Thread: Audio Pre/Pro??

Just wondering, since I'm not an audio specialist, is there something like a DVDO Duo for audio, that you'd use to make your rcvr even better. Im sure there are audio pre/pro's, just dont know anything about em, and what they would do for the audio signal.

After doing a little reading, and understanding all-in-one (rcvr) vs amp and decoder, one would wonder "why?". Not exactly what I thought it was, so it'd seem, IMO, unless you have some high end gear, just buying a high quality rcvr with good processing and a good amp, would be the way to go. I really like Pioneers SC37, but I just dont think I need an audio upgrade. If anything, Id upgrade my sub.

I don't think there's a lot of audio upgrade to be had in normal HT-oriented gear. Certainly, there are audiophile companies who make HT avrs and separates, like NAD, Roksan, Meridian, Krell, Classe, etc., but, aside from NAD, those get extremely pricey.

Better speakers are nearly always the best and easiest way to upgrade audio, so, yeah, I think you're on the right track.

Yeah, I dont really see it. I mean if I was making up ways to blow money, OK. But no thanks, little more than I need, and not quite the same role as a video pre/pro.

HDMI is killing the high end audio products.. they cant keep up and who wants to buy flagship 6-7 grand receivers every year when HDMI xxxx.xxxx comes out. These companied need to spend millions to get HDMI sort of working.. they cant do it. Companies like Parasound have dropped the next line for such reasons.

Hi speedking,

Originally Posted by speedking

They still rule the roost...but the gap is so close now it takes a Donald Trump like bankroll to really put distance between a high end recevier/amp...and the ultra expensive separates....

as a former owner of an integrated receiver that wasn't exactly cheap, I beg to differ. It is true, like you said, that nowdays high end separates have increased in price so much it takes a tycoon to afford them*, but if you pick the right ones they'll really make a whole lot of difference in your listening experience. You cite Home Theater Mag's review of Rotel separates as an example. Rotel is, in my opinion, a mid-tier brand that doesn't offer much compared to more mainstream brands like Denon or Marantz. I can't speak for their newer class D devices but I know I don't like the sound of class D, so that's easy math for me to do. You can get better stuff than Rotel for $5000 (and I'm talking both pre/pro and poweramp).

I respectfully disagree with your statement "To get closer to a high end audio setup without going to separates...you find a receiver that has a clean power source...and invest more money in speakers...". Speakers are indeed vital to an audio setup, but also something you supposedly get right the first time around. Unless you made a false step in your unexperienced days and bought speakers you ended up not liking that much, they should be a fairly final investment: once you have what you like, it's time to make it sound good by means of a good amplification. I've heard (and owned) quite a handful of integrated AVRs and never have I witnessed one that could come even close to my NAD separates (let alone my Krells or those of my friends). And trust me when I say I'm no tycoon - I'm not poor either, that much is obvious, *but it's really a matter of knowing what and where to look for. That, and some good old having friends in all the right places, if I may quote the Manchester Orchestra on this

Originally Posted by speedking

In your case...if you are going to get into DVD Audio and SACD...you need to add 2 speakers...you are losing too much content by keeping it at 3.1...5.1 is a must..IMO...

I concur to the importance of surround sound: finalizing your speakers' layout should be the first thing.

Originally Posted by speedking

when you look at the amps in the high end Denons and Pioneers...it's a hard sell to anyone that's not a purist to buy separates that cost much more..

It depends. If you heard a pair of Krells, I personally guarantee you that you wouldn't think of Denon as "sounding good" any longer

Originally Posted by spdntrxi

HDMI is killing the high end audio products.. they cant keep up and who wants to buy flagship 6-7 grand receivers every year when HDMI xxxx.xxxx comes out.

I agree. In fact, this is something I've never liked about the mainstream market: they come up with a new, appealing, and often useless knick-knack every year to force buyers to upgrade their stuff, then you compare a new HDMI 1.3/1.4 AVR to an older, non-HDMI high end pre/pro and find out the latter performs a lot better with non-HD audio than the newer receiver does with HD audio.

Between this, and the SACD thread, I've come to the realization I'm just not an audio guy. Don't get me wrong, I can tell the difference between a DVD with 5.1, and a BR with DTS Master, but above that, I really lost interest. I look at the cost of the higher end audio, and it just does not suit me, because going from my $1700 3.1 system, so say a $15k 5.1 system, would not give me that much more enjoyment. It's not that I'm saying it would not sound better, it's just that I can't see spending that kinda money for audio, when I'm already happy.

But different strokes for different folks. I'd compare it to how speed says Im picky about displays and video. Maybe if I was more into audio, and had worked with it more, Id be more picky, but Im not. I'm actually glad Im not as anal about audio as I am video, because my bank account would be unhappy. I have to wonder if I should leave it alone or risk developing another bad habit

Originally Posted by elwaylite

I look at the cost of the higher end audio, and it just does not suit me, because going from my $1700 3.1 system, so say a $15k 5.1 system, would not give me that much more enjoyment. It's not that I'm saying it would not sound better, it's just that I can't see spending that kinda money for audio, when I'm already happy.

I can totally understand your point, elwaylite. It's the same for me when it comes to video, to an extent. Even if I had deals tantamount to robbery on most of my gear, I have still spent a lot for it and I realize that's not something everyone would necessarily be interested in or deem worthwhile. It just does it for me

Give me a few more years, Ill prob start blowing money on audio crap too. I just moved up to this system, in early 2009, so Ive not had good audio for long.

Originally Posted by elwaylite

Give me a few more years, Ill prob start blowing money on audio crap too. I just moved up to this system, in early 2009, so Ive not had good audio for long.

Good audio does not have to be that expensive.. my 2 channel system consisted of klipsch Lascala's ($1300) and used Sony SACD player I got off ebay ($20) and a vintage Scott 233 tube amp. ($200) In fact it is better then the 2 channel stereo I am getting from my KL-650's and Denon A100. There where things I like about the Scott tube amp more then say a McIntosh tube amp I had... and the Scott can do a center channel as well...really cool for something from the early 60's.

I will probably go pre/pro one of these days..hoping that this HDMI/HDCP stuff settles down. I just ordered a large external amp...so when that day comes I will be ready...XLR cables already in possession.