Denon AVR-X3800H Review

[GaryH]

That was a terrible example especially for those that have experienced cancer. I’m sure you could come up with something better to prove your point.

Personally I find all the repeated doctor analogies on here not only inapt but distasteful too. No, measuring audio equipment is in no way like being a doctor. At all.

 

[birdog1960]

Personally I find all the repeated doctor analogies on here not only inapt but distasteful too. No, measuring audio equipment is in no way like being a doctor. At all.

i hadn't gotten the impression that emotional sensitivity was a feature of this site. It appears medical analogies are the exception

 

[amirm]

Wow, I hate to say, but I think a large chunk of the forum see this differently, including myself.

I have had to give my explanation multiple times in the past so I know that. It is time for people to understand and accept that when you ask a subject what they hear, by definition the assessment is subjective. It has to be and it is.

 

[amirm]

Personally I find all the repeated doctor analogies on here not only inapt but distasteful too. No, measuring audio equipment is in no way like being a doctor. At all.

Every time I go to my doctor both she and her nurse make measurements of my weight, blood pressure, etc. Depending on what is wrong with me, they order more measurements/tests. So nothing wrong with proper analogy here.

 

[birdog1960]

Every time I go to my doctor both she and her nurse make measurements of my weight, blood pressure, etc. Depending on what is wrong with me, they order more measurements/tests. So nothing wrong with proper analogy here.

Thanks. Most of my job is analyzing data (labs, X-rays, physical findings, history, second opinions) filtering out the noise and formulating a plan. Similar in many ways.

 

[voodooless]

I have had to give my explanation multiple times in the past so I know that. It is time for people to understand and accept that when you ask a subject what they hear, by definition the assessment is subjective. It has to be and it is.

But that's not what is done. It's not asking a subject what they hear, it's asking them to prove that they can hear. That is not subjective. It does have some margin of error for sure, but so has your SINAD measurement.

 

[Karls_speaker_works]

Did you miss the fact that the 3800 a DAC IC replaced by one with 14 dB lower SINAD than the X3700H's? That alone should explain most if not all of the drop in the measured SINAD.

Minor quibble, but since they sample at 96kHz, the difference is 11dB -> 104 dB for AKM (per datasheet - see below), 93 dB for TI. Let's also note that the X3800H did NOT replace an X3700H with a DAC IC 14dB lower. You could not buy an X3700H with the AKM DAC for over a year before the X3800H came out! Since design cycles used to be about a year prior to covid (if the info posted earlier in this thread is accurate), the X3800H is the 2nd generation Denon product using the higher THD+N DAC IC. This lower performance is old news, we just hadn't seen it documented until this past week (thanks Amir!)

 

[CyrusTheGreat_600BC]

To some degree, and all in one component typically is going to be a compromise in some area. I believe the target consumer buying an AVR is ultimatley not concerned about sound quality or specs, just like an SUV auto buyer is not demanding the best handling vehicle.

Yes, but some of us compromise on a crossover, and if you don’t think CUV handling is anything but as good as a sedan, you should try Alfa Romeo Stelvio, BMW X3, and Audi Q5 among others. I don’t need balanced preamp outputs as RCAs will do just fine, so 3700 was my crossover. There was no reason 3800 could not be a good handling crossover like its predecessor (AKM), but now it drives like a Honda CRV!

The 3700v2 used a lower DAC. I get that. It was AKM fire surprise and all, and they didn’t have time to really spend on new development. But after 2 years, they should’ve done better with 3800 since they had ample time.

 

[peng]

Minor quibble, but since they sample at 96kHz, the difference is 11dB -> 104 dB for AKM (per datasheet - see below), 93 dB for TI. Let's also note that the X3800H did NOT replace replace an X3700H with a DAC IC 14dB lower. You could not buy an X3700H with the AKM DAC for over a year before the X3800H came out! Since design cycles used to be about a year prior to covid (if the info posted earlier in this thread is accurate), the X3800H is the 2nd generation Denon product using the lower distortion DAC IC. This lower performance is old news, we just hadn't seen it documented until this past week (thanks Amir!)

View attachment 240445

Agreed,the 14 dB is only based on 44.1 kHz that was used in Amir's test results shown on the dash board.

 

[voodooless]

It was AKM fire surprise and all, and they didn’t have time to really spend on new development. But after 2 years, they should’ve done better with 3800 since they had ample time.

That is really the question. How long is the development pipeline for these products? If long enough, they were probably stuck and could only use these chips. It may be like steering a massive oil tanker. Look at just how long they take to implement Dirac Live? About a year to integrate something that is basically of the shelve (yes, yes, there is some porting involved for sure, but not a year's worth).

 

[peng]

But that's not what is done. It's not asking a subject what they hear, it's asking them to prove that they can hear. That is not subjective. It does have some margin of error for sure, but so has your SINAD measurement.

Amir is right by definition though. I even checked a few dictionaries to read the definitions. You can play a 6 kHz sine wave tone and asked subjects a, b, and c at say -3 dB from 3 meters, not all 3 may say it is audible. Audible or not in such tests would be on per "subject" participant basis.

 

[cesjr02]

Greetings. Long time lurker, first time poster. This sadly feels like a poor time to be in the market for a new midrange AVR. I've been a long-time fan of Denon and finally looking to upgrade my 12 year old Denon 5.1 AVR.

In my opinion, it's not the point whether the measurable degradation over the past two generations is audible or not. It's the principle of the matter. At the end of the day we all get to vote with our wallets.

 

[beagleman]

I have had to give my explanation multiple times in the past so I know that. It is time for people to understand and accept that when you ask a subject what they hear, by definition the assessment is subjective. It has to be and it is.

When you ask a subject WHAT THEY THINK of what they hear, that is subjective, and relies on their thoughts, opinions and beliefs...

When you see IF a subject can hear something, that is an objective measurement of their hearing.

 

[voodooless]

Amir is right by definition though. I even checked a few dictionaries to read the definitions. You can play a 6 kHz sine wave tone and asked subjects a, b, and c at say -3 dB from 3 meters, not all 3 may say it is audible. Audible or not in such tests would be on per "subject" participant basis.

Sure. But so have not all AVR's the same SINAD. It is no different. The subject is just not alive.

 

[beagleman]

Amir is right by definition though. I even checked a few dictionaries to read the definitions. You can play a 6 kHz sine wave tone and asked subjects a, b, and c at say -3 dB from 3 meters, not all 3 may say it is audible. Audible or not in such tests would be on per "subject" participant basis.

Not really.
You are saying it VARIES based on each subject.
Subjective assessment verus objective assessment is one persons method of characterizing WHAT they hear.

We are in this forum talking about subjective/objective assessment.

 

[MCORN]

Wow, I hate to say, but I think a large chunk of the forum see this differently, including myself.

Whether you hear something or not is subjective. That can be measured and yes it will vary somewhat person to person, but it still can be objectively measured.
What you think about what you hear is subjective.

Audibility, is whether you hear it or you do not hear it. That can be measured.
If one thinks distortion SOUNDS good or not, is the subjective part.

Audibility: the quality of being possible to hear clearly

Quality: the standard of something when it is compared to other things like it

Possible: able to be achieved or done

Audibility is the standard of sound when compared to other sound like it. As the standard is qualified by hearing and in the context of home audio this can only be achieved by listening and subsequently having a subjective opinion on that sound.
An objective opinion is based on fact, while a subjective opinion is based on emotions
It is not possible to hear the quality of sound as fact because we perceive sound individually.

 

[voodooless]

It is not possible to hear the quality of sound as fact because we perceive sound individually.

Why not? ABX tests exist. At some point, nobody can hear a difference. That's your benchmark... until somebody can...

 

[MCORN]

Why not? ABX tests exist. At some point, nobody can hear a difference. That's your benchmark... until somebody can...

I didn’t write the English dictionary but can read it.
You are welcome to try and re-write it if enough people agree with you

 

[voodooless]

I didn’t write the English dictionary but can read it.
You are welcome to try and re-write it if enough people agree with you

I don't see a need. My conclusion does not violate any of the premises.

 

[MCORN]

I don't see a need. My conclusion does not violate any of the premises.