Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater AVR What to buy, need help???

Ok, I have to weigh in on this one. if you haven't persoanlly heard the difference between a budget AVR and a really good AVR or in particular a pre/pro/amp setup then i suggest you find a way to do so or not be so quick to make such broad sweeping statements as JohnK and others have and continue to make. JohnK, you are obviously very well read on audio gear and music but what systems have you heard and or compared? I think by the way you and others preach this nonsense that its very limited.

The case really comes to point when talking about big, power hungry speakers with low ohm requirements such as the M80's as a very good example and there are many others that are much more demanding. I suspect Mdrew will have alot of problems getting any where near his Mirantz' performance AND sound from that baby Yamaha avr, not gonna happen with M80's.

Well - could anyone tell me where to find the blind tests? A quick search finds many references to such tests, but no actual, you know, links to reports of the tests themselves.

(well, there's a second hand description here:
http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/1/18030.html
which might lead me somewhere eventually).

The power requirements are one thing, and that makes perfect sense. But within the limits of a particular reciever, I don't see a *necessary* reason for noticeable differences in sound quality.

Show me the data, please!

I've done a LOT of reading here and elsewhere, and the only times I've seen such claims is when someone is attributing them to some unnamed other person.

If you actually know of someone making these claims, feel free to point me. I've never seen it. I've never seen ANYONE recommend a 3-watt amp and/or reciever. I've never seen ANYONE saying that "any" receiver is as good as the best receiver.

Such a hot topic of debate.

To the OP, you will find two distinct camps of people on this subject. On the one hand, those like JohnK who point only to the empirical evidence. Electrons are electrons, and provided that the physical abilities of the AVR are not exceeded (clipping, etc), then all receivers and pre-processors sound the same. It's simple science, and everything else is simply hubris of the human psyche.

On the other hand, you have all of the home theater industry and many folks that passionately believe that different products sound different, and that a $10,000 prepro/amp stack will sound better than a $99 HTIB receiver.

So who's right? Both. Neither.

Here's my opinion. You can print it out and hang it on the wall, or send it to the recycle bin, it matters not to me.

As a physical phenominon, sound is sound. It is measurable. Those measurements may support that the sound is the always the same. All sorts of instruments can be used to detect, test, and compare the physical properties of sound. Blind comparisons may show that there really aren't many (if any) differences. But music isn't measurable. Music is experienced differently by different people. It is absolutely subject to emotion, taste, and perception. Blind comparisons remove those factors from the equation, and it's no different than trying to do a wine tasting by removing the grapes. I like jazz, you like classical. Norah Jones' voice moves me to tears, yet does nothing for you, etc. Sound quality is highly subjective, just as 'Art' is subjective. You can say that all Art is Art, but it effects different people differently, even though various hues or techniques may be identical.

So if I spend $10k on a prepro/amp stack because I believe that it sounds better, and it creates a more worthwhile and enjoyable musical experience than a $99 HTIB, then no one has any right to tell me that I'm wrong. The perception of sound quality is exactly that, a perception. Perception is not only influenced by the physical characteristics of the sound and one's hearing ability, but also the type of music, the happiness of the listener, events that are transpiring in our lives, and a myriad of other factors.

So do (some) more expensive receivers sound better than (some) cheaper ones? To me, yes, they do. Whether those improvements are real or imaginary, they are pleasing to me and make spending the extra money worthwile. This is, after all, a hobby and the point of it is to bring some joy and pleasure to your life.

Make no judgements based on internet chatter. Get out there and listen. Take advantage of money-back guarantees. The land of home theater isn't Orwellian, where you will only buy the Big Brother's Voice Mark I receiver and you will agree that it is the best sounding receiver in existence. Audition! Experience! Critique! Buy the one that meets your needs (features, connections, wattage), you can afford, and that makes you happy.

Well, I've found 1 actual report.

http://avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=607389

Not a wide ranging test, but a "null" finding.

Most references I've found are to non-internet sources, so are harder to track down.

Amp Comparison

It's an older article, but it still applies. There's a low priced receiver thrown in with higher end amps.
Show me any similar testing that contradicts this and I will listen. Double blind testing is the only way I know of to remove emotion / eyes from the equation.

If someone truly believes their $10,000 Krell amp sounds so much better than a $500 Denon, Yamaha,etc in terms of sound quality, then a double-blind test should end all discussion.

I just haven't EVER heard of that situation to date.