• 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!

Anthem MRX1120 Home Theater AVR Review

CJ Miller

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
18
Likes
42
Nice to see they didnt totally blow it but the last anthem was one of the better bad products. Its scary how you can spend this much money to experience worse than smart phone audio out of a headphone jack.

These reviews have made me think sound bars may have a fighting chance of being Hifi if the execution continues to get better over time.
 

jam

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2020
Messages
123
Likes
258
Location
Montreal
I would love to see the AVM 60 processor from Anthem reviewed by Amir. Anybody out there that can send it to Amir for a few days?
 

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
2,116
Likes
2,781
He, need a current Arcam for sure. Also NAD T778 that is now out. Amps are now ncore. Also would be interesting to see if they made any improvements on the DAC measurements from the T758 V3.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,614
Likes
5,167
Why they didn't use better DACs and balanced connections for that price?
AKM AK4458 DACs (I would have like to see ESS DACs).

They could have used the AK4490, that has better specs than most ESS except the top model such as the ES9018/28/38. The AK4490 is not the top model any more but I think in 2015/16 it was.

The better ESS DACs such as the 9018,9028,9038 are only found in external DACs, not AVRs. The AVR-X8500H and AV8805 are among the few that used the better AK4490.

This seems like a case of implementation being more important than just using a better quality DAC chip. If Anthem had used the 4490 instead of the lower grade 4458, it may have gotten even better results, but we would never know.
 
Last edited:

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,614
Likes
5,167
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Anthem MRX1120 "flagship" Home Theater Surround 4K/UHD 11.2 Audio/Video Receiver (AVR). Got all that? It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $3,499.

You have seen one Athem AVR, you have seen them all:


IMD test peformance was disappointing though:
View attachment 53150

I can't recall if I have asked you all for money recently so to be sure, please donate what you can using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

Everything looks great for an AVR, but how good really is it's IMD? At gen level -45, IMD is at only -50 dB. Would that be bad enough to have audible effects, or that's just due mainly to noise than distortions?
 

North_Sky

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 31, 2019
Messages
2,741
Likes
1,553
Location
Kha Nada
They could have used the AK4490, that has better specs than most ESS except the top model such as the ES9018/28/38. The AK4490 is not the top model any more but I think in 2015/16 it was.

The better ESS DACs such as the 9018,9028,9038 are only found in external DACs, not AVRs. The AVR-X8500H and AV8805 are among the few that used the better AK4490.

This seems like a case of implementation being more important than just using a better quality DAC chip. If Anthem had used the 4490 instead of the lower grade 4458, it may have gotten even better results, but we would never know.

AV Receivers use multichannel DACs - 8-channel DAC(s) on a chip.
You are right; they don't use the better stereo DACs.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,384
Location
Seattle Area
Arent there any friendly dealers around your location, that would let you home "audition" one of these things? :)
Well, I just went to a "friendly" big box store that is a dealer. They don't stock a single unit from Arcam!
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,614
Likes
5,167
They could have used the AK4490, that has better specs than most ESS except the top model such as the ES9018/28/38. The AK4490 is not the top model any more but I think in 2015/16 it was.

The better ESS DACs such as the 9018,9028,9038 are only found in external DACs, not AVRs. The AVR-X8500H and AV8805 are among the few that used the better AK4490.

This seems like a case of implementation being more important than just using a better quality DAC chip. If Anthem had used the 4490 instead of the lower grade 4458, it may have gotten even better results, but we would never know.

In some cases lower output levels yielded different/better results so it may depend on which one he picked for the ranking chart. I mentioned that to him before that it could potentially be misleading. It would be good if he uses two templates, one for the typical 4V balanced/2V unbalanced and the other for the reduced output of say, 3V balanced and 1.5V unbalanced. 1.2V unbalanced would seem too low to be useful for preout.
 

GD Fan

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
932
Likes
1,699
Location
NY, NY USA
Well, I just went to a "friendly" big box store that is a dealer. They don't stock a single unit from Arcam!
My rep at the nearby Magnolia said he could order the AVR20 for me with ETA approximately one week. But it would have only a 15 day return window, which seemed too tight to arrange drop shipping for testing and subsequent return if need be. Perhaps once the issues are worked through they'll stock it on hand and have their usual generous return policy.
 

Francis Vaughan

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 6, 2018
Messages
933
Likes
4,697
Location
Adelaide Australia
This seems like a case of implementation being more important than just using a better quality DAC chip. If Anthem had used the 4490 instead of the lower grade 4458, it may have gotten even better results, but we would never know.

A bit of a tangent, but a very important point. Implementation will make or break a product. Things are vastly more sensitive to implementation than the use of the latest and greatest DAC chip. To a large extent you can safely ignore the precise DAC chip in use. This has been true virtually forever.

Sometimes the later chips are better simply because they have better resistance to ills of implementation. So an earlier chip with a well though out design will perform no worse anyway.
 

North_Sky

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 31, 2019
Messages
2,741
Likes
1,553
Location
Kha Nada
Good implementation of the DAC section; sounds fair to me.
Which AV receiver's manufacturer has the best DAC(s) implementation in their flagship receiver?
DACs using dual differential balanced designs
 
Last edited:

North_Sky

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 31, 2019
Messages
2,741
Likes
1,553
Location
Kha Nada
Just for DAC talk sake ... Yamaha RX-A3080 AV receiver ...
Plus XLR stereo inputs, and Artificial Intelligence (Intelligent Surround Analysis & Optimization) ... ouf!
20200307_173050.jpg
 

Francis Vaughan

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 6, 2018
Messages
933
Likes
4,697
Location
Adelaide Australia
Good implementation of the DAC section; sounds fair to me.
Which AV receiver's manufacturer has the best DAC(s) implementation in their flagship receiver?
DACs using dual differential balanced designs


In a receiver this is probably not true. The first thing you need to do is convert the output to single ended to drive the amplifier. So balanced is wasted. True balanced amplifiers designs exist, but are little more than an excuse for overly complicated designs with dubious actual advantages in performance, and some very real down sides.
For a processor, if there is a need for longer runs to the amplifiers, something that may result in real world noise and ground loop issues, balanced has clear benefits. But if you are simply stacking the processor and amplifiers in the same rack, it is quite possible that balanced is a net loss in overall performance. Even with balanced outputs, driving the two sides of the balanced outputs as a pair of individual balanced signals all the way from the DAC outputs is also potentially complicated and fraught with issues. You need dual reconstruction filters, and you need to manage the RF energy in the system with larger path loops resulting from the more complicated design. And you must still provide galvanic isolation if you want the performance benefits. Given the essentially perfect performance seen in quite mundane and cheap systems where little more than careful adherence to layout, grounding and decoupling are all that is needed, the complexity, cost, and potential performance issues would suggest staying away from dual differential balanced for any reason other than marketing. Maybe if you have a true cost no object design, and need to justify the resulting eye watering cost, this is a way to go. But it won't sound any better. Just get you bragging rights.
 

Francis Vaughan

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 6, 2018
Messages
933
Likes
4,697
Location
Adelaide Australia
I’m certain there are minor differences, but the MRX-720 costs $1,000 less and only removes 4 of the 11 amplifier channels.
https://www.anthemav.com/products-current/type=av-receiver

And licences for sound processing for those channels. There are hints that there is a disproportionate cost for licensing those additional channels. Perhaps reflecting the rarefied heights it is assumed such systems are destined for. (So both lower volume and fatter wallets.)
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,614
Likes
5,167
In a receiver this is probably not true. The first thing you need to do is convert the output to single ended to drive the amplifier. So balanced is wasted. True balanced amplifiers designs exist, but are little more than an excuse for overly complicated designs with dubious actual advantages in performance, and some very real down sides.
For a processor, if there is a need for longer runs to the amplifiers, something that may result in real world noise and ground loop issues, balanced has clear benefits. But if you are simply stacking the processor and amplifiers in the same rack, it is quite possible that balanced is a net loss in overall performance. Even with balanced outputs, driving the two sides of the balanced outputs as a pair of individual balanced signals all the way from the DAC outputs is also potentially complicated and fraught with issues. You need dual reconstruction filters, and you need to manage the RF energy in the system with larger path loops resulting from the more complicated design. And you must still provide galvanic isolation if you want the performance benefits. Given the essentially perfect performance seen in quite mundane and cheap systems where little more than careful adherence to layout, grounding and decoupling are all that is needed, the complexity, cost, and potential performance issues would suggest staying away from dual differential balanced for any reason other than marketing. Maybe if you have a true cost no object design, and need to justify the resulting eye watering cost, this is a way to go. But it won't sound any better. Just get you bragging rights.




For AVR, the AVR-5805/MKII seems to be the only one that uses flagship model DAC chips of the day, the Burr Brown PCM1792, that is very outdated now but still has better SNR and THD+N than the ES9026 Pro in the RX-A3080.
https://hometheaterhifi.com/volume_12_2/denon-avr-5805-receiver-5-2005-part-1.html

For AVP, there isn't too many built like the Denon AVP that is fully balanced.
https://www.audioholics.com/av-preamp-processor-reviews/denon-avp-a1hdci/design-overview


1583640935252.png
 

North_Sky

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 31, 2019
Messages
2,741
Likes
1,553
Location
Kha Nada
And there was the Yamaha RX-Z1 AV receiver with ten BB PCM-1704 DACs.
...Replaced by the Z9 with BB PCM-1792 DACs, then the Z11 with BB DSD-1796 DACs.
Those were all stereo DACs.

These were the days ... receivers weighting 62, 66, 75 pounds respectively.
You open the top cover and there it was, high end master bedroom.

Today's top receivers weight half roughly (30 to 40 pounds), and are using 8-channel DACs.
The MRX1120 (32 pounds). And ARC, with quality mic & stand, no Mickey mouse Yamaha mic (YPAO). ...And the Parametric EQ.

 
Last edited:

onion

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2019
Messages
338
Likes
379
I have this in my cinema room, with the stereo speakers and subs driven by a Lyngdorf 3400 from the pre-outs on the Anthem. So thanks for reviewing my setup!

It would be interesting to see how well the room correction performs quantitatively.

To my ears, the Anthem is not good enough for music - not even close. But the Lyngdorf does sound excellent. The Lyngdorf is also way better than the Arcam AVR 850 that I also have - although a lot of review sites rate the Arcam for music, I never found it good enough either.
 
Top Bottom