Why Avr so bad for music?

[cha_indian]

since most of the AVRs are made for US and European markets and the fact that their movies don't have songs, maybe is the reason they don't play songs well

 

[cmsajith]

Following are my observations (done long time back), I could find significant SQ difference b/n an AVR in direct mode and a stereo amplifier in all the following situations,

- Onkyo 606 AVR in Direct mode feeding Optical port from DVDP
- Nakamichi RE-10 + Beresford Caiman DAC
- DIY pure silver interconnects
- Quad 22L2 speakers w/ Belden 16AWG speaker cable

The SQ differential factors could be
- DAC
- Pre-amp sections
- Amp sections

So tried the following, AVR sound improvement was observed

- Used Beresford Caiman DAC to feed both Onkyo 606 AVR and Nakamichi RE-10

Here the difference could be because of either the Preamp section / the Amp section


Later I had tried the same with the following setup:

- Emotiva UMC-1 Pre-Processor
- Acoustic Portrait PM1 Tube PreAmp
- Quad 909 Power Amp
- Beresford Caiman DAC
- VDH b/n DAC & Pre, DIY Pure Silver Interconnects for Pre to Power
- VDC speaker cables
- ATC SCM 40 and Quad 22L2 speakers

Found the SQ improvement by using an external DAC compared to the Emotiva Pre-Pro. Also found a significant difference b/n the Tube Pre and the Emotiva UMC-1 Pre.

So I am a strong believer a good stereo amp can clearly outperform an AVR for music because of the difference in the DAC/Pre/Amp section.

 

[doors666]

So I am a strong believer a good stereo amp can clearly outperform an AVR for music because of the difference in the DAC/Pre/Amp section.

whole point is to not use the dac/preamp in the avr and just use the 2 channel amplification capabilities of an avr.

 

[deba]

Most AVRs sound awful when it comes to stereo music except few expensive high end ones........Marantz does it quiet well........

 

[cmsajith]

whole point is to not use the dac/preamp in the avr and just use the 2 channel amplification capabilities of an avr.

How to bypass the pre amp in an AVR, i think no way unlike if there is something similar to preamp-poweramp jumper in a NAD amp.

 

[doors666]

How to bypass the pre amp in an AVR, i think no way unlike if there is something similar to preamp-poweramp jumper in a NAD amp.

its called external decoder inputs on yammies.

 

[cmsajith]

are you talking about the analog in? If so, it will not bypass the preamp section.

 

[rishiguru]

An amplifier's job is nothing but amplification. Everything else is an interference, to a good extent that includes even the wire and solder.

I tell you next time you upgrade to a pre-power, don't even bother to look at the pre-amplifier. Just buy the power amp and connect it directly to a CD player having a variable output, you don't even need a volume controller.

That would work very well with the right speaker and amp, if some required factors like impedance matching, output levels, input sensitivity and gain are taken care of properly.

Hope so.

But I still do not understand why audiophile boutique brands born to satisfy "analog stereo purist" audiophiles still makes pre-amplifier. After all to a purist a pre-amplifier is just another obstacle in achieving pure sound.

Now thinking from an "analog purist" point of view, I think real purist are those who use only headphones from source. To them a power amp is just like a pre-amp i.e. an obstacle in the chain. I mean to them the sound should be even more pure with headphones with no audio transmission losses an altering ever happening inside the power amp.

In the same analogy an extreme analog purist will not even bother to have audio equipment. He will attend a real concert and receive audio waves generated from the original analog source.

Am I right from this point of view? I ask this coz I am just a music lover, who loves to hear music and is least concerned about so called "ripped apart digital sound" disliked by "pure analog" audiophiles.

Actually on the contrary I like really like digital sources like CDs over analog ones like cassettes & LPs.

 

[square_wave]

For purity of sound, you need to keep things very simple. The chip amp is a purist amplifier while the avr is a multitasking gadget. For all things important, the chip amp will sound better as long as the speaker can be competently driven by the chip amp.

 

[pranavkumar]

For purity of sound, you need to keep things very simple. The chip amp is a purist amplifier while the avr is a multitasking gadget. For all things important, the chip amp will sound better as long as the speaker can be competently driven by the chip amp.

I beg to differ, a chip amp might not be the purest of amplifiers... a class A amplifier involving a three stage transistor arrangement would be regarded as a pure amplifier

 

[corElement]

Hope so.

But I still do not understand why audiophile boutique brands born to satisfy "analog stereo purist" audiophiles still makes pre-amplifier. After all to a purist a pre-amplifier is just another obstacle in achieving pure sound.

Now thinking from an "analog purist" point of view, I think real purist are those who use only headphones from source. To them a power amp is just like a pre-amp i.e. an obstacle in the chain. I mean to them the sound should be even more pure with headphones with no audio transmission losses an altering ever happening inside the power amp.

In the same analogy an extreme analog purist will not even bother to have audio equipment. He will attend a real concert and receive audio waves generated from the original analog source.

Am I right from this point of view? I ask this coz I am just a music lover, who loves to hear music and is least concerned about so called "ripped apart digital sound" disliked by "pure analog" audiophiles.

Actually on the contrary I like really like digital sources like CDs over analog ones like cassettes & LPs.

I was talking about practical comparative purity of signal. Viren Bakshi's SET 2a3 which is very highly regarded on this forum is a good example of this dedicated effort to achieve as close to a pure amplifier only amplifier. This is not about analog vs digital. They are two entirely different contexts.

I had written

technically rips the signal apart and rearranges it.

you have understood it as

"ripped apart digital sound"

I'll rewrite it in two words,

"processed sound"

Processing sound and amplifying sound are two separate functions. Do not confuse the two. The context of this thread was why an AVR is not good for music.

 

[jaudere]

are you talking about the analog in? If so, it will not bypass the preamp section.

Not for regular 2 channel analogue in but my yammy had multichnnel analogue in (front rt, lt, rear rt,lt and centre). All pre amp circuitry except volume control is bypassed. When I selected multichannel in, the AVR screen showed --- for all other settings.

 

[doors666]

I was talking about practical comparative purity of signal. Viren Bakshi's SET 2a3 which is very highly regarded on this forum is a good example of this dedicated effort to achieve as close to a pure amplifier only amplifier. This is not about analog vs digital. They are two entirely different contexts.

whats so special about it thats not there in other set amps.

if it makes you feel better I'll rewrite it in two words,

"processed sound"

Processing sound and amplifying sound are two separate functions. Do not confuse the two because that's what you are doing over and above a non existant digital vs analog debate.

You are saying processed sound. you stated this earlier also, but didnt provide any example or proof. as you state below, till that happens, it remains your opinion and not fact.

Sound processing happens everywhere, including ripping it apart. some prime examples of that are crossovers, bridges, filters, bypasses etc. try making an audio system without that. There is no digital processing happening in the AVR when you feed it with an analog signal in pure direct mode. To do that, you need to include a ADC and DAC, and being short on cash and skimping on parts avr companies wont do that for you.

Try doing a blind a/b testing between a good avr and a good amp, show me you are scoring above 90% and then claim that stereo amps sound better. without that, everything is an opinion. anyway, audio is subjective right, so who's to dispute when i say my yammy sounds better than someone's mcintosh or set amp.

The context of this thread was why an AVR is not good for music. The reasons are being discussed, preferences are a different matter to fact.

Not for regular 2 channel analogue in but my yammy had multichnnel analogue in (front rt, lt, rear rt,lt and centre). All pre amp circuitry except volume control is bypassed. When I selected multichannel in, the AVR screen showed --- for all other settings.

IIRC, mine even disables the volume control. use the two channels out of these for music.

 

[jaudere]

That is what I used to do till I got my stereo amp and sold the AVR. My change in amp was not because of AVR vs stereo argument but it was more of Marantz vs Yamaha. I like sound signature of Marantz over Yamaha and my use was 95% music 5% movies.

 

[adie]

Its good discussion flowing with lots of knowledge . I agree that people who have access to different components may go for blind tests so that some conclusions be drawn.

 

[corElement]

whats so special about it thats not there in other set amps.

There isn't anything special about it compared to other SET amps but the specialty of a minimalistic amp itself compared to a loaded avr.

You are saying processed sound. you stated this earlier also, but didnt provide any example or proof. as you state below, till that happens, it remains your opinion and not fact.

Sound processing happens everywhere, including ripping it apart. some prime examples of that are crossovers, bridges, filters, bypasses etc. try making an audio system without that. There is no digital processing happening in the AVR when you feed it with an analog signal in pure direct mode. To do that, you need to include a ADC and DAC, and being short on cash and skimping on parts avr companies wont do that for you.

Quite indeed so, you can't, and that's why I also wrote it's not practical if not impossible to make such a system in my previous post but the ASPIRATION of achieving such a goal is important to exist for new innovation.

Try doing a blind a/b testing between a good avr and a good amp, show me you are scoring above 90% and then claim that stereo amps sound better. without that, everything is an opinion. anyway, audio is subjective right, so who's to dispute when i say my yammy sounds better than someone's mcintosh or set amp.

EXACTLY, it's subjective! and in my case there was a heaven and earth difference in sound between my 1000 priceband Jamo AVR and 1000 priceband CA 840a. However the difference between the two itself does not define which one is better or worse but what the person on the listening end perceives it as. Which is why I try not to say what's better or worse but rather stick to the core basic principal whichever applies for staying as close to the original signal as possible. This is purely for theory as practically having such a setup is not possible for everyone.

 

[Santy]

I tell you next time you upgrade to a pre-power, don't even bother to look at the pre-amplifier. Just buy the power amp and connect it directly to a CD player having a variable output, you don't even need a volume controller.

Thus you will be having a more direct contact from the source to the loudspeaker saving you from all the audio signal losses that happens while it is passing through the pre-amplifer circuits and keep the signal more "pure" as per you liking. And what is the need of bass, treble controls as it is going fill impurities in the original audio signal. I am sure you will be happy with the said combo.

Or you may DIY your CA amp and rip the pre-amp section apart.

Hope you all the best.:clapping:

That's one great piece of an advice.

Just to be a little more elaborate, can you please tell us what's the difference between variable output and volume control?

Have you ever connected a source directly to a power amp before? Atleast once?

Can you tell us what you call that
component of some CD players which is responsible for variable output?

How you are you so sure that preamps exists in an audio system with no function whatsoever other than degrading the sound, so much so that removing it will give better quality sound?

Will look forward to your explanation for our knowledge.

 

[doors666]

EXACTLY, it's subjective! and in my case there was a heaven and earth difference in sound between my 1000 priceband Jamo AVR and 1000 priceband CA 840a. However the difference between the two itself does not define which one is better or worse but what the person on the listening end perceives it as. Which is why I try not to say what's better or worse but rather stick to the core basic principal whichever applies for staying as close to the original signal as possible. This is purely for theory as practically having such a setup is not possible for everyone.

I am not sure which avr you tried, jamo doesnt make their own avrs as far as i know, ealier they used to just rebadge denon avrs. whats the scene now. CA amps arent supposed to be all that great either, frequent quality issues also it seems.

Heaven and earth, day and night differences get touted too often and have lost all meaning. people usually claim that and then fail to identify the component in a blind test. Even if identification happens correctly, its due to clear differences in sound signature

 

[cmsajith]

Not for regular 2 channel analogue in but my yammy had multichnnel analogue in (front rt, lt, rear rt,lt and centre). All pre amp circuitry except volume control is bypassed. When I selected multichannel in, the AVR screen showed --- for all other settings.

How did you find the 5.1 analog in bypass the preamp circuitry, Is it mentioned anywhere in the manual, if so they should have definitely mentioned about the power amp params like input sensitivity, input impedance etc. As far as I know none of the multichannel AVRs are bypassing the preamp (bypassing the processing is different), if they allow and if anybody connects a device doesnt match with the impedance and the other reqd params of a power amp, it will not work or even it can damage the connecting device or the amp. (Correct me if I am wrong)

 

[square_wave]

I beg to differ, a chip amp might not be the purest of amplifiers... a class A amplifier involving a three stage transistor arrangement would be regarded as a pure amplifier

There are many stellar examples of purist designs using chips.
DIY Chip Amplifier Kits, PCB's, Components and Information.

There are many more like this.

A well designed class A amp is alo a purist design.

On a related note, the moment you remove all unnecessary design elements and paths from an amplifier, the sound will improve considerably.