A/v Reciever Or Seperates. Help

[69 camaro SS]

Hey everybody, I love all the info a person can get from here. I am in a delema. I am in the market for a new a/v reciever. Or seperate pieces, I like the idea of seperate stuff but dont know where to even begin with amps and tuners. I have researched recievers now , And I know what I will get If I go that way. I really like the idea of seperate pieces, I do play movies alot , Having 3 kids . I also love to sit back when noone is around and blow my brains out on some good music. Someone please point me in a good direction on amp pre amp stuff. HELP PLEASE... A tunner isnt real important

[Woochifer]

Depending on your budget, why not do both? You could get the multichannel receiver and use it as a preamp for two-channel playback by adding an outboard two-channel amp, while using the receiver to drive the surrounds and/or center speaker. Just make sure that you choose a receiver that has multichannel preouts, so that you can add additional amplifiers later on, should you choose to do so. Almost any receiver past the $500 price point will include multichannel preouts.

Sir Terrence, kexodusc and others on the board have their systems setup with an AV receiver as the preamp/processor, and hooked up to outboard amplifiers. Decent two-channel amps don't have to cost a lot, and give you a lot of flexibility for future upgrades. Multichannel separates typically start in the $4k+ range, so going with a dedicated processor and five-channel amp might be prohibitive for your budget.

[69 camaro SS]

I have thought about that. So I have a multichannel reciever in mind , But know I need some advice on the pre amp? Is that what Iwould be looking for? It is possible to pick up at a later date. I would like some ideas on quality names to look for. I will probally look on line to pick one up. By the way , My main speakers areklipsch KG 3.2

[Woochifer]

I have thought about that. So I have a multichannel reciever in mind , But know I need some advice on the pre amp? Is that what Iwould be looking for? It is possible to pick up at a later date. I would like some ideas on quality names to look for. I will probally look on line to pick one up. By the way , My main speakers areklipsch KG 3.2

Since you're going the multichannel home theater route, you should start with a decent midlevel receiver that has preouts (so that you can add outboard amplfiers for at least the two main speakers), and some kind of direct mode or analog bypass that bypasses the digital processing circuitry on two-channel playback. Like I said, you can use the receiver as the preamp if you want to add a two-channel outboard amplifier. You can always upgrade to a dedicated processor and add any additional outboard amplifiers later on. Any model on the market right now should have all of the decoding capability that you would need, but you should look out for HDMI switching if you're starting up your HT system from the beginning. Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo, Marantz, Pioneer, harman/kardon, Rotel, Arcam, and NAD are some of more frequently recommended receivers on this board.

[kexodusc]

Hi 69 Camaro SS,

Do you have a budget in mind?

I like Woochifer's suggestion above about running an A/V receiver with amplifiers.
Just so there's no confusion, I'm going to write what we're referring to when we name all these pieces of electronics.
A/V receiver - an all-in-one box that contains an internal digital processor, amplifier, tuner, pre-amp/switching device that will accept inputs from CD/DVD players etc, and send power to speakers. These also have video inputs (hence the V in a/v) for flexibility. This is the "nervous system" of your home theater.

Amplifier (separate) - accepts signal from pre-amp or receiver (voltage) and "amplifies" it.

pre-amp (separate) - accepts the special low signal from source component (cd or dvd player for example) and amplifies it enough to send to an amplifier...pre-amp was the best name they could come up with I guess. Receivers do this stage internally.

Processor or "pre-processor" is an a/v pre-amp with no ampfication stage that sends power to speakers, so an amp would be needed.

You generally see separates (amp and pre-amp) in higher end 2-channel stereo systems. For home theaters, preamp/processors and separate amps are the equivalent, but cost alot more than just a receiver.

Which is why receivers are so great, they do everything pretty well for not a lot of money.

As Wooch mentioned, I run an A/V receiver connected to external power amplifiers (separates) for added power above what my receiver can do. I chose this method because separate pre-amp/processors for Home Theater (that decode dolby digital, DTS, have video inputs, etc) are still quite costly and often provide fewer features. For me they didn't have as much value.

I recommend starting off with a good a/v receiver (depending on your budget of course). If you find the receiver isn't sufficient at making your speakers play movies and music loud enough (and clear enough) then you can add amplifiers later.

Truth is most people will be just fine with an a/v receiver driving their speakers. They make them pretty powerful.

Hope this helps (and didn't bore you).

[accastil]

i agree with both of them. if you are going to set up a system for both music and HT, make use of an AV receiver as preamp/processor and buy a separate stereo power amp to boost your front speakers.let your receiver power up your center and effect speakers while the separate power amp make the magic for your mains/fronts. may i also advise that you choose a mono bridgeable stereo amp for a better flexibility in future upgrades. once ready for an upgrade, you may buy another identical power amp so that each of your 2 fronts will have 1 each or make use of your old one to power the center channel and the new one to power your mains. reputable brands would be HK, Marantz, Rotel, B&K...these are good for both music and HT. on the other hand, Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo may be lacking some musicality but very good also in HT.

[kexodusc]

Having owned Marantz, H/K and Yamaha receivers, I can say with authority that you won't find one anymore lacking in "musicality" than the other, assuming they're reasonably close in price/features. In fact, the sonic differences are so minute as to be indistinguishable at times (especially between Marantz and Yamaha, though that wasnt' always the case). H/K sounds a bit warmer to me, and I stress "a bit", but it's not my cup of tea. Doesn't sound real to my ears, maybe to other ears.
If you did run external amps off these receivers, the differences would be further diminished. Just food for thought.
Rotel is a good step up on these brands IMO, but you'll pay for it. Haven't heard any B&K receivers.

[L.J.]

Hmm....my Denon has all the "musicality" for my needs. Sounds good to me.

[GMichael]

Aren't you guys tired of beating this dead horse? He's not going to believe us no matter what we say or what proof we have. It's like the setting of the sun. It's going to happen no matter what. Just let it happen.

[L.J.]

Aren't you guys tired of beating this dead horse?

No, I spend more time listen' to my music instead of my Denon ;)

[GMichael]

No, I spend more time listen' to my music instead of my Denon ;)

I've tried listening to just my Yammie. But it doesn't seem to make any sound without the speakers. Go figure.