JBL SDR-35 AVR Review

[KMO]

THX Ultra specification used to be 1V for the input sensitivity to hit 28.28V.
Could the SINAD 100 at 1V reflect that outdated approach?

That's 29dB gain, and it remains basically universal in AVRs, including this one. You can see the gain measured at 28.7dB in one of the readouts. I'm not actually aware of any AVR that doesn't use 29dB.

A slightly odd number - if I had to guess, it's derived from 1Vrms = 100W at @8ohm - the aim being to be able to reach reference level without significantly going above the nominal 1V line level.

There's clearly a fight going on where a lot of people including Amir want to increase source DAC level and reduce amplifier gain for separate amps, but I'm not aware any AVR has made a corresponding internal gain change. For decades they have been set up so that the DACs' 0dBFS = 2Vrms - more than enough to get full power from the 29dB internal amps . They do use the full 2Vrms DAC range, but have analogue volume afterwards before going into the amps and pre-outs. If that analogue volume doesn't attenuate a 0dBFS=2Vrms signal, it will clip the internal amps.

A few amps like high-end Denons will at least allow internal amp disconnection to allow the full 2Vrms clean on the pre-outs.

 

[Worker]

Cool. So what am I testing for?

From my perspective I would like to know if the core digital functionality of the Arcam/JBL platform is clean and if, as I suspect, most of the problems you have identified are related to the DAC/analogue routing/amplification stages and related system "hygiene".

So as a first simple test; what do your normal SINAD type tests reveal if an HDMI and/or SDIF/TOSLINK digital input is routed directly to the digital Dante output? Should be bit perfect once bass control and volume control parameters are allowed for and ignoring the surround decoding algorithms since they are a given for all manufacturers.

Only a few of the higher end AV processors have the option of digital outputs, typically multiple AES ports presented as the "DCI" interface (Trinnov, Storm & Lyngdorf and their derivatives), and I believe only JBL & Storm offer Dante so far.

I'm hoping that the digital in and digital out paths are clean and so using Dante I would build a system using the SDP-55/58 feeding proven multi channel pro audio analogue interfaces e.g. from Focusrite, Tascam, Glensound, Sonifex and others. It would also be possible to use pro power amplifiers with built in Dante/DSP and even direct to active speakers e.g. some newer models from Genelec & Neumann.

I believe some of the higher end JBL "Synthesis" systems already use this approach with JBL Dante input amplifiers.

Using a Dante multichannel AV processor output would also allow the use of Dante interfaced multichannel DSP for active crossovers, eq. and more sophisticated routing/control than is available more basic processors. One would again use pro DSP e.g. From Yamaha, BSS, Symmetrix (Qsys), Extron etc. All these products are in wide spread and stable use in live sound, broadcast and commercial audio.

 

[Krobar]

9.x.6 is kind of standard today for smaller rooms. You add channels by 4 - e.g. 11.x.8, once you start to add rows in your HT. I prefer 9.x.7 with extra Center Height added. So you actually need at least 18 channels to connect minimum 2 Subs or 20 with 9.4.7.

7.2.4 is considered bare minimum.

Don’t look at your living room, visualize somebody with 6 seater cinema. This is what those product are mostly used.

Nothing other than Trinnov and Storm seem to support the additional surround positions which seem to be pretty important if you have multiple row of seating. I run 7.2.6 CH/VOG which I like for my single row dedicated room but I see your point about high channel counts being useful for larger dedicated rooms.

 

[dlaloum]

Integra's previous generation DHC-60.7 had HDBaseT distribution for Zone2/3 - but not Dante.

In today's market, it would make sense for other manufacturers in the Custom install marketplace, to provide Dante interfacing...

But there isn't much out there other than JBL/Trinnov

 

[Krobar]

@amirm Interesting review. Did you try playing with the Protection Sensitivity setting in the system menu? It defaults to high and I suspect it might affect the 20hz tone amp result.

Also did you try changing with the "CD Direct" input setting to see if it affects the Toslink 15bit muting/linearity issue?

Is the HDMI grounding issue reported in the SDP-55 review fixed by the new 2.1 board?

 

[Koeitje]

Would be an interesting buy at a tenth of the price. But with this MSRP I consider it a complete scam and a waste of a Dirac license.

 

[Grotti]

9.x.6 is kind of standard today for smaller rooms. You add channels by 4 - e.g. 11.x.8, once you start to add rows in your HT. I prefer 9.x.7 with extra Center Height added. So you actually need at least 18 channels to connect minimum 2 Subs or 20 with 9.4.7.

7.2.4 is considered bare minimum.

Don’t look at your living room, visualize somebody with 6 seater cinema. This is what those product are mostly used.

"7.2.4 is considered bare minimum"

That is why you most likely never find this kind of devices in average Western European homes (apartments or flats with unavoidable neighbour's).

13 speakers in a living room (aka home theater) and this mediocre measuring monster sitting in the middle: a nightmare (strictly subjective of course)

 

[Vacceo]

Looks like its difficult to put everything ( poweramps , processors, dacs and preamps ) inside the same box and expect good measurement results .

But in the case of separates, the results are not a whole lot better. Perhaps with the exception of Anthem´s AVM70 (perhaps the 90 too, but Amir hasn´t tested it), the reviews on AVP on Marantz, NAd or Arcam do not show great results. In theory it should be easier to provide a clean implementation, but in practice, we have yet to see it.

 

[Tangband]

But in the case of separates, the results are not a whole lot better. Perhaps with the exception of Anthem´s AVM70 (perhaps the 90 too, but Amir hasn´t tested it), the reviews on AVP on Marantz, NAd or Arcam do not show great results. In theory it should be easier to provide a clean implementation, but in practice, we have yet to see it.

Maybe those homecinema products are constructed as cheap as possible , with hefty pricetags = more profit?
Or is there no 7.2 processor chip with sota performance ?

 

[Vacceo]

Maybe those homecinema products are constructed as cheap as possible , with hefty pricetags = more profit?
Or is there no 7.2 processor chip with sota performance ?

Marantz processors are not cheap, but compared to the cost of an AV40 from Arcam, they may look so. Anthem´s AVM70 shows that with a relatively contained price (still, not cheap!), it is possible to reach CD quality reproduction (and a bit more, actually). To be fair, that should be the minimum expected on a 3 grand purchase...

 

[JStewart]

This is on the spec listing in the review:
”Nominal sensitivity - 1V. 2V. 4V (user adiustable)”
Is that for inputs or pre-outs?
Would the setting have made any difference when testing the DAC?

I think this shows the intended value proposition for the Monoprice HTP-1 at $4000US also reviewed by Amir. It would be less than this unit when paired with excellent amplification such as the Hypex module based amps from @Buckeye Amps

 

[KxDx]

One day, when the Next Big Thing makes HDMI obsolete, you'll be able to get one of these on Craigslist for 50 bucks.

 

[KMO]

This is on the spec listing in the review:
”Nominal sensitivity - 1V. 2V. 4V (user adiustable)”
Is that for inputs or pre-outs?

A check of the manual says inputs:

Input Trim – Sets the maximum analog input signal level (sensitivity) on this input before the ADC (Analogue-toDigital converter) signal path clips. Options are 1, 2 and 4 volts RMS maximum input. The default is 2Vrms maximum

 

[Deleted member 50971]

This is on the spec listing in the review:
”Nominal sensitivity - 1V. 2V. 4V (user adiustable)”
Is that for inputs or pre-outs?
Would the setting have made any difference when testing the DAC?

I think this shows the intended value proposition for the Monoprice HTP-1 at $4000US also reviewed by Amir. It would be less than this unit when paired with excellent amplification such as the Hypex module based amps from @Buckeye Amps

I wanted to like the Monoprice too, but I wasn’t willing to hang around while they fixed all the bugs. If I’m spending that kind of money I’m not jumping into a glorified beta version. Amir also said when he was plugging cables in the back panel flexed a bit… that would be enough to make me unhappy for $4000. It’s not easy to do these right, and even harder if you don’t have any experience doing it. The stable ones have been around for years.

 

[Music1969]

What's happening with Engineering over at Harman Group.

@Sean Olive , please tell your colleagues they need to do better.

 

[Dj7675]

Why? It’s not a codec used on content people view (I.e. streaming). Neural:X is the worst of the immersive upmixers IMO for stereo music. Besides, isn’t the distinction between Pro and regular just channel count? Sixteen channels on a modern AVR/P generally means 7.1.4 with multiple subs integrated with DLBC. Doesn’t normal DTS-X handle that? If it were a 20-channel thing then ok, it should support all of the wides and middles or whatever.

-IMO Neural X is one of the best upmixer for 5.1/7.1 content (althrough very poor with 2 channel music)
-There is quite a lot of existing and some new content in DTS:X
-Those that prefer to add wide or other channels and go beyond 11 channels cannot use those channels with DTS:X.
-Yes DTS:X will handle 7.1.4 layouts just fine since it won’t be beyond the 11 channels. But it is a limitation this price segment shoudln’t have. It is a capability out for a few years now.
-The limitation of not having DTS:X Pro may not be relevant to all setups, but if you decided on 2 subs for example, you then could add 6 height layer channels or FW and CH. With this receiver and the SDP55 you don’t get the option to those channels with DTS:X content or upmixing with neural x.
It doesn’t make sense to excuse lack of features at this price point. It would be like arguing against 4 sub outputs if you only needed or used 1. Customers should be able to use their channel count however they want. Without DTS:X Pro, it limits options which I don’t think is a good thing, considering the price point and 16 channels offered.
I just wonder why it isn’t added to the processors/avr’s that don’t have it. Is it a licensing expense they don’t want to pay, or is it a hardware/platform problem?

 

[beagleman]

Looks like its difficult to put everything ( poweramps , processors, dacs and preamps ) inside the same box and expect good measurement results .

But perhaps more importantly, it can be done and fairly decent listening quality can be had.

Maybe I am seeing the reality, of most AVRs simply pack a lot of stuff in a limited space, and yes that will affect SINAD and a few things, but as long as the final sound we hear is still good, are measurements the ONLY thing that matter in a product like this?

As I have said before. I have a few fairly recent used Yamaha AVRs, mediocre measurements and all.
But I have NEVER been let down by the ACTUAL SOUND.................

I love this site and the measurements are cool, but there has to be a point where measurements correlate TO what we actually are hearing.....

 

[Fidji]

Nothing other than Trinnov and Storm seem to support the additional surround positions which seem to be pretty important if you have multiple row of seating. I run 7.2.6 CH/VOG which I like for my single row dedicated room but I see your point about high channel counts being useful for larger dedicated rooms.

I have Altitude 32 for 1 row, 3 seater.
I added 8&9 bed plane more like “front surrounds” than “front wide” , nicely fills the space and extends screen speakers immersion (think bombastic symphonic score playing from 5.1 content into 8 speakers instead of 3). They do not need to be extra fancy, just timbre matched and able to play without distortion around down to 100 Hz.

 

[Dj7675]

DTS-X content…tee hee.

Lots of existing content that is very good that I have on 4k disc… Best list I can find is HERE
Plus there titles still being released in DTS:X on 4K Disc
Jurassic Park World Dominion
Nope
13 IMAX Enhanced Marvel movies on Disney+. I don’t have any experience with this, but my understanding is it is streamed DTS:X for the audio…
So while new releases are mostly Atmos there is still quite a lot of DTS:X out there both old and new

 

[KMO]

Might as well get a second serious problem out of the way which is the muting of input below 90 dBFS over Toslink:
We have seen this before. Either these companies are sharing the same platform or there is some kind of valid reason for this. Either way, it needs to be clearly documented and defeatable.

One of the options in the manual is:

CD Direct – Turns off the compressed audio detection mute delay and should only be used for sources that will only transmit PCM audio (e.g. a CD player).

That sounds like it might be the defeat option - I can imagine a bit of logic that outputs a "mute" signal whenever it sees something that doesn't look like valid PCM, and being 16-bit based also decides to say "mute" when it sees 16-bit silence.

(For those unaware, the first generation of compressed audio formats like DTS and Dolby Digital are carried "unflagged" over links intended to carry PCM audio. Indeed, DTS was distributed "unflagged" on CDs. There's nothing to explicitly indicate "this is not LPCM audio". Any unaware device trying to play it as if it was audio would end up outputting full-scale white noise, possibly damaging speakers. An AVR normally has to auto-detect whether incoming TOSlink data is PCM or encoded bitstream, continuously, and make sure it doesn't try to play bitstreams as PCM. This needs a separate "is this valid PCM" test, distinct from a "is this a bitstream I recognise" test, to protect against unsupported bitstreams. This option would shut that off and get you "pure PCM DAC" behaviour. HDMI (and I guess USB) now have proper format indicators to avoid this, so autodetection is not required).