Alternative SINAD Chart for AVRs and Processors Showing Best Performance Voltage

[peng]

I think the 1.4-1.6 does make sense to test based on common amps out there that people tend to use.
However, it doesn’t address AVR SINAD performance when using just the internal amps which I think should be a consideration. Seeing a low SINAD on an AVR because it is tested at a higher voltage that its internal amps can do seem to portray them inaccurately. For example (sorry to keep bringing it up) the Denon’s can go to -0 or -0.5 on the master volume which gets us reference level. For the 95% (wild guess) of users that don’t need to use external amps, this seems to be one of the most important things to show in a chart. The biggest example is people looking at the main AVR/Processor chart and assuming they perform poorly as a stand alone unit When in fact they may not. This same thing could happen at another level that is too high for the AVR’s internal amps.
Just a thought

I understand your point but if I only use the internal amps I should focus on the power amp output's SINAD. For example, I will know the 3500 is good because it's power amp SINAD is as good as many separate power amps, regardless of the low preout SINAD. By listing/charting SINAD for 1.5/2.0 V that's double the data, have to draw a line somewhere, by picking the most useful numbers imo.

 

[Dj7675]

I understand your point but if I only use the internal amps I should focus on the power amp output's SINAD. For example, I will know the 3500 is good because it's power amp SINAD is as good as many separate power amps, regardless of the low preout SINAD. By listing/charting SINAD for 1.5/2.0 V that's double the data, have to draw a line somewhere, by picking the most useful numbers imo.

Hadn’t thought of it like that before. Makes sense. I certainly understand too shooting for something 1.4-1.6 as well as that is a typical use when connecting a common amp. Hard to know what is the best way to go to provide the most value to people viewing it.

 

[Vasr]

Why? I use it as a 2.0 system for music all the time.

Sure, it is not the number of channels but most people who do the above for music with an AVR, use it as an integrated amp, or a pre-amp to an external amp and most likely with DSP processing like Room Eq, or bass management, etc. Units designed to to be a DAC don't have any of those features so it is apples and oranges to compare them (not that they don't have common things between them).

But more important people who are looking for a DAC aren't going to look at AVRs as alternates or vice versa. So putting them on the same chart for ranking does not make much sense. This is the kind of equivalence that creates the meaningless "worse than a dongle" comparisons.

It is far more useful if there were separate ranking charts for units with similar purpose (a unit may be used for more than one purpose).

 

[Dj7675]

Sure, it is not the number of channels but most people who do the above for music with an AVR, use it as an integrated amp, or a pre-amp to an external amp and most likely with DSP processing like Room Eq, or bass management, etc. Units designed to to be a DAC don't have any of those features so it is apples and oranges to compare them (not that they don't have common things between them).

But more important people who are looking for a DAC aren't going to look at AVRs as alternates or vice versa. So putting them on the same chart for ranking does not make much sense. This is the kind of equivalence that creates the meaningless "worse than a dongle" comparisons.

It is far more useful if there were separate ranking charts for units with similar purpose (a unit may be used for more than one purpose).

There is a separate chart for AVRs/Processrs already. I think this is the latest one. It seems that AVR/Processor reviews in the beginning were compared more directly with stand alone DACs. It seems as the number samples have grown it became apparent that they needed compared against each other because they do so much more than stand alone DACs. Maybe I am wrong but that is what it seems like which is a good thing. After all a stand alone DAC with great specs doesn’t do me any good in my theater without the ability to do HDMI/DTS/Dolby Atmos etc. I may be in the minority, but I am amazed that a near 100 SINAD receiver exists at $1200 (x3600( considering all the processing and amps in one box.

 

[Vasr]

There is a separate chart for AVRs/Processrs already. I think this is the latest one. It seems that AVR/Processor reviews in the beginning were compared more directly with stand alone DACs. It seems as the number samples have grown it became apparent that they needed compared against each other because they do so much more than stand alone DACs. Maybe I am wrong but that is what it seems like which is a good thing. After all a stand alone DAC with great specs doesn’t do me any good in my theater without the ability to do HDMI/DTS/Dolby Atmos etc. I may be in the minority, but I am amazed that a near 100 SINAD receiver exists at $1200 (x3600( considering all the processing and amps in one box.

I agree with all of this. I mentioned the AVR chart already available as one of the categories.

I was just extending the logic further to break up the "DACs in everything" humongous chart (this is probably like this for legacy reasons from how the site came about) and keep only DACs used as DACs there not AVRs and every other gizmo with a DAC in it. Similarly, make separate charts for the other categories I mentioned.

The rationale is that if I read a review of an integrated amp, I would like to see how it compares with other integrated amps as the main chart. not how its DAC compares with everything from Dongles to AVRs (the review would obviously provide its DAC measurement). And so on...

The good side-effect is that it would prevent people evaluating the DUT comparing it to something that is not serving the same purpose. And worse, the DAC performance getting a disproportionate "vote" for judging something like an AVR.

 

[peng]

Hadn’t thought of it like that before. Makes sense. I certainly understand too shooting for something 1.4-1.6 as well as that is a typical use when connecting a common amp. Hard to know what is the best way to go to provide the most value to people viewing it.

Here's one I quickly done for my own use, it can be charted easily but table works well for me.

Note: The following table may contain errors. For official figures please refer to ASR's reviews.

If this is not appropriate, I am counting on the moderator to delete this post for me.

 

[Dj7675]

Here's one I quickly done for my own use, it can be charted easily but table works well for me.

Note: The following table may contain errors. For official figures please refer to ASR's reviews.

If this is not appropriate, I am counting on the moderator to delete this post for me.

View attachment 74324

Great to have this table. I think when we get this on a SINAD chart it will help paint a more complete picture and show better performance under other conditions-some of which are more typical for many users. These AVR and Processor reviews seem to garner a lot of interest and traffic from a wide range of viewers. Making that snapshot in a chart as complete as possible I think is important so people get the most complete picture.
@peng can you increase the picture size a bit?

 

[peng]

Great to have this table. I think when we get this on a SINAD chart it will help paint a more complete picture and show better performance under other conditions-some of which are more typical for many users. These AVR and Processor reviews seem to garner a lot of interest and traffic from a wide range of viewers. Making that snapshot in a chart as complete as possible I think is important so people get the most complete picture.

One thing I hope Amir will continue to provide is the following chart. So far we have seen the X3600H and X4700H both did very well in the "first watt" range. This is important for people like me who always stay clear of ref level, vol at -15 is very loud for me. So performance of the pre out in the range 0 to 1.0 V maximum is more important to me than the 1.0 V-2.0V range. No wonder the 3500 sound as good as my separate pair 840E and Halo A21.

You can also see that the high end AVR850 did not do as well in that range.

 

[Dj7675]

One thing I hope Amir will continue to provide is the following chart. So far we have seen the X3600H and X4700H both did very well in the "first watt" range. This is important for people like me who always stay clear of ref level, vol at -15 is very loud for me. So performance of the pre out in the range 0 to 1.0 V maximum is more important to me than the 1.0 V-2.0V range. No wonder the 3500 sound as good as my separate pair 840E and Halo A21.

You can also see that the high end AVR850 did not do as well in that range.

View attachment 74327

View attachment 74329

I agree. It really does tell it all in a snapshot. 1.1V @ 101 on the 4700.

 

[LeeDeeCaa]

Good day Amirm.
Maybe You can include (in Yours reviews) the SINAD measurements (PRE OUT) for 2V (RCA), 4V (Balanced) output signals and for NOMINAL (reference) output signals (1,2V & 2,4V - DENON; 1,2V & 2,4V - MARANTZ; etc.)?
Surely it is important for ordinary users to know the performance of their systems under normal conditions (recommended by the manufacturer).
For example, I use a bundle of Denon AVC-X6500H (pre out) + Yamaha A-S1000, not exceeding the volume values of 60-70 dB, and would like to know the performance at these levels (Vol <80dB). But when I see the poor performance of the Denon AVC-X6700H (2V pre out), I can't be sure - is my kit is good enough.
Here are your measurements to illustrate the difference between SINAD and TDH + N for the Denon AVR-X3500H. Difference is "huge" SINAD 73dB (2V) vs 95dB (1V).

 

[amirm]

Maybe You can include (in Yours reviews) the SINAD measurements (PRE OUT) for 2V (RCA), 4V (Balanced) output signals and for NOMINAL (reference) output signals (1,2V & 2,4V - DENON; 1,2V & 2,4V - MARANTZ; etc.)?

I started going that route but people got unhappy that it was not level playing field. So I discarded it.

The graphs that I post has that information so if someone wants to make a table out of them, they can.

 

[LeeDeeCaa]

Ok.
Understand.
Maybe You can include (SINAD and THD+N) in updated review of AVC-X6700H.
If it's not hard for you.
Thank You.
Dmitry.

 

[amirm]

Maybe You can include (SINAD and THD+N) in updated review of AVC-X6700H.

I will be measuring SINAD of course.

 

[LeeDeeCaa]

Excuse me.
Apparently I did not formulate my request quite correctly.
I meant measuring the DAC performance not only at 2V (output), but at 1.2V on the Preout.
Thank You.

 

[LeeDeeCaa]

It's not obligatory.
But if you do this, then it will be great.
Everything is at your discretion.

 

[superczar]

It's not obligatory.
But if you do this, then it will be great.
Everything is at your discretion.

+1 to that.
A lot of your readers are still getting familiarised with how to read and interpret the data correctly.
I had in fact been wondering if I should explore alternate options for stereo streaming (external amp + x3500h) after seeing the rather poor pre-out readings at 2V
It's only later that I realized that the SINAD improves to 95db (which is reasonably above my desired threshold) below 1.2V which is a much more realistic use case for me as well as probably other users

 

[Grandzoltar]

To use the best measuring amps on here i.e. Purifi, Hypex you need at least 2v or better. The graphs shown where peak performance voltage is and where voltage clipping is tells me everything. Saying 1.4 for avrs is unrealistic like Amir said you would have to get the input sensitivity for 50 amps and get the mean.

 

[superczar]

The graphs

To use the best measuring amps on here i.e. Purifi, Hypex you need at least 2v or better. The graphs shown where peak performance voltage is and where voltage clipping is tells me everything. Saying 1.4 for avrs is unrealistic like Amir said you would have to get the input sensitivity for 50 amps and get the mean.

Yeah, i just realized the newer reviews like x3700 and x4700 do have it.
Naturally not possible to have that for the reviews already done I suppose.

 

[peng]

I will be measuring SINAD of course.

When you do the next AVR, would you try measuring SINAD with the preouts driving an external power amp? I seem to recall you tried that once with your Purifi and for some reason it didn't work out. May be you will have better luck using an external amp that has unbalanced inputs..

 

[BsdKurt]

When you do the next AVR, would you try measuring SINAD with the preouts driving an external power amp? I seem to recall you tried that once with your Purifi and for some reason it didn't work out. May be you will have better luck using an external amp that has unbalanced inputs..

Indeed this is a pressing question. @amirm fixed the ground loop issue in the updated 6700 review. Perhaps this will also help with using the Purify with the preouts. I’d love to know if the preouts can drive a high SINAD amp like the Purify or the Benchmark AHB2.