• 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

Rate This AV Processor:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 7 3.6%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 15 7.6%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 91 46.2%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 84 42.6%

  • Total voters
    197

johncapra

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2024
Messages
5
Likes
0
The AVM won't be a bottleneck for music listening because the measurements indicate the device is transparent in terms of distortions, so basically what goes = what goes out in terms of waveform.

On paper, it will be a bottleneck if you pair it with an ext. DAC (just an example) that has better distortions specifications.

Your Eversolo's dac chip has about the same specs as the AVM90's, but implementation ia likely a little better, and it probbably has a better preamp section too, so the AVM90 may become a bottleneck. Again, that would be on paper only, in a level matched listening, I would bet 10:1, it would't sound different either way.

Since you have the A8 already, I would suggest you use it with the 90's analog input, or directly with a power amp such as the AHB2, or one that has comparable specs.
Thanks Peng, really appreciate the response. I have considered connecting the Eversolo directly to my amp (Parasound A21+) but comparing that against the AVM90 as a preamp would be difficult, and brings me back round to the idea of a preamp that is at least as good as the preamp section of avm90, so I could maximize the best of the AVM90 and separate DAC.

When you say "On paper, it will be a bottleneck if you pair it with an ext. DAC (just an example) that has better distortions specifications." Do you mean the DAC specs or the analog specs (or a combination of the two)? Apologies if this should be obvious.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,733
Likes
5,308
Thanks Peng, really appreciate the response. I have considered connecting the Eversolo directly to my amp (Parasound A21+) but comparing that against the AVM90 as a preamp would be difficult, and brings me back round to the idea of a preamp that is at least as good as the preamp section of avm90, so I could maximize the best of the AVM90 and separate DAC.

When you say "On paper, it will be a bottleneck if you pair it with an ext. DAC (just an example) that has better distortions specifications." Do you mean the DAC specs or the analog specs (or a combination of the two)? Apologies if this should be obvious.
I mean the A8's output specs vs the 90's. For example, the A8's spec for SINAD is 120 dB, that's more than 10 dB better than the AVM90's. I doubt anyone can tell the difference between 120 dB and say, 102 dB SINAD.
 

rlal

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2020
Messages
22
Likes
3
Location
United States
I have one question regarding the Xlr or balanced output of processors.

It was mentioned Anthem AVM90 XLR output was derived from unbalanced output. I was looking at the Arcam processor spec.
Arcam spec says "16 transformer less balanced XLR output channels"
Does this means that XLR output is derived from balanced output? Can some one please let me know.

Thanks.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,733
Likes
5,308
I have one question regarding the Xlr or balanced output of processors.

It was mentioned Anthem AVM90 XLR output was derived from unbalanced output. I was looking at the Arcam processor spec.
Arcam spec says "16 transformer less balanced XLR output channels"
Does this means that XLR output is derived from balanced output? Can some one please let me know.

Thanks.
No it does not mean that. Which Arcam avp, can you get more detailed info?
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,733
Likes
5,308
Okay. I was under the impression that XLR in high end processors are all balanced. I was mentioning about Arcam AV41 processor.
The outputs are balanced. Some people want their avps to be input to output end to end balanced. The only one that is known to be differential/balanced from input to output is the Denon AVP-A1HD, launched many years ago. Such schemes are often referred to as fully balanced. Fully balanced end to end doesn't mean better sound quality, but some people just want it regardless.
 

welwynnick

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 26, 2023
Messages
244
Likes
199
The outputs are balanced. Some people want their avps to be input to output end to end balanced. The only one that is known to be differential/balanced from input to output is the Denon AVP-A1HD, launched many years ago. Such schemes are often referred to as fully balanced. Fully balanced end to end doesn't mean better sound quality, but some people just want it regardless.
We were discussing this earlier.
Curiosity got the better of me, and I just bought a AVP-A1HD.
I haven't fired it up yet - I pulled it apart as soon as I got it home, but looking forward to hearing it.
I think there ARE benefits to fully balanced equipment. Lots of Amir's tests show less noise, less distortion and especially less power supply breakthrough, even with digital inputs. I know you think it's a waste, but I think it shows the benefit of balanced comes from rejection of internal interference as well as external interference to the cables.
Nick
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,733
Likes
5,308
We were discussing this earlier.
Curiosity got the better of me, and I just bought a AVP-A1HD.
I haven't fired it up yet - I pulled it apart as soon as I got it home, but looking forward to hearing it.
I think there ARE benefits to fully balanced equipment. Lots of Amir's tests show less noise, less distortion and especially less power supply breakthrough, even with digital inputs. I know you think it's a waste, but I think it shows the benefit of balanced comes from rejection of internal interference as well as external interference to the cables.
Nick

Congrats! I assume you got a good price on it, and if you change your mind later, send it to me. For <$500 shipped I'll be happy to take that 70 lb/80-85 lbs boxed thing away from you.:p

You believe what you believe, I believe maths and science don't lie, best theoretical benefit for such costly implementation is 6 dB reduction in noise from input to output. The typical balanced schemes do not do differential balanced configuration still can achieve very close to that, and the Gene measured the AVP-A1HD, and it did not have better SNR than the AV10, AVM90. Even if it does, say pick the best FFT achievable under a specific condition, such as at 1V, 1 kHz test:

You can see that the AVM 90, at 2 V, still beat the Denon by roughly 6 dB, though both are at the level believed to be below the threshold of audibility, and worth emphasizing that the Denon's SINAD was pulled down by a single 3rd harmonic and such low order harmonic probably have threshold as high as 60 dB or even higher, but we are not talking about audibility but strictly about the fully balanced Denon's measured SINAD against the output balanced Anthem or Marantz flagship. It probably was still the best measured AVR/AVP at the time though, just time time changed lots of things...

I was surprised that the apparently cost no object Denon had the non flagship TI DAC IC, whereas the AVR-5805 did use the TI flagship DAC IC, had the Denon AVP used the same TI chips as its AVR cousin, it would likely have measured as good or better than the AVM90 and AV10, but of course we'll never know, though in theory that would likely be the case.

From Gene's measurements:

image



Gene like that scheme for the added benefit of reduced or eliminated the even order harmonics, but keep in mind to achieve that you need the two legs to be identical and that's a tall order because DAC, volume control, opamps (discreted or IC), even caps and resistors have tolerances so that one is a hit and miss thing, though there will be some theoretical reduction, you still have to go with measurements.

Bottom line, regardless of what all the talks above, AVPs, that would represent the vast majority, that don't implement fully differential/balanced signal path, do not show better SINAD than those (may be a couple more aside from the Denon) that are "fully balanced" on the test bench.

To be clear, I am in full agreement with you in terms of theory, just not in real world use, where I believe other factors could be far more important and impactful on the final bench test results, let alone in terms of "audibly better/worse".

By the way, I read a lot about that Denon, there were multiple report of failures of some sort at the roughly 8 years mark. That could have been due to the heat generated by the large number of parts used and relatively high bias current, lack of eco kind of gadgets so if you are going to keep it, I would suggest you use an external fan, even if the unit is well ventilated.
 

rlal

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2020
Messages
22
Likes
3
Location
United States
The outputs are balanced. Some people want their avps to be input to output end to end balanced. The only one that is known to be differential/balanced from input to output is the Denon AVP-A1HD, launched many years ago. Such schemes are often referred to as fully balanced. Fully balanced end to end doesn't mean better sound quality, but some people just want it regardless.

Basically fully balanced output from end to end doesn't mean the sound quality. This make things difficult and we need to look at the measurements.
Okay, thanks for the info.

I was thinking like what welwynnick has posted. End to end balanced means it is better for noise rejection.
 

rlal

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2020
Messages
22
Likes
3
Location
United States
Congrats! I assume you got a good price on it, and if you change your mind later, send it to me. For <$500 shipped I'll be happy to take that 70 lb/80-85 lbs boxed thing away from you.:p

You believe what you believe, I believe maths and science don't lie, best theoretical benefit for such costly implementation is 6 dB reduction in noise from input to output. The typical balanced schemes do not do differential balanced configuration still can achieve very close to that, and the Gene measured the AVP-A1HD, and it did not have better SNR than the AV10, AVM90. Even if it does, say pick the best FFT achievable under a specific condition, such as at 1V, 1 kHz test:

You can see that the AVM 90, at 2 V, still beat the Denon by roughly 6 dB, though both are at the level believed to be below the threshold of audibility, and worth emphasizing that the Denon's SINAD was pulled down by a single 3rd harmonic and such low order harmonic probably have threshold as high as 60 dB or even higher, but we are not talking about audibility but strictly about the fully balanced Denon's measured SINAD against the output balanced Anthem or Marantz flagship. It probably was still the best measured AVR/AVP at the time though, just time time changed lots of things...

I was surprised that the apparently cost no object Denon had the non flagship TI DAC IC, whereas the AVR-5805 did use the TI flagship DAC IC, had the Denon AVP used the same TI chips as its AVR cousin, it would likely have measured as good or better than the AVM90 and AV10, but of course we'll never know, though in theory that would likely be the case.

From Gene's measurements:

image



Gene like that scheme for the added benefit of reduced or eliminated the even order harmonics, but keep in mind to achieve that you need the two legs to be identical and that's a tall order because DAC, volume control, opamps (discreted or IC), even caps and resistors have tolerances so that one is a hit and miss thing, though there will be some theoretical reduction, you still have to go with measurements.

Bottom line, regardless of what all the talks above, AVPs, that would represent the vast majority, that don't implement fully differential/balanced signal path, do not show better SINAD than those (may be a couple more aside from the Denon) that are "fully balanced" on the test bench.

To be clear, I am in full agreement with you in terms of theory, just not in real world use, where I believe other factors could be far more important and impactful on the final bench test results, let alone in terms of "audibly better/worse".

By the way, I read a lot about that Denon, there were multiple report of failures of some sort at the roughly 8 years mark. That could have been due to the heat generated by the large number of parts used and relatively high bias current, lack of eco kind of gadgets so if you are going to keep it, I would suggest you use an external fan, even if the unit is well ventilated.
Thanks Peng for these details. Appreciate your effort in giving lot of details.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,733
Likes
5,308
Basically fully balanced output from end to end doesn't mean the sound quality. This make things difficult and we need to look at the measurements.
Okay, thanks for the info.

I was thinking like what welwynnick has posted. End to end balanced means it is better for noise rejection.
You are welcome, more details, in case you are interested in:

To be clear, it is 6 dB better for noise rejection in theory. The non fully balanced schemes are also balanced at least at the output stage so it is also possible to yield close to 6 dB noise rejection, depending on how well they implement the stages that are not balanced. The output stage is important because it then allows you to use balanced interconnects with power amps that have balanced input, so that the noise induced in the long interconnects (say >3 meters) could be much reduced if not eliminated. Again, there are noise within the preamps that could be eliminated by balanced stages but for well designed preamps, the majority of noise ended up in the power amp would be from the long interconnects between the preamp and power amp. That's why most users especially in the pro side, that typically have to use long interconnects, balanced output is a must whereas the so called truly or fully balanced implementation is not their priority, as long as again, they get their balanced output and that the final stage is in fact balanced.

The reduction or elimination of second harmonic is theoretically a big advantage on paper, but in practice, a) many people don't mind a dose of 2nd and 4th harmonics, may even prefer to have some lol... b) even without the ability to cancel out the even harmonics, well designed preamp processors already have very low 2nd, and 4th, and negligible from 8th harmonic and up anyway, so it they are already so low, cancel or not won't make audible differences.

Take a look of an mid range AVR, yes, just and AVR that has 9 channels of power amps jammed in a small box:
See how low the 4th and 6th harmonics were, like -125 to -130 dB, who can hear those?


index.php
 

rlal

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2020
Messages
22
Likes
3
Location
United States
Peng,

Thanks for more details which gave me more insight.
Yeah in pro world they use balanced connection as much as possible.
 
Top Bottom