Anthem AVM60 Review (AV Processor)

[SimpleTheater]

I will probably go with the monoprice if I sell my stuff it doesn't measure too horrible. and I'm very curious about Dirac I can't stand room correction but want to give this a shot at least for bass management.

If they haven’t changed, Paradigm subs can run ARC, without dealing with the rest of a system.

 

[walt99]

I've never understood the fascination with Anthem to begin with for a pre-pro or avr....

I always prefer to support a small business compared to mega corporations, unfortunately in this case I'm beginning to feel like I didn't do enough homework/believed the 'rumors' that they built a superior sounding product. It would be easy enough for them to just send a 70 to Amir for testing but unfortunately it doesn't look like they are willing step up to the challenge.

 

[Chrispy]

I always prefer to support a small business compared to mega corporations, unfortunately in this case I'm beginning to feel like I didn't do enough homework/believed the 'rumors' that they built a superior sounding product. It would be easy enough for them to just send a 70 to Amir for testing but unfortunately it doesn't look like they are willing step up to the challenge.

Yeah I can appreciate that but it isn't much removed when you think of the manufacturing aspect for an item like this (like them making the AVM 60 in Vietnam in a contract factory). Kinda hard to avoid the big boys....then there's the music/movie industry for content.....

 

[amirm]

It would be easy enough for them to just send a 70 to Amir for testing but unfortunately it doesn't look like they are willing step up to the challenge.

This may be happening so let's not go there.

 

[Dj7675]

This may be happening so let's not go there.

This is actually the outcome I was hoping for... either sending another sample of this unit or the 70 instead. The thing is, someone eventually will and if they are confident in what they have made, it will be great to see the results.

 

[Mike-48]

Based on I feel betrayed and I vote with my $$$. This is big 'investment' for me and I don't like what I see here.

Hey, Walt, don't forget. The measurements were of a different model from yours, and of a unit that seems to have issues to boot. They don't directly apply to your AVM70.

I personally think that ARC is worth having, if it's coupled with reasonably good performance. In my 2.2 stereo system, I've gotten better results from ARC (using the STR Preamp) than I ever got from my old TacT 2.2X or from manual EQ done with a variety of gear, some cheap and some quite expensive. Not to say that ARC is perfect -- no DRC system is -- but at least to my ears in my system in my room, any harm it does is inaudible, and it does a lot of good. Those of course are entirely subjective statements.

Whatever you choose to do, I hope you're happy with the result!

 

[JSmith]

I've never understood the fascination with Anthem to begin with for a pre-pro or avr....

Their room correction system ARC is actually very good and known as one of the easiest to use out of the box to get good results. Further some of their other products have tested reasonably well on this site.

It will be interesting though to see how they respond to these recent findings.



JSmith

 

[symphara]

This may be happening so let's not go there.

Let’s hope it won’t be the golden sample

 

[Francis Vaughan]

, but the outputs aren't really balanced at all, they just added some amps to the connector board to drive them

Just for total obsessive accuracy, the outputs are balanced. What they don’t do is provide an end to end balanced DAC to balanced output. The technical merit of doing such a thing is mixed at best, so they can’t be criticised for just that. (Lots of audio religion out there claiming end to end balanced is the only true way, but the reality is more complex.) The outputs will yield improved common mode noise immunity. But that is about it. This extra noise immunity should not matter unless you have a pathological problem with your environment.
The complaint about adding a balanced line driver to the existing unbalanced implementation is that it cannot perform any better, and that performance was pretty average to start with. The implied promise is for a step up in performance. It is certainly what they charged for.
So the core complaint is that the balanced outputs are just bling. They charge an unreasonable amount for what is a minimal effort. Most users would and should be better off with a properly implemented high performing unbalanced output. Something most other AVR manufactures are also remiss in providing. You get high performance from neither output.
There is a lack of sincerity on the part of just about all the AVR manufacturers. We call Anthem out because they claim to strive to meet a higher standard, but turn out to be no better.

 

[peng]

Those of course are entirely subjective statements.

Whatever you choose to do, I hope you're happy with the result!

Absolutely, really appreciate you saying that in the end as a qualifier, I wish more people who do the same. For those (like me) who cannot tell a difference, there are at least two choices. That is 1) go with something else so you don't pay the premium that comes with Anthem ARC or Dirac Live, or 2) look at measurements from a credible, unbiased source (sadly I couldn't find any), or do your own measurements (as I have done) and evaluate it to convince yourself if there are differences that should result in "better" sound quality.

Also sadly 2) is not practical to do, its not hard to do one (Audyssey XT32 SubEQ HT in my case and Dirac 2 channel trial version), but very difficult to more than that for home users. Regardless, based on my somewhat objective (my subjective perception..) data, that include my own and those posted by others online, I am convinced claims of AARC, Dirac sounding better than Audyssey is subjective based, no evidence whatsoever to support one claim over another, but ymmv..

 

[peng]

Just for total obsessive accuracy, the outputs are balanced. What they don’t do is provide an end to end balanced DAC to balanced output.

Some AVR based two channel devices would probably did take advantage of the balance DC output option. The Yamaha A-S801, (I suspect the R-N803 as well but not sure) does it, based on the schematics I have seen, but sadly they still has that AVR LSI IC upstream for volume control so if measured on ASR, it would likely be only a few dB better in SINAD than the RX-A AVRs. For AVRs/AVPs, except those selling for $6K or higher, I can see the difficulty for the engineering teams to justify the higher costs especially as the channel count increases to >7.1.

 

[Spocko]

Careful with that assumption.

View attachment 112710
A Quick demonstration of Transformers I's initial fight. Didn't scan the whole movie, so it might not be the peak.

Rear levels aren't that much lower and I have seen other movies in which the rears actually peaked higher than the fronts. It's very mix dependent.

As long as the Atmos ceiling channel levels aren't this high, we should still be OK!

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

As long as the Atmos ceiling channel levels aren't this high, we should still be OK!

You mean because any amp could divert power from those channels to "help out"?

 

[Spocko]

Maybe it’s a question of trust? Customers who are lead to believe they get technical excellence feel betrayed even if the measurements match the spec, and the device has no audible flaws. What the tests of AVRs have shown is that these devices struggle to produce measurements that match a $9 dongle, and that doesn’t feel good.
Absent trust, any real or perceived flaw in the sound will make people doubt their purchase. Look at the storm of protests when a Topping headphone amp was suspected of frying a headphone — there were only a few reports, and it wasn’t clear the amp was to blame, but lots of people threatened to get a Schiit amp instead.

Can't be too upset about measurements that match a $9 DAC dongle when you consider that technology has already trickled down performance due to advances in this area. People buying $5,000 AVRs don't realize that the $9 DAC chip is good enough - it's the other things connected to the DAC that's the problem. Noisy circuit design? Blame the $9 DAC rather than the engineers that designed the AVR.

 

[Spocko]

I've never understood the fascination with Anthem to begin with for a pre-pro or avr....

My biggest disappointment is that Anthem does not include Auro-3D when everyone else does.

 

[Spocko]

Absolutely, really appreciate you saying that in the end as a qualifier, I wish more people who do the same. For those (like me) who cannot tell a difference, there are at least two choices. That is 1) go with something else so you don't pay the premium that comes with Anthem ARC or Dirac Live, or 2) look at measurements from a credible, unbiased source (sadly I couldn't find any), or do your own measurements (as I have done) and evaluate it to convince yourself if there are differences that should result in "better" sound quality.

Also sadly 2) is not practical to do, its not hard to do one (Audyssey XT32 SubEQ HT in my case and Dirac 2 channel trial version), but very difficult to more than that for home users. Regardless, based on my somewhat objective (my subjective perception..) data, that include my own and those posted by others online, I am convinced claims of AARC, Dirac sounding better than Audyssey is subjective based, no evidence whatsoever to support one claim over another, but ymmv..

ARC, Audyssey and Dirac can all be tuned to sound identical if you know the exact room curve you prefer. It's the trouble free automation (correcting for all the issues of your room) to get to that point which separates them. But a bad room that cannot be corrected by ARC, will be similarly impossible to correct by any other software.

 

[SimpleTheater]

ARC, Audyssey and Dirac can all be tuned to sound identical if you know the exact room curve you prefer. It's the trouble free automation (correcting for all the issues of your room) to get to that point which separates them. But a bad room that cannot be corrected by ARC, will be similarly impossible to correct by any other software.

I'm no fanboy, but thank God I don't use any of those three products you listed. I use YPAO which can correct for anything, better than any other product by far! And I should know, my ears are proof.

 

[Mike-48]

I am convinced claims of ARC, Dirac sounding better than Audyssey is subjective based, no evidence whatsoever to support one claim over another, but ymmv..

I think this is an area where we don't know just what to measure, so subjective evidence is king. (Outside of measuring obvious errors, of course.) It is easy to "correct" FR digitally, but what to correct is the question, and that touches heavily on psychoacoustics. What kind of windowing should be used? What kind of spatial averaging? How does one avoid trying to correct the uncorrectable (room nulls or SBIR), while correcting broader dips that can and should be boosted? What is it that causes some DRC systems to sound "hard," while newer ones exhibit less or none of that?

Of course, measurable things, like resolution with DRC on vs. off, also are important, but I'm not convinced the answer lies mainly there when trying to evaluate DRC.

 

[Newman]

... but sadly they still has that AVR LSI IC upstream for volume control so if measured on ASR, it would likely be only a few dB better in SINAD ....

Perhaps @amirm could measure that sort of IC volume control in isolation. If an integral aspect of AVRs is what limits their SINAD, then this mindset of telling the makers off for not measuring better is not warranted. But if it measures fine, then we know it is not the IC to blame.

 

[Jim - where is The Abyss]

I'm no fanboy, but thank God I don't use any of those three products you listed. I use YPAO which can correct for anything, better than any other product by far! And I should know, my ears are proof.

And you hold on to those ears, they are really, really rare.