Which manufacturer makes the most musical A/V receiver?
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Comments
I'm building a new system from the ground up; it will be used primarily for playing music sourced from CDs or a small number of SACDs. To keep things simple, I'll also run my TV sound through this system. The acoustics of my apartment's living room are far from serendipitous, so I'm working at putting a reasonably priced system together.
I don't need high power output since my room is small (14 by 11), and I will only run a 2 speaker configuration. From recent auditions the B&W 685s appear to be a good choice.
The wiring convenience of A/V receivers makes them attractive, particularly since I have HDTV. However, I don't want to give into convenience and needlessly compromise on music playback. My question is whether the sonics of current generation A/V receivers (under $1K) is as good as those in the sub-1K integrated amps? A number of manufacturers offer them ... Marantz, Cambridge Audio, NAD, Onkyo, etc. Simple logic would err on the side of the integrated, but given the reorientation of manufacturer's R&D to A/V in past 10 years I wonder if that's really the case any longer.
I have been unable to find any review or discussions on this question. Unfortunately, the dealers in our metropolitan area don't have both on demonstration so I can make my own assessment.
I would appreciate hearing the experience of others who might have crossed this or a similar bridge.
I have used both a Denon DRA-395 reciever and Cambridge Azur 840A.
Really the only thing a receiver will give you is a tuner (which I assumed is not a prority if you will be listening to mostly CDs).
I'm not sure what you mean by "wiring convienience" since you have a HDTV? Using HDMI or optical connections? I use the RCA jacks on my TV to go into the Amp, sounds fine for me for movies etc.
Anyway, I find the sonics of the cambridge much better than the Denon, in any perceptive quality of music from bass to treble, but particularly in the midrange. The B & W 685s seem like a great choicek, and with the ~88db sensitvity, 50-75W should be pleanty of power for your room. I'd look at the Azur 540 or 640, I know TAS had the 540 as a product of the year (budget integrated). I have also heard good things about the NAD 325BEE. All of these are in the $450-650 range.
At about the $1K mark I think you’ll be better off with a “very nice” receiver vs. an integrated, the B&W 685’s that you might be using are definitely good enough to reveal higher quality amplification even in the $3K mark. I am personally a huge fan of Onkyo receivers and have been since the mid 80’s, I “once” owned a Denon integrated and found it’s sound just, just slightly too bright for my taste, though overall great sounding what drew me away from Denon is when for the first time I went to have the unit serviced the horrible treatment I got from Denon USA was enough for me to say, “never again” there’s just too many great products these days to put up with that kind of treatment anymore. Anyway enough of my sob stories, most “decent” A/V dealers will allow you to try the equipment in your home for a couple of weeks, so that’s what I would do. Try the Onkyo TX-SR805.
I would look at a good budget integrated from Rotel, Cambridge, or NAD. Unless you demand a tuner, you'll get better sound quality and better looks.
BTW I have spent some time with the B&W 685 and they are truly spectacular little speakers. In a small room they alone should do the job for 'most anything.