@amirm What about AVM70 measurements, didn't you have also that model?
Interested to see these as well. Last week Secrets of HT and HF posted their review with measurements so we have at least some objective measures out there on the AVM70.
@amirm What about AVM70 measurements, didn't you have also that model?
Interested to see these as well. Last week Secrets of HT and HF posted their review with measurements so we have at least some objective measures out there on the AVM70.
That is a good question since most everyone else has been getting onboard. My Marantz 7703 required a $200 downloadable firmware upgrade but from the 7704 on, it was included for free. And I just read about another company now including it in their more upscale units.I don't understand why Anthem leaves out Auro3D - this is a premium brand and Auro3D/Auromatic upmixing is arguably the best at this, why not charge a little more for the Auro license?
Any idea when you will be reviewing it?It is still int box....
I don't understand why Anthem leaves out Auro3D - this is a premium brand and Auro3D/Auromatic upmixing is arguably the best at this, why not charge a little more for the Auro license?
Maybe I get motivated to do it soon.Any idea when you will be reviewing it?
I've heard cash was a good motivator.Any idea when you will be reviewing it?
Very true - Auro3D's value is in its upmixing of badly recorded Atmos movies or older 5.1 mixes or mono TV mixes or just stereo - this means that it will get more use than Atmos processing of great native Atmos mixes (which are a handful at best).That is a good question since most everyone else has been getting onboard. My Marantz 7703 required a $200 downloadable firmware upgrade but from the 7704 on, it was included for free. And I just read about another company now including it in their more upscale units.
OTOH, you still won't find a Auro encoded movie anywhere in the US?
A strange kettle of fish?
I admittedly don't have it, or know a lot about it - apart of the different speaker setup it requires. So I'm kind of "neutral" here. But, upmixing is more or less a guess, it "makes" channels that don't exist in the source, or "improves" existing ones, based on what data, if it's stereo or "a badly recorded Atmos movie"? In the latter case, how does it distinguish a "badly recorded" one from a good one? Call me paranoid, but I smell marketing poetry here.
One can make alcohol from potatoes, but not potatoes from alcohol
Its due to how the Auro upmixer works. Dolby and DTS upmixers are more advanced and look for spatial cues in the music to determine what sounds to put where. Auro is much simpler in that is adds an adjustable amount of echo mainly upmixes from pure channel information and adds a lower mid-bass boost effect. For most poor mixes the spatial info just does not seem to work well with DTS/Dolby but Auro's simpler approach does work OK. Auro is not a better upmixer at all IMHO but it is a nice alternative option to have for certain content.
OK that's more comprehensive for me. I'll try it if I have the opportunity....Auro is not a better upmixer at all IMHO but it is a nice alternative option to have for certain content.
I don't believe there has been any news since the initial review; I am anxious to hear about the AVM 60 and AVM 70 which I believe is in for review.I remember Amir mentioned his correspondence with Anthem engineers regarding the measurements results, but I can't seem to find it here. I wonder what Anthem had to say about their flagship product deviation from specs?
I am eager for this review but I suspect Anthem's feelings are more akin to anxiety.I don't believe there has been any news since the initial review; I am anxious to hear about the AVM 60 and AVM 70 which I believe is in for review.