Versatility and two channel performance

Bass management; poor remote

Many of the comments in this forum directed at the Arcam AVR 100 unfairly criticize its two channel performance. As a former owner of the highly acclaimed Arcam Alpha 10 integrated amp, I understand the AVR 100 does not perform in two channel mode with the same balanced delivery of its Alpha brother. But for a home theater entry, the two channel performance is as fine as any in the market less than $1500.

The AVR 100 offers fine HT performance for 5.1 channels, allowing listeners to manually balance the db from back to front to subwoofer, a unique feature if you connect the unit to a monitor. True, in HT "Hall" mode at 70 watts per channel, the AVR 100 does not meet the two channel performance of the Alpha, nor is it as well balanced. But switching to "Stereo" mode brings the performance closer to the Alpha standard at 90 watts, a heavy burden for any HT receiver at any price. Indeed, by definition, multi-purpose HT receivers cannot deliver the two channel performance of any unit at the HT receiver's price. But the AVR 100 is as close as any I've sampled.

I am particularly impressed at the AVR 100's versatility, offering various connection options (composite/component/S-video/digital)combined with the usual HT filter selections. Balancing the sounds between front and rears is a nice feature, particularly if you bi-amp your speakers, adding more punch to the unit itself. By adapting to the listeners needs (of course, requiring the purchase of another amp), the AVR 100 essentially offers everything its competition flaunts, but at the Arcam performance standard.

Much unfortunately is made of the unit's PRC manufacturing site, but if it was assembled in the UK, it might render the unit unafordable. Two channel enthusiasts seeking a quality HT option in the $1500 price range will be more than satisfied with the AVR 100.

My only quarrel is the relatively poor bass management. Arcam suprisingly does not sufficiently boost or balance the bass management in this unit, a problem I suspect will be corrected with its later progeny. Also, the remote should be lighted and made more user friendly. It is difficult to operate the remote in the light, given the small buttons with barely discernable markings; in the dark, you better have memorized the button positions.

But despite these important flaws, the unit warrants a four star rating. Audio enthusiasts seeking a HT option will not be disappointed.

Excellent in Stereo

A bit expensive

I have to say that I only auditioned the Arcam on music and it sounded warm and beautiful through the Castles speaker.
To be honest I am between the Arcam and the Denon 3801 and I haven't decided yet.
The thing is that some people on this site are not giving reviews on the product but prefer to criticise its origin. That does not help people that are looking for a product. Moreover the overall rating of this product is dropping and it is unfair. Any of you who actually owns the product feel free to email on arischr@hotmail.com. I wpould really appreciate a review that is subjective-(good or bad). After all its all about personal experience and different sound likes
Thanks
PS 5 stars for its great musically against several rivals

Similar Products Used:

Denon AVR2801,AVR3801, Yamaha 495a

Smooth and very musical

Flexibility

Some of the reviews on this forum are comical. You have several people who trash this product because it's put together in China. Several other reviewers trashed it because it only weighs 28 lbs. (like weight has anything to do with sound quality). You have the reviewer below who says that Arcam sounds good but gives it a low rating because he can't drive a demanding esoteric audiophile speaker with a receiver. The fact is that AVR100 blows away any of the mass-produced Japanese receivers on the market. Arcam has a history of making great sounding products at reasonable prices. The AVR100 is not trying to be like the mass-produced Japanese receivers. It does not have all the useless bells and whistles that are associated with other receivers. The AVR100 is built with sound quality in mind. All of Arcam's products are built with audiophile parts including; fiberglass circuit boards, metal resistors, and upgraded polypropylene capacitors. The AVR100 uses a massive torodial power transformer. You don't see that in any other $1,000 receiver. The AVR100 also has a unique tone defeat switch that bypasses the Digital Signaling Processing (DSP) in stereo mode, so the analog signal is not messed with. The beauty of this receiver is that it can do double duty as a Home Theatre receiver as well as being part of a high-quality audio system. There is no grain or brightness with this receiver, a character that is commonly associated with the mass-produced receivers on the market. I've listened to receivers from Denon, Pioneer, Yamaha, and Onkyo, and they just don't sound good in two-channel stereo. If you value musicality, then the AVR100 is for you!

Similar Products Used:

Denon,Yamaha, Pioneer

In response to Neil's review below, I certainly a realize that everyone is entitled to there opinion.............sound is personal. But keep in mind that this unit is assembled in China, not engineered, designed etc. What really matters is what it sounds like, and beleive me it is sweet. the Marantz SR18 to me was a close second, but for substantially more. Go into your local audio store, get a good CD player, speakers, and drop in your favorite CD and listen, that is what really matters and that is the untimate test. I sure did and loved whatI heard. Sony, Pioneer, even Rotel and Nakamichi were not close. I didn't critically listen to the HT section, because to be honest, I don't really care, as long as movies sound decent, that is fine with me, I need AUDIOPHILE quality stereo. If the Marantz was anywhere near the price I would have considered that just becasue of the additional inputs, better bass management etc. But as I said, drop in a CD and listen. Everyone is different, but I certainly thought it was no comparision......so did the hi end stereo sales guy who could have sold me a unit costing much more.

Similar Products Used:

You name it, I've auditioned it.

Excellent Sound quality, Good looks, Great company support

Remote is hard to read, Digital inputs cannot be assigned, bass management is weak

The sound quality from this unit is excellent! I am not an Audiophile, but I could definately tell the difference when I upgraded from my Onkyo TX-DS747. I agree with most of the ACTUAL reviews on here for this product with regards that the remote sucks, bass management is poor and the digital inputs cannot be assigned. I have to run my SAT through the VCR input of this unit because it is the only input which uses TOSLINK. Likewise my VCR is running through the SAT input. Kind of confusing so I contacted ARCAM directly to see if they were planning on possibly an update for this and they said NO. Ohh well it still bugs me to watch the SAT with VCR displayed on the receiver, but I wouldn't give it up because the sound quality is so good.
The DACs on this unit are phenominal. I run my SAT using a TOSLINK cable into this reciever and it sounds AMAZING! I would have never guessed I was just listening to a SAT signal.
Well that is my humble review. Any comments or questions just drop me an email.

4 Stars for Quality just because of the Input and Bass management flaws (the remote I could care less about) but if I was just judging sound quality it would definately have been 5 Stars! If they would have just spent a little more time in R&D this would have been an unbeatable unit.

Similar Products Used:

Onkyo TS-DX747

Good Sound, good looks, okay performance

Difficult to use, poor remote, poor bass performance, poor performance in HT mode. Underpowered, essentially an overpriced NAD.

I was very disappointed by this receiver. I read all of the reviews and couldn't wait to try it out. Maybe my expectations were too high, but I was not impressed with the performance in HT mode and I didn't feel the two channel music performance was good enough to make up for the lack of HT features and performance.

I don't care what anyone says, this is an overpriced NAD. Try the NAD side by side and you will see. The units perform and look very similar.

I will wait until Arcam produces an Arcam receiver. When they do, I will be the first in line. I expected more from this great company. This unit was a major disappointment.

Music

Bass management, remote, build quality

I was very happy to start with but after about a week I was becomeing much less happy, I then noticed that the main speakers had a hissing noise and even worse the centre channel and a very bad hum. I got the shop to replace the unit with a new one and a day later the new receiver developed the same fault. So unless I'm very unlucky it looks like the AVR100 and some significant quality issues.

Similar Products Used:

Yamaha RX-V995

SOUND, Elegant Looks,simplicity of design, Quality of DTS, Dolby Digital and Prologic decoding. NO Gimmicks

Remote is non learning and sort of hard to read, Setup adjustments are more limited than other receivers

This receiver really does not sound like one. The sound is warm and authoritative and is typical of the Arcam products. I like the styling of the unit(plus you can choose silver or black...)as well as the styling of the remote even if it is a bit hard to read (you basically have to remember where the functions are...). But they rightfully decided to spend more on the amplfier and less on the remote: I think it was the right move.This unit seems to have a lot of power in reserve and i have yet to see loose control at high output (though it runs fairly hot).
This is the first Arcam product to be assembled outside of England (in fact it shares the same basic plateform as the NAD T760, but with better components)but the quality is way up there! A "must try" in its price bracket.

Similar Products Used:

NAD AV316, Auditioned Rotel RSX-965,NAD T760

Gives an extra dimension to the sound of movies, especially those in DTS. Knocks your socks off!!

Remote - too small and fiddly

Auditoned the Arcam against the Denon 3801; the Armcam was much more detailed and much more musical.

I also like the uncluttered styling and finish. All round the best sounding AV receiver I have heard in the price range.

My other equipment is Pioneer 636 DVD player and Boston speakers with REL sub-woofer.

A must for anyone auditioning an AV receiver.
I now watch movies more than once - principally for the sound!

Similar Products Used:

Denon 3801

Flexible AV unit and ideal for most home cinema enthusiasts.

Can't compare to dedicated amps but then it could never be expected to. Slightly under powered in more than 2 channels.

It seems a lot of people are not happy with this product. I have to say for the purpose it was built namely home cinema , it performs well for the price (cheap). Of course it can't be compared to audiophile hardware like the Chords of this World but it's not supposed to. It drives my B&W CDM 7NTs nicely without hiding too much detail and the radio functions very well. I guess the FMJ will be much better but then I'm not in the league for paying 3-4K for an AV unit for a naff movie soundtrack !

Similar Products Used:

Cyrus, TagMclaren