7 Reasons HT Receivers are Better for Music than 2 Channel Receivers - and 1 Reason they Aren't

[@cheapaudioman]

Pioneer VSX LX305 howl.me/chGAFHyvjOf www.patreon.com/cheapaudioman Tidal Deal bit.ly/3siuqSF Crutchfield shop-links.co/cguPK8XEGmt Best Buy Deals shop-links.co/cf9yDZeYtUH amzn.to/3GkNaop CAM Store (New Products!) bit.ly/30Lgu4K apos.audio?sca_ref=552340.TY98BPcZ6P massdrop.7eer.net/qnOye5 Amazon Unlimited Music and Disney Plus Free Trial amzn.to/3DRAVj9

[@Music.Movies.67]

cheapaudioman You have a lot of scam on this post from

[@JoshHare85]

Great video. I have a 2008 Onkyo AV Receiver with outdated HDMI (1.4) and still use it for 2 channel & home theatre sound with a HDFury splitter to send the 4K video signal to the TV and the sound to the Onkyo. Still sounds great but not ideal for ease of use

[@mistymangham4410]

I'm in the process of building a HiFi system for my home. I'm on a very strict budget. I've got a pair of PIONEER tower speakers (90s model) I'm going to be getting a pair of Boston HD5 to be hooked up to a TOSHIBA SD-6109C I have a TEAC dual cassette. I'm excited. Are these the highest end in AUDIOPHILE products no, but I'm sure it will work for what I need. Just curious if I need a center speaker my receiver is 5 channel 50 watts per channel. Much appreciated for your advice.

[@englishsteve1465]

@@mistymangham4410 Music isn't usually mixed with use of a centre channel unless it's a surround mix (still very rare) and good stereo will throw a phantom centre image for vocals anyway. I would advise a subwoofer instead, you could then set it up so that anything below say 100 hz goes only to the sub, therebye taking the pressure off your older speakers to reproduce these difficult lower frequencies. Good luck and happy listening ! lol.

[@mistymangham4410]

@@englishsteve1465 thank you for the advice. Very much appreciated.

[@dkeener13]

Great points, this is one of your best videos IMO. You're at your best calling out some of the bogus price practices in this industry. They do it because they can, and they can because so many of their buyers are suckers.

[@getahanddown]

The power supplies are made for multiple channels and often a sub, using good efficiency 2ch they never sag. Clean power is always #1

[@danielbrown2715]

I agree, there is sometimes "my amplifier is more expensive than yours little man" mentality amongst some audiophiles. Having said that Avr's do sell in FAR greater numbers than 2 channel so i t is significantly cheaper for a manufacturer to fit to avr's as a result.

[@skonopik]

This gives me hope that I may be able to recover from the syndrome of being a lifelong suckaface and be able to do what I set out to do and what we ALL SHOULD RETURN TO!! to the music. Don't let the haters dim your shine Randy youre what the rock was cookin' believe that!

[@Drinkyoghurt]

People are willing to buy volume knobs that are "acoustically superior" for $500. If people are willing to give their money away to feel superior about themselves, who are we to stop them?

[@jskyg68]

Why did video cards come to mind when i read this comment? hmmm

[@keithjohnson2863]

Other reasons for AVRs are: 1) preouts and bass management for sub woofers. 2) many have a built in headphone jack. 3) can use the rear speakers for 4 channel stereo, front and rear on each side get the same signal.

[@khoi83]

Buy a nad C399 STEREO integrated and you get ALL that and more, like double sub outs and eArc etc.

[@will3346]

@@khoi83 yes however they cost significantly more than the AVR I have which can do all of that and process video.

[@khoi83]

@@will3346 buy used =)

[@will3346]

@@khoi83 I bought my AVR used for about half of what it cost the year before. I highly doubt a used nad could beat that price.

[@khoi83]

@@will3346 the suggested PIONEER Elite VSXLX305 costs here in Canada around 2700 $ taxes and shipping included. I got my NAD C399 with dirac and BluOS card, used like new, 2650 $ =)

[@Mark-hb2zy]

I think the price differences is partly because the 2 channel market is these days a much smaller niche market than home theatre. So they're looking for bigger profit margins to make up the loss from smaller sales volume. Also as you said as well, an AVR is obsolete after a few years so people are repeatedly buying them, unlike a 2 Channel amp that may last a lifetime.

[@mychildrenareashamedtobese3398]

If I am using the AVR for music...Will it really be obsolete in a few years? I have an old AVR from the early 2000 s with a legit high current 125 per channel. It's obsolete for my theater but it's still pretty great for pushing music.

[@Wolfstanus]

@@mychildrenareashamedtobese3398 Considering people are using AVR that are 20 plus years old for music and they can cost over 1k on the second hand market for certain models? Probably not since most music isn't even in surround in the first place. The only music I have that is in true surround sound are from video games and on CD and not on MP3 and even then thats like 4 out of the dozen I have. MP3 versions that I have right from the company are in stereo. HDCP made many receivers obsolete but you really don't need your receiver for video as its not really doing anything to video. Just connect through ARC or through optical and you're golden until the receiver dies are they stop using hdmi and optical.

[@nuggyfresh6430]

AVRs becoming obsolete is bogus dude. What are you even talking about. An AVR gets obsolete for VIDEO, not audio. And we aren't even talking about video because 2 channels don't even do video period. A good AVR with strong hookups and high quality amp/dac is going to be just as good for music 20 years from now if all you want is something that "does music good". Just a bizarre argument to make imo. When people say an AVR will be obsolete, they mean some new surround sound standard or video standard will come out that it won't support, how does this affect audiophile listening? Hint, it does not

[@Kryptic1046]

@@nuggyfresh6430 - Exactly. I have two home theater set-ups in different rooms, both using Pioneer Elite receivers from the '07-'10 era. I don't use receivers to handle video, I do all of that directly from the sources to my TVs/monitors. If the only thing someone's interested in with a receiver is the sound portion of it (like me), a high-end receiver with good processing and a strong amp from 10 or 15 years ago (or even older) is still going to sound good now. Audio tech has not advanced anywhere near enough over the past couple decades to render older HT receivers "obsolete."

[@toddblack3957]

I love this video. I use an outdated 2000s Sony AV receiver as my main two channel amp. I use a Little Dot Mk II as a preamp to put that golden tube goodness on it, a Schiit Modi 3+ dac, and Loki Mini Plus. This runs into vintage Infinity SM-152 speakers and a polk sub just for that very bottom end of the range. Im getting 145 watts per channel, and I've dialed all this in from speaker placement to the settings of everything. To my ears it sounds absolutely fantastic. I am a genuine cheap audio guy and loving it lol.

[@rickt.223]

Wife and I purchased a new home so I’m updating my 14 yo home theater gear. My 2010 Pioneer Elite SC-27 will move to my home office and serve as my 2-channel exclusive amp along with the Pioneer Elite Blue Ray player. The SC-27’s ICEpower-based Class D amp (140 WPC at 8 ohm) will power my B&W 686 bookshelf speakers. I thought about spending money on a Rotel with 35 WPC but you’ve convinced me my “old” AVR is more than capable of creating the sound I want. Thank you…

[@anthonyhfe6450]

Call me old-fashioned but I listen to movies in two-channel stereo. The average livingroom I think is not likely to have a AVR and a 2-channel integrated amp/receiver. So they're listening to music on the AVR. I don't buy into the audiophile snobbery that an AVR cannot sound good in two-channel stereo mode!! I'm not saying all of them sound good, but some can, and do. Having three AVR now (Sony, Onkyo, and Yamaha) from over the last 4 or 5 decades, I can say the audio quality is pleasing. I've been an audio nut since the '70s. I restore and repair many types of equipment (as a hobby). I listen to everything from tubes, to transistors, to an old Victrola from 1917. Now we just acquired a Yamaha RX-V863, 7.1 AVR. It's from around 2006 or 2007. In 2- channel stereo mode it sounds pretty darn good, especially with a CD player connected. Keep in mind the power supply in a quality AVR must be large enough to run all 7 amplification channels at once. So when you use this huge power supply to run only two channels, you have endless reserves of current. It's got two, 12,000uF caps rated at 71VDC, running at +/- 57VDC. Plenty of energy storage there. But there's always a compromise. To fit all the output transistors n the heatsink, smaller output transistors had to be used (but rated at 140V, 10Amps they're pretty respectable). I was hoping that the front main channels would have larger output devices but this is not the case, perhaps it was cheaper for Yamaha to standardized on less variations of output devices to keep costs down on a receiver that is already around $700 or so when new. So with a dedicated 2-channel all analog amp, you are likely to have much larger output transistors, and a much, much greater lifespan in the component. And you may or may not have better sound quality. That's up to you to decide. Running this Yamaha into some older Polk RT-35 speakers sounds real clear, and will make your ears bleed if you like it loud. Now to the bad part. AVR are loaded with crap that makes them hard to fix, impossible to fix, or not worth fixing when they have an issue. The plethora or circuit board assemblies, microprocessors, Digital features just, unfortunately, give them a much shorter lifespan than a quality 2-channel all analog amplifier (check your zeroes and ones at the door folks). So if an AVR sounds good to you with you music sources in 2-channel stereo. Enjoy it!! When it dies simply "place it at the curb" (recycle it) as it may not be worth the cost to repair.

[@ProfessorHamer]

You missed a trick on the last point. Old receivers with hdmi audio, even if they are limited to 1080p, you can simply use an hdmi splitter with scaler to take the audio. Ezcoo has one for about $40, it sends the 4K to one output, and 1080p with multichannel lpcm to the other output. It’s kept my 2007 Yamaha receiver from being redundant, and performs exactly as always.

[@stevelouie5928]

You can get used home theater receivers for dirt cheap because some of the inputs are obsolete for the video portion. But if you just use it as a stereo receiver it still functions perfectly.

[@felixlaboy1453]

Yes I agree I got my Pioneer Elite for under 200 and I love it.

[@stevelouie5928]

@@felixlaboy1453 People that need the latest and greatest typically give away electronics. Speakers on the other hand.. those are hard to come by on the cheap. So my advice is to spend the most of your budget on speakers.

[@felixlaboy1453]

@@stevelouie5928 Thanks buddy I really appreciate that advice.

[@eespinosa64]

That's what I'm doing with my Pioneer VSX-4600 AV receiver.l. Bought it in '92 and it still kicks ass. The remote still works, too

[@felixlaboy1453]

@@eespinosa64 I’m actually very impressed with how they do sound. Even to two channel listening. The movies play well

[@bluecalix]

I like the Onkyo TX-8270 quite a bit. 2.1 channel integrated, with all the streaming goodness you could want, HDMI switching, solid built in DAC, bass management for a sub, dual antenna for WiFi and hardwired ethernet, phono preamp, Sonos/Airplay/chromecast. Had it for 5 years and it's very sturdy. Not my end state by any means, but it's a great little package with a huge amount of features for not too much $$ if you can find them.

[@chillpengeru]

I got the tx nr6100, I honestly should've just gotten a stereo receiver because I really don't have room for surround sound, but it has all the stuff you listed and sound good. I just probably could've spent the same or less on a stereo receiver with better quality but oh well.

[@Per12189]

I'm waiting for the Onkyo TX8260 I recently bought.

[@13_13k]

I'm running my old Yamaha DSP - A3090 7.1 for music. It rocks. There are so many settings and options it's insane

[@dennism1919]

Very good video. You struck a nerve! I am running a Denon AVR-2800CI as a 2-channel amp in my bedroom and I love it. I feed it with a SMSL M200 DAC as a source for Amazon HD via cell/USB and it's incredible. It truly is amazing how musical these old HT rigs are.

[@lanceevans1689]

After decades with high-end music audio gear, I tossed it for a home theater in the living room, a $400 Yamaha RX - V379 with a BIC surround 5.1 speaker system ($700-800 at a guess). Amazingly good for home theater use. And reasonably good for pure music reproduction. I could swap out two better front speakers and improve that. However the center speaker and subwoofer from BIC are quite excellent.

[@spellacy29]

I use the 'multi channel stereo' setting on my Denon av receiver for all my music listening. I realise this is heresy, but it completely fills my living room with high quality sound. I love it

[@jeffsussman9310]

Randy I went through this when I bought my Heresy IVs. I had them hooked up to a Yamaha RX-A1070. The 2 channel performance was just ok. Clear sounding but I had to use DSP modes to get any real satisfaction. After auditioning some 2 channel integrated amps from Cambridge, Denon, and Vincent, I finally tried and kept the Outlaw Audio RR 2160 Mk II stereo receiver. It plays well in my living room video setup and sounds excellent. $999. You gotta audition the Outlaw.

[@rianredfield5252]

Thumbs up for Outlaw rr2150, well beyond in bass mgmt arena. 2.2 with RSL Speedwoofer 10s and Fluance xl7f. Add sources and good to go...on the cheap too!

[@Edward135i]

Another point that I'd make is a lot of music is starting to be released in ATMOS, so your going to want a AVR anyways so that you can listen to music in suround sound. I have a Denon AVR x4700h that I use for everything, music sounds great on it. it even has 2 channel mode where when you switch it into stereo you can have a totally different calibration from surround sound. For instance in stereo mode you can tell the AVR to run the speakers full range and shut the subwoofers off.

[@seanhilliard7995]

Absolutely love my Marantz 2 channel NR1200 paired with my KLH model 5s. I’m surprised this AVR isn’t talked about more than it is.

[@Pentenfi]

Great product. I recommended that stereo receiver to a friend who wanted his first stereo. People want features. And it checks all the boxes

[@oishikplays]

Timestamps: 0:46 - DSP 2:21 - EQ 4:01 - Price 6:52 - HDMI connectivity 8:44 - Feature set 11:13 - Surround sound 12:10 - Two-channel tax 14:25 - But..

[@gabrielmease1169]

I have a Marantz NR1609 AVR. After doing all of the HiFi research it was an easy decision. I have a TV at the center of my setup. AVR's with a pre-out let you play with external amps for your stereo setup. Best of both worlds. Glad I went that route.

[@mychildrenareashamedtobese3398]

This is one of your best videos. The only downside to using an AVR as a 2 channel is form factor. Even if the HDMI world moves on, the amp still works as an amp.

[@12GaugeLeadSalad]

I just want to say I have the Pioner VSX-LX505 and I absolutely love it. I mainly got it for the pre-outs so I can do 7.2.4 if I ever buy another sub. Whats really funny is I'm using Jamo 809 towers with the atmos modules, S803 and S801 bookshelves and their S83 center channel. I guess some people say you're supposed to go with expensive speakers and budget amps, I did not know this. 🤷‍♂

[@sbaisden100]

Randy: I have two receivers: A Marantz 1403 (5.1 AVR w/Audessey) I paid $250 bucks for (discontinued product) and a Harman 1510 (AVR) I paid $300. Both of them sound great and I actually prefer the "cheap" Harman (I find it a bit more neutral than the Marantz). You can tell the build quality of the Marantz is about 6,000 times better but the sound quality is about equal. My point is you don't have to spend $1,000 - $3,000 to enjoy some sweet, sweet sounds.

[@TwoLastNames]

The thing for me is that I’m already going to be buying a new AVR every 5 years or so as I’m into home theater. Considering that, I’m perfectly happy to use it for my two-channel listening as well, for all of the reasons you mentioned.

[@jamesminotto8036]

Spot on! I have a Yamaha RX-V6A AVR coupled with my Polk TST 300 towers for 2 channel use (the 2Polk towers, Polk CG10, subs(2) and Yamaha surrounds for my ATMOS setup. In two channel the sound is fantastic given it's an AVR. To your point. As an audiophile for over 45 years the dollar difference value is huge and the sonic differences small compared to expensive 2-channel setups which I also have in the same room.. The Yamaha costs around $700. Great video!

[@brodelicious]

If you’re buying today, a receiver with real HDMI 2.1 switching and e-ARC, then I think you’re safer than you were even 5 years ago. 4K 120 or 8K 60 with Atmos isn’t going to be obsolete like Dolby Pro Logic and the older surround formats are now. Simply because gaming consoles, streaming services and physical media aren’t going to be able to deliver these formats competently for a while yet.

[@exit4design]

Great video, Randy. I found your comment near the end of the video that “it’s exciting to have a home theater receiver sound as good as it does now, because that wasn’t the case even a couple years ago” especially interesting. I have two AV receivers - a Pioneer from 2011 and an Integra from 2009. Both have Audessy room correction, which makes a big improvement, but they still don’t come anywhere close to the sound I get from my Mytek Brooklyn Bridge and Amp combo. Now, the Mytek combo is nearly $5k, so I would hope it would blow the socks off a $500 receiver from 12 years ago. That said, I recently “downgraded” to a NAD M10 because it has most of the features I want (except a built-in phono stage) plus it has Dirac. I found the NAD with Dirac configured to smooth out my speakers’ (Dali Opticon 6) and room’s anomalies to sound better than the Mytek setup, which doesn’t have Dirac… and the NAD is like half the price! I hadn’t considered going for an AVR just because I didn’t think it would sound nearly as good as a dedicated 2-channel setup. If AVRs really have gotten that much better sounding in recent years, I may have to check out the Pioneer or some others around that price. Who knows, maybe I can have similarly awesome 2-channel sound and cut my cost in half yet again! 😲

[@Dry1nk]

This was an excellent video! I have been doing AV work for nearly two decades and an AVR has been a practical, solid solution for many of my clients and myself at home. Most of the people I have run across use their space for television/movies and music. If someone is creating a dedicated listening room, I can see that being a different animal. The flexibility and sound quality that modern AVRs have is remarkable in a lot of ways. You do however get what you pay for, and some of the HT Receivers aren't worth a second glance.

[@chrisyoung8946]

I really like your insight and find the info you provide very valuable to someone like me who is working, raising a family, etc., BUT appreciates good sounding music and is annoyed by bad sounding music. I don't have time to audition 10 different receivers or integrated amps. Please keep it up!

[@danielbrown2715]

Here's a thing Randy, Top of the line AV receivers from 20 years ago were better built and better sounding in stereo than ones today but as you said now just glorified paper weights because of hdmi so, on ebay for just around £100 you can buy something like a yamaha DSPA1 £3000 and 30kg in 2003 which sound fantastic in 2 channel audio i know i have one, recently compared it to £1000 Cambridge cxa81 and it blew the Cambridge out of the water! There are loads of top of the range avr's from yesteryear on ebay for crazy cheap prices, if you got the space and a strong shelf it's the way to go. The internal quality of those older totl avr's is simply better than today i guess because they were not trying to cram so much in. Check them out you might be tempted, good comparison video (old avr vs new hifi amp) Love the channel.

[@ricksmith7659]

100% correct

[@TheTruthTeller1111]

Awesome video! I've been saying this for a decade! I've waited over a decade to upgrade my receiver! I'm finally getting the new Onkyo TX-RZ50, I should have it Monday evening. I've been blowing off upgrading to an HDMI receiver as I have just been using the optical output on my Panasonic plasma. My old Onkyo TX-DS939 died and I have been using a 15 year old Marantz in the interim.

[@artyfhartie2269]

With my Marantz SR 7005 made in Japan, I use it as a home theatre AVR and a two channel amp in bi amp mode as per the manual instructions (AMP C) .Audyssey is disabled ( Yeh) The trick with floor standing speakers like mine with dual binding posts (straps removed) is to ignore all the BS. Set all level at 0, all distance 8 feet, all large, and all frequencies at 80 hz including so called LFE. And plus main. With a sub, forget all the bs again. just turn the volume until you hear the low bass kicking in and set cut off at 80 hz. Incredible.

[@nate6862]

Picked up an Arcam AVR350 this weekend locally for $25 looking forward to setting it up exclusively for music, this thing is HEAVY

[@peterlarkin762]

Probably one of the best used deals ever. Those are class G, designed by Harman, and maintain high quality.

[@totalplonker824]

That's an amazing find! I love the arcam sound

[@zepar221]

That's a way better deal than I got...nice score.

[@wg5768]

I don't think you touched on this,but one of the pluses for a AVR is convenience. One unit to do music and home theater. Your comment about AVRS becoming obsolete was right on. When I upgrade my old big screen tv, I'll have to upgrade my AVR as well in order to pass 4k or 8k signals. My wallet can't keep up with the speed of changing technology!

[@roadfordays]

DSP is a double-edged sword in most consumer-grade receivers, because it all runs at a single crappy 48 kHz sampling rate. They "support" higher sampling rates, but it all gets down-sampled to 48kHz before it is processed. Not only do you lose the resolution of hi-res sources, but who knows whether the resample is any good to start with. The same goes for analog inputs if you use the DSP, which is required for bass management, even if you aren't using room correction or EQ. Your phono input is getting first converted into digital via whatever crappy analog-to-digital converters they throw in (they know these converters will never be used by 90% of buyers, so you can bet they are not high quality), then processed with DSP, then converted back into analog for amplification. The sound quality difference between direct mode and 2.1 stereo on my Onkyo's analog inputs is instantly noticeable, and I have to assume it's mostly the unavoidable digital conversion for bass management. The difference for digital sources is much more subtle but still there. The only workaround I've been able to identify is to pony up for a receiver that has pre-outs, which the Onkyo RZ-50 has but the Pioneer doesn't. Then you can run your analog sources (including the output from any quality outboard DAC you want to run) in direct mode, and send the front channel preouts to something like a miniDSP for bass management (carefully setting the crossover to work with your front speakers in full range), and then to the right channel input on your sub. The LFE output of your receiver goes to the left input of the sub, like usual. Analog inputs run in direct mode and still get the sub, and you run surround sources normally and also get the sub. The sub will have an unavoidable A/D/A conversion, but for bass it probably doesn't matter as long as the latency is below the limits of perception. Of course, you will have the same challenge with any kind of DSP, regardless of device. You're subject to the internal sample rates, and unless you are running DSP prior to DAC conversation (Dirac can do this if you pay lots of $$$ for a stand-alone all-digital box prior to DAC or use your laptop as a source), you are adding a full A/D/A conversion on your previously analog source. There are some 2-channel amps out there that have sub outs without DSP, but they are usually either full-range mono outputs, or are limited to whatever crossover was baked-in at the factory, so it's not the same as real bass management.

[@louiesipes2257]

I suppose my biggest argument against an AV receiver would be switching. My first and last Sony ES AV was bought over 25 years ago. It lived 10 years before something inside died and would not switch inputs. Back in went my wiper style preamp. Now, I did have to crack it open last year to clean with Deoxit, but it still works. 💁

[@Jwalker76]

Thank you Randy, for this video and your previous works. I'm someone who has been out of the home hifi world for the last 15 years. I have some old (15 years roughly) hifi gear. A Sony receiver which is a surround sound which at the time I bought was quite good or so I thought it was. At the time I thought the higher the watts RMS a receiver the better. It has no HDMI connections which I thought was really bad after hearing another channel say HDMI is better than optical for sound, which I'm guessing if you're into movies maybe true, but I want it now more for music. I was also starting to think that maybe 2 channel systems were superior to my surround system for music. I'm watching your older content and I learn something new everyday from your channel. Like that phono on a receiver has a preamp, which may have helped my Father from frying his equipment as he has been using the phono on his receiver for the TV and his record player into another channel.

[@Pentenfi]

Best thing ist that AVRs have preouts. So you can still use your precious beloved most audiophile 2 channel amp and have all the features of a modern AVR. Most 2 channel integrated amps have no preouts, so adding subs has to be using the high level route (which is what I have to do). There is no crossover though. If you want that, you need additional components

[@avidgamefan]

I’m not sure most AVRs have preouts. I think mine might have 1pair for zone 2, so you might be right if only concerned about stereo playback, but when shopping, I found it a bit frustrating that it seemed like you had to get more expensive top of the line AVRs to get full preouts. Seems to me like it used to be common to have them. Dedicated 2 channel amps have some advantage, but I still use the AVR’s amp. It’s fine, if not pushed too hard.

[@keithholmes6776]

Hi I discovered my Denon AV amp has Audyssey built in and I looked at the eq and was blown away by how much correction was being applied to ALL my speakers including my main left and right connected to my Audiolab 8300a. Great shout! Thanks so much.

[@jim010109]

I think you have some valid points, the only problem is some or a lot of these AVR'S aren't available due to the chip shortages. And most of integrated stuff from Yamaha, Rotel, NAD, Audiolab is in stock. I guess I just need to be more patient, lol. Great video, keep up the good work.

[@Maurizzio_]

High pass filter on mains, low pass filter on subs, eq, you got your dirac but manual on AVR's. Only node and maybe other few have sub out and high pass filtering, I can't believe how much is being spent on mid level streamers without sub out or crossover capabilities. I started my journey on AVR's, they are definately capable, but you just can't compete with higher class integrated's with good quality speakers to power. In any case, it depends on the application, but definately I agree on marginal gains in a 1-3K price bracket. Great great insight.

[@bgroovin1343]

The shirt! Classic! You need to start providing links for all the awesome shirts you wear.

[@wilkinru]

eARC is amazing. I'm just a newb, but I run everything through my TV into the receiver. I'm happy.

[@adammandel5216]

I agree with your conclusion. I have an NAD M10. The HDMI switching never worked. And the unit broken down twice. NAD was unable to fix it in a timely manner during the first malfunction yet, they were also reluctant to replace the unit (until the dealer intervened). When I visited the service center after the replacement unit broke, the servicer mentioned that another M10 has been sitting in the shop for 7 months waiting for replacement parts. To make matters worse, although I loved the M10 form factor and dirac implementation, I preferred the sound I achieved when I used the M10 as a preamp for a much cheaper class AB amp. As I sit and wait for the unit to be fixed a second time, I can't help but think I'd be way off better using simple AV receiver or processer as a preamp. It feels like these mid-to-high-end audio companies just don't do the volume needed to perfect complicated electronics. An AVR would have been cheaper, provided more features, and been more reliable. Heck, it would have effective HDMI switching and Dolby decoding. Sure, the receiver or processor would suffer from obsolescence. But so will a feature-packed 2-channel integrated with many of the same features but fewer amplification channels. The alternative is to go with an unwieldy number of separates that could be serviced and replaced as they break or get outdated. But it would be hard to achieve synergy, cost much more, and be impossible to use for other family members. What would seal my position on AVRs is the effective integration of dirac, preouts, and wireless rear speakers (e.g., similar to yamaha's implementation of music cast and sonos integration rears with the sonos amp) in a reasonable form factor. That would allow for super high quality wired 2-channel sound and easy double duty for home theater. End of rant.

[@kurtislowe6749]

I think we need to make it clear that I feel like he's referring to the budget world. If you got 5-10-20 grand and up then you have so many high end 2 channel amps and preamps that will blow all this stuff away. If you're playing at the under 5 grand (round about figure) then I think what he's saying is valid.

[@conkerman01]

I have a NAD T778. It's a banger. Not cheap, but sounds great and has BluOS built in. I agree, Dirac is a game changer.

[@preauxtip]

I've been building a hifi system for my new turntable hobby and working with old stuff I already had so I was using my old Denon AVR S720W. I saw no reason to spend money on anything else when this thing has Audyssey, streams spotify for me (without a single hiccup ever I might add), has airplay, sounds good enough too. Using that Denon AVR has allowed me to spend money on a better overall system and most importantly, buying more vinyls!

[@mykschafe4728]

Completely agree here...it really goes back to what sounds good to you and what works for your situation. The rest is fodder for good conversation.

[@AA-ws3vd]

Yes perfect timing. Our AVR is the center/heart of the AV setup

[@rianredfield5252]

Must admit in 6channel mode, the Onkyo txnr737 did sound pretty good in the past. Also enjoyed the sr7005 from Marantz in 2.1channel as well. Used market still a safe bet if beware! Thanks for your time CAM aka Randy.

[@robvermeulen]

Good points. I have used AV receivers for my stereo listening for ages. But don't discard HDMI on a 2 chn receiver as "just an input". It also allows for a great integrated use of the TV's remote control. But since almost every AV receiver has that feature, it would be really weird if you would pay $2000 more, just for that. Thanks Randy!

[@Dis-Emboweled]

I just found your channel and I got to say, I'm having fun! I have been sticking with midrange THX receivers for 20+ years and have been pretty darnd happy with my setups. I'm about a 60/40 movie to music guy so the AV receivers make more sense for me. I actually should shoot video of my setups in my areas... "real audiophiles" would cringe and puke their IPAs out while screaming at their screens in discust at how I have my rooms set up!!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Love the channel man!

[@tmdillon1969]

I went from a 90s Marantz two-channel to a Yamaha 7.1 system. I love having the TV integrated into everything but I swear it's never sounded as good. But part of that is the room too. When I first had that 2 channel system it was in an apartment built in the late 30s with high ceilings, plaster walls, and wood floors. It was a "lively" room and those Mirage speakers paired perfectly. Now my system is in an upstairs room with carpet, slanted walls following the roof line, and a low ceiling. There's just no "there" there anymore. Functional and integrated but nothing that makes you want to listen to another song. I'm thinking of some DIY CSS speakers that might rekindle the setup. Or maybe the Yamaha just isn't a great core.

[@Music4thsoul]

I absolutely agree with you, I've got the marantz NR1710, pretty much similar room scenario, love my music, home theatre meh i can do without and I'm not getting the as you say "there's just no there anymore, I'm getting my self a rotel A11 integrated and getting back the there in my love for music. As for movies I'm happy to go back to 2 speakers and if I want surround I'll go to the cinema and watch a movie

[@a.drewwalker9662]

Soooo, sometimes you find a vid who's timing is perfect with a 'eureka' moment. This rarely happens... and this vid is 1 of those moments. A friend had a simple system with solid power and great speakers with bluetooth to stream music and his tv hooked up. Music audio specific but added bonus of tv coming thru system. I could care less how great my tv sounds thru said system because its still better than built in speakers. I care greatly how the music sounds... but to have those options are amazing. Some receivers now add phono in, mic drop done. Your vids have schooled me and my praise & thanks are deep n profound....

[@lgude]

I’ve never used a home theatre amp and wondered if they were worth exploring for music. This head to head comparison with 2 channel set ups tells me everything I need to know. I tend to use separate components WIMM streamer, iFi DAC, SMSL amp, polystyrene exciter driven speakers and a separate sub. But I’ve been thinking about a surround sound set up using a home theatre amp - this gives me what I needed to try it. A used one will probably do very nicely before considering an up to date one. Great episode! Thanks.

[@paradoxicalcat7173]

I have a home cinema set up and use it a hell of a lot more for listening to music (everything from average MP3 to FLAC lossless) and even on my older equipment, I'm more than satisfied with the result! I can hear the differences in quality of the audio, and the detail does come out of the music if you bother to sit and get it set up correctly. NOTHING sounds its best out-of-the-box. It's insanity to think they would.

[@danielprivate7442]

My HT system lets me optimize and save my 2.1 setup for music, so when I switch modes everything is ready to go. Pretty convenient actually. Music sounds fine through a Denon AVR.

[@munkenstraillb8642]

Also bass management. Most AVs have better bass management that the 2-Channel counterparts.

[@dans550]

I bought the Yamaha RXA2 for it's 2 channel capability, and musicality, totally low midlevel and sounds fantastic

[@mindzoid]

I feel compelled to mention the "topic screens," e.g., 2 Channel Tax, high pitched background (noise, music, sound FX?). I watch on my TV with the surrounds and it gets to me. Just wanted to throw that out there. Keep it coming with the great content.

[@billpetersenjr.5781]

I totally agree with you on this video I have the Marantz NR1510 and it has the audyssey software. Our entertainment room is an oddball room so the Audyssey really helped with setup for the surround setup (utilizing the built-in ceiling surround speakers that came w/ the house) and my own Polk bookcase monitors. Audyssey allows me to setup up each input with its own listening profile for the Phono, Spotify, & CDs. And being able to switch back and forth between the Audyssey room correction settings and my own dialed in EQ settings. Same for the headphones. I can switch between the direct neutral setting or my EQ settings depending on input. The other nice thing is have the HEOS software for multi room listening. The other thing about the newer Marantz AVRs is that they have done a better job of circuit isolation and shutoff depending on how you listen to the input. When in headphone mode, it shuts off everything that isn't needed. Our next house will have a more dedicated listening/movie room and I'm looking at a few integrated amps for the flexibility for movie and music. I may opt to use the NR1510 for the movie room and a really nice 2 channel setup for the home office/music room.

[@MaybeTiberius]

Kind of simple to me: as an average person i just have an audio setup. But it needs to do movies and music like probably 99,9% of the setups out there. Might a dedicated amp setup sound nicer? maybe, i dont know. But i m more than happy with how my avr sounds plus it does EVERYTHING. The only way i would even consider a dac amp setup is if i had a big house and a dedicated music listening room. i dont have either of those. And i also dont have the money or time to fiddle in seperate amps and dacs into my home theater just so i can switch amps and cables around when music is played. i wanna come home, sit down and play whatever music or movie i want and an avr does just that.

[@paulleggett9735]

100% this. Common sense.

[@artgarcia116]

Hey Randy, you have to review the Marantz NR1200. Has all of the above and is priced welll.

[@danielkent4217]

As someone with a Denon 3600 wanted to go to a NAD M10 this really shifted my thought process. I might just upgrade the tower speakers and add a power amp so I can have the best of both worlds and save money.

[@insurrectionindustries1706]

The crazy part is that goes up another level when you only have preamplifiers to do all that, it literally costs money to take the amplifier out of a two channel integrated. I had to spend more to get a fully featured To channel preamplifier simply because I really wanted to use a specific amplifier that I had.

[@anthonybielobockie4991]

I ordered an AVR receiver model with preamp outputs because the dedicated AVR preamp with the same features cost twice as much. Most of the amplifiers in the receiver will go unused. The pricing doesn't make any logical sense to me other than they must make so many more receivers that the economy of scale brings the pricing down for the receivers?

[@TM-fx2pi]

Great points. Thanks. I can relate to AVR’s becoming obsolete. Years ago, I bought an NAD AVR. It was bad ass….. at the time. Lots of good power. It was HEAVY. After about fifteen years, the technology and back panel connectivity became outdated. I could have kept it as a two channel receiver but the video portion was difficult especially with converter boxes, adapter s a mile of wires and wall worts. I traded it in and began my current two channel journey a couple of years ago. Never looking back. Bought a separate cheap onkyo 5.1 for tv.

[@dananskidolf]

Absolutely right about the rip-offs. HT receivers struggle to keep noise low so if your stereo amp costs 3 times as much and sounds worse, you've been utterly ripped off. It's common because it's so easy to get away with in hifi where people are attracted by high price and 'bad' can be sold as 'character', whereas HT receivers are a consumer product where the competition is on value for money and even worth a hit on margins. But there are good 2 channel amps out there that'll smash any HT receiver at the price, if only the signal was eq'd. With that in mind, I will begrudgingly go through the hassle of making convolution filters for Roon for my two-channel setups until a simpler EQ method arises. Oh but one other pro with HT receivers - you should be able to connect two biampable speakers as four channels and use the tasty tasty EQ to fine-tune the crossovers. Throw in a sub too!

[@cliph6068]

We recently replaced our FL/FR/C with KEF LS50 Metas in our home theater 5.1 setup in a small condo. Out of our Marantz AVR they sound great for HT but rather mediocre for music, even with Audyssey. Part of it is power related, but it's also the rest of the chain. We tried a number of 2 channel integrated amps in HT bypass mode running the FL/FR channels. It definitely helped with power but the AVR processing was still a weakness for 2 channel. Listening to 2 channel directly through the integrated amps sounded much better to us. One of the integrated amps we tested was the Arcam SA30 which has Dirac. We preferred the sound without Dirac enabled for 2 channel listening. Ended up buying the Lyngdorf TDAI-1120 so we could use RoomPerfect correction and integrate our subwoofer for both 2 channel and HT, and we are very pleased with the result. Not only is it the best room correction we've heard, but the integrated amp does a seamless job blending our sub with the mains.

[@LencoTB]

I just got my LS50 Metas and saw your comment. I live in Denmark where Lyngdorfs originate from. My main requirement is HDMI ARC. I’ve been looking at PowerNode3, Nad C700 and the Lyngdorf you mentioned. I even thought of Sonos Amp because it has 125W. It seems you tried a lot so what would you recommend?

[@JohnKelly2]

I'm also a cheap audio man, but most of mine comes from thrift stores, garage sales and Facebook marketplace. I have a Marantz NR 1604 receiver that I got for free because "it doesn't work". They had lost the remote, and it requires a remote for setup, so I bought a replacement remote and it works perfectly. It's still amazing as a receiver, but it slays as a 2 channel. It has menu options so you can configure it as a 2 channel if you'd like. All the built in streaming stuff is obsolete, because they stopped updating the apps. It doesn't matter anyway because they required an ethernet connection, no Wi-Fi. I use a Sony 4k TV with Chromecast and eARC and everything works fine.

[@DAVID-io9nj]

Main point for me is multiple HDMI connection and sub-out with selectable crossover point.

[@phatjbl]

Hi Randy this makes perfect sense on a budget. I recently tried a used Denon Avr 3133 reciever for the hell of it. I have to say in two channel direct mode it exceeded my expectations completely. Connected to it was a pair of very revealing Electrovoice Inteface One speakers and a quality Rotel Rcd 1572 cd player. Sure I have better amps but I wouldn't be sad if I was stuck using the now 8 year old Denon. I sell hardware these day as I believe the hifi industry is evermore into marketing and price gouging. Thumbs up mate.

[@nonehart8017]

K... Love your stuff first of all. To be short is to say some of my fav. Speakers will cause high-end marantz a/v sets to shut down. Duntech 4ohm rated at low mid 90s db. I can run a vintage NAD 3020 and i cant say it would not shut down ever. But if you get pasted 3-4 on the volume neighbors might knock on the door. Oh.. and even with 6ohm speakers same. Wish i could be happy with the use of an A/V with speakers I love an A/V makes me use speakers that I like and think are well more than fine but the LOVE of the music is not the same

[@bassandtrebleclef]

I'm using 8 year old Dynaudios, a 15 year old Musical Fidelity integrated and recently bought a Bluesound Node 2i (essentially serving as a streaming Pre-amp). Good sounding speakers will likely always sound good. Same goes for integrateds, although that will need to be serviced in the next few years.

[@stansteez]

DSP boards are the #1 component which breaks down on these HT Receivers so you are left with a useless. There are also examples of EQs with DSP add-ons which turn out to be worse than the ones without. A prime example would be the Technics SH-GE70 (classic Graphic EQ) vs. the SH-GE90 (EQ+DSP).

[@CraigArnolduk]

Correct. There is an affordable 2-channel solution too though. Wiim mini, MiniDSP Flex for Dirac, pro amp like Behringer A800 or Crown. => Streaming, Dirac Live, tons of clean power. You get the same features as the expensive all-in-ones and with equivalent or sometimes better measurements too at less than half the cost.

[@lsaideOK]

I'm not so worried about the built-in obsolescence of AVRs. I was able to sell my older unit when I got my newer AVR a couple years back. Obviously didn't get a great return but the couple hundred bucks helped me with the new purchase. Reliability is more of an issue as my current AVR is having some difficulties. Just one month past its warranty. ☹️

[@TheGreatTomDix]

It’s just mind blowing to me that some people don’t realize this! Optical digital input and preouts are your friend in a a reciever. Apparently many of these recievers make make a great headphone amp too!

[@mattsynth]

I run a 6-year-old Marantz AV7001 surround processor for both movies and music. I run the B channel pre outs through a tube amp to tower speakers just for music. The best of both worlds but that dam HDMI always prevents me from running video through this old processor. I currently run all HDMI to my OLED tv and use optical out to the processor for sound. This works well and sounds great. You could not of told this story any better, HDMI always causes your equipment to be outdated.

[@My_Legs_Are_OK]

Just bought a used Yamaha RX-V771 for the reasons described in the video. TL:DR it has everything I wanted: at least some room correction, HDMI ARC, bi-amping mode (speakers I already had use it so why not), preout for potential external dsp - just perfect. And it’s a single, all in one device. It cost me $250 and an hour to get it and bring it home, which I think was well worth it. The story began with a move. In my old place my wife and I watched online content and even (oh no) occasionally listened to music via the TV audio. It was alright. I’m a headphone guy, and usually when it was important to have good sound quality I just used my DT880 with an emotiva amp. And there was no space to put any kind of speakers anyway. But then we moved. TV audio in the new place was unbearable, with huge bass standing waves. I couldn’t even watch KZbin, the resonance was killing my bloody ears. I tried using my amp with some speakers I bought for my PC, other speakers from an old technics music system with the amp they came with, still terrible. Naturally I started looking for ways to fix it. Bass traps were not an option, so eq it was. I also wanted HDMI ARC for better user experience. Nothing 2 channel came even close. Granted, I was not looking into the 3k price range… Yamaha’s room correction is no Dirac, but it helped. And I am considering a MiniDSP with Dirac (or even just for the precise parametric eq) to use with a preout on the receiver into the zone 2 input in the same receiver to use its amplifier. My tv remote turns the tv, apple tv and the receiver at the same time - it’s very convenient. Music can be played from Apple TV apps. I don’t care for surround sound formats, so the device being a bit obsolete is irrelevant. Not do I care for it not having airplay, streaming etc - everything is handled by the apple TV. The fact that we have to pay 3 grand for the same set of features in an audio only device is just stupid.

[@traildoggy]

I worry about any high end feature's that require an app. What if your 30 year old system right now required a 90's computer platform to use some feature's? I'm not at all confident there will be a way to use those feature's in 20 years.

[@daniannaci3258]

I’m surprised nobody has mentioned the Yamaha R-N803 network enabled 2-channel receiver that’s been around for a couple years. At 100 WPC/8 ohms (20-20 kHz @ 0.019% THD) real power with 290 WPC/2 ohm dynamic power from a true Class A/B amplifier, it should be able to drive any speaker, even difficult loads, in all but the most palatial of rooms. Complete with streaming capabilities and multi-room abilities through Yamaha’s MusicCast app and an internal DAC from ESS capable of DSD playback it should satisfy those wireless fans. No HDMI (which is of no benefit for 2 channel TV SQ) but there’s 2 coax, 2 optical and USB, though. Yes, there’s Bluetooth, Apple AirPlay, Apple 24/96 lossless and Yamaha’s own excellent YPAO room correction from Yamaha’s best HT receivers. Also a phono input, 2 tape loops, sub out, app control and Amazon and Google voice control capability. And a very good FM/AM tuner. Yet the front panel is complete, straightforward (bass and treble knobs and an awesome variable loudness knob) and is easily operable by all family members. And at 25 pounds it’s built like a brick outhouse. But the best part is that it retails for $849 (and will likely go on sale). Ya missed this one, Randy.

[@avidgamefan]

That sounds awesome. I need to keep that in mind next time I feel an upgrade. Probably sometime in the next decade. 😅

[@RileytheBunny]

Just ordered one!. Sadly they are discontiunued.

[@vikrambhaskar7976]

Randy you might wanna check out Marantz PM7000N. It's an integrated stereo amplifier with built in streaming. Would love to hear your thoughts

[@paulkerr9128]

Great video and I totally agree. I have always used AVRs for my two channel listening, both new and used. In fact older, high end AVRs, can be a real steal. I bought a used Onkyo TX-NR806 AVR for peanuts and use it as a two channel receiver. The thing is a beast at about 40lbs, huge amp section with 7 channels - 130W a channel and bi-ampable - and every type of connection you can think of, including a phono stage. The built in DAC is decent, but even with a better, newer, external DAC added it is still a bargain and sounds great. The only thing it doesn't have is any built in streaming capability. I just use my phone as a streamer anyway.

[@TopHatCat1989]

I've been using the same Denon AVR for the last 9 years and I hope to keep using it for a long time. Currently it's hooked up to my old 37" HDTV both hdmi and optical since my PS5 is plugged directly into the TV while the rest of my consoles(PS3 and PS4) and Chromecast Ultra is plugged into the AVR since I don't need all of the latest tech. Once I upgrade my TV I'll probably just keep using the optical connection until the AVR burns out then upgrade to a newer one with all the trimmings.

[@leo11877]

Bonus => Spatial Audio (Apple TV) + Crossover settings vs full range for optimal output + Dual Subwoofer support + much better remote

[@themarklar8759]

I think the biggest oversight on this video that I see, is that AVRs in many cases are not going to be able to properly drive 4 ohm speakers that are lower in sensitivity, in a stable fashion if you listen for extended periods at volumes in the 80-85db range and above. Heck, even my old 2 channel Rotel integrated amp (which is technically not rated as being stable down to 4ohm) doesn't always drive my KLH Model 5s without clipping (or occasionally even going into protection mode). And the Model 5s aren't even 4 ohm speakers (they're 6 ohm but dip down to 4). So, while I understand the assertion that one can in theory save a lot of money by simply getting an AVR with Direc, that AVR is probably only going to work well driving 8ohm speakers that are highly sensitive (90s and up). So that leaves a lot of speakers that simply won't work well with those AVRs.

[@Audiodreamer192-24]

My pioneer elite 504 has no issues running 4ohm speakers what so ever and for that matter even my elite 103 will drive 4 ohm with no issue. I think most people into audio get it in their heads that if you don’t use separates then it’s no good. Not true at all…. Good avrs are awesome! 🤟✌️

[@Grassy_Gnoll]

Yep. 50w @ 8ohm isn't going to do it for me and my Elac Uni-fi. I listen at a much louder volume than most.

[@Audiodreamer192-24]

@@Grassy_Gnoll my 504 is 120 watts @ 8ohms actually and it rocks with anything you got 🤟

[@Audiodreamer192-24]

@@Grassy_Gnoll I actually have the unifi towers and they purr with sweet dynamics on the 504

[@themarklar8759]

@@Audiodreamer192-24 I looked at the specs and Pioneer does say 'Yes' in their spec sheet that it can drive a 4 ohm load but it doesn't say at what THD (sidenote: I've noticed some other companies will say say their product can drive a 4ohm load and then say @ 10% THD which if we are in the hobby of good clean sounding music - this doesn't really qualify right?). I find it interesting Pioneer themselves doesn't give an actual rating at 4. What db do you listen to music at and for what durations? The example I cited with my Rotel integrated amp, it works fine for awhile on 6ohm or 4ohm speakers but eventually, after an hour or two at 80-85db, it breaks down and can't handle the load any longer.

[@devinhamblet2537]

Just bought an Onkyo AV TX-SR313 from Goodwill (for $10), it's from 2012 with 3 hdmi inputs and one output and it's been working awesome.

[@msalt19]

I absolutely love the alien/ blade runner reference t-shirt!

[@frankierodriguez8661]

As far as I'm concerned, my MacBook pro has a built in DAC. it has to have it for sure because plugged to my analog stereo Class A amp, it sounds AWSOME. As good as some of my buddies systems with a separate DAC.

[@psyphonyxaudio]

Full agree - AVR potential is great. I'd love to see some measured results of " sound " performance in a controlled test.

[@chrislair8816]

after much frustration of trying to make a multi-channel sound great with music, I went back to one of the best sounding receivers I ever owned a Pioneer SX 950 from the late seventies. what forethought they possessed in placing a loop through connection on the rear so if I do get the burning desire for DSP I can get a Great two-channel Loop through with EQ room correction and more toys than I know what to do with control through my phone for a couple hundred bucks but as it is it sounds great Equalization a couple tone controls and a loudness button do the work hard to be to Vintage receiver even if it does weigh 80 lb....... and yes I do stream quite a bit of music through it

[@oldskool80sfan12]

i use Pioneer AV receiver to play music simply because it has that room acoustic correction mic that sorts out the reverb, distortion and auto EQ’s to make music sound cleaner and accurate (that if you know how to place the microphone in the right position and hight) For those High-End nerds…No need for room treatments, expensive cables or still points :D

[@jefferycostner2636]

The reason Randy is Current, There is no replacement for a high current amp for dynamic range and fullness.

[@ericelliott227]

In my opinion: For two-channel application though one doesn't really need DSP and it won't do a whole lot anyway. Sure, it's nice to have a computer figure out such corrections, but this is far more necessary for multi-channel. I used to run AVRs (high-end ones) because I wanted both worlds, but only my first gen Kenwood was any good at two channel. After that, two channel performance with an AVR was dismal at best. I actually grew tired of multi-channel after 20 years and went back to two channel. (I'm not a big movie watcher anyway). I had EQ on both my Onkyo flagship and Denon flagship and it was a PITA. The Onkyo was a little easier, but still, give me a separate EQ with sliders or knobs any day. My AVRs were more than double the $1100 versions and that was before this mess we have now. I got the high-end ones thinking they would give me the best of both worlds, just wasn't the case. There is an argument for AVRs not sounding good for two channel, I have lived it. The reason is simple, there are a lot more things in the signal path on an AVR, than a two-channel, integrated or separates. You have anomalies from the HDMI circuits, digital circuits. ARC, etc. If you ever pop the hood on one of these babies, they are over-stuffed with next to no shielding. Now Marantz has their ND8006 that allows you to shut down all unused ports and circuitry. However, that is a CD player/network player/streamer, not a receiver. I'd be willing to bet that if they shielded AVRs better or offered the ability to "move stuff out of the signal path" but turning off circuitry, that it would improve things. Yes, just because something cost more, does not translate into sounding better. In fact, I'd say that is true at least 95% of the time. Hell, I have vintage receivers I bought used for a couple of hundred or less that blow the doors off of $10k amps in sound quality. Yeah , I won't pay for a built-in streamer. In fact, I don't even want a built-in streamer for free! The Marantz ND8006 sucks at streaming! All you get is an amber colored scroll! I hate scrollies! Give me a screen like on the Logitech Squeeze or forget it. In my opinion, if one is into movies and such as much as music listening or leaning more towards movies over music, then a good AVR makes sense as long as it can bring good performance as possible for both. But if one is say 80% or more music, the an AVR may be a big disappointment. For a situation like that, I would suggest first to have a good smart TV or what have you and either run the audio out to the receiver, preamp or integrated or get a good sound bar so you don't have to make long cable runs or something trying to get sound from the TV to your rig. It used to be hard to find a good sound bar that sounded even decent, but now, while it would not be my first choice for music listening, some sound bars today are very good. Personally, I'd like to run sound to my two channel system for concert DVDs or whatever, but the optical cable would need to be around 8 feet or so and they don't make those, likely for good reason. So I run a Yammy sound bar for the TV and BR player and my "rig" is separate for strictly music listening. It wasn't hard for me to go back to two-channel as I was tired of HT and I'm insufferably old school anyway.

[@user-hb9mz2hp2g]

i had yamaha rx-v701 - but once I had connected my laptop to watch some movie ( my TV wasn't smart yet), and after this my AVR get broken. HDMI is very sensitive..... Full digital board stop to work. So I bought stereo amplituner with optical input. Now I'm safe.

[@mychildrenareashamedtobese3398]

I have three systems in my house. Two are 2 channel with high end amps, and then an AVR in the basement that I got off of Accessories4less at some big discount (I can't tell you the model name and I'm too lazy to walk down and look). The speakers are far more important than the amps. If I move speakers around, the $700 Denon is just as good in 2 channel mode as the $2500 two Channel in the living room. You might be able to hear a difference in a blind AB test in the same room, but you are going to have to concentrate hard to find it. I perceive zero gain in musical enjoyment in the amps that cost 3 times the AVR. The further I go into the Hi fi rat hole my experience tells me to prioritize speakers over all other things by a HUGE margin. Good enough is good enough on an amp....Spend on speakers.

[@8474Starscream]

Picked up a Marantz SR7013 a few years ago and never looked back. Yes I added an Emotiva XPA-5 Gen3 however this is what you have to do when you want a 5 channel surround sound setup with power hungry speakers.

[@dylanemeraldgrey]

Hey Randy, this might help your brother, at least as a stop gap: My setup forever has been laptop>dac>HT amp. HDMI from computer to tv because my onkyo is so old it doesn't have HDMI! Wireless keyboard and mouse. I can stream anything and that's a big computer screen, which I use all the time. Works well for me, but ever since you mentioned the pioneer 305, I wonder how much better my system would sound with that. If it would easily be more than 20% better, I'd probably pull the trigger...

[@tommy-be-good6580]

For 2 channel listening, i use the "direct" or even "pure direct mode" with my marantz sr 8012. Most of the time I had to realize, that the room correction during music playback was rather the opposite of what I expected. Audyssey may by useful while watching movies in multi channel mode. But even when i watch Concert DVD´s, i do so in "direct mode", because it just sound´s more natural to me. This topic is indeed very controversial. I just can’t count anymore, how often I have been told by dealers, that a pure stereo amplifier is simply the better alternative for music. Well it probably depends on how high the expectations on music playback are. 🤔 Yes and i have to admit, that after many, many years of listening to music with an avr, i consider buying a pure stereo amp. But first i think, it would be more important, to purchase some new speakers. (mayby) Not sure, what is the better way, cause i never had a chance to compare an integrated amp side by side with my marantz av-amp in my environment.

[@chrisy4011]

Direct mode disables Audyssey..

[@tommy-be-good6580]

​@@chrisy4011 What i wrote is no contridiction to what you say imho. 😉

[@chrisy4011]

@@tommy-be-good6580 I have a high end onkyo and if I'm listening to 2 channel and use the above as you mentioned, it cuts the subwoofer off and sounds, not so good.

[@tommy-be-good6580]

@@chrisy4011 ok, i understand what you mean. Of course there is less bass in direct/pure direct mode. Not everyone likes that. Especially with rock music to little bass is negatively noticable, for example. But in direct/pure direct mode there is more presence in the upper mid and high frequencies. The overall sound is a bit clearer, for my taste. But of course it also depends on the speakers, how much better it sounds then. I have not used a subwoofer for longer period of time, because it broke 2 1/2 years ago (i guess it is the power amp of the active sub).

[@stevenwhite2061]

I use a Marantz NR1711 with a Rotel power amp, works great.

[@johnsradios484]

Got a Pioneer AVR VSX-D1S and I use it for stereo. Great sound, I paid $150. Prices have gone up some but still affordable. Well worth picking one up.

[@AllboroLCD]

Aww man preach it Cheapaudioman!!! Right there with ya brotha! Grab urself a 5.1 integrated w/ some form of 2ch pre-out analog or digital and your g2g!

[@ginom407]

2 Channel For Life!!!! Very interesting though... Thanks Randy! 👍

[@cheapaudioman]

I started thinking about this when I did that NAD review.

[@NuggetsXInfinite]

I’ve been using a Yamaha TSR-700 (Costco version of the RX-V6A) with my first hi-fi / home theater setup. It was $400 and is considered a low-mid AVR. But it powers my KEF Q350’s without issue. Really only notice a bit of distortion past -10db which is very loud for the room it’s in. It’s great being able to listen to 2 channel music, then switch to full 5.1.2 Dolby atmos for movies and games. Plus all the other positives you mentioned from AVRs Maybe one day I’ll be able to spend thousands on separates and be able to appreciate it, but for now that seems like a a waste of money to me