• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

The Case For AVRs... Am I missing something???

Do you have more use for a good stereo amplifier or an AVR?

  • AVR

    Votes: 74 62.7%
  • Stereo Amplifier

    Votes: 44 37.3%

  • Total voters
    118

Spocko

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
1,621
Likes
2,999
Location
Southern California
Which has better accuracy?
1) Stereo amp without subwoofer
OR
2) AVR with subwoofer(s)
You're missing a critical variable: DSP bass management or not? Bass accuracy requires some sort of bass management room correction, so if the AVR has Dirac and the stereo amp does not have something similar or Lyngdorf/Trinnov, then the AVR wins on accuracy due to this one feature. Bass accuracy is 100% dependent on room interaction which means bass management is a must if you want accuracy below 200Hz (or below your room's transition frequency).
 

Koeitje

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Messages
2,292
Likes
3,880
Which has better accuracy?
1) Stereo amp without subwoofer
OR
2) AVR with subwoofer(s)
If I want LFE then the AVR for sure.
 
D

Deleted member 43441

Guest
There’s no option for both haha.

I have a two channel preamplifier, and a multi channel preamplifier on a transparent XLR switcher, kind of the best of both worlds.

That being said my AVR does two channel music very well in pure direct mode.
 

valerianf

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
691
Likes
442
Location
Los Angeles
With the new Onkyo/Pioneer/Integra you get Dirac processing in the AVR.
Why to ask for more boxes and cables?

According to the first user feedback Dirac seems the way to go.
 

pseudoid

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
5,125
Likes
3,439
Location
33.58 -117.88
In my experience the "problem" with AVR's is that they are too complicated and unreliable.

AIOs (all-in-ones) and the kitchen-sink approach to home-audio (=AVRs) is a great concept for the disposable society that we have become.
And why not? It seems to work for most people, who seek "immersive" audio-for-video.
I am getting the itch to update my A/V system in a way which totally puts a controlled-firewall between the A and the V sections; yet still resolves the audio down to L/R channels.
Unfortunately, in the Atmos standard and the streaming services that are pushing this "Immersive" sound for video; 'stereo downmix' is but an 'optional' audio stream.

I was forced to retire my last AVPre, strictly because the HDMI1.4b became a relic, when I was stepping-up to an OLED.
I know that HDMI2.1 will also become a relic in the next few years, and my current AVPre will need to be retired again.
I was most interested in @amirm shaking down the HDMI Audio Extractor (Audiopraise VanityPro Review) and I hope more devices like this are reviewed at ASR.
 

amicusterrae

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2020
Messages
57
Likes
54
AVRs are more convenient than having separates, and modern tech is all about convenience.
AIOs (all-in-ones) and the kitchen-sink approach to home-audio (=AVRs) is a great concept for the disposable society that we have become.
And why not? It seems to work for most people, who seek "immersive" audio-for-video.
I am getting the itch to update my A/V system in a way which totally puts a controlled-firewall between the A and the V sections; yet still resolves the audio down to L/R channels.
Unfortunately, in the Atmos standard and the streaming services that are pushing this "Immersive" sound for video; 'stereo downmix' is but an 'optional' audio stream.

I was forced to retire my last AVPre, strictly because the HDMI1.4b became a relic, when I was stepping-up to an OLED.
I know that HDMI2.1 will also become a relic in the next few years, and my current AVPre will need to be retired again.
I was most interested in @amirm shaking down the HDMI Audio Extractor (Audiopraise VanityPro Review) and I hope more devices like this are reviewed at ASR.
I think this is in the minority of what consumers want. Even amongst audio enthusiasts, how many want to sit in dedicated media room with a giant screen, surrounded by speakers, and listen in stereo? While I would love to see cheaper and more readily available digital audio extraction options, it is ultra niche. The broader market seems to be moving away from AVRs anyway. How many people who owned AVRs in the 5.1/6.1/7.1 days have stuck with what they have or even downsized? I think room correction has helped persuade many to upgrade, and that's a big can 'o worms above the transition zone. Atmos might continue for a while because Apple and streaming services are promoting it, someone with Airpods Max may think that's immersive audio, and the Atmos sound bars and tower speaker add-on modules, etc. might give others enough of an effect to be satsified. But, how many people have experienced immersive audio in a nice home theater with at least 9 objectively high-performing speakers in the proper locations, driven with ample headroom? And of those who have or otherwise want that experience at home can actually do it? It's an investment in money, space, and decor--let alone time and effort if DIY. Stereo is so inherently compromised compared to the sound at a live performance, but it is a lot simpler, cheaper, and for most people, easier to live with in the home. Plus, the resurgent interest in vinyl might be driving more interest in stereo, which seems to be leading to more product offerings.
 

amper42

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
1,583
Likes
2,287
I have the Denon 4700 with a 7.2.4 setup. It works great for movies. As far as I'm concerned Movies are where you need subs for car crashes, explosions, rocket launches and gut wrenching low tones like the first few minutes of "Edge of Tommorrow" or the huge rocket launch track in "Interstellar".

On the other hand, for stereo I prefer the Revel F328Be with the RME ADI-2/Purifi amp combination running full range. It sounds absolutely awesome. It's much cleaner sounding than my Denon 4700. If I want to add subs I could use a Flex with Dirac but I'm totally satisfied with the F328Be in stereo without subs. If I want more bass it can be accommodated with the ADI-2 but it's a rare song that cries out for the "Loudness" button. My music choices are Classical, Jazz and some pop. I'm looking to relax with stereo music listening, not trying to rattle the walls. I can do that with subs and the Denon 4700.

The clarity difference between these two setups is quite recognizable. 90% of the time I listen to music in stereo. The Denon 4700 is reserved for movies. I see these two setups as totally different tools for different functions. Each with its own designed benefit for specific tasks. I don't use a 5 pound hammer when a rubber mallet works best. The same applies to my music listening. I understand many believe music can't be good without subs. I don't find that to be true with the Revel F328Be at least for my taste. Total bass heads who want 1000 pounds of bass with every music track will never agree with my preferred setup. :D
 

krabapple

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
3,169
Likes
3,717
If you want *accurate* low bass (or low bass that starts from accurate and can be tweaked from there --as in a house curve) you're likely going to need a sub or get creative with speaker/listener placement. And some room EQ or treatment. That's true of stereo or multi. It's not about rattling walls. Sub owners aren't all bass freaks. I barely ever watch movies on my main (5.2) system (though there's a flatscreen there too). It's mostly music, and I aim for balanced bass, not a kiloton of it. (Though if that's on the recording itself, so be it. I know how to turn it down.)

There is no difference between the physics of sound of movie recordings versus music recordings. There is no need for separate 'tools' for them. There is no reason why 2.0 should sound 'clearer' than 2.1 or higher.

Personally, I find that stereo recordings are 'good' but upmixed to surround can be 'great'. This isn't because that necessarily sends sounds whizzing around the room -- that happens more with discrete surround mixes, versus upmixing -- it's because for me it gives more a sense of 'realness', pleasantly so. It also takes more of the room out of the heard sound field...the 'room' gets bigger. Those who think it's sacrilege and that no one who really cares about 'high fidelity' would do it...go tell Floyd Toole.
 

pseudoid

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
5,125
Likes
3,439
Location
33.58 -117.88
The broader market seems to be moving away from AVRs anyway.
To what?
Certainly you don't mean they bought their TVs and just listen to the tin-cans wedged somewhere inside that wallet-thin display; do you?
OR maybe you are referring to smaller "AVR" systems; do you?
I had used the specific choice of words about "most people" but we here at ASR (and as a whole) are wanting quality unlike those "most people".
 

billyjoebob

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2021
Messages
307
Likes
118
Alot of talk about "needing" an AVR for proper sub integration.
It really depends on the sub that is being integrated.
I use on older preamp, I simply split the pre-outs with an old fashioned y cable and run the RCA's to the sub. Then set the cross over frequency on the sub and dial it in to where I "feel" it then just back the level off a tad till it disappears.
Easy peasy!
My .02c is not much different from my old Marantz 7015 w/audyssey.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,767
Likes
3,706
Alot of talk about "needing" an AVR for proper sub integration.
It really depends on the sub that is being integrated.
I use on older preamp, I simply split the pre-outs with an old fashioned y cable and run the RCA's to the sub. Then set the cross over frequency on the sub and dial it in to where I "feel" it then just back the level off a tad till it disappears.
Easy peasy!
My .02c is not much different from my old Marantz 7015 w/audyssey.
Well it is different because to do a really good job you need delay control and room correction.

Without that, at least use a device like a MiniDSP 2x4.
 

sgent

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2020
Messages
99
Likes
127
Alot of talk about "needing" an AVR for proper sub integration.
It really depends on the sub that is being integrated.
I use on older preamp, I simply split the pre-outs with an old fashioned y cable and run the RCA's to the sub. Then set the cross over frequency on the sub and dial it in to where I "feel" it then just back the level off a tad till it disappears.
Easy peasy!
My .02c is not much different from my old Marantz 7015 w/audyssey.

The problem with that method is that if you have full range speakers you're outputting too much bass. If you don't have full range speakers, you're trying to drive them full range which causes a massive increase in distortion.

Note that very, very few tower speakers are "full range" even for music listening according to measurements done by ASR / Erin / Others.
 

amper42

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
1,583
Likes
2,287
Have you ever switched between the electronics on the same pair of speakers using the same setup parameters (EQ off, etc) or is this is in different rooms and comparing Audyssey vs RME?

When I first got the Revel F328Be I powered them with the Denon 4700. I calibrated the F328Be with Audyssey app. They sounded horrible after Audyssey screwed with the FR. Turning off default MRC made little difference and limiting Audyssey to less than 500Hz was not much better. The F328Be has a wonderful downward sloping curve and Audyssey flattens everything which kills the beautifully designed F328Be crossover. REW displayed the difference before and after Audyssey. It was significant. The original slope was missing. I ran the F328 in Pure Direct Stereo Mode which sounded better but it still didn't have the clarity I was looking for.

I called Benchmark and talked to their tech. I explained I was using the 4700 with a Purifi amp and wondered if the Benchmark amp might offer the sound I was looking for. He believed I would notice more difference getting the Benchmark LA4 and taking the F328Be off the Denon receiver. He believed the Denon was the limiting factor. I though about his comments and did some research. The ADI-2 had a powerful preamp and a good DAC so I thought I would try it. When the ADI-2 arrived I was totally acclimated to the Denon in Pure Direct mode. I plugged in the ADI-2 and a few things happened.
1. The clarity with the F328Be was there. It was like a thin sheet was lifted from the speakers. The sound was awesome!
2. The ADI-2 had a HUGE amount of additional gain for driving the Purifi amp. It opened up the spigot like I had never heard before. The Denon couldn't come close to driving the Purifi amp like the ADI-2.

I A/B'ed the two setups several times switching back and forth while carefully level matching the output. The clarity with the ADI-2 was noticeable and exactly what I was looking for while costing less than the Denon 4700. I still use the F328BE on the Denon 4700 now and again but my preferred configuration continues to be the ADI-2/Purifi and F328Be. Your taste may be differ but I certainly found what I was looking for.

Revel F328Be CEA-2034 Spinorama Predicted In-room Frequency Response Measurements.png
 
Last edited:

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,454
Likes
4,218
If you knew your speakers were flat on axis, like the F328Be, then you really needed to limit Audyssey to below the transition frequency range, ie 200-300 Hz.
 

jhaider

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
2,823
Likes
4,519
… they sounded horrible after Audyssey screwed with the FR. The F328Be has a wonderful downward sloping curve and Audyssey flatten everything which killed the beautifully designed F328Be crossover. REW displayed the difference before and after Audyssey. It was significant. The original slope was missing.
That’s fixable. Audyssey’s default target curve sounds worse in most rooms than no EQ.

Have you tried using it properly? Spend the $20 for the iOS app to delete the midrange notch and set the bass target curve to be a smoothed version of your speakers’ natural room gain. Also, as @Newman just suggested, limit the correction bandwidth so it’s room correction and not speaker EQ.

Better or whatever is subjective, especially when one setup is a cheap tin movie box and the other is lovingly crafted boutique audio gear ;) . But for a single seated listener at least the fidelity will be higher when using Audyssey as described above than it is with the fancy shit.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,767
Likes
3,706
When I first got the Revel F328Be I powered them with the Denon 4700. I calibrated the F328Be with Audyssey but they sounded horrible after Audyssey screwed with the FR. The F328Be has a wonderful downward sloping curve and Audyssey flatten everything which killed the beautifully designed F328Be crossover. REW displayed the difference before and after Audyssey. It was significant. The original slope was missing. I ran the F328 in Pure Direct Stereo Mode which sounded better but it still didn't have the clarity I was looking for.
Just to be clear, the speakers have a flat response. I believe you are referring to an in-room response being sloped downward as measured by an omnidirectional mic to include all of the reflections.

And this is a common complaint about Audyssey, even from myself. Which is why it's up to the user to make the correct decisions.

I called Benchmark and talked to their tech. I explained I was using the 4700 with a Purifi amp and wondered if the Benchmark amp might offer the sound I was looking for. He believed I would notice more difference getting the Benchmark LA4 and taking the F328Be off the Denon receiver. He believed the Denon was the limiting factor. I though about his comments and did some research. The ADI-2 had a powerful preamp and a good DAC so I thought I would try it. When the ADI-2 arrived I was totally acclimated to the Denon in Pure Direct mode. I plugged in the ADI-2 and a few things happened.
1. The clarity with the F328Be was there. It was like a thin sheet was lifted from the speakers. The sound was awesome!
2. The ADI-2 had a HUGE amount of additional gain for driving the Purifi amp. It opened up the spigot like I had never heard before. The Denon couldn't come close to driving the Purifi amp like the ADI-2.
I A/B'ed the two setups several times by switching back and forth between the two. The clarity of sound with the ADI-2 was exactly what I was looking for. I still try the F328BE on the Denon 4700 now and again but my preferred configuration continues to be the ADI-2/Purifi and F328Be. Your taste may be different but I certainly found what I was looking for.

I would like to give it a go just out of curiousity, however I would lose room correction and that would be an audible downgrade. I would like to know what contributed to your perception of clarity. The Denon has been shown to not audibly color the sound and you were using an external amp so it shouldn't be a power issue.
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,454
Likes
4,218

Putter

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 23, 2019
Messages
493
Likes
771
Location
Albany, NY USA
It is kind of weird how a moribund thread gained new life. The question can never be answered definitively. The unscientific poll seems to show that 6 out of 10 think an AV Receiver is 'good enough' or maybe better than Stereo amps. The reason they're better is simple. They've been the cutting edge of audio technology for the last 30 years. Think of all the features that are rare or nonexistent on stereo amps. Sub outs with assorted frequency cutoffs, room equalization, Dolby Digital, DTS, Dolby True HD, Atmos, wireless inputs, internet radio etc. You can argue that some of these features don't appeal. (Personally I find Atmos overly complex with its speaker arrangements....a bridge too far.)

What new technologies apply to stereo amps; remotes a me-too feature still not found on all amps and along those lines sub out. Many don't even bother with tone controls in the pursuit of 'purity'. Digital amplification is the only novel feature I can think of which has made somewhat greater inroads with stereo amps vs. AV receivers.

So what are you missing with 2 channel amps......more power, but wait, AV receivers have subwoofer outs which are essentially a power amp and speaker tasked with dealing with the low frequencies which demand the most watts. Also many upscale AV receivers have all or some channels with preamp outs allowing you to connect a separate power amp if needed. Admittedly an upscale AV receiver plus sub(s) and possibly 2 or more channels of power amplification has a cost that approaches if not exceeds that cost of a powerful stereo amp although you do still have multichannel and the other features. You do have however added complexity and I do not enjoy setting up a multichannel system even if I like the results.
 
Top Bottom