This question has probably been vexed about 5000 times on this board but I'm new so:
I'm going to state it pretty briefly...is it REALLY worth it go have a seperate amp, preamp, and CD player versus having a CD player and say a very high end Denon or Yamaha or Rotel receiver? I am going to be driving a set of Polk LSi9's and a Polk 12" powered sub. I am considering doing an Adcom seperates system but its a LOT of money. How much difference will I notice between the Adcom seperates and a high end receiver? Thanks a lot for any help!
J. Vigne
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Opinions obviously differ on this forum and range from the (more or less) all amplifiers sound alike (with little exception) to the "I can hear the difference a humid day makes in my system" set of ears. I, personally, fall more toward the latter side of the equation. The investment in separates should be based on several factors that only the individual can decide for themself. The first is cost. There are the people who buy a luxury automobile and don't even drive, but how much you use the system is a first consideration to me. (I have had this discussion many times, you see, I sold audio/video for over twenty five years.) If your usage is so infrequent or you are not a person who sits and listens to music with no distractions (no newspaper, no computer, no playing games with the kids - just sit and listen) then a listener who is not going to be involved in the music is going to be quite happy with a reciever. If you can find a reciever that you can operate. So many recievers are full of switches and circuits that can send you off into a land that time forgot, you (or the kids with a remote that is now a ray gun) can accidentally hit a button and suddenly there is no sound and you have no idea how to get back so you turn everything off permanently. The casual user forgets rapidly how to make complex equipment work. (If you're not a frequent user of Photoshop try giving a little dashing or burning in to photo.) So you can buy bottom of the line gear since price precludes many features but that may not be acceptable even to the casual listener who is familiar with live music's sound. One of the values of a separtes based system is they are almost always more straight forward in their operation. Buttons and knobs are bad things in the world of separates as they are percieved to affect sound quality if for no other reason than to add a feature either raises the cost of the whole or lowers the cost of the individual parts that are included for the same price. Simplicity usually equates to the best sound for the dollar spent. Separates also offer the flexibilty of both upgrading your system and picking what pieces of equipment suit your needs best. Few manufacturers can be best at everything or offer the package of "features" one person might want. If you want DVD-A/SACD playback you can pick which brand siuts your needs best while buying the best pre amp and amp that fit your needs. Some people need the flexibity of mulitple inputs (or a phono input) while others do not. Some need high powered amps but simple in-out on their pre amp. Separates give this flexibilty which no reciever possibly could match. If you look at the cost of replacing a reciever every few years to stay current vs. the cost of separates the separates still are the better value. I say this because, even though your initial outlay for separates is higher, if you look at the used equipment market you will see many separates hold their value quite well while few recievers are worth anything on the used market. So you have equity in separates. A quick example is a McIntosh, Marantz or Dynaco power amp from the 60's is worth as much as 10 times their original cost. As to what you will hear I can't predict from this vantage point. When I sold equipment the most common remark I would hear from novice clientelle was, "I don't think I could tell the difference." I seldom found that to be true. The example of any item where subjective opinion is the deciding factor is sufficient for most people to at least be curious about high end audio. I did sell to people with more than enough money to meet their basic needs so they had experienced a better autombile, better food and drink, better appliances and better seats at the concert. Ask them if they would find a difference if those items were removed today and most said yes to all of the above. Better audio is the same way. You may not know what you are hearing at first, but, if I take it away after two weeks of listening you will not want to go back to your old system. Your hearing is quite perceptive to the changes even though you may not realize the changes as they arrive. It normally only took a few minutes to let the client listen to two systems of differing cost and quality before they were interested enough to venture into the separates. The lack of distortion, noise and "hi fi" quality was the most evident to many. The ease of presentation was the more obvious to some - at first. If you have ever turned off your system because you were just tired of listening, then separates can be the best answer. Take a few discs you are familiar with to a good shop (let them play a few they think show off their systems) and ask to listen first to their best system even if you could never afford that equipment. Then listen to a budget system, then start working with the price range you think you can afford. Do this on a slow afternoon or evening where neither you or the salesperson will feel rushed and others will not intrude on your audition. Most salespeople like to talk about their equipment and should be happy to acommodate your request. If the Adcom is a bit more than you want to spend ask about alternatives or about designing an upgrade route that will allow you to build the system as your finances allow. This was a common job for me as not everyone interested in good sound had more money than they needed for all luxuries. There are less expensive pieces of good equipment than the Adcom, but remember, Adcom has been around for twenty years now as a high value line. Longevity counts. Part of the reason the Macs and Dynas are worth the money today is they not only still sound quite good but they can still be serviced and parts are available. Try that with a Yamaha reciever from just ten years ago. You might want to check "Twilight of the compact disc" under the "DVD-A/SACD" portion of this forum to see what Kegger's experience has been with a new pre amp.
Thank you very much for the detailed reply. I'm considering a Rotel RSX-1056 or a Rotel RSX-1067 for my needs. I understand that Rotel offers a very big bang for the buck.
However, about 18 months ago I "downgraded" from stereo separates (pre-amp; power-amp; FM tuner) to an integrated 5.1 AV "receiver" (all those, plus more, in one box). I kept all the old stuff. I thought the family would like surround sound, and I wanted to use some of my old speakers for that. In fact, the performance of the intergrated system, just on two-channel stereo, was just as good, if not better, though it was a different make, etc.. I can now happily play stereo on either system.
Following the spirit of jan's post, I think the sort of integrated AV receiver to get has plenty of connectivity: analogue pre-amp inputs and ouputs for 5.1 channels, plus stereo, plus tape, etc. I did not know, at the time, how valuable "Ext. 5.1" input would turn out to be. But having that capability "by accident" allowed me to move on to DVD-Audio.
I would still recommend getting a separate DVD/CD-player, separate speakers, and I always think specialist manufacturers usually do the best job - this is particularly true for speakers, and definitely for turntables. Sure, separate pre- and power-amplifiers have some advantages, but "receivers" are better today than they used to be: I had to overcome my own prejudices to allow one through the door!
What is even better is to keep the old stuff. You can mix and match, identify what is going on, decide what might be a weak link, what matches with what, etc. Depending on your domestic circumstances, it can also be good to have a whole, separate system somewhere.
ok i looked at it this way. i really wanted to go seperates and all channels "7.1" driven by 200w each but knew that i could not afford to do it all at once.
so first i found a good deal on a 7.1 reciever that had all the bells and whistles i was looking for. hooked it up used it. then slowly started getting all my amps and putting them on the external preamp outputs of my reciever. i now have all my amps.
i was able to do it slowly while still having full surround. now i can make the move to the prepro of my choice when i find the right one for me. or keep it the way it is and just use my reciever as the preamp.
i'm in no hurry to get a prepro because what i have now does everything i need/want and sounds excelent while providing plenty of power.
so this gives you another option and lets you do it at a slower pace instead of a big chunk all at once.
where if you did it all at once you may have to skimp hear or there to afford the system.
if you do it over time it's easier to afford exactly what you want.
I second Kegger. Furthermore, you end up with a system you understand, and one that probably out-performs anything you could have bought all in one "swell foop".
Im not sure how it does or does not compliment your existing equip. but my friend has the Outlaw audio Model 950 Preamp/Processor & 7100 7-channel Amplifier $1598.00 direct from site which sounds great and is priced great for seperates.