AudioControl receiver vs separates

We are an Audio Control dealer and have direct experience with both their processors and their A/V receivers.

To answer your question, yes a very high end receiver can beat lesser or similarily priced separates. 

It is all in the design of the piece, in some cases the high end a/v receiver is the company's 5 or 7 channel amplifier with a processor board in the same chassis.

We used to do that very same demo of a Audio Control $6k A/V receiver vs a set of similarily priced separates and there was no real improvement with the separates. So the purpose of the demo was to show that you could create a very high end system with a receiver for those that didn't want to take up the additional space that separates would require and wanted to save the cost of having to buy 2.5-3.5 good sets of interconnects. 

We currently have a great setup at the shop which is the Anthem AVM 60 processor for $3k with the Audio Control Savoy a $2,500.00 5 channel amplifier from Audio Control and that combo totally rocks. Yes the Audio Control processor would be even better but the Maestro M7 is $5,500.00 so then the package would go up considerably.

In our reference theater room we use the Audio Control Maestro M9 pre/pro with the Plinius Odeon a monster of a multi channel amp and the sound is too die for

Dave and Troy
Audio Doctor NJ Audio Control dealers

Of course a single unit can sound better than separates, given that the quality of the single unit is better.

However, what sucks with separates for home theater is many do not support modern formats. I see processors still being sold that are $10K and don’t support HDR nor Atmos.

Also, you want room correction, at least for the subwoofer. For the consumer level, Audyssey (Denon/Marantz) is the best, though I recommend the $20 app as the default target curve sucks. Higher in price gets your Dirac or Anthem’s ARC, but again many of those products don’t support modern formats.

The NAD T777 V3 is $2500 and I believe it supports all the current codecs (not HDMI 2.1 I believe, but I wouldn’t think you’d have use for that). It has Dirac, which is really good.

mzkmzcv, I totally agree with you. For a while I chased used Proceed AVP2 units because people told me that a well setup 5.1 system is better than the newer 7.1 formats. Plus my budget was lower back then. The thing was it really wasn't better to my ears, the higher resolution master audio sounded miles better to me. It had nothing to do with 5.1 vs 7.1, it was just that the higher resolution source (lossless 24/192) was just better. The problem was you can only pass that stuff over HDMI as far as I know so I had to change everything.

For today's stuff, I'm not sure Atmos is better because I understand it to be more about speaker location than source quality. I haven't really heard a good Atmos theater so I'm just not sure. The reviews I read about 5.1 Master Audio vs 5.1.2 Atmos are mixed. Plus my theater only has one row of seats. But, the room correction is a big plus and I agree Dirac looks great (AudoControl has it also).

Thanks for the recommendation on the NAD T777 V3. I'll look into that because it seems to have a lot for the price.

audiotroy, that sounds like a great demo that let's you really compare differences. I knew there were units of different quality, but I thought I was comparing the upper end of HT when asking about Marantz separates.

So here's a really tough question for you. Have you compared the AudioControl AVR-9 (that's the top receiver right?) to the Anthem AVM 60 with Savoy you have right now? Where does it stand because now we're talking similar money and quality?

I haven't heard this comparison directly, but I would doubt the AaudioControl AVR9 could sound better or even the same as the AVM60 plus Savoy. The Savoy should be a better amp than what's in the AVR9 and the Anthem AVM60 should be at least as good sounding as the processor section of the AVR9. That's my reasoning, but as I said I haven't heard this comparison.

a real world consideration in HT is the screen, formats, and speakers.

HDMI is already at 2.0 and about to jump into HDMI 2.1 or 2.2. to accomodate forth coming screen resolutions and other new tech.

I'd ensure both HDR and Dolby video are supported in what ever proc. at least.

having something and not needing it is better than not having something and needing it.

then therer's the amp to speaker concern. ya gotta have the right combo in that respect. receivers even at the top tier don't always have the true juice needed to accomodate any sort of speaker impedance curve and in my exp, I've always found dedicated amps the usual first upgrade.

yes. I have a 5 ch amp yet I'd rather have and should have went with a two ch and a three ch amp instead, or at least two 2ch amps and used the Receviers amp for the center ch.

ATMAS or the over head speaker array simply does not interest me. $$$$$

I'd be more interested in networking, blu tooth, upgradability, and local support.

good luck.

Yes, I think keeping future use in mind is important. For me, I still have a 1080 projector, but I'll probably upgrade that during the life of this unit. So 4K and HDR are important because I plan to get a 4K unit next when the prices come done some more.

I really like the idea of using the receiver's amps for surround and getting an external amp for the critical channels. I would probably include the center as one to get an external amp. So if one were to do a 5.1.4 Atmos setup it would be ideal to use the preamp outs to an external amp for the L/C/R channels and then use the receiver to power the 6 other channels, two rear surrounds and the 4 Atmos ceiling.

The problem is, I don't think all receivers can do this. I'm not sure, but I don't think the AudioControl allows you to use the 7 channels of amplification for any speakers you want. Maybe someone here knows how to set something like that up.