Integra DRX-8.4 Multichannel Receiver: Overview, features, build, a few pre-out measurements...

Obviously, value is an important consideration for consumers when it comes to buying and enjoying products. As discussed over the years, I'm not an audiophile who's particularly interested in the luxury aspect of these machines. To me, the ideal of achieving "high fidelity" sound does not care about MSRP or some other determinant of whether a product is artificially exotic/elite, thus "High End Audio" (a.k.a. High Priced Audio) is meaningless to me unless there is evidence of improved sonic performance (whether from plain increased objective fidelity or incorporating technical features) correlating with higher asking price. As such, I believe audiophiles should seriously think about the value of modern AV receivers which over time have also incrementally shown improved sound quality by incorporating higher quality DACs, newer DSP room correction technologies, and potential benefits like balanced connections.

In my opinion, this also means the divide between "home theater" enthusiasts and "audiophiles" is largely artificial when it comes to sonic performance. Subjectively, we're all aiming for an excellent audio experience with high-fidelity to the source with utmost clarity (including time-domain coherence), low distortion, high dynamic range, excellent reproduction of nuances, while achieving realistic/intended soundstage. Objectively, a high quality AV receiver these days should not have difficulty providing hi-fi performance compared to many very expensive products (like the Dan D'Agostino Momentum monoblocks US$80k/pr as an obvious example - other than high power, there's nothing particularly good), plus typically these AV companies provide way more features and modern amenities. The R&D firepower behind these companies are substantial compared to the small-business shops that typically make products for the esoteric 2-channel audiophile niche. Over time, as I hope audiophiles increasingly consider enjoying the new multichannel recordings and remixes, moving into "immersive" audio, these multichannel receivers should be seen as serious options.

The only utilitarian difference between home theater enthusiasts and audiophiles is whether video playback is needed.

In this post, let's start with having a look at the item pictured above, the Integra DRX-8.4 multichannel receiver. (Discussions and measurements of AV receivers are not new on this blog with previous posts on the Yamaha RX-V781 and Onkyo TX-NR1009.)

Despite being the current flagship receiver from Integra, the price is "only" US$3,200 or about CAD$4,000. I bought this item through standard retail channels online because I was interested in it; no company incentives.

SUMMER MUSINGS: "How Much Difference Does It Make?" - On Balance and Adequacy for audiophiles.

The other day, I was reading Jim Austin's "As We See It" post on Stereophile titled "How Does the Music Make You Feel?". A relatively sensible article putting forward his and the magazine's perspective around finding "balance" between the subjective and objective sides of the audiophile pursuit. I agree with the central thesis, ultimately it is a subjective decision how one wants to spend time engaged in this hobby based on the emotional effect of music (I hesitate a little to say "music" here because let's be honest, not all audiophiles are in it for the music - sometimes it's the "sound" that's being sought). Music is art and appreciation of art will always be subjective, perhaps even wildly idiosyncratically for each person. Nonetheless, it's not that simple is it if we "look at the forest instead of the trees"? Let's take a higher level perspective and consider the audiophile hobby as a whole, rather than the audiophile him/herself. Are there some principles we might want to keep in mind?

Remember that what I've called "hardware audiophiles" are actually the niche hobbyists Stereophile is speaking and advertising to. I don't think Stereophile is of much interest to the multitudes of "music lovers" who probably are quite happy already with decent bitrate MP3 streaming over cell phones. As discussed before, these two hobbies intertwine but IMO are not the same. In every Stereophile issue, while some pages are dedicated to albums, music reviews, or maybe interviews with artists, the contents mostly discuss hardware products used in reproduction of the music. Our emotional response to reproduced music is a combination of the artistry in the music and science of reproduction. The audio devices used have technical characteristics that are objective and can be measured. As an analogy, in the visual arts world, we might or might not subjectively like the Mona Lisa, but when we look at a reproduction (photograph or scan of it), we can certainly experience and measure the differences between high vs. low resolution copies, and we can comment on or measure other objective traits like color saturation, accuracy, brightness, contrast, etc. compared to the "real thing" under the lighting conditions at the Louvre.

In reading that article by Mr. Austin however, between the personal stories and opinions, I noticed that like in most editorials covering this topic over the years in magazines, it's side-stepping a very important dimension. Achieving "balance" is not just about the way it is done (subjective listening +/- objective measurements), but also about the depth of exploration from which we derive adequacy. In other words, it's not just about whether we subjectively look at a car/woman/man and be captivated by its/her/his beauty, or whether the thing/person is objectively faster/taller/shorter/skinnier, but rather, are these qualities "good enough" for our intentions?

Let's expand on this...