Stereo receiver recommendation

[regal]

I need a new receiver, I am done with home theater dolby receivers that either don't have enough power or break down. I need a stereo receiver that puts out a lot of power and has a sub out.

 

[Lazarus Short]

Get yourself a vintage, well-built receiver. The sub-out may be a problem, but most subwoofers don't need a dedicated feed, do they? My favored way to go would be a quad receiver which can be bridged back to stereo. I once owned a Pioneer QX-949 (IIRC), bridged it to stereo (easy to do), and was surprised at the sound quality and sense of power (80 watts per side in stereo). Quad receivers are a neglected part of the gear world, and can be purchased cheaply - many are on eBay.

Laz

 

[Uncle Erik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazarus Short /img/forum/go_quote.gif Get yourself a vintage, well-built receiver. The sub-out may be a problem, but most subwoofers don't need a dedicated feed, do they?

No, a lot of subwoofers have a high pass filter - that is, they'll pass the higher frequencies off to the main speakers. You can also add a filter between a receiver that doesn't have one and a sub.

You might even be better off this way, since it's best to match the cutoff between your particular speakers and sub.

Laz is right on about vintage receivers. A lot of them are great. If you haven't visited Tuner Information Center - Vintage Stereo Tuners, you'll find a lot of good information there. A good FM section is a joy, too, since a lot of people haven't heard quality FM. Look for one with a phono stage, too, if you might want to give a turntable a spin.

As for new receivers, I like the ones from Marantz, NAD and Outlaw Audio. They make quality units that are excellent for the price.

 

[Yikes]

The Stereo Receiver is sort of a dead product. There are only a few on the market. Most are trash suitable for Walmart rack systems.

There is one that might meet your needs

The Outlaw Audio RR2150

Outlaw Audio

 

[juniperlater]

If you go vintage, I can whole-heartedly recommend the Marantz 2270. I use it in my system and really enjoy it.

In regard to current stuff, I think the Marantz PM7001 (now PM8003) is quite good - although not at its new pricepoint ($999). There is no FM tuner in either of these though.

Also, the NAD 720BEE is a good performer. I was about ten seconds from pulling the trigger on this one after some really long listening sessions at my hifi shop.

 

[cardude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal /img/forum/go_quote.gif I need a new receiver, I am done with home theater dolby receivers that either don't have enough power or break down. I need a stereo receiver that puts out a lot of power and has a sub out.

I agree going with a vintage receiver. I recently picked up a Kenwood KR-9600, they were made in 1977-78. My late father had one of these when I was a teen. This baby cranks out 160 watts per channel and sounds as good as it looks! It also has a real phono output if you ever decide to get into vinyl. Actually, the HP out sounds pretty damn good too. They come up every so often on eBay and sell for around $500.

You might also look at the Pioneer SX-1080 or the big boy SX-1250. These vintage receivers were built like tanks and sound great. Give them a look.

 

[redshifter]

get a marantz

 

[ronnielee54]

Vintage Marantz most definetly. Their tuners are sweet. They are always turning up on ebay. Don't concern yourself all that much with the output power unless your speakers are extremely power hungry. They didn't b#$$*@*t the numbers back then the way some manufacturers do these days. Old Kenwoods are pretty decent to.

 

[sahwnfras]

If you do want a new product, buy an Pioneer Eliete A-9 (i believe is the model). But the Elietes i never see problems with at all, also come with 3 year warranty. In a year I have had one Eliete have a problem, and it was a PDP with a bad power supply (likely lighting stike, or surge)

 

[-=Germania=-]

One option that would be cheaper than the vintage marantz and IMO just as good is to pick up one of the Yamaha CA series receivers. They are part of their "Natural Sound" premium line. It is a more airy sound than the marantz equipment.

I have the CA-600 (minty

) and it is a superb sounding and built piece of equipment. It has two stereo speaker outputs. The other set of outputs could be combined and filtered to a passive sub. Or you could use the pre-amp outputs and convert to sub input.

The Pioneer Elites are excellent if you have more money to spend.

 

[guttorm]

i have a top of the line sony for sale here for $200. It has 110 watts per channel...

 

[olblueyez]

I think the Outlaw is the best suggestion so far.

 

[arnesto]

I haven't heard or seen it in person, but this one looks nice.

Accuphase Integrated Stereo Amplifier E-213

How about these.

http://www.avrev.com/home-theater-po...plifier-2.html

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/Superio...llkav400xi.htm

 

[Xena]

I have/love a NAD L40 ... integrated amp with built-in CD player and tuner. Got it as a refurb for under $400. There are more recent designs with built-in DVD players and more channels, but for me the L40 was the perfect bedroom system, paired with a pair of NHT SuperOnes.

 

[mrarroyo]

The Accuphase is beautiful! expensive but built like a tank.