Stereo Receiver vs. Separate Amp?

Options
Kingkwas
Kingkwas Posts: 92
in 2 Channel Audio
Are stereo receivers as good as an amp? I've learned an AVR is not. But thought since the role is diminished to just Audio maybe a stereo receiver would have good components.

Thx!
AVR: Marantz SR 5011
L/ R: Polk Audio 703 LSiM (Bi Amp'd)
C: Polk Audio 255c - LS
R: Def Tech
Sub: PSW 505 (12 inch)
DVD: Oppo UDP 203
TV: 2016 Sony XBR 75X850D
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • Airplay355
    Airplay355 Posts: 4,298
    Options
    A lot of the cost of an AVR is in bells and whistles. With a stereo receiver or integrated you get better guts. I had an $800 Musical Fidelity integrated that was more powerful and sounded better than any $800 AVR I can think of. But it was as basic as basic gets.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Upstatemax
    Upstatemax Posts: 2,623
    Options
    I've heard some great integrated amps that I would happily put in my system.

    What are you looking to improve and what is your budget?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,046
    edited July 2017
    Options
    High-performance stereo receivers are pretty much anachronisms at this point; virtually all (no, not all!) modern 2 channel receivers are entry-level products.

    There are still good two-channel integrated amplifiers; I think that would be a much better place to look for good quality affordable two-channel sound (assuming that the OP is looking for new or recent production hardware).

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 10,716
    edited July 2017
    Options
    Wha?
    Game on dude:
    https://www.crutchfield.com/p_022AS3000B/Yamaha-A-S3000.html?tp=34948&awkw=75838518625&awat=pla&awnw=g&awcr=48679658425&awdv=c&awug=9015305

    oh, I see you gave a nod to integrated amps. Point.
    I'd like to trot my A-S2100 up to you to see how you like it w/ the Hardys.
    mhardy6647 wrote: »
    High-performance stereo receivers are pretty much anachronisms at this point; virtually all (no, not all!) modern 2 channel receivers are entry-level products.

    There are still good two-channel integrated amplifiers; I think that would be a much better place to look for good quality affordable two-channel sound (assuming that the OP is looking for new or recent production hardware).

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • tonyb
    tonyb Posts: 32,906
    Options
    Kingkwas wrote: »
    Are stereo receivers as good as an amp?
    Thx!

    Short answer is...no, they are not.
    HT SYSTEM-
    Sony 850c 4k
    Pioneer elite vhx 21
    Sony 4k BRP
    SVS SB-2000
    Polk Sig. 20's
    Polk FX500 surrounds

    Cables-
    Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
    Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
    Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
    Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable

    Kitchen

    Sonos zp90
    Grant Fidelity tube dac
    B&k 1420
    lsi 9's
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WLDock
    WLDock Posts: 3,073
    edited July 2017
    Options
    Hard to beat a good preamp / amp combo mated with good speakers. However, as stated they all should be judged on their own merits is a the best answer. I'm sure there are some that like the sound of the older stereo receivers better than some modern day amps or integrates.

    2.2 Office Setup | LG 29UB55 21:9 UltraWide | HP Probook 630 G8 | Dell Latitude | Cabasse Stream Amp 100 | Boston Acoustics VS 240 | AUDIORAX Desk Stands | Mirage Omni S8 sub1 | Mirage Omni S8 Sub2
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • K_M
    K_M Posts: 1,627
    edited July 2017
    Options
    Kingkwas wrote: »
    Are stereo receivers as good as an amp? I've learned an AVR is not. But thought since the role is diminished to just Audio maybe a stereo receiver would have good components.

    Thx!

    There is no simple answer to you question.

    There are many AVR's that have great sound, and consequently many that are mediocre.
    As WLDOCK said, judge things on their own merits.

    We have owned several receivers ranging from vintage models to current, and a handful of AVRs ranging from entry level to fairly higher priced.

    Have found nothing that can be said in "General" about ANY of them.




    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 49,802
    Options
    All receivers suck if you are serious about music reproduction.
    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

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • lightman1
    lightman1 Posts: 10,776
    Options
    F1nut wrote: »
    All receivers suck if you are serious about music reproduction.

    But....not all of us have the means to go above and beyond for "serious" music reproduction.
    Tell me where you started, all high and mighty @F1nut? And please, just respond like a human.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • lightman1
    lightman1 Posts: 10,776
    Options
    F1nut wrote: »
    All receivers suck if you are serious about music reproduction.

    The more I read this statement....
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 49,802
    Options
    lightman1 wrote: »
    F1nut wrote: »
    All receivers suck if you are serious about music reproduction.

    But....not all of us have the means to go above and beyond for "serious" music reproduction.
    Tell me where you started, all high and mighty @F1nut? And please, just respond like a human.

    wdv1f1o04k59.jpg
    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

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 10,716
    Options
    ^^^^ I'm glad he didn't include integrated amps in that statement.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dannylightning
    dannylightning Posts: 233
    Options
    integrated amps are usually a pretty good bang for the buck. buit well and sound good. the save a little space since your getting a amp and preamp in one unit. but you do not have a radio tuner.. i never listed to the radio i do not need to buy a separate tuner. i think my integrated amp sounds great.

    with a amp and separate pre amp you can usually get more wattage per channel and sometime even better build quality, they usually take up more space since you have 2 units..

    i have a nice receiver, i probably paid 500 bucks for it back around 2005.. and i also have a integrated amp i got a few years ago that cost a little more.. the integrated is much better IMO

    receivers are generally just kind of inexpensive and not built super well, there generally not made for a high end listener.
    Cambridge Azur 651A
    Polk LSi M703
    Sonos Connect




    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,046
    edited July 2017
    Options
    FWIW, for two channel, I started with this -- still have it.
    I was (shall we say) poor, so I spent lots of time listening & decided the best bang for the buck was a mid-power (by 1978 standards) integrated amplifier.

    12312777693_480440b67e_b.jpgP1020541 by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

    (the tuner came later... and, truth be told, isn't very good)

    Thought an integrated amplifier (and this Yamaha in particular) was a good choice then, and I still do think that it was a good choice.


    EDIT: My first hifi was powered by an EICO HF-52: a push-pull EL34 mono integrated amplifier with excellent output iron. I do wish I still had that one,,,


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dannylightning
    dannylightning Posts: 233
    Options
    old stereo amps did tend to sound really good.
    Cambridge Azur 651A
    Polk LSi M703
    Sonos Connect




    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • K_M
    K_M Posts: 1,627
    Options
    There is good and okay in everything.

    Has no direct correlation with price or age, or application.

    Why not judge everything based on it's own merits, instead of making sweeping generalizations.

    I highly doubt anyone here has enough first hand experience with "all amps or receivers".

    I have "just" enough experience to realize most all of the generalizations I see being touted routinely are easily proven wrong.....
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,046
    Options
    "All generalizations are false, including this one".

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • lightman1
    lightman1 Posts: 10,776
    Options
    $7
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 10,716
    Options
    in with 16!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 49,802
    Options
    K_M wrote: »
    I have "just" enough experience to realize most all of the generalizations I see being touted routinely are easily proven wrong.....

    And yet, you never can.
    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

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,046
    Options
    lightman1 wrote: »
    $7

    oh, easy.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dannylightning
    dannylightning Posts: 233
    edited July 2017
    Options
    K_M wrote: »

    I have "just" enough experience to realize most all of the generalizations I see being touted routinely are easily proven wrong.....

    that McIntosh MAC6700 stereo receiver probably sounds better than allot of amp/preamp combos or integrated stereo amplifiers. there are generally some exceptions but generally generalizations are pretty accurate in general, well generally but most of the general time the generalizations are generally collect..


    EDIT...
    except the ones that say evertying sounds exactly the same and the only thing that will change how your stereo sounds are speakers.. those generalizations are generally incorrect most of the general time..





    Cambridge Azur 651A
    Polk LSi M703
    Sonos Connect




    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WLDock
    WLDock Posts: 3,073
    Options
    mhardy6647 wrote: »
    Thought an integrated amplifier (and this Yamaha in particular) was a good choice then, and I still do think that it was a good choice.

    A Yamaha integrated was my first real move towards a nice music system in my 20's. I was coming from a JC Penney MCS system, and a vintage Fisher stereo receiver that my Uncle gave me. I think that thing had tubes?

    2.2 Office Setup | LG 29UB55 21:9 UltraWide | HP Probook 630 G8 | Dell Latitude | Cabasse Stream Amp 100 | Boston Acoustics VS 240 | AUDIORAX Desk Stands | Mirage Omni S8 sub1 | Mirage Omni S8 Sub2
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • K_M
    K_M Posts: 1,627
    Options
    dannylightning wrote: »
    K_M wrote: »

    I have "just" enough experience to realize most all of the generalizations I see being touted routinely are easily proven wrong.....

    that McIntosh MAC6700 stereo receiver probably sounds better than allot of amp/preamp combos or integrated stereo amplifiers. there are generally some exceptions but generally generalizations are pretty accurate in general, well generally but most of the general time the generalizations are generally collect..


    EDIT...
    except the ones that say evertying sounds exactly the same and the only thing that will change how your stereo sounds are speakers.. those generalizations are generally incorrect most of the general time..





    Generally.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter