Separates - why use a pre/pro and not a receiver as a processor? (1 Viewer)

[ArmenK]

What is the advantage of using a pre/pro and power amp versus using a receiver such as the hk avr320 and a power amp (using the preouts from the receiver)? It seems to me that this would be much more affordable.

Armen

 

[Thomas_Berg]

basically, the electronics in the H/K are not as good as those in, say, the Outlaw 950's. the H/K is designed as a receiver, so the engineers put about the same amount of time into the amp section as the processor section. in the case of any separate pre/pro, all the time put in by the engineers and designers was put into making it the best processor they possibly could. basically, by focusing on one thing, that one thing (in this case, being a pre/pro) is done much better.

you are making the same argument as 'why not just find a good pre/pro and run it to the pre-ins on my receiver to power the speakers?' and i think you can see why this would not yield as good results as using a separate amp.

hope that explains it.

 

[ArmenK]

yup, makes sense, thanks

 

[peter_anderson]

Thomas_Berg has pointed out the most important reason, but there are others, which sometimes push people over the edge to separates:

Sex appeal: a slim pre/pro instead of an overweight receiver

efficiency: your pre/pro only has the electronics it needs to do its job, instead of a bunch of amps in a receiver doing nothing all the time.

 

[Bob McElfresh]

There are several issues around why a pre/pro sounds better than a receiver, and this same question pops up in the "Receivers/Separates/Amps" fourm every few weeks. Just go over there and browse and you will find lots of questions, and lots of people trying things and reporting their results.

 

[chella]

To ask a related question, how much of difference in music quality will there be between

1. A good receiver (say Onkyo 797, HK 520, Sony STRDA5ES, Denon 3802, Yamaha RX-V2200 or Outlaw 1050) and a $1000 power amplifier

2. A $1000 pre/pro and the same $1000 power amplifier

I know it is very subjective any we can talk about details and nuances of improvement, but if asked to put a specific number, like say 10% or 40% improvement, what would be your call?

 

[Harold_C]

basically, the electronics in the H/K are not as good as those in, say, the Outlaw 950's. the H/K is designed as a receiver, so the engineers put about the same amount of time into the amp section as the processor section.

I've never used the HK or the Outlaw so I don't have a dog in this hunt.

However, based on several decades in the audio biz and first hand experience sourcing products for Asian manufacturer, I don't believe there would be any basis for this assumption at all.

There is no question that the amplifier sections of receivers are usually the weak link (for reasons of power supply, available cooling, and cost).

However, I would be very surprised if there is one iota of difference in the digital processing and preamplifier sections of a receiver and a pre-pro in the same general range. For the most part, they would use the identical chipsets and provide essentially identical performance.

Buying an inexpensive receiver with pre-amp outputs is actually a very cost effective strategy. Put the money into amplifiers and speakers and subwoofers where it will make a major difference in the sound.

 

[John Garcia]

Why use a towel when you could use a napkin?
I'll have to agree with Harold on this one. While I feel a pre/pro WILL have some effect on sound, it is not as significant (IMO) as utilizing a good, dedicated amp. Where you are gaining mostly from separates is much superior amplification. This also allows you to just replace the receiver with a nice pre/pro in the future, should one decide it is necessary.