• 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!

Marantz AV7705 Home Theater Processor Review

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
Too bad, but fortunately the effects of poor measured performance by ASR, AH and others have started to to influence the manufacturers. If there was not time to get the SR8015's upgrades to the 7706, I have a feeling we will see it in the 7707. The lower cost 770x line are upgraded yearly while the TOTL 880x's don't get addressed till at least every 2 years. Maybe they want to wait for the next 880x to get it first, wouldn't want the 7706 outperforming the current 8805

I think cost may have played a big part. The AV7706 has the balanced circuit so it will need twice as much HDAM modules as the SR8015 assuming they have the same number of channels. So Marantz may have opted to use their better version in their flag ship AVR, AVP and integrated amps only. The AV7706 is basically derived from the SR7015, but add multichannel analog inputs, XLR outputs, and subtract the power amp section, and replaced the much large power supply with a smaller one.

One funny fact by the way, my AV7005 had a 100% toroidal looking PS transformer but the info sheet indicated that it was toroidal, so I contacted Marantz support and they confirmed it was just an E-I transformer, but encased by a toroidal case. I wasn't upset because I do not it is not true that toroids are always/automatically better, it often is, but it depends. It just show there has always been a big gap between the build quality of the 7000 and 8000 series preamp/processors, though the key parts and circuitry are the same, including the HDAM modules, until now (i.e. the SR8015).
 

thehun

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2019
Messages
29
Likes
37
I'm in the middle of deciding if I should go for the 7706 or the Anthem 70 (1K more)... Ideally I would like to stick with the 7706 as I can use the 1K elsewhere in the HT.. as well as 7.2.4 is the max HT speaker config I will need.. (anthem supports more ch which I wont need for my room). As well as Marantz supports Auro which is probably something I would like to try .. and is missing from Anthems lineup.

However, this review now has me questioning the sound quality and output capability of Marantz.. unless they corrected it in the 7706 ?? but maybe need to wait and see.. Guess will need to wait for Amir to get a 7706 to review.

Are there any other pre-pros in this price range 2.5K - 3.5K that measure up ?
I think a lot of people here misunderstand the purpose of this board. The measurements here more often than not criticize engineering short comings rather than passing judgments of actual audible qualities, unless of course it's so bad that it can be judged "broken".
When it comes to AV products for instance this AVP's the real issue was that it had a poor implementation of the digital filter which in turn affected some of other measured data, but it won't necessarily be audible or certainly won't make it sound "bad". However there is no good reason why Marantz employed this implementation. Also the resulting measured data indicates that you are wasting your money on any so called "Hi Res" media as this Marantz and pretty much all the other AV products comes short to have much better resolution if at all passing the lowly CD 16 bits, so all that fancy 32 bit DACs that these products have playing back 24/192 files is rather fools errand.
So the point is buy these products based on their features that you might need, and on their reputation that they don't break down for repair.
 

Martin_320

Active Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2020
Messages
106
Likes
93
I think a lot of people here misunderstand the purpose of this board. The measurements here more often than not criticize engineering short comings rather than passing judgments of actual audible qualities, unless of course it's so bad that it can be judged "broken".
When it comes to AV products for instance this AVP's the real issue was that it had a poor implementation of the digital filter which in turn affected some of other measured data, but it won't necessarily be audible or certainly won't make it sound "bad". However there is no good reason why Marantz employed this implementation. Also the resulting measured data indicates that you are wasting your money on any so called "Hi Res" media as this Marantz and pretty much all the other AV products comes short to have much better resolution if at all passing the lowly CD 16 bits, so all that fancy 32 bit DACs that these products have playing back 24/192 files is rather fools errand.
So the point is buy these products based on their features that you might need, and on their reputation that they don't break down for repair.

But the job of a processor is to "process". And the golden rule is you always need to do your processing at much higher bit depths than the final output resolution. Otherwise you get compounded errors that can become audible. So I'm glad that the DSPs in my AV7705 are doing their arithmetic in 32bit float.
 

thehun

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2019
Messages
29
Likes
37
But the job of a processor is to "process". And the golden rule is you always need to do your processing at much higher bit depths than the final output resolution. Otherwise you get compounded errors that can become audible. So I'm glad that the DSPs in my AV7705 are doing their arithmetic in 32bit float.
Those are two completely different things handled by entirely 2 different chips. The measured data was without any DSP processing naturally and the outcome was hampered by the filter and of course the analog section that follows the DAC.
 
Last edited:

Masza

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Messages
63
Likes
37
No matter if the processing is in 32 or even 64 bits if the analog output doesn't have even 16 bit quality. The DAC could even truncate everything to 16 bit, I doubt we would see any difference in the analog measurements regarding this unit.
 

Martin_320

Active Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2020
Messages
106
Likes
93
No matter if the processing is in 32 or even 64 bits if the analog output doesn't have even 16 bit quality. The DAC could even truncate everything to 16 bit, I doubt we would see any difference in the analog measurements regarding this unit.

I don't agree. To measure amplitude resolution you would need to accurately measure the discrete output level (or "step") difference between one digital input value and the next digital increment. Amir didn't do that. Just graphically overlaying an inaudible noise floor plot, and arbitrarily equating that to a digital bit resolution of the system is completely misleading.

A practical example: with a 16bit digital volume control, if you listen carefully, you can actually discern the output step differences as you turn up the knob (or slide the fader up) from the lower extremities. With a 24bit digital volume the steps are so fine that your brain cannot discern them anymore. THAT's resolution.
 
Last edited:

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
Thanks for that video oupee.. I saw that before.. however I think you misunderstood.. I am going separates.. Both the Marantz 7706 and the Anthem AVM70 are separates.. I know separates sound better ...However my dilemma is with the measurements of the older Marantz 7705 based on Amirs measurements, had Marantz done anything about it in the 7706.. Their sister brand Denon measures very well in all x700 series.

That video is entertaining, I actually laugh watching it)that's about it. If you look to the objective side, nothing supports their claims. If you must have an AVP and wants better measurements that the current Marantz, or Yamaha models can offer, you probably should wait another year. The reason I say this is that we already know the SR8015 measures much better (Matthew Poes hinted it, iirc..) based on Audioholics bench test results so it is a reasonable bet that the AV8806 (to be launched next year?) will measure as good as, or better than the Denon AVRs. The same may apply to the upcoming CX-A5300, based on the measurements of the CX-A5100/5200 that were comparable to the AV8805 and much better than the AV7705 (potentially 7706 too).

As a stop gap measure, would you consider grabbing a low cost (sort of disposable in relative term:D) AVR-X3600H or X3700H for the time being, then sell it or trade it in for the AV8806, or CX-A5300 when they are ready?
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
That video is entertaining, I actually laugh watching it)that's about it. If you look to the objective side, nothing supports their claims. If you must have an AVP and wants better measurements that the current Marantz, or Yamaha models can offer, you probably should wait another year. The reason I say this is that we already know the SR8015 measures much better (Matthew Poes hinted it, iirc..) based on Audioholics bench test results so it is a reasonable bet that the AV8806 (to be launched next year?) will measure as good as, or better than the Denon AVRs. The same may apply to the upcoming CX-A5300, based on the measurements of the CX-A5100/5200 that were comparable to the AV8805 and much better than the AV7705 (potentially 7706 too).
The real question remains, will any of them sound any different ?????
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
That's the question, the answer could be, it depends.:D
LOL, yep for sure. ;)

The more I think about the problem of reviewing and evaluating AVR gear the more difficult I find the proposition.
I don't know if it's wishful thinking, but the latest popularity of Atmos encoded and other immersive technologies seems to have spawned renewed interest in multichannel music production. Being a avid surround enthusiast I'm hoping I'm right but my joy has been shot down too many times in the past to let myself get too carried away.
Back on point, the layers of software at play in the average AVR makes it difficult in the extreme to measure and compare the different components. From the various onboard DSP programs, dynamic eq, dynamic volume, and 6 different stereo to multichannel up-sampling programs, and idea of putting together a comprehensive comparison of even just 2 different pre/pros is staggering.
Back in the day, (50 & 60s) we audiophiles mostly turned our backs on this type of approach and became minimalists, just get as close to a straight wire with gain as possible and listen to the source as-is. But in these days of dsp, immersive techs and all the rest, much of it is hard, if not impossible to ignore. So to find some science like approaches is going to take some new ways of thinking and outside the box approaches.
Much appreciation goes out to the engineers that will be tasked with these chores..
 

Martin_320

Active Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2020
Messages
106
Likes
93
The real question remains, will any of them sound any different ?????

More importantly, let's hope they don't actually sound worse than today's AVPs -- as a consequence of the pressure from online blogs (like this one) for them to display SINAD measurements that "look" good ;-)
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
More importantly, let's hope they don't actually sound worse than today's AVPs -- as a consequence of the pressure from online blogs (like this one) for them to display SINAD measurements that "look" good ;-)
Have no fear of that.
 

Martin_320

Active Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2020
Messages
106
Likes
93
How can you be so sure? History is littered with things that have got worse thanks to pressure from the minority.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
More importantly, let's hope they don't actually sound worse than today's AVPs -- as a consequence of the pressure from online blogs (like this one) for them to display SINAD measurements that "look" good ;-)

I don't think you have to "hope". At least to me, my AVR-X4400H absolutely does not sound worse than my AVPs.:D And again, my X3400H that I had for about 10 days, did not sound worse than my two channel separates, but I know it doesn't matter how many times I repeat this, those in the only your ears matter/count, not measurements will not believe it is possible for such low cost multichannel to sound as good as "separate" AVPs, let alone two channel gear. Those believers would watch that video and couldn't agree more with the two gentlemen that the AV7705 that has the same DSP engines, preamp/DAC as the SR8012 (I bet they had no idea that is the case) would sound so obviously better.;) I actually couldn't help lol when watching it..:D
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
How can you be so sure? History is littered with things that have got worse thanks to pressure from the minority.
Well unless they badly screw up some other area of performance in the attempt, the numbers don't lie. A better SINAD will at least sound the same or better.
 

Martin_320

Active Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2020
Messages
106
Likes
93
Well unless they badly screw up some other area of performance in the attempt...

Precisely -- If the goal to placate the baying mob is to simply show them a SINAD test graph with no noise floor, then there all sorts of 'ways and means' to achieve that -- and you will never know how they did it.
Noise reduction circuits have been doing that for years. And it ruins the sound.
I would rather have the hiss, but with all the original sonics intact.
If you've heard the original Pink Floyd DSOTM 24bit DVD-Audio Alan Parsons quadraphonic studio tape transfers then you'll know what I mean. Compare that with "official" DSOTM remasters where they've magically removed the noise floor. No contest.
 
Last edited:

Martin_320

Active Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2020
Messages
106
Likes
93
...the numbers don't lie. A better SINAD will at least sound the same or better.

Not neccessarily.
The numbers can lie.
Using artificial noise reduction can result in higher signal-to-noise ratio -- in measurements. But it screws the audible sound quality.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
Not neccessarily.
The numbers can lie.
Using artificial noise reduction can result in higher signal-to-noise ratio -- in measurements. But it screws the audible sound quality.
But now-a-days they know we're watching.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
Not neccessarily.
The numbers can lie.
Using artificial noise reduction can result in higher signal-to-noise ratio -- in measurements. But it screws the audible sound quality.

Surely Amir is watching for such tricks? Amir's measurements typically includes the FFT so you can see what's there, he also measures IMD, SNR, DR, linearity, FR just to name a few.. So we don't have to say device A is "better" than device B based on just SINAD in one test.

Besides, if we are comparing the ASR measurements between something like the AV7705, SR6014, 7015 and the Denon AVRs, we don't have to be concerned about such "artificial noise reduction" because we know the little difference between those devices already.
 
Last edited:

stevenswall

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
1,366
Likes
1,075
Location
Orem, UT
Was about to purchase this over an Emotiva that costs twice as much, but this review worries me... And heck, almost all other processors seem terrible too.

Not sure if the issues are audible though... For example, does it hiss, and will I notice the lack of 16 bit resolution since to even hear the softest sound a CD can make, I'd have to blow my ears when it was playing a loud sound from what I understand.

Mostly wanted this because Audessey XT32 sounds easier to use than DIRAC, and this has XLR outputs which I'm hoping work well enough that it's okay to have modern amenities like Wifi and cellphones nearby. (Noise comes through regular RCA cables, and I'd rather get rid of XLR adaptors for my active monitors than keep buying more as I move towards surround sound.)
 
Top Bottom