# Are dedicated amps worth it?



## Mazda3SQ (Nov 11, 2006)

I'm an admitted noob when it comes to home audio. My question is what are the benefits of a dedicated amp over running off of a receiver. Obviously power increase and I would imagine a cleaner signal depending on the cost of the amp but for someone who is content with running off a receiver is the benefit worth the cost?


----------



## drake78 (May 27, 2007)

It's hard to say because results will very. I would say there is mostly always improvements. The question is will it be worth the extra money. I am biased as a two channel stereo listener. This is what I would do. I would spend 75% of the money on the main left and right speakers. Why, because you will get exceptionaly greater results going with hi end speakers and not so hi end mid/front end components. Than you would vise versa. Then buy a used home reciever and dedicated used two channel amps on ebay. Then sell back the one I don't keep. You can also get them at your local electronics store with a return policy. Then do the same thing. See what the results are and is it really worth the money. good luck


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

I've always used dedicated amps and seperate pre-amps ever since my first crappy Fisher receiver and countless auditions with friends receivers.

The forst time I experienced my first seperates system I was blown away....and can STILL remember the feeling that overcame me.

I'll admit ....receivers are alot better than they were 20 years ago. And there are several receivers I would use for a secondary system or a small home theater.


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

Once you've heard a nice system with seperate amps you won't have to ask if they're worth it.

YOu're not relying on a preamp crammed into a metal box that ALSO contains the amp section.

Corners are cut to meet a pricepoint.

Now when you get to the level of a $!200 receiver you might as well go with seperates. 

Theres no reason not to.


----------



## Mazda3SQ (Nov 11, 2006)

Alright well then let's shift the discussion from whether it's worth it to what is a good quality stereo amp in the 300 dollar range new or used...


----------



## seagrasser (Feb 6, 2007)

best bang for the buck if you can find one is a Hafler 9180

also, the ART SLA-1 seems like a really good buy also. I just got one and it really seems like gem of an amplifier. you can possibly buy two for $300.


----------



## Sideshow (Mar 6, 2007)

I will chime in that as long as all things are the same, mostly real power ratings and speakers, there will be no audible difference between the two. 

Where I used to work in my early 20's, we were trying to show people the benefits (or so we thought), of bi-amping and the use of separates. We made a setup using Energy Veritas bookshelf speakers, Adcom CD player, and a 100 wpc Denon receiver and Adcom seperates. At first we thought it was great, and we thought we heard a difference, but we DID know what we were listening to at any time. Later the first day, somebody messed with the setup for fun and made it so both audio switches sent the sound through the same amp, and at least 3 people listened and commented on how much better the separates sounded. Then he notified us of what he had done, which was pretty embarrassing for those 3 guys. We got curious and started doing blind listening A/B/X tests, having the listener listen to whichever he wanted to for as long as he wanted until he thought he knew which was which. I'd say people got it right about half the time, and you know what that means.

I've done the same thing since then with cables and power conditioners and other audio myths and had the same results. Do a blind test yourself and see.


----------



## drake78 (May 27, 2007)

Sideshow said:


> I will chime in that as long as all things are the same, mostly real power ratings and speakers, there will be no audible difference between the two.
> 
> Where I used to work in my early 20's, we were trying to show people the benefits (or so we thought), of bi-amping and the use of separates. We made a setup using Energy Veritas bookshelf speakers, Adcom CD player, and a 100 wpc Denon receiver and Adcom seperates. At first we thought it was great, and we thought we heard a difference, but we DID know what we were listening to at any time. Later the first day, somebody messed with the setup for fun and made it so both audio switches sent the sound through the same amp, and at least 3 people listened and commented on how much better the separates sounded. Then he notified us of what he had done, which was pretty embarrassing for those 3 guys. We got curious and started doing blind listening A/B/X tests, having the listener listen to whichever he wanted to for as long as he wanted until he thought he knew which was which. I'd say people got it right about half the time, and you know what that means.
> 
> I've done the same thing since then with cables and power conditioners and other audio myths and had the same results. Do a blind test yourself and see.



Your system is only as good as you weakest link applies here. If your speakers resolution doesn't play the subtle differences. Then you can't tell. If you are ears are not exprienced or less sensitive. You won't be able to either.


----------



## Mazda3SQ (Nov 11, 2006)

I'm running jbl L890's which are their largest "studio series" towers. I would imagine (hope is a better word) that they are capable enough to benefit from the "cleaner" power. I figure I might pick something up from parts express or best buy on the cheaper side just to see if I can tell the difference there and then go from there...


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

Mazda3SQ said:


> Alright well then let's shift the discussion from whether it's worth it to what is a good quality stereo amp in the 300 dollar range new or used...


IN that price range on the used market I would recommend:

Adcom GFA-545II(100 x 2)

Adcom GFA-555II(200 x 2)

Rotel makes nice power amp that can be had for little scratch

If you're lucky you can find an Aragon 8008 for a little over $300.....closer to $400....but they're REALLY nice amps.


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

Also don't overlook Pro amps as the build quality is excellent.

Look into the QSC Mx series. A TON of power for the money and very space efficient.

This is what I'll be using for sub duty in the HT.


----------



## Mazda3SQ (Nov 11, 2006)

Well for the time being I picked up an onkyo 2x100 that circuit city has on sale so we'll see how that sounds and if I like the results I'll get to reaching a bit deeper in the old pocket. Thanks for everyones input.


----------



## Sideshow (Mar 6, 2007)

drake78 said:


> Your system is only as good as you weakest link applies here. If your speakers resolution doesn't play the subtle differences. Then you can't tell. If you are ears are not exprienced or less sensitive. You won't be able to either.


I think the Energy Veritas should be more than adequate for hearing any changes in sound quality. Besides, if you need super high end speakers to barely hear the difference, is the ultra-tiny difference that is supposedly there really worth the trouble?

And please don't start with the "golden ears"...


----------



## havok20222 (Sep 5, 2007)

GlasSman said:


> Also don't overlook Pro amps as the build quality is excellent.
> 
> Look into the QSC Mx series. A TON of power for the money and very space efficient.
> 
> This is what I'll be using for sub duty in the HT.


I will second this and add Crown pro series amps into the mix. I have heard nothing but good things about both of these. I was looking into that as an option, but I ended up getting a nice receiver instead. 

If I get some extra cash I may consider going with an Integra DTC9.8 and 3x Crown pro-amps since the Integra has balanced inputs.


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

havok20222 said:


> I will second this and add Crown pro series amps into the mix. I have heard nothing but good things about both of these. I was looking into that as an option, but I ended up getting a nice receiver instead.
> 
> If I get some extra cash I may consider going with an Integra DTC9.8 and 3x Crown pro-amps since the Integra has balanced inputs.



I'll be trying 2 QSC Mx 700 for the lowend. I've always wanted to try them and they've been VERY reasonably priced back when Parts Express carried them. The Mx 700 was UNDER $500. 

Thats a sick price for 700 x 1 @4 ohms and MUCH more power than anyone could DREAM of getting from a semi high end home marketed amp.


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

****....for $500 you can't even DREAM of owning a Krell amplifier......well MAYBE the heatsink. 

And those made in my backyard. The irony....the irony.


----------



## Catman (Mar 18, 2008)

It depends on the equipment. I had rather have my Nakamichi Stasis Receiver than I had Pioneer seperates. 

>^..^<


----------



## Glowbug (Oct 23, 2006)

Wow, I never remember this section being here...great 

As to your original question, I'd definitely prefer separate amps. I went the pre-amp to monoblock amps route a couple years ago, and there's no going back IMO


----------



## havok20222 (Sep 5, 2007)

GlasSman said:


> ****....for $500 you can't even DREAM of owing a Krell amplifier......well MAYBE the heatsink.
> 
> And those made in my backyard. Th irony....the irony.


and are highly over rated. I use to sell Krell. We stacked it up against a classe with the same power for about 1/3 the price and it make the Krell sound like dirt.


----------



## bretti_kivi (Dec 3, 2007)

should i apologise for having heard obvious differences between amps (ok, that was an Arcam 8 / 8P and a Marantz PM 66 KI-Signature) and cables (van den Hul / Audioquest)? same price range, different sonic signature. Anyway. 
I personally prefer seperates but have a receiver at the moment. Financial Constraints 
Looking to replace that with one home-made box that does everything: Digi TV x 2, recording, DVDs, decoding and amplification. Why? WAF: Wife Acceptance Factor. Plus it willl save some space and I think a 50s radio under a modern LCD is gonna look way cool.

Bret


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

bretti_kivi said:


> should i apologise for having heard obvious differences between amps (ok, that was an Arcam 8 / 8P and a Marantz PM 66 KI-Signature) and cables (van den Hul / Audioquest)? same price range, different sonic signature. Anyway.
> I personally prefer seperates but have a receiver at the moment. Financial Constraints
> Looking to replace that with one home-made box that does everything: Digi TV x 2, recording, DVDs, decoding and amplification. Why? WAF: Wife Acceptance Factor. Plus it willl save some space and I think a 50s radio under a modern LCD is gonna look way cool.
> 
> Bret


Why would you apologize?

Real life IS NOT a test set up in a controlled lab by Richard Clark. I'm not knocking the guy either since he's contributed ALOT to Audio.

But there ARE differences.

And if you have to go with an All-In-One-Wonder-Box Denon, MArantz, Pioneer Elite and high end Onkyo are a good place to start.


----------



## Sideshow (Mar 6, 2007)

GlasSman said:


> Why would you apologize?
> 
> Real life IS NOT a test set up in a controlled lab by Richard Clark. I'm not knocking the guy either since he's contributed ALOT to Audio.
> 
> ...



If people are proven not to be able to hear a difference in a controlled environment with a test set up with ultra high end equipment providing the "better sound", why would things be any easier to hear in a "real life" situation? It makes no sense.

I think the perceived difference in sound between components and especially cables comes from a desire to have as many possibilities for improvement as possible, thus adding a little more excitement and intrigue to the hobby. This is why, no matter how many things people add to their systems, they always want to hear that their money and time weren't wasted. If all we have to improve on is the speakers, it adds too much finality to your current system. People want to think that improvements can always be made, which is why each addition always seems to supposedly improve the sound. Each cable improvement, each ferrite magnet clamped onto a cable, each improved CD player and amp, each power conditioner, each CD demagnetizer (groan!), each speaker wire burn in component (please!), each set of vibration-reducing component feet, seems to make a slight difference, but not so much that there is not room for more improvement. You can make yourself hear whatever you want.

I can't count how many times in that listening room that we would tell people we were switching to the higher-end cable or amp, and they would talk about how much clearer the highs sounded, how much more defined the bass was, how the soundstage was more open.... when we hadn't actually made a change at all.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Best way to tell if separates are for you is be hearing the difference.. If your ears can tell the difference, combined with the room and the rest of the equipment, especially the speakers, then separates are of value to you. headroom, dynamics, imaging, detail, stage... All should be better typically. I'll take a 75lb multi-monoblock theater amp with a good pre/pro anyday over a 40lb receiver... within reason.

It's comparable to the difference in running off a decent car head unit internal amps verses a drz dead-head preamp only through good interconnects into some excellent but modestly powered power amps... At the same volume compared, there will be no comparison in every facet of the music reproduction.. In my opinion.

Caveat.. If you do go separates, be careful.. There's junky separates out there that overlap (don't sound as good as) good receivers... I found this out when I tested the preouts on my A/V receiver into an older Carver amp.. The internal amps of the Cambridge Audio 540R sounded marginally cleaner than running into the old Carver... I could tell the old crap amp was inducing a veil over the detail and imaging robbing distortion in the mids and highs (wouldn't be noticed unless compared to something better).. My Carver-fan friend thought that was "warmth". It was really poor performance compared to good bipolar outputs in a class A/B setup. Speaking of Cambridge Audio... I can vouch for their receivers... They spank! Very simple signal path, no frills in between the surround DAC's and output amps.. GOOD GOOD VALUE receivers for the cash! Comparable to NAD, Arcam, etc.. Infact I think CA and NAD typically come from the same shops in Asia. Haven't heard Arcam, but they're claimed to be about as good as you can get in one box, save maybe the lexicon or B&K receivers maybe. Some say Arcam is better actually.


----------



## Fast1one (Apr 6, 2007)

The big difference I have heard with separates is the reduction of stereo crosstalk...

The differences were minimal, but they were definitely THERE. In my opinion, if you are going to go separates, then go all or nothing at all...

Mono DACs> Mono pre > Mono amps...only way to do it..


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

Mazda3SQ said:


> I'm an admitted noob when it comes to home audio. My question is what are the benefits of a dedicated amp over running off of a receiver. Obviously power increase and I would imagine a cleaner signal depending on the cost of the amp but for someone who is content with running off a receiver is the benefit worth the cost?


i like a separate amp on my sub, at night with the volume down i can still feel the bass by turning the sub amp up a lil.movies etc.

but any serious 'listening' is done in my vehicle, not at home, so no need for a serious home system.


----------



## Fellippe (Sep 15, 2006)

GlasSman said:


> ****....for $500 you can't even DREAM of owning a Krell amplifier......well MAYBE the heatsink.
> 
> And those made in my backyard. The irony....the irony.


No need to dream about KRELL to begin with.....it's an amateur amplifier pretending to be high end. 

For $500 you're about 25% to some quality tube amps (if you know where to get them from).


----------



## vmaxnc (Mar 22, 2008)

GlasSman said:


> IN that price range on the used market I would recommend:
> 
> Adcom GFA-545II(100 x 2)
> 
> ...


All these amp suggestions are fine, but what about the preamp? Are you thinking of using the receiver as a preamp? Is this a two-channel or surround system? Are we only concerned with audio, or do we need to consider video switching as well?

What I suggest to a lot of clients is to start with a receiver that has pre-outs. Then add an amp, using the preouts. This upgrades the power, but you're still using the preamp in the receiver. Then swap out the receiver for a preamp. This is a cost-effective way to step up the system one piece at a time.

I use a Cambridge 640R surround receiver which runs Martin Logans, but I have added an Adcom GFA5500 for the main speakers. Surround sound is less important to me than two-channel.


----------



## vmaxnc (Mar 22, 2008)

Fast1one said:


> The big difference I have heard with separates is the reduction of stereo crosstalk...
> 
> The differences were minimal, but they were definitely THERE. In my opinion, if you are going to go separates, then go all or nothing at all...
> 
> Mono DACs> Mono pre > Mono amps...only way to do it..


Everyone has their own opinion, but I disagree with yours. Having sold and owned many dozens of combinations I can say that every step towards a full component system _can _show significant improvement. Start with a good (_not _$300) receiver, then add an amp, then swap the receiver for a preamp, etc. Then you can get into seperate DACs, mono amps, etc., but 95% of the people will likely not want or need to get into that kind of money to get the sound they want. BTW-speakers are the most important piece-put as much money as possible there. Then move backwards through the audio chain.

So far the most cost effective improvment I've done to my current gear is to replace the AC cables for the receiver and main amp. I was surprised when I heard the difference.


----------



## drake78 (May 27, 2007)

vmaxnc said:


> BTW-speakers are the most important piece-put as much money as possible there. Then move backwards through the audio chain.


IMO,This is so true. It also needs to be highly emphasized. With hi resolution speakers. It's cake, to hear the subtle differences as you work your way up to higher fidelity mid and front end for future upgrades.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Biggest sonic bang for your buck in either home 2-ch music or home theater is in the speakers... Awesome speakers driven by a receiver will always spank nice separates through mediocre speakers. 

BUT, combine exceptional speakers of any size or style with exceptional source equipment (cd, dvd, sacd, vinyl, etc), exceptional processing (2-ch dac/preamp, A/V processor/preamp or hi-end receiver such as an Arcam, etc), and exceptional 2-ch or multi-ch amps, assuming adequate cables at all ends of the setup, and you're weakest link then will become your room. Then some minor tweaks such as a good AC power source and acoustic treatment can only help if done properly. Trick is balance of your cash spent matching up a nice setup.

I'll take a mid-fi (receiver or decent separates and decent speakers) in a well-treated room over great great high-end gear in a non or poorly treated room. In a home setting, the room is as much part of the sonic gear as anything else. Attention to reflections, absorption, bass-trapping to tame freq-response, diffusion etc is paramount for world class sound at the sweet spot (the lazy-boy).  You don't just hear what comes out of those tweets and drivers for sure.


----------



## Fast1one (Apr 6, 2007)

vmaxnc said:


> Everyone has their own opinion, but I disagree with yours. Having sold and owned many dozens of combinations I can say that every step towards a full component system _can _show significant improvement. Start with a good (_not _$300) receiver, then add an amp, then swap the receiver for a preamp, etc. Then you can get into seperate DACs, mono amps, etc., but 95% of the people will likely not want or need to get into that kind of money to get the sound they want. BTW-speakers are the most important piece-put as much money as possible there. Then move backwards through the audio chain.
> 
> So far the most cost effective improvment I've done to my current gear is to replace the AC cables for the receiver and main amp. I was surprised when I heard the difference.


You don't have to spend that much money at all...I thought this was a DIY website, you guys don't make your own amps, DACs, and pre's?  

Step it up guys! Hehe....


----------



## Diru (May 23, 2006)

Yes..........


----------



## drake78 (May 27, 2007)

Babs said:


> Biggest sonic bang for your buck in either home 2-ch music or home theater is in the speakers... Awesome speakers driven by a receiver will always spank nice separates through mediocre speakers.
> 
> BUT, combine exceptional speakers of any size or style with exceptional source equipment (cd, dvd, sacd, vinyl, etc), exceptional processing (2-ch dac/preamp, A/V processor/preamp or hi-end receiver such as an Arcam, etc), and exceptional 2-ch or multi-ch amps, assuming adequate cables at all ends of the setup, and you're weakest link then will become your room. Then some minor tweaks such as a good AC power source and acoustic treatment can only help if done properly. Trick is balance of your cash spent matching up a nice setup.
> 
> I'll take a mid-fi (receiver or decent separates and decent speakers) in a well-treated room over great great high-end gear in a non or poorly treated room. In a home setting, the room is as much part of the sonic gear as anything else. Attention to reflections, absorption, bass-trapping to tame freq-response, diffusion etc is paramount for world class sound at the sweet spot (the lazy-boy).  You don't just hear what comes out of those tweets and drivers for sure.


X2  I will have to most certainly agree. You can also add spikes and weight to you speakers. To further damped/secure them. Wich give you a very noticeble improvement to most speakers. I also tried putting books on top of a xbox. I also made sure all the cables were firmly pushed in the connectors. Then pushed in the power cable to the wall outlet all the way in. It was a quarter way out. It did improved the picture clarity on the tv. Simple things can be really effective. You just got to cipher out the proven ones. You results will vary accordingly. How big was that particular problem was in the first place. Like how weak was the weakest link.


----------



## SQKid89 (Feb 22, 2007)

My reasoning behind using a seperate (at least soon) for my home theater is the ability to push 4ohm speakers. I've found quite a few good DIY speakers, but they all are 4ohm nominal, where as my Pioneer is only safe to 8ohms. While its not the worlds greatest receiver, it has all the features I want at the moment and is in great shape. I'd prefer not to destroy this thing any time soon, so I decided to build my own amp capable of safely driving my future products. I can always upgrade it all later anyway....


----------



## backwoods (Feb 22, 2006)

home audio money chain is simple..

1. speakers
2. processor/preamp
3. amps


Don't forget about that processor, it can make a world of difference in the setup.


----------



## Mazda3SQ (Nov 11, 2006)

So as previously stated I bit the bullet and bought an onkyo stereo amp. I finally had a chance to hook it up today and must say im rather impressed with the addition clarity, detail and depth that it has added to my sound stage. Next step now will be to upgrade my reciever. I was under the impression that the one I am running, Yamaha RX-V457, had rca output but it certainly does not so right now the amp is being fed off of the tape recorder outputs and therefor I have no volume control. All around though I'm incredibly happy with my decision and wanted to thank everyone for your input.


----------



## Irons82 (May 12, 2006)

Sideshow said:


> If people are proven not to be able to hear a difference in a controlled environment with a test set up with ultra high end equipment providing the "better sound", why would things be any easier to hear in a "real life" situation? It makes no sense.
> 
> I think the perceived difference in sound between components and especially cables comes from a desire to have as many possibilities for improvement as possible, thus adding a little more excitement and intrigue to the hobby. This is why, no matter how many things people add to their systems, they always want to hear that their money and time weren't wasted. If all we have to improve on is the speakers, it adds too much finality to your current system. People want to think that improvements can always be made, which is why each addition always seems to supposedly improve the sound. Each cable improvement, each ferrite magnet clamped onto a cable, each improved CD player and amp, each power conditioner, each CD demagnetizer (groan!), each speaker wire burn in component (please!), each set of vibration-reducing component feet, seems to make a slight difference, but not so much that there is not room for more improvement. You can make yourself hear whatever you want.
> 
> I can't count how many times in that listening room that we would tell people we were switching to the higher-end cable or amp, and they would talk about how much clearer the highs sounded, how much more defined the bass was, how the soundstage was more open.... when we hadn't actually made a change at all.


I must say that this is the best post I have read on this forum in a long long time... I tip my hat to you, sir. The notion that you could hear anything you want in your mind is just... too mind boggling for some people.


----------



## Sideshow (Mar 6, 2007)

Irons82 said:


> I must say that this is the best post I have read on this forum in a long long time... I tip my hat to you, sir. The notion that you could hear anything you want in your mind is just... too mind boggling for some people.


And my point is helped by the fact that people just ignore the post, for the most part. Nobody wants to believe it. I just feel lucky that I have come upon this realization while I am still young. It all started at that audio shop where we were listening to the "differences" between different cables, and one employee let us all describe the differences we heard before he finally told us, laughing, that he hadn't changed anything at all. That started us on a quest to discover whether anybody could really hear anything or not. Our 2 managers HATED this and told us they didn't want us "talking like that" in the store, like it was slander or something. Some people refused to take our little test and experiments because they "already knew they heard a difference, so why prove it?", which just made us smile. Needless to say, our "attatchment rate", or the percentage of component sales that went out the door with "upgraded" cables, went way down. I didn't last there much longer. I am now 30 and running a home theater install business. The idea that big money accessories get better sound should mean more to me than ever now, but it doesn't. Nobody has been able to prove otherwise to me. It's all in the speakers, the processing, and the install.


----------



## Sideshow (Mar 6, 2007)

I should add that I also believe headroom to be important, for obvious reasons. If your amp is struggling to push the speakers, there's a good chance that that struggling will be audible, mostly in the control it has over low frequency drivers. If it cuts that throw short from a lack of sustained power, that woofer will let you know.


----------



## Xander (Mar 20, 2007)

GlasSman said:


> Also don't overlook Pro amps as the build quality is excellent.
> 
> Look into the QSC Mx series. A TON of power for the money and very space efficient.
> 
> This is what I'll be using for sub duty in the HT.


Definitely don't overlook pro amps. I use two Crown XLS202D amps to power my mains and center. 200 wpc into 8 ohms and 300 into 4ohms, what more could I ask for. just the amount of headroom I have makes one less thing to worry about. I'll be going pro for a sub too, it's a lot harder and more expensive to get 1000 watts from a plate amp.


----------



## Sideshow (Mar 6, 2007)

vmaxnc said:


> Everyone has their own opinion, but I disagree with yours. Having sold and owned many dozens of combinations I can say that every step towards a full component system _can _show significant improvement. Start with a good (_not _$300) receiver, then add an amp, then swap the receiver for a preamp, etc. Then you can get into seperate DACs, mono amps, etc., but 95% of the people will likely not want or need to get into that kind of money to get the sound they want. BTW-speakers are the most important piece-put as much money as possible there. Then move backwards through the audio chain.
> 
> So far the most cost effective improvment I've done to my current gear is to replace the AC cables for the receiver and main amp. I was surprised when I heard the difference.


You didn't hear a difference. You just thought you did because you wanted to justify the price and trouble you went through. I'll let this excerpt from an article by the Audio Critic sum it up:


The biggest and stupidest lie of
them all on the subject of “clean” power
is that you need a specially designed
high-priced line cord to obtain the best
possible sound. Any line cord rated to
handle domestic ac voltages and currents
will perform like any other. Ultrahigh-
end line cords are a fraud. Your
audio circuits don’t know, and don’t
care, what’s on the ac side of the power
transformer. All they’re interested in is
the dc voltages they need. Think about
it. Does your car care about the hose
you filled the tank with?


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

Look, the bottom line is as simple as the following:

IF
A) You are designing a system with active crossover and EQ for individual drivers playing above the sub-bass range, OR;
B) Your speakers are among the _extremely small_ group of speakers that present truly horrendous loads to amplifiers (if your speakers a cone-dome unit that aren't from Thiel ca. 1988, they are probably not part of this group), OR;
C) You are willing to pay more than required to achieve transparent electronics (very little, today) in order to get some audiophile bragging rights.

separates are probably a good idea.

If neither A, B, nor C apply in your case, then separates are just a waste of money.



GlasSman said:


> Once you've heard a nice system with seperate amps you won't have to ask if they're worth it.


And once one's heard a nice system driven by a $300 receiver, you'll quickly learn how abjectly insignificant audio electronics are....




GlasSman said:


> IN that price range on the used market I would recommend:
> 
> Adcom GFA-545II(100 x 2)
> 
> Adcom GFA-555II(200 x 2)


Hmm. I found a sub-$300 reciever (Panny XR55) to sound better than a Marantz AV600/Adcom GFA-535II combo on ppp passages at low volumes. Why? The digital-to-the-binding-posts Panny had a lower noise floor.



GlasSman said:


> But there ARE differences.


Of course there are. Thing is, those differences are primarily in appearance, ergonomics, size, etc. IOW, sound quality is NOT one of them with competently-designed modern gear.




Xander said:


> Definitely don't overlook pro amps. I use two Crown XLS202D amps to power my mains and center. 200 wpc into 8 ohms and 300 into 4ohms, what more could I ask for. just the amount of headroom I have makes one less thing to worry about. I'll be going pro for a sub too, it's a lot harder and more expensive to get 1000 watts from a plate amp.


Agreed. My current favorite pro amps are the Crown XTi line, because they are cheap for the power and have an extremely useful DSP built in for crossover/EQ. 

For a simple setup or if one's using outboard processing, the Behringer A500 is also a nice bet. I'd buy one of those before I even thought of any Krell/Halcro/Classe/Pass/Levinson/Burmeister whatever, unless someone decided to sell me one of those above amps with similar power for less than the cost of the A500.


----------

