ARCAM AVR300 VS ??? what is the best receiver under 2500 dollars?!?
jak jak
Unregistered guest
Posted on
HI, MY NAME IS JACK I AM LOOKING TO BUY A NEW SET OF HOME THEATRE, BUT I WOULD BE USING IT MOSTLY FOR MUSIC. I HAVE MORE OR LESS MADE UP MY MIND ON SPEAKERS AND CD/DVD PLAYER. I AM THINKING OF BUIYING THE B&W MT-30 SPEAKERS (THAT IS 5 M-1 SPEAKERS WITH PV-1 SUB) AND THE B&O BEOCENTRE2 FOR DVD PLAYER. NOW THE REVEIVER I REALLY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT TO GET. IS THE ARCAM AVR300 THE BEST FOR THIS KIND OF BUDGET? WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST RECEIVER OR AMPLIFIER TO GET??? PLEASE ADVICE ME AS I AM VERY CONFUSED. I ALSO NOTICED THAT SOME OF THE RECEIVER HAS THX2 THX ULTRA ETC. ARE THESE IMPORTANT? THE ARCAM AVR300 DOESN'T HAVE IT, BUT SOME OF THE CHEAPER REVEIVER HAS THEM! DOES IT MEAN THAT THE CHEAPER RECEIVER IS BETTER THAN THE ARCAM???
Please take off the caps lock. Internet protocol says that upper case sentences mean you'ree shouting at us.
Musically, I think the Arcam is a brilliant performer. In my part of the world (the UK), it's the one to beat both as surround sound receiver and as music receiver.
I am a little concerned with your choice of speakers. They're OK, but from a music point of view, they are not in the same league as the AVR300. Musically, you would get a better result by spending more on the front two speakers and filling in the surround channels with less capable speakers. From a surropund point of view this is incoprrect of course, sionce you want the same (or as similar as popssible) speaker for each channel (apart from the sub of course).
On your side of the pond you have local brands of speaker which may also be very interesting to you. If you insist on having a sub/sat solution, look closely at the M&K solutions which are excellent for surround sound and better for music than any other sub/sat systems I've heard.
However, if you can go with conventional speakers, then there are several brands which you can look at, including B&W themselves, which will be far better than the MT30 system.
Finally, I don't see you mentioning the source. It's important to note that the source is just as important (some would say more important) as any other part of the system, since anything that comes out of the player has to be right in order for the rest of the system to make it sound right. A dedicated CD player such as an NAD C542 (the minimum I would suggest in an AVR300 based system) would typically give you a much better musical result. Of course, you'd need a separate DVD player to take care of movies, but again it depends on how to share the cash. If you don't have the space for the extra box, then I'd suggest you went for as good a DVD player as possible such as a Denon DV2805, Arcam DV78 (or DV79). The Arcams are miles better musically than most other DVD players and many CD players. The DV79 is better than anything else for music and video for the money, that I have seen and heard.
Please note that when I'm talking about the music presentation, I'm talking mainly about CD reproduction in two channel. I'm not interested in the high res surround music carriers (DVD-A and SACD) since I don't count those as viable long term media. The CD is around to stay for a long time to come in my view, and the SACD/DVD-A media will probably die a death when the high res DVD discs (HD-DVD or BluRay) get going.
In talking about music presentation, I'm also meaning that the CD/DVD player will be connected to the AVR300's analogue inputs for left and right so the D/A conversion would happen in the player, not the receiver. This usually has a better musical result.
Of course, for surround sound you'd use the digital interconnect between the player and receiver. So this means that if you were using a DVD player for both duties, you would have a digital interconnect connected to (for example) the DVD input on the receiver, and a 2-channel interconnect connected from the player to the receiver's analogue CD input for 2-channel reproduction. Obviously you'll want to use one of the fake surround modes such as Club or Party when having a party, but generally I find one gets a more musically engaging result if these modes are switched off for most music reproduction since that's more of a distraction than anything else.
jak jak - not sure if you are still looking for a receiver but check out the new Sony STR-DA7100es. I know, I know, its a SONY so how on earth can it possibly be good? Just try it out and see. It is a full digital amp design with a massive power supply and utilizes DSD instead of PWM (DSD is what SACD uses) and sounds extremely smooth yet detailed. It is also virually the same as Sony's ultimate receiver, the STR-DA9000es which retailed for a whopping $4500 a couple of years ago. It also has HDMI switching and an i-Link input for SACD listening without any additional processing.
Lets just say that I was always an analog guy with a long history of great analog gear and while the Panny sa-xr50 failed to convert me, this Sony has converted me to digital.
That Sony is an extraordinary receiver and unlike most other digital products on the market. The Sony Digital Drive technology is different than what's used in the budget Panny's.