🔥Thanks to Keeps for supporting the channel! For more info: keeps.com/AndrewRobinson ★ *CLICK 🔝 “SHOW MORE” in the description for answers to many of your questions* ★ *RULES: Please be respectful. NO OUTSIDE LINKS, URLs, email addresses, etc.*
Still struggling to get the results I want from my Anthem MRX540. PS if want to demo an MRX 540 I will be more than happy to lend you mine. All in the name of science.
I am all about A/V! My Marantz being programable for 2-channel @ Subs (145 W) or 7.2.4 (100W) theater and both with room correction meets my needs. The speakers and wiring cost a bit but it is a good reward for a retired man and wife who played by the rules and won.
Yes. You could benefit from more AV receivers review, even if using them in stereo setups. IMHO, AV receivers pack more real world benefits over stereo amplifiers in the lower end of the price range. This has likely related to the number of units sold, and how much more competitive that market is (against 2 channel amplifiers), and you usually get streaming services like Tidal, integrated DAC, bass management and a level of control of most rooms acoustics that entry level stereo amplifiers can only dream of. And interestingly enough, they usually have more power on 2 channels for euro (they only start to go down on real power when we start adding more and more channels playing at the same time). There are obvious audio performance advantages on separates when you climb the price ladder, but on entry-level stereo integrated amplifiers (these days), I rarely see the value proposition of a 500 to 750 euro stereo amplifier. Even at 1.000 euros, a lot of them are still lacking on value.
I’m leaning towards this set up it’s proven tech that works very well. I made a mistake in buying a supposedly high end sound bar for music and it has always underwhelmed me even with the average stereo set up that I had which I’m convinced sounded superior.
I can agree on this about Pioneer for owning one myself until the HDMI card died a few years ago. Not reparable. Quite a lot of AV receivers died this way. Needed to replace fast, bought a Denon. Definitely not for Hifi! And no pre out either. Learning the hard and expensive way…. So now Fosi or Wiim. Haven’t decided yet. Fosi double mono would be a way to go or wiim Amp. Not the same budget either. Aargh!
I'm a minimalist and love my AVR! It works great in my music first mixed use system. Great video Andrew & Kristi!! I hope you're enjoying your new home and everything is coming together for you both!!
Really good video. I’ve had both AVRs as well as two channel, and even have vintage Sansui and Marantz units (I just love music). I feel that the speakers make the biggest difference in any system. In pure mode, or in two-channel (or 2.1) on my Marantz, Denon, and older HK AVRs the sound is really nice. Search for an AVR with a reputation for nice stereo sound (many from Marantz, Pioneer, NAD have solid audio), and enjoy flexibility. Add great speakers to increase your fun levels. Try to get an AVR with pre-amp outs, so you can use an external power amp (if you’re really concerned about sound quality or power). As always, Andrew nails it.
One thing I have very much enjoyed is listening to 5.1 surround music. There are quite a few albums available on Blu-ray, DVD, and SACD in the 5.1 format, many of them lossless. I like the additional separation of the instruments, which makes for a much more immersive experience. I'm a bit surprised that this has not taken hold more. Like Andrew describes, I've got one room in which to watch movies and listen to music. So I bought a high end AVR with plenty of power and decent clarity for listening to music, while also handling movies. Then I tried listening to a few albums in 5.1 and fell in love with it. It's a great way to experience music.
I am totally with you on this. For this reason I started my subscription to Apple Music. They have quite a bit of spatial music titles across many genres.
Hi Andrew. I couldn't agree more. For a time I worked at Best Buy and would always recommend folks pick-up a multi-channel receiver rather than Stereo tuners or integrated amps to save money and also provide them with flexibility to expand going forward. The latter was an equally weighty argument that I made to HTIB shoppers who wanted immediate gratification and it was all that I could do to dissuade them. I usually did this by showing them the THD % of the HTIBs and then having them listen to the receivers in the Magnolia section. Though this was years back, I still make the same recommendation to folks if they happen to ask me about my opinion. You get a lot of bang-for-your-buck with receivers and most of the R&D goes into them to keep them modern. Lots of competition keeps prices lower than with separates as well. Anyone looking to potentially expand from a 2.0/2.1 to a 5.1 or beyond would be wise to look at multichannel receivers to dip their toes into Stereo then add a Center channel and Sub to improve HT/Music listening. Add AppleTV and you get the option for Dolby Atmos Audio and the arguments are even more compelling when HDMI simplifies that lossless surround experience.
Exactly what I did ~10 years ago. I always ran my TV over the HiFi, because of the awful sound quality of TV speakers 15-20 years ago. And when I replaced the old system in 2011/12, the only option, that could connect and do everything the way I wanted it, was an AVR. I'm now bi-amping my ELAC floorstanders with ~190 Watts per channel, I used Audissey for years (currently using a self made EQ profile for testing), I have upgraded my old TV with an Amazon Fire TV stick, so I can stream not only video, but also (Amazon) music and I recently replaced my BluRay player with a new one, that can also stream video and music and play SACDs, FLAC and DSD. So far I am happy with the sound quality, the possibilities, the connectivity and the overall performance of my system.
I use an av receiver from the early 2000 that was bought by my father back then, it sounds in stereo really good and clear, but when i use the dolby pro logic and the 5.1 channels classical music becomes just gorgeous, sounds like you are in a theather
One thing I like about newer av receivers is the sound fields you can experiment with on 2 channel music. Music sound fields like “Dolby pro logic IIx music”, “Neo 6 music”, “concert” etc. add a greater sound field in my opinion. I prefer those to the “ pure direct” function as it sounds crisper and clearer to me.
You're the first audio expert l hear make this suggestion im 72 and found this out years ago , the versatility of the Avr's.what l like is the choice of sounds effect the easy switch from one setup to the other..andrew you are the best.also like the idea of you asking the first lady her opinion..keep up the good work.
I'm using the NAD T778 for 2-channel music with Klipsch RF7 IIIs and additionally an RC-64 III and SVS SB4000 sub for 3.1 home theater watching. It's heaven!
100% agree. I picked up an older AVR with the 'base' Audyssey system and I'm blown away by how well it works. It gave my setup a new life. Imaging & sound stage improved dramatically. If I'd buy new I'd get the cheapest Denon with Audyssey ($500).
@@andrewrobinsonreviews I'd go ahead and say game changing. My speakers are not considered to be anything special at all. They are old late 80's JBL TLX-8 "party boxes". The room correction made them sound VERY good. Balanced, detailed, the party bass profile completely gone. It's amazeballs! I'd be very curious what it can do for budget bookshelf speakers for example.
this past week I realized how much more convenient it is to have an av receiver. I started my audio journey a year ago and messed around with different options of amp set ups and would struggle so much with getting that stereo sound I was looking for. Today I’m enjoying my set up very much
I love my AV receivers, have them all over the house in each room, so easy to have so much flexibility when you need it. Onkyo's and Denon's in my setup .Great video as usual.
I gave away a perfectly good Onkyo stereo receiver and replaced it with an Onkyo 5.1 that I only use for a 2.1. I get way better sound than I could otherwise get by having individual volumes for both speakers and sub and most of all, having an ADJUSTABLE CROSSOVER. I cannot believe it isn't more common to find a stereo receiver with these features. Don't come near me with a stereo amp with a fixed frequency subwoofer out jack, and don't tell me to "turn down the crossover on the back of the sub" like that's the same thing. It isn't the same because the speakers will still be playing full range and the sub will sound more closed with the frequency turned down. All the magic happens when you remove the unplayable lower frequencies from going to your speakers and let your sub remain completely open and only playing below what the speakers are getting. And while I'm on my soapbox, stop telling me to set my crossover at 80 when my speakers easily play down to 60. Everything sounds so much better when I set the crossover to 60. (End of rant) 🐸
Crossover boils down to different speakers, different subs, and preference. Having said that, I actually prefer my crossover at 60hz as well ;) Also, I feel that those variabilities in speakers and subs reinforces your argument in that an AVR crossover gives you greater flexibility in that regard. It seems like it'd be totally doable to make an integrated 2 channel amp that has a similar frequency split/crossover since integrated amps have a dac and dsp capabilities. For whatever reason though there are plenty of amps that don't do that.
I agree. Purists don't like it but I've long since ceased giving af what they think (if I ever did). Those people live to tell you how everyone else's opinions suck except theirs. Certain kinds of music like live performances and orchestral are an amazingly immersive experience on a good surround set-up.
The new bumpers are just fantastic andrew. Production and look are pure excellence. That little audio snippet in the background with that little hit of bass is divine. Choice of topic is more educational than looking to stir up the trouble. Fantastic video, straight to the point and doesn't sound like a lecture. Keep it up and congrats on the house.
@@andrewrobinsonreviews Absolutely! I pretty much dismissed going the AVR route until this video. I currently have a Sony STR-DH190 paired with Elac Debut 2.0 6.2 stand mounts, with a Schiit Modi 3 DAC. I was thinking my next step would be to upgrade the Sony 2-channel receiver to an integrated amp (like an IOTAVX SA3 perhaps). Decisions, decisions… 😁
Agreed! I'm realizing that I watch TV way more than I sit down and listen to my stereo... I really need a center channel to reduce that compressed vibe from my 2 channel setup.
I totally agree. I use a Mcintosh MHT100 (AVR) for my dedicated music listening room and it works perfectly. The unit has eight channels so it gives me eight channels of Mcintosh sound so I can bi-amp four separate speakers in two different rooms and sub out to run the dedicated woofers on my Klipsch horns and la scalas. The sound is incredible and for a fraction of the cost of buying four different separate mcintosh amps. For less than a couple of grand you can pick up a older McIntosh AVR unit and drive many speakers for the same/similar sound that would cost 10k if using separate amps.
In the mid 90's, with an eye toward a possible home theater set up, I bought a big Denon 7 channel AVR receiver rated around 175W per channel. Was running Vienna acoustics (still use) and a six changer Sony cd player with a Dual TT as well. Sounded awesome. On the side I still had the trusty big boy, music only, Hafler DH500 with preamp. Never made it to the home theater set up but the music sounded damn fine! I have no qualms about operating this way......until the bug hits to move beyond........🤣🤣 Good stuff sir.
Did you manage to attach an external phono to your amp? I see the Denon Avr (xr-1700h) has one built in but won't support MC cartridge use. So where can you attach an external phono. Was wondering if you had tried?
Certainly wouldn’t be afraid of placing my NAD T778 running Monitor Audio Platinum 200’s, using Dirac, against any separates or integrated amps out there. Simply mesmerizing.
@@dalmd I’ve had different Marantz AVR’s that I’ve used over the years. Then I bought a used NAD M3 integrated and loved the sound so I figured why not get that sound over my other speakers for movies etc and bought the 778 and got the NAD sound for both stereo and multi channel. Great AVR
I wanted more then my current soundbar w/subwoofer could deliver but also wanted to keep things pretty minimal. Now that I have all my components I will be putting together my 3.1 system built around some products that you have positively reviewed.
You might not be old enough to remember this, but back when everyone bought stereos, they often sold them all in once package. So no work required for the customer unlike now where you have to assemble all the parts yourself. I remember buying a Sony stereo system in the mid 90's from.....I don't know......JC Penny!? It was definitely some store in the mall. It had a CD player, tape deck, amp, floor standing speakers, and sub. And the cabinet. All in one.
I got a used $200 Pioneer Elite VSX-91TXH 7.1 with new demo $1400 Wharfedale Lintons and sometimes it's just as satisfying as my other system, HiFi Rose RS201E ($2200) currently paired with used ZU Omen DW ($1300). I fell into the snobbery of 2 channel hi-end and although the Rose has a great DAC streamer, I struggle justifying the diminished cost. AVRs are plenty for most audiophile music listeners and they offer more versatile settings for real world usage. They are big and clunky though.
I went with an AVR for my new shop building over a cheap stereo amp mainly to control multiple inputs and subwoofer connection. TV, AVR and speakers were free from a friend moving out of the country. Bought a rolling cart for the TV so I can move it to the patio for football watching and moving around the 26x40 shop. Very happy with my set up!
I admire your bravery to speak out on this publicly. Expect heavy blowback from the traditional audiphiles. This is the route I went when I downsized my home, mothballed my 5.1 system back to strictly 2-channel audio. I'm running a 12-year old Onlyo AVR because it has so many different audio inputs and I have several different sources from the cable box to a PS4. If I used a respectable pre-amp, I would run out of the inputs.
Great presentation. For me, Denon AVR 4700. Love it. Drives my Klipsch Forte II’s, Klipsch Center Channel and in ceiling speakers perfectly and movies on the LG UHD Blu Ray are excellent. Fluance Turn table for vinyl. Teac CD player rounds things out. Love the streaming capability too. AVR def the way to go.
Back in the 70's prior to having surround, we used receivers such as Sansui, Pioneer, and National(Panasonic). My family would listen for hours on end. It was quite satisfying to listen in stereo especially from vinyl records. Music was warm and alive.
I have a Marantz multi channel AV receiver paired with Paradigm Monitor 11 speakers. The Marantz has a set up that bi wires it and pulls the various dedicated amps for the channels together. It sounds fantasma gastical!! I have been in love with the sound for several years.
I have a Denon AVR. When I upgraded my turntable, I also got a good phono stage for it. That plugs into one of the regular component inputs of the AVR. I think that small box is the most important thing to add to an AVR if you want to improve overall musicality. Also, learn how to use something like a pure direct setting that turns off most AVR circuitry when you wish to listen to two channel stereo.
@@rdroid2438 I love my Moon 110LP v.2. It will handle any MM or MC cartridge. It plugs into any line-in RCA connections on your AVR. You do not use the phono connection. You connect the turntable ground to the ground on the phono preamp.
After doubting about the quality of the phono stage of my Yamaha reciever, I upgraded with a separate phono preamp (not even high end) and the sound improvement was HUGE! I can finally hear the vinyl properly. Then I coupled the reciever with another stereo amp via the pre out of the reviever. The stereo amp sounds way more musical and alive. I fully agree on the top 5 benefits of AV recievers but musicality does not seem to be AVR's first strength to say the least. Great video by the way :)
AVRs are totally doable. But I would only purchase one where I could bypass any sort of digital processing and have a pure analogue pathway from source to speaker.
I have separate components, but I bought an Onkyo TX-NR686 7.2-channel home theater receiver. I find myself enjoying 5 channel stereo surround sound for music, besides Dolby Digital for movies. Having exposure to many types of equipment, through my servicing, I get to test many amplifiers, turntables, and speakers. I think a recent pairing of this receiver and Totem Rainmaker loudspeakers, was a beautiful listening experience.
I feel like there should be more emphasis on the fact that you can still add separates to an AVR. AVRs with pre-outs would allow external amplifiers if desired. They also have plenty of analog inputs if one should decide to go with an aftermarket DAC. The expandability isn't limited to going from stereo setup to home theater later on.
Definitely. A lot of comments here seem to be unaware that for like $100 they could add a small Bluetooth/DAC receiver for dedicated listening that will probably beat the existing DAC significantly
Some AVRs manufacturers such as Pioneer have Direct and Pure Direct modes which bypass video, EQ, and DSP circuitry for a more cleaner direct audio path. Used with an external DAC, the quality of sound is remarkable.
Some AVRs manufacturers such as Pioneer have Direct and Pure Direct modes which bypass video, EQ, and DSP circuitry for a more cleaner direct audio path. Used with an external DAC, the quality of sound is remarkable.
I completely agree with Andrew. With a few exceptions, AVR’s are an excellent choice. My AVR is the Sony STR-ZA3100ES. It’s second only to Sony’s flagship 5000ES. I run my 3100ES with a Def Tech speaker setup, and couldn’t be happier with the Home Theater performance and the Stereo music playback is exceptional. The only caveat regarding Sony’s ES lineup is the absence of a phono stage. However, that’s an easy-to-fix situation with plenty of affordable Phono preamps from Schiit, Fluance, U-Turn, Fosi Audio & even Pro-Ject. It’s all about balancing personal preference with your budget without getting OCD and find yourself over-spending. But that’s just me.
I can't agree more with this MOST of this video. I have a dedicated listening room that I use for 70% music and 30% movies. That being said I still needed a few extra channels for surround and center channels. My Yamaha A2A is more than enough to drive my BW 683s in bi-amp configuration and having 2 REL subwoofers only sweetens both the music and theater experience. In regards to your opinion on AVRs not being able to drive speakers like BW 702s I would not agree. AVRs in the sub $1500 range put out close to 150w per channel @ very low THD and are bi-amp compatible. I've listened to a set of 702s on a bi-amped Yamaha A6A and was blown away with the sound quality. Not quite as good as a tube audio research or McIntosh but for far less cost was acceptable. Very good video and agree with many of your points!
I've been using a Sony AVR for two channel listening for a few years. It's connected to the TV with eARC so we have sound when we watch movie & TV, as well as when we play video games, and now I have a Node connected with stereo RCA for streaming music. It works great! I'm also able to bi-amp my tower speakers for some extra power and sound quality. In the future I plan on adding a center channel, and a subwoofer.
I have an old Sony AVR (STR-DE315) capable of only analog inputs. I've kept it around because to does do stereo so well. In my opinion it has always been a much better at being a "stereo" than an AVR.
I had always been under the impression that receivers not only makes 2-channel music sound a little tinny but can also make the audio sound a little digital too, but that impression was blown out the window once I tried the arcam avr20. I actually preferred the sound of the arcam avr20 standing alone then the Denon 6500 helped out with a poweramp 😯
Hey butty boy donkey dicker. My fellow Welshman I can’t decide on wether to get an AVR for my pro-ject speaker box 5 s2 or stick with a stereo receiver. I want to future proof in case I decide to home theatre but not at the cost of loss of quality of music. Also plan on getting some keg LS50meta . I can’t spend more than £1000 on either a stereo receiver or AVR . What do you recommend?
@@rhysholley8289 what's happening butty 😄 if I was you I'd persevere and carry on saving rather than taking the risk and living with regret! Besides doing the research to buy a new set up can be an enjoyable journey in itself. One thing you should take into account, if you was to go with the ls50 metas for home theatre, what would you use as a centre channel? And of course quality speakers like the meta's are not gonna be able to truly sing with a mid-priced standing alone AVR. If you're looking for any more advice, I'd be happy to help... click on our red dragon
I used to own modern separates in the lower five-figure range (when new), but through a very long and extremely eye-opening process of buying and trying different gear of all kinds, of all eras and price points, I settled on a 2000s-era Yamaha A/V receiver (that I bought in near-mint condition for the ridiculous price of $40, I might add) as the main amplification device for my main system. The amp and preamp separates I used to own have been sold off for nearly 7 years now and I'm happier with the sound of my system than I've ever been. Seriously. With that said, there's an insane synergy thing going on with my system, so your results may vary. My audiophile journey is somewhat like Andrew's in that my system became more and more expensive and complex as the years passed, but once I started expanding my audiophile horizons into different (and even cheaper) gear, I began to find even more overall enjoyment from it. And in my case, even better results. All I can say is if you never broaden your horizons to include ALL types of gear (or eras of gear), you'll never truly discover all the things there are to discover as a listener. By never broadening your horizons, you prevent yourself from discovering things that not only have the potential to open your eyes, but blow your mind as well. By pushing my own boundaries, nearly all of the preconceived notions I used to have as an audiophile, and that were fed to me through the many biases and common stereotypes within the community, have been pretty much obliterated over time. If you're willing to look and listen, and have a completely open mind about new things, you'll more than likely be very surprised what you can find. Just some food for though.
In my case I've always had AVRs because that's what was presented to me in 1998. I started with a DENON which lasted me a long time until someone else needed it more. Then I replaced it with a Yamaha which I absolutely love and still own. More recently I added a newer Yamaha (RX-A780) which is even better because it has a phono amp. We've been listening to vinyl a lot these past couple of years so we upgraded our speakers to the Paradigm 800Fs and oh boy... I'm certain there are better ways to listen to music but we are just so happy with our set up (plus it was kind of over budget for us) that we don't need anymore. We love movies and our receiver works really well for for our music and movie needs. Also I confess that I was always ignorant about hi fi and felt intimidated when going to high end stores.
I've tried to replace my separates with a quality AVR but truth is that they just sound flat and cannot compare to the sound of a quality amp. The newer AVR's can be used as a pre if you're on a budget but the amp section is just not up to pair.
I've got 2 systems, and I'm using an Anthem pre/pro as the preamp for each one! In my 2-channel music-only system, I went through a couple different stereo preamps, and finally one day decided to try my old, retired AVM20, only to find out how great and transparent its analog performance is. Plus, it's got lots of inputs, FM radio, and OK (but not the best) sounding DACs. It's got balanced outs for feeding the long XLRs to my active studio monitors. Old AVM20's can be had on eBay for around $350.... a steal.
For 500 USD you can find quite good integrated 2.0 amplifiers. 5.1 AV Receivers in the 500 USD pricd range, they are just not that great. But I do agree that a GOOD AV Receiver is by defenition good in doing stereo. A lot of the bad reputation of AV Receivers is people spending 500 USD not just on a AV Receiver, but actually on a Home Theater in a Box set: a ultra downmarket Sony, Yamaha, Pioneer or Onkyo AV Receiver with 5 plastic speakers and a 6 inch 'sub' that looks from a distance like it's a serious setup. If you have only 500 to spend, go for a stereo integrated amp and a pair of good bookshelf speakers, that will sound much better than a Home Theater in a Box set.
Have had an AVR for years as a preamp with external amps for my power hungry speakers. Plus I use multi-channel for music as well as movie watching. Cheers!
My question is is can you compare avrs with integrateds. How would a mid range avr compare with a mid range integrated, what benefits would one expect between a power node with a denon or something like that
I bought a Technics AV receiver months ago for these very reasons, but also because older AV receivers have Tape Return which allows you to add an equalizer. I've not seen any modern stereo receiver that has tape return.
Something to beware of if setting up an AV receiver in a music listening area….some of them need a connection to a TV to access basic functions like tone control. I’ve ordered a Marantz NR1200 for my listening area because it had both physical tone controls and a phono preamp. It’s going to be driving a pair of Klipsch Ref II speakers and two 10” Klipsch subwoofers. It’s been on order for a month now. Really hard to get. It doesn’t need a TV to access all its features.
The thing that resonate most with me are HDMI eARC inputs wether its an Amp or an AVR. When there is a TV get the eARC input having the system change automaticly as you switch on the TV and the volume control is just nice. The others i wont say i build a whole cabinet around multiple components just for there to be a lonely C700 Mani and Rega P1^^
My friend runs his Bowers and Wilkins 702 S2 Signatures on a RX-A1080 and it's really wonderful how good it sounds. So a "good" receiver can work with high current demanding speakers. :) Could it get better, sure, but it's not bad at all with just the receiver powering them.
Good Vid! Kristi's right, and I vote stereo for the win. I've tried 4 different 5.1 systems (Polk, Bose, Sony, Yamaha) but keep going back to my old 90's Optimus Professional Series stereo. I use it for music only, so the 5.1 doesn't sound right to me. Recently I inherited a heavy 110lb. (90's) Theta Dreadnaught amp that puts out 5 channels at 240 watts each, Theta Casanova preamp with 5 channel sound, along with 4 Vandersteen Series 3 (4ohm) speakers, 2 Vandy Series 1's, and 2 300 Watt Vandy Subs. Testing them, I noticed the lights dim when I turn it, and it is drawing 425 watts at Zero Volume! Afraid to turn it up, it will probably throw a breaker. This thing could power a church! Definitely going back to my old Stereo ;)
Another great video as per usual. I totally agree. I really want to underscore the value of (well applied) room correction, especially in the low end. It can really push an AVR to a point where separates will struggle to compete if they don't have room correction.
I often use my Yamaha avr for two channel listening. Many of the people in the forums actually recommend avr’s Because they are generally less expensive than equivalent integrated amps. One advantage of separates (especially if using an integrated amp) is that you could actually end up with a smaller footprint than an avr since avrs tend to be large so they can hold all the individual components and have proper ventilation.
Well, I’m gonna say what Andrew didn’t. There is way too much snooty snobbery in the “audiophile” world. If the music you’re listening to demands piles of expensive boxes to be enjoyable, maybe you don’t really enjoy the music all that much. Get back to basics and stomp that foot any which way you can!
When you review some hardware and forget about listening to the equipment and just enjoy the music there might be little to be gained in listening to anything more expensive or "up market".
@@geraldmcmullon2465 John Atkinson, of Stereophile-fame, said about a $600 Wharfedale speaker, comparing it to a $200k Tidal speaker, in 2018, “…when I wasn’t in critical listening mode and was simply playing music for pleasure, none of that mattered much…”. Isn’t “playing music for pleasure” what this is all about? It seems many get stuck in the specs of their pricey boxes and forget to just sit back and listen to music for pleasure.
I totally get this! First from a home real estate perspective, who has the room? You buy a place as big as you can afford and at some point down the road, you're looking for space for this or that. A room just for listening, for some, ok sure. But generally I like the home filled with music in the background far more often than sitting in a room alone enjoying two channel. Not that I don't immensely enjoy that, but it's not often I'm sacrificing my time to do only that. So a dedicated room to be used so little, doesn't make sense. That said, I want a place I can sit down with my wife, a bottle of wine, cheese & crackers and some incredible vinyl. The living room is the best bang for the buck space in the whole house considering its multiple use. And considering this is the place I'm generally entertaining guests, why not have a decent investment into "entertainment" in this space. My solution is having a very good (not necessarily flagship) AV receiver running 7.2.2, but preamping out the front left and right to a very good power amp and towers. I really feel like room dimensions and textures aside, I'm getting what I want out of my living space with very little compromise. And for the audiophiles out there confining themselves to two channel only, boy are you missing out on concert dvds. Let's face it, one of the best ways to enjoy music and all that it is to our psych, nothing beats the live experience at a great venue. While a concert dvd is not there, it sure is great to enjoy bringing there to right here as best as possible. Multichannel puts us in the crowd. Some of the best times I've had with friends has been a night of cocktails, conversation and concert dvds creating that almost at the venue experience, except with better seats for the show than you can normally afford. With all the options available to us all, it sure is a good thing we don't all want the same thing.
I have tried this "AVR for stereo approach" back in the late 90s and early 2000's with more than a few brands and models and have found too many trade offs. The all-in-one AVRs are engineered and built primarily around HT and as a result, less attention is paid to 2-channel use. This solution is best suited for a casual stereo listener, music streaming, non-focused, non-critical listening, etc. If you are primarily a 2-channel music listener, you are better off choosing a receiver (or amplifier) built for that purpose over a jack-of-all-trades solution, IMO.
Decent AVRs are actually pretty powerful these days with 2 channel only driven mode. I measured a few of mine and receivers were consistently putting out more poweр like 120W агаинста 150W In 4ohms load.
I'm still rocking my 16 y/o Cambridge Audio 540R AVR with Energy RC70 speakers. I use it in 6ch passthrough for music and movies and the thing sounds amazing. I'll be upgrading to a Pioneer 305 once I can afford to.
I have a high end Sony ES AV receiver that has no problem in the stereo direct mode holding its own with many respected integrated 2 channel amps. Good sounding solid state amps are much easier to build these days due to surface mount components and super clean op amps that keep the cost down without sacrificing audio quality. A dedicated power amp is still the way to go for speakers that are hard to drive but the premise that there is no such thing as a good sounding AV receiver is just rubbish.
Great video detailing the reasons to get a home theater system for 2 channel audio. However, a home theater system would never be suitable for me. I 've assembled an audio system consisting of mix of old and new components. The system consists of: 1. Dual 1228 turntable brought back to life, has a new Ortofon 10OM cartridge ($190 total) 2. Kenwood KR-70 75 watt stereo receiver ($70, used) 3. Pioneer DV-C505 CD player ($40, used) 4. Yamaha RS-202 stereo amplifier ($130, new) 5. Schiit Loki mini equalizer ($160, new) 6. Two C-Note Bookshelf speakers ($150) a DIY kit 7. Two KLH M365 tower speakers ($35, used) The Yamaha RS-202 has Bluetooth connectivity. Also have a collection of new and used phono cartridges (Shure, Stanton, Ortofon, Audio Technica, Oyster and Pickering) that can be swapped out on the tonearm. Also made my own small audio component rack. Total cost of audio components is less than $1000 and I had pleasure selecting each component. I also enjoy swapping out various components (turntable with Shure cartridge-Kenwood-KLH speakers vs streaming music-Yamaha-C note speakers) to experience and understand what each audio component bring to the table. I gain audio enjoyment and from mixing and matching. A home theater system for the pricing you mentioned ($3k) might have superior performance (note that I said might) but it would certainly deny me the pleasure of component swapping, listening discovery and learning what works for me. I would never want a set and forget system. It's probably the same reason I always preferred a manual transmission to an automatic for driving. Love the control and performance that personal hands on management can bring. It is more work but it was also more fun and requires more engagement. Not for everyone. So perhaps people who prefer a hands on audio engagement experience with mix and match capability should NOT get a home theater audio system. People who prefer buy it, set it up one and enjoy what you got should lean towards the home theater audio.
Dont forget UPGRADEABILITY! I started my system with a Marantz SR7015 which I now use as a Pre-Amp with a standalone DAC upstream and a standalone AMP downstream, throw in Audyssey from the Marantz... Sounds spectacular!
Five years ago I setup Pioneer VSXLX101 7.2 Channel Networked AV Receiver ($399.00) paired with Klipsch R-28F Reference 5.1 Channel Home Theater Speaker Package ($1,475.00) in our living room and never looked back. Can this be done better for under $2000? maybe it can, but as far as we concerned this is good enough.
Hello Andrew. I am always appreciative of your gear reviews and perspective. I have sat in front of many a receiver, amplifier, monitors, speakers, etcetera. I used to change them out every several months looking for that perfect and sweet combination. The one thing I have learned through those years can be filtered to one major contributor. I have found that the parts that contribute the most to higher quality sound are in the amplification section: No matter what component you get, ensure the power production is from a clean and well designed amplifier. I have had many ‘Hi-Fi’ units that were designed well with options and DAC’s up there with the best but the amplifier section was limited and weak. It reduced the potential of the other components. I have also used many entry level ‘sleeper’ units with stellar amp sections that sang so sweet. Let’s just say that most new AVR sound good, even entry level, up to about 30% volume and every percent past that increases distortion level to parallel it. That is why so many separate component system with big, beefy, quality amplifiers sound so nice. Put an entry level receiver behind them and one may be surprised how nice it actually sounds. Just my 7 cents worth. Thanks for all the content, keep it coming.
Many years ago, I bought a Yamaha RX-A1010 AV/receiver to replace my old all-in-one system. That was the start of my new setup and my hunt for an audiophile system. I recycled the speakers I had to start with, but every year I added another (separate) element to it. I've used this receiver for years now with a pair of Q Acoustics 3020 bookshelve speakers in combination with a subwoofer. I do select the 'pure direct' function, which bypasses the internal equaliser/sound program settings and just amplifies the sound of the source that's fed into the receiver. This gives me the most satisfying result for stereo listening. Last month I found a cheap pair of Mordaunt-Short 906 speakers in a thrift shop. I replaced the Q Acoustics with those and bi-amped them on the receiver. The sound they deliver exceeded my expectations. Airy, open and detailed sound. The bass is snappy and has some punch, but it goes less deep than the subwoofer. It is more lively and rhythmic though. The result is so enjoyable that I'm not thinking of replacing my AV/receiver by a dedicated stereo amplifier yet. The Q Acoustics 3020's now function as surround loudspeakers for movies, where they've replaced some old satellite speakers I had. It's nice to get some confirmation by this video that AV/receivers can provide some good stereo sound.
I was glad to make the move to an AVR over my Kenwood stereo receiver at 200 watts . I will say though adding a Amp to the AVR is definitely a good thing. The Amp gives the high power performance when your listening to 5 channel stereo at the reference level . I like my music loud and the Amp gives you clarity without effort at higher levels. But I have no regrets using a AVR for music until you want to drive your speakers and then that's where the added Amp comes in .
Great points! Thank you ! Now that I'm confirmed it's a serious and viable option, and considering I will stick to a 2 channel system, I have the following question. I plan to get the Klipsch RP-8000f or the KEF Q750 (loved your reviews) and to pair them with the Onkyo RZ-50. Is the Marantz Model 40 a better choice (as it does also everything) ? Does the price difference translate in a significantly better sound quality ?
If you know, I MEAN KNOW that you are not going to expand to home theater or mult-channel anything and you do not need or want room correction, get the Marantz. BUT, if you want to spend less and get more, the RZ50 will power 8000Fs no problem and do just fine with KEF too.
My living room is my listening room which is also my theater. I was going to go hard on a dedicated two channel set up with a modest home theater for TV duty. But then I thought, why? I merged the budget, took advantage of sales and available hardware and got an NAD T778 and KEF R3s for the mains, R2c center, T301 surround and an SVS 3000 Micro. Two-channel, R3s with DIRAC's correction to my taste and that perfect sub integration? Hard to beat and so elegant for streaming hi-res from Roon. I may be giving up the last 1% of performance, but I also can be super happy with the 99% I have.
Thanks for the great info. Not that I've had buyers remorse for the recent purchase of the Marantz SR6015, but the crazy overload of "Too much information", and snobbery of audiophiles, can leave a person wondering about a leap of faith into a $1700.00 receiver. Especially the "Separates only" crowd. Not that I regret it, because every time I turn it on, and listen to music, I just grin with amazement over how well it sounds. Even with two channel movie viewing, it's quite the sweet machine.
I could not agree more. Every manufacture has made some very special AV receivers over the years. Find one with Phono input and enjoy the music. Thank you for a great video!
Love that you tackled this subject, needing something 4ohm capable is a great point and the reason I went this route. Congratulations on finally buying the new house, I can't wait to see the new living room setup.
Interesting video but strangely enough you did not mention sound quality. In my experience if you compare a 1000 dollars AVR with a 1000 dollars stereo integrated (in my case Marantz SR5014 and PM7000N) the sound quality is dramatically different. Yes you can listen the music on the AVR, yes it’s more convenient, doable yep, yes you have many fringes but still music sounds flat in comparison to its stereo brother. Tested in a normal/not ideal room with Q Acoustics 3030i. Cheers
I have a Sony STR DE825 in my family room that I am currently using for 2 channel listening, with a JBL sub and two Sony SSCS5s (will upgrade the speakers when able). I see 2 advantages of using this surround receiver for two chanel listening. 1) As you pointed out, optical from cable box to the Sony receiver for better sound when watching TV. 2) using optical from my WiiM Mini to the Sony receiver to add streaming, which opened a whole new world of listening. I have an old Sansui R70 in my office upstairs, where I keep my vinyl and cd collections. I have a WiiM Mini on that system so I can cast my vinyl and cds to my Family Room Sony when I want.
I used an AVR setup, for 2 channel, for many years. I have a Sony DA4ES, which was highly regarded decades ago. I decided to up my 2 channel game last year. I bought a Hegel H390, a pair of B&W 805D3s, and a pair of REL t7i subs. While the Sony has high quality amplification, the Hegel is in a different league. I now have the Sony pushing HT bypass through the Hegel to drive the L/R speakers. Eventually, I'll buy the other speakers to complete the surround sound system. But, to your point, you can absolutely use an AVR for high quality 2 channel...and save a lot of money by doing so.
@@KristiWright I live in the desert 🏜 as well / high Sierra Nevada's watch those rattle snakes on walks with Katie. I never let my Ridgeback off leash!
@@KristiWright Me too. I see a lot of folks taking their dogs off leash into BLM / open space Desert during the Spring & Summer. Fools dogs shove their noses in holes and often times rattle snakes will hide within sage brush. Your looking at possible death and a $5-$7k vet bill. Happy for the new home purchase for the Robinson's!
I agree with all the reasons you have put forward and particularly agree with the room correction arguement. I have a denon avrx 3600 and pre-out the front two channels into a separate more powerful amp. Room correction is the best upgrade I have heard. Were probably both wrong in some people's eyes though.
If I was new to this hobby in this era, and I wished to build a 2 channel setup, I would not hesitate to consider a modern AV receiver for the immense processing capabilities along with its preamp section. I would then consider adding a separate Herculean power amp with low-Z load drive capability (say, a 2 ohm load as its minima) and a high maximum output power into 8 ohms, to drive a most stubborn mule of a speaker load that I decided upon obtaining. I want to wish Andrew and Kristi a hearty congratulations on their new home! Enjoy!
I pretty much agree with everything presented in this video. I am currently running an Audio Technica LP7 turntable with an Ortofon Bronze cartridge through a Schiit Mani and Loki combination and into a Yamaha AVR6a AV receiver. When set on Pure Direct, the receiver does not process the signal in any way and sends it only to the two Polk M70 front speakers. The sound is highly detailed with a decent soundstage with clear highs and tight punchy lows. It's a difficult room with a large brick fireplace, 5 windows and hardwood floors but the combination works well, and I am highly satisfied.
The critical components of a HiFi system are the source and the speakers+room combo. Receivers are so good today that so few people could tell the difference.
This is one time I gotta disagree. An avr on paper makes more sense, but if you're big into music, an integrated amp or separates are the way to go. I don't have near the experience nor access to avr's like yall do, but I've yet to hear an avr that I've been satisfied with for 2 channel music listening. The only ones I find acceptable have been marantz, but listen to a marantz integrated vs marantz avr with comparable power, and I find the integrated version to be superior.
Bias. It's a thing. -Just like people claiming to be able to hear the difference between 320 kbps AAC/Ogg/MP3 and lossless. -They are not being honest to themselves.
Most avr's sound flat to me, some Onkyo's and Pioneer Elite's were decent that I owned. Marantz, no opinion, never had one, just the old vintage stuff.
Great video, I sold my home a few years ago and relocated to a new city to be closer to the Granddaughters (5). I found a nice budget studio apartment with a nice kitchen and a fair sized living area estimated at 14' x 20'. I'm a big fan of 2 channel and downsized my 7.1 system to 5.1. I use Paradigm for my center and rears but sold off my giant Studio mains and replaced them with a nice pair of Totem Sttafs. I still use a 1080p 58" non Smart tv for movies etc. While I do still have a few CDs, my main music comes from Blu-ray and DVD concert discs that I play through my Oppo Blu-ray player as well as Stream from my custom PC , gaming is done through the PS3 and PS4. Since the advent of HDMI, sound quality is unparalleled with a minimum of wiring involved. All of the above is connected using a 2nd gen Anthem AVR receiver the MRX 310. While not top of the line, I still consider this to be an audiophile system that I enjoy tremendously and is mostly Canadian...
Been looking to pick up a receiver for a while! I like the flexibility, usability, and modular nature. Thanks for the video and advice. Helps me make my decision.
I switched from two channel to a 7.1 surround sound system years ago! I used to have a Yamaha M-60 power amp and pre-amp with a pair of ESS AMT 1 Floorstanding Monitors. In 2013 I purchased a 7.2 Yamaha RX-V665 A/V receiver and a 7.1 Klipsch Synergy speaker system. Even though I purchased the system in 2013, it still rocks. Sounds as good as the day of purchase.... knock on wood. With the system I have a 55 inch VIZO TV connected. I also have my PC connected to the system. I enjoy burning CDs. I have two Tascam CD recorders so that I can burn a CD digitally. I love watching Blu-ray and DVD movies with the system and I love listening to my music with the system. I listen to CDs, vinyl records, and reel to reel tapes. I have a Music Hall turntable and a Pioneer RT-1020L reel to reel tape deck. I enjoy watching TH-cam videos as well. My Blu-ray player has Netflix pre-installed. Surround sound is the way to go!!
One point that I'd like to make with using an AVR is that you can use Zone 2. Either the on board power or the pre outs with a separate amp for a nice stereo setup. Which is a great way to test different speakers, but leaves your main system alone (family friendly).
This is the video most people need to see first before they tunnel down the rabbit hole of TH-cam audiophilia. It can be a long expensive road to ultimately come to the conclusion that you don't need to have a whole rack full of different amps to get high quality sound
All you need is a 2Ch Integrated or Vintage receiver, a streamer ( chromecast/airport or streamer of choice ) which can both be had cheap used and a turntable if you like vinyl.. You can get amazing 2ch sound without going down much of a Audiophile rabbit hole at all.. AV Receivers dont hold any value, If its an all purpose room I agree, But for your office / listening space or wherever theres no TV much better options exist for less much with less gimmicks and bells. The beauty in 2ch is its basic setup and minimal gimmicks.
@@quiksr20 I think the point Andrew was making though is most people just have their living room to work with where there's a tv. If your just in an office I'd be buying fosi and aiyima equipment to outfit that, which to your point is very cheap for solid two channel listening
@@hitters07 well then yes any av receiver will work for two channel in stereo mode… If you turn off the processing your left with just stereo you also can enjoy 5ch stereo too if you like… I get it just not what I’d ever consider for 2ch, it will work 100% though for sure.
![[Full] 4 ต่อ 4 Celebrity EP.910 | 22 ก.ย. 67 | one31](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4TR3MVpOiw8/mqdefault.jpg)
🔥Thanks to Keeps for supporting the channel! For more info: keeps.com/AndrewRobinson
★ *CLICK 🔝 “SHOW MORE” in the description for answers to many of your questions*
★ *RULES: Please be respectful. NO OUTSIDE LINKS, URLs, email addresses, etc.*
Props for throwing up the side by side. Takes guts!
@@swingkat No shame here.
Still struggling to get the results I want from my Anthem MRX540. PS if want to demo an MRX 540 I will be more than happy to lend you mine. All in the name of science.
I am all about A/V! My Marantz being programable for 2-channel @ Subs (145 W) or 7.2.4 (100W) theater and both with room correction meets my needs. The speakers and wiring cost a bit but it is a good reward for a retired man and wife who played by the rules and won.
@@bullpup33 I just picked up a 740. Lots of settings to play with.
Great video. I’ve been pondering this very thing since I’ve had time with the pioneer and just how good it is with music.
What pioneer is this? I’ve just bought some pro-ject speaker box 5s2 and amp but don’t want to rule out home theatre in future and can’t afford both.
Best cameo ever!!!
Yes.
You could benefit from more AV receivers review, even if using them in stereo setups.
IMHO, AV receivers pack more real world benefits over stereo amplifiers in the lower end of the price range.
This has likely related to the number of units sold, and how much more competitive that market is (against 2 channel amplifiers), and you usually get streaming services like Tidal, integrated DAC, bass management and a level of control of most rooms acoustics that entry level stereo amplifiers can only dream of.
And interestingly enough, they usually have more power on 2 channels for euro (they only start to go down on real power when we start adding more and more channels playing at the same time).
There are obvious audio performance advantages on separates when you climb the price ladder, but on entry-level stereo integrated amplifiers (these days), I rarely see the value proposition of a 500 to 750 euro stereo amplifier.
Even at 1.000 euros, a lot of them are still lacking on value.
I’m leaning towards this set up it’s proven tech that works very well.
I made a mistake in buying a supposedly high end sound bar for music and it has always underwhelmed me even with the average stereo set up that I had which I’m convinced sounded superior.
I can agree on this about Pioneer for owning one myself until the HDMI card died a few years ago. Not reparable. Quite a lot of AV receivers died this way.
Needed to replace fast, bought a Denon. Definitely not for Hifi! And no pre out either. Learning the hard and expensive way…. So now Fosi or Wiim. Haven’t decided yet. Fosi double mono would be a way to go or wiim Amp. Not the same budget either. Aargh!
I'm a minimalist and love my AVR! It works great in my music first mixed use system. Great video Andrew & Kristi!! I hope you're enjoying your new home and everything is coming together for you both!!
Really good video. I’ve had both AVRs as well as two channel, and even have vintage Sansui and Marantz units (I just love music). I feel that the speakers make the biggest difference in any system. In pure mode, or in two-channel (or 2.1) on my Marantz, Denon, and older HK AVRs the sound is really nice.
Search for an AVR with a reputation for nice stereo sound (many from Marantz, Pioneer, NAD have solid audio), and enjoy flexibility. Add great speakers to increase your fun levels. Try to get an AVR with pre-amp outs, so you can use an external power amp (if you’re really concerned about sound quality or power).
As always, Andrew nails it.
One thing I have very much enjoyed is listening to 5.1 surround music. There are quite a few albums available on Blu-ray, DVD, and SACD in the 5.1 format, many of them lossless. I like the additional separation of the instruments, which makes for a much more immersive experience. I'm a bit surprised that this has not taken hold more. Like Andrew describes, I've got one room in which to watch movies and listen to music. So I bought a high end AVR with plenty of power and decent clarity for listening to music, while also handling movies. Then I tried listening to a few albums in 5.1 and fell in love with it. It's a great way to experience music.
I am totally with you on this. For this reason I started my subscription to Apple Music. They have quite a bit of spatial music titles across many genres.
Hi Andrew. I couldn't agree more. For a time I worked at Best Buy and would always recommend folks pick-up a multi-channel receiver rather than Stereo tuners or integrated amps to save money and also provide them with flexibility to expand going forward. The latter was an equally weighty argument that I made to HTIB shoppers who wanted immediate gratification and it was all that I could do to dissuade them. I usually did this by showing them the THD % of the HTIBs and then having them listen to the receivers in the Magnolia section. Though this was years back, I still make the same recommendation to folks if they happen to ask me about my opinion. You get a lot of bang-for-your-buck with receivers and most of the R&D goes into them to keep them modern. Lots of competition keeps prices lower than with separates as well. Anyone looking to potentially expand from a 2.0/2.1 to a 5.1 or beyond would be wise to look at multichannel receivers to dip their toes into Stereo then add a Center channel and Sub to improve HT/Music listening. Add AppleTV and you get the option for Dolby Atmos Audio and the arguments are even more compelling when HDMI simplifies that lossless surround experience.
Exactly what I did ~10 years ago. I always ran my TV over the HiFi, because of the awful sound quality of TV speakers 15-20 years ago. And when I replaced the old system in 2011/12, the only option, that could connect and do everything the way I wanted it, was an AVR. I'm now bi-amping my ELAC floorstanders with ~190 Watts per channel, I used Audissey for years (currently using a self made EQ profile for testing), I have upgraded my old TV with an Amazon Fire TV stick, so I can stream not only video, but also (Amazon) music and I recently replaced my BluRay player with a new one, that can also stream video and music and play SACDs, FLAC and DSD. So far I am happy with the sound quality, the possibilities, the connectivity and the overall performance of my system.
I use an av receiver from the early 2000 that was bought by my father back then, it sounds in stereo really good and clear, but when i use the dolby pro logic and the 5.1 channels classical music becomes just gorgeous, sounds like you are in a theather
I found a Denon AVR at a used bookstore for $40. I use it to power some old NHT SuperOnes mounted on my back porch.
I’m super happy with this.✌🏻
One thing I like about newer av receivers is the sound fields you can experiment with on 2 channel music. Music sound fields like “Dolby pro logic IIx music”, “Neo 6 music”, “concert” etc. add a greater sound field in my opinion. I prefer those to the “ pure direct” function as it sounds crisper and clearer to me.
You're the first audio expert l hear make this suggestion im 72 and found this out years ago , the versatility of the Avr's.what l like is the choice of sounds effect the easy switch from one setup to the other..andrew you are the best.also like the idea of you asking the first lady her opinion..keep up the good work.
I'm using the NAD T778 for 2-channel music with Klipsch RF7 IIIs and additionally an RC-64 III and SVS SB4000 sub for 3.1 home theater watching. It's heaven!
The T778 is great!
100% agree.
I picked up an older AVR with the 'base' Audyssey system and I'm blown away by how well it works. It gave my setup a new life. Imaging & sound stage improved dramatically.
If I'd buy new I'd get the cheapest Denon with Audyssey ($500).
Room correction software is AMAZING isn't it!?
@@andrewrobinsonreviews
I'd go ahead and say game changing.
My speakers are not considered to be anything special at all. They are old late 80's JBL TLX-8 "party boxes".
The room correction made them sound VERY good. Balanced, detailed, the party bass profile completely gone. It's amazeballs!
I'd be very curious what it can do for budget bookshelf speakers for example.
I totally, 100% agree! Because it being the centre of your entertainment in the living room, you can do so much more with an AVR vs just an amp
this past week I realized how much more convenient it is to have an av receiver. I started my audio journey a year ago and messed around with different options of amp set ups and would struggle so much with getting that stereo sound I was looking for. Today I’m enjoying my set up very much
I love my AV receivers, have them all over the house in each room, so easy to have so much flexibility when you need it. Onkyo's and Denon's in my setup .Great video as usual.
Thanks Ron, appreciate you tuning in!
I gave away a perfectly good Onkyo stereo receiver and replaced it with an Onkyo 5.1 that I only use for a 2.1. I get way better sound than I could otherwise get by having individual volumes for both speakers and sub and most of all, having an ADJUSTABLE CROSSOVER.
I cannot believe it isn't more common to find a stereo receiver with these features.
Don't come near me with a stereo amp with a fixed frequency subwoofer out jack, and don't tell me to "turn down the crossover on the back of the sub" like that's the same thing. It isn't the same because the speakers will still be playing full range and the sub will sound more closed with the frequency turned down. All the magic happens when you remove the unplayable lower frequencies from going to your speakers and let your sub remain completely open and only playing below what the speakers are getting.
And while I'm on my soapbox, stop telling me to set my crossover at 80 when my speakers easily play down to 60. Everything sounds so much better when I set the crossover to 60.
(End of rant) 🐸
Crossover boils down to different speakers, different subs, and preference. Having said that, I actually prefer my crossover at 60hz as well ;) Also, I feel that those variabilities in speakers and subs reinforces your argument in that an AVR crossover gives you greater flexibility in that regard. It seems like it'd be totally doable to make an integrated 2 channel amp that has a similar frequency split/crossover since integrated amps have a dac and dsp capabilities. For whatever reason though there are plenty of amps that don't do that.
Watching concerts with surrounds is a whole new experience in listening to music.
I agree. Purists don't like it but I've long since ceased giving af what they think (if I ever did). Those people live to tell you how everyone else's opinions suck except theirs. Certain kinds of music like live performances and orchestral are an amazingly immersive experience on a good surround set-up.
The new bumpers are just fantastic andrew. Production and look are pure excellence. That little audio snippet in the background with that little hit of bass is divine. Choice of topic is more educational than looking to stir up the trouble.
Fantastic video, straight to the point and doesn't sound like a lecture.
Keep it up and congrats on the house.
This actually was more thought provoking than I expected! It may influence my audiophile direction moving forward. Thanks a lot Andrew! 😎
I would encourage folks to give it a try. It's okay if you don't ultimately decide it's right for you, but I believe it's worth consideration.
@@andrewrobinsonreviews Absolutely! I pretty much dismissed going the AVR route until this video. I currently have a Sony STR-DH190 paired with Elac Debut 2.0 6.2 stand mounts, with a Schiit Modi 3 DAC. I was thinking my next step would be to upgrade the Sony 2-channel receiver to an integrated amp (like an IOTAVX SA3 perhaps). Decisions, decisions… 😁
Agreed! I'm realizing that I watch TV way more than I sit down and listen to my stereo... I really need a center channel to reduce that compressed vibe from my 2 channel setup.
I totally agree. I use a Mcintosh MHT100 (AVR) for my dedicated music listening room and it works perfectly. The unit has eight channels so it gives me eight channels of Mcintosh sound so I can bi-amp four separate speakers in two different rooms and sub out to run the dedicated woofers on my Klipsch horns and la scalas. The sound is incredible and for a fraction of the cost of buying four different separate mcintosh amps. For less than a couple of grand you can pick up a older McIntosh AVR unit and drive many speakers for the same/similar sound that would cost 10k if using separate amps.
In the mid 90's, with an eye toward a possible home theater set up, I bought a big Denon 7 channel AVR receiver rated around 175W per channel. Was running Vienna acoustics (still use) and a six changer Sony cd player with a Dual TT as well. Sounded awesome. On the side I still had the trusty big boy, music only, Hafler DH500 with preamp. Never made it to the home theater set up but the music sounded damn fine! I have no qualms about operating this way......until the bug hits to move beyond........🤣🤣 Good stuff sir.
Did you manage to attach an external phono to your amp? I see the Denon Avr (xr-1700h) has one built in but won't support MC cartridge use. So where can you attach an external phono. Was wondering if you had tried?
Certainly wouldn’t be afraid of placing my NAD T778 running Monitor Audio Platinum 200’s, using Dirac, against any separates or integrated amps out there. Simply mesmerizing.
Was the T778 the only AVR on your list? I’m currently looking at one for my next AVR but of course nothing is available so I have time to browse lol
@@dalmd I’ve had different Marantz AVR’s that I’ve used over the years. Then I bought a used NAD M3 integrated and loved the sound so I figured why not get that sound over my other speakers for movies etc and bought the 778 and got the NAD sound for both stereo and multi channel. Great AVR
@@lloydmetcalf2593 wow that’s awesome! Now if I could just get my hands on one lol
Also with the right AVR you get preouts so you can have more fun down the road and maintain multiroom zones and play with new amps.
I wanted more then my current soundbar w/subwoofer could deliver but also wanted to keep things pretty minimal. Now that I have all my components I will be putting together my 3.1 system built around some products that you have positively reviewed.
You might not be old enough to remember this, but back when everyone bought stereos, they often sold them all in once package. So no work required for the customer unlike now where you have to assemble all the parts yourself. I remember buying a Sony stereo system in the mid 90's from.....I don't know......JC Penny!? It was definitely some store in the mall. It had a CD player, tape deck, amp, floor standing speakers, and sub. And the cabinet. All in one.
I've never had a problem with using an AVR to listen to 2 channel music. I actually love what it sounds like in that particular environment.
I got a used $200 Pioneer Elite VSX-91TXH 7.1 with new demo $1400 Wharfedale Lintons and sometimes it's just as satisfying as my other system, HiFi Rose RS201E ($2200) currently paired with used ZU Omen DW ($1300). I fell into the snobbery of 2 channel hi-end and although the Rose has a great DAC streamer, I struggle justifying the diminished cost. AVRs are plenty for most audiophile music listeners and they offer more versatile settings for real world usage. They are big and clunky though.
I went with an AVR for my new shop building over a cheap stereo amp mainly to control multiple inputs and subwoofer connection. TV, AVR and speakers were free from a friend moving out of the country. Bought a rolling cart for the TV so I can move it to the patio for football watching and moving around the 26x40 shop. Very happy with my set up!
I admire your bravery to speak out on this publicly. Expect heavy blowback from the traditional audiphiles. This is the route I went when I downsized my home, mothballed my 5.1 system back to strictly 2-channel audio. I'm running a 12-year old Onlyo AVR because it has so many different audio inputs and I have several different sources from the cable box to a PS4. If I used a respectable pre-amp, I would run out of the inputs.
Great presentation. For me, Denon AVR 4700. Love it. Drives my Klipsch Forte II’s, Klipsch Center Channel and in ceiling speakers perfectly and movies on the LG UHD Blu Ray are excellent. Fluance Turn table for vinyl.
Teac CD player rounds things out. Love the streaming capability too. AVR def the way to go.
I have a AV Receiver with my mains hooked up to a power amplifier to makes a huge difference
Back in the 70's prior to having surround, we used receivers such as Sansui, Pioneer, and National(Panasonic). My family would listen for hours on end. It was quite satisfying to listen in stereo especially from vinyl records. Music was warm and alive.
Welcome to the joy of the loudness wars.
One additional reason: AVRs have HDMI inputs. You can play SACDs through your Blu-Ray player (if it supports HI-Res).
I have a Marantz multi channel AV receiver paired with Paradigm Monitor 11 speakers. The Marantz has a set up that bi wires it and pulls the various dedicated amps for the channels together. It sounds fantasma gastical!! I have been in love with the sound for several years.
I have a Denon AVR. When I upgraded my turntable, I also got a good phono stage for it. That plugs into one of the regular component inputs of the AVR. I think that small box is the most important thing to add to an AVR if you want to improve overall musicality. Also, learn how to use something like a pure direct setting that turns off most AVR circuitry when you wish to listen to two channel stereo.
Which phono stage recommend? Where on the Denon does it plug into
@@rdroid2438 I love my Moon 110LP v.2. It will handle any MM or MC cartridge. It plugs into any line-in RCA connections on your AVR. You do not use the phono connection. You connect the turntable ground to the ground on the phono preamp.
After doubting about the quality of the phono stage of my Yamaha reciever, I upgraded with a separate phono preamp (not even high end) and the sound improvement was HUGE! I can finally hear the vinyl properly. Then I coupled the reciever with another stereo amp via the pre out of the reviever. The stereo amp sounds way more musical and alive. I fully agree on the top 5 benefits of AV recievers but musicality does not seem to be AVR's first strength to say the least. Great video by the way :)
AVRs are totally doable. But I would only purchase one where I could bypass any sort of digital processing and have a pure analogue pathway from source to speaker.
I have separate components, but I bought an Onkyo TX-NR686 7.2-channel home theater receiver. I find myself enjoying 5 channel stereo surround sound for music, besides Dolby Digital for movies. Having exposure to many types of equipment, through my servicing, I get to test many amplifiers, turntables, and speakers. I think a recent pairing of this receiver and Totem Rainmaker loudspeakers, was a beautiful listening experience.
I feel like there should be more emphasis on the fact that you can still add separates to an AVR. AVRs with pre-outs would allow external amplifiers if desired. They also have plenty of analog inputs if one should decide to go with an aftermarket DAC. The expandability isn't limited to going from stereo setup to home theater later on.
Definitely. A lot of comments here seem to be unaware that for like $100 they could add a small Bluetooth/DAC receiver for dedicated listening that will probably beat the existing DAC significantly
Yup second this. I haven’t had to use the pre-outs yet but good to know I have the option if I want more juice.
Agree
Some AVRs manufacturers such as Pioneer have Direct and Pure Direct modes which bypass video, EQ, and DSP circuitry for a more cleaner direct audio path. Used with an external DAC, the quality of sound is remarkable.
Some AVRs manufacturers such as Pioneer have Direct and Pure Direct modes which bypass video, EQ, and DSP circuitry for a more cleaner direct audio path. Used with an external DAC, the quality of sound is remarkable.
I completely agree with Andrew. With a few exceptions, AVR’s are an excellent choice.
My AVR is the Sony STR-ZA3100ES. It’s second only to Sony’s flagship 5000ES. I run my 3100ES with a Def Tech speaker setup, and couldn’t be happier with the Home Theater performance and the Stereo music playback is exceptional.
The only caveat regarding Sony’s ES lineup is the absence of a phono stage. However, that’s an easy-to-fix situation with plenty of affordable Phono preamps from Schiit, Fluance, U-Turn, Fosi Audio & even Pro-Ject.
It’s all about balancing personal preference with your budget without getting OCD and find yourself over-spending. But that’s just me.
Especially if they have preouts for a power amp. It's what I've been doing for years.
Same here. Running fronts from separate amp. Best solution for my audio-videophile needs
I can't agree more with this MOST of this video. I have a dedicated listening room that I use for 70% music and 30% movies. That being said I still needed a few extra channels for surround and center channels. My Yamaha A2A is more than enough to drive my BW 683s in bi-amp configuration and having 2 REL subwoofers only sweetens both the music and theater experience. In regards to your opinion on AVRs not being able to drive speakers like BW 702s I would not agree. AVRs in the sub $1500 range put out close to 150w per channel @ very low THD and are bi-amp compatible. I've listened to a set of 702s on a bi-amped Yamaha A6A and was blown away with the sound quality. Not quite as good as a tube audio research or McIntosh but for far less cost was acceptable. Very good video and agree with many of your points!
Spend the most of your money for very good speaker and you will have a smile each time, no matter what receiver you have
I've been using a Sony AVR for two channel listening for a few years. It's connected to the TV with eARC so we have sound when we watch movie & TV, as well as when we play video games, and now I have a Node connected with stereo RCA for streaming music. It works great! I'm also able to bi-amp my tower speakers for some extra power and sound quality.
In the future I plan on adding a center channel, and a subwoofer.
I have an old Sony AVR (STR-DE315) capable of only analog inputs. I've kept it around because to does do stereo so well. In my opinion it has always been a much better at being a "stereo" than an AVR.
I had always been under the impression that receivers not only makes 2-channel music sound a little tinny but can also make the audio sound a little digital too, but that impression was blown out the window once I tried the arcam avr20.
I actually preferred the sound of the arcam avr20 standing alone then the Denon 6500 helped out with a poweramp 😯
Hey butty boy donkey dicker. My fellow Welshman I can’t decide on wether to get an AVR for my pro-ject speaker box 5 s2 or stick with a stereo receiver. I want to future proof in case I decide to home theatre but not at the cost of loss of quality of music. Also plan on getting some keg LS50meta . I can’t spend more than £1000 on either a stereo receiver or AVR . What do you recommend?
@@rhysholley8289 what's happening butty 😄 if I was you I'd persevere and carry on saving rather than taking the risk and living with regret! Besides doing the research to buy a new set up can be an enjoyable journey in itself. One thing you should take into account, if you was to go with the ls50 metas for home theatre, what would you use as a centre channel? And of course quality speakers like the meta's are not gonna be able to truly sing with a mid-priced standing alone AVR.
If you're looking for any more advice, I'd be happy to help...
click on our red dragon
I used to own modern separates in the lower five-figure range (when new), but through a very long and extremely eye-opening process of buying and trying different gear of all kinds, of all eras and price points, I settled on a 2000s-era Yamaha A/V receiver (that I bought in near-mint condition for the ridiculous price of $40, I might add) as the main amplification device for my main system. The amp and preamp separates I used to own have been sold off for nearly 7 years now and I'm happier with the sound of my system than I've ever been. Seriously. With that said, there's an insane synergy thing going on with my system, so your results may vary.
My audiophile journey is somewhat like Andrew's in that my system became more and more expensive and complex as the years passed, but once I started expanding my audiophile horizons into different (and even cheaper) gear, I began to find even more overall enjoyment from it. And in my case, even better results.
All I can say is if you never broaden your horizons to include ALL types of gear (or eras of gear), you'll never truly discover all the things there are to discover as a listener. By never broadening your horizons, you prevent yourself from discovering things that not only have the potential to open your eyes, but blow your mind as well. By pushing my own boundaries, nearly all of the preconceived notions I used to have as an audiophile, and that were fed to me through the many biases and common stereotypes within the community, have been pretty much obliterated over time. If you're willing to look and listen, and have a completely open mind about new things, you'll more than likely be very surprised what you can find. Just some food for though.
One reason I like receivers is they have full equalizers rather than simple base/trebble adjustments as most 2 channel amps only have.
In my case I've always had AVRs because that's what was presented to me in 1998. I started with a DENON which lasted me a long time until someone else needed it more. Then I replaced it with a Yamaha which I absolutely love and still own. More recently I added a newer Yamaha (RX-A780) which is even better because it has a phono amp. We've been listening to vinyl a lot these past couple of years so we upgraded our speakers to the Paradigm 800Fs and oh boy... I'm certain there are better ways to listen to music but we are just so happy with our set up (plus it was kind of over budget for us) that we don't need anymore. We love movies and our receiver works really well for for our music and movie needs.
Also I confess that I was always ignorant about hi fi and felt intimidated when going to high end stores.
I've tried to replace my separates with a quality AVR but truth is that they just sound flat and cannot compare to the sound of a quality amp. The newer AVR's can be used as a pre if you're on a budget but the amp section is just not up to pair.
Yep, same here. All cheap class d chips, limited current output. Nothing beat the value proposition of an AB amplifier IMO.
I've got 2 systems, and I'm using an Anthem pre/pro as the preamp for each one! In my 2-channel music-only system, I went through a couple different stereo preamps, and finally one day decided to try my old, retired AVM20, only to find out how great and transparent its analog performance is. Plus, it's got lots of inputs, FM radio, and OK (but not the best) sounding DACs. It's got balanced outs for feeding the long XLRs to my active studio monitors. Old AVM20's can be had on eBay for around $350.... a steal.
For 500 USD you can find quite good integrated 2.0 amplifiers. 5.1 AV Receivers in the 500 USD pricd range, they are just not that great. But I do agree that a GOOD AV Receiver is by defenition good in doing stereo. A lot of the bad reputation of AV Receivers is people spending 500 USD not just on a AV Receiver, but actually on a Home Theater in a Box set: a ultra downmarket Sony, Yamaha, Pioneer or Onkyo AV Receiver with 5 plastic speakers and a 6 inch 'sub' that looks from a distance like it's a serious setup. If you have only 500 to spend, go for a stereo integrated amp and a pair of good bookshelf speakers, that will sound much better than a Home Theater in a Box set.
Have had an AVR for years as a preamp with external amps for my power hungry speakers. Plus I use multi-channel for music as well as movie watching. Cheers!
My question is is can you compare avrs with integrateds. How would a mid range avr compare with a mid range integrated, what benefits would one expect between a power node with a denon or something like that
I bought a Technics AV receiver months ago for these very reasons, but also because older AV receivers have Tape Return which allows you to add an equalizer. I've not seen any modern stereo receiver that has tape return.
Something to beware of if setting up an AV receiver in a music listening area….some of them need a connection to a TV to access basic functions like tone control. I’ve ordered a Marantz NR1200 for my listening area because it had both physical tone controls and a phono preamp. It’s going to be driving a pair of Klipsch Ref II speakers and two 10” Klipsch subwoofers. It’s been on order for a month now. Really hard to get. It doesn’t need a TV to access all its features.
The thing that resonate most with me are HDMI eARC inputs wether its an Amp or an AVR. When there is a TV get the eARC input having the system change automaticly as you switch on the TV and the volume control is just nice. The others i wont say i build a whole cabinet around multiple components just for there to be a lonely C700 Mani and Rega P1^^
Most people can't tell the difference on sound quality
Why not? I'm currently rocking a 30-yr old Pioneer AV receiver with my Klipsch floor speakers and Bluesound Node 2i. Sounds great to me!
I use Yamaha RX-A2080 with very good floorstanding speaker, and some of ext HDD with full of audiophile music files. ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
My friend runs his Bowers and Wilkins 702 S2 Signatures on a RX-A1080 and it's really wonderful how good it sounds. So a "good" receiver can work with high current demanding speakers. :) Could it get better, sure, but it's not bad at all with just the receiver powering them.
Good Vid! Kristi's right, and I vote stereo for the win. I've tried 4 different 5.1 systems (Polk, Bose, Sony, Yamaha) but keep going back to my old 90's Optimus Professional Series stereo. I use it for music only, so the 5.1 doesn't sound right to me. Recently I inherited a heavy 110lb. (90's) Theta Dreadnaught amp that puts out 5 channels at 240 watts each, Theta Casanova preamp with 5 channel sound, along with 4 Vandersteen Series 3 (4ohm) speakers, 2 Vandy Series 1's, and 2 300 Watt Vandy Subs. Testing them, I noticed the lights dim when I turn it, and it is drawing 425 watts at Zero Volume! Afraid to turn it up, it will probably throw a breaker. This thing could power a church! Definitely going back to my old Stereo ;)
If you want to listen to Spatial Audio/Atmos Music then AVR it is.
Another great video as per usual. I totally agree. I really want to underscore the value of (well applied) room correction, especially in the low end. It can really push an AVR to a point where separates will struggle to compete if they don't have room correction.
Which 7.1 AVR’s produce the Best Sound Quatity for 2.1 Music and which do you prefer ?……
I often use my Yamaha avr for two channel listening. Many of the people in the forums actually recommend avr’s Because they are generally less expensive than equivalent integrated amps. One advantage of separates (especially if using an integrated amp) is that you could actually end up with a smaller footprint than an avr since avrs tend to be large so they can hold all the individual components and have proper ventilation.
Well, I’m gonna say what Andrew didn’t.
There is way too much snooty snobbery in the “audiophile” world. If the music you’re listening to demands piles of expensive boxes to be enjoyable, maybe you don’t really enjoy the music all that much. Get back to basics and stomp that foot any which way you can!
100% AGREE!!! ☝️
When you review some hardware and forget about listening to the equipment and just enjoy the music there might be little to be gained in listening to anything more expensive or "up market".
@@geraldmcmullon2465 John Atkinson, of Stereophile-fame, said about a $600 Wharfedale speaker, comparing it to a $200k Tidal speaker, in 2018, “…when I wasn’t in critical listening mode and was simply playing music for pleasure, none of that mattered much…”.
Isn’t “playing music for pleasure” what this is all about?
It seems many get stuck in the specs of their pricey boxes and forget to just sit back and listen to music for pleasure.
I totally get this! First from a home real estate perspective, who has the room? You buy a place as big as you can afford and at some point down the road, you're looking for space for this or that. A room just for listening, for some, ok sure. But generally I like the home filled with music in the background far more often than sitting in a room alone enjoying two channel. Not that I don't immensely enjoy that, but it's not often I'm sacrificing my time to do only that. So a dedicated room to be used so little, doesn't make sense. That said, I want a place I can sit down with my wife, a bottle of wine, cheese & crackers and some incredible vinyl. The living room is the best bang for the buck space in the whole house considering its multiple use. And considering this is the place I'm generally entertaining guests, why not have a decent investment into "entertainment" in this space. My solution is having a very good (not necessarily flagship) AV receiver running 7.2.2, but preamping out the front left and right to a very good power amp and towers. I really feel like room dimensions and textures aside, I'm getting what I want out of my living space with very little compromise. And for the audiophiles out there confining themselves to two channel only, boy are you missing out on concert dvds. Let's face it, one of the best ways to enjoy music and all that it is to our psych, nothing beats the live experience at a great venue. While a concert dvd is not there, it sure is great to enjoy bringing there to right here as best as possible. Multichannel puts us in the crowd. Some of the best times I've had with friends has been a night of cocktails, conversation and concert dvds creating that almost at the venue experience, except with better seats for the show than you can normally afford. With all the options available to us all, it sure is a good thing we don't all want the same thing.
Appreciate you sharing your personal experience!
I have tried this "AVR for stereo approach" back in the late 90s and early 2000's with more than a few brands and models and have found too many trade offs. The all-in-one AVRs are engineered and built primarily around HT and as a result, less attention is paid to 2-channel use.
This solution is best suited for a casual stereo listener, music streaming, non-focused, non-critical listening, etc.
If you are primarily a 2-channel music listener, you are better off choosing a receiver (or amplifier) built for that purpose over a jack-of-all-trades solution, IMO.
Agree 100%, i hv tried that long ago and never satisfied using AVR for 2 channel hifi. I keep 2 separate systems for each purpose
Decent AVRs are actually pretty powerful these days with 2 channel only driven mode. I measured a few of mine and receivers were consistently putting out more poweр like 120W агаинста 150W In 4ohms load.
Hi Guys🙋♂ Good Morning
Good morning Nevin!
I'm still rocking my 16 y/o Cambridge Audio 540R AVR with Energy RC70 speakers. I use it in 6ch passthrough for music and movies and the thing sounds amazing. I'll be upgrading to a Pioneer 305 once I can afford to.
I have a high end Sony ES AV receiver that has no problem in the stereo direct mode holding its own with many respected integrated 2 channel amps. Good sounding solid state amps are much easier to build these days due to surface mount components and super clean op amps that keep the cost down without sacrificing audio quality. A dedicated power amp is still the way to go for speakers that are hard to drive but the premise that there is no such thing as a good sounding AV receiver is just rubbish.
Great video detailing the reasons to get a home theater system for 2 channel audio. However, a home theater system would never be suitable for me. I 've assembled an audio system consisting of mix of old and new components.
The system consists of:
1. Dual 1228 turntable brought back to life, has a new Ortofon 10OM cartridge ($190 total)
2. Kenwood KR-70 75 watt stereo receiver ($70, used)
3. Pioneer DV-C505 CD player ($40, used)
4. Yamaha RS-202 stereo amplifier ($130, new)
5. Schiit Loki mini equalizer ($160, new)
6. Two C-Note Bookshelf speakers ($150) a DIY kit
7. Two KLH M365 tower speakers ($35, used)
The Yamaha RS-202 has Bluetooth connectivity. Also have a collection of new and used phono cartridges (Shure, Stanton, Ortofon, Audio Technica, Oyster and Pickering) that can be swapped out on the tonearm. Also made my own small audio component rack. Total cost of audio components is less than $1000 and I had pleasure selecting each component. I also enjoy swapping out various components (turntable with Shure cartridge-Kenwood-KLH speakers vs streaming music-Yamaha-C note speakers) to experience and understand what each audio component bring to the table. I gain audio enjoyment and from mixing and matching.
A home theater system for the pricing you mentioned ($3k) might have superior performance (note that I said might) but it would certainly deny me the pleasure of component swapping, listening discovery and learning what works for me. I would never want a set and forget system.
It's probably the same reason I always preferred a manual transmission to an automatic for driving. Love the control and performance that personal hands on management can bring. It is more work but it was also more fun and requires more engagement. Not for everyone.
So perhaps people who prefer a hands on audio engagement experience with mix and match capability should NOT get a home theater audio system. People who prefer buy it, set it up one and enjoy what you got should lean towards the home theater audio.
Dont forget UPGRADEABILITY! I started my system with a Marantz SR7015 which I now use as a Pre-Amp with a standalone DAC upstream and a standalone AMP downstream, throw in Audyssey from the Marantz... Sounds spectacular!
Five years ago I setup Pioneer VSXLX101 7.2 Channel Networked AV Receiver ($399.00) paired with Klipsch R-28F Reference 5.1 Channel Home Theater Speaker Package ($1,475.00) in our living room and never looked back. Can this be done better for under $2000? maybe it can, but as far as we concerned this is good enough.
No need to upgrade if you're happy with what you've got :)
Hello Andrew. I am always appreciative of your gear reviews and perspective. I have sat in front of many a receiver, amplifier, monitors, speakers, etcetera. I used to change them out every several months looking for that perfect and sweet combination. The one thing I have learned through those years can be filtered to one major contributor. I have found that the parts that contribute the most to higher quality sound are in the amplification section: No matter what component you get, ensure the power production is from a clean and well designed amplifier. I have had many ‘Hi-Fi’ units that were designed well with options and DAC’s up there with the best but the amplifier section was limited and weak. It reduced the potential of the other components. I have also used many entry level ‘sleeper’ units with stellar amp sections that sang so sweet. Let’s just say that most new AVR sound good, even entry level, up to about 30% volume and every percent past that increases distortion level to parallel it.
That is why so many separate component system with big, beefy, quality amplifiers sound so nice. Put an entry level receiver behind them and one may be surprised how nice it actually sounds.
Just my 7 cents worth.
Thanks for all the content, keep it coming.
Many years ago, I bought a Yamaha RX-A1010 AV/receiver to replace my old all-in-one system. That was the start of my new setup and my hunt for an audiophile system. I recycled the speakers I had to start with, but every year I added another (separate) element to it. I've used this receiver for years now with a pair of Q Acoustics 3020 bookshelve speakers in combination with a subwoofer. I do select the 'pure direct' function, which bypasses the internal equaliser/sound program settings and just amplifies the sound of the source that's fed into the receiver. This gives me the most satisfying result for stereo listening. Last month I found a cheap pair of Mordaunt-Short 906 speakers in a thrift shop. I replaced the Q Acoustics with those and bi-amped them on the receiver. The sound they deliver exceeded my expectations. Airy, open and detailed sound. The bass is snappy and has some punch, but it goes less deep than the subwoofer. It is more lively and rhythmic though.
The result is so enjoyable that I'm not thinking of replacing my AV/receiver by a dedicated stereo amplifier yet. The Q Acoustics 3020's now function as surround loudspeakers for movies, where they've replaced some old satellite speakers I had.
It's nice to get some confirmation by this video that AV/receivers can provide some good stereo sound.
I was glad to make the move to an AVR over my Kenwood stereo receiver at 200 watts . I will say though adding a Amp to the AVR is definitely a good thing. The Amp gives the high power performance when your listening to 5 channel stereo at the reference level . I like my music loud and the Amp gives you clarity without effort at higher levels. But I have no regrets using a AVR for music until you want to drive your speakers and then that's where the added Amp comes in .
Great points! Thank you ! Now that I'm confirmed it's a serious and viable option, and considering I will stick to a 2 channel system, I have the following question. I plan to get the Klipsch RP-8000f or the KEF Q750 (loved your reviews) and to pair them with the Onkyo RZ-50. Is the Marantz Model 40 a better choice (as it does also everything) ? Does the price difference translate in a significantly better sound quality ?
Super good question! I would love to know the answer to that as well.
If you know, I MEAN KNOW that you are not going to expand to home theater or mult-channel anything and you do not need or want room correction, get the Marantz. BUT, if you want to spend less and get more, the RZ50 will power 8000Fs no problem and do just fine with KEF too.
@@andrewrobinsonreviews That makes sense. Thanks!
@@andrewrobinsonreviews Thanks a lot Andrew! Super looking forward for your new type of content coming in! Keep up the amazing work :)
My living room is my listening room which is also my theater. I was going to go hard on a dedicated two channel set up with a modest home theater for TV duty. But then I thought, why? I merged the budget, took advantage of sales and available hardware and got an NAD T778 and KEF R3s for the mains, R2c center, T301 surround and an SVS 3000 Micro. Two-channel, R3s with DIRAC's correction to my taste and that perfect sub integration? Hard to beat and so elegant for streaming hi-res from Roon. I may be giving up the last 1% of performance, but I also can be super happy with the 99% I have.
Thanks for the great info. Not that I've had buyers remorse for the recent purchase of the Marantz SR6015, but the crazy overload of "Too much information", and snobbery of audiophiles, can leave a person wondering about a leap of faith into a $1700.00 receiver. Especially the "Separates only" crowd.
Not that I regret it, because every time I turn it on, and listen to music, I just grin with amazement over how well it sounds.
Even with two channel movie viewing, it's quite the sweet machine.
I could not agree more. Every manufacture has made some very special AV receivers over the years. Find one with Phono input and enjoy the music. Thank you for a great video!
Love that you tackled this subject, needing something 4ohm capable is a great point and the reason I went this route. Congratulations on finally buying the new house, I can't wait to see the new living room setup.
Interesting video but strangely enough you did not mention sound quality. In my experience if you compare a 1000 dollars AVR with a 1000 dollars stereo integrated (in my case Marantz SR5014 and PM7000N) the sound quality is dramatically different. Yes you can listen the music on the AVR, yes it’s more convenient, doable yep, yes you have many fringes but still music sounds flat in comparison to its stereo brother. Tested in a normal/not ideal room with Q Acoustics 3030i.
Cheers
I have a Sony STR DE825 in my family room that I am currently using for 2 channel listening, with a JBL sub and two Sony SSCS5s (will upgrade the speakers when able). I see 2 advantages of using this surround receiver for two chanel listening. 1) As you pointed out, optical from cable box to the Sony receiver for better sound when watching TV. 2) using optical from my WiiM Mini to the Sony receiver to add streaming, which opened a whole new world of listening. I have an old Sansui R70 in my office upstairs, where I keep my vinyl and cd collections. I have a WiiM Mini on that system so I can cast my vinyl and cds to my Family Room Sony when I want.
Which brand receivers do you think produce the best sound quality for music and movies ?
Arcam
@@TheEchelonany budget ones?
there are many, Denon is good, Sony is beast, Marantz is also good, Yamaha good!
Only your ears can answer that !
I used an AVR setup, for 2 channel, for many years. I have a Sony DA4ES, which was highly regarded decades ago. I decided to up my 2 channel game last year. I bought a Hegel H390, a pair of B&W 805D3s, and a pair of REL t7i subs. While the Sony has high quality amplification, the Hegel is in a different league. I now have the Sony pushing HT bypass through the Hegel to drive the L/R speakers. Eventually, I'll buy the other speakers to complete the surround sound system.
But, to your point, you can absolutely use an AVR for high quality 2 channel...and save a lot of money by doing so.
Awesome content!
😊
@@KristiWright I live in the desert 🏜 as well / high Sierra Nevada's watch those rattle snakes on walks with Katie. I never let my Ridgeback off leash!
@@8474Starscream keeping her close by and always on leash. I’m paranoid AF about snakes.
@@KristiWright Me too. I see a lot of folks taking their dogs off leash into BLM / open space Desert during the Spring & Summer. Fools dogs shove their noses in holes and often times rattle snakes will hide within sage brush. Your looking at possible death and a $5-$7k vet bill. Happy for the new home purchase for the Robinson's!
I agree with all the reasons you have put forward and particularly agree with the room correction arguement. I have a denon avrx 3600 and pre-out the front two channels into a separate more powerful amp. Room correction is the best upgrade I have heard. Were probably both wrong in some people's eyes though.
If I was new to this hobby in this era, and I wished to build a 2 channel setup, I would not hesitate to consider a modern AV receiver for the immense processing capabilities along with its preamp section. I would then consider adding a separate Herculean power amp with low-Z load drive capability (say, a 2 ohm load as its minima) and a high maximum output power into 8 ohms, to drive a most stubborn mule of a speaker load that I decided upon obtaining. I want to wish Andrew and Kristi a hearty congratulations on their new home! Enjoy!
I wanted to buy a pair of speakers and AVR but bought keeps for my hair, now I can truly enjoy my life with long hairs.
lol good one. I'm too late for the keeps.
I pretty much agree with everything presented in this video. I am currently running an Audio Technica LP7 turntable with an Ortofon Bronze cartridge through a Schiit Mani and Loki combination and into a Yamaha AVR6a AV receiver. When set on Pure Direct, the receiver does not process the signal in any way and sends it only to the two Polk M70 front speakers. The sound is highly detailed with a decent soundstage with clear highs and tight punchy lows. It's a difficult room with a large brick fireplace, 5 windows and hardwood floors but the combination works well, and I am highly satisfied.
The critical components of a HiFi system are the source and the speakers+room combo. Receivers are so good today that so few people could tell the difference.
This is one time I gotta disagree. An avr on paper makes more sense, but if you're big into music, an integrated amp or separates are the way to go.
I don't have near the experience nor access to avr's like yall do, but I've yet to hear an avr that I've been satisfied with for 2 channel music listening. The only ones I find acceptable have been marantz, but listen to a marantz integrated vs marantz avr with comparable power, and I find the integrated version to be superior.
Bias. It's a thing. -Just like people claiming to be able to hear the difference between 320 kbps AAC/Ogg/MP3 and lossless. -They are not being honest to themselves.
@@mrpeterfromgodknowswhere what bias? Bias towards intergrateds?
Most avr's sound flat to me, some Onkyo's and Pioneer Elite's were decent that I owned. Marantz, no opinion, never had one, just the old vintage stuff.
Great video, I sold my home a few years ago and relocated to a new city to be closer to the Granddaughters (5). I found a nice budget studio apartment with a nice kitchen and a fair sized living area estimated at 14' x 20'. I'm a big fan of 2 channel and downsized my 7.1 system to 5.1. I use Paradigm for my center and rears but sold off my giant Studio mains and replaced them with a nice pair of Totem Sttafs. I still use a 1080p 58" non Smart tv for movies etc. While I do still have a few CDs, my main music comes from Blu-ray and DVD concert discs that I play through my Oppo Blu-ray player as well as Stream from my custom PC , gaming is done through the PS3 and PS4. Since the advent of HDMI, sound quality is unparalleled with a minimum of wiring involved. All of the above is connected using a 2nd gen Anthem AVR receiver the MRX 310. While not top of the line, I still consider this to be an audiophile system that I enjoy tremendously and is mostly Canadian...
I love the intensity with which you listen to your spouse / partner. You seem like a good duo!
Been looking to pick up a receiver for a while! I like the flexibility, usability, and modular nature. Thanks for the video and advice. Helps me make my decision.
Thanks for watching!
I switched from two channel to a 7.1 surround sound system years ago! I used to have a Yamaha M-60 power amp and pre-amp with a pair of ESS AMT 1 Floorstanding Monitors. In 2013 I purchased a 7.2 Yamaha RX-V665 A/V receiver and a 7.1 Klipsch Synergy speaker system. Even though I purchased the system in 2013, it still rocks. Sounds as good as the day of purchase.... knock on wood. With the system I have a 55 inch VIZO TV connected. I also have my PC connected to the system. I enjoy burning CDs. I have two Tascam CD recorders so that I can burn a CD digitally. I love watching Blu-ray and DVD movies with the system and I love listening to my music with the system. I listen to CDs, vinyl records, and reel to reel tapes. I have a Music Hall turntable and a Pioneer RT-1020L reel to reel tape deck. I enjoy watching TH-cam videos as well. My Blu-ray player has Netflix pre-installed. Surround sound is the way to go!!
One point that I'd like to make with using an AVR is that you can use Zone 2. Either the on board power or the pre outs with a separate amp for a nice stereo setup. Which is a great way to test different speakers, but leaves your main system alone (family friendly).
This is the video most people need to see first before they tunnel down the rabbit hole of TH-cam audiophilia. It can be a long expensive road to ultimately come to the conclusion that you don't need to have a whole rack full of different amps to get high quality sound
All you need is a 2Ch Integrated or Vintage receiver, a streamer ( chromecast/airport or streamer of choice ) which can both be had cheap used and a turntable if you like vinyl.. You can get amazing 2ch sound without going down much of a Audiophile rabbit hole at all.. AV Receivers dont hold any value, If its an all purpose room I agree, But for your office / listening space or wherever theres no TV much better options exist for less much with less gimmicks and bells. The beauty in 2ch is its basic setup and minimal gimmicks.
@@quiksr20 I think the point Andrew was making though is most people just have their living room to work with where there's a tv. If your just in an office I'd be buying fosi and aiyima equipment to outfit that, which to your point is very cheap for solid two channel listening
@@hitters07 well then yes any av receiver will work for two channel in stereo mode… If you turn off the processing your left with just stereo you also can enjoy 5ch stereo too if you like… I get it just not what I’d ever consider for 2ch, it will work 100% though for sure.