• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Monoprice HTP-1 Home Theater Processor Review

OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,394
Location
Seattle Area
I don't disagree with any of this. But the HTP-1 and AHB2 are not in the same class. Doesn't the AHB2 list for $3,000 (2ch)?
The HTP-1 is not a $4000 2ch processor. This is an "entry-level" 16ch processor. Imagine the cost of installing 8 AHB2s. I would love to be the salesman to a customer who thinks they need a 130dB dynamic range in their surround and overhead channels (let alone their mains).
The Monoprice is sold at thin margins with no dealer network or mark up. If it were to be sold like a Lyngdorf, it would retail for $10,000. And if it had the brand assurance of Benchmark, it again would sell for a lot more money.

By any definition, anyone buying a $4,000 processor is looking for state of the art in sound reproduction. Yet what they get can't even properly muster 4 volt output which we get in a $150 balanced DAC:

index.php


Under the same condition HTP-1 severely clips and produces SINAD of 56 dB from what I recall.

I am an electronic designer and I am still waiting or the explanation for why it is OK to give us less output level and lower distortion and noise. We have an Apple dongle which at $9 produces a SINAD of 99 dB:

index.php


And here is our $4,000 processor again at reduced output of 2.7 volts:

index.php


Distortion level is essentially the same as the Apple $9 dongle.

In this forum, we are after engineering excellence. When corners are cut at the expense of the consumer, then we point it out. We have a large reference of audio products tested. As I said, the ones with DACs near 300 units now. The standard of performance is firmly established even among bargain products sold by brands similar to Monoprice. We are not going to grade on a curve just because something has HDMI switching and a DSP.

It is time that the AV industry wakes up and produces proper performance when it comes to audio. The dark secrets are no more.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,394
Location
Seattle Area
Thank you for the crossover measurements.

A multichannel audio possessor is expected to be used as such, so multichannel roon playback is supposed (and expected) to work, and a fine tuning (easy or difficult to achieve) with dsp equalization for home target curve, applied to a good set of speaker + sub setup is expected.

High quality av processors are equipped with auto calibration software, which is supposed to work.

It would be great to see the spinorama measurements from a decent speaker (Neumann 80 for example), after the auto calibration dsp with a crossover'd decent subwoofer (Neumann would be excellent).

Are there any Phase and frequency problems, thd problems, after using cross and dsp for the target curve? You can use the harman curve, the Toole curve, whatever curve you like, 1dB per octave works fine for everyone.

The main job for such a processor is not just to work as a dac. We expect this hardware and software to make massive amount of dsp, speaker management, bass management, setting a target curve, and after all these, working with high quality.

So, a measurement after these, is the best possible way to evaluate such a processor.
First, even after paying $4,000, you don't get a measurement microphone with this processor! I don't know what they were thinking. So out of box, I can't perform any automatic EQ testing.

Second, I have tested the EQ systems on a number of products in the past like Lyngdorf, Paradigm (with Anthem ARC). For the most part the better designed ones work well. However, keep in mind that almost all of them lie about the corrections they perform. The graphs they show are simulated correct curves, not remeasured. Indeed remeasuring is almost impossible if you move the microphone during measurements as is required. You would have to accurately remember 3-D positions of each position to repeat it which is not very practical.

Third, the real test of an EQ system is to listen. Yes, "trust your ears." :) A single microphone and certainly electronic instrumentation cannot convey what two ears hear in an acoustic environment.

All of this said, I love to do a side-by-side test of various audio eq systems but the amount of work it takes is way beyond what I have time for.

My purpose of testing here is to determine any weaknesses in the pipeline itself.
 

Spocko

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
1,621
Likes
2,999
Location
Southern California
There are fixed costs for the engineering, marketing, case, power supply, number of boards, etc.
I think @amirm has made the point that a $4000 product should be able to meet the performance of a 500 "quid" 2-channel DAC that has "high end" performance. This product does not have amplifiers.

- Rich
Speaking of $500 stereo balanced DACs, the Topping DX7S when it was last available on Drop for $325 ( https://drop.com/buy/topping-dx7s ) comes to mind. So yes, a well engineered audiophile quality balanced DAC unit can be had for $300. The question is whether an AVR system that integrates 8 pairs of DACs fed into multiple DSP filters should ever be compared to a simple stereo DAC at all? It's like comparing a minivan to go kart when the measurements are elapsed times around an track with multiple hairpin turns. However, if you include measurements based on how many cartons of milk and stacks of toilet paper you can fit in the car, then the results will be obviously different.

I believe we need to create a separate baseline expectation for AVRs as it appears that multiple stages of DSP filtering for the variety of purposes (room EQ, multi-channel, dolby/DTS, etc.) required for AVR functionality will have a deleterious effect on measurements built for pure/simple stereo DAC measurements.
 

Gedeon

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 30, 2018
Messages
191
Likes
195
The Monoprice is sold at thin margins with no dealer network or mark up. If it were to be sold like a Lyngdorf, it would retail for $10,000. And if it had the brand assurance of Benchmark, it again would sell for a lot more money.

By any definition, anyone buying a $4,000 processor is looking for state of the art in sound reproduction. Yet what they get can't even properly muster 4 volt output which we get in a $150 balanced DAC:

index.php


Under the same condition HTP-1 severely clips and produces SINAD of 56 dB from what I recall.

I am an electronic designer and I am still waiting or the explanation for why it is OK to give us less output level and lower distortion and noise. We have an Apple dongle which at $9 produces a SINAD of 99 dB:

index.php


And here is our $4,000 processor again at reduced output of 2.7 volts:

index.php


Distortion level is essentially the same as the Apple $9 dongle.

In this forum, we are after engineering excellence. When corners are cut at the expense of the consumer, then we point it out. We have a large reference of audio products tested. As I said, the ones with DACs near 300 units now. The standard of performance is firmly established even among bargain products sold by brands similar to Monoprice. We are not going to grade on a curve just because something has HDMI switching and a DSP.

It is time that the AV industry wakes up and produces proper performance when it comes to audio. The dark secrets are no more.

A line output from an AVR/AVP is designed to feed a multichannel poweramp, not an integrated amp. Usually 1.2 unbalanced, 2.4 balanced, no more.

On the other hand I can't agree amore with your totally honest goals. But sadly these machines aren't as simple as two channel dacs and there are very few builders out there when comparing with the amount of simpler stereo electronics brands and makers.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,394
Location
Seattle Area
The question is whether an AVR system that integrates 8 pairs of DACs fed into multiple DSP filters should ever be compared to a simple stereo DAC at all?
Why not? There is huge economies of scale there because you only need one enclosure, not 8. Here is an example 8 channel DAC: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...d-measurements-of-okto-dac8-8ch-dac-amp.7064/

It leaves the HTP-1 in the dust as far as noise and distortion:

index.php


Since the review of the prototype, they upped the output voltage to 4 volt as well. We are talking some 25 dB improvement in noise and distortion for $1,000 or thereabouts.

As I keep saying, hardly any cost was saved in producing lower output with more distortion and noise.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,394
Location
Seattle Area
A line output from an AVR/AVP is designed to feed a multichannel poweramp, not an integrated amp. Usually 1.2 unbalanced, 2.4 balanced, no more.
There are plenty of DACs with volume controls that can drive a power amplifier direct and still output 4 volts. Here is SMSL SU-8:

index.php


A $300 DAC. Go up to $399 and you get this:

index.php


Look at the notation: it can produce up to 6.8 volts!

If there is one place you need higher output is for AV applications. Often remote amplifier or subs are used across longer cables. And playback levels are much higher than music listening. Noise performance becomes very important.

We used to have a $300,000 reference theater at Madrona. It was wonderful but if you got closer than 6 foot to the speakers, you could hear the hiss. That shouldn't be the case. The solution starts with higher source output so that the power amplifier can reduce its gain and produce much better signal to noise ratio.
 

JEntwistle

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
127
Likes
133
I'd like to hear a technical reason for why AVRs can't perform as well as other DACs and amplifiers, rather than explanations that just point to the set of existing AVRs and says no one is doing it well, so that is the level that should be expected. Is there an inherent reason that the additional duties of an AVR preclude better performance? Is it really cost? Or is it just unwillingness on the part of manufacturers to do better?

To me, the differences are there and measurable. What I have not heard is a clear explanation of why the differences are so great, or necessarily need to be.
 
Last edited:

Gedeon

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 30, 2018
Messages
191
Likes
195
There are plenty of DACs with volume controls that can drive a power amplifier direct and still output 4 volts. Here is SMSL SU-8:

index.php


A $300 DAC. Go up to $399 and you get this:

index.php


Look at the notation: it can produce up to 6.8 volts!

If there is one place you need higher output is for AV applications. Often remote amplifier or subs are used across longer cables. And playback levels are much higher than music listening. Noise performance becomes very important.

We used to have a $300,000 reference theater at Madrona. It was wonderful but if you got closer than 6 foot to the speakers, you could hear the hiss. That shouldn't be the case. The solution starts with higher source output so that the power amplifier can reduce its gain and produce much better signal to noise ratio.

I'm sorry, don't try to sound like an asshole, just saying that most AVR/AVP balanced/unbalanced outputs will be connected to poweramps which expect to deal with a signal no greater than those 1.2v / 2.4v. IMO, It's the typical, common, usual, normal, standard, use case, as easy as that.

The new Rotel MICHI monoblocks ($8000!!!!!!) have these specs (in the manual):

Input Sensitivity Impedance nput Sensitivity / Impedance Unbalance : 1.85 V / 12.5k ohms Balance 3 V / 100k ohms Gain Unbalance 34 dB Balance 30 dB

1.8 max to get a 34db gain... and it's just a mono poweramp. To feed this kind of electronic I don't want a source which performs well at 2v/4v, Maybe one able to perform ultra-good at 1.5/2.8

Shouuld these machines also perform well at 2v/4v....? maybe,.... why not ? Should it the be judged because not reaching those ...? I don't know..

In any case, it doesn't mean those equipments should be stupidly expensive and/or perform below 16bits levels (even the cheaper ones). I trust a lot in the kind of review done by you in this site.

Thanks for your patience.
 

MZKM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
4,240
Likes
11,463
Location
Land O’ Lakes, FL
I'm sorry, don't try to sound like an asshole, just saying that most AVR/AVP balanced/unbalanced outputs will be connected to poweramps which expect to deal with a signal no greater than those 1.2v / 2.4v. IMO, It's the typical, common, usual, normal, standard, use case, as easy as that.

The new Rotel MICHI monoblocks ($8000!!!!!!) have these specs (in the manual):

Input Sensitivity Impedance nput Sensitivity / Impedance Unbalance : 1.85 V / 12.5k ohms Balance 3 V / 100k ohms Gain Unbalance 34 dB Balance 30 dB

1.8 max to get a 34db gain... and it's just a mono poweramp. To feed this kind of electronic I don't want a source which performs well at 2v/4v, Maybe one able to perform ultra-good at 1.5/2.8

Shouuld these machines also perform well at 2v/4v....? maybe,.... why not ? Should it the be judged because not reaching those ...? I don't know..

In any case, it doesn't mean those equipments should be stupidly expensive and/or perform below 16bits levels (even the cheaper ones). I trust a lot in the kind of review done by you in this site.

Thanks for your patience.
I agree. However, the same SINAD as the $9 Apple dongle is disheartening.

I don’t know if I’ve seen a power amp with >3Vrms input sensitivity.

As for the M8 amp, damn >1000W into 8ohm! Why?
However, a 75dB SINAD (0.018% THD) is pretty poor; but assuming that’s at max output, I wish they specified THD at 1W & 100W.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,394
Location
Seattle Area

RichB

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
1,946
Likes
2,611
Location
Massachusetts
I believe we need to create a separate baseline expectation for AVRs as it appears that multiple stages of DSP filtering for the variety of purposes (room EQ, multi-channel, dolby/DTS, etc.) required for AVR functionality will have a deleterious effect on measurements built for pure/simple stereo DAC measurements.

If they cannot compete with a stand-alone DAC in Pure/Direct mode, that does not bode well for performance with DSP's engaged.
There can be difference with DIRAC and PEQ fitlers as well.

- Rich
 

bigguyca

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
477
Likes
617
A Proposed Reason for the Excess Distortion in the HTP-1

It seems unproductive to make the same posts on a separate website so here is a link to a post on the AVSForum as to why the HTP-1 may have excess distortion . The link is based on looking at the hardware so there are of course uncertainties as to if the observations match the actual design. There are previous posts a few posts back on the same AVSForum site that provide more details of the design of the HTP-1 from the DAC IC to the output.

Input on all this would be great.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-r...lith-htp-1-owners-thread-40.html#post59240064

Post with an overview of the design:

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-r...lith-htp-1-owners-thread-39.html#post59238228

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-r...lith-htp-1-owners-thread-39.html#post59238376
 

Zooqu1ko

Active Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2020
Messages
152
Likes
88
I believe we need to create a separate baseline expectation for AVRs as it appears that multiple stages of DSP filtering for the variety of purposes (room EQ, multi-channel, dolby/DTS, etc.) required for AVR functionality will have a deleterious effect on measurements built for pure/simple stereo DAC measurements.
The RME ADI-2 has a DSP for parametric EQ, and yet is measures very well, so that's absolutely no excuse. Why artificially lower the bar if there's obviously room for improvement? I also don't think Amir measures multichannel devices with all channels driven during the test.

Personally, I'd have preferred a 4000$ processor with 8 AES/EBU outputs, so I can use whatever DAC I fancy. DANTE or RAVENNA would be a great alternative...
 

SimpleTheater

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 6, 2019
Messages
927
Likes
1,789
Location
Woodstock, NY
Just a note on Pure Direct modes.

Imo Pure Direct modes are not at all usable since that turns off all of bass management. That would assume that you have full range speakers.
Are you mocking my choice of music? I need NOTHING below 700 hz, because I live on Triangle music only.
My personal favorite album is from Christine Balfa. 45 minutes of pure triangle bliss.
ChristineBalfa_triangle.jpg
 

Dimifoot

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Messages
506
Likes
746
Location
Greece
@Floyd Toole has thoroughly analyzed in his recent book why we need well-designed speakers and:
  • Multiple subwoofers
  • Room Eq up to Schroeder (transition) frequency
  • Multichannel reproduction.
Any dac-processor that doesn’t offer all three in 2020 for me is outdated. No matter if it has a SINAD of 150dB, It’s just vintage gear.
 

Dimifoot

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Messages
506
Likes
746
Location
Greece
And as mentioned by an avsforum member:
“Sorry for being novice, but comparing a $9 DAC to HTP-1 is kind of comparing a $9 steering wheel to the entire car, is it not?”
 
Top Bottom