AVR vs Integrated amps for 2 channel playback general consensus?

The answers you get on this forum will be against the AVRs. This is a heavily biased 2 channel analog world. Nothing wrong with that, just be aware of that fact.

The answer for you depends on what you listen to. If you only listen to 2 channel audio then ya no need for an AVR. But if you like surround sound, watch blu rays, want 4k video switching, play games etc AVRs offer more features and bang for the buck.

Myself I listen to 2 channel vinyl, streaming flac library, blu rays, playstation, tv, often some of those things simultaneously... so an AVR is hands down the best option. If I had a dedicated 2 channel listening room the answer would be different. (I like watching sports & playing records at the same time)

As for dollar for dollar, well it comes down to the "features" you need. Also keep in mind economies of scale... companies know the 2 channel integrated isn't going to move as many units as an AVR... so there's probably a sweet spot of quality/price. At the low end an integrated will blow away the equivalent AVR... but at some point the AVR is going to sound pretty F'n good and provide more options.

Finally if you're going the AVR route, do your research on the AVS forums.

 

AVR's sell because people need them for their video rigs, not for their 2 channel music rigs.

 

And I'd draw you to my earlier post that saw my Onkyo see off Exposure and Leema.

Onkyo TX-NR818 | gramophone.co.uk

 

You may have found your nirvana in an AVR, but I dare say you're very much in the minority.

 

I'm not saying it's not possible but it's difficult to believe. I've heard Exposure mono blocks that sounded awesome, while Onkyo's Integra line is some of the worst I've heard in recent years. IMO, they sound too similar to the old class D designs: bright and analytical with no body.

 

I quoted the Gramophone article written by Andrew Everard. He's been a hifi journalist for years and one I trust.

As for my experience, this was using the 818 in two channel mode which is the only one I go for. No m/c for me. And this isn't Integra and it's not Class D. You've got the link, check out the article.

 

I have a bit of experience with this, and the forums are heavily biased against AVRs for two channel listening. The digital front ends of most AVRs are actually pretty good. Where AVRs fall flat is their power amp sections. I am not one who thinks that all amps sound the same. To me, most clearly they do not. A good set up is an AVR with an external power amp for the front two channels. It's not a question of power, but audio quality. A most effective set up I used for quite a while was a Denon 100th Anniversary AVR with an AVA U70 tube amp for the front two channels. When I got my Raidho C1.2 the U70 just couldn't drive them, so I am using the power amp section of my HK990 until my Odyssey Kismet comes in.

Of course, I have a pair of subwoofers, and listen to a lot of two channel DVD-A and SACD, along with surround, so the crossovers and room correction are important to me as well.

 

I picked one up for $400 last month but haven't hooked it up yet.I'm putting an RXV1 through its paces then compare.I'm pretty sure the RXZ9 will be my last amp.

 

It's not that AV Receivers/Amplifiers can't (or don't) sound good with 2-channel music, but just not at an equivalent price point for fairly obvious reasons.

I was always pretty happy with the 2-channel sound from my Yamaha DSP-Z7 but that was an expensive AV amp. I've now got a Yamaha A-S1100 (slightly cheaper than the Z7 was in its day) and it's noticeably better: I could tell instantly that it was a significant step up in class. I reckon for 2-channel stereo it would probably wipe the floor with all but the most expensive AV amps/receivers.

I don't think there's any hard & fast rules with regards to price-ratios, but I reckon you're probably looking at a rule of thirds i.e. a £1500 AV receiver/amp being equivalent to a stereo amp of approximately £50o.

Edit:

I forgot to add that conversely, the first AVR I ever had was a more entry-level machine, an Onkyo TS-XR606 priced at £400 in 2008. Whilst it was ok for surround sound purposes, it was pretty piss-poor for 2-channel stereo and was a significant step down from the NAD 302 stereo amp I'd been using since 1993 (and cost me £169 at the time).

 

So who determined it outperforms Exposure and Leema, you or this reviewer? The review doesn't mention any comparisons.

 

Would be interesting to compare against the RXV9 which is purported to be the pinnacle of Yamaha AVRs for music.

 

I can't find any reference to that model anywhere. From what I can see, the top-end Yamaha AVR is the RX-A3060 which I suppose is the modern-day equivalent of the DSP-Z7 I owned until recently. I bet it's a superb AVR but I'd back my A-S1100 to comfortably beat it for 2-channel stereo.

 

I've auditioned the A-S1100 and would have to agree. Their AVRs aren't using those big storage caps and heat sinks. Noise? None to be found in the A-S1100...quietest amp I've heard. I'm now considering picking one up again after hearing my Spendors with my A-S500. My Dad owned one of the higher end Yamaha AVRs (probably 2009ish model), it might not have been the top of their line, but was probably only one step below. I know he paid over a grand. Overall it felt well constructed and was heavy. However, its 2 channel performance wasn't up to par with my A-S500, not even in the same ball park.

 

Sorry.It is a RXZ9.

 

He didn't. I did. Let's say performance on two channel is as per the review.

 

Never!

 

I agree with this on my Marantz AVR's I used to use, however, the pure direct on my Yamaha sounds terrific, but it is an integrated 2 channel.

 

I used a demon avr essentially as a pre amp for many, many years. I think I pairs about $2,000 for it in 2007, a very serious investment for me at the time. As time went on, I started using fewer and fewer of the features. First it was an external phono, then I upgraded L/R speakers dropped the center channel and sub and I went to an external DAC. Each step along the way was a big improvement.

After being on this forum for awhile there was a consistent bit of advice, the avr is holding me back. At first I was pretty offended by the suggestion and in fact it was presented in an offensive manner from time to time. My position was that if I was running pure direct, it was clean and that is really all you can ask of any preamp.

Curiosity got the better of me and I got a nice line stage pre amp. The improvement was absolutely jaw dropping. All the lame clichés were on point, a veil was lifted. Seriously it was like someone took a heavy blanket off my speakers.

That avr sat in a box for about two years and I just set it up in an extra room. For the first time ever I'm using its internal amplification and I'm running it with some decent speakers. I don't hate it but by comparison to the other three two channel systems I have running, it sounds cloudy and muddy.

I'm not saying that all AVR's are the same or that mine is the best one ever made. I do think they are all built with video and processing as the priority. The business model is mass marketing and built to hit a price point and winning a share of the audiophile market isn't the objective.

As they say, different horses for different courses.

 

Skim reading the article I took something else "But if you need a ‘one box does it all’ amplifier for both music listening and video sound, this receiver makes a sensible case for itself" which suggests to me that the writer feels/thinks that better sound can be had for the money as long as you don't need a ‘one box does it all’. Personally I haven't heard the Onkyo (not even sure how to pronounce it) and I'm highly unlikely to as I'm not in the market for a new amp, but I can't fathom how a company can/could do HDMI/digital processing/video and 7.1 amplification better than it could do a simple analogue 2 channel amplifier, on the same budget.

 

Onk-e-o

 

Thank you, I wasn't sure if it was more Oink-yo which I thought sounded horrible

 

In my experience with Onkyo AVR/prepros (805, 885 and 886) the two channel SQ was not the best. For two channel playback I used a number of different analog preamps with HT Bypass and the SQ was much better. I tried analog, optical, coaxial and HDMI with various sound modes (Pure Audio etc.) with the Onkyos and the SQ never compared to the analog preamps. It was the same with the Denon 4311 as well. Since getting the Emotiva XMC-1 the need for an analog preamp is no longer necessary as the two channel SQ is excellent.

When using an AVR in my system an external multichannel amp was always used. I've never owned or had an integrated amp in my system. But using an analog preamp with an external amp would equate to the same thing I would think .

 

I guess I couldn't fathom how some traditional hifi companies weren't producing gear when they were being left behind in the market. Two channel integrated amps that gave me a selector switch, volume pot and a toroidal transformer that was equalled in performance by a supposedly inferior AV amp that did all the they could but more.

Onkyo, and others, did and I see the aforesaid Exposure 3010 now comes with an onboard DAC which it didn't when I was buying.

I think perhaps the question that I asked five years ago is finally being addressed to the point that my next amp will be a neater two channel amp with digital functionality.

 

You missed my point which was that even the article that you were referencing did not suggest or imply that your AVR matched a dedicated stereo amplifier for the cost (quite the opposite in fact)! I understand you may prefer the Onkyo sound but wouldn't one of their stereo amps be better (ie not paying for a load of pointless gubbins) value? The Onkyo A-9070 Integrated Stereo Amplifier, for instance (even comes with Dirac)!?!

These would be of no interest to me because, personally, I would never consider an amplifier with any digital input (or processing) as digital seems to change rapidly and I think a good amplifier should be with me for 10 years + and I'll upgrade my source (CD/DAC).

 

Not quite.... the Onkyo A-9070 comes with DIDRC (Dynamic Intermodulation Distortion Reduction Circuitry) not Dirac. I had to look real quick as an Onkyo with Dirac would be big news! Looks like a nice integrated amp though .