| Author |
Thread: Who said don't buy a reciever for music? |
    
Gold Member Username: My_rantz
Australia
Post Number: 2237
Registered: Nov-05
|
| Posted on Sunday, June 14, 2009 - 06:20 pm: |
|
It is common practice here to criticise recievers for a music system. Here is one that may be an exception - if your wallet is fat enough.
http://www.arcam.co.uk/_ugc/file/avr600wsr-web.pdf |
|
|
|
Gold Member Username: Artk
Albany,
Oregon
USA
Post Number: 9883
Registered: Feb-05
|
| Posted on Sunday, June 14, 2009 - 06:40 pm: |
|
Arcam has long been an exception for most of us. However they are usually so expensive that buying a good integrated is costs. The Arcam receivers I've listened to were very good with music. |
Gold Member Username: Dmitchell
Ottawa,
Ontario
Canada
Post Number: 2663
Registered: Feb-07
|
| Posted on Sunday, June 14, 2009 - 07:26 pm: |
|
My dealer sells Arcam stuff. I've always been pretty impressed with the sound and build quality.
What's the sticker price on one of those M.R.? |
Gold Member Username: My_rantz
Australia
Post Number: 2238
Registered: Nov-05
|
| Posted on Sunday, June 14, 2009 - 07:33 pm: |
|
I think around 5 grand US. It's about 8 here.
Way out of my league. |
Platinum Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 12635
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Sunday, June 14, 2009 - 07:34 pm: |
|
I look twice when I see an AR300 or 350 on the block, for sure. |
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10
Post Number: 2567
Registered: Jun-07
|
| Posted on Sunday, June 14, 2009 - 08:28 pm: |
|
Yup, Arcam make some of the best sounding AVR's with an Music first philosophy. |
Platinum Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 12640
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Sunday, June 14, 2009 - 09:36 pm: |
|
How dear in the UK???
Frank?! |
Platinum Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 12641
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Sunday, June 14, 2009 - 10:01 pm: |
|
some of the prices are absolutely astounding! |
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25
Dayton,
Ohio
United States
Post Number: 2109
Registered: Jun-05
|
| Posted on Monday, June 15, 2009 - 07:44 pm: |
|
I agree Arcams AVR's sound very good,but even with their 2-channel stuff they sound somewhat polite and kind of light in the bass. |
Gold Member Username: Stu_pitt
Irvington,
New York
USA
Post Number: 3335
Registered: May-05
|
| Posted on Monday, June 15, 2009 - 08:49 pm: |
|
Here's what seems to be 2 great stereo receivers...
http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=MDMD209
http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=MDMD309
Their last receiver was co-developed with Simaudio. Not sure if these are as well. |
Gold Member Username: Dmitchell
Ottawa,
Ontario
Canada
Post Number: 2668
Registered: Feb-07
|
| Posted on Monday, June 15, 2009 - 08:52 pm: |
|
Man, those are nice looking! |
Gold Member Username: My_rantz
Australia
Post Number: 2241
Registered: Nov-05
|
| Posted on Monday, June 15, 2009 - 09:53 pm: |
|
Yeah, I've seen their stuff before (on-line) and have been very impressed. |
Gold Member Username: Artk
Albany,
Oregon
USA
Post Number: 9896
Registered: Feb-05
|
| Posted on Monday, June 15, 2009 - 10:17 pm: |
|
I've had the pleasure of using one of those Magnum Dynalab receivers (a generation before the ones pictured). They sound very nice. Much more like a very good integrated amps. It was driving ProAc's and Spendor's. |
Gold Member Username: Frank_abela
Berkshire
UK
Post Number: 3664
Registered: Sep-04
|
| Posted on Monday, June 22, 2009 - 02:35 pm: |
|
The Arcam costs £3500 in the UK so $5k is about right. I disagree with Tawaun about Arcam bass. If anything, I think that Arcam have traditionally had too much bass and have only started to remove that extra cloying warmth for a more sensible bass presentation. But then, you yanks love your fat bass.
The AVR600 is an excellent machine, no question (yes, we have one in the shop). Would I spend my money that way, possibly not. I'd probably go for a cheaper AV receiver such as an Onkyo TX-SR876 with a dedicated 2-channel amplifier to drive the front speakers for pure analogue. But anyone not able to spare the 3 shelves and with that kind of budget would be a fool not to at least consider the Arcam. I still think it's an expensive proposition in comparison to the competition, but musically it's certainly one of the contenders for 'best in its category'.
Frank. |
Gold Member Username: Exerciseguy
Brooklyn,
NY
United States
Post Number: 2720
Registered: Oct-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, June 25, 2009 - 08:06 am: |
|
I've never had a problem with receivers for music  |
Gold Member Username: Petergalbraith
Canada
Post Number: 2219
Registered: Feb-04
|
| Posted on Monday, August 10, 2009 - 09:23 am: |
|
Me neither. I use an AVR for music as well as HT (hk avr-325 and soon an hk avr-254). As long as the speaker isn't too much of a wild load, and then just use the pre-outs with an external amp. Not very audiophile of me, I know. |
Platinum Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 13143
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Monday, August 10, 2009 - 11:14 am: |
|
A receiver serves it's purpose, and there are some good ones out there, to be sure.
The beakdown/cost/necissity factor comes in.
If I still ran a 5.1, I would not do it with amps, just a receiver. 4000$? Nope. |
Gold Member Username: Frank_abela
Berkshire
UK
Post Number: 3770
Registered: Sep-04
|
| Posted on Monday, August 10, 2009 - 11:18 am: |
|
Most people compare multichannel receivers to like-priced 2-channel amplifiers. In that situation, it seems reasonable that the similarly priced 2-channel unit will sound better since you've spent a lot more money per component and you've been able to spend more R&D hours on each section of the unit. By spreading the cost between 78 channels of power and a geometric rise in complexity, you've diluted the value of each section.
Even if you compared cheaper stereon units to the AV receivers, the very complexity of the system makes it much harder to control noise and heat, optimise pathways for sonics etc. The AV receiver is the jack of all trades and master of none. A trade-off has to occur, even at the AV high end. It's life.
This doesn't mean all AV receivers are rubbish, just that they are more compromised than dedicated 2-channel solutions. So, if someone mentions that music is important to them, it makes a lot more sense to split the solution two ways, a cheaper AV receiver and separate 2-channel amplifier for music replay, preferably with dedicated CD player/turntable, but not many people will countenance two mplifier boxes, let alone the multiple silver disc spinners (DVD/BD box and separate CD player). |
Platinum Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 13170
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 - 05:39 pm: |
|
Single guys can do that 
Lets face it, 98% of people own and enjoy receivers, it is just the 'fringe' music hobbyists that get nose deep in the system.
So live and let live. Or live and let die, on vinyl(good soundtrack). |
Platinum Member Username: Artk
Albany,
Oregon
USA
Post Number: 10522
Registered: Feb-05
|
| Posted on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 - 05:58 pm: |
|
Some married guys can do it to... |
Gold Member Username: Exerciseguy
Brooklyn,
NY
United States
Post Number: 2810
Registered: Oct-04
|
| Posted on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 - 06:03 pm: |
|
...and some can't. |
Platinum Member Username: Artk
Albany,
Oregon
USA
Post Number: 10526
Registered: Feb-05
|
| Posted on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 - 07:15 pm: |
|
So true Chris. |
Platinum Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 13180
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 - 09:13 pm: |
|
First point taken, Art.
That's my only strong suit, so I run with it, LOL!
A decent receiver/speaker setup is going to sound good to 98% of the folks out there. |
Gold Member Username: My_rantz
Australia
Post Number: 2397
Registered: Nov-05
|
| Posted on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 - 10:20 pm: |
|
Yeah, unfortunately the other 2% are deaf.
 |
Gold Member Username: Gavdawg
Albany,
New York
Post Number: 1298
Registered: Nov-06
|
| Posted on Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 02:42 pm: |
|
the B&K receiver I heard a couple of years ago sounded great. I was really pleased with it. Granted, it was quite expensive.
Here is the latest version on the B&K website.
http://www.bkcomp.com/products/home-theatre/?tx_ttproducts_pi1[backPID]=36&tx_ttproducts_pi1[product]=35&tx_ttproducts_pi1[cat]=3&cHash=7317c9 27a4 |
Platinum Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 13190
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 03:54 pm: |
|
Still great B&K stuff around. |
Gold Member Username: Frank_abela
Berkshire
UK
Post Number: 3781
Registered: Sep-04
|
| Posted on Friday, August 14, 2009 - 11:21 am: |
|
A decent receiver/speaker setup is going to sound good to 98% of the folks out there.
What's worse, 80% of those 98% won't discern a difference between your beuatifully put together separates system and their $800 stack.
And that really saddens me... |
Platinum Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 13202
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Friday, August 14, 2009 - 03:10 pm: |
|
98% of the time... |
