A/V Receiver vs Integrated Amp .... How Much Difference?

[Witterings]

Wondering what people's thoughts are on using an AVR for stereo as opposed to a dedicated Integrated Amp and if there's a massive improvement in sound quality or not.

An AVR for me is much more convenient / less units and easier setup, I also use the 2nd Zone on it for music in the garden so if a streamer's plugged into a seperate amp that only takes one set of speakers, that creates a different problem for me.

Interested to hear others experience / opinions and if it is a night and day difference or just marginal.

 

[CnoEvil]

The only AVRs I thought were any good for 2 Channel, were the Class G offerings from Arcam....which have now got really expensive.

Personally, I think the way to go is get an affordable AVR with Pre-Outs and a 2 Channel Amp with HT Bypass.....and then get the best of both worlds.

Other opinions may vary.

 

[audio_PHIL_e]

I had to ask google what AVR meant

 

[Nothingface]

I had to ask google what AVR meant

You'll find yourself doing it more often as you get older...!

 

[vinyl4ever]

There are some good avr amps ( marantz spring to mind) that bypass the multi channel set up and use dedicated 2 channel stereo amp which to my ears sound pretty good. Especially the older 6xxx series

 

[PeteVid]

The Yamaha network receivers, stereo amps, are very good with two sets of speaker outputs

 

[Lawrence001]

Denon have a facility to mirror the front channels through the rear so you get 4 channels to bi amp stereo if your speakers are capable, that's usually about 200wpc total.

 

[Pressure]

This is something I’m struggling with at the moment. My AVR is good and has a reputation for being better than most with music - a NAD T758. Over the last two days I’ve got it sounding pretty good for music, sometimes very good. But the sound still gets fatiguing after an hour. the speakers can be sublime with 2 channel, Genelec 8040s, in another room with more treatment and a decent DAC feeding them they could be extraordinary. I can’t help feeling they’re so transparent they’re showing up the faults of an AVR and the impact of all the gubbins inside them.

Today I re-ran Dirac just up to 400hz and that’s helped a lot, especially on well recorded old soul and new jungle and techno. But I’m not sure. For TV and film the sound is utterly divine and you have to spend vastly more for Lyngdorf or Trinnov to get better (although Primare has an interesting AVR at £5k).

I’m idly curious about what a preamp would bring to the party but they £££ and I do often see the point of Dirac for 2 channel, and a sub, and the NAD sorts all that pretty well. Might need a streamer too.

People talk about Marantz as being musical but I had a 6010 and it was shit with B&W 603s, XTZs and the Genelecs. I gave it away last month, terrible amplifier IMO.

 

[Cable Monkey]

Most AVR's perform A to D to A conversions as part of the way they deal with any signal. The "Direct" mode most of them have cancels any processing but doesn't necessarily override the ADA sequence. Back in 2006 I matched what I paid for a Denon AVR to buy a stereo integrated and it was just  so much better.

 

[Warszawa]

Big difference in my experience.

 

[uzzy]

The science suggests that a pre and power (each with their own power supply) is best, an ingrated will share its power supply with both pre and power (unless passive pre) and so that is a limitation,

A receiver is sharing the power supply three ways so that is a further compromise.

Of course that is just the science - the listening experience may be totally different

 

[Lawrence001]

You can get big old Denons for £100 which biamped will beat a £100 stereo amp and have a built in DAC and tuner. But if you want to replace a £1k+ amp no receiver I've ever heard will better it. They may exist but are few and far between.

 

[Jezzer]

I went from about 10 years of having a 2 channel amp to having a 5 channel Sony ES AVR. Didn’t like the Sony so moved on to a Harman Kardon (which had a reputation for being a versatile AVR which also did good 2 channel). That little experiment lasted about 6 months. It was horrible for music (regardless of whether you were using source direct/bi-pass/internal conversion). If you’re serious about your music then you can’t beat a dedicated 2-channel set up.

 

[bigfish786]

Isn’t it like buying a tractor and wanting a Rolls-Royce

 

[Witterings]

The reason I'm asking, I've had a Denon AVR 2311 which I've been using for music as well for many years but recently added an Arcam SA30 using it in AV/HT Bypass mode for any movies / surround sound and all other muic sources directly into the Arcam.
I was thinking the it sounded a little dull with some music so tried using the Denon again for music and wonder if it has a slightly "livlier" presentation which may be better.
Must admit though I'm struggle for any noticeable differences which makes me think I've quite a bit of money in an Amp that's maybe not needed.

I'll keep testing for a while longer and see where I end up, I may get an Amp switch to make the change more instant and see where I end up.

Cheers for eveyone's input

 

[manicatel]

My thoughts are that if you took for example a £1000 AV amp, & took away the cost of the hdmi boards, the extra channels of amplification, the av processing , the Dolby licensing & all the other AV related stuff & extra large casework, you’d be left with a 2 channel amp of approx £250-300 tops.
If you like the livelier brighter sound of the Denon vs the smoother Arcam sa30, thats your preference, even if the SA30 is/should be a fair bit better for stereo. If it doesn’t make that much difference to you , stick with the Denon.

 

[AnilS]

I have a highly regarded Sony ES AVR that plays 2 channel very well but it always felt like something was missing.

I split stuff in my rack to accommodate one of the many amps I have (and still do and need a clearout ).

Even with my ever decreasing and changing hearing, I can tell that a decent integrated sounds better than the Sony.

I know it's an unfair comparison of the Roksan in the picture, compared to my AVR (it does sound incredible) but I'll be returning to a much simpler integrated, with a balance control.

 

[Beobloke]

Years ago I bought a Yamaha DSP-A1 for £25 that was languishing on a stall at the end of the day at the audiojumble.

It had no remote , so there wasn't great deal of AVR stuff I could do with it, plus all its video connectivity was S-Video or composite. No SCART and definitely no HDMI.

However, in two channel mode, it remains one of the best stereo amplifiers I have ever used - it sounded absolutely magnificent in 'Pure Direct' mode. I only got rid of it as it really did take up way too much space and was too heavy to keep lugging out of the way!

 

[Nativebon]

If you've bought an AVR of late the difference in sound quality is very marginal, compared to 2 channel amp. But you may have to spend 2k and above to really get decent stereo sound quality. Much better designs these days to separate video from audio signals. Brands like Marantz, Arcam and Anthem.

 

[newlash09]

Wondering what people's thoughts are on using an AVR for stereo as opposed to a dedicated Integrated Amp and if there's a massive improvement in sound quality or not.

An AVR for me is much more convenient / less units and easier setup, I also use the 2nd Zone on it for music in the garden so if a streamer's plugged into a seperate amp that only takes one set of speakers, that creates a different problem for me.

Interested to hear others experience / opinions and if it is a night and day difference or just marginal.

Hi sir

Iam among the boffins who always suggests a AVR for a newbie starting out and not a 2 channel integrated amp. I started with one maybe a decade back. And it still stays my most enjoyable system till date. There is definitely more serious gear in the other room. But most of my listening is via my AVR in my living room, connected to the TV. Where my family shares my love for music.

Coming to the issue of adding a 2 channel integrated amp with HT bypass. Ive tried that too. But unless your speakers are very inefficent it is pointless doing so in my humble books. The clarity and detail retreival are done at the dac and premap stage both of which are built into the AVR. So adding an external poweramp doesnt change anything. My system was a Marantz SR 6011 feeding a parasound halo integrated + Qacoustics concept 40 HT system.