Things are a bit dead here, so lets try and liven it up a bit 
Often you hear about people who have bought an AV Receiver as an upgrade to an old integrated stereo setup and most are impressed by the HT sound, but often disappointed by the stereo playback capabilities of their purchase despite toys such as "Pure Direct", etc.
You will also find the guys who would except the "lesser" stereo quality and even defend it based on either the fact that they have paid R10K plus or possibly due to the fact that they have not heard a "goodish" stereo setup.
I have always believed that my CA 540R with Flying Mole monoblocs driving my front speakers sound quite good in stereo(compared to many AVR I have listened to) and indeed it sounds good in stereo when playing a decent recording, but when listening to lesser recordings the difference compared to a stereo amp is glaringly obvious.
Whilst on leave I connected my CDP to the NAD 320BEE I used as a headphone amp previously and listened to a few CDs of varying quality and the difference was quite pronounced. Only problem was when I used the NAD to drive my Maggies, the lack of drive from the NAD became obvious, although using my Mordaunt Short speakers presented no problems at all.
Next step was to connect the monoblocs to the NAD's pre-outs and that brought about a "step up" in sound quality although I feel that the Maggies need a lot more power to make them sound like they should, but that's another topic all together.
Okay what I am trying to get to with this short story is that an AV Receiver is never as good in a stereo role as even an entry-level stereo integrated despite the manufacturer's claims and when you decide to upgrade, careful consideration should be taken into the future role of your purchase and if the ratio of music/movies is higher than 40/60 rather look at seperate systems or even use a stereo amp for movies(it sounds quite good when using a good DVD player)
Often you hear about people who have bought an AV Receiver as an upgrade to an old integrated stereo setup and most are impressed by the HT sound, but often disappointed by the stereo playback capabilities of their purchase despite toys such as "Pure Direct", etc.
You will also find the guys who would except the "lesser" stereo quality and even defend it based on either the fact that they have paid R10K plus or possibly due to the fact that they have not heard a "goodish" stereo setup.
I have always believed that my CA 540R with Flying Mole monoblocs driving my front speakers sound quite good in stereo(compared to many AVR I have listened to) and indeed it sounds good in stereo when playing a decent recording, but when listening to lesser recordings the difference compared to a stereo amp is glaringly obvious.
Whilst on leave I connected my CDP to the NAD 320BEE I used as a headphone amp previously and listened to a few CDs of varying quality and the difference was quite pronounced. Only problem was when I used the NAD to drive my Maggies, the lack of drive from the NAD became obvious, although using my Mordaunt Short speakers presented no problems at all.
Next step was to connect the monoblocs to the NAD's pre-outs and that brought about a "step up" in sound quality although I feel that the Maggies need a lot more power to make them sound like they should, but that's another topic all together.
Okay what I am trying to get to with this short story is that an AV Receiver is never as good in a stereo role as even an entry-level stereo integrated despite the manufacturer's claims and when you decide to upgrade, careful consideration should be taken into the future role of your purchase and if the ratio of music/movies is higher than 40/60 rather look at seperate systems or even use a stereo amp for movies(it sounds quite good when using a good DVD player)
