How inexpensive could a pre-pro be? (1 Viewer)

[Samuel Des]

Quote:

I have read that the center is more demanding in HT, because of dialogue. Are you referring to music alone?
Conventional wisdom around here seems to say that you must use the same exact amplifier for each channel. Wouldn't it be a bad idea to split amplification duties between an outboard amplifier and the receiver because of this "voice matching" issue?

 

[Hank Frankenberg]

Just a note on power amps. Yes, most receivers skimp there, and you don't see multiple, descreet high-quality output transistors per channel, and large, torroid transformers. A general rule of thumb to judge an amp is its load rating at 8 ohms and at 4 ohms. If it is a robust design, with enough transformer, power supply capacitance and output devices, the power available at 8 ohms should double into a 4-ohm load. Usually you'll see both specs listed for a separate power amp, but only an 8-ohm rating for a receiver. Skimpier designs will indicate less than 2X power at 4 ohms than at 8 ohms, say maybe 100 watts at 8 ohms and 150 watts at 4 ohms.

Enough. FWIW, I'm not an engineer.

 

[chung]

Conventional wisdom around here seems to say that you must use the same exact amplifier for each channel.

In general for HT it is a good idea to have similar frequency response from each of the front speakers to ensure a smooth transition across the front soundstage. In practice, it is difficult to have 3 identical speakers: most people have smaller center than L/R's. Given that there is inherent mismatch already, it is not crucial to have identical amps, since the amp's contribution to the overall mismatch of the sound is quite insignificant. The center channel carries dialog, which is in general lower level than what the L/R speakers have to deliver. If you do not have an outboard amp yet, it is probably not a bad idea to get a 3-channel amp. if you have a stereo power amp already, I would recommend that you try using the receiver's power amp first. You may be happy with the results. HT is unlike stereo hi-fi: it is harder to define what fidelity is.

I'm sure some people are not happy unless all 3 channels are driven by identical amps. And these people will insist on identical speakers for the 3 channels. For me, it is not worth it to sacrifice great stereo sound for the marginal improvement in HT. My stereo speakers are great, and there is no way they can work as centers.

The Sony STR-DA5ES has equalization on every channel. That is a very nice feature, if indeed it works. You can do a better job of matching centers with the L/R's, if you can tweak the center's frequency response.

 

[Samuel Des]

It occured to me that, in response to Matthew J S question, I would be among those who would be willing to spend money on an inexpensive pre-pro or receiver. In fact, I plan on doing this shortly. I will likely purchase an interm receiver while my HK 7000 is in the shop. Because the HK700 has main outs, I may experiment a bit with using the interim receiver as a pre-pro... before relegating the interim peice to the bedroom or wherever. My thinking is that, aside from the different "in-house" DSPs, the DTS and Dolby modes should be relatively similar.

 

[iweiss]

My needs are a little more basic. I am using Definitive Technology Speakers all around which go down to around four ohms and seem to be difficult for many even high end receivers to drive. I've seen several posts on this forum and others about shutdowns even on highly regarded receivers like the Pioneer VSX-49TX. Do I want to spend thousands of dollars on a receiver that may not cut the mustard? I don't think so!

One receiver I had looked at was the Kenwood Sovereign series, one of a few that has enough inputs and outputs to accommodate my very complex system. I posed a question to Kenwood about whether they would create a pre-pro in that line and here is their response:

Thank you for writing to us at Kenwood USA Corporation.

The Sovereign receiver's have preamp outputs for the FL, FR, RL, RR, LB, RB, and SW for the new 6.1 formats. This will allow you to hookup external amplifiers that can provide the additional power you need and use all of the features of the receiver. If you have any further questions or need help with anything, please feel free to contact us again.

I hate the idea of spending big bucks on unused amplifier sections and that is why I would love to buy a pre-pro-tuner at around $1,000 (and the Outlaw 950 isn't flexible enough regarding inputs for me) and get a good amplifier that I know can drive my speakers with no sweat.

The surprising thing about receivers that crap out with some speakers is that many are THX Ultra or Ultra2 certified.

Am I asking too much for some of the larger manufacturers to accommodate this concept?

Ira

 

[Samuel Des]

Well, as Chung mentioned, receivers overall are the best value around. If I understand the above correctly, we are, in some sense, asking too much. Personally, I wouldn't mind it too much having to spend $200 every 5 years to get a new quality pre-pro. (i.e., assuming that I wanted the upgrade in the first place!) Cheaper than a lot of upgrades!

 

[chung]

I hate the idea of spending big bucks on unused amplifier sections and that is why I would love to buy a pre-pro-tuner at around $1,000 (and the Outlaw 950 isn't flexible enough regarding inputs for me) and get a good amplifier that I know can drive my speakers with no sweat.

The receiver is still your best bet, even if you don't use the internal amps. The same pre-pro sections packaged as a separate will cost more, not less, because the sales volume will be much less. You can still use the internal amps in a receiver for the surrounds, at least. You can pick up a nice 2-channel power amp for a very reasonable price in the used market.

Have you looked at the HK-AVR520 or the Sony STR-DA5ES as pre-pros? You can get the HK for about $650. A nice used power amp can be had for less than $600. You will end up with a system that is excellent for stereo hi-fi as well as HT. Much cheaper than Outlaw 950 with 7 channels of amplification. Logic 7 and HDCD decoding, too. Oh, BTW, it's available today.

 

[BruceD]

Chung,

The receiver is still your best bet, even if you don't use the internal amps. The same pre-pro sections packaged as a separate will cost more, not less, because the sales volume will be much less.

This may be the right answer for this member under discussion, but high quality 2-channel sound from the Sony, I doubt it.

Sony has certainly been known for good digital engineering in it's receivers, but it's also known for poor analog stage engineerining and part selection in it's receivers, although ES models are certainly better.

Your tastes in equipment (and music) may be fine for some, but the Sony STR-DA5ES receiver's preouts certainly didn't compare well in a side by side comparison with a Ref-30, Krell amplification for both, and Vienna Acoustics speakers.

The audition was simply analog bypass with CD music.

The Sony (balanced to 80dB SPL at 1kHz) sounded harsh in 2-channel analog bypass by comparison to the Ref-30 on the same material (female vocals by "Jewel"). Same interconnects for both preouts to amps, no digital bass re-direction just analog bypass L&R mains.

This is all just my opinion, but just another viewpoint. I don't own any of the above discussed components.

 

[chung]

The Sony (balanced to 80dB SPL at 1kHz) sounded harsh in 2-channel analog bypass by comparison to the Ref-30 on the same material (female vocals by "Jewel"). Same interconnects for both preouts to amps, no digital bass re-direction just analog bypass L&R mains.

I will have a chance to listen to a Sony STR-DA5ES with my amps and speakers soon. I look forward to comparing it against my analog preamp.

Your opinion is indeed one of many. Seems like there are a lot of people who like the new Sony's sound.

 

[Samuel Des]

I have to second the recommendation for the Harmon Kardon based on my experience with the HK7000 and my listening experience in show rooms of the 520. It really is an amazing peice. When I was shopping, I narrowed my choices to Denon and HK. Once I learned what surround was about, the HK won hands down. (Used the same speakers, NHT all around.)
BTW - I should ammend that $200 every 5 years to $200 every 2-3 years.

 

[Samuel Des]

I have to say that I am automatically biased against Sony for some reason -- even though I have had GREAT experiences with their stuff (Walkmans and Diskmans.) It's the appearance of mass market merchandise I'm afraid. e.g., when I read quotations like this:

it's also known for poor analog stage engineerining and part selection in it's receivers

I feel justified in my snobiness against Sony. It is totally unreasonable, but I simply cannot force myself to consider Sony receivers!

 

[AjayM]

Just a note on power amps. Yes, most receivers skimp there, and you don't see multiple, descreet high-quality output transistors per channel, and large, torroid transformers. A general rule of thumb to judge an amp is its load rating at 8 ohms and at 4 ohms. If it is a robust design, with enough transformer, power supply capacitance and output devices, the power available at 8 ohms should double into a 4-ohm load. Usually you'll see both specs listed for a separate power amp, but only an 8-ohm rating for a receiver. Skimpier designs will indicate less than 2X power at 4 ohms than at 8 ohms, say maybe 100 watts at 8 ohms and 150 watts at 4 ohms.

While this is sorta true for some of the higher end stuff, don't worry about an amp doubling power as the Ohm load decreases, first if I'm not mistaken it's going to be impossible in the real world (I don't think the amp will be able to act like a true voltage source), second the specs you read don't mean anything unless they are tested by a 3rd party.

Check out some of Stereophiles archives and check out amps like the Krell 350 Monoblocs, they advertise true doubling of power when the Ohm load drops in half, but it doesn't really do it. The amp was very under-rated for 8Ohms, was semi-under rated for 4 Ohms, was pretty close for 2 Ohms and there wasn't enough power from the wall outlet to test at 1Ohm. So what the manufacture does is fudge the numbers a little. Say it's advertised at,

1000w - 2 Ohms

500w - 4 Ohms

250w - 8Ohms

What it may test at is

1000w - 2 Ohms

600w - 4Ohms

400w - 8Ohms

I still think one good indication of quality in a product is weight, sounds stupid and silly. But seriously, if I see a 400wpc 5 channel amp and it weighs 20lbs, I know it's not going to be a good quality piece of equipment (at least right now today, when Class D get's a little more refined, that's all going to change). When I see a 2-channel amp that weighs 100 lbs, I know that it is probably a good quality piece and that I'd go take a listen to it.

Andrew

 

[MatthewJ S]

This ,I Know, is an unpopular belief but I can't help reiterating my uneasiness at not matching ALL speakers and amps...so, while my budjet says buy a great 2 channel amp ,my brain asks if I can afford three of the same... too damn many good multi-channel mixes to mix rcvr amps for surrounds with mono-blocks for mains(etc.)............

 

[Russell _T]

Iweiss,

Would you be kind enough to expand on your comment that the 950 inputs aren't flexible enough for you? I am considering this unit and am concerned about a couple of features as well.

Thank you,

Russ

 

[Mifr44]

"Would you be kind enough to expand on your comment that the 950 inputs aren't flexible enough for you?"

The first one that caught my eye was the two digital coax inputs. I have three already, with one or two more on the way, so I needed a minimum of four digital coax inputs. A small point, but I didn't want to replace my other gear. Someone with a smaller number of components would probably find the two digital coax inputs sufficient, especially with the four optical inputs.

Michael

 

[Scott H]

I haven't read all the posts, but find many of the latter ones interesting. It's good to see other folks at HTF who prioritize the two-channel aspect, even with HT.

Anyway, as I haven't read all of the posts, I apologize if someone has already conveyed this, but pertaining to the topic of pre-pros and separates, I sit by quietly appalled when reading about products like the Outlaw 950 here - I have an internal debate with myself as to whether or not it is a sham to even refer to it as a separate. It's a pre/pro and a tuner all in one. And the inclusion of the tuner seems digressive to me, and it certainly can't be of any sonic benefit to the unit. In the world of musical two-channel separates, a tuner is another component. I don't know how inexpensive pre/pro can be (I do know how inexpensive a pre can be, like the Bottlehead Foreplay), but the 950 should be less sans the tuner.

 

[David Judah]

I still think one good indication of quality in a product is weight, sounds stupid and silly. But seriously, if I see a 400wpc 5 channel amp and it weighs 20lbs, I know it's not going to be a good quality piece of equipment

I agree, but the Sunfire Cinema Grand and CG signature are two of the few exceptions.

DJ

 

[Robert_Gaither]

I read this with great interest as I have three other friends and I formerly did myself use an AVR for a video switcher and/or amplification for the rear channels. I would love to see a budget pre-amp with the latest processing in the $500 price range as I hate paying extra for amp sections that I won't use (please, don't get me started on all those BS DSPs!) or higher price one must pay to move into the AVRs with all channel pre-outs. I was for the longest while using a Denon 2400 (I also currently own the Technics SH-AC500D decoder, now my pre-amp) and using my AudioSource 5.1 (mono-block center), AudioSource Amp1a (mains), and Adcom 535 (subs) and scouring the net before the advent of DTS-ES, DD-EX, or DPL2 for a cheap pre-amp.

The funny part is that there are plenty of older 5.1 pre-amps that were in the range of 1000-1500 dollars now that are being blown out in the $500 price range (Proton, AMC, Sherwood, Marantz, and HK are some I can think of off hand though most must be bought online from most likely non-authorized dealers). Many of these can be bought and most people can then reconfigure there old AVRs to main large, center large, no rears, no sub, and DPL 3-channel for rear channel usage (thus avoiding cascading cross-over by setting speaker size, rear delay, front/center/sub levels at the pre-amp and rears/center rear levels, center rear delay with the AVR) that would most likely blow away most of the $1000 AVRs when matched to a decent used 3 channel of front amplification (I blame this on having to use the $1000 AVR's amp sections which is compounded by having to power all the speakers on it's own). The main disadvantage of this type of system is SOF, multiple outlets, cabling, complicated setup/use (you think the SOF or children have a hard time with your current gear...), video switching (most older gear lacked component switching to my knowledge), cost (maybe cheaper than simply buying a $1000 AVR, but most likely more than what one currently may want to spend), and space taken. Of course most of these pre-amps still cost more than a comparable 5.1 pre-out AVR such as the Yamaha 5150/1105, Sherwood 7106 (among many others), Sony DB series, or Denon 3200 and most likely harder to dispose of as well.

There also plenty of 5-channel amps out there such adcom 7300, HK PA5800/sig 2.1, AMC 25100, Sherwood, and Proton just to name a few in the $500 or less range (especially used) that most likely are about as good or better than the AVRs in the $1000 range. There are many decent used two channel amps in this price range as well for those who would like to go for separates. I am amazed when I see reviews of people jumping from their $500 AVRs to another $1000 AVR when I think it would be much wiser to invest in the better amplification.

I think for those audiophiles who need DD/DTS and AV switching for HT, the market for $500 pre-amp is there since there are quite a bit of people who are still too scared to pay too much for processing which seems to be changing on a yearly basis (I wonder when 7.1 discrete will show up?) and could care less about DPL2, DTS-neo, or Circle surround (I still know people who'd rather listen to broadcast programming in stereo over DPL since some consider any kind of processing other than bass management as DSP). With general lack of knowledge of the common man (how else do the low end Sony, Pioneer, JVC, etc sells?) will most likely keep the $500 pre-amp with the latest processing out of the market though I'm amazed they don't repackage the processing sections of a $500 AVR as a separate pre-amp for about a $1000 due to the perception of separates are better that we all hear about so often (I agree when the price pushes to the point of a Lexicon).

There are other ways to maybe get into budget separates such as if you own a DD decoder then all you would need to add is a video switch and an analog to digital converter (midi-man flying calf, RS 15-1242, and MSB ADD are the only companies I know of that makes these) though space, cabling, cost, and inconvience will most likely make the AVR still a superior choice.

 

[Scott H]

I still think one good indication of quality in a product is weight, sounds stupid and silly. But seriously, if I see a 400wpc 5 channel amp and it weighs 20lbs, I know it's not going to be a good quality piece of equipment (at least right now today, when Class D get's a little more refined, that's all going to change). When I see a 2-channel amp that weighs 100 lbs, I know that it is probably a good quality piece and that I'd go take a listen to it.

Gee, I sorta feel like a shill for this amp tonight, but you simply must read this regarding the Odyssey Stratos amp and a Stereophile "dollar-per-pound" performance analogy for amps:
http://www.odysseyaudio.com/value.html

 

[iweiss]

What I was concerned about in terms of the outlaw 950 is:

1. Lack of a phono input. I plan to dub a large portion of an lp collection to CD and it may be difficult to find a usable phono preamp that won't cost at least a good portion of the cost of the 950 itself.

2. Lack of tape monitor functions. I will need flexible recording capabilities for a three-head open reel tape deck, three-head cassette tape deck and cd-r/rw recorder. This is one reason why I am looking at the Kenwood Sovereign or new Pioneer Elites, which include the tape monitor functions.

I am hoping that Pioneer will release a replacement for the VSX-36TX in the near future that I can use as a pre-pro since I will not be using the beefy amp sections.

Ira