AVR for music suggestions

[Svend P]

Way to miss the actual point, mate.

So you have no examples of something that measures good but sounds bad?

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

So you have no examples of something that measures good but sounds bad?

First we need to define what we are talking about:

Objectively speaking: well measuring electronics: would be impossible to sound "bad" as they do not "sound" at all.

But that is where preference comes in: some people may be used to characteristics of not so well measuring electronics and miss them.

Concrete example from personal experience: a higher output impedance of an amplifier with a low Impedance headphone, that would mimic a shelf PEQ in the low end.

I experienced that when going from a Titanium HD (35Ω output impedance) to my RME.
Technically the RME measures vastly superior but my ear preferred the added warmth of the Titanium HD's higher output impedance.
-> hence me using PEQ to re-create it.

The same can happen with distortion. Some people prefer higher THD. I'm not one of them, though I'm also not overly sensitive to it.

When we talk about transducers: Harman is a preference curve, not a scientific, absolute optimum for every human out there. So yeah: a well measuring can that sits on the harman target can sound bad to a person. I experienced that when I EQ'd my cans to follow Harman. The bass levels were unpleasant and overwhelming.

So now you have TWO concrete examples. One of "measures well but does not sound the way I like" and one of "measures not so well but sounds exactly the way I like it".

 

[EWL5]

OK I know what you mean, but really, it isn't that, I like the extended high frequencies, I even boost them as needed, depending on the music, but mostly listen to everything set to flat. The Pioneer sounds harsh to me cause its top end isn't sounding that natural, sounds digitized and messed up, and if I boost that it just sounds worse, cause I'm boosting something already that isn't that good. If I boost the same just with the external DAC is sounds amazing.

The external DAC is dead flat and rolls off beyond 20kHz, sounds more even and refined throughout the whole range of the freq spectrum especially the treble, all instruments in the song sound properly leveled, clean and natural. The main difference between it and the Pioneer is it's smooth and natural, doesn't sound digitized, and it has bigger sound stage and spaciousness, has more depth... I don't know how else to describe this. With it I've heard some sounds in songs that I haven't before, probably they were there anyway, but not as audible as with the external DAC and they are much easier to hear without even focusing on hearing things like these.

I'm a musician as well and play in a band, and I know exactly how a hi-hat, cymbals, crash etc sound naturally and I'm comparing to that. With the external DAC the system sounds the closest if not the same to that. Doesn't sound digitized.

And honestly I don't really care much about Audyssey or Dirac as long as the amp has manual option to adjust standing waves in a room. It's fiddling around a little bit manually but you do it only once. That's what I've done with the Pioneer cause it's VERY flexible and offers fantastic options to do that, it just doesn't deliver as much of a polished sound on its own, which has nothing to do with the room correction for what I'm talking about.

You could also be describing compression in the Pioneer. Have you checked that any optional compression settings are turned off?

 

[Vacceo]

Less than you might think. 30Hz isn't that hard for a sub to do and punches through walls as if it was nothing
Pretty easy to get to a point where it is annoying to a neighbor.

20Hz is definitely more difficult unless your neighbor has a display cabinet with glasses inside that start rattling.

I can confirm that. My old and humble PSW 2500 have been able to rattle the floor and walls playing the start of Edge of Tomorrow.

 

[techsamurai]

The same can happen with distortion. Some people prefer higher THD. I'm not one of them, though I'm also not overly sensitive to it.

Has anyone done a blind test of DTS vs Dolby TrueHD or DTS vs Atmos or DD vs DD+?

I had switched to an older AVR that didn't support DD+ and DolbyTrueHD and I enjoyed it so much that when I switched to the same model supporting those formats, I found myself not necessarily enjoying it more - I would say possibly less. It was clearer, no doubt and had more information but I'm not sure if my ears and my brain preferred it. I couldn't do A/B or a blind test but I was shocked how amazing DTS in particular sounded.

DD wasn't as impressive compared to DD+. I felt DD lost quite a bit especially in the song in the intro of No Sudden Move and some other music. It could have been Netflix just offering a really low bitrate for DD but DD+ felt like a clear step ahead.

I could have lived with DTS easily but I also needed HDMI 2.1.

 

[techsamurai]

I can confirm that. My old and humble PSW 2500 have been able to rattle the floor and walls playing the start of Edge of Tomorrow.

That makes it tough to put subs especially in a living or great room. Even without a sub, my main speakers would even do that at high volume levels due to room extension dropping to 25hz. I only have a SVS Micro 3000 and it can get annoying occasionally when things start vibrating and it's not even rated for 20hz or anything like that. People with subs in living rooms or apartments can't really blast bass and then you got the possibility of augmented bass in some parts of the room (like my workstation in the corner of the living room) which distorts the sound if you're in a different spot, although apps can help that by switching sub volumes.

 

[masterhw]

Has anyone done a blind test of DTS vs Dolby TrueHD or DTS vs Atmos or DD vs DD+?

I've compared DTS HD MA and Dolby TrueHD (both lossless) for some BluRay Audio albums in Audacity and on every track I've compared they unpack to being identical. Its not unthinkable though that AVRs have separate decoding pipelines, I know Loudness Management and DialNorm settings for Dolby are often the cause of them playing differently.

As for lossy sometimes being preferable, thats also not unheard of. High bitrate lossy (which at 640 or 768kbit/s I would consider DD+) is removing mostly imperceptible noise and its possible this slimmed down signal is slightly easier on the loudspeaker or our ears. Its only playing what you actually want to hear and not a bit more. I understand the "as the artist intended" argument but I don't think high frequency noise is creatively integral to any piece of work I've come across.

I hoped to also head-to-head compare DTS lossy vs DTS HD MA and DD+ vs TrueHD but I can't find any source material that has both the lossy and lossless codecs in what are assured to otherwise be identical mixes. The BluRay media that typically provides lossless often doesn't contain the lossy tracks, or if they do it'll be 5.1 DD+ vs 7.1 TrueHD and I'm not confident the mixes are identical.

 

[techsamurai]

I've compared DTS HD MA and Dolby TrueHD (both lossless) for some BluRay Audio albums in Audacity and on every track I've compared they unpack to being identical. Its not unthinkable though that AVRs have separate decoding pipelines, I know Loudness Management and DialNorm settings for Dolby are often the cause of them playing differently.

As for lossy sometimes being preferable, thats also not unheard of. High bitrate lossy (which at 640 or 768kbit/s I would consider DD+) is removing mostly imperceptible noise and its possible this slimmed down signal is slightly easier on the loudspeaker or our ears. Its only playing what you actually want to hear and not a bit more. I understand the "as the artist intended" argument but I don't think high frequency noise is creatively integral to any piece of work I've come across.

I hoped to also head-to-head compare DTS lossy vs DTS HD MA and DD+ vs TrueHD but I can't find any source material that has both the lossy and lossless codecs in what are assured to otherwise be identical mixes. The BluRay media that typically provides lossless often doesn't contain the lossy tracks, or if they do it'll be 5.1 DD+ vs 7.1 TrueHD and I'm not confident the mixes are identical.

It makes sense that DTS HD MA and Dolby TrueHD (both lossless) would be very close or identical with the AVR decoding potentially modifying the sound.

DTS is lossy but I think it's high resolution enough compared to the older DD which was much lower quality. I could have lived with DTS level sound and may not have known the difference

I've been watching Andor with my son on Disney+ and also watched Rogue One (Dolby True HD) and even though they are different beasts (movie vs streaming series), I'd forgotten how good physical media sounded whether it's DTS or Dolby True HD/Atmos. I actually might start watching stuff on physical media if I can but Netflix DVD is gone (argh!).

 

[masterhw]

It makes sense that DTS HD MA and Dolby TrueHD (both lossless) would be very close or identical with the AVR decoding potentially modifying the sound.

DTS is lossy but I think it's high resolution enough compared to the older DD which was much lower quality. I could have lived with DTS level sound and may not have known the difference

I've been watching Andor with my son on Disney+ and also watched Rogue One (Dolby True HD) and even though they are different beasts (movie vs streaming series), I'd forgotten how good physical media sounded whether it's DTS or Dolby True HD/Atmos. I actually might start watching stuff on physical media if I can but Netflix DVD is gone (argh!).

Ah you're hitting on another big thing, streaming vs physical media consistently have different mixes! I don't have Atmos but I routinely see people reporting FAR more atmos activity on BluRay releases compared to the streaming version. So the bitrate difference is certainly the most visible and easy to market one (bigger number = better), but in the real world it is often more hidden things like different mixing and processing by the AVR that make a more meaningful difference than the bitrate.

 

[Vacceo]

That makes it tough to put subs especially in a living or great room. Even without a sub, my main speakers would even do that at high volume levels due to room extension dropping to 25hz. I only have a SVS Micro 3000 and it can get annoying occasionally when things start vibrating and it's not even rated for 20hz or anything like that. People with subs in living rooms or apartments can't really blast bass and then you got the possibility of augmented bass in some parts of the room (like my workstation in the corner of the living room) which distorts the sound if you're in a different spot, although apps can help that by switching sub volumes.

Luckily, the concrete slab that separates me from the neightbour downstairs is quite thick.

 

[Oddball]

Multi purpose rooms and open floor plans are difficult to handle for low bass even before you include the neighbours divided by 30cm reinforced concrete slabs.

First one would need to make sure that the bass is not breaking or resonating anything in your flat. This is completely different exercise than for a dedicated HT room, albeit even it that case one needs to take care of the leaks that go beyond that room.

This is a pickle as you can't really calibrate only for the MLP, only that you have a huge mode in your china cabinet, or that your large glass structure to the terrace wants to disintegrate imminently.

As they say, with great power comes the great responsibility so people just need to be prepared to do a lot in such spaces if they want even and impactful bass experience. Generally this would be limited to some SPL at any given level, and probably not to 115dB at 20hz as that would wreck the whole place down.

 

[Oddball]

Ah you're hitting on another big thing, streaming vs physical media consistently have different mixes! I don't have Atmos but I routinely see people reporting FAR more atmos activity on BluRay releases compared to the streaming version. So the bitrate difference is certainly the most visible and easy to market one (bigger number = better), but in the real world it is often more hidden things like different mixing and processing by the AVR that make a more meaningful difference than the bitrate.

There is certainly more detail in the disc material and more dynamics as well. I don't really do discs any more, but the problem that at least HD Blu Rays had was delay in LFE channel that I can't say I notice on the less bit rate streaming. D&M actually acknowledged that and provided a separate adjustment for that fact.

The only problem is that you would need to adjust it by ear, which is not really that popular technique around here, but the only one practically available though.

 

[schotky]

Most of Behringer probably doesn't measure well. But please name one concrete model.

Lane Poor HB. Have a look at the curve and tell me if it's supposed to sound good or not. If not why not, and if good why good

 

[schotky]

P

Actually, the best option is to buy competently designed, audibly transparent hardware with Parametric EQ capabilities.
Learn to use PEQ to custom tailor the sound to your personal preference & room conditions.

That way you can get the best of both worlds: absolutely accurate sound or personal preference with a switch of a simple profile.

Forgive my bluntness but did you measure the voltages with a test signal at the speaker terminals?
If not: you cannot assure a volume match within 0.1dB in any comparison.

Effects of subtle volume differences can be all kinds of things. From "more open" to "livelier", "more natural" etc. pp.
That is the mean thing about them: we do not consciously perceive them as "this is louder" just yet.

RME ADI-2 DAC and a Focal Clear professional.

Both get good measurements from ASR (aside from the X-max issue at high volumes) yet in said combination they sound very sterile/lifeless to me. A simple 60Hz bass shelf at +2dB totally fixes that issue.

Even the Harman target allows for personal preference in the bass area.

PEQs are probably the best thing ever created, but are sadly not implemented as much due to their considered advanced level of usage for the average user. I've been wanting a good one for such a long time. The Pioneer has it, but only for the standing wave correction function, sadly not for the main EQ.

But I have 16 band PEQ in my car multimedia system, it's freakin' amazing and beats any graphic EQ.

OK you meant micro volume levels... I've been doing adjustments by ear. I'm thinking if the volume level is that much critical in micro adjustments for what I'm describing in the sound, then I'm not sure why when I boost the treble or the volume, it's harder to listen on the Pioneer's DAC, but the boost with external DAC is so smooth and fine and easy to listen to... Or are you referring to something else? I'm not sure on that

I know what you mean on effects of subtle volume differences, but the difference I'm referring to, I hear it regardless of what the volume is... I mentioned that on high volumes with the Pioneer I can't listen for long, it's getting fatiguing from the harshness of the treble especially, but not at all with external DAC... With it everything sounds well rounded an fine I can go for hours. The treble is even slightly more pronounced on the DAC, but it's cleaner, that's what I'm referring to. In that case the DAC should theoretically be more fatiguing cause it has slightly more pronounced top end but it's the other way around

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

I know what you mean on effects of subtle volume differences, but the difference I'm referring to, I hear it regardless of what the volume is... I mentioned that on high volumes with the Pioneer I can't listen for long, it's getting fatiguing from the harshness of the treble especially, but not at all with external DAC... With it everything sounds well rounded an fine I can go for hours. The treble is even slightly more pronounced on the DAC, but it's cleaner, that's what I'm referring to. In that case the DAC should theoretically be more fatiguing cause it has slightly more pronounced top end but it's the other way around

I think we'd need measurements of your gear to formulate any viable conclusion. It is possible that there is some post processing going on in the AVR even if you listen to "Pure direct" or whatever the DSP bypass mode is called.

Plus, you'd need to test the volume matched DACs in a double blind scenario in order to determine, whether you can hear any differences with statistical relevance.

Needless to say, both are not easily done. So if the external DAC sounds better, just roll with it. Keep the AVR for movies, where sound isn't as critical (sine you are distracted anyway) and keep the DAC for music.
Forget about the damn gear and enjoy the music.

BTW: I always consider loud music fatiguing, no matter the DAC or the speaker/headphone. Might be my room that gets overwhelmed or my ears, dunno.

 

[schotky]

You could also be describing compression in the Pioneer. Have you checked that any optional compression settings are turned off?

Everything that I could turn off I did, and when you select Pure Direct you can't turn on anything anyway, not even the EQ or room correction, and the sound is stripped down of everything it's noticeable, but it isn't improved

 

[schotky]

I think we'd need measurements of your gear to formulate any viable conclusion. It is possible that there is some post processing going on in the AVR even if you listen to "Pure direct" or whatever the DSP bypass mode is called.

Plus, you'd need to test the volume matched DACs in a double blind scenario in order to determine, whether you can hear any differences with statistical relevance.

Needless to say, both are not easily done. So if the external DAC sounds better, just roll with it. Keep the AVR for movies, where sound isn't as critical (sine you are distracted anyway) and keep the DAC for music.
Forget about the damn gear and enjoy the music.

BTW: I always consider loud music fatiguing, no matter the DAC or the speaker/headphone. Might be my room that gets overwhelmed or my ears, dunno.

If there is any processing in Pure Direct I wouldn't know, what's obvious is that when that mode is on you can't turn on anything not even the EQ and room correction and the sound does sound like it's stripped away from all that, but it isn't really improved

As of now I'm rolling with the DAC for music I just have to stream it on my phone instead on the system setup, this DAC doesn't have HDMI

As for loud music I do like it, not excessively loud and not all the time, but maybe cause I play in a band and I might be used to it... My room is also somewhat reasonably treated, the only hard surfaces are the TV, the speakers themselves, and some portions of the walls, I have stuff on the walls to minimize hard surfaces and soft blinds on the windows. The only thing I haven't touched is the ceiling, I was thinking of maybe doing it, but when I got the DAC it doesn't seem like it's on the way much, I can enjoy music as is atm quite a bit

But I do plan on testing different AVRs as I find them to see what I'll actually like. I'm using the Marantz atm but not crazy happy with it, not this model at least. It only has a little more refined sound than the Pioneer, but I can't adjust the overall tonality as I like it, it's way too limited, I HAVE to use it without room correction too cause its Audyssey is crap and you can't tweak it, so it's either the auto mess or off... XD haha. Thanks for all your thoughts and input I appreciate it

 

[EWL5]

Everything that I could turn off I did, and when you select Pure Direct you can't turn on anything anyway, not even the EQ or room correction, and the sound is stripped down of everything it's noticeable, but it isn't improved

One final thought: your Pioneer is from 2011. The HDMI 2.0 standard came out in 2013 and jitter reduction over HDMI has been improving since!

Could you be susceptible to jitter in your current setup?

Edit: looks like your Marantz SR5008 is only HDMI 1.4a so jitter still in play!

 

[schotky]

One final thought: your Pioneer is from 2011. The HDMI 2.0 standard came out in 2013 and jitter reduction over HDMI has been improving since!

Could you be susceptible to jitter in your current setup?

Edit: looks like your Marantz SR5008 is only HDMI 1.4a so jitter still in play!

Hey now that you mentioned that it could be. I wasn't too familiar with the HDMI standards and its limitations as the AVR was always the last link in the chain, not a pass through and I never considered it would be an issue for audio only even if it's a bit older. And with external DAC you do skip the HDMI...

Where would the jitter come from though? The ARC cable is only 1m long, and other HDMI cables are 1.2m longest. The TV is the pass through for audio and is a high end TV from 2016. The Pioneer has a clear visual indicator if the sound is clipping and is never engaged with its own DAC. Sometimes it does get engaged with external DAC but I don't audibly hear the sound getting distorted or messed up, I adjust accordingly on the DAC to stay below the limit anyway

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

But I do plan on testing different AVRs as I find them to see what I'll actually like. I'm using the Marantz atm but not crazy happy with it, not this model at least. It only has a little more refined sound than the Pioneer, but I can't adjust the overall tonality as I like it, it's way too limited, I HAVE to use it without room correction too cause its Audyssey is crap and you can't tweak it, so it's either the auto mess or off... XD haha.

Well you not knowing is why I said: we'd need measurements to see if anything hidden messes up the signal that could explain what you are hearing.

I got a new AVR last Fall and can only say the X4800H is amazing. Signal source is usually my PC.
Having Dirac in such a unit is so comfy, no longer do I need to fiddle with DAWs and plugins. :'D

I can also find no fault in it's sound even when I compare it to my ADI-2 DAC, which is proven to be above reproach by hard data measured by our Senpai Amir.

Perhaps worth consideration for your setup?