Theriverlethe
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2019
- Messages
- 493
- Likes
- 344
People often confuse that setting with the subwoofer crossover, but LFE is a discrete channel so there is no reason that I'm aware of to low-pass it.
-
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 AVM90 AV Processor Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
The accepted industry standard is to low-pass the LFE channel at 120 Hz in the mixing and/or mastering process, but it's common do at the playback as well... just for safe keeping I guess?
Theriverlethe
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2019
- Messages
- 493
- Likes
- 344
I should’ve said “no reason to low-pass lower than the default 120Hz.”
- Joined
- May 27, 2020
- Messages
- 552
- Likes
- 461
To make sure I'm understanding correctly, are the balanced outputs fake? Which is happening here:
1) They took the single ended output from the preamp section and just routed it to an XLR connector.
2) They employed circuitry which converts the single ended output to a balanced one after the fact.
And to make sure I understand what a proper implementation would look like.. The manufacturer would employ DAC's in differential mode creating a true balanced signal and volume control would be done in the digital domain prior to the DAC?
Really why no true Balanced?
It also looks like the Marantz AV 10 is not truly balanced either?
“Performance remains the same for XLR as that is derived from unbalanced output”
So why not truly Balanced is it due to cost?
Last edited:
If you are referring to the AVM 90 and the AV10, they are not wiring the DAC chips in differential mode, I don't think so. The only AVP that use such a scheme, is the Denon AVP-A1HD.
As Gene cited in his review: "Denon boasts the AVP-A1HDCI is the world’s ONLY fully balanced processor from input to output
Denon AVP-A1HDCI AV Processor Review
Review: The Denon AVP-A1HDCI AV processor is packed with the latest HD audio and HDMI connectivity and THX Ultra2 Certification. It supports 12 channels of audio and is a technological masterpiece.
That was of course years ago, but as far as I can tell, no other AVP has been made using the real differential scheme for the DACs, volume control, and opamp ICs in the audio signal path. If the expensive Storm Audios and Trinnov have done it, you bet they would have advertised it for sure.
Denon and Marantz did, at least at one time, implemented the AKM chip, the AK4458 in differential mode, and it would look like the following, and the volume control IC would have to be wired in differential mode as well. That is easier to do because D+M only did it in their 2 channel DRA-800H and the NR1200. I suspect, but don't know for sure, that their successors, the Denon DRA-900H and the Marantz Stereo 70 likely are still done in differential mode. For the AV10 or Anthem AVM 90 to have done so, their DAC IC counts would have been double that of what they have mentioned in their marketing info, so while I have not seen their schematic or block diagram, based on their marketing info, you can forget about differential schemes in the DAC>>>>VOL signal path.
How the D/A would have been wired if in differential,
versus the regular way:
Last edited:
Yes, it obviously is due to cost, but also based on the benefits, while implementing truly balanced scheme as shown in the Denon AVP, you can in theory gain 6 dB of noise reduction and may be a couple dB distortions because of the cancellation of the even harmonics, for real world use it most likely won't make any audible improvements.
Theriverlethe
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2019
- Messages
- 493
- Likes
- 344
Removing the possibility of ground hum/noise with a balanced connection would be a much bigger benefit than a likely imperceptible amount of SNR gain. This can be a very real-world benefit and is what the vast majority of "pro" audio equipment uses balanced connections.
I don't think he's talking about just "balanced" output and input. When someone says "truly" or "fully" balanced, the likely are thinking about end to end input to output differential/balanced like the one Gene's talking about in his review of the Denon AVP.
Theriverlethe
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2019
- Messages
- 493
- Likes
- 344
Which is the same as saying "balanced." Obviously it's possible to have an XLR connector without being balanced.
Not sure what your point is, but we can leave it at that...
Um why would you not wait for the Emotiva G4P? Processors with true Differential Balanced IO?
No reasons to pay $6,350.00 for a processor without true reference differential balanced topology. Emotiva's new processors will have a reference differential variant of 16 channels for $5,495.00 HDMI v2.1, web ui and dirac.
No reasons to pay $6,350.00 for a processor without true reference differential balanced topology. Emotiva's new processors will have a reference differential variant of 16 channels for $5,495.00 HDMI v2.1, web ui and dirac.
I will never buy Emotiva again the company is the most arrogant I have ever dealt with!
Ok. Just discussing form and function. They actually have a reference differential topology. I am interested in knowing more about end to end balance processors and amplifiers.
Just a cautionary note, the so called end to end differential topology, whatever it is, does not mean much unless the product has better verified (such as by measurements) performance than similar products that do not use end to end differential. If done well, end to end differential could cost as much as double the cost for the parts alone, and if not done well the results could be worse. Also, assuming everything is good, for a truly end to end setup, then one has to consider not just one device but every one in the chain, such as the source such as phono, dac, BDP, streamer, preamp, power amp etc., its some deep multi rabbit hole.
Such "topology" has the advantage that it could in theory cancel the even harmonics, but if you look at even a 19 channel AVP such as the AVM90, it already manage to limit THD+N to lower than -100 dB, and the even harmonics itself are well below -100 dB, so lowering it by less than 1 dB (likely much less) or so is not going to make any difference.
Fully/end to end differential, along with damping factor, EPDR (less so on that one) are becoming just buzz words many so called audiophile tend to throw around for whatever reasons, some just want to show off their new found "knowledge" lol..., been there, done that.
Huh Amir just said the XLR inputs stink on the AVM90. I would take a HTP1 with functioning XLR and DTS-X Pro over this any day.
First of all, I don't believe he said that, secondly, that has nothing to do with what I commented in my post your quoted.
Apparently you have never owned a newly released Emotiva product. If you had, you would likely NEVER consider them. Need to wait for about 5-8 years before they have worked the bugs out and even then its a risk
I've only heard terrible things about newer Emotiva stuff. Luckily my XPA2 amp came from the "Golden Age" of Emotiva when they were darlings of the industry!
I hear you, if I would even try Emotiva stuff, I would only try models that have been proven over time. Like Anthem, I would never pre-order their AVM gear no matter how tempting, but would jump in a couple years after it gets proven, with enough bug fixes, though I would have no concerns about their power amps, and I felt no need to wait for those to be proven over time.
