider the SR-8000 to be an excellent piece of gear.

 

Movies definitely sounded more impressive after running MCACC right out-of-the-box. I also added two additional surround speakers for 7.1 encoded movies. Conveniently, the SC-37 has a few options for 7.1 surround if sources are not 7.1 encoded.

 

Experimenting & suggested upgrades...

 

I added a PS Audio Quintet and changed the power cord to Pangea AC-9. Also changed the stand from a glass & steel Bellogetti unit to a Solidsteel 5.4 rack with some additional products from Herbie's Audio Lab for added vibration control.

 

Personally, I recommend vibration control and an upgraded power cord for the SC-37.

 

Networking...

 

The SC-37 will connect to your home network. According to Pioneer, the front USB port will also play “MP3, WAV, or WMA music files with full ID3 tag and album art support.”

 

Instead of networking, I decided to use an original Apple TV for music playback and the newer ATV2 for movies. Both ATVs are connected via separate HDMI inputs.

 

Price-to-performance-based recommendation...

 

Personally, I think you will have to spend a lot more money to substantially improve the overall performance of the SC-37. Pioneer’s suggested price is $2,200 and SC-37s are selling new on Amazon for about $1,400.

 

I continue to be wowed by the performance of the Pioneer Elite SC-37. Based on my experience, I highly recommend the SC-37 as a budget-friendly high-performance receiver with built-in 24/192 DAC.

 

Best regards,

Chris

 

 

[4est]

Maybe Chris should start reviewing car audio as well!

 

[Russ Reed]

This is my setup in my signiture. I'd like to have better just for music, but this sounds pretty good. Stand alone DACs are worth every dollar.

 

[Terry]

I think a lot depends on what you are trying to accomplish. How important is home theater which is not what this site is about obviously is to you. I do not doubt that you can get a very nice avr that does a decent job on 2 channel. I would think if you going to just do two channel or no HT one would not go that way. I think that in all honesty that this is not the thrust of this site and therefore just as out of place as reviews of separate controllers would be here. I would say no to that and you should get a good idea on that is good for the dual function from other sites and outlets. I would not really expect Absolute Sound even though it has changed to do a shootout of AVRs nor would I expect home theater to devote pages to stereo pre amps and amplifiers. That is not what the sites pertain to.

 

[4est]

Agreed with Terry. Reviews about AVRs etc abound. In fact, I would rather see the focus solely on computers and DACs as they are often difficult or impossible to audition. One can find other equipment reviewed elsewhere, whereas Chris has done a better job with cutting edge digital sources than most, if not all others.