The reason why receivers cant work for two channel music reproduction
Comments
-
I gotta take that one step further as I have done a few tests that shocked the hell out of me.pearsall001 wrote: »Hearing is just fine. No mistakes here, my system sounds "stellar" & there's no need for separates in my book. Just because you feel the need for separates doesn't mean others simply follow suit. I can't believe how you guys just assume that separates equal better sound. Total hogwash.
I'd challenge anyone to a blind test using a few different receivers , pre and amp , then using some of the receivers as a preamp into said amps.
I own Intergraded , amps , receivers of all kinds of levels and as much differences there are between them all , you'll be surprised what preamp or receiver makes for the best pre. using internal amps on some receivers don't sound as good in 2 channel as a outboard amp does depending on how hard given speakers are to drive. It's also a balance as to which IF said speakers will gain a noticeable difference using a external amp or pre and amp .
It's all a matter of synergy in ones given system. There is no absolute. Some pre's suck and so do a lot of receivers. Some amps suck as well.Dan
My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time. -
-
I've got a 1985 vintage, mos fet, Kyocera R-851 receiver That I will happily put up against many separates of the same era & price point. (approx. $800.00 IIRC) A curtain and a chair would tell the story.
-
After listening to literally dozens of different 2 channel systems that utilized both seperates and receivers, my experience has been that overall system performance rests with innumerable other variables that had little to do with the number chassis in the setup.
Keep in mind none of the receivers were manufacturered past the early 1990s and most were either TOL or near TOL in their day. None were AVRs. Again, few would dispute that manufacturers tend to best of what they've got to offer in seperates however there were a number of excellent 2-channel receivers that more than held their own against a comparable stack of seperates while costing significantly less and taking up less real estate.
Once again, I feel that to denigrate an entire subcategory of gear is incredibly simplistic, in poor taste and insulting to the judgement of those who choose that route.Main:
McIntosh: MC 2155, MC 2125(x2), MR 80, C 32, MQ 101; Snell J7; Polk: RTiA7, RTiA9;
Pioneer PL-518; A/T 440 MLa; Yamaha CD
Vintage:
McIntosh: MX110Z, MC 2505, MC 240, Thorens TD 145; Shure V15III; Altec 14, Boston T1000; Yamaha CDX 393 CD; Yamaha Cass -
There are plenty of "stellar" receivers and reasons why a person would want one of them instead of stereo separates.Stellar two channel and receiver in the same sentence.......hilarious!
don't be so hard on yourselfThis place is going down the toliet, fast.design is where science and art break even. -
Nothing like limiting the competition!
Like I said, most receivers aren't that good. But there are some that are.
Hardly the norm. And HT stuff gets even harder to find as far as holding their own.
It comes down to the point that most makers of gear put their best efforts into
separates. Receivers aren't normally where they apply the good stuff. I'm sure
anyone could build a great receiver. But for the most part, they don't.
Kind of like a 4 door sports car."The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." --Thomas Jefferson -
sucks2beme wrote: »Nothing like limiting the competition!
Like I said, most receivers aren't that good. But there are some that are.
Hardly the norm. And HT stuff gets even harder to find as far as holding their own.
It comes down to the point that most makers of gear put their best efforts into
separates. Receivers aren't normally where they apply the good stuff. I'm sure
anyone could build a great receiver. But for the most part, they don't.
Kind of like a 4 door sports car.
I don't think companies are putting better effort into their separates. I think they put as much effort into their AVRs. They just have to spread out the same amount of money over a much larger number of components and functions.
Based on Trey's original post, I take the argument to apply Pre/Pros, as he asserts that "All the freaking processing and adjustments and room correction BS is a musical tone sucker..." is the reason AVRs cannot "work for two channel music reproduction."
There is no one here that can make an argument that no Pre/Pro can perform with top tier 2 channel preamps.design is where science and art break even. -
Receivers are consumer grade electronics. If you think otherwise, you're delusional or you've just never heard what stellar really is.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
Receivers are consumer grade electronics. If you think otherwise, you're delusional or you've just never heard what stellar really is.
Unless specifically constructed for commercial/industry use, everything is consumer grade electronics.
And I am not delusional, sir.Main:
McIntosh: MC 2155, MC 2125(x2), MR 80, C 32, MQ 101; Snell J7; Polk: RTiA7, RTiA9;
Pioneer PL-518; A/T 440 MLa; Yamaha CD
Vintage:
McIntosh: MX110Z, MC 2505, MC 240, Thorens TD 145; Shure V15III; Altec 14, Boston T1000; Yamaha CDX 393 CD; Yamaha Cass -
The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD
“When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson -
Unless specifically constructed for commercial/industry use, everything is consumer grade electronics.
Commercial/industry use would be considered pro gear. Your Pioneer/Yamaha/MAC 4300 would be considered consumer grade. Your other Mac gear could be considered audiophile grade. I hope that clears up your misunderstanding.And I am not delusional, sir.
So, you've just never heard what stellar really is?Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
I wonder if it's Senator McCarthy ?! FYI that term has been used generously on here by the "family, core members" so, it must be permissible.nooshinjohn wrote: »Who's got the ban-hammer today? -
I've heard the McIntosh 2Kw reference system which to my knowledge, is classified as consumer electronics. High-end consumer electronics but consumer electronics, nevertheless. Would I compare what I've got to that? Of course not.
After decades of following hi-fi, I've yet to hear of a consensus of what constitutes "audiophile grade" or not, let alone an industry accepted definition. In my humble opinion, it's a distinction that ought not to be made for innumerable reasons.
I had tried a fully refreshed McIntosh C32 preamp against the pre of the 4300 and really didn't hear much of a difference, contrary to my expectations. Maybe the rest of the system isn't good enough- I dunno. At any rate, I'm extremely satisfied with the level of performance and utility of the 4300 for the time being- particularly relative to its cost vs that of seperates of the same level of quality.Main:
McIntosh: MC 2155, MC 2125(x2), MR 80, C 32, MQ 101; Snell J7; Polk: RTiA7, RTiA9;
Pioneer PL-518; A/T 440 MLa; Yamaha CD
Vintage:
McIntosh: MX110Z, MC 2505, MC 240, Thorens TD 145; Shure V15III; Altec 14, Boston T1000; Yamaha CDX 393 CD; Yamaha Cass -
I don't think companies are putting better effort into their separates. I think they put as much effort into their AVRs. They just have to spread out the same amount of money over a much larger number of components and functions.
There is no one here that can make an argument that no Pre/Pro can perform with top tier 2 channel preamps.
Agreed. But again, few are doing it. Most consumers want ease of use and lots of channels.
And that's what they getfor their money. I know of a number of integrated amps that are great.
Not many receivers fall into this group Certainly not HT stuff as a rule. I prefer to look at the
electronics on their own merit, not by what they are."The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." --Thomas Jefferson -
I gotta take that one step further as I have done a few tests that shocked the hell out of me.
I'd challenge anyone to a blind test using a few different receivers , pre and amp , then using some of the receivers as a preamp into said amps.
Blinded, unblinded, one legged..........I'll put my separates rig up against any receiver and there will be no contest, end of story."Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
Blinded, unblinded, one legged..........I'll put my separates rig up against any receiver and there will be no contest, end of story.
The point being that the mere presence of seperates is hardly a passport to perfection any more than having a receiver is a guarantee of mediocrity.
Point 2: It's all relative to cost: $20,000 worth of seperates vs a typical receiver is not an equal comparison. (Not to suggest that's what your's cost)Main:
McIntosh: MC 2155, MC 2125(x2), MR 80, C 32, MQ 101; Snell J7; Polk: RTiA7, RTiA9;
Pioneer PL-518; A/T 440 MLa; Yamaha CD
Vintage:
McIntosh: MX110Z, MC 2505, MC 240, Thorens TD 145; Shure V15III; Altec 14, Boston T1000; Yamaha CDX 393 CD; Yamaha Cass -
Receivers are consumer grade electronics. If you think otherwise, you're delusional or you've just never heard what stellar really is.
Boy oh boy, you just can't help yourself can you?????Blinded, unblinded, one legged..........I'll put my separates rig up against any receiver and there will be no contest, end of story.
You're on!!!!! My place or yours? Now don't go kicking & screaming when you flunk the test because you always can fall back on the premis that those tests are always invalid...pretty much a built in excuse to CYA."2 Channel & 11.2 HT "Two Channel:Magnepan LRSSchiit Audio Freya S - SS preConsonance Ref 50 - Tube preParasound HALO A21+ 2 channel ampBluesound NODE 2i streameriFi NEO iDSD DAC Oppo BDP-93KEF KC62 sub Home Theater:Full blown 11.2 set up. -
My place and I'll even supply the beer and munchies and burn something on the grill. There will be no flunking, I can assure you of that. I think if I can discern between which tubes are playing, I can pick out a receiver vs. my separates pretty handily.
H9"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
My place and I'll even supply the beer and munchies and burn something on the grill. There will be no flunking, I can assure you of that. I think if I can discern between which tubes are playing, I can pick out a receiver vs. my separates pretty handily.
H9
Split the airfare?"2 Channel & 11.2 HT "Two Channel:Magnepan LRSSchiit Audio Freya S - SS preConsonance Ref 50 - Tube preParasound HALO A21+ 2 channel ampBluesound NODE 2i streameriFi NEO iDSD DAC Oppo BDP-93KEF KC62 sub Home Theater:Full blown 11.2 set up. -
pearsall001 wrote: »Split the airfare?
All kidding an peacocking aside, I think this would be a lot of fun. If I was independently wealthy I'd pick up 1/2 the airfare.
H9"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
I'm satisfied w/my 2 channel/music performance.
When I receive my tax refund, I'll finish my speaker mods w/YOUR advice for XO parts and move up to Happy!
TonySamsung 60" UN60ES6100 LED Outlaw Audio 976 Pre/Pro Samsung BDP, Amazon Firestick, Phillips CD Changer Canare 14 ga - LCR tweeters inside*; Ctr Ch outside BJC 10 ga - LCR mids, inside* & out 8 ga Powerline: LR woofers, inside* & out *soldered LR: Tri-amped RTi A7 w/Rotels. Woofers - 980BX; Tweets & “Plugged*” Mids - 981, connected w/MP Premiere ICs Ctr Ch: Rotel RB981 -> Bi-amped CSi A6 Surrounds: Premiere ICs ->Rotel 981 -> AR 12 ga -> RTi A3. 5 Subs: Sunfire True SW Signature -> LFE & Ctr Ch; 4 Audio Pro Evidence @ the “Corners”. Power Conditioning & Distribution: 4 dedicated 20A feeds; APC H15; 5 Furman Miniport 20s *Xschop's handy work -
IMHO you can get very good performance from some AVR's and receivers for two channel music. My Onkyo does sound better in stereo for music than it does with sound processing in 5.1. The stereo performance of the Onkyo does not come close to the sound quality of separates. A good pre amp and amp would put this 100 WPC Onkyo to shame. I would take a simple low power tube system any day over a SS amp.
On this subject, I knew I was compromising by buying an Onkyo for SQ in music.
It has always been my goal when picking a SS device to get one that has more a tube type sound for better sound quality. -
We're all after the same goal and the roads there are infinite.
Whatever path is chosen revolves around dozens of criteria that vary from one individual to another.
Generally speaking, I have a big problem with universal affirmative statements which are flawed more often than not.
H9- I'd be more than happy to extend the same generous invitation if you're ever in the Scranton PA area.
Main:
McIntosh: MC 2155, MC 2125(x2), MR 80, C 32, MQ 101; Snell J7; Polk: RTiA7, RTiA9;
Pioneer PL-518; A/T 440 MLa; Yamaha CD
Vintage:
McIntosh: MX110Z, MC 2505, MC 240, Thorens TD 145; Shure V15III; Altec 14, Boston T1000; Yamaha CDX 393 CD; Yamaha Cass -
Yes, but compare either of those to a C48 or MA6600 and there will be a substantial difference.I had tried a fully refreshed McIntosh C32 preamp against the pre of the 4300 and really didn't hear much of a difference, contrary to my expectations. Maybe the rest of the system isn't good enough- I dunno. At any rate, I'm extremely satisfied with the level of performance and utility of the 4300 for the time being- particularly relative to its cost vs that of seperates of the same level of quality."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche -
Yes, but compare either of those to a C48 or MA6600 and there will be a substantial difference.
Point of that was that some would call the C32 "audiophile grade" but not the MAC.
The MC 2125 doesn't even have anything over the 4300's amp- IMHO.Main:
McIntosh: MC 2155, MC 2125(x2), MR 80, C 32, MQ 101; Snell J7; Polk: RTiA7, RTiA9;
Pioneer PL-518; A/T 440 MLa; Yamaha CD
Vintage:
McIntosh: MX110Z, MC 2505, MC 240, Thorens TD 145; Shure V15III; Altec 14, Boston T1000; Yamaha CDX 393 CD; Yamaha Cass -
I would hope not, the 2125 doesn't sound great at all. As for the C32...calling it audiophile grade would be very subjective."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche
-
RT-12, CS350-LS, PSW-300, Infinity Overture 1, Monoprice RC-65i
Adcom GFA-545II, GFA-6000, Outlaw Audio 990, Netgear NeoTV
Denon DCM-460, DMD-1000, Sony BDP-360, Bravia KDL-40Z4100/S
Monster AVL-300, HTS-2500 MKII -
All kidding an peacocking aside, I think this would be a lot of fun. If I was independently wealthy I'd pick up 1/2 the airfare.
H9
It would be a lot of fun. I'm with you, airfare ain't cheap now a days. Maybe we could get Jesse to ainte up!!!!! :razz:"2 Channel & 11.2 HT "Two Channel:Magnepan LRSSchiit Audio Freya S - SS preConsonance Ref 50 - Tube preParasound HALO A21+ 2 channel ampBluesound NODE 2i streameriFi NEO iDSD DAC Oppo BDP-93KEF KC62 sub Home Theater:Full blown 11.2 set up. -
I would hope not, the 2125 doesn't sound great at all.
You've omitted the all-important part, "to me".
**I've not been on Club Polk very long yet I'm truly saddened by the amount of elitism and closed-mindedness I've observed here coming from certain members. It is for this reason I've limited my participation in this forum. Finding this thread particularly in need for clarification, I chose to participate. During the discussion I've been told: Some of my gear is not "audiophile grade" (whatever that is); receivers "suck"; and finally the above statement that [my amp] "doesn't sound great at all."
Well gentlemen- the only thing that sucks around here is the attitude of a few of which I've had more than enough. With that I think I'll be moving along.Main:
McIntosh: MC 2155, MC 2125(x2), MR 80, C 32, MQ 101; Snell J7; Polk: RTiA7, RTiA9;
Pioneer PL-518; A/T 440 MLa; Yamaha CD
Vintage:
McIntosh: MX110Z, MC 2505, MC 240, Thorens TD 145; Shure V15III; Altec 14, Boston T1000; Yamaha CDX 393 CD; Yamaha Cass -
Ah, I should have looked at your signature first, I apologize.
For what you could sell your 2105 for, you could pick up a 2125 or similar for not much more coin and get much better sound. Each generation from Mac was a marked improvement, I've owned a 250, 2105, 2125, 7270, MX115, MX119, plus a few other models."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche
