Arcam AVR-250 (1 Viewer)

[Mike<>S]

I am thinking about upgrading my receiver (currently have a NAD T742) and the Arcam AVR-250 looks like a great choice.

Thoughts? Opinions?

 

[Martin Rendall]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this unit does not have pre-outs, which would be a deal killer for many.

Martin.

 

[Mike<>S]

Correct. It only has a sub pre-out (which is fine for me.)

 

[John Garcia]

Do a search on Arcam; there were some discussions about significant problems with the AVR 200/300. IIRC, one person had to have his 200 replaced 2 times with the same problem each time. It seems isloated to the AVRs, and not the integrateds though.

 

[Dean Wette]

I used an AVR200 for 18 months and upgraded it to an AVR300 which I've had since May '04.

These are excellent units. Mine has been reliable and sounds terrific. If you care about sound quality, Arcam is definitely worth an audition.

The AVR250 does not have preouts, but if that's OK with you, it's a good choice. The AVR300 has preouts and a bit more power, but otherwise the two are the same.

 

[skip marr]

How do you think they stack up against Marantz?

 

[Dean Wette]

When I originally auditioned the AVR200 I owned prior to my AVR300, I compared it to the Marantz 9000 series (9100, 9200...can't remember which).

Although the Marantz had many more bells and whistles, the AVR200 at MSRP $1199 blew away the Marantz 9x00 at ~$3000 in terms of sound quality. I was very impressed as I had always considered Marantz to be very good.

But sound quality is really Arcam's bread and butter, and their claim to fame. Arcam may not have all the features of the competition, but they have what really counts, and they deliver on quality. The AVR300 not only has great sound, but has a very nice set of AV features as well. It's a great unit and I've been really happy with it.

I have since added 2 outboard Arcam amplifiers to my AVR300 for further improvement, but the 300 on it's own has been excellent.

 

[John Garcia]

I'm a fan and owner of Marantz, but Arcam is a cut above in terms of sound quality. IMO Arcam has better DACs and power. I wouldn't say they blow away Marantz, but they are better IMO. A better comparison might be something like Rotel.

 

[ilyak]

i owned the avr200 for a year and was pleased for the most part. I just upgraded to the 3805 and can make judgment that the arcam is more musical. The Denon has more juice and better ht capabilities(why i bought it). They are different, get what is your style

 

[Dean Wette]

The AVR200 and AVR250 are very different. The 200 is an older 5.1 model. The AVR250 is a newer design and full featured 7.1 PLIIx AV receiver, so it has the best of both worlds: very musical and high quality sound, and all or most of the HT features you'd need.

 

[Mike<>S]

After doing a little more research on this, I am having a hard time spending around $1700 on an Arcam AVR-250 because it has no preouts (besides a subwoofer.) I guess the AVR-300 is going to be the way to go.

 

[Dean Wette]

I think you won't regret getting a AVR300. I've had one since early May when they came out and love it. Having the preouts makes it nice in case you want to upgrade amplification (for more power, bi-amping, etc.) later on. At first I didn't think I would add external amps, but have ended up doing so.

Dean

 

[Mike<>S]

Thanks Dean. Any shortcomings or dislikes of the AVR-300?

 

[Dean Wette]

No, I've really liked it, and it has worked very well for me. I also have fairly demanding speakers (Dynaudio) and the built-in amp does a good job poewering them (even though I've since added external Arcam amps).

Maybe the only downside is that you can't layer PLIIx over DTS (it's an optional feature of PLIIx, some chipsets support it, others don't), but that's not a big deal since you can force DTS ES for DTS 5.1 sources.

A big plus is that Arcam customer support is second to none. They are very responsive to their customers, and they are constantly improving the AVR300 control and DSP software.

Dean