Why Avr so bad for music?

[tirthankar]

I've noticed live performances normally have very poor sonics, too much ambient noise and reflection along with non ideal sitting positions.

Yes, I agree that for some genres where electronic amplification is a major part of the performance, like trance, metal, rock or pop.. live performances have many issues which are overtaken in a personal stereo.
But for more acoustic or softer music like classical, jazz or folk, live performances can be un amplified, and they have and intimacy or immediacy which can be difficult to reproduce in a stereo.

sorry I have not read the entire thread. But I am experiencing that my opinion that AVRs are worse than stereo amps has changed. It was a WRONG setting that was screwing the soundstage and vocals were not coming dead center. I think if you have a good AVR, stereo amp is not of much use, at least in the case of NAD T785

I agree, that when you go above a certain threshold, AVRs can give sound quality to rival stereo amps. But if I concentrate on two channel music only, for the same amount of money.. wont you agree that the sonic benefits of a quality stereo amp will exceed that of an avr at any level?
For example, the NAD T875 costs around 4000USD, I think. Used for two channel music, for 4000 USD.. will you say that there are stereo amplifiers which can beat it any day?

 

[doors666]

Most of the additional circuitry of an AVR can be switched off for music. use only power amp inside. If you dont do this, dont compare. And dont post here as your setup is less than optimal and your opinion counts for didley squat.

BTW, power amps make the least amount of difference in an audio chain. Speakers, source, dac, preamp, lp etc make more difference than a power amp. Dont forget, the ideal amp is a wire with gain. If you disagree, tell me which component makes less difference than a power amp. i am not counting cables as they dont make a difference.

I draw two conclusions from people that say that at the same price point an AVR cannot beat a stereo amp.

1. A cheaper design (or a design with lower number of components) can not be better than more expensive designs.

2. quality of parts is more important than a design.

If and only if the above statements are true can you say that an avr at the same price point cant beat a stereo amp. Otherwise you would've said lets compare and decide which one is better.

an avr is more value for money, a stereo amp has much larger profit margin. Usually stereo amp guys have no patents money to pay also, while avrs have tons for hdmi, dolby, hd audio etc. Considering the parts being used, most of the stereo amp companies are blatantly ripping you off.

Its actually possible to make an amplifier board per channel for less than Rs500 and it will sound pretty decent.

Please open your stereo amps and see the innards, you will be shocked to find whats inside. what the hell did i pay so much of money for. Open an AVR and you wont get that feeling.

 

[jaudere]

Doors, I am not blindly against AVR like some people here but I won't agree to the last sentence. A 'feeling' that AVR looka great inside does not necessarily mean it is IN FACT good.This is exactly like what many patients feel. A doctor giving a lot of medicines(half of which are unnecessary) is supposed to be very good , while the doctor giving only essential medicines is supposed to be low on knowledge. A doctor confidentl saying 'nothing wrong with your brain' in a case of headache is not good while a doctor doing CT+MRI for simple headache is great. So what one 'feels' may not be FACT. AVR looks extremely complicated from inside as compared to simple stereo amp. Only an expert can tell what is needed and what is unncesessary (like only another good doctor can judge whether all tests or medicines are really necessary or no). One does not pay for level of complicated/sophisticated circuit. One pays for the final sound quality. If one looks at an amp where soldeing is done point to point rather than using PCB, the look (at least to my eyes) is ghastly. However, I have read experts prefering point to point soldering over PCB and as along as that sounds better, the looks don't have significance.

 

[square_wave]

Looks like the thread is slowly progressing into a vicious mud slinging match. I advice the participants to retrace a few steps and understand what the discussion is all about.

1. The discussion is not to degrade avrs.
2. It is not to propound any particular philosophy

The discussion is about some fundamental engineering realities. This can easily be verified if one is very serious about it.

 

[manoj.p]

So what one 'feels' may not be FACT.

Now that I totally agree with.

A lot that gets thrown around like noise, distortion, purity in audio world is full "Audiophile" grade. Most of is with feelings and not facts.

An amplifier does not change the sound drastically. It's job is to get whatever signal its got and just multiply it because speaker needs more of that current. It does not know that it has to sound musical or what not. It just treats it as electronic signal. Now, that does not stop some amp manufacturers playing with some electronic filters, like rolling off some frequencies. But it still can't do much to change the sound signature and it shouldn't. It should be neutral. If an amp causes coloring and someone prefers it, its okay. That's a preference. Just don't push it as Reference.

Where the amps make difference is-

• Distortion: - This is already quite low. Most modern amps are rated at 0.08% THD or so. That's very minor and cannot be detected in real life listening.
• Power rating: - Power rating is watts/channel and has very little bearing on sound. It needs very less power to drive speakers. Although higher power rating does provide the dynamic bandwidth and headroom incase sudden boost is needed.

Most AVR's have to drive 5 channels simultaneously with their limited power. But if driven with two channels only, then there is not much difference.

Many times people claim they hear details in the sound by change of amps. It is possible those details are placebo effect. It can only be reflected in a blind test. Those details also could the distortion. Many perceive the distortion as extra details.

There are lots of factors which can effect the sound. But honestly, pre-amp, amp and cable is the least. The biggest device that causes the distortion and noise in the sound chain is the speaker itself. That's the device which will alter the sound totally. The next thing that will have the effect on sound is the listening room itself. The reflections, corners, material in the room, listening position will alter the sound so much. The purists should first focus on these two before even thinking about difference between amps/receivers/power cords/interconnects etc. And they should all be listening to calibrated setups, with full flat frequency curve at listening position. But most of their exotic speakers have colored signatures. They should all be listening to studio monitors.

No offense to anyone.

 

[square_wave]

An amplifier is a purist design just like the body of a high quality SLR. A high quality SLR body, in the hands of an erudite photographer, the possibilities are endless. But if you hand him an all in one point and shoot, he will be seriously handicapped.

But it all depends on whose hands the camera is !

 

[manoj.p]

An amplifier is a purist design just like the body of a high quality SLR. A high quality SLR body, in the hands of an erudite photographer, the possibilities are endless. But if you hand him an all in one point and shoot, he will be seriously handicapped.

Analogy is not correct. A Purist amplifier design does not give the end user much tweaking capability. There is no way to change its output, like a point and shoot. An SLR on other hand, allows the user change focus, metering, sport metering vs matrix, bracketing, white compensation, depth of field, Aperture control, shutter speed.
A good body SLR can be compared with a Good AVR which can offer multiple inputs, outputs, more speaker configs, room corrections, different dsp modes, freq adjustments, crossover, tonal controls etc.

But it all depends on whose hands the camera is !

Agree with part totally. A good equipment can be wasted by end user. But a knowledgeable and objective end user will still be able get the most out of whatever equipment he has. That's why it's said - A good photographer will still get good pictures, no matter what the camera is.

 

[square_wave]

@Manoje,

Discussions like this can go on till the cows come home. This is usually what happens when people with completely different point of references have a point of contention.

So according to you a calibrated setup using an AVR is the best one can do for music ! Anything beyond this is a waste of money. There is no improvement to be made.

What is your reference setup for music ? The best that you have heard ? If you have listened to a pure 2 channel reference setup, are you able to hear improvements over what you hear in a calibrated home theatre setup ?

 

[jaudere]

Square_wave, I don't think that is what Manoj means to say. his point was the analogy of point and shoot /SLR camera to avr/stereo was incorrect.

 

[square_wave]

Square_wave, I don't think that is what Manoj means to say. his point was the analogy of point and shoot /SLR camera to avr/stereo was incorrect.

I agree with that. It was just a general statement .

I was refering to many generalised statements like the below ones.

Where the amps make difference is-
Distortion: - This is already quite low. Most modern amps are rated at 0.08% THD or so. That's very minor and cannot be detected in real life listening.

Many times people claim they hear details in the sound by change of amps. It is possible those details are placebo effect. It can only be reflected in a blind test. Those details also could the distortion. Many perceive the distortion as extra details.

There are lots of factors which can effect the sound. But honestly, pre-amp, amp and cable is the least.

And they should all be listening to calibrated setups, with full flat frequency curve at listening position.

I agree there are many points that are valid in a very generalist point of view. But arent we sidelining the actual point of the discussion ?
For example, lets say, we have a perfectly calibrated room with reference speakers connected to an AVR. If we replace the AVR with a reference grade pre and power amp, wont there be a difference?

 

[jaudere]

No doubt there will be difference, probably a major one but the question will be whether the diffrerence can be called as Improvement or just change in sound signature.

 

[manoj.p]

I was refering to many generalised statements like the below ones.

If you read closely, my points about distortion, power ratings are not generalized statements. Distortion ratings are out there for all amps. Same is the known truth about power rating and its effect on a speaker. Same can be said about other statements that you highlighted.

I agree there are many points that are valid in a very generalist point of view. But arent we sidelining the actual point of the discussion ?

The actual point of discussion is "Why AVR so bad for music". OP switched the AVR to the amp or so and everything is now revealed, come into life etc. Then a lot got thrown around how the amp in the avr is bad, how the rest of the components in AVR cause interference, how EM affects the sound, purity and everything. Isn't that all generalized statements? All I did was to counter it with some factual statements of what an amp does and it will not alter the sound by itself. Same goes for noise/distortion.

For example, lets say, we have a perfectly calibrated room with reference speakers connected to an AVR. If we replace the AVR with a reference grade pre and power amp, wont there be a difference?

Well, you tell me. If you have a perfect calibrated setup (with anything, be it AVR or dedicated amps and what not) Which is giving you the most accurate results. Now you switch any component with reference grade (again calibrated - if not then it will not be straight comparison) will you hear difference? I mean the output in both cases will be same - "Calibrated Output". May be in a subjective test. But in a blind test, No way. There have been multiple blind tests which prove these results. Look up at google about the tests. If you can't find them, I can link those for you.

 

[manoj.p]

So according to you a calibrated setup using an AVR is the best one can do for music ! Anything beyond this is a waste of money. There is no improvement to be made.

I did not say that calibrated setup using only an AVR. I said calibrated because lots get thrown around about purity. If someone desires purity, they should make sure that it is there by not based on brand, money, exotic ways but by actually measuring it. Isn't it funny when the purists talk about it but fathom when it comes to actually measuring the response in their rooms? anyway, I still make the statement - A calibrated setup (using anything AVR, pre-pro, amps) is a reference setup.

What is your reference setup for music ? The best that you have heard ? If you have listened to a pure 2 channel reference setup, are you able to hear improvements over what you hear in a calibrated home theatre setup ?

Well, I don't have to tell my reference setup for music to establish my credentials. It's a very wrong way to argue. But because you asked, here is the info.

The best music setup I have heard is with Lexicon MC12, ATI 7 channel amp, Oppo BDP-80 (passing audio through HDMI), monoprice cables and Infinity P163B bookshelf speakers in a living room. This is a multi channel music setup. The person is extracting 2 channel tracks and playing as 7 channel. You will never feel that surrounds are overpowering or anything. That's the best stereo sounding setup I have heard.

The next best setup is Oppo 83, Tannoy 7 channel speakers, Marantz AV7005 and marantz amp in a dedicated, treated theater room. User was playing it as 2 channel music setup for a long then moved to multichannel music. He did have some expensive balanced cables and some monoprice cables.

Another setup is I went to a home of a JBL fan. He has a theater with JBL Synthesis 7 channel setup in his theater room. He also have 5 channel JBL music system in his family room. And a 2 channel JBL synthesis K2-S9900 in the living room. I did not think much of the K2 because the imaging was not very solid. If you move away from center spot even by few inches, there goes imaging. We did listen to multi-channel music setup in the family room and watched movies in the theater room.

So there you have it. I am not claiming that all of these rooms are the ultimate. Just pointing out my references because you think I am just throwing it all around. In the first setup, the guy has the expensive receiver and amp but he uses cheap cables and $150 speaker each. He is also one of the most knowledgeable guy I have talked to about audio related stuff. But everyone who goes there is amazed by what they hear. And this includes people who have dedicated stereo setups with exotic cables and what not. Funny thing is - they don't even realize that its not a stereo setup, unless told by him.

 

[cmsajith]

Can somebody care to tell me the reason for the difference (Eventhough I had tried this before and found a significant difference, to confirm I did the following test today):

- Instead of AVR, used Emotiva UMC1 to eliminate the confusion of the amp section in the AVR.
- Acoustic Portrait PM1 Preamp
- Quad 909 PowerAmp
- Speakers ATC SCM 40
- Beresford Caiman (to eliminate the DAC difference in an AVR)
- Acoustically treated room
- Audio CD : Rock the Tabla by Hossam Ramzy

Emotiva UMC1 is one of the well regarded pre-pro for SQ for both movies and music and it has well implemented h/w (s/w is almost stable eventhough people reported issues during the initial versions)

On changing the pre to PM1, I am not supposed to get any significant difference as per the discussion in this thread, but I could find a huge difference in tonality esp the mid, the grip on the instruments (UMC1 was not able to reproduce the feel as PM1, the beats on the drum doesnt feel like the drum beat as on PM1), the sound stage (hope I am able to convey what I am trying to say). I am not saying the sound from UMC1 is bad, its good, but till I connect PM1. With digital-in of UMC1 and using Onkyo 606 was showing a big difference.

Once we find the improvement in sound, the UMC1 \ Onkyo 606 sound will be relatively "bad", I think this is what the people are trying to say as "AVR for music is bad" or "not at all good" for music.

 

[square_wave]

@ Manoje,

Cables, blind testing in the usual method We will be flogging a dead horse if we go down that path again !

You seem to be a pure surround sound guy who looks at sound from a completely different angle than what many of us do

Our experiences are different hence our conclusions differ. So I desist. Have a nice evening

 

[anm]

yes NAD T785 is expensive, but those looking for surround setup and a very good music setup as well, I would say don't bother about another stereo amp. Just invest in good AVR and you will be rewarded with both good surround sound and 2 channel. It will cost similar, and reduce a great number of wires and interconnects etc.
Of course, this discussion is valid only for those who are considering a surround sound setup but also want to give due stress on 2 channel music, and hence AVR comes into picture. If you want a 2 channel setup ONLY, go for stereo amp.

 

[doors666]

Once we find the improvement in sound, the UMC1 \ Onkyo 606 sound will be relatively "bad", I think this is what the people are trying to say as "AVR for music is bad" or "not at all good" for music.

Personally, I never liked any onkyo.

Of course your quads sound better. why dont you use an arcam avr and compare. For all you know, you might find it better than your quads.

What is an AVR. If I take a 5 channel pass f5, throw in a dolby card and a video switching card in the same cabinet, will it make it worse. I dont think so.

Frankly, bad amps or avrs dont bother me, unless its some sp road junk amp. low bit rate mp3s bother me, bad speakers bother me, boom boom car audio bothers me. Really bad sources bother me like samsung dvd players. Apart from that, I can pretty much listen to music on anything.

I have enough parts to make 3 stereo amps right now in my cupboard and an ssp preamp also. what do i make, I go ahead and make more speakers and sub first. dont even feel like looking at the amps right now, happy with my avr and topping. oh i will get to it someday, but whats the tearing hurry.

Some of you audiophiles will puke if you knew what kind of electronics your music has gone through before it even comes to you. and here you are cribbing about a perfectly fine avrs. Most of the mixing consoles are running on ne5532, a 10 rupees opamp.

Here's a million dollar question, if you only have the option to listen to music through an AVR, would you listen or switch off. If you feel its that bad that you switch it off, congratulations, you are now an audiophile. Please dont call yourself a music lover though.

 

[cmsajith]

Personally, I never liked any onkyo.

Of course your quads sound better. why dont you use an arcam avr and compare. For all you know, you might find it better than your quads.

What is an AVR. If I take a 5 channel pass f5, throw in a dolby card and a video switching card in the same cabinet, will it make it worse. I dont think so.

Frankly, bad amps or avrs dont bother me, unless its some sp road junk amp. low bit rate mp3s bother me, bad speakers bother me, boom boom car audio bothers me. Really bad sources bother me like samsung dvd players. Apart from that, I can pretty much listen to music on anything.

I have enough parts to make 3 stereo amps right now in my cupboard and an ssp preamp also. what do i make, I go ahead and make more speakers and sub first. dont even feel like looking at the amps right now, happy with my avr and topping. oh i will get to it someday, but whats the tearing hurry.

Some of you audiophiles will puke if you knew what kind of electronics your music has gone through before it even comes to you. and here you are cribbing about a perfectly fine avrs. Most of the mixing consoles are running on ne5532, a 10 rupees opamp.

Here's a million dollar question, if you only have the option to listen to music through an AVR, would you listen or switch off. If you feel its that bad that you switch it off, congratulations, you are now an audiophile. Please dont call yourself a music lover though.

My question was the difference which I found when using Emotiva UMC1 and PM1 while using the same amp.

Here's a million dollar question, if you only have the option to listen to music through an AVR, would you listen or switch off. If you feel its that bad that you switch it off, congratulations, you are now an audiophile. Please dont call yourself a music lover though.

Where did I mention that if I have the option of having only an AVR, I will not listen to it? The issue is that once I find the improvement which a good stereo component can make I will never go back to AVR, I am not at all using UMC1 for music after using PM1 coz I clearly know what I am missing in UMC1.

What is an AVR. If I take a 5 channel pass f5, throw in a dolby card and a video switching card in the same cabinet, will it make it worse.

If it is that simple, I should get the same performance as a stereo component, which I am not able to get. As far as my experience the DAC and the pre are the main contributors for the difference.

 

[rishiguru]

Here's a million dollar question, if you only have the option to listen to music through an AVR, would you listen or switch off. If you feel its that bad that you switch it off, congratulations, you are now an audiophile. Please dont call yourself a music lover though.

You nailed it doors666.

 

[cmsajith]

You nailed it doors666.

What are you trying to prove here... If you have some valid points, please contribute and help me why I find a significant difference while using PM1 instead of Emotiva UMC1. Loving music is different than listening to music, I enjoy music with Sansa Clip+ while travelling.