Monoprice HTP-1 Home Theater Processor Review

[Spocko]

I am following the JBL knows better line of reasoning. They have the knowledge and the testing equipment to know better than me and you.
I already mentioned that I am not planning to buy the Monoprice, I already own a competent prepro (Trinnov)

Better still, Denon and Marantz is unmatched and their rock solid ability to implement trouble free eARC, which for me, is quite difficult for most pre/pro manufacturers to get right in terms of TV compatibility, and most importantly, eARC is essential for all AVRs plugging directly into the latest flagship TVs. The world is going towards less components not more, and so with that in mind, TVs with integrated streaming services (Netflix, Disney Plus, etc.) require eARC capable receivers.

 

[Dimifoot]

Better still, Denon and Marantz is unmatched and their rock solid ability to implement trouble free eARC, which for me, is quite difficult for most pre/pro manufacturers to get right in terms of TV compatibility, and most importantly, eARC is essential for all AVRs plugging directly into the latest flagship TVs. The world is going towards less components and not more, so with that in mind, TVs with integrated streaming services (Netflix, Disney Plus, etc.) require eARC capable receivers.

I don’t use TVs, I have no familiarity with eARC, so I can’t comment on this

 

[Spocko]

I wonder if any improvements can be heard in a blind ABX test between a multichannel processor with SINAD of 100db to a 90db one.

Or one with 110db SINAD compared to 90db.

This point has been discussed regarding stereo DACs (sorry didn't have time to search the forum but there's a few threads on ASR) and ultimately the conclusion is it's not audible but as consumers we just want to make sure we are getting our money's worth of quality engineering when paying a premium - though not necessarily paying for more audible improvements.

 

[Dimifoot]

This point has been discussed regarding stereo DACs (sorry didn't have time to search the forum but there's a few threads on ASR) and ultimately the conclusion is it's not audible but as consumers we just want to make sure we are getting our money's worth of quality engineering when paying a premium - though not necessarily paying for more audible improvements.

Agreed. Of course.

But these multichannel prepros are already very expensive to start with. This Monoprice at 4000$ is one of cheap-mid priced balanced prepros. Cheaper than the Nad and the Marantz, much cheaper than other brands. The market is very competitive and they are not making big profits here.

How much more are we prepared to pay to see the SINAD rising to 110dBs?

 

[digicidal]

It’s not coincidental that Dirac (and Trinnov optimizer) is used by JBL. They know better.
As far as the cost issue, let’s not forget that the Monoprice is a balanced prepro, with more channels. And if you need a 7.4.4 system, you need the 16 channels offered.

Which again returns to the number of channels and logos being paramount. I don't think anyone is denying that if you are planning an installation for a full 16ch setup... then you will obviously have a much smaller number of options available to you. However, you are also likely to be building a theater where the total budget is well into 5 figures (presuming you're correctly spending the lion's share on speakers) and possibly low 6 figures. In that case, what is the compelling reason for saving $2K-6K by going with the HTP-1? It requires a similar level of installation expertise to the higher priced competition (tablet/PC configuration, calibrated mic, etc.) but does not share the same integrator networks that the Trinnov's of this market have.

Is the final result with Audyssey32XT inferior to Dirac Live? Possibly, at least objectively speaking... but the results with Audyssey are significantly better than not having DSP at all... and the time between unpacking and enjoying content is measured in minutes and doesn't even require cracking the manual. Cheaper and more aesthetically pleasing (IMO at least) aren't even included, but their proven reliability over time definitely puts another check in their column for me.

You can't have it both ways... if SQ isn't really important to anyone... then what are the odds that they can even tell the difference between two DSP REQ implementations? And if the "crappier" version is more amp agnostic, allows for on-screen calibration with an included mic, and is so simple no manual is needed even for those not technically gifted - what does "better" even look like?

 

[Dimifoot]

Which again returns to the number of channels and logos being paramount. I don't think anyone is denying that if you are planning an installation for a full 16ch setup... then you will obviously have a much smaller number of options available to you. However, you are also likely to be building a theater where the total budget is well into 5 figures (presuming you're correctly spending the lion's share on speakers) and possibly low 6 figures. In that case, what is the compelling reason for saving $2K-6K by going with the HTP-1? It requires a similar level of installation expertise to the higher priced competition (tablet/PC configuration, calibrated mic, etc.) but does not share the same integrator networks that the Trinnov's of this market have.

Is the final result with Audyssey32XT inferior to Dirac Live? Possibly, at least objectively speaking... but the results with Audyssey are significantly better than not having DSP at all... and the time between unpacking and enjoying content is measured in minutes and doesn't even require cracking the manual. Cheaper and more aesthetically pleasing (IMO at least) aren't even included, but their proven reliability over time definitely puts another check in their column for me.

You can't have it both ways... if SQ isn't really important to anyone... then what are the odds that they can even tell the difference between two DSP REQ implementations? And if the "crappier" version is more amp agnostic, allows for on-screen calibration with an included mic, and is so simple no manual is needed even for those not technically gifted - what does "better" even look like?

I would also like to see a blind ABX test comparing room eq software, similar (and bigger) to the one S.Olive did a decade ago.

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/11/subjective-and-objective-evaluation-of.html

Superiority was audible back then, I expect it to be audible now.

JBL is known for contacting similar tests all the time.

 

[BDWoody]

I meant a general "you", not you in particular, sorry for confusion. But yes, we agree then. That is one reason I'm waiting to see JBL take on this market segment before I buy anything this year.

I had bought this unit and had it sent to Amir with the hopes that it wouldn't have had to make quite so many...compromises? Excuses for why they couldn't or shouldn't have to meet even their own 'specs' populated in their sparsely populated spec sheets? Maybe that should have been my first clue...

The question for me wasn't just whether it would work...it's whether they got it right. They just didn't get enough right, IMO, to make me want to keep it.

Anyway, I thought this would be a great unit for Amir to test, as it comes from a company that has recently gotten a lot right, and had gotten a lot of very worthy praise on this site. I am disappointed that it didn't turn out (seemingly) to have had that last round of review, where someone(s) with the very highest level of competence could have gotten involved a little earlier.

I was going to pay $4k if it had needed fewer excuses as to why we shouldn't expect so much.

I will also wait for the upcoming JBL offering...and will continue to suffer through with using my Integra 80.3 pre-pro...which I actually like a lot.

By the way...for anyone thinking of either sending your existing gear, or having something drop shipped to @amirm after purchase, he couldn't have made it easier, or been more responsive to my time limitations. Happy to do it again for the JBL if he can't get a donor.

I hope all of the noise generated by these reviews let's these high dollar (at least relatively speaking) sellers Understand that they need to get it right.

They are running out of excuses, and the more the word spreads, the less they can hide behind marketing copy and all the other standard nonsense.

 

[digicidal]

I would also like to see a blind ABX test comparing room eq software, similar (and bigger) to the one S.Olive did a decade ago.

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/11/subjective-and-objective-evaluation-of.html
View attachment 50320

Superiority was audible back then, I expect it to be audible now.

JBL is known for contacting similar tests all the time.

I would also love to see a current test. The original implementations (subjectively at least) of Audyssey were quite bad in my experience. Even the difference coming from the previous generation to the XT32 iteration was audibly significant with the former sounding artificial to me and the latter sounding much more neutral than without DSP... all on same speakers.

However, it's important to note that S. Olive also tested this in mono due to the inherent decrease in listener discrimination as the number of channels increases. While this can be an important limit in such a test, IMO it also is flawed in that sense. It's unclear if all forms of RC employed distinct filtering on each channel in complete isolation. Would be more interesting to see if the subjects could still tell the difference (and if their preference changed) once you're talking about 5 channels or more. Since almost all RC systems are "black boxes" without detailed information regarding their process - outside of target curve and a few simple parameters at least - it's impossible to tell what/if newer releases actually improve or degrade previous performance.

At least as long as I didn't misread the descriptions in his slides.

 

[Dherrmann717]

BDWoody - did you ever consider that the lack of peer review for the findings may have let some errors through?

 

[digicidal]

BDWoody - did you ever consider that the lack of peer review for the findings may have let some errors through?

I certainly did... thankfully Monoprice provides a full and comprehensive set of specifications which could be verified... oh wait a minute.

Is there a possibility (even likelihood) that some nuanced settings could have improved measurements or removed issues (and did in the auto-muting case)? Of course. On the other hand, when you're left completely blind deliberately by the manufacturer... how do you recommend determining the difference between measurement error, manufacturing defect, and bad engineering design? Especially without responsive communication from the source?

 

[Dimifoot]

Which again returns to the number of channels and logos being paramount. I don't think anyone is denying that if you are planning an installation for a full 16ch setup... then you will obviously have a much smaller number of options available to you. However, you are also likely to be building a theater where the total budget is well into 5 figures (presuming you're correctly spending the lion's share on speakers) and possibly low 6 figures. In that case, what is the compelling reason for saving $2K-6K by going with the HTP-1? It requires a similar level of installation expertise to the higher priced competition (tablet/PC configuration, calibrated mic, etc.) but does not share the same integrator networks that the Trinnov's of this market have.

Big dedicated home theaters are expensive, you are right, there is no reason to try and save “pennies” by choosing the HTP.

But there are also smaller setups that people use in smaller spaces-smaller houses.
For example, wouldn’t it be nice to use the recently reviewed ADAM s2v all around in a 7.4.4 setup in a small living room?
(Please don’t start with WAF issues, please, please)

You need 13000$ for speakers, and you will be fine with 5000$ for 4 subs. 18000 in total.

We want 15 channels on a balanced prepro, and user friendly room eq.
Now, you can either buy the small Trinnov and go to 35000$ or the HTP and spend 22000$...

Doesn’t this make a difference?

I would probably prefer to spend 2000$ more and wait for the Dirac equipped JBL on the way, so let’s see how this measures, but at this moment the HTP is the best measuring prepro on the list. And the cheaper one.

 

[BDWoody]

BDWoody - did you ever consider that the lack of peer review for the findings may have let some errors through?

I read and understand the review, and all of the follow up, in addition to the product and owners thread on other forums.

Is there some specific measurement beyond those discussed that you believe are in error? Do you think that because it sounds good to you that the voltage output limitation is O.K.?

I want a product that has been somewhat more finely tuned. Not one that sounds good to you...no offense...i have zero doubt that it does, and I sincerely hope you enjoy it! Nobody loves seeing a product they own and enjoy thoroughly getting a decapitated panther...but...its a cold, cruel world...

 

[SimpleTheater]

Excuse my ignorance, but from what I can tell, aren't the results from the HTP-1 fairly positive? As long as you listen to content at reference volume (or lower) and your amp sensitivity is less than 4v then everything works as expected, correct? Under reference volume and under 4v there is no clipping/compression? The rest of the measurements put the HTP-1 above all the previously tested receivers/processors? Functionally (stability and features) it appears to be miles ahead of other competitors like Emotiva as well.

This is my understanding as well. Keep the volume at 0 or less, ensure to set the settings menu to remove the muting issue and you appear to have an excellent APR. The headless panther is used because the product is inherently flawed because it can’t do what it promises.

That said, I’m waiting on the JBL before deciding what to buy. If the JBL costs under $7k and passes all tests, it will be my next unit, replacing a decently capable Yamaha 3060.

 

[A/V Analysis]

The Classe Sigma SSP I measured with my RME ADI-2 PRO fs here is probably a little better. Its THD is a little too close to the RME to get a reliable measurement, spec is 0.0005% = -106 dB and I measured 0.00073% at 3.8 Vrms.

You need to get it to 4V for comparable SINAD to the other tested gear.

 

[LTig]

You need to get it to 4V for comparable SINAD to the other tested gear.

I measured in pass through mode (fixed volume, no EQ, no tone control) to measure the DACs performance and the 3.8Vrms are what I got.

 

[Kishore]

Amir -can you re-test for 2 Ch with Dirac enabled? That should also be interesting

 

[amirm]

Amir -can you re-test for 2 Ch with Dirac enabled? That should also be interesting

I can't just enable Dirac. I have to run the calibration.

 

[OverTheAir]

But there are also smaller setups that people use in smaller spaces-smaller houses.
For example, wouldn’t it be nice to use the recently reviewed ADAM s2v all around in a 7.4.4 setup in a small living room?
(Please don’t start with WAF issues, please, please)

You need 13000$ for speakers, and you will be fine with 5000$ for 4 subs. 18000 in total.

We want 15 channels on a balanced prepro, and user friendly room eq.
Now, you can either buy the small Trinnov and go to 35000$ or the HTP and spend 22000$...

This is a good observation but even in this simple model we are assuming that every channel is equally critical and should therefore attract the same $1,750 cost of an individual Adam S2V, including the height speakers. In addition we are already seeing, relatively early in the speaker tests, that it is possible to get very acceptable performance from relatively inexpensive speakers, particularly if we apply EQ, which is after all one of the main attributes and capabilities of AVRs.

Would someone buy an HTP-1 at $4,000 and 16x Pioneer SP-BS22-LR at $960 (16 because they come in pairs ) ... probably not, but there are many options between that and 15x Adams at $26,250, or the implied much higher speaker costs of Digicidal's original comment. In consequence, there will probably be many owners of lower cost 16-channel AVRs who are only into low five-figure home theaters and who are looking for a low entry point, especially if some of those channels are used for multiple subs instead of speakers as you modeled (particularly in combination with Dirac's Bass Management Module when available).

 

[Srrndhound]

No, it is indeed 14 dB below our digital processing headroom. But I have the impression that you didn't get the point. With such a setting and provided the input signal already reached 0 dBFS the user will have to reduce volume with the big front dial by these 14 dB to prevent the DAC chip from clipping. And the user knows that he has to do that because the level meter tells him (just in case he couldn't hear it).

Thank you. That answers my question. If one wants to run a 0 dBFS input signal through the RME DAC at a fixed output volume that preserves x dB headroom, then the noise floor will be x dB higher than the best case (no headroom). I just wanted to make sure there was no black magic happening in DACs.

 

[apgood]

Simple reason is price. What are you getting for $4000 vs $1500-$2000?



I don't really follow reviews of AVRs outside this site, as they're mostly useless, so I don't know what's supposedly wrong with the Arcam AV-40, but the JBL SDP-55 is supposed to have true digital outputs which means you can completely ignore the entire analog audio output path in it if you want. You have full control over your output chain, not something that the Monoprice(or any other AVR I've heard of) can do. The Arcam can't do that either.

You can get the AES or AVB digital version of the Stormsudio ISP now to do digital out to up to 32 Processing Channels and 16 Atmos Decoded channels of about 12 Months now and even longer for the Trinnov Altitude 32 that allow digital out for 16 of it's 32 Channels, but you pay quite a bit more than for a HTP-1. Not sure how much the the SDP-55 costs, but assume will be somewhere in between the HTP-1 and the Stormaudio ISP.