Review and Measurements of Marantz AV8805 AV Processor

[restorer-john]

So basically Amir, you've 'tested' and 'reviewed' (with 'detailed' measurements) a sophisticated AV processor as a simple D/A converter only and declared it to be not much good at that. It's designed to be a multipurpose hub for an awful lot of gear, a super-charged switch box of sorts.

There's no test results from you for frequency response, channel balance, maximum output, source impedance, cross-talk, phono RIAA deviation (yes it has a phono stage), sensitivity, overload or any testing whatsoever of the multitude of processing options the unit allows for.

How you can come to a point of recommendation or not when you've looked at only one parameter is beyond me. As for comparing it to a $99 desktop D/A converter, they are completely different beasts. One is chip-in-a-box with one job, one input and not much else to do.

It's like declaring a TOTL BMW 7 series is no good without taking even it for a drive, simply because the Bluetooth integration didn't work with your phone.

The whole review comes off as a hatchet-job with a lynch-mob yelling in from the sidelines for four pages. I'm not remotely interested in a one-box AV solution, but for people who are, such a device offers phenomenal integration, processing and connectivity options, none of which you have explored.

 

[LTig]

So basically Amir, you've 'tested' and 'reviewed' (with 'detailed' measurements) a sophisticated AV processor as a simple D/A converter only and declared it to be not much good at that. It's designed to be a multipurpose hub for an awful lot of gear, a super-charged switch box of sorts.
....

I definitely see your point but the DAC is a central part - all music goes through it. Since Marantz sells it as an audiophile highend AV prepro a somewhat better DAC is mandatory in my view. Regarding the AV7705 I would not be so critical, for sure.

It's like declaring a TOTL BMW 7 series is no good without taking even it for a drive, simply because the Bluetooth integration didn't work with your phone.

It's more like a BMW 7 with a bad motor - my 2 cents.

 

[amirm]

So basically Amir, you've 'tested' and 'reviewed' (with 'detailed' measurements) a sophisticated AV processor as a simple D/A converter only and declared it to be not much good at that. It's designed to be a multipurpose hub for an awful lot of gear, a super-charged switch box of sorts.

There's no test results from you for frequency response, channel balance, maximum output, source impedance, cross-talk, phono RIAA deviation (yes it has a phono stage), sensitivity, overload or any testing whatsoever of the multitude of processing options the unit allows for.

Frequency response is there in the from of white noise sweep and showed the most significant fault in the unit. I don't as a rule measure source impedance for anything. Crosstalk is also so good that I don't bother unless asked. As for phono, I didn't realize it was there but if I had, i would have ignored it regardless. People don't buy home theater processors for LP playback usually.

This is the Audio Science Review so I leave video testing to others. Ditto for the rest of the functionality. The D/A is in the pipeline for all other sources so if it doesn't perform, I am not sure how anything else could have saved it. At best those tests would show nothing worse, at worst, show more problems.

I have said this countless times before: my goal is to run enough tests to get confidence in engineering of a product. There are no less than 11 tests in the original review to get that idea. If I spent any more time on products, I would never get to the mountain of other products I have to test. As I type this, I have two urgent reviews to get done that owners are asking about. Between those 11 tests, I have enough information to know where the product stands. If that is not enough, then that is that.

 

[March Audio]

So basically Amir, you've 'tested' and 'reviewed' (with 'detailed' measurements) a sophisticated AV processor as a simple D/A converter only and declared it to be not much good at that. It's designed to be a multipurpose hub for an awful lot of gear, a super-charged switch box of sorts.

There's no test results from you for frequency response, channel balance, maximum output, source impedance, cross-talk, phono RIAA deviation (yes it has a phono stage), sensitivity, overload or any testing whatsoever of the multitude of processing options the unit allows for.

How you can come to a point of recommendation or not when you've looked at only one parameter is beyond me. As for comparing it to a $99 desktop D/A converter, they are completely different beasts. One is chip-in-a-box with one job, one input and not much else to do.

It's like declaring a TOTL BMW 7 series is no good without taking even it for a drive, simply because the Bluetooth integration didn't work with your phone.

The whole review comes off as a hatchet-job with a lynch-mob yelling in from the sidelines for four pages. I'm not remotely interested in a one-box AV solution, but for people who are, such a device offers phenomenal integration, processing and connectivity options, none of which you have explored.

Well granted this isn't comprehensive but as mentioned it is sold as a premium product that is claimed (well at least generally marketed) to deliver premium technical performance. Its clearly not top tier.

Second thing is that if we want Amir to perform more comprehensive testing that will inevitably mean less time to test other kit so there will be less reviews.

I very nearly bought one of these a while back, but I have seen enough to be glad that I didn't.

 

[Sancus]

I think the testing regimen is OK. We(or at least I) come to Amir's reviews to read audio performance measurements, not to read comprehensive product reviews. If writing a comprehensive review for every unit means testing only 1/2 or 1/4 as many different products over time, that seems like a poor trade off. I feel like the backlog is already too long as it is

 

[amirm]

FYI, I just shipped this unit back and it cost almost $90! Are folks getting proportional value out of the review of these massive/heavy boxes?

 

[RayDunzl]

I was quite shocked when I saw my frequency response and could not understand that I had not realized how bad it is.

I discovered significant HF loss by age 7 or 8 via test LP.

Dad could hear way up the scale, Mom and I could not.

I don't know if it has gotten worse, or not. I don't think it has.

I chose not to be measured so as not to "bias" my remaining perception. I'll just not preach whatever I hear as "better" or "worse", just that it suits me or not. Within my range I seem to agree with my Audio Buddy's conclusions, who is less deflicted.

As for missing higher tones or sounds, I don't seem to be able to even imagine them. Can a normally eared person imagine higher than he can hear, and think, "Oh, I'm missing that!"?

 

[Sancus]

FYI, I just shipped this unit back and it cost almost $90! Are folks getting proportional value out of the review of these massive/heavy boxes?

I actually think it's very useful/important to get measurements for the major AVR manufacturers because of just how many people are using those boxes. I have a Denon X4000 myself and now I'm pretty curious how it measures.

 

[GoMrPickles]

FYI, I just shipped this unit back and it cost almost $90! Are folks getting proportional value out of the review of these massive/heavy boxes?

I definitely appreciate it! The Marantz 7xxx and 8xxx lines are pretty popular, and lots of other products (Denon) are likely extremely similar.

A good question might be, what else would you measure that would provide a contrast? Do we expect any home theater pre/pro or receiver to measure better than this Marantz?

 

[March Audio]

FYI, I just shipped this unit back and it cost almost $90! Are folks getting proportional value out of the review of these massive/heavy boxes?

I am still very interested in this area personally. My systems have for many years been combined audio and theater use. As such I have always been interested in AV amps that also have genuinely good straight audio performance. There seems to be a dearth of information regarding their technical performance.

In my current setup the stereo audio is taken care of separately from the AV receiver so its not such a big issue for me now, but Im sure there are plenty of people out there that want a one box solution.

 

[bigx5murf]

I buy, sell, and trade AVR/Seperates alot. Probably have had over 50 of them go through my hands. It's my opinion that build quality peaked around 2000-2009, and have steadily gone down after that. I'd really like to see how a TOTL units from the "golden era" stacks up with this.

 

[Sal1950]

Are folks getting proportional value out of the review of these massive/heavy boxes?

Quit your bellyaching, the exercise is good for you!
Otherwise all you do is sit at that bench playing with your toys.

 

[SplitTime]

It's like declaring a TOTL BMW 7 series is no good without taking even it for a drive, simply because the Bluetooth integration didn't work with your phone.

Apropos - I think this is exactly the point. A BMW 7 series without a good BT for handsfree talking, streaming low quality audio if the owner desires, ... is misleading at best if not down right unethical. In a car these days, if you can’t get BT right then - you shouldn’t have BT listed as a feature set. What other corners have they cut on the product? Don’t mislead the consumer into thinking they’re getting something that they’re not all the while charging very high prices. High end products should do everything that they claim to do superlatively - if they don’t then the company should drop the features that they’re not going to properly fund & develop. There’s an implicit expectation (which I think Amir has demonstrated is wrong in multiple reviews) that if a device has balanced outputs (spent the time, energy, effort to include them) then it “should” sound better than a $99 product with RCA outs.

 

[Sal1950]

Thanks to @amirm and the member that loan it to him! The biggest bonus here is that there is a complete void of this type of investigation into units in this market corner. But the more this gets around to the public, the more uneasy it will make the manufacturers and hopefully improve the breed as time goes on. Kal reviewed this unit at Stereophile but unfortunately Atkinson didn't put it on the bench.

 

[SplitTime]

FYI, I just shipped this unit back and it cost almost $90! Are folks getting proportional value out of the review of these massive/heavy boxes?

Yes. I have a BD105D and UDP203 (sadly I went back to buy the UDP205 just after they’d posted they’re closing shop and I was too far down the wait list so that I didn’t get one on their final production run). I’d thought about sending you the 203 to test (and the 105D - since at some point I thought I read that there was a desire to see if the initial measurements were sample-variation related). However you seem to have a really significant back-log and I use them pretty much every day. But, I do really appreciate the wide range of products that you are testing. I have been slowly thinking about my next AV unit (and more importantly, I think I at this point, speakers) - so it is helpful.

Thank you for your efforts!!

 

[Blumlein 88]

Looking at the chart with around 100 products listed I began to wonder.........................................

What if Amir were doing your sighted, subjective reviews for all of these? Say he keeps them 4 to 6 weeks to use them daily, to compare with other similar gear, to eventually reach an emotionally comfortable place so he can tell us how he feels about them. Then does some measurements. I think the amount of gear usefully reviewed would require at a minimum 500% longer. By which time much of it would be of no relevance at all.

AVR's or Pre/Pros are a nightmare product to review. You really should listen and look at or measure each and every mode of operation. Which is ridiculous. I hate that you rarely see meaningful measurements of even the basic DAC in the device like Amir has done. I'd expect the DAC and the video output to get attention. Worse is when you get lied to by reviewers. You may remember the Emotiva which has no specifications at all in the manual. Yet one big time video review spot listed its 2nd harmonic distortion spec, and said you'll have no worries with distortion with this device. Well the device had very poor measurements. The one and only really good measurement is 2nd order HD. It has a very low number for that. Of course 3rd is very high, 4th is high 5th is very high. So that reviewer either let Emotiva spoon feed him info or he did the measurements and looked for anything good to say, and found that one only good measured result of that device. I'd consider that fraud were I on a jury.

So I'd hope Amir gets the chance to measure lots more AV gear. And would be grateful and wouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth.

Thanks Amir.

Also thanks to the owner who sent it to him.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I definitely appreciate it! The Marantz 7xxx and 8xxx lines are pretty popular, and lots of other products (Denon) are likely extremely similar.

A good question might be, what else would you measure that would provide a contrast? Do we expect any home theater pre/pro or receiver to measure better than this Marantz?

I'd expect Denon to be about the same. They are actually the parent company to Marantz.
As for Yamaha or others I don't know. I hate the H-K isn't making AV gear anymore.

Of course all this points out the value of this here. You can't get any measures of this stuff too many places.

I'm of two minds about this product. I've Sal's old 7701 which is a good product. It appears to roughly equal this one in basic performance though not the list of features. I don't perceive a deficiency with it though I have other AV gear. So maybe it is good enough and the processing done for video and other surround formats is what you get. I would have hoped for that much money they'd have advanced the audio basic performance some. It isn't a cost issue. There are too many very nice performing 8 channel ADC/DAC chips available that aren't that expensive.

 

[ryanmh1]

I'm in Restorer John's camp on this one.

.002% THD and 110dB dynamic range is exemplary performance by any reasonable measure, and not indicative of any likely audible issues. Which golden ears thinks they can hear that as other than transparent? I would find it more helpful to display that audibility curve as was done on the Cambridge phono amp. That was a very good and quite fair review. The laserlike focus on a rather simplistic number such as THD+N/SINAD continues to make me uneasy, particularly in the context of a complex product like this. It loses the forest for the trees.

Archimago measured an Onkyo AVR which I linked earlier. That, I felt, was a good model for a balanced and informative presentation for a limited review of a product such as this. I don't know if I would call this review a hatchet job, but I can see how it would be possible to construe it as such, unfortunately.

 

[amirm]

.002% THD and 110dB dynamic range is exemplary performance by any reasonable measure, and not indicative of any likely audible issues.

Reasonable by whose standards? Here are the specifications from AKM on the DAC chip in there:

And this is what I measured:

You want to tell me how I am supposed to be OK with a product that costs thousands of dollars but leaves 20 dB of the DAC performance on the table?

 

[amirm]

Archimago measured an Onkyo AVR which I linked earlier. That, I felt, was a good model for a balanced and informative presentation for a limited review of a product such as this.

Archimago is not a design engineer. He comes at these products with different ideas. My role here is to be a mechanic you take to see a used car before you buy it. I give advice on what is great engineering, and what is not. I do that with absolute transparency and prejudice. You want people that think as long as something is good enough, it should get praise, you are in the wrong forum.

I have no sympathy for my peers who don't believe in delivering excellence. None.