Anthem AVM60 Review (AV Processor)

[LTig]

So visually impactful movies attenuate your hearing - unless you close your eyes and only listen to the effects?

Absolutely yes in my experience. It's true for music as well. Just watch a concert movie and then close your eyes to concentrate on the music. Often one realizes then that the sound is worse than one thought seconds before.

 

[StefaanE]

Absolutely yes in my experience. It's true for music as well. Just watch a concert movie and then close your eyes to concentrate on the music. Often one realizes then that the sound is worse than one thought seconds before.

I notice that when watching a concert, where the camera moves from performer to performer, the soundstage all but disappears. It reappears when I close my eyes, so the information is there, but the visual information apparently inhibits the auditive information (or the brain decides it's not worth spending energy on becoming aware of it, as it is useless anyhow).

 

[peng]

Yup. Only in the AVP category, I believe every single one of them came out short in the measurements...MP, JBL, Anthem, Arcam. Maybe varying level of failure but still failure. Some may have been improved in some aspects with firmware updates since.
I guess given the above, the way to go is a Denon AVR used as an AVP, but you don't have much variations if you want something that doesn't use Audy. MRX 1120 got a pass for not being broken, I guess that's the other alternative. Or maybe the new Anthems improved over the previous ones?

It is really inexcusable, given that so many forum members have been saying AVRs are so compromised, having too many things jammed in one box, yet the seemingly less jammed AVPs, AVCs, rarely scored better even in noise, let alone distortions. Also, given that most of them clearly were AVR based in terms of the all important ICs including the processors, preamp vol control, DACs and various OPAs, one can't even believe, if we think logically, claims like, ..they may have higher distortions, but what about things you can't measure, but things that affect sound quality... The only reason I can think of why they didn't measure better, is, they know as long as the price is right (hint: higher than AVRs), and they emphasize/claim the theoretical advantage being "separates" in their advertisements and publications (I don't buy that either, not that separated all), make them look better, include balanced or pseudo balanced feature, who cared, or even know about measurements and what they mean. They also always get help from professional magazines and online reviewers who have no problem backing up the claims with their typical subjective/flowery praise on the "sound quality" thing, even if their own measurements show they measured worse than the highly compromised AVRs.

For example, if Marantz is really serious about AVP always "sound better" than AVRs, it should be very easy for them to make the AV7705's SINAD, SNR/DR, at least 3 dB better than their own SR6014, SR7015 right? Well, at least they managed that in the $4999 AV8805, and I do give them credit for that.. So again, its not like they couldn't, but they wouldn't..

 

[nathan]

It is really inexcusable, given that so many forum members have been saying AVRs are so compromised, having too many things jammed in one box, yet the seemingly less jammed AVPs, AVCs, rarely scored better even in noise, let alone distortions. Also, given that most of them clearly were AVR based in terms of the all important ICs including the processors, preamp vol control, DACs and various OPAs, one can't even believe, if we think logically, claims like, ..they may have higher distortions, but what about things you can't measure, but things that affect sound quality... The only reason I can think of why they didn't measure better, is, they know as long as the price is right (hint: higher than AVRs), and they emphasize/claim the theoretical advantage being "separates" in their advertisements and publications (I don't buy that either, not that separated all), make them look better, include balanced or pseudo balanced feature, who cared, or even know about measurements and what they mean. They also always get help from professional magazines and online reviewers who have no problem backing up the claims with their typical subjective/flowery praise on the "sound quality" thing, even if their own measurements show they measured worse than the highly compromised AVRs.

For example, if Marantz is really serious about AVP always "sound better" than AVRs, it should be very easily for them to make the AV7705's SINAD, SNR/DR, at least 3 dB better than their own SR6014, SR7015 right? Well, at least they managed that in the $4999 AV8805, and I do give them credit for that.. So again, its not like they couldn't, but they wouldn't..

Yeah I almost get the sense that AVP prices reflect the lower number of units sold, lower economics of scale, and not any great increase in quality.

Maybe the answer is hidden in the few that measure well like the AV8805, ie, that to really make something that is better, it ends up costing a sum that so few people would be willing to pay, that the economies of scale really really suffer and the prices end up too high?

This sounds like I am giving the manufacturers an excuse. I'm not trying to do that. I'm trying to figure out the economics of the situation.

But maybe its just that it hasn't been pressed enough in the consumer response to these products, ie, few people complain command or influence the companies in a meaningful way, and it doesn't seem to impact their sales when they do release a well measuring product, so they logically conclude from a business perspective that there is no advantage to their company to do better?

 

[Spocko]

I notice that when watching a concert, where the camera moves from performer to performer, the soundstage all but disappears. It reappears when I close my eyes, so the information is there, but the visual information apparently inhibits the auditive information (or the brain decides it's not worth spending energy on becoming aware of it, as it is useless anyhow).

Although anecdotal, I think corroborating research is out there to confirm what we've all personally observed (attenuation of audio sensitivity when visual stimuli is the focus of our attention) and AVR manufacturers know this reality so won't spend money to improve performance where the gains are completely lost to the consumer experience (unless people watch movies with their eyes closed).

 

[RichB]

Yeah I almost get the sense that AVP prices reflect the lower number of units sold, lower economics of scale, and not any great increase in quality.

Maybe the answer is hidden in the few that measure well like the AV8805, ie, that to really make something that is better, it ends up costing a sum that so few people would be willing to pay, that the economies of scale really really suffer and the prices end up too high?

This sounds like I am giving the manufacturers an excuse. I'm not trying to do that. I'm trying to figure out the economics of the situation.

But maybe its just that it hasn't been pressed enough in the consumer response to these products, ie, few people complain command or influence the companies in a meaningful way, and it doesn't seem to impact their sales when they do release a well measuring product, so they logically conclude from a business perspective that there is no advantage to their company to do better?

Marantz in particular spent money on HDAM cards, featured them in photos and marketing but in reality appear to only degrade performance.

- Rich

 

[kernelpanic]

These measurements are really unfortunate to see. Any updates from working with Anthem? It seems odd this would not outperform the MRX 1120. I was considering the AVM 70 I'm sure along with many others and now I'm not so sure...

 

[amirm]

These measurements are really unfortunate to see. Any updates from working with Anthem?

Nothing I can report. I like to keep communication with companies private in these situations to allow free exchange of information and ideas. But we are communicating and their intentions are good.

 

[Spocko]

Nothing I can report. I like to keep communication with companies private in these situations to allow free exchange of information and ideas. But we are communicating and their intentions are good.

Amir, I'm wondering since you've tested quite a few of these full featured pre/pros and specifically Demon, NAD, Marantz, Emotiva, Monoprice and now Anthem, which would you buy today if you were in the market for a high end AV pre/pro?

 

[amirm]

Amir, I'm wondering since you've tested quite a few of these full featured pre/pros and specifically Demon, NAD, Marantz, Emotiva, Monoprice and now Anthem, which would you buy today if you were in the market for a high end AV pre/pro?

I would get a Denon AVR and not use its amps.

 

[Lsc]

I would get a Denon AVR and not use its amps.

Just to be clear here...

Based on your results will the Denon sound better than the RMC1? What about Dirac vs whatever room correction there is on the Denon? What about the usage of fully balanced amps?

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

Based on your results will the Denon sound better than the RMC1? What about Dirac vs whatever room correction there is on the Denon? What about the usage of fully balanced amps?

As far as I know, Amir uses the Dirac Live processor at the source (a PC). So to him, the actual implementation of the AVRs room correction would be irrelevant.

As for balanced interconnects/amps: A normal home setting should not be so noisy and the cable runs should not be long enough for that to matter. You aren't putting this thing on a stage.

Still, people prefer different room corrections, I would hazard a guess and say, from all the differences between these units, this is probably the most noticeable one in terms of actual audibility.

 

[Alexanderc]

So as a layman music lover and not a tech geek, I'm trying to digest what this means. AVM60 was loved by consumers, but doesn't measure well.

So is the measurement off? Or does this level of measurement is good enough for the average human ear?

The other possibility is the product is poor, but given the independent positive reviews from multiple users; that probability is small.

In this forum there is not generally an attempt to answer questions about the “sound” of electronics. Where most of the magazines and websites are primarily (or singularly) concerned with how a component “sounds,” ASR tends to focus on how such products are engineered.
There is much good science regarding human hearing, brain function as related to hearing, the thresholds pertaining thereto, the physics of acoustics, etc (much of which is available on this forum in lay-person’s terms if you search for it). In addition, there is a long list of electronic components measured by Amir (and, in essence peer-reviewed by the membership here) showing the limits of engineering and the current SotA.
Put those two things together along with things like desired features, build quality, and budget and a person can draw their own conclusions. We here tend not to say one product “sounds” better than another unless there is incontrovertible evidence (that would be found in the measurements) supporting such a statement, and it wouldn’t be made lightly because it would have to stand up to the scrutiny of the members—many of whom are very qualified to scrutinize.

 

[StefaanE]

Or does this level of measurement is good enough for the average human ear?

I think it is good enough for the untrained listeners, specifically those who cannot audition devices and speakers in a direct comparison (not necessarily blind). I went to listen to KEF Q750, Fyne F501 and Waterfall speakers at a dealer with a couple of nice listening rooms. He would swap out the speakers, no switches or so, and to me they all sounded different, with the KEF pleasing me most. But I didn’t hear any distortion — I guess one needs to be taught how it sounds. It’s easy to recognise hiss and hum because they are present without music; recognising the difference between 1% THD and 0.5% THD is much harder (if possible at all) and requires level-matched AB switching or something like that, and someone in the know pointing out the differences. That why Harman trains the members of their listening panels.
I’m pretty sure that @amirm with his training and experience perceives a lot more distortion than most of us, and might be less happy with an AVR with a SINAD of 80dB than yours truly .

 

[Chrispy]

I think it is good enough for the untrained listeners, specifically those who cannot audition devices and speakers in a direct comparison (not necessarily blind). I went to listen to KEF Q750, Fyne F501 and Waterfall speakers at a dealer with a couple of nice listening rooms. He would swap out the speakers, no switches or so, and to me they all sounded different, with the KEF pleasing me most. But I didn’t hear any distortion — I guess one needs to be taught how it sounds. It’s easy to recognise hiss and hum because they are present without music; recognising the difference between 1% THD and 0.5% THD is much harder (if possible at all) and requires level-matched AB switching or something like that, and someone in the know pointing out the differences. That why Harman trains the members of their listening panels.
I’m pretty sure that @amirm with his training and experience perceives a lot more distortion than most of us, and might be less happy with an AVR with a SINAD of 80dB than yours truly .

You're going to have to prove that, seems unlikely. Has Amir proved such an "ability" in a pre-pro vs avr?

 

[amirm]

What about Dirac vs whatever room correction there is on the Denon?

I tested the Audyssey Room EQ in it and as long as you use it with their App, it does the job very well: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/audyssey-room-eq-review.12746/

 

[StefaanE]

You're going to have to prove that, seems unlikely. Has Amir proved such an "ability" in a pre-pro vs avr?

Do you mean that 80dB already exceeds the ability of any human to discern? I know I was pretty happy with the entry-level HiFi of the late 1970ies and early 1980ies (which probably had a SINAD of around 65dB, I don’t know what SINAD DIN45500 corresponds to), and never had a “I hear IM distortion in this passage” moment. I don’t doubt that a trained listener can hear such distortion, though.
When I got my active, quad-amped Nubert speakers I did hear that they have better (more) bass and treble than my Infinity Primus, and also that some recordings sounded worse. More specifically, I noticed how “bad“ the soprano in Karajan’s recording of the Verdi Requiem sounded. But I can’t tell you if it’s the recording (on CD), or my speakers distorting this recording — given that other recordings of sopranos sound great, I suppose it’s the recording, but I don’t know. But I assume trained, experienced listeners like @hardisj or @amirm would probably be able to observe more accurately, and arrive at a better diagnosis even without measuring.

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

and also that some recordings sounded worse. More specifically, I noticed how “bad“ the soprano in Karajan’s recording of the Verdi Requiem sounded.

That's actually a common experience when you move to more revealing gear. Unfortunately.

Back on my 50€ Sony bass cannons Hans Zimmer's "The Dark Knight" sounded fantastic. Once I upgraded to my DT-880, some tracks became near unlistenable due to the digital clipping that was now very audible. When you have good gear (and that doesn't have to cost thousands anymore) you will quickly notice that the recordings/mixes themselves are often the weak link, especially if you like contemporary music. London Grammar's "If you wait" and "Truth is a beautiful thing" would be other prime examples with horrible digital clipping. It can get pretty frustrating, if you like the music but realize how badly it has been treated by the producers.

 

[Rottmannash]

In this forum there is not generally an attempt to answer questions about the “sound” of electronics. Where most of the magazines and websites are primarily (or singularly) concerned with how a component “sounds,” ASR tends to focus on how such products are engineered.
There is much good science regarding human hearing, brain function as related to hearing, the thresholds pertaining thereto, the physics of acoustics, etc (much of which is available on this forum in lay-person’s terms if you search for it). In addition, there is a long list of electronic components measured by Amir (and, in essence peer-reviewed by the membership here) showing the limits of engineering and the current SotA.
Put those two things together along with things like desired features, build quality, and budget and a person can draw their own conclusions. We here tend not to say one product “sounds” better than another unless there is incontrovertible evidence (that would be found in the measurements) supporting such a statement, and it wouldn’t be made lightly because it would have to stand up to the scrutiny of the members—many of whom are very qualified to scrutinize.

well said.

 

[Rottmannash]

I tested the Audyssey Room EQ in it and as long as you use it with their App, it does the job very well: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/audyssey-room-eq-review.12746/

Have you ever measured one of Onkyo's RZ series AVR's?