I have a sensitive ear...I can tell minute differences in sound. I just traded up my M60's for M80's and could immediately tell the greater detail and overall forwardness as compared to the 60's. In fact two of my classical recordings were being played rather loudly and at some climaxes I thought the tweeter was broken as the music sounded distorted. I was disturbed but then played other pieces, better recorded, and the sound was pristine. These are wonderful speakers and I am happy I made the trade.

I also noticed a distinct difference in the quality of sound when I exchanged receivers. From the Technics (circa 1990's) to the Denon (circa late 1980's). The Denon was distinctly better.

So, I am anxious to maximize the sound emanating from the 80's by investing in separates. I am looking at Parasound, NAD, Rotel, Classe, among others. But there seem to be many who read this forum who do not think there is an audible difference. So this is a debatable point.

I'd like the "die hard" separate folks to chime in and indicate the advantages of separates. Are they easy to set up in 5 or 7 channel surround (my preference for future expansion to HT)? Is there a dedicated subwoofer LFE output?
In your opinion have you noticed a distinct improvement in sound quality vis a vis say a Denon AVR like the 4310 or 4311? Suggestions for a pre/pro & amp @ about $2000 or less would be welcome.

Certainly I would like to hear from those who find little difference between separates and an AVR. I am aware of the greater value of AVR's with more bells and whistles at lower cost. But superior sound from any source is my goal. Thanks everyone....

I would not consider myself an audiophile by any means (I'm sure I even spelled it wrong). About a year ago I decided to upgrade to seperates. I opted for the Sherwood Newcastle A-965 and th P-965. I am very happy with both of them. They listed for 1500 a piece. Axiom did offer them at one point, and I think there might have been a little more if memory serves me right. I had the exact same price point that you did. I ended up buying the set along with their dvd/sacd player for about 1500 bucks. I did have to do a fair bit of searching around the internet before I found them. If you are able to come across a new set, because I don't even know if Sherwood makes them anymore, I dont think you would be dissapointed. Now one thing I don't like about them is the menu setup. It is absoluntly aweful in my opinion. But once I screwed around with all the settings for about half a day, it was worth the small investment. Keep in mind shipping might not be cheap, the amp is very heavy.

The P-965 may not meet your needs if you are using it for video switching as there are only component video ports available. In my case, I only cared about the sound quality.

Hope my 2 cents helps out.

Cheers, Brendan

Not too sure there is any difference from the processing stand point of an AVR vs. a separate pre/pro and most avr's are at the bleeding edge of the tech while separates seem to lag behind.

I do feel adding an amp does help clean things up sound wise at higher volume levels and I have found the lower frequencies are played with more snap/punch. Whether or not these differences are worth the extra dollars spent is upto each individual. I am quite content with my Denon 3808 but will eventually add an amp at some point.

Jakewash,

I hear POA-A1HDCI is awesome..
It would look sweet in the same rack as the 3808.

You buying me one? I accept!

If he buys you one, he's got to buy one for the whole class.

From my experience, the difference in sound between an AVR, especially the upper end of the line of any manufacturer and a Pre-Pro/amp combination, to me, has been negligible at best. However, having said that, I do own two multi-channel power amps that I have used in conjunction with two AVRs, the most current a Marantz, which gives me a flexibility, especially with perhaps speakers of varying resistance and getting the full bang for my buck in power output that you don't generally achieve with most AVRs, particularly with all channels running.

One of the reasons I have yet to purchase a separate Pre-Pro is the price since it has to be asked, why should one generally pay as much or more for it as opposed to the similar AVR when the Pre-Pro has eliminated the amps? I have resisted considering any of them , until now. Marantz has recently come out with a new Pre-Pro(AV 7005/$1499) that looks particularly appealing and of course, there is Emotiva with their UMC-1 which although it blows everyone else out of the water in price, it still continues to have some issues which hopefully will be eliminated soon as they get ready to introduce their new XMC-1 scheduled for early 2011. Outlaw is apparently trying again with a new unit that is suppose to be introduced in the new year. Based on their history, if they finally get it right, I am sure it will be a good one.

Other than a couple of the mainstream companies like Marantz along with Onkyo/Integra, Pre-Pros have been pretty much restricted to the smaller specialty companies and it seems no easy task to do it right. Parasound, for example, back a few months ago, announced they were cancelling their Pre-Pro program because they just couldn't get it to work reliably. Companies like Classe, are nice, but way out of sight in price. With Rotel and Nad , you are looking over the $2000 mark along with the Onkyo/Integra units, so it just doesn't give you a lot of choice.

So essentially your options are the Marantz, Emotiva(currently UMC-1 and forthcoming XMC-1, both to be $1000 and under) and the forthcoming Outlaw which looks to be priced around the same as the Marantz.

Lee, the same cold, hard facts of amplifier technology still apply. If the amplification takes place with level frequency response and inaudibly low noise and distortion(the norm these days even with modestly-priced receivers), that's all that any amplifier can do. Contrary reports abound, of course, usually sincere and well-intentioned, but good intentions can't change the facts, and when put to the(blind listening)test, these claims collapse. The classic Stereo Review tests , just for example, still stand unchallenged(by contrary evidence, not just by stubborn disagreement)and illustrate the point. Flowery comments about the "sound" of the amplifiers in open listening under the same conditions are quoted, but as soon as the labels and price tags disappeared, so did the sound.

You've emphasized that, as is also the case with me, your classical listening is at moderate levels. Except in the highly unlikely situation(and then for only a split-second at peaks)that more power is needed than the receiver can supply cleanly, more maximum power capacity, regardless of whether it's in one box or two, is meaningless. Relax and enjoy the great music we have.

John: Having read your postings for many months I could expect no less of an answer than the one you have given. I read the article from the link you inserted (seems a little dated but still relevant) which I believe I read some time ago. If I hadn't experienced the differences in receiver sound myself I would be less inclined to pursue this. However, I am sure there is a point where the sound produced vs cost reaches a plateau and where equipment upgrading does not justify the minute improvements. But this is subjective. My goal, and it is a taxing one, is to find the equipment that best suits my hearing and pocket book with the highest quality (my perception of "high quality" of course).

I can honestly say that listening to the M80's with my present sub and the M80's powered by my 55 watt Denon from the 1980's is very satisfying. But I do want to go HT as well, not only for movies but for my DVD audio and SACD surround collection. So all responses are important to me in my research, and the various opinions of Axiomites in past threads and present ones are very informative. It's just my nature to explore alternatives (buying Axioms is the result of one of my explorations).

I certainly value your opinion John, not only for your technical knowledge but also because your tastes in music are close to mine and accurate and full reproduction of the orchestral, choral, organ, piano and human voice (among others) is primary for both of us. But I am also sure that there are differences in how we listen and what we listen for. I think the quality of audio equipment reproduction may be a factor that affects my listening enjoyment and so I continue to explore. By the way...are you from the Southland?

Lee(no, I'm nowhere near there), beware of falling victim to the "Golden Ear" mythology. It appears that when claims of such special abilities are actually put to the test a sort of reverse-transmutation occurs in which the gold is turned to tin.

I'll weigh in that you are on the right track if better fidelity is your ultimate goal. Generally speaking a good set of separates should move you in that direction.
I've always been a big fan of receivers for their ease of use and compact size. I have several integrated receivers in the house including an original Sansui 9090db which powers my Algonguins and a Harmon Kardon AVR80. Both have the usual great FR, distortion specs etc.

However for serious listening I rely on my Integra AVR9.8/Outlaw 770 combo and my Pass Lab B1 buffer pre/McIntosh amps. Soundstage width and depth as well as imaging are just better with quality separates particularly if you like to listen for long periods. The reasons for this are fairly well documented.

Based on my experience, heat and quality of circuits and internal power supplies are the items which most determine why these differences exist. Heat plays havoc with specs and leads to a drop in sound quality of the unit. With a receiver no matter how good its designed its not going to have less heat than a system with separate external amps. The other factor hurting performance is the amount of RF emanating from the internal power supply and how well its isolated from the rest of the circuitry. Modern integrated processors have actually really improved in this area but again it depends on how well the internal amp and other transformers are insulated.

As usual there are exceptions. With all the advances in audio engineering the decision is tougher if the choice is between a high end receiver and lower quality separates. Also with separates, component matching and system synergy is also a factor to be aware of though its less of a concern with an all solid state setup.

I claim no such ability. I claim only to be under the influence of my own subjectivity in terms likes and dislikes of sound...nothing more, nothing less.

I went the separates route simply for an increase in power or headroom. I have a 4000 cubic foot dedicated HT room. More power simply equals more safety from clipping and speaker damage. I have done some experimentation between my Rotel, Denon, and Audio track power amplifiers and really can’t hear a difference between them. Granted these were nowhere scientific (something I’d like to put on my bucket list; true blind listening test between different power amplifiers).

I also recently purchased a Denon AVR and use it as a pre / pro. It was actually cheaper to do this than to buy a dedicated pre / pro. I don’t believe I am missing anything sound wise between this Denon AVR and a much more expensive pre / pro. I also figured it adds more flexibility and probably would be easier to sell if required down the road.

The M80’s are a very efficient flat revealing speaker, as you have already found out. I find they love to be played loud, and to do that you need to have power. To get power, (200 wps plus) you need to go separates!

Be forwarded, the M80’s are capable of playing cleanly way beyond safe listening levels in modest sized rooms. Hearing lost is not just possible, but expected at these levels!

pn

to me - a big part of the seperates arguement is that amplifiers have great longevity. You can look at an AVR from fifteen years ago and the cutting edge might have included composite video. Today,that's worth pennies on the dollar to most people.

On the other hand, a fifteen year old solid amp is, to me at least, still worth a great deal. Only the processing bits need to be upgraded for htmi 1.5, 1.6, 1.7 etc...

And although axioms are very efficient, this is an evolving hobby for many. Perhaps you'll someday want to ply with a pair of power hungry speakers... i.e thiel, etc. today's "seperate" investment will likely continue to hold it's own in many future senarios