What is the deal with Pre/Pro (1 Viewer)

[SamC]

Guys (and, of course, Girls),

I think the question says it all.

I've heard how much better it is, but I don't know why. I'm sure that if I knew what it was I would be a lot closer to understanding.

I do know (or at least think I know) that it involves using separate components, but I don't know which components that is.

Is it the act of separating the amp from the sound processor, or is it more than that??

 

[Derrick G]

SamC,

Pre/Pro is short for preamp/processor. You are correct in that is separates the amps from the processor. You will have one unit that does all the processing, switching, etc. and then a separate amplifier. It's kind of like the saying "do only one thing and do it well." In a receiver compromises are made in the circuitry to accomodate everything. With a separate processor and separate amp, no compromises have to be made. Most of the time you get better quality internal components and circuitry with separates. There is some debate about the differences between flagship receivers (Denon 5800, Yamaha RX-Z1, etc), and separates. Do some searches and you will find several threads debating the subject.

Separates can be pricey though. The B&K Ref 30 is about $2500+B&K Ref 7250 amp is about $2700. Anthem AVM20=$3200, Anthem MCA 5 II amp=$1300. These are both very nice separate systems.

You can go a cheaper route, and use a cheaper receiver such as the Denon 3802, and use the analog outputs to feed a separate multichannel amp, thus bypassing the internal amps in the receiver. Several people have heard tremendous improvements in their systems doing this.

Hope this helps,

Derrick G

 

[Ted Lee]

sam -

currently, i only own a receiver, but i think i'll go separates next time around.

please note derrick's appropriate use of italics when stating "most of the time".

there are people that say that a good (more than likely) high-end receiver can perform as well as separates. of course, with audio being as subjective as it is, who can argue with them?

when you start crossing the 4K price-barrier both options become available.

for me, i think another key to going separates is flexibility. amps are amps and (afaik) won't change too much in the immediate future. on the other hand, with all these sound formats going on, pre/pro's are more likely to require upgrades.

being able to keep the amp but upgrade the processor sounds very enticing to me.

if you're interested in going separates, there's a special forum you can (for now) check out.

 

[SamC]

OK thanks guys.

So then you could take that as far as you want and use (for 5.1) 1 stereo amp for the front L/R, a mono for the Center, and another stereo for the rear and an active sub? Or further, 1 mono amp per speaker for 5/6/7.1?

I think I'm getting this now. I have been thinking about upgrades recently, and this just fuels the bug I guess.

 

[Derrick G]

SamC,

Yep, you can use monoblocks for every channel. Or two three ch for 6.1, a stereo and a three ch. for 5.1, four monoblocks and a stereo, three monoblocks and a 3 ch, or any combination you can think of.

Derrick G

 

[Jim_Stu]

Sam,

..and then after we get all caught up with our mono-blocks,

we can start bi-amping each of our speakers. It just goes

on and on, there is no end to our ..........