Are receivers considered audiophile grade?

[just dave]

I think the gap between Receivers and separates was the closest back in the late 70's and widened a lot in the 80's and 90's.And has narrowed again recently,of course there are always exceptions.

 

[just dave]

QFT. These threads always seem to devolve into the "anointed" telling the "great unwashed" how ignorant we are if we don't have multi-thousand dollar systems. BS. I've had $35 systems from the GW that, at normal listening levels, sound every bit as good as anything I've listened to. Spend your money on content, starting with Louis Armstrong and Beethoven.

Then go get a copy of Douglas Self's book on power amp design, and read what he has to say about audiophilia.

I think everybody who's posted here has been pretty cool.Although there are a couple guys who come across that way.(not you John )

 

[Polarbear]

If the receiver sounds really super fine and great...congradulations!! You win. What more do you want out of it????????????

If it sounds really great...it is really great.

If your equipment sounds really fine, then your in there, your lucky! You've found excellence. Count your blessings.

That's it really. That's all there is to it.

Audiophile this, Audiophile that. Who cares??? That's a 'rich cats game' that is hard to compete in. And a game 95% of us can't really join without extreme sacrifice. Too extreem. $4000+ for just an amp. Nice, if you got it. $6000+ for speakers. Yeah, right.

If your receiver, or equipment, sounds really great...perfect! Your lucky. Your in audio heaven. You win. Just don't blow it up or melt it down. Be easy with it, expecially if it's vintage gear. One mistake and it's over, ya messed it up.

If it sounds really fine...it is really fine! That's it.

If you want a super fine radio tuner, get a seperate. That goes for amps too. But receivers can sound outstanding, especially the late 70s vintage ones!!! When they built those they knew what they were doing and cared about the end product and not just about profits.

Couldn't agree more! Don't let the rich people on ak tell you that your cheaper gear is junk.

 

[RamblinE]

Couldn't agree more! Don't let the rich people on ak tell you that your cheaper gear is junk.

You're kidding right? RIGHT?

Discussing the inherent limitations of something is not calling it junk BECAUSE everything has it's downsides.

Some of the "rich people on ak" have been very kind and willing to use their experience to help me out in the past.

IMO your attitude is junk.

 

[redjr]

looks like a baby to me. :yes: For ease of posting I just borrowed this pic from another post as I didn;t want to look for mine. If you take a close look at the transformer, you can see the copper bulging out the sides. I think it is a pretty safe bet that the transformer alone on this weighs as much as the entire receiver. The amp itself weighs 90 pounds and the vast majority of that is the transformer. Picture still does not do this transformer justice. It is about as deep as a pencil - it is one massive transformer.
Also if you notice, since it is very common for these to put out around 610 wpc into 4 ohms before clipping, the entire frame is the heat sink. Just a little bit of difference between the receiver and a separate power amp.

or, again not my picture, but the inside of my "baby" amp.

Dang donberry, that's is one hefty built PS. I've been following this thread with interest and have enjoyed everyone's comments and point of view on this conundrum of the definition of 'audiophile'. Just looking at the copper-clad buss bars over the filter caps speaks volumes about both the build quality and current handling ability of that amp. I also noted the perfection at which much of the the point-to-point wiring has been done! The specs of the amp notwithstanding, you can readily assess the value (or perhaps its electrical characteristics) by build quality alone.

I've never had the time, or resources ($$) to put together a system that I would consider audiophile grade - at least by the definition I'm use to - rightly or wrongly.

My definition of that difference is the degree of transparency you hear with such a setup. I first heard a system like that in the late 80's when my younger brother - who had always been bitten by the bug - purchased a pair of Infinity Kappa 9s, driven by some mono-block amps. The sound and sonic clarity I heard was as if I had be transported to the sweet spot in a theater and there was a live concert taking place in front of me. I never really heard the speakers. All I heard was the sound! I have since never personally been able to emulate that sound. But then I never really tried very hard due to resources.

Whether that sonic clarity was achieved by the fact he was using mono blocks, the Kappa 9s, or a combination of the two I don't know. But it indeed was a delightful experience, and one I would classify as having achieved the level of 'true' audiophile.

My take on separates over receivers is that they provide the flexibility to mix and match (or upgrade) system components to the needs and/or desires the user is trying to achieve. Today I have a very modest system with a Pioneer Elite receiver driving some small Energy RC towers in my HT, and putting together some vintage gear with a Sansui G-8000 at the core and some nice sounding HPM-100. I guess I've always leaned towards a receiver, but recognize the versatility of separates.

Great discussion guys.

 

[JohnVF]

I.(not you John )

Oh, I'm a total gear snob. You can come out and say it, and I'll own up to it . I don't care what people run- I only get worked up when anybody, regardless of what they have, seems to think that their decision is the best for everybody. And that goes for thinking everybody should be happy with a $38 system, or thinking everybody needs to run super expensive, esoteric, high end. The very suggestion that there are tiers of quality in gear is not meant as a personal affront to anybody. Its just reality. The best systems I've heard, are also out of my reach financially- but I'm glad to have gotten to hear them, and they give me a context for what is possible, and how close I can get within my means.