Denon AVR-A1H High-end AVR Review

[welwynnick]

Hoping to see much better amplifier performance by using class D for next generation AVRs

I've been meaning to reply to this for ages. There have been many class D receivers over the years, and some were tested on ASR. Here's a sample.

Focal Astral 16
Onkyo TX-RZ1100
Panasonic SA-XR57 and others
Pioneer SC-LX90 Susano
Pioneer SC-61 and others
Sony TA-DA9000ES and others
NAD T778
Storm Fusion 20

The advantages are obvious, but they didn't really seem to catch on. I suspect that conventional linear amps are cheaper.

 

[EWL5]

I've been meaning to reply to this for ages. There have been many class D receivers over the years, and some were tested on ASR. Here's a sample.

Focal Astral 16
Onkyo TX-RZ1100
Panasonic SA-XR57 and others
Pioneer SC-LX90 Susano
Pioneer SC-61 and others
Sony TA-DA9000ES and others
NAD T778
Storm Fusion 20

The advantages are obvious, but they didn't really seem to catch on. I suspect that conventional linear amps are cheaper.

You forgot the JBL MA7100HP:

JBL MA7100HP AV Receiver Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the JBL MA7100HP 7.2/5.2.2 home theater AVR with support for 8K over HDMI. It was kindly drop shipped by a member and costs US $1,200. The industrial design is absolutely stunning! JBL goes from mundane to top of the heap with a massive gap between...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Frank207be]

I've been meaning to reply to this for ages. There have been many class D receivers over the years, and some were tested on ASR. Here's a sample.

Focal Astral 16
Onkyo TX-RZ1100
Panasonic SA-XR57 and others
Pioneer SC-LX90 Susano
Pioneer SC-61 and others
Sony TA-DA9000ES and others
NAD T778
Storm Fusion 20

The advantages are obvious, but they didn't really seem to catch on. I suspect that conventional linear amps are cheaper.

I believe it was said during the presentation of the A1H that it's the size/shape of the class-D modules that makes it very challenging building them into a 15 channel AVR of normal proportions.

Most AVR's of this list don't even exceed 11 channels except the uber expensive Focal Astral 16 with 12 amplifier channels and Storm ISR Fusion 20 with 16 amplifier channels.

 

[GXAlan]

Sony TA-DA9000ES and others
… I suspect that conventional linear amps are cheaper.

For sure. Sony moving away from S-Master to traditional is one good example when the ES AVR line went from global to U.S. only. When Onkyo took over Pioneer, the loss of Pioneer’s own in house Class D tech was explained in an interview somewhere that modern Class AB was very good and was still a better value for consumers since it was cheaper to produce.

For what it’s worth, Marantz was a very early adopter of Class D and the AV10/AMP10 counts as a AV platform in my mind, even though it’s technically not an AVR.

 

[Hipster Doofus]

Thanks great for Denon fans.

Now I just have to wait 12 years do I can find it for $200 at goodwill. Currently I am buying x4000h and above for the XT AUDYESSY…to have something to play with.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

I believe it was said during the presentation of the A1H that it's the size/shape of the class-D modules that makes it very challenging building them into a 15 channel AVR of normal proportions.

Most AVR's of this list don't even exceed 11 channels except the uber expensive Focal Astral 16 with 12 amplifier channels and Storm ISR Fusion 20 with 16 amplifier channels.

I share the same thoughts on this. Additionally, the modular nature of high-quality Class D amplifiers makes it nearly impossible to fit into something as compact as, say, the A1H. While it may not seem small, just imagine how large it would be if it housed 11 channels of Purifi modules + power supplies that would need to be cooled sufficiently.

Then there’s the alternative -chip amplification. I’m not sure why no one has attempted to base an AVR design on it. It should be feasible without the space constraints that come with Class D modules.

 

[peng]

I share the same thoughts on this. Additionally, the modular nature of high-quality Class D amplifiers makes it nearly impossible to fit into something as compact as, say, the A1H. While it may not seem small, just imagine how large it would be if it housed 11 channels of Purifi modules + power supplies that would need to be cooled sufficiently.

Then there’s the alternative -chip amplification. I’m not sure why no one has attempted to base an AVR design on it. It should be feasible without the space constraints that come with Class D modules.

Class AB=heavy, Class D=Larger foot print
??

 

[Old_School_Brad]

Class AB=heavy, Class D=Larger foot print
??

As I see it, this obviously isn’t an issue with one- or two-channel designs due to their efficiency and reduced need for cooling plates compared to class A/B. However, when using the same modules in an 11-channel design, they appear far less practical within the same physical space as class A/B. The modular nature of Class D, which is an advantage for low channel counts, becomes a drawback as the number of channels increases.

But I should think that it should be more feasible with chip-based amplification.

 

[Golfx]

I believe one of the reasons Denon sticks with class AB amps is their proven bug free use versus adding new designs and potential unforeseen issues and bugs.

 

[welwynnick]

Multichannel class D amps can be packaged many different ways.

The NAD M27, M28 and the Storm Fusion 20 simply use multiple ICE or Hypex or Purifi modules.

The Marantz AMP10 build their own ICE Edge board, neatly integrated without wires with their HDAM modules, but why not everything on one single board?

The Lyngdorf MXA-8400 appears to use the Purifi design but re-laid out by Lyngdorf and manufactured with 8 buffer and amp channels on a single PCB:

There's more than one way to skin a cat, as we say in the old country. I think they could have gone that way if they wanted to.

 

[beagleman]

But Electronics Engineering is numbers driven. Great maths and objective measurement obviously means great sound.

I suppose if you do not work in this area, you might not understand this. This reply is not intended to upset anybody.

What is really interesting is that it is obvious even at this level of engineering, there does not seem to be the components available within Denon's cost remit to be able to bring an AV based amplifier anywhere near a DAC/stereo amp. Perhaps, we will get D class amplifiers, such as Purifi or similar in the next generation, which will assist the energy efficiency, in addition to helping with the sound quality of the analogue based amplifier stage.

Even so, in the Denon's price/feature category, it seems to be the best product available for sound quality. I think for most people though, the Denon avc-x4800h is the best value overall. Law of diminishing returns.

According to who? The guys that simply look at numbers and have never owned an AVR, or guys like me, that saw the numbers tried a few AVRs and found, while the numbers may tell one story, I can not in good faith, say I can really tell much of or any difference?

 

[Aventador_SVJ]

According to who? The guys that simply look at numbers and have never owned an AVR, or guys like me, that saw the numbers tried a few AVRs and found, while the numbers may tell one story, I can not in good faith, say I can really tell much of or any difference?

Yes, once you achieve a certain SINAD (value to be decided), then your ear would become the weak link. My understanding is that in reality, it is the speaker that let's the side down with much worse distortion levels.

In reality, it is the combination of your room acoustics, speaker and electronics that build up the true picture and in our fairly large kitchen (with lots of reflective surfaces), without DIRAC or similar, it would be a disaster.

Hence, I would never own another piece of hifi without DIRAC, as rooms are atypically far from perfect and the frequency response is so often far away from the harman curve, that without correction, it is pointless having Topping/Purifi/Revel without it.

The biggest win for Denon in its current guise is having DIRAC support.

 

[Frank207be]

The biggest win for Denon in its current guise is having DIRAC support.

With ART hopefully coming soon as the cherry on the cake.

 

[Zippo]

I have this AVR and it is an awesome awesome component. I use all channels, most are effect channels anyway so need to invest only on good 5.2 speakers and subs.
My only complain about this AVR is the hopeless HEOS App but that was fixed with a separate Wiim box with bitstream digital output.
To people who claim this AVR is "too expensive" I can only mention that it is actually dirt cheap for the value and quality you get.
There are so many grossly overpriced crappy "Hi End" component out there that perform much worse than this box not to mention absurd useless snake oil items like "audiophile switches" sold for $3K or "power conditioners" for $5k etc.
Hell, crappy Rega "reference" Amp is $12K these days ...
If this AVR was offered by one of these boutique vendors and not a mass vendor like Denon / Marantz my guess they would have easily slapped $20K MSRP on it.

 

[bmwr75]

I have a 10 year old Denon AVR-4520CI that is 9.2 channels. Appears that 4-4.5 lb. per channel is pretty much the Denon standard. My 4520 looks just like the reviewed Denon from the front. Paid $1099 for it new in 2015 including shipping and tax.

 

[Chrispy]

I have a 10 year old Denon AVR-4520CI that is 9.2 channels. Appears that 4-4.5 lb. per channel is pretty much the Denon standard. My 4520 looks just like the reviewed Denon from the front. Paid $1099 for it new in 2015 including shipping and tax.

Think they're basically the same amp modules in both models. Just different power supply details I think.

 

[Chrispy]

My post had nothing to do with ACD power (reference the attached image in my post). Might be best to ask as a separate topic.

But it did, even referring to a 7ch test is such. It' just not that important and is mostly power supply dependent.

 

[zentiques]

But it did, even referring to a 7ch test is such. It' just not that important and is mostly power supply dependent.

Partly my fault for chasing this rabbit here. Apologies for being a newbie on the board and not understanding all the math and science. I bought into the A1H's flexible amp configuration, using it to bi-amp speakers. So naturally I'm curious how the multiple channels test, especially if 6 are used across the front mains, surrounds notwithstanding. I have zero complaints, the Klipsch being highly efficient. Denon promotes the feature specific to this model, shouldn't there be some specs and conversation about how it handles it and not an ACD sidebar ?

 

[Chrispy]

Partly my fault for chasing this rabbit here. Apologies for being a newbie on the board and not understanding all the math and science. I bought into the A1H's flexible amp configuration, using it to bi-amp speakers. So naturally I'm curious how the multiple channels test, especially if 6 are used across the front mains, surrounds notwithstanding. I have zero complaints, the Klipsch being highly efficient. Denon promotes the feature specific to this model, shouldn't there be some specs and conversation about how it handles it and not an ACD sidebar ?

AVR bi-amping is just not a good move. The marketing of such is bordering irresponsible. Where are you usually sourcing your information from until ASR? Klipsch can be more efficient but they also use inflated "in-room equivalent" specs for sensitivity vs usual standards, too.

 

[zentiques]

AVR bi-amping is just not a good move. The marketing of such is bordering irresponsible. Where are you usually sourcing your information from until ASR? Klipsch can be more efficient but they also use inflated "in-room equivalent" specs for sensitivity vs usual standards, too.

So, Denon is falsely promoting the use of it ? Fully documented in the manual, nothing cautionary about it. Should I contact Denon about bordering on irresponsible? When I reach Denon Corporate tomorrow I'll be sure to reference this ASR discussion.