-
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!
Denon AVR-A1H
- Thread starter Recluse-Animator
- Start date
Steve Dallas
Major Contributor
AVRs are limited by their power supplies. Each additional channel drags all the others down. I have seen test results of some higher output AVRs such as this one produce 30 to 70W per channel with all channels driven under test conditions, depending on the configuration. Some manufacturers, such as Marantz, advertise power guarantees such as 70% of rated power up to 5 channels driven.
However, an AVR is never asked to produce maximum power through all channels at the same time. It simply needs enough power supply capacity to produce what it needs to faithfully amplify the program content. And that will be less than 5W per speaker for most speakers most of the time.
During high SPL transients, 2 or 3 speakers demand a lot of power, while additional power demands are delegated to the powered subwoofers. The rest of the channels are still bumping along at less than 5W each. And, AVRs typically have more dynamic power available than continuous power to handle such situations.
This thing appears to be capable of a shared 300W at the given impedance and distortion. That is more than enough for a small to midsize home theater. If you need more, you can use external amplification for the front 2 or 3 speakers and be good to go.
It is also worth mentioning that the extra 50W this has over most AVRs is worth only 1.5dB increased SPL at 1M per channel when available.
Here are some resources:
www.audioholics.com
www.ecoustics.com
www.audioholics.com
However, an AVR is never asked to produce maximum power through all channels at the same time. It simply needs enough power supply capacity to produce what it needs to faithfully amplify the program content. And that will be less than 5W per speaker for most speakers most of the time.
During high SPL transients, 2 or 3 speakers demand a lot of power, while additional power demands are delegated to the powered subwoofers. The rest of the channels are still bumping along at less than 5W each. And, AVRs typically have more dynamic power available than continuous power to handle such situations.
This thing appears to be capable of a shared 300W at the given impedance and distortion. That is more than enough for a small to midsize home theater. If you need more, you can use external amplification for the front 2 or 3 speakers and be good to go.
It is also worth mentioning that the extra 50W this has over most AVRs is worth only 1.5dB increased SPL at 1M per channel when available.
Here are some resources:
Marantz SR8015 11CH 8K DTS:X Pro AV Receiver Review
The Marantz SR8015 11.2CH Atmos/DTS:X Pro HDMI 2.1 AV receiver is built on a very solid platform with benchmark measured performance. Is this the best AVR for 2020? Read our review to find out.
AV Receiver Power Ratings Explained
It's no surprise then that one of the first specifications a novice or seasoned enthusiast looking to buy an AV receiver or amplifier sees is its power
AV Receiver and Amplifier Power Ratings Trends: Manipulating Wattage Ratings
Ever wonder how receiver and amplifier power ratings are measured? How "accurate" are they really? This article and YouTube video explores the trends in wattage ratings and how its changed over time.
Doubtful, it only has a 1100 watt power supply, with all channels driven-73.33 per channel.
Unbalanced LCR+Surround, but balanced sub-woofer outs?
Weird since most people are either running wireless subs, or self-powered subs that accept unbalanced signals. If it's a cable run issue, shouldn't the surrounds be balanced? If it's a best-of-the-best approach, shouldn't it be the LCR?
Weird since most people are either running wireless subs, or self-powered subs that accept unbalanced signals. If it's a cable run issue, shouldn't the surrounds be balanced? If it's a best-of-the-best approach, shouldn't it be the LCR?
It says up to 150W I.e. the maximum available power. It may mean any value when all channels driven.
I disagree. Subs are active and are placed away from the AVR. However, extra amplifiers are placed next to it.
Where do you see those wireless subs, BTW?
What is interesting is I believe it could be considered 19 channel… 15 speakers and 4 subs… I hope someone sends Amir one to test as well as the new Marantz prococessor. Something costing this much might be hard to consider either a good value, but in the world of 16+ channel processors, with their reliability, they actually are (if you want that many channels). I think was will hamper their sales for a while is the slow rollout of Dirac and Dirac DLBC for those that prefer the Dirac option…
AT4 Wireless Audio Transmitter - RSL Speakers
rslspeakers.com
SoundPath Wireless Audio Adapter
Add wireless audio connectivity to subwoofers, speakers, amplifiers and more. Transmits pristine audio signal up to 65’ at CD quality.
Wireless adaptors for subs that use plate amps (i.e. active) is almost standard at this point so if this is targeted towards prosumer or lifestyle customers it's a pretty good chance they will be using wireless subs. Even then, if I was worried about picking up signals along the way, the rear surrounds which have to travel the same distance + height + are run inside walls next to who knows what else would be my concern
It says assignable, so perhaps you can use the single end output above for the subs and the XLR below for the LCR.
There is a thread about it already:
www.audiosciencereview.com
Maybe @AdamG247 could merge both.
Denon AVR-A1H
https://www.denon.com/en-us/product/av-receivers/avr-a1h 9.4.6 ch 15 x 150w 8K DIRAC upgradable $6,500
www.audiosciencereview.com
This is the top of the range AVR from Denon, I think you are mistaken about their market segment.
Besides, wireless adapters are nowhere near as common as you think. Otherwise, every sub manufacturer would have designed subs with integrated receivers. Anyhow, you may want to open a poll to see who is right
Steve Dallas
Major Contributor
AT4 Wireless Audio Transmitter - RSL Speakers
etcSoundPath Wireless Audio Adapter
Add wireless audio connectivity to subwoofers, speakers, amplifiers and more. Transmits pristine audio signal up to 65’ at CD quality.www.svsound.com
Wireless adaptors for subs that use plate amps (i.e. active) is almost standard at this point so if this is targeted towards prosumer or lifestyle customers it's a pretty good chance they will be using wireless subs. Even then, if I was worried about picking up signals along the way, the rear surrounds which have to travel the same distance + height + are run inside walls next to who knows what else would be my concern
It says assignable, so perhaps you can use the single end output above for the subs and the XLR below for the LCR.
I know these exist, but I do not know a single person who uses one, and the people in my circle are very much into home theater. I could not call that "standard" in my sphere.
Done Sir!There is a thread about it already:
Maybe @AdamG247 could merge both.Denon AVR-A1H
https://www.denon.com/en-us/product/av-receivers/avr-a1h 9.4.6 ch 15 x 150w 8K DIRAC upgradable $6,500
This is the top of the range AVR from Denon, I think you are mistaken about their market segment.
Besides, wireless adapters are nowhere near as common as you think. Otherwise, every sub manufacturer would have designed subs with integrated receivers. Anyhow, you may want to open a poll to see who is right
From what I've seen around here the people who are truly into the multi-row home theater experience wouldn't Denon-grate themselves for anything less than a Trinnov or Anthem
I assumed this was targeted towards people who wanted a name brand flagship for their single row living room/family room home theater.
But I am surprised that they aren't so common, @Steve Dallas is it because they already had in-wall conduit for wires? When I started looking for subwoofers a few years ago it was a common checklist item I saw when trawling forums; either a built in or an OEM solution. I know people weren't thrilled with the gen 1 offerings, but the later ones handled the connection latency and strength much better.
ASR does in no way reflects the market.From what I've seen around here the people who are truly into the multi-row home theater experience wouldn't Denon-grate themselves for anything less than a Trinnov or Anthem
Subwoofers has been around for decades so are home theatres. People had been using wired connections all along. Wireless is the new kid in block hence nowhere near as you said “the standard” just a new niche.
Steve Dallas
Major Contributor
Perhaps we are less aware as we are not into trawling AV forums?From what I've seen around here the people who are truly into the multi-row home theater experience wouldn't Denon-grate themselves for anything less than a Trinnov or Anthem
I assumed this was targeted towards people who wanted a name brand flagship for their single row living room/family room home theater.
But I am surprised that they aren't so common, @Steve Dallas is it because they already had in-wall conduit for wires? When I started looking for subwoofers a few years ago it was a common checklist item I saw when trawling forums; either a built in or an OEM solution. I know people weren't thrilled with the gen 1 offerings, but the later ones handled the connection latency and strength much better.
For my part, my 2 subs sit inside my LR speakers, so they are next to the AVR. My friend Bryan's setup is the same, as his room dimensions are similar to mine. My friend Alex has 3 subs. The front 2 flank the AVR. The rear 1 has balanced cable in the walls / ceiling. My cousin Zac had balanced cable installed to support up to 4 subs when his house was built.
I suppose if I were to add a 3rd sub, which would probably work best behind the sofa, I might look at a wireless solution.
Amusingly, when my house was built, I specified cable locations to support 4 subs. My design for sub locations turned out to be incorrect (thanks, AV forums!), and none of those sub cables are in use. I use 4' RCA cables.
As much as I’d like to agree with you, at least with my wallet speaking, I can’t, simply because what you’re saying is just not true.
Your claim that all amps, whether stand alone, integrated or packaged as receivers, are equal to one another doesn’t hold water. Some have much lower distortion than others at a given level. Some are rated at X # of watts but go much higher without reaching clipping levels than others do, while others fall short. Some are rated higher than what they truly produce with all channels driven. Some have different designs, which accentuate certain aspects of the music, such as bass, midrange or treble, and some fall short in certain areas. There are many different types of amplification, such as tube, class A, class AB, class D, class H and so on.
Not all amplifiers sound the same. Without getting obnoxious in price, I think it would be fairly obvious to anyone that an early to mid 60’s Fisher tube amplifier, a mid 80’s Harman Kardon amplifier, and a present day Insignia receiver sound worlds apart.
Above a certain dollar amount, the differences are less noticeable, but they still exist in amplifiers, CD players and processors, as well as turntables, & the mat, cartridge & needle used with them. To think otherwise would be akin to saying that people should just buy the cheapest, bottom of the line components from Best Buy, and pair them with high end speakers & room correction to achieve the highest level of performance. That would be silly, and you know better.
I’ve conducted several blind listening sessions in my home, where the people judging the components were normally unable to know what they were beforehand (unless one of them brought one to include of part of the test), completely unable to see them during the process, and were only told what they were afterwards. I’ve done this with speakers, amplifiers (including integrated and receivers), CD players, DVD players, etc, all using the same speakers, wires, etc to have a constant in the test. I’ve been on the receiving end of such tests as well. While we didn’t always agree 100% on what sounded best to us, it was always clear that some units just sounded better to us, that there were differences, and we pretty much always agreed on certain aspects of the sound, which was written down during the experiments, and only shared afterwards, so no one had any influence on anyone else’s opinions. It wasn’t always night and day, but every now and then it was.
Now I’ll agree with you that cables have the least amount of influence on the sound of a system, if they have any at all, and that speakers and the room itself have the greatest impact on the sound of a system. But to say that a $150 Insignia stereo receiver from Best Buy with a $69 Insignia CD player will sound just as good, or the same as a $15,000 system from Krell or McIntosh is either an outright lie, or the assumption from someone who’s never actually been a part of such demos.
Sure, there’s plenty of hogwash in the audio community. Cable risers, outlet filters, magic fairy dust, collected by pixies, who groomed unicorns raised by angels on Atlantis, you name it, there are always these nonsense items created by people who are looking to take advantage of real or would-be audiophiles, who are looking to upgrade their system for a couple hundred bucks, and are gullible to the placebo effect. They’ll swear up and down that it made a difference, most likely so they wouldn’t have to admit that they threw $ away on a scam. I get it, it would hurt their ego to admit that they wasted $ on a scam. Nobody likes to look like a fool, right? And everyone else who bought into the scam agrees with them! They don’t want to feel stupid either, so they play along with the facade, which is nothing more than an audiophile’s interpretation of ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’.
I’ll tell you what. Come over to my home, and listen to the same speakers (whichever you choose, I have plenty to choose from) with 5 different amps, in a room that is well designed for acoustics. We can then conduct another test where one amplifier is chosen, while several pre-amps are used. Then we listen to these same speakers through 5 different CD players/transports on either one or all of these amps, because I believe that synergy does exist. We will also include a few different people chosen at random by both of us from various audio forums to join in. I’ll provide lunch and dinner, as well as accommodations for all. If everyone comes to the same conclusion as you, that amps, CD players, etc don’t matter at all, and have no contribution to the overall sound and performance, then I’ll happily pay for your travel expenses, and you’ll have not only had a fun time (I’m a pretty good host lol, and tend to go all out), but you’ll have this test to cite as conclusive evidence that nothing except speakers and the room matter! If not, then you’ll owe me nothing at all, but you will be on the hook for your travel expenses and lodging. I would only ask that you admit that some amplifiers, preamps, CD players etc can indeed change the overall sound and performance of a system, no matter how slight you may have perceived it, and if everyone else was able to detect these differences, but you disagreed, that your hearing may be the reason why you think all amps are the same.
The ball is in your court. I’m thinking sometime in May would be good so that we have time to make travel arrangements for all, with the best possible airfare prices, and so that we can select a group of people willing to be a part of this experiment. If that’s too soon, or doesn’t work for you, then please name a time after May, and we can go from there.
Of course you could decline, perhaps because you don’t have time, because you just don’t care, or for other reasons. It would be fun though, right? I understand that it could be an expensive trip just to try to prove someone wrong, but if you’re right it wouldn’t cost you a dime. Just let me know
This post measures at a THD <= 0.001%, all channels driven.
I agree with most of what you said in your long post, but where did Snowpuppy claimed such a thing? I re-read his post and all he said was, as you quoted him
never said anything about "all amps.... are equal to one another...".
Or you think he meant because if people did not hear a difference in amps,....in those tests, then he meant "all amps......,are equal to one another......". If so, I think you may be over thinking, probably should ask @Snowpuppy if that's what he meant first. To me, devices arranged for in such 3rd party DBT ABX test were often preselected, to ensure they all can performed well within their designed limits. It would have been a waste of all participant's (and readers of such reports) time if they did such tests to compare a 50 W $200 amp to other 200 W $2,000 amps driving some 4 ohm nominal large tower speakers.
Alright struggling here with what path to go down / purchase
I have a decade old Emotive processor (whatever their cheapest one was at the time)
and my Emotive amp only does 80w / channel which is very not enough for the Polk's
Choice:
- Buy the A1H to replace both the processor and amps, ~$6k (I have discount through a friend)
Or
- Buy just a Stereo amp (I have a March reservation for Hypex Nila 500 Monoblocks, and keep using the old Emotive processor. (no purchase A1H), ~$2.1k
Considering the old processor has to use optical (it only does 1080p), that maxes out at a 5.1 system
Going A1H represents a $4k additional spend but if I do not plan to go above 5.1 in the next 18mo's I'm thinking I stick to the old processor, get the Hypex monobolocks, and then upgrade AVR alongside doing all the wiring / going above 5.1
I have a decade old Emotive processor (whatever their cheapest one was at the time)
and my Emotive amp only does 80w / channel which is very not enough for the Polk's
Choice:
- Buy the A1H to replace both the processor and amps, ~$6k (I have discount through a friend)
Or
- Buy just a Stereo amp (I have a March reservation for Hypex Nila 500 Monoblocks, and keep using the old Emotive processor. (no purchase A1H), ~$2.1k
Considering the old processor has to use optical (it only does 1080p), that maxes out at a 5.1 system
Going A1H represents a $4k additional spend but if I do not plan to go above 5.1 in the next 18mo's I'm thinking I stick to the old processor, get the Hypex monobolocks, and then upgrade AVR alongside doing all the wiring / going above 5.1
Similar threads
