PreAmp Versus Receiver

Printable View

  • 07-23-2006, 02:41 AM
    EdwardGein
    PreAmp Versus Receiver
    Someone on another board stated that almost all PreAmp's produce better sound then an A/V Receiver for CDs. Does anyone concur or disagree with this & why?
  • 07-23-2006, 03:20 AM
    kexodusc
    Not as easy as that...I would say at a given price point, a receiver won't sound as well as a pre-amp...but the differences often aren't as big as you'd think for digital signals. Analog, expecially phono, isn't a receiver's strong point. A lot of good receivers use the same componentry as the companies dedicated pre-amp line-up though, and sound every bit as good. Genenerally that's not your typical entry level receiver from Denon, Yamaha, H/K, Pioneer, etc, though.

    A $300-$400 pre-amp would sound better than $300 receiver - but a $1000 receiver - not as clear cut, I in my experience.

    Wasn't very long ago that receivers were mostly analog, and the pre-amp stages in them were pretty mediocre though -
  • 07-23-2006, 09:00 AM
    N. Abstentia
    I think that's definitely true, as I went from a $1500 high end Onkyo receiver to the Outlaw Audio preamp with amazing results. And honestly, since I have Paradigm Active speakers I think other people would gain a lot more than I did by going the pre/pro route since the amps for my front channel did not change. If you go from powering your speakers with a receiver to powering them with a big dedicated amp the results can be quite stunning. I had actually gotten away from using the receivers amps years ago when I got a 3-channel Rotel amp for the center and surrounds. When all those components...especially an amp..has to be crammed in a small receiver chassis there will be compromises. The power supply is the first thing to be downgraded.

    Pick up a so-called 100x5 receiver. Now pick up a good dedicated 100x5 amp..notice the amp is much much bigger and twice as heavy? Notice the power supply is twice as big? Many of them even have two or three toroids to supply power. A receiver just cant' do that.

    Now that being said, the difference is not going to be huge for everyone...Ed, you listening? With your limitations of your Orb speakers and the bigger limitation of living in an apartment and not being able to open up the volume I doubt you would gain anything.

    Use that money to upgrade your speakers first. You keep looking to improve your sound so you're obviously not happy...yet you seem to be strangely attached to those tiny Orb speakers which should be the obvious upgrade. After upgrading speakers, get a dedicated amp and use your receiver as a preamp. More power = cleaner sound. Once you have the amp you can upgrade to a preamp at a later time.
  • 07-23-2006, 09:33 AM
    bobsticks
    Why Kexo, NAbby...
    ...fancy finding you characters in the same place. Quick question on topic, what would be some specific models I should test drive. I am woefully uninformed about preamps.
    The application would include both two-channel and surround, hi-rez formats, and everything but the kitchen sink. Ultimately, I want to be looking at 5.1 with Martin Logans all the way around.HT would be icing on the cake, but I'm mostly concerned with multi-channel playback without two-channel compromise.
    Further, I suppose I should ask one of those difficult questions--as difficult as it is to put into words, what will I gain musically by moving up the pre/pro foodchain?

    Thanks
  • 07-23-2006, 10:41 AM
    superpanavision70mm
    A receiver certainly has limitations, but also is a great compact way of utilizing and centralizing alot of things. For example, you can have your components plugged in, plus do 5.1 analog in or digital in and also in most cases use the receiver as a hub for your video signal as well. Then you also have tuner capabilities etc. I have found that the best bet for my money was to keep my receiver and use the pre-outs to connect amplifiers to power my front towers and my surrounds. This gives me more control and more power, but not losing my receiver, which essentially is acting like a pre-amp. You could easily connect your receiver to a 5 channel amp at 100w/channel and get the best of both worlds....or get some stereo amps and segment your speakers so that you are using 1 stereo amp for your front left and right, 1 stereo amp for your surrounds, and then bridge the stereo amp for your center channel.

    Just a thought....
  • 07-23-2006, 11:27 AM
    bobsticks
    Hey S7
    Actually, the receiver to amp scenario is precisely what I'm doing now. I was rather clumsily inquiring for a starting point for moving to the next level. I have some experience with amps, but I was curious as to what physical or technological properties a preamp had that create sonic differences. Further, I was wondering what a high-end pre/pro would add to my experience. Thanks though.

    Cheers
  • 07-23-2006, 12:37 PM
    drseid
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by EdwardGein
    Someone on another board stated that almost all PreAmp's produce better sound then an A/V Receiver for CDs. Does anyone concur or disagree with this & why?

    Didn't work that way for me...

    I initially switched from a Marantz SR-7400 receiver that I was using as a pre/pro ($800 at the time) to a similarly priced Outlaw 950 dedicated Pre/Pro, and it was a *very* bad decision on my part. The Marantz was far superior on my speakers at least. I had to dump the 950 very quickly (and I really wanted to like it as the Outlaw folks are super nice guys). That said, I then switched to a much more expensive Cary pre/pro (that I still use) and *that* was much better than the Marantz, but it cost over 3 times as much so it *should*.

    Bottom line is that just like any other audio component, not all pre/pros will sound better than all receivers. It depends on the rest of the components in the chain, and the specific pre/pro and receiver in question.

    ---Dave
  • 07-23-2006, 04:23 PM
    N. Abstentia
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bobsticks
    ...fancy finding you characters in the same place. Quick question on topic, what would be some specific models I should test drive. I am woefully uninformed about preamps.
    Further, I suppose I should ask one of those difficult questions--as difficult as it is to put into words, what will I gain musically by moving up the pre/pro foodchain?

    Thanks

    Start with the Outlaw 990 and move your way up. The 990 is priced at $1100 which I personally feel is where a mid/high end pre/pro should be priced. I looked into $3000 units from Anthem, Arcam, Adcom, (and other companies that didn't start with A) and kept going back to the Outlaw because the others lacked features that I needed.

    As far as what you will gain..that's hard to explain in words. You'll obviously gain higher quality components, better features, and overall better build quality but of course that does not mean better sound. Compared to my Onkyo (which was NO slouch) the Outlaw gave me better dynamics and 'more articulate' sound. Music just breathed a little more. I had outgrown my receiver so all this was a bonus as I would have kept the Outlaw even if it sounded the same. They give you a 30 day trial.
  • 07-23-2006, 04:28 PM
    bobsticks
    Good evening Dave,
    Your experience certainly speaks toward the validity of system synergy, a concept in which I myself am a proponent. If I may press the second point, however, what is it about the Cary that makes it "better"? In theory (yeah,yeah, I know) a preamp should be silent, shouldn't it? I'm wondering what sonic results were derived from the Cary that were absent when previous pre/pro units were in use.

    Thanks
  • 07-24-2006, 01:04 AM
    drseid
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bobsticks
    Good evening Dave,
    Your experience certainly speaks toward the validity of system synergy, a concept in which I myself am a proponent. If I may press the second point, however, what is it about the Cary that makes it "better"? In theory (yeah,yeah, I know) a preamp should be silent, shouldn't it? I'm wondering what sonic results were derived from the Cary that were absent when previous pre/pro units were in use.

    Thanks

    The truth is it is in a completely different league than the other two I tried. In direct comparison to the Outlaw, the biggest difference was in listening to 2 channel through its analogue bypass. The Outlaw changed the nature of the music to the point I did not want to listen to it, while the Cary seemed to pass through the signal as it was intended. With the Outlaw, I felt the sound was being "tampered with" so to speak. My speakers tend to be somewhat finicky and can reveal electronics quite readily... The Outlaws just were not a good fit I guess. I should mention I tried switching to some Outlaw Monoblocks to work with the 950 to see if that improved things, but my Tylers did not like those either, unfortunately.

    Other improvements were less important to me, but significant... The Cary had better flexability as to connections, sound options with its newer processor, better build quality and had a better remote. The two channel sound was what made me keep it though. It has the best performance in 2 channel I have heard to date from a pre/pro on my speakers in that respect. Other aspects I have found better elsewhere, but 2 channel music is my top priority.

    As for the Marantz...

    I should point out it was excellent as a pre/pro and I could have easily lived with it long-term in that fashion. It did two-channel quite well, and it had *plenty* of sound options and connections for HT use. The remote on the Marantz was/is killer, and I still use it on the rest of my gear even though the receiver is out of my audio chain. The Cary is better in two-channel, but certainly the Marantz is the better value. It all came down to the two channel performance of the Cary (again, while less noticable than on the Outlaw, it again passed on the music to my amp in cleaner fashion without adding its own signature to the sound) -- that was the difference, but it was a costly decision dollar-wise.

    ---Dave
  • 07-24-2006, 01:20 AM
    bobsticks
    Mornin' & where's the coffee?
    Thanks for the specifics guys, at least I know where to start...

    Cheers