Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Receiver: Arcam vs Marantz vs Integra

I am building a home theater and have received my epic 80 system. I chose the EP500 sub and will be running a 5.1 system in a room that is 14 x 16 x 8 (I know, it'll be rockin'!). Most of my use will be for movies and TV, with maybe 10-20% music listening and concert viewing.

The local (Northern Virginia) hi-fi store guy will be doing my prewiring and projector set-up. He deals in the above brands, plus some higher end stuff (B&K, etc) that is over my budget. My budget is flexible but I'm eyeing the USD$1000-1500 range. I could stretch this to $2000 for the Arcam AVR300.

I lugged my M80s and VP150 into the store and auditioned a Marantz receiver and thought it sounded really nice - I guess it is called "warm". I heard some Arcam separates which have some of the same hardware as the AVR300.

Can anyone share their experiences over the long term with any of these receivers?

Imho. save yourself some money and go with the Denon 3805.

JP, welcome. You've already completed what is by far the most significant audio step by getting your excellent speakers. Frankly, attempting to "audition" a receiver with them is a rather pointless exercise since any well-designed receiver amplifies transparently and doesn't introduce a sonic character of its own. What's heard at such "auditions" isn't the receiver, but rather the source material being played, as affected by the speakers and the specific acoustic characteristics of that particular room.

If you're not limited to that store, there're several excellent receivers at the $1,000 end of your budget which should be considered, such as the Denon 3806(or as previously mentioned, the older 3805 if you'd like to save a bit more), Pioneer 74TXVi or Yamaha 2600.

Actually, I've lurked for a while in these boards (and others, eg AVS Forums) and noted that the Denon 3805/3806 seems to be the receiver mentioned most. It actually was my first thought as I was ordering the speakers, and I haven't ruled it out. There's a Tweeter in town that carries it and the Ya-mama-hah! 2600/4600 models as well as Onkyo's 803.

I'll be running DirecTV HD/DVR, which has HDMI, so the switching on the 3806 seems a plus, I guess. I'm also shopping for a universal DVD player, and was going to ask about those in another thread.

Thanks for your replies - now where are the Arcam/Marantz users?

Ratpack has the Oppo dvd player and an Onyko 703. You might fire a PM at him. I believe he doesn't use the video connections. Just the audio in his set-up.

Bug is correct. I have all of my video connections going directly to the Sony SXRD. After studying all of the pros and cons of doing your switching in your audio receiver, I decided that unless you have an overhead projector where cabling may be an issue, it just doesn't make any sense to video switch in your audio receiver. I have also seen a large number of threads where people are complaining about the HDMI switching of the Denon and Yahama receivers. I suspect that the other brands are also having their share of HDMI problems.

I bought the Onkyo 703 instead of the 803 because I didn't want the HDMI switching of the 803. For just about the cost difference, I was able to buy a Harmony 880 remote.

I think that was an excellent trade. A key stroke or two with the Harmony and all the audio receiver, cable TV, Satellite TV, DVD or VCR settings are automatically sent to the appropriate gear.

Thanks, ratpack. My installer has recommended just what you are doing, ie feeding the audio to the receiver but the video sources directly to the projector. With a prewire, hopefully the cables will be out of the way.

In addition to the receiver choice, I am also looking at universal DVD players, currently favoring the Marantz 7600. For a projector, either the Panny AE900 or Epson 550. Looking forward to having this all complete by March Madness! Then I can add my name to the listeners list (northern VA)...

Hi medic8r,

Based on our past Axiom customer experiences (and my own as well), Arcam receivers will drive 4-ohm M80s with no problems. As to Marantz and Onkyo, the record is spotty. Many Onkyos shut down or overheat with 4-ohm loads, and some Marantz have also not coped well with 4-ohm loads.

Since the Marantz in the store drove your M80s (did you run it fairly loud for an extended period?) you should be OK, but one of the reasons Axiom likes the Denon, H/K and Outlaw brands is that even the less expensive receivers from those brands will drive the M80s without overheating or shut down.

Regards,

Alan, thanks for your input, and thanks for your work with these fabulous speakers that I now own.

I am glad that you mentioned Outlaw, as I had been curious about them but never investigated them. I have since gone to their web site and am very impressed with their gear. There is something appealing about buying high-performing audio gear over the internet for and keeping the money that would have gone to the middleman! After all, I'm one-for-one so far!

medic8r

The best thing about Outlaw is the trial at home just like Axiom.

In reply to:

---

doesn't introduce a sonic character of its own

---

John we have been down this road before my friend and for some reason I feel like going down it again. Not picking an argument, just looking for a bit more clarification on your end.

I'm not going to stop saying this, your wrong. All receivers don't sound the same. Exactly how many have you A/B’d at home over say the last year to make this statement? What exactly do you own anyway? I have always been curious as you always make definitive statements to people and other then a white paper that somebody put out, what do you base it on? Is there any first hand experience at play here? You never talk about what you own and I’m dead serious, I’m curious.

I have said in the past that there are a lot of them out there that do provide the same sonic signature but to say EVERY one is exactly the same, in my books is wrong. I have owned a few and there is now way anyone is ever going to get me to buy into the statement that they all sound the same…….and god knows I have owned enough to make that statement.

Never: you raise an interesting point. As you know, for the past year, I have been reviewing all the material that I could on receivers and pre/ pros.

From the specifications, I could NOT discern any sonic difference!!!! If they really have a flat response from 20 Hz to 20 KHz and less than .08% THD, how can they sound different unless their signal processing is different?

So, I either conclude that they are sonically the same or the manufacturers cooked the specs.

I wouldn't argue either way because I no "proof." Could be that many are sonically the same. Could be that some manufacturers lied.

I look forward to your discussion.

NeverHappy,

JohnK's claim of "no difference" depends upon proper blind listening tests. He would readily agree with you that a casual comparison between brand A and brand B -- even a carefully level-matched one -- would likely result in a claimed differences.

Have all your comparisons been done without you knowing which device is playing?

It basically comes down to conclusions based on anecdotal evidence vs. conclusions based on properly tested and supported theories. Since the entire transit of an audio signal through an amplifier/receiver/preamp/what-have-you must obey the laws of physics -- incidentally, these "laws" are actually theories -- any two amplifiers measured to have linear frequency responses, THD below the threshhold of human hearing, etc. should produce the same output given the same input.

Many -- and dare I say most -- perceived differences between amplifiers having linear specs are a result of the brain's not-to-be-discounted capability of influencing perception. In order to do a proper comparison, you need to deprive the brain of as much extraneous information as possible. Simply knowing which device is playing will influence your perception. This is why a double-blind test is vital to getting any sort of definitive answer to whether or not sonic differences exist between any two (or more) amplifiers.

Way too many big words at play here and I'm easily confused!

Let's keep this simple. Some manufactures play around with their respective outputs and for various reasons also fool around with various impedances. Sunfire for example uses a 1 Ohm resistor that is placed in series with the output of each channel to alter the sound. They then also run a standard set of outputs where the resistor is not used.

Everyone and anyone who has ever heard Sunfire equipment acknowledges that there is a difference in the sonic signature coming out of each output. The amp is identical; everything is exactly the same from point to point with one exception.

My point is this, to say that all receivers sound the same is like saying they all use the same internal parts and have the exact same specs at the output stage. I have my doubts. I'm not sure if they still do or not but Marantz was another one that played with the final output stage to achieve a warmer then normal sound. I have no idea if they still are but it's interesting that most reviews you read on a Marantz product bring up the word warm, laid back etc.

Like it or not, the end result can be altered by any manufacture if they want to………..and some do. To say they all sound the same in my books is wrong.

In reply to:

---

Like it or not, the end result can be altered by any manufacture if they want to………..and some do

---

If that is the case, then those alterations would show up in the frequency response graphs. I'm not disputing the fact that a linear and non-linear amplifier will sound different.

But you completely sidestepped the point that Peter was making. Have you double blind comparo'd the receivers you mentioned? And saying "big words am hard" doesn't get you out of it.

While JohnK usually doesn't make this specific: if an amplifier (or receiver) is designed to have a flat frequency response (and achieves this design goal, as I'm certain that all major mid-high end manufacturers are capable of) then they must, by definition, when level balanced, sound the same. The Sunfires would appear to be an exception, from your description.

As a psychiatrist, I heartily agree with your comment on suggestibility, whether conscious or subconscious, as a major factor in listening tests. Because I'm thrifty, I think that 's what led me to conclude there was little difference between the $3000 B&K receiver and the $1000 Marantz - ha!

But then, if all receivers are the same, wouldn't we all have bought ours for $200 at Best Buy or Wally World?

Hmm ... newbie confused ...

So, just to stir things up a bit more, which is the biggest factor in how my Rush CD will sound: the disc player, the receiver/amp, or the speakers?

The speakers. Hands down. I doubt that you'd find many people disagreeing with that.

$200 receivers often do not have the features that we're looking for (inputs, processing modes, video switching, etc.) Also, they may not have been designed well enough to be flat.

I too would say the speakers have the most impact on sq.

In reply to:

---

But you completely sidestepped the point that Peter was making. Have you double blind comparo'd the receivers you mentioned?

---

I didn't side step squat. I have done more A/B side by sides in my day then I care to remember. Anything I make a comment on you can be assured that I have heard it or I would not offer an opinion.......unlike some.

As for your last comment:

In reply to:

---

And saying "big words am hard" doesn't get you out of it

---

Huh? Get me out of what? Has this forum gotten to the point that an obvious joke is now taken as some form of challenge? Is that political thread still alive and well in some folks?

I don't need to get out of anything.

Forgive me for even getting into this. Everyone sell off everything they own, spend it all on speakers and get a $300.00 receiver as you won't be able to hear squat for difference from a higher quality receiver or god forbid..........separates. Don't worry about the brand either as they all sound the same. Happy now? I feel good :-)

You say you have A/B compared them, but did you do it in a way that concealed the identities of the currently playing amp? That's the only way to remove your brain's influence from the equation.

I agree with Wid and Ken.

I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid....

Oh, sorry. I didn't recognize you with your new avatar.

Does this mean Christmas is now officially over?

"Will I Dream?"

Yep, my wife finally made me take the lights down off of the house tonight, dang it was cold out, I about froze my fingers. Not to worry, I followed that project by changing the oil in my Silverado, warmed them up good with that freaking hot oil......

Holy crap.................it's like beating a dead horse. Yes I have done true blind testing in my day. That is if there is such a thing. My experience is limited to trying it with receivers and speakers only. But now I have opened up the door for the usual stuff that follows when blind testing is brought into question, was there a delay between switching components? Did you change seating positions? Did the sky go from Blue to Grey?

Have I been fooled? Yep this is why I openly admit that I have heard receivers that sound very similar and some that add there own twist to things. If you all believe that every receiver in existence sounds the same, so be it. It's all good. I’m just saying that I have heard other things that make me think a little differently.........and no, it wasn’t always the higher priced item that sounded better so please don't even go there. The "It sounded better because you needed it to because you paid a whack of cash for it" argument is lame and was old a long time ago.

As I know somebody is going to ask, the last true blind test I did was with the NAD T773 and the Yamaha 4600. If anyone cares, I honestly had a hell of a time telling them apart. Then it was an HK7300 and an Anthem AVM30 with power being supplied by a Sunfire. Call me an idiot; discount my ramblings as some guy on a quest for audio nirvana I don’t really care but the difference was night and day.

Now let me ask you all. Has anyone here done a blind A/B with the T773 and 4600? If you have let me hear your thoughts. If you haven’t, I question what you would be offering an opinion on? Speculation perhaps? A graph posted on the internet?

In reply to:

---

Yep, my wife finally made me take the lights down off of the house tonight, dang it was cold out, I about froze my fingers.

---

Ahhh, 72 degrees in Fresno today...life is good!

Just flip those numbers, and you've got a blistering 27, not including the wind chill ...

How does the corn survive in that temperature? lol

I don't think Fresno has ever gotten below that mark in all the years i've lived here. I should keep my mouth shut... because before you know it summer will be here...and I will be paying the price bigtime with these scorching desertlike temps...

Only 70 here today but you are a bit further south. lol

In reply to:

---

If you all believe that every receiver in existence sounds the same

---

Holy crap.....it's like beating a dead horse. Not a single person here has claimed that all receivers or amps sound the same. We've only claimed that any two receivers that are measurably flat in their amplification will sound the same.

A linear amp changes the input signal only by making it louder. In other words, it changes the source signal's amplitude equally across the entire range of human hearing.

A non-linear amp will not increase a signal's loudness equally from 20Hz to 20kHz. There might be a gradual dip at the high end, resulting in a "warmer" tone. There might be a gradual dip on the low end, resulting in "anemic" bass.

All the "brain trust" -- to borrow a term from 2x6 -- has been saying is that two amps with measurably flat frequency responses will sound the same. To put it another way, measurably flat frequency response results in transparent amplification, as long as you're not overdriving the amp.

In reply to:

---

which is the biggest factor in how my Rush CD will sound

---

This is the way I see it:
brain
software
speakers
room acoustics....and then
source, pre amp, amp, dacs, etc. (in no particular order).
And last and surely least-wires.

P.S. All bets are off if tubes and vinyl are involved.

Well, then, I'm set - got the Axioms and am on the way to a kick-ass theater.

Probably will go with the Outlaw 990 prepro and 7125 amp. With my smallish theater, don't figure I need the 7700 with its 200WPC. 125WPC should do fine, right?

So, in order to properly beat this thread into the ground, do you figure the speakers are 75% responsible for sound quality, with receiver or amp 20% and source player 5%? Just my newbie (oops, now a regular - wow!) estimation...

medic8r

I would say speakers 95%. Unless, of course, as mwc says, you're dealing with tubes and/or vinyl.

The speakers account for 100% of the sound, without them you don't hear a thing . Seriously I would say the speakers would account for the majority of sq of a system with the source and amp section playing an equal role for the rest.

But once you get the speakers that make you happy, nothing can tighten up the overall resolution of the system like some judicious room acoustical treatments can. Even something as simple as some heavy curtians and throw pillows can make a huge difference. Much more so than electronics, IMO.

Very good point, I do agree.

A-f'in-men, brother. Yet some people still spend thousands of dollars seeking the holy grail of sources or amps -- or even just the holy grail of tubes to replace their factory-installed tubes.....

Truly, the mind boggles.

Amen! can I get a witness?

I'm a witness! Speakers have the most effect, followed by the room. I don't think the influence the shape, size, and surfaces of a room can have on the sound of a system can be overemphasized.

I would almost argue that room makes more difference than speakers once your speakers are up to a certain level (and IMO Axioms are above that level).

Amen!
I really wish the audio community (magazines, e-zine reviewers etc.) would put more emphasis on educating the audio buying public (us?) about the importance of room acoustics.

... but then people wouldn't keep buying new equipment and new speakers in order to get the same sound their buddy has in HIS room

Wow, thanks a lot everyone for all of the helpful feedback. As my room is a little boxy and will be soundproofed by double sheet rock with green glue, I'm guessing that some curtains and/or some other sound absorbers will be needed liberally ...

An idiosyncratic orthodoxy has emerged on this site, an orthodoxy whose opinions have all the hallmarks of a "party line."

It is not surprising to hear folks announce that all amplifiers sound the same, or that different tubes of a type do not impart a different sound quality to a tube amp or other tube component. What is surprising is the mocking chorus which shouts down differing opinions.

First of all, to say that different tubes of type do not impart different sound quality to tube amps or output sections in tube components signifies to me that the proclaimer has no personal experience with tubes to base such an opinion. My experience of tube components is that different tubes (new, properly biased and performing to spec) have an obvious effect on sound quality.

Similarly, Alan Lofft's characterization of tube components as "distortion generators" is a laughable generalization, at least to anyone who has had the pleasure of listening to some of the wonderful tube amps and CD players with tube output sections currently on the market.

The idea that any solid state amp with similar output power rating and a similarly a flat frequency response output curve from 20Hz-20kHz will sound like any other amp with a similarly flat frequency response curve is demonstrably wrong. If this were the case, then folks who really 'know' would all be using the cheapest amp they could find. As to those here who hold the opinion that all amps sound the same, are there any among you who use separate amps? If so, would you let us know what kind of amps you use, and could you tell us whether you chose the cheapest amp you could find for your application?

You can look at your charts, but I suggest you listen to the music. As to A/B tests, I think they are valuable. I also think that much longer term experience with various components can reveal sonic qualities which are not immediately apparent in an A/B test. Ever notice how a system sometimes sounds better playing the same source material than at other times? If you have, how can that difference be revealed in an A/B test? It cannot because we are talking about perceived differences in an A/A situation. I think it would be fair to say that all similarly powerful amps with similar frequency response characteristics (flat from 20-20) will sound adequate or passable. Some will reproduce music with better sound quality - music magic - truer to the original source, more like live - with the same recordings - than others. Some will image better. Different amps will reproduce soundstaging differently. Some amps have better sound quality at lower volumes than others. It is not necessarily price dependent, but not all similarly spec'd amps are the same.

My opinion.

AMPS
T-Amps (modified) (7)
Kenwood KA9100
Yamaha M-80 (3)
Onkyo Integra M-504
Anthem PVA-5
Antique Sound Labs MG S1 15DT

CD SOURCES
Ah! Njoe Tjoeb tube output CDP
Philips SACD1000
Toshiba SD9200
Sony CX 90ES
Sony CA 7ES
Pioneer DV 578A

Speakers
Axiom M2e
Axiom QS8
Axiom M3Ti (gifted away)
Axiom M22Ti (returned)
Axiom M50 (sold)
Thiel CS3.6
Michaura M55
Michaura M66
Michaura M665
Merak MC6H modified
Merak MC634 modified
Mission 77ds
Dahlquist DQM905 with Regnar upgrades

If the "party line" happens to be science and empiricism, I'll toe that line every. single. time.


Yet again, you are twisting words and obfuscating the issue. I am loathe to repeat myself needlessly, but since you obviously have not read any of my posts in this thread, I feel I am justified. I have not claimed that all amps sound the same. I have not claimed that different tubes sound alike. That is something you have invented as false evidence against the "idiosyncratic orthodoxy." (Might as well go all the way and call us the "axis of evil"....)

In reply to:

---

Similarly, Alan Lofft's characterization of tube components as "distortion generators" is a laughable generalization

---

Your inability to see that distortion simply means an introduction of something into or a substraction of something out of the original signal is laughable. Tubes do just this.

In reply to:

---

The idea that any solid state amp with similar output power rating and a similarly a flat frequency response output curve from 20Hz-20kHz will sound like any other amp with a similarly flat frequency response curve is demonstrably wrong.

---

Demonstrably wrong because of the evidence you cite? That people don't all own the cheapest amps? You call that evidence? Laughable.

In reply to:

---

I also think that much longer term experience with various components can reveal sonic qualities which are not immediately apparent in an A/B test.

---

The human being's auditory memory is demonstrably short. Any differences realized over the long term are most likely due to outside factors, not the least of which is faulty long term auditory memory. (It could be the relative humidity of the room, or you may have just gotten over a head cold that negatively impacted your hearing, etc., etc.)

In reply to:

---

...truer to the original source...

---

Ahhh. You should not have dropped that in your post. A well-designed solid state amp will pretty much always give you a truer to the original source output signal than a tube amp. (This goes back to the whole distortion thing.)

BTW, should be CA 9ES not CA 7ES, very nice CDP.

Of course the flat-worlders will tell you that all CD Players sound the same.

This has gotten old real fast. For those of you who have actual first hand experiences, please share your views. Agree or disagree but at least do it based on experience and not on what you read on the can one day.

Way too many folks around here throw out statements like they are the gospel and have little if any experience on what it is they are debating. Throw away the charts that everyone loves to bring up and base it on your own real world experience! If you can't, then I'm lost.

In reply to:

---

Of course the flat-worlders will tell you that all CD Players sound the same.

---

Flat-worlders? You mean the people that believe their eyes -- the eyes that tell them the world is flat -- and ignore the scientific evidence to the contrary?

Seems to me that label would be better applied to the person who stares back at you in the mirror.

Hi NeverHappy

I'll share my impressions of the various 2 channel amps I've had over the recent years. (Too many, because I'm never Happy, or because of my relentless pursuit of the perfect sound ...)

Rated in order of sound qualities:

1. Antique Sound Labs MG S1 15DT with upgraded caps Mullard long plate 12AX7's, Electro Harmonix KT88s. Fabulous midrange, sweet highs, huge soundstage, excellent imaging. 5 watts per channel in Single End Triode Mode. I've used this amp with M2e's, M3Tis, M22s, M50, Michaura M55s, M66s, Wharfdale Diamond 9.1's.

2. Kenwood KA9100 - top of the line Kenwood 2 channel 90 wpc with power meters, this amp is the second best I've had. Involving, lively ... love to listen to music from this amp, more so than my other solid states.

3. Anthem PVA5. Wonderful amp.

4. Onkyo Integra M506. Great amp. bass very tight and controlled.

5. Yamaha M80. Bruiser. Drives the Thiels effortlessly. after back and forth with the M504, decided the M80s sound better. Like them so much I got 3 of them for my Home Theater system.

6. Onkyo M504. Excellent amplifier.

7. T-Amp modded. What a joke! $20.00 and sounds absolutely terrific. Cannot drive 93db efficient speakers to reference levels. Bass not as tight as big boys. Highs and mids are superb. Within its comfort zone its a mid pack performer.

8. Kenwood KMX 1000 (didn't like it, returned it right away. Lifeless.)

I never did A/B tests or measured the apparent width of the sound stage, imaging abilities ...

Impressions are based on living with these amps.
.

I love reading these debates. It's what makes these boards interesting. And life in general I might add. Diversity, diversity, diversity. Without which, life would be rather dull. So keep it up gents. Keep it up!

By the way. My opinion is not set but I tend to lean towards scientific reasoning. . . .having said that

Installing an external amplifier in an automobile has in my applications made a dramatic change in the sound (for the better). Perhaps this is because the deck units have flawed amplifiers. . .but who knows. I just know that I would always smile hugely once I fired up the external amp and gave it a listen. (numerous vehicles)

No these weren't double blind tests. . . not even close. But I think that we don't give our ears and brains enough credit. Yes we are incredibly biased to how much we spend on something and how much we like it and how much effort we put into researching something and how much we like it etc etc. But sometimes it is the opposite. We spend a fortune on something and expect a world from it and we are not impressed in the least. Sometimes we find things like T-amps and are impressed with the quality per dollar ratio.

I think we have incredible ears and incredible brains interpreting what our ears are picking up. We probably are able to tell the difference in sounds between different components. We are probably able to do more than what science can measure. After all science can't measure what you "actually hear".

Or maybe we just need our eyes to be able to hear really well

I don't know, but I sure like hearing you guys discuss it. Discuss being a nice way of saying argue.

nicely put. Very nicely put.

Gives me enough fuel for another round. Any of you round-earthers wanna go again?

Again? I'm still waiting for round one or at the very least someone with first hand knowledge to jump in and disagree with me. I also agree with most of what 2X6 had to say and good for him for doing it.

Right or wrong I at least speak from what I have experienced first hand.

This has been anything but a debate...........more like a lecturing on why the little graph says it so…….so it must be so and if you don't believe the little graph, you’re hearing things........and that is my point, I do hear things and not all those things sound the same.

As for the car stuff, I know nothing about car audio but I did recently have the factory CD player removed from my van and in went an Alpine. Does it sound better? I honestly think it sounds worse and I have yet to figure out why. That blows the theory of spending money and needing your brain or ears or whatever to think it sounds better to justify the money.

In reply to:

---

That blows the theory of spending money and needing your brain or ears or whatever to think it sounds better to justify the money.

---

You're right that this has been anything but a debate, and this quote shows it. You ignore the actual things I say and put things in my mouth that I never said. Where did I say anything about money and needing to justify spending it?

I'm fully aware of more money not equating to better anything. If you actually took the time to read my posts -- this goes for 2x6, especially -- instead of assuming I am the worst kind of graph-worshipper, you might realize that our beliefs aren't as incompatible as you continue to assert.

Again, not all amps sound the same. I'm just saying differences in sound will show up in the specs. If the specs are the same, the sound will be as well.

"Again, not all amps sound the same. I'm just saying differences in sound will show up in the specs. If the specs are the same, the sound will be as well. "

Well said Peter, facts are the facts. I trust graphs over ear drums.

pm: it would sure be nice if an independent testing company would test receivers, pre/pros, and amps like Consumers Reports does for lots of things. While I think that Consumers Reports misses the boat every once in a while, I think that they do an OUTSTANDING job. My hat is off to them.

I don't know if any of the manufacturers cook their specs, but I do know that I'm not going to argue electronics and physics with anyone "who thinks that the world is flat."

What's that old story about the little moron beating his head against the wall?

Hey, if anyone loves their $1000 speaker wires and Chinese tube amps, GO FOR IT and be happy!!

Still like to see some independent testing.

You trust Consumer Reports? I think they rather love Bose...

In reply to:

---

I think they rather love Bose...

---

A jeeeez you beat me to it! I question most reviews I read regardless of if they are good or bad. Audioholics has there obvious favorites that seem to never do anything wrong, as do Secrets but not to the extent of Audioholics. I take them all with a grain of salt.................just like I do with some of the posts I read around here.

In reply to:

---

Where did I say anything about money and needing to justify spending it?

---

Relax there buddy. When did I say you said it or when did I quote you directly as saying anything? Who exactly is ignoring stuff and who isn’t?

It would seem that when one disagrees with the normal train of thought around here most of the regulars get grumpy a little too quick.

Ah,..."Consumer reports"

I recall a review of a number of "consumer" class bicycles back in the early 80s.

One actually well regarded model was given the ax over a number of poorer performing and constructed bikes, due to the fact that if squeezed too hard, the brakes would lock!

The alternative, of course, is a bike that would continue to gradually slow to the point of coming to a halt in front of, rather than to the side, of the moving truck that you may wish to avoid.

...back to audio.

Like I said, I think that they miss the boat once in a while. LOL!!!!

But, overall I still think that they do an excellent job!!!!

I don't think that it would be all that difficult to develop a standard test for receivers, pre/ pros and amps. I know that everyone would not like it, but at least we would have a baseline of somesort.

One thing that I like about Consumer Reports is that they DO NOT take advertising money from the manufacturers they test. I think that is an EXTREMELY important factor in an independent test.