AVR for music suggestions

[NicC]

For what it's worth Schotky, I have a Marantz SR5011 from 2016. It's hooked up to a Definitive Technologies sub-woofer, Emotiva XPA5 amp, and (new) Ascend ELX speakers. The sound is exceptional. Just pure, detailed, clear goodness...with oomph to spare. I hope you sort your system out.

 

[mk05]

To some of you, technically this might seem silly or ridiculous or whatever, it doesn't matter...

I still have a Marantz SR4001 driving an equally ancient pre-Klipsch Energy Connoisseur C-system. Depending on my mood, I prefer it to my SMSL>NC400>KEF. Do what makes you happy, at least that way one person will be happy.

 

[Vacceo]

Of course it can be measured. But if it can't be heard why would the neighbors hate me... Plus, I don't think my subwoofer is capable of producing that low frequencies at that intensity, that would probably require an 18" driver sub or something like that

Infrasonics are really good at rattling walls.

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

Everything you can hear can be measured.

In theory, it can but in practice it's really not clear cut like that for the average user, I'm afraid.

First of all you need the technology that can measure the characteristics you want at the precision you need.
Then you need the knowledge how to use said technology correctly (lots of room for error on that one, even seasoned veterans can trip up).

Third, you need the knowledge and experience in order to correctly interpret the resulting data, including the ability to recognize errors made during measurements. This is bloody hard, off the top of my head I'd have 0 clue what to look for in order to evaluate e.g.: perceived "spaciousness" or "soundstage".

I'd wager a guess that the latter is way beyond the ability of your average home audio listener.

Plopping down a umik, measuring one position with REW or running a simple 1KHz sine signal into an electronic component and thinking you now have the end-all, be-all of measurements is ... probably not a good idea. :'D

 

[OCA]

Everything you can hear can be measured.

We have almost no idea yet how brain internally works and interprets what we hear which is what really counts. We have some idea how ear canal shape effects what goes inside our brains. So, what goes into our ears is quite irrelevant. We can measure "good sound" rhetoric is often just an excuse for people who owns awful sounding set ups that measured well in the remaining metrics.

 

[schotky]

For what it's worth Schotky, I have a Marantz SR5011 from 2016. It's hooked up to a Definitive Technologies sub-woofer, Emotiva XPA5 amp, and (new) Ascend ELX speakers. The sound is exceptional. Just pure, detailed, clear goodness...with oomph to spare. I hope you sort your system out.

That sounds like a very good setup. I might be tempted to try an external DAC there just for the sakes haha

Thanks BTW. Is the SR5011 also that limited with controls?

 

[schotky]

Infrasonics are really good at rattling walls.

For that to happen at those frequencies I think you need a beast of a sub. I also have a 15" bass amp cabinet on which I play my bass guitar and it does literally shake windows but around 60-70hz, not really below 20, it moves down to even 2-3Hz like crazy and looks like slow motion, but it doesn't have the power and air moving surface to shake anything at that low frequency and it's 400W

 

[schotky]

In theory, it can but in practice it's really not clear cut like that for the average user, I'm afraid.

First of all you need the technology that can measure the characteristics you want at the precision you need.
Then you need the knowledge how to use said technology correctly (lots of room for error on that one, even seasoned veterans can trip up).

Third, you need the knowledge and experience in order to correctly interpret the resulting data, including the ability to recognize errors made during measurements. This is bloody hard, off the top of my head I'd have 0 clue what to look for in order to evaluate e.g.: perceived "spaciousness" or "soundstage".

I'd wager a guess that the latter is way beyond the ability of your average home audio listener.

Plopping down a umik, measuring one position with REW or running a simple 1KHz sine signal into an electronic component and thinking you now have the end-all, be-all of measurements is ... probably not a good idea. :'D

I was actually thinking the same, frequencies are straightforward, but what to look at the measurement for perceived sounstage, spaciousness and "layers" and stuff like that when listening, you can't even describe this actually to anyone and it isn't visual like frequency is, it has to be heard to know how it sounds

 

[schotky]

We have almost no idea yet how brain internally works and interprets what we hear which is what really counts. We have some idea how ear canal shape effects what goes inside our brains. So, what goes into our ears is quite irrelevant. We can measure "good sound" rhetoric is often just an excuse for people who owns awful sounding set ups that measured well in the remaining metrics.

Yup this, I've seen and heard equipment like this before. It measured great, but sounded like the smartest Kardashian

 

[EWL5]

@schotky, based on recent postings (and your recent acquisition of the Marantz), it appears you may prefer a "warmer sound" and may have found the Pioneer too "harsh". You can easily get that warm sound by purchasing any modern AVR w/decent room correction and roll off the highs (say beyond 14-15 kHz) to achieve this! Your external DAC may already be doing this and that's probably why you prefer that sound (not the DAC SINAD rating!).

I have the Denon 3800 and purchased the Dirac Live FB license. You may enjoy this combo as well if you auditioned it in your home (or @OCA's latest A1 Evo Acoustica if you want to stick w/Audyssey)!

 

[Svend P]

Yup this, I've seen and heard equipment like this before. It measured great, but sounded like the smartest Kardashian

Do you have any examples of something that measures good and sounds bad?

 

[Svend P]

In theory, it can but in practice it's really not clear cut like that for the average user, I'm afraid.

First of all you need the technology that can measure the characteristics you want at the precision you need.
Then you need the knowledge how to use said technology correctly (lots of room for error on that one, even seasoned veterans can trip up).

Third, you need the knowledge and experience in order to correctly interpret the resulting data, including the ability to recognize errors made during measurements. This is bloody hard, off the top of my head I'd have 0 clue what to look for in order to evaluate e.g.: perceived "spaciousness" or "soundstage".

I'd wager a guess that the latter is way beyond the ability of your average home audio listener.

Plopping down a umik, measuring one position with REW or running a simple 1KHz sine signal into an electronic component and thinking you now have the end-all, be-all of measurements is ... probably not a good idea. :'D

We have almost no idea yet how brain internally works and interprets what we hear which is what really counts. We have some idea how ear canal shape effects what goes inside our brains. So, what goes into our ears is quite irrelevant. We can measure "good sound" rhetoric is often just an excuse for people who owns awful sounding set ups that measured well in the remaining metrics.

I have no idea of what your points are. The OP said there was a difference in sound between two DACs that were supposed to sound identical, and my response was that everything you can hear can be measured.

I feel your objections might be better suited for this thread:

"Things that cannot be measured"

Something the subjectivist crowd often brings up. "There are things we cannot measure but the human ear/brain can hear it." We retort, an analyzer can hear much better than any human can. Which is the truth. But thinking about the question I did being to wonder... Could it be possible for there...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[OCA]

I didn't object anything and I agree:

I have no idea

 

[Juhazi]

I use Yamaha Stereo and AVR receivers since 1970s. Had two Denon AVRs but didn't like the UI. Several other brand stereo amps too, including B&O and Hypex modules. At summer cottage I have solar system with cheap 12V car "radios" connected to good home audio speakers.

I believe that any this millenium AVR is good enough with it's DAC. Smallest have just too small amps.

Most common cause of disappointment is that dsp settings are wrong. All kinds of unnecessary eq, effect and compression options are "ON" as defaut

 

[Oddball]

Ok I managed to get a Marantz SR5008 for $200 so I can at least compare and do some testing. To some of you, technically this might seem silly or ridiculous or whatever, it doesn't matter, I'm writing what I hear, so there's that.

Did some testing and comparing, and in short, the Marantz does sound better than the Pioneer, but is worse in almost any other regard. Biggest improvement is in the treble, it's cleaner and smoother, and the bass section is somewhat different too, maybe a little tighter. I did include the external DAC in testing on the Marantz too.

Again, I'm saying what I hear, whether that might be technically ridiculous or not I don't care... The Marantz sounds better than the Pioneer, but it isn't a match to the external DAC. It sits somewhere in between in audio quality that is audible to me. This is all settings flat or default and pure direct on all tests, and then even with some features or options engaged.

But, setting up and adjusting the Marantz... Boy is it terrible... Things as simple as adjusting subwoofer volume, you have to turn off music, go back into the deep settings in the GUI on the TV and adjust the level visually only on the screen... The worst way the adjust any audio. Most settings are like this.

Audyssey on this model. It's bad. It's worse than the Pioneer's MCACC which isn't really known to be a great room correction software, plus you can't tweak anything. I know it's old, the new XT32 is supposed to be better I really hope it's much better than this, but the Pioneer is already two years older than this Marantz. When I ran the room correction the sound got messed up, got the mids so scooped and the rear surround speakers so loud they overwhelmed the fronts by so much it actually made me laugh . It just sounds way better with it off. Another stupid thing about it is, you can't access some settings unless you run Audyssey... Why, just why. The Pioneer doesn't have any of these limitations, while the Marantz is full of it.

It took me about 2h to get everything set up almost the way I like it (almost cause of its many limitations and lack of options), and looking at the inbuilt small display, I have no idea what the current audio mode is selected. It took me about half an hour on the Pioneer and have clear visibility of what mode I'm in. On the remote you can't control any useful functions related to audio unlike the Pioneer without getting into the GUI. You can control literally everything on the Pioneer (except the Graphic EQ) without going into the GUI and while audio is playing so you can hear the adjustments real time. This is just the tip of the iceberg of how limited and non intuitive the Marantz is compared to the Pioneer. Some audio functions are even only available on the front panel buttons... I also don't know why, I couldn't find those to be adjusted on the remote or the GUI. They may be hidden somewhere where I might have missed, but if they are that hard to find, again... Why??

So, except for the sound which is audibly better than the Pioneer, the Marantz is a disappointment in almost every other regard for my liking. This model at least, I really hope newer models are better than this. Seems like this Marantz at least, isn't meant for people who'd like to have more control over their sound and setup, in a convenient way.

I'll use it for a few more days to see if I can fine tune it further, but it already lacks A LOT of options and convenient features that the Pioneer has. And I'm only referring to the sound options and features. So far for me, the Pioneer is much enjoyable to use with an external DAC, than the Marantz on its own.

Not really sure why so much negative energy. Seems like you got your $200 worth and reviewing vintage models.

Yes, newer Marantz models are better and can do more for you, but not for $200. I can definitively recommend Marantz C30, AV-20 or AV-10. They are amazing but also there is a price attached to them. Not much different will be Denon 3800H which one can have for $1K or less.

 

[Oddball]

We have almost no idea yet how brain internally works and interprets what we hear which is what really counts. We have some idea how ear canal shape effects what goes inside our brains. So, what goes into our ears is quite irrelevant. We can measure "good sound" rhetoric is often just an excuse for people who owns awful sounding set ups that measured well in the remaining metrics.

Yeah there is a problem with different ear shapes externally and internally as well as ear hygiene , but I would not dismiss measurements so easily. Good sound is what produces at least decent graphs, and then you still have to like hearing it. The real question is what is a decent graph and that is what people will not really agree upon. How much tolerance and in what range for broader dips? How narrow can a hole or a peak be to be good to ignored? Put 10 members in the room and pray they come out undamaged .

After that comes the home curve, which is very different for different people and systems as we know. As they say, when the "Hell Freezes Over" and you can leave Hotel California at will, we will find a custom curve to agree upon.

But pls keep on the good work and pls PM me when have LFE+Main and LFE distribution ready.

 

[techsamurai]

I was looking to upgrade my AVR with music being the main aim. I'm not really concerned L how it will sound for movies, but very much so for music.

I'll regale you with my story and also state that music = movies. I would pick a home theater that prioritizes music and dialogue over bass every day.

Movies are 80% music - all good movies score +1 on a musical system and drop up to 5 points in a bad theater that plays explosions like a whisper. My commercial movie theater close to me is one of the few real IMAX theaters and when it was renovated, they actually kept the THX speakers as I guess there was no upgrade. I've heard that system pierce ears with a whimper with people leaving the theater and crying outside. But it's not musical. Zero connection to any song.

On the other hand, my system was musical even without a sub. I'm not Amir but I knew the bass was good enough and sure enough measurements 15 years later showed extension into the 20s. Movies were a jaw dropping experience because when the music, it was just an experience. Music made you want to dance even though I would never do that normally.

About 2 years ago, I decided to upgrade mostly for HDMI 2.1 and new Audyssey or Dirac Live. I thought about keep my old AVR as an amp and play music through it, if I needed to or getting an external amp assuming one could fit in the cabinet.

I decided to upgrade and I went from an Onkyo RZ50 with Dirac Live, to a Marantz Cinema 70 powered by my old AMP, and finally a Denon 4800h powered by itself and then by my old AVR with the toroidal.

I had to tweak the 4800h's curve massively to come close to the old Marantz but the jaw dropping part is missing. It sounds great but not the same. I'm too busy to deal with it at this point and I can always play music on the old Marantz but someday I'd love to try to get the 4800h somehow to sound like the old AVR. SteveDallas said that Audyssey XT32 hammers the high frequencies and I'm beginning to suspect he's right as playing with the treble tone improves the sound.

Bottomline, get a lot of AVRs and try them out. Play a song you like - if you find yourself analyzing the sound instead of just enjoying, then it sounds wrong. Your brain is doing the listening over your ears and that's because it's detecting issues with the sound.

The sound could also be affected by the DAC and no amount of tinkering will get the 4800h to 8002 levels but I don't play with DACs enough to know their impact.

 

[OCA]

Yeah there is a problem with different ear shapes externally and internally as well as ear hygiene , but I would not dismiss measurements so easily. Good sound is what produces at least decent graphs, and then you still have to like hearing it. The real question is what is a decent graph and that is what people will not really agree upon. How much tolerance and in what range for broader dips? How narrow can a hole or a peak be to be good to ignored? Put 10 members in the room and pray they come out undamaged .

After that comes the home curve, which is very different for different people and systems as we know. As they say, when the "Hell Freezes Over" and you can leave Hotel California at will, we will find a custom curve to agree upon.

But pls keep on the good work and pls PM me when have LFE+Main and LFE distribution ready.

I remember the LFE + Main promise, sorry for the delay but could only just iron the bugs out. You should try, you might change your mind about LFE + Main.

I don't dismiss measurements at all, I am just well aware that they only tell a small (but important) part of the whole story. The better graphs will sound worse and perfect graphs will sound the worst.

 

[Oddball]

I remember the LFE + Main promise, sorry for the delay but could only just iron the bugs out. You should try, you might change your mind about LFE + Main.

I don't dismiss measurements at all, I am just well aware that they only tell a small (but important) part of the whole story. The better graphs will sound worse and perfect graphs will sound the worst.

Its LFE+Main, plus LFE distribution, so kind of cube in 4D . But understand that very few people are interested in that as not many systems that can support and at the end you do need to compromise based on specific gear and room. So take your time. ART is for Christmas in D&M family, so let's see what they have in store for $999. You are doing a great job for what really matters - and for free to all users.

I don't share my graphs as 1) I don't have them so can't pursue my OCA and also to stop the "upgrade" bug; 2) don't want to argue with other members around what is a "good graph" 3) my graphs pretty good and I chose what I think was sounding best.

Graphs are really complicated. Frequency response is obviously (or not?) most important, but then there is phase, group delay and other measurements. Not really possible to optimise all of them at the same time. Even though this is ASR, I agree that a good pair of ears will help .

 

[Oddball]

I'll regale you with my story and also state that music = movies. I would pick a home theater that prioritizes music and dialogue over bass every day.

Movies are 80% music - all good movies score +1 on a musical system and drop up to 5 points in a bad theater that plays explosions like a whisper. My commercial movie theater close to me is one of the few real IMAX theaters and when it was renovated, they actually kept the THX speakers as I guess there was no upgrade. I've heard that system pierce ears with a whimper with people leaving the theater and crying outside. But it's not musical. Zero connection to any song.

On the other hand, my system was musical even without a sub. I'm not Amir but I knew the bass was good enough and sure enough measurements 15 years later showed extension into the 20s. Movies were a jaw dropping experience because when the music, it was just an experience. Music made you want to dance even though I would never do that normally.

About 2 years ago, I decided to upgrade mostly for HDMI 2.1 and new Audyssey or Dirac Live. I thought about keep my old AVR as an amp and play music through it, if I needed to or getting an external amp assuming one could fit in the cabinet.

I decided to upgrade and I went from an Onkyo RZ50 with Dirac Live, to a Marantz Cinema 70 powered by my old AMP, and finally a Denon 4800h powered by itself and then by my old AVR with the toroidal.

I had to tweak the 4800h's curve massively to come close to the old Marantz but the jaw dropping part is missing. It sounds great but not the same. I'm too busy to deal with it at this point and I can always play music on the old Marantz but someday I'd love to try to get the 4800h somehow to sound like the old AVR. SteveDallas said that Audyssey XT32 hammers the high frequencies and I'm beginning to suspect he's right as playing with the treble tone improves the sound.

Bottomline, get a lot of AVRs and try them out. Play a song you like - if you find yourself analyzing the sound instead of just enjoying, then it sounds wrong. Your brain is doing the listening over your ears and that's because it's detecting issues with the sound.

The sound could also be affected by the DAC and no amount of tinkering will get the 4800h to 8002 levels but I don't play with DACs enough to know their impact.

That's a long story and thanks for sharing.

Not sure what was the difference between your old Marantz and what model and the 4800H, but pretty sure you can find your lost treasure with 4800H if you set it up right.

XT32 does not "hammer" the high frequencies, it just applies algorithm to whatever is that you requested. It is sometimes successful in catering to your requests but it is in sense like a Jukebox machine - it wont cater to all your requests, only the ones that it has in the store. If you experience that problem you need to up the curve in the high frequency range and check with REW what is it actually delivering. Not to be forgotten, XT32 won't deliver much flexibility as AVR version. $20 D&M app will significantly improve the ability to adjust to your liking, but then if people are looking for lost treasure, then probably a deep-dive equipment like $200 Audy MultiEQ-X app will be needed. EDIT: There will be further improvements from @OCA.

DACs on all modern AVRs are transparent, so no real point in discussing that. It's really up to room EQ and your set-up skills to define the sound you want - within the limits of what the system and the room can produce.