Separates versus Receivers

The whole separates versus receivers debate has raged on for as long as I can remember and I see no sign of it going away anytime soon. In essence the proponents of separates claim they give you the best sound quality and the best upgrade path. While on the other side of the fence; fans of receivers state that it’s easier (and ultimately less expensive) to just replace a receiver every four to five years when significant advances in technology warrant doing so.

Here’s the thing, both sides are right and wrong to some extent. Firstly receivers do offer the best bang for the buck, more features and the latest advancements are usually what you can expect going with a receiver over separates but that’s not to say separates don’t offer advantages over receivers.

Separates offer you the ability to keep the amplifier section and only change out the pre-processor or vice versa. Often times the amplifier doesn’t really benefit from an upgrade (assuming we’re starting with a relatively good amplifier to begin with) as much as the pre-processor.

Listen (no pun intended) both receivers and separates are capable of fantastic sound, much of this boils down to personal preference but I’m of the opinion receivers are generally the way to go unless you’re really after that last 5-10% of sound quality only a top notch set of separates can offer.

Share or Bookmark This Post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.