Review and Measurements of Marantz AV8805 AV Processor

[restorer-john]

This is not a power amplifier. Have you see balanced output with "rated" specification of 2.5 volts or whatever it is?

See some examples below.

I know it's not a power amplifer Amir. I am using an 'example' to illustrate that if you test a product at way in excess of it rated output, you cannot drag them through the mud on performance.

The Marantz in question.

Accuphase C-11 (one of mine)

Sony ES preamp.

Denon preamplifier

4V is double rated output and excess THD could well be expected to influence tested vs rated specs in many cases. As such, declarations of poor performance cannot be concluded can they? By all means test for maximum output, but benchmark the devices at their rated output/input levels.

 

[restorer-john]

Net, net, you have made no case for why a lower standard should exist for flagship AV processor. Customers think they are getting everything there, not settling for something less.

They are getting everything jammed into a single box with all the compromises of doing that. To me it's obvious, I've been working on this gear for decades and mainstream AVRs/AVPs are massively compromised, regardless of price.

 

[Sancus]

*AHEM* Could we please have Amir back this imposter is spouting all sorts of subjectivist rubbish.

This is just my understanding so I could be wrong, and I haven't done much research into room eq. But I feel like people are misunderstanding Amir's points. He isn't saying that you can't possibly measure the results of room eq. Just that 1 measurement taken with 1 microphone doesn't give you an unimpeachable answer. I'm assuming the correct process of proving room EQ works properly requires many more measurements, probably taken with multiple microphones simultaneously. Or you can listen to it.

This doesn't really seem that controversial, after all, proving that a speaker sounds good, where there is only 1 source of sound, requires a whole set of on and off axis anechoic measurements. Even then you can only connect the validity of those measurements to listener preference because of a huge amount of research done to prove that those measurements correlate.

It doesn't follow from the speaker research I've read that you could measure a single point in the middle of multiple sound sources with a single microphone and call it done.

 

[restorer-john]

This is just my understanding so I could be wrong, and I haven't done much research into room eq. But I feel like people are misunderstanding Amir's points. He isn't saying that you can't possibly measure the results of room eq. Just that 1 measurement taken with 1 microphone doesn't give you an unimpeachable answer. I'm assuming the correct process of proving room EQ works properly requires many more measurements, probably taken with multiple microphones simultaneously. Or you can listen to it.

This doesn't really seem that controversial, after all, proving that a speaker sounds good, where there is only 1 source of sound, requires a whole set of on and off axis anechoic measurements. Even then you can only connect the validity of those measurements to listener preference because of a huge amount of research done to prove that those measurements correlate.

It doesn't follow from the speaker research I've read that you could measure a single point in the middle of multiple sound sources with a single microphone and call it done.

This discussion is good, but it could deserve its own thread?

 

[Sancus]

They are getting everything jammed into a single box with all the compromises of doing that. To me it's obvious.

Huh? The oppo-205, the single highest SINAD "DAC" out of all tested units, has 8 channels "jammed into a single box" at a much lower price point and that doesn't seem to be a problem for it.

This discussion is good, but it could deserve its own thread?

Yeah, probably. If only we had a mod to move some posts!

 

[amirm]

They are getting everything jammed into a single box with all the compromises of doing that. To me it's obvious.

And we are looking for products without compromise.....

 

[MZKM]

Huh? The oppo-205, the single highest SINAD "DAC" out of all tested units, has 8 channels "jammed into a single box" at a much lower price point and that doesn't seem to be a problem for it.



Yeah, probably. If only we had a mod to move some posts!

There is a huge difference in functionality when comparing the Oppo to the Marantz.

 

[Sancus]

There is a huge difference in functionality when comparing the Oppo to the Marantz.

Certainly. But why should functionality necessarily add distortion or noise? Lets not forget that this Marantz is a huge, heavy box, and it has no power amplifiers in it. I'm pretty sure you could literally put the digital processing boards, the preamp, and the power supply in separate cases within the box and still have room leftover, if that's what it took to prevent interference.

In actuality I doubt this is necessary, most likely all that is necessary is for some iteration & testing to be done on the board layout before sending it to manufacturing. My guess is that, since these manufacturers release new units every year, they have a pretty tight schedule and doing this kind of iteration to high standards tends to fall by the wayside.

That second paragraph is just speculation though as I'm not an electrical engineer who works for an AVR manufacturer

 

[MZKM]

Certainly. But why should functionality necessarily add distortion? Lets not forget that this Marantz is a huge, heavy box, and it has no power amplifiers in it. I'm pretty sure you could literally put the digital processing boards, the preamp, and the power supply in separate cases within the box and still have room leftover, if that's what it took to prevent interference.

In actuality I doubt this is necessary, most likely all that is necessary is for some iteration & testing to be done on the board layout before sending it to manufacturing. My guess is that, since these manufacturers release new units every year, they have a pretty tight schedule and doing this kind of iteration to high standards tends to fall by the wayside.

That second paragraph is just speculation though as I'm not an electrical engineer who works for an AVR manufacturer

The Atmos processing alone is a huge toll. Being able to take a bed+object based soundtrack and on-the-fly figure out where to route all the audio (meaning even shared or partially shared between speakers) that is dependent on which of the dozens of possible setups the user has. Then take just Audyssey and it’s Dynamic EQ, it has to adjust the EQ for every volume change that you do, also take Audyssey’s LFC (Low Frequency Containment), it doesn’t just add a filter that rolls off the low-end, it actually boosts the frequency of them so you can hear them just as loud yet your neighbors won’t hear it as much. Dual independent subwoofer outs, meaning separate gain and delay for the same feed.The Marantz has a lot more HDMI inputs and outputs, including simultaneous outputs to two zones besides your main zone, meaning it’s decoding and routing 3 sources at the same time.

Not saying I excuse poor performance, just stating it’s a whole different beast than the Oppo. It’s like saying the Oppo is a Swiss army knife, whereas the Marantz is the whole tool store.

 

[Sancus]

The Atmos processing alone is a huge toll. Being able to take a bed+object based soundtrack and on-the-fly figure out where to route all the audio (meaning even shared or partially shared between speakers) that is dependent on which of the dozens of possible setups the user has. Then take just Audyssey and it’s Dynamic EQ, it has to adjust the EQ for every volume change that you do, also take Audyssey’s LFC (Low Frequency Containment), it doesn’t just add a filter that rolls off the low-end, it actually boosts the frequency of them so you can hear them just as loud yet your neighbors won’t hear it as much. Dual independent subwoofer outs, meaning separate gain and delay for the same feed.The Marantz has a lot more HDMI inputs and outputs, including simultaneous outputs to two zones besides your main zone, meaning it’s decoding and routing 3 sources at the same time.

Not saying I excuse poor performance, just stating it’s a whole different beast than the Oppo. It’s like saying the Oppo is a Swiss army knife, whereas the Marantz is the whole tool store.

But this is a very additive model of interference, which seems deeply incorrect to me. All that functionality is performed in digital processing, before the audio even reaches the preamp stage. As long as the processor and digital board are correctly isolated, it seems like it shouldn't matter at all how much processing it's doing. After all, nobody is saying that having a 32-core desktop PC connected via USB to your DAC is going to affect the DAC's SINAD, because if the DAC is correctly engineered it should be isolated.

Same with the digital processing board(s) in this AV unit.

 

[March Audio]

I'm not going to debate how golden your ears are... I'm well aware of some of the opinions posts here as to what is audible, and I've linked before what I think is Ken Rockwell's very good and well-stated rebuttal. That's a debate for another time and place.

All I'm pointing out is that it is not fair to compare the performance of a $100 plastic box headphone amp or DAC with that of a 16+ channel AVR. I just think you're unfairly mixing apples and oranges. It's not a "reference quality DAC" but a "reference quality AVR". In my personal view, the standards are not necessarily the same, and the failure of the one to do everything the other is able to do, does not indicate a lack of engineering prowess or shoddy engineering. 'Nuf said.

But that is the point. It clearly does not perform like a reference quality AVR. A reference quality AVR would have performance that was near the the cheap dac. So I am a bit confused by what you are saying.

 

[restorer-john]

But that is the point. It clearly does not perform like a reference quality AVR.

A reference AVR or AVP in this case exists for the purpose of bring together as many sources, be they digital or analog and offer the latest surround multi-channel decoding, video switching, convenience, multiroom, wireless (wifi and bluetooth) connectivity and network capability along with the entire operation being commanded from a single remote control.

One limited parameter was tested, one pair of D/A converter channels. Nothing else. The entire digital video processing functionality and all the surround capabilities may well be truly excellent, but we'll never know. The wireless integration may be excellent, the remote control may be superb but we'll never know that either. The phono stage may be absolute crap (highly likely) or excellent, but we'll never know.

One man, lots of gear and not enough time, is a recipe for incomplete reviews such as this. I feel for Amir, and appreciate what he is attempting here, but fewer comprehensive reviews are better than lots of superficial ones IMO. ASR will otherwise be known as a $2 shop version of Stereophile's reviews. (how many more cheap dongles and Chinese D/As do we need?)

Amir may know better than me. Perhaps in this sound-bite world with people wanting instant 'solutions' and 'recommendations' with little or no effort on their part, such go or no-go reviews are just the ticket. Trouble is, in audio, it's always been the polar opposite for the technically minded.

The technical reviewing load needs to be spread to people with appropriate test gear and the desire to contribute. I cannot justify a fully kitted out APX555 but rest assured if I could, I'd be doing my bit (and copping the criticism too, no doubt)

 

[amirm]

The entire digital video processing functionality and all the surround capabilities may well be truly excellent, but we'll never know.

There is nothing worth using there as far as video. You should feed it the native format of the display device in which case, it is just a pass through.

As for surround processing, it is all licensed technology. They rely on the DSP company to provide them all of that.

 

[amirm]

One limited parameter was tested, one pair of D/A converter channels. Nothing else.

The part we are testing, is the part they designed. And is the heart of the audio subsystem. To wit, you can run the DSP processing in software and just feed it multi-channel PCM to output.

 

[Sal1950]

Admittedly it's no longer being produced, but what can this do that the Oppo-205 can't? A few more HDMI inputs, a lot moar channel outputs... anything else?

I have no idea what your talking about? A bluray player vs a 11 channel AV pre/pro?

 

[amirm]

I have no idea what your talking about? A bluray player vs a 11 channel AV pre/pro?

The Oppo has a mini pre/pro built into it. It has a few inputs for example including HDMI.

 

[stunta]

but fewer comprehensive reviews are better than lots of superficial ones IMO

Perhaps it is useful to some. For instance, if I owned this pre-pro or was considering buying it AND I were interested in using it as a DAC even for my stereo music listening, Amir's review helps me decide if I should consider adding a separate DAC that measures better.

In my case for instance, I have a pre-pro. I can't find any measurements for it. I use an external DAC (measured by Amir) just for peace of mind - it was quite cheap for me.

 

[March Audio]

A reference AVR or AVP in this case exists for the purpose of bring together as many sources, be they digital or analog and offer the latest surround multi-channel decoding, video switching, convenience, multiroom, wireless (wifi and bluetooth) connectivity and network capability along with the entire operation being commanded from a single remote control.

One limited parameter was tested, one pair of D/A converter channels. Nothing else. The entire digital video processing functionality and all the surround capabilities may well be truly excellent, but we'll never know. The wireless integration may be excellent, the remote control may be superb but we'll never know that either. The phono stage may be absolute crap (highly likely) or excellent, but we'll never know.

One man, lots of gear and not enough time, is a recipe for incomplete reviews such as this. I feel for Amir, and appreciate what he is attempting here, but fewer comprehensive reviews are better than lots of superficial ones IMO. ASR will otherwise be known as a $2 shop version of Stereophile's reviews. (how many more cheap dongles and Chinese D/As do we need?)

Amir may know better than me. Perhaps in this sound-bite world with people wanting instant 'solutions' and 'recommendations' with little or no effort on their part, such go or no-go reviews are just the ticket. Trouble is, in audio, it's always been the polar opposite for the technically minded.

The technical reviewing load needs to be spread to people with appropriate test gear and the desire to contribute. I cannot justify a fully kitted out APX555 but rest assured if I could, I'd be doing my bit (and copping the criticism too, no doubt)

Thing is, for me at least, regardless of the performance of the rest of the unit and its functionality, if it doesnt get that basic D/A conversion right then I really have lost interest.

Its a premium quality and cost unit that is outperformed by cheap DACs.

This has prompted me to measure my recent acquisition of a Yamaha RX A3080. I am certainly hoping for better performance than the Marantz.

 

[Blumlein 88]

It can be dangerous to make assumptions from one piece of gear to another especially several years apart. I tested the 7701. I have parts of my test signal step across levels to see if something is being badly over driven and lowering level will make it look much better. When I look at the specifications page for the 7701 and the 8805 they are identical for the analog audio section, phono section and video section. Tuner is a little bit improved on the 8805.

I concluded the analog out was the limiting factor. I could reduce a signal in the digital input 12 db, turn volume up 12 db and get identical distortion results which tracked with the output level. Best I can tell from my other level and distortion checks it might have clocked in around the mid 90 db range at 2.4 volts tested. Marantz's own specs look like they have been taken at 4 volts or a bit above. Actually maybe close to the 4.5 volts I checked.

My test results make you think the two units are very similar. I sent 0 dbFS to the unit and at 0 db volume (it can be turned up to +18 db on volume) it put out 3 volts which is what I tested even though rated output is 2.4 for balanced. I spot tested at higher levels. For instance at 4.5 volts THD+N was - 84 db. At 3 volts it was -94 db as I recall. So Amir's SINAD of 91 db for 4 volts doesn't look out of line. I found about -40 db THD+N at 6 volts. It would actually put out 16 volts at a few percent distortion. Best I can tell your max SINAD would occur at roughly 2 volts and be about 98 db. The specs do list DA rated output (at 0 db) as 2 volts. Is this the rated output we should have "decoded" and used?

So has Marantz not changed the analog section in several years in their pre-pro's with this physical appearance? Should the $4500 device have the same analog performance as a previous $1500 one? I'd have thought they maybe just weren't careful with specs, but results say they are being honest.

I'm not denigrating Amir's results. Mine may corroborate them in a sense. Gain staging is important in any system. A multi-channel pre-pro is crazy complicated. What output levels should be checked? I don't know. Amir made a reasonable choice, and you could make at least two others. 2.4 volts or 2 volts just based upon their specs. Then again their specs look like the results you get at 4.5 volts.

 

[March Audio]

OK kere is the Yamaha RX A3080 playing from USB thumb drive. Balanced out. Volume is set to -6dB so Yamaha obviously view 0dB to be 4 Vrms with balanced, which is in line with my expectations.

https://au.yamaha.com/en/products/audio_visual/av_receivers_amps/rx-a3080/index.html#product-tabs
Its $3000 AU about $2000 US

THD is not bad but it is clearly let down by noise. If that noise was under control it would be more like 104dB SINAD