Best $1000 (or cheaper) Musical Receiver (Pre/Amp)?

[Kisakuku]

That's true, SubEQ wouldn't be used in a system with one sub. However, chances are if you play around with REW you would find out that two less powerful subs give you a spatially much smoother bass response than one more powerful sub. And then you'll get an urge to upgrade your receiver again...

[Veda]

The new D3 design is claimed to address several problems with previous versions of digital amplification. If you want an ICEpower AVR, you'll have to look at previous Elite generations available on the used market.

Wouldn't that make it an even better choice at $750? I noticed TEAC also stopped using ICE amps as per link below. If it's true 125W@8 while running all channel. Heck if it's even 100 while running all ch, what other options are there? Doesn't matter if you're in the equal watt sounds the same camp, more is just better. Marantz NR1604 at $650 is only 50W.

Too bad the op isn't looking for a 2 channel amp. The new ones from NAD using their Power DAC amp modules are hella cheap now:

http://www.soundstageglobal.com/inde...les&Itemid=354

"The D3020 DAC/amp, in particular, looks promising, and it features a 30Wpc class-D amplifier with a claimed "0.00%" distortion" MSRP $400 + USB input = perfect bedroom / office amp.

hans_nad.jpg

[Dark Ranger]

Wouldn't that make it an even better choice at $750? I noticed TEAC also stopped using ICE amps as per link below. If it's true 125W@8 while running all channel. Heck if it's even 100 while running all ch, what other options are there? Doesn't matter if you're in the equal watt sounds the same camp, more is just better. Marantz NR1604 at $650 is only 50W.

Ultimately, it comes down to personal preferences and expectations. Some folks prefer Audyssey or Yamaha's YPAO over Pioneer's MCACC, so they will buy a receiver from the other Big Boys. Some want specific features or aesthetics offered by a certain brand. For those more focused on AVR power output and efficiency, then the Pioneer models are very attractive.

Class D amplification has come a long way, but there are some who still prefer the sound or performance of a Class A/B amplifier. Actually, I seriously considered the Elite AVRs over a year ago before I ultimately made the jump to separates. I would have bought one for several reasons, but the ONLY thing that kept me from it was the lack of multichannel inputs on all models except the SC-68. I couldn't justify an extra $500 for multichannel inputs.

There are lots of good things going for the SC-61. Recently, hometheater.com did a review on the SC-61 and included a few measurements. The AVR is rated at 125 wpc with two channels driven, but the efficiency of the D3 design provides 99.4 wpc with seven channels driven (8 ohms, 0.1% distortion) which is quite impressive in my opinion. At ~$750, it's even more attractive.

[curtis]

Years ago, I took the approach of wanting to be able to drive any speaker of my choice with enough power to spare. So after two receivers, the second one had 7.1 RCA outputs, and I bought a used 5-channel amp a few months later. The amp is an ATI 1505....150wpc x 5, and over 100 lbs. I still have it, and it drives my surrounds and center channel. I've had it for almost around 8 years.

I then moved a pre/pro, using the same amp. Then I experimented with two-channel amps, and for around the last 5 years, using a ICEpowered based 500wpc amp for the L/R.

Last year, I moved to a receiver (had to make the move to HDMI, and got Trinnov), but still use the amps with it.

Anyhow...look at what you want now, with what may want in the future, and plan your purchase accordingly.

I think that is the point I'm trying to make.

[Veda]

Curtis, how is the future for separates (multi ch amp + processor)? I think on the processor side it's getting too expensive and loaded with too many options we don't use. Not too many big boys offer dedicated processors anymore. Might be cheaper to buy a regular AV receiver with pre outs and use the receiver as processor only.

[curtis]

Curtis, how is the future for separates (multi ch amp + processor)? I think on the processor side it's getting too expensive and loaded with too many options we don't use. Not too many big boys offer dedicated processors anymore. Might be cheaper to buy a regular AV receiver with pre outs and use the receiver as processor only.

That is exactly what I'm doing now.

Pre/pros are definitely more more expensive, and really don't need to be. In my case, I got a great deal on a receiver with per-outs.

[Dark Ranger]

Might be cheaper to buy a regular AV receiver with pre outs and use the receiver as processor only.

That's what many enthusiasts are doing nowadays. You don't have to shell out obscene amounts of money to get some of what you want, while including features you'll never use. A quality AVR can be had for under $1,300. Run it for a few years, and then upgrade when more features come out that you need.

For my own requirements, I found a pre/pro that didn't break the bank, yet offered all the essentials for stereo and multichannel formats. Features like AirPlay, Ethernet/Wi-Fi, dock connectivity, PLIIz, and mobile apps are some features not included with my current preamp/processor. That's absolutely fine because I don't use them anyway.

Some folks prefer the pre/pro + amp approach because it's more "pure." The focus is on SQ first and foremost, with no interference from idling amps you're not using. My thought process, however, leaned more towards rational reasons like "why do I want to pay for an AVR with built-in amps that I'll never use?" I planned to have external amps, so I saw the included AVR amps as a waste of money. That's just my opinion, though.

While the audio industry does not change with leaps and bounds like the computing industry does, it's still important to look towards the future (like Curtis said). Determine what you want right now and what you might want in the future. Go from there. It's all a learning experience. The end result is always the same: to reproduce our favorite music with high-fidelity and accuracy. There are many ways to get there.

[Stump909]

Sorry to bump this once again, but after further research, I stumbled across the Sherwood R-972. From my understanding the sound quality is out of this world, but apparently the HDMI function leaves something to be desired. Any experience or insight?

[curtis]

Sorry to bump this once again, but after further research, I stumbled across the Sherwood R-972. From my understanding the sound quality is out of this world, but apparently the HDMI function leaves something to be desired. Any experience or insight?

That is what I am using now. Its use of Trinnov for Room EQ and placement correction is great.

What holds it back from being a great receiver is its operational quirks. If you can handle them, then it is currently, IMO, the best buy for a receiver right now.

Keep in mind, that the model is around 4 years old now, and does not have some of the latest features found in many other receivers nowadays. The unit retailed for $1800 when it first came out. I got mine for $600 a little over a year ago...you can get the same pricing now, but refurbs are available sometimes for $300!

Do you research. There are a couple of great threads on AVS for resources.

Because of its quirks, I will not ever tell anyone to buy it, but I will say that I am VERY happy with mine. HDMI works fine for me...I set it for bypass.

[Stump909]

That is what I am using now. Its use of Trinnov for Room EQ and placement correction is great.

What holds it back from being a great receiver is its operational quirks. If you can handle them, then it is currently, IMO, the best buy for a receiver right now.

Keep in mind, that the model is around 4 years old now, and does not have some of the latest features found in many other receivers nowadays. The unit retailed for $1800 when it first came out. I got mine for $600 a little over a year ago...you can get the same pricing now, but refurbs are available sometimes for $300!

Do you research. There are a couple of great threads on AVS for resources.

Because of its quirks, I will not ever tell anyone to buy it, but I will say that I am VERY happy with mine. HDMI works fine for me...I set it for bypass.

Yeah, video processing isn't essential to me. However, I hear there is a audio drop (up to 3 seconds) when the source switches from 2.0 to 5.1 and back. Do you experience this issue? As for features, the only ones I need are HQ sound and room calibration. Network audio can be handled via other means I assume. Once setup is complete, and you're happy with the end result, do the quirks become a thing of the past or are they something you must constantly work with?