Denon AVR-X3600H AV Receiver Review

[Sparkymarky]

Thinking about it.....if i want a high end (ish) dedicated music room with the naim as the power amp, then using the denon 3600, as convenient as it is as i alreqdy own it for one and for streaming and a hub for all sources to be piped from, would degrade things wouldnt compared to standalone direct inputs in the music room - i'd be using the denons pre amp section for one and connecting sources to the denon (decent arcam cd players and the like) would be degraded too (however marginal) compared to connecting straight into the Naim in the music room. Back to the idea of a streamer and dac (topping?) sited in the music room as a pre amp plugged directly into the Naim i think for best quality?

 

[Infl3x]

Hi everyone. New to ASR and loving the parametric measurements and data.

First... Is the test methodology or measurement procedure documented anywhere? This might answer a whole bunch of questions on my end. Thanks in advance.

I have a question on the methodology used to evaluate DAC SINAD, and more specifically what exactly is meant by the text quoted in bold/italics below.

I wanted to show what the SINAD would be relative to output level but the curve there was highly dependent on the volume setting. I picked a random, 85 on the volume indicator and got this:

View attachment 75005

The bold/italic text seems to imply that the DAC is driven by arbitrary amplitude and an arbitrary volume combo to achieve 2Vrms output of the DAC.

This makes the results difficult to interpret relative to real-world system performance. Wouldn't it make more sense to have a fixed input amplitude at 2Vrms and then vary the volume on the AVR/DAC from min to FS?

If SINAD is dependent volume setting, then as an AVR buyer, I'm interested primarily in SINAD at the specific volume setting of the AVR + all other audio components in my system that produces a real-world reference SPL of 85db in my system. Generally, that is no where near 2Vrms out of the DAC.

I'll give a more concrete example:
1. Let's assume I have speaker sensitivity of 100db
2. My external amp is 2ch 250w/ch, with input sensitivity of 2.3v (full scale at 2.3v input)
3. I sit 12' from my speakers

Based on the above, I actually want to target ~0.5W of amplification to achieve ~85db, which means DAC output to my external amp should be around 100mV.

So, if 2V is roughly full scale output of DAC, then what a buyer is really interested in should be 2Vrms input and SINAD from 0Vrms to 2Vrms (volume of AVR/DAC) of the DAC's output. Is that data available in measurements of AVR reviews? Am I looking at this wrong?

 

[tifune]

Anyone know how the bi-amp mode works, exactly? What I mean is, Cambridge 851W for example has a bi-amp mode where they recommend 4ohm out to the woofer and 8ohm to the tweeter. Does the 3600 act in such a way?

I'd like to have dual full range fronts as well as a zone 2 pair - from the manual, there's no specific option for that but if the bi-amp outputs are just a mirror of front L/R I don't see why it wouldn't work? This is just for music in 1 large room (4 bookshelf speakers) and the option to play back in 2nd smaller room

 

[peng]

I'll give a more concrete example:
1. Let's assume I have speaker sensitivity of 100db
2. My external amp is 2ch 250w/ch, with input sensitivity of 2.3v (full scale at 2.3v input)
3. I sit 12' from my speakers

Good assumption but I am not aware of any speaker that has such sensitivity and measured well, at affordable price (say <$10.000 a pair).

Based on the above, I actually want to target ~0.5W of amplification to achieve ~85db, which means DAC output to my external amp should be around 100mV.

I have not checked your calculations but it sounds about right.

So, if 2V is roughly full scale output of DAC, then what a buyer is really interested in should be 2Vrms input and SINAD from 0Vrms to 2Vrms (volume of AVR/DAC) of the DAC's output. Is that data available in measurements of AVR reviews? Am I looking at this wrong?

I would use 2.5 Vrms input just to have some safe margin. I think that's what Amir has been doing, and has provided curves for up to 4 V output occasionally (Using RCA/unbalanced).

 

[Infl3x]

Good assumption but I am not aware of any speaker that has such sensitivity and measured well, at affordable price (say <$10.000 a pair).

I have some Klipsch Chorus II speakers rated at 101dbs of sensitivity. I found some actual measurements of the Chorus I at 96db, but haven't found anything specific to Chorus II. In any case, the rough order of magnitude is in the ball park, which is that the output of the DAC should be in the low hundreds of mV.

I would use 2.5 Vrms input just to have some safe margin. I think that's what Amir has been doing, and has provided curves for up to 4 V output occasionally (Using RCA/unbalanced).

In Amir's review post, he stated the following:
I wanted to show what the SINAD would be relative to output level but the curve there was highly dependent on the volume setting. I picked a random, 85 on the volume indicator...

That tells me the test methodology is actually variable input at fixed volume to get to 2V output. It seems it instead should be fixed input with varied volume setting of AVR/DAC to see SINAD curve from min-FS.

Also, my other point is that SINAD at 2V output is not as important as SINAD at 200mV, because most of the listening is done at 200mV. It would be good to see the data at these levels.

 

[peng]

I have some Klipsch Chorus II speakers rated at 101dbs of sensitivity. I found some actual measurements of the Chorus I at 96db, but haven't found anything specific to Chorus II. In any case, the rough order of magnitude is in the ball park, which is that the output of the DAC should be in the low hundreds of mV.



In Amir's review post, he stated the following:
I wanted to show what the SINAD would be relative to output level but the curve there was highly dependent on the volume setting. I picked a random, 85 on the volume indicator...

That tells me the test methodology is actually variable input at fixed volume to get to 2V output. It seems it instead should be fixed input with varied volume setting of AVR/DAC to see SINAD curve from min-FS.

Also, my other point is that SINAD at 2V output is not as important as SINAD at 200mV, because most of the listening is done at 200mV. It would be good to see the data at these levels.

Of course you are right, I should have said "except Klipsch's and may be a few others, though not many.." lol..

Regarding you other point, it would be nice to have it measured both ways. Given just one, I actually prefer fixed volume and variable input because that is what we do when listening to music, that we would set the volume to a comfortable level and leave it there.

About you last last point, agreed that 2 V is no as important as at 200 mV, except for some who do require 2 V often enough because of their spl requirement, peaks in the music (some classical music may have very high dynamics), speaker sensitivity and seating distance. Also, the first watt (power amp) and <200 mV (preamp) importance could be a little overrated too imo, because at such low output level, spl may also be low (not always as it depends). If in fact the spl is low, then even 70 dB SINAD, or -70 dB THD+N could mean distortions would be into the noise floor of the room and potentially masked by the music to the point it may not matter, or it may be not a whole lot.

 

[Infl3x]

About you last last point, agreed that 2 V is no as important as at 200 mV, except for some who do require 2 V often enough because of their spl requirement, peaks in the music (some classical music may have very high dynamics), speaker sensitivity and seating distance. Also, the first watt (power amp) and <200 mV (preamp) importance could be a little overrated too imo, because at such low output level, spl may also be low (not always as it depends). If in fact the spl is low, then even 70 dB SINAD, or -70 dB THD+N could mean distortions would be into the noise floor of the room and potentially masked by the music to the point it may not matter, or it may be not a whole lot.

Yes agreed. Many different variables and different system set ups out there with different requirements. My situation may be a bit extreme and actually not ideal, in that I have very sensitive speakers and a relatively high gain amp, which means I need a low pre-amp mV output.

But that's also why I'm particularly interested in measurements at the lower end of the scale rather than the upper end. That said, the lower level output generally applies to many systems out there.

Changing the volume setting will allow the measurement isolate the DAC's performance across its "volume" range. The specific (and unchanging) volume that works for a particular system will differ, but that's why having that data would be useful--so each user can understand a DAC or AVR's performance at a volume level that works for them.

 

[alexb997]

Anyone knows if 3600H supports the following video formats?

- HDR+
- Dynamic HDR
- VRR
- QMS
- QFT

I know these are HDMI 2.1 stuff, but I also see them listed on some HDMI 2.0b devices or old Blurays that get this enabled with firmware update. So, confused as to requirement. Is it chipset, cable, or both?

 

[milosz]

HDMI feature set compatibility issues can be confusing. One DOES need a good HDMI cable for the higher bandwidths of 4k HDR etc if the cable is longer than a meter or two. But typically all this stuff is a FIRMWARE issue; sometimes it is chipset capability. It should be noted that manufacturers would rather sell you a new pre/pro or AVR if you are looking for upgraded HDMI capabilities than just update your firmware. They make money selling gear when yours becomes "obsolete."

 

[milosz]

Here's an aside you all might find interesting.

I played a Blu-Ray from the set of The Expanse SF series, and my TV told me it was HDR. (Looks HDR, too)

HDR but only 1080p. It's a "regular" BluRay not a 4k blu-ray disc, but my 4K player and TV decoded HDR from it.

I checked the other Expanse blu-ray discs in the set that I have, and they all come up as 1080p HDR.

There's no mention of HDR 1080p blu-ray content anywhere that I can find, though there is nothing to prevent it from being done. Even the Amazon.com listings for these blu-ray discs does not mention HDR.

The series, as presented on Amazon.com Prime streaming, is 4k HDR but these blu ray discs are definitely 1080p discs and not 4k.

Anyone know of any other 1080p HDR content? There really should be more of it. HDR is -in my opinion- a greater improvement in image quality than just the increase in resolution from 1080-p to 4k. My 4k set is large enough and I sit close enough to it to clearly see the increased detail in 4k content, but even so the addition of HDR is more of a noticeable improvement in image quality than just the increased resolution. (Also, the image upscaling and enhancement applied to a 1080p image on a top-level 4k TV improves the 1080p image to near 4k clarity even if the actual detail and resolution is not there.)

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

Here's an aside you all might find interesting.

I played a Blu-Ray from the set of The Expanse SF series, and my TV told me it was HDR. (Looks HDR, too)

HDR but only 1080p. It's a "regular" BluRay not a 4k blu-ray disc, but my 4K player and TV decoded HDR from it.

I checked the other Expanse blu-ray discs in the set that I have, and they all come up as 1080p HDR.

There's no mention of HDR 1080p blu-ray content anywhere that I can find, though there is nothing to prevent it from being done. Even the Amazon.com listings for these blu-ray discs does not mention HDR.

The series, as presented on Amazon.com Prime streaming, is 4k HDR but these blu ray discs are definitely 1080p discs and not 4k.

Anyone know of any other 1080p HDR content? There really should be more of it. HDR is -in my opinion- a greater improvement in image quality than just the increase in resolution from 1080-p to 4k. My 4k set is large enough and I sit close enough to it to clearly see the increased detail in 4k content, but even so the addition of HDR is more of a noticeable improvement in image quality than just the increased resolution. (Also, the image upscaling and enhancement applied to a 1080p image on a top-level 4k TV improves the 1080p image to near 4k clarity even if the actual detail and resolution is not there.)

HDR is not a gimmick. 4K is noticable on large projection scree

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

HDR is not a gimmick. 4K is noticable on large projection scree

Screens. Maybe an eagle can tell the difference.

 

[RichB]

Screens. Maybe an eagle can tell the difference.

All formats include massive compression. 4K requires greater bitrate and for that reason, it has an advantage.
There is not doubt that UHD BD, well authored and peaking at 100 mbs, is perceptible on a 4K display.

- Rich

 

[Vasr]

Anyone know of any other 1080p HDR content? There really should be more of it. HDR is -in my opinion- a greater improvement in image quality than just the increase in resolution from 1080-p to 4k.

HDR and Image resolution are different things and can exist independent of each other. Just happened that HDR was initially supported by only 4k TVs. So HDR content was primarily produced with 4k content. But some of the remastering of older content into 1080p blu-ray have started to include HDR encoding even though you need a 4k TV to get support for HDR (don't know of any 1080p TVs with HDR support, some projectors might have it).

HDR increases the color contrasts by mapping the colors over a wider range of brightness (higher dynamic range for color). So the blacks look blacker and the colors are not dithered as much to get more realistic shades and transitions. This requires the TV to display at high nits (the brigher the TV can go, the better the HDR rendering). There are several tiers of support for HDR in TVs and so the final result does depend on how good the TV and its display is.

I rip all the Blu-Rays and play it using MPC with MadVR in a HTPC containing a RTX 2060 graphics card. The upscaling from 1080p when necessary and the HDR mapping done by MadVR is far superior to anything you can find in affordable 4k TVs. The 2060 is the minimum needed for the best scaling and HDR mapping that can be done by madVR even though it can work with lesser cards.

 

[avrpdx]

I rip all the Blu-Rays and play it using MPC with MadVR in a HTPC containing a RTX 2060 graphics card. The upscaling from 1080p when necessary and the HDR mapping done by MadVR is far superior to anything you can find in affordable 4k TVs. The 2060 is the minimum needed for the best scaling and HDR mapping that can be done by madVR even though it can work with lesser cards.

Would you care to share your MadVR settings?

I have the 'bare' minimum, and I mean 'bare', for my HTPC GPU. I'll consider upgrading in the future, but interested in collecting experiences from fellow HTPC enthusiasts.

 

[Vasr]

Would you care to share your MadVR settings?

I have the 'bare' minimum, and I mean 'bare', for my HTPC GPU. I'll consider upgrading in the future, but interested in collecting experiences from fellow HTPC enthusiasts.

Unfortunately, there is no way I know of to share a human readable version of the entire MadVR settings and the settings are spread over a huge number of screens. I have different profiles set up for different combinations of source resolution, framerate, HDR or SDR, etc., with a highly nested set of auto select rules (see pic) to get the maximum out of the graphics card. The GPU load and hence what you can do depends a lot on those source parameters. Higher frame rate or larger scaling require faster frame processing and so limits what you can do. 4k sources take longer to process and will need to do less for higher frame rates, etc. So, it has to be tuned a lot to optimize it for each type of source.

For a start, I would recommend the Wiki at jRiver which gives the basics of all settings for a low end graphics card but you may already have that in your bare profile. If you understand all the settings from there, then you experiment to make sure your frame processing delay is less than the the time between frame refresh and bump up the processing until it starts to drop frames. How much you can go up depends on the capabilities of the graphic card. I have used anything from a GT-1030 (very basic) to a RTX-2060 (anything higher makes it difficult to have a silent HTPC).

https://wiki.jriver.com/index.php/MadVR_Expert_Guide

 

[avrpdx]

Thanks, I indeed have the GT 1030! Good enough to play HEVC x265 1080p video, which is sufficient for me for now.

I can see how with that many video types, having it set up to automatically adjust settings would be useful.

Since my TV is quite old, the last gen of 1080p TVs before everyone switched to 4k, no HDR obviously, I have far fewer visual demands currently. Once I get my 4k projector picked out, I'll be looking closer at all this.

Thanks!

 

[AudioLover73]

In what ways are they superior to AVRs? Over in this thread, you mentioned that with the Denon AVR, the "sound out of my system was now reference quality, pinning me down to my seat listening to track after track from my "audiophile" playlist." Are "desktop audio products" really that much better?

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/audyssey-room-eq-review.12746/#post-378771

...Desktop audio products still have nothing to fear from AVRs when it comes to absolute transparency and superb performance...

 

[Deleted member 26908]

@amirm

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...r-x3600h-av-receiver-review.12676/post-377846

So is this measurement with the internal amplification turned ON or OFF?
I have a very hard time comparing your reviews to one another, you seem to have different workflows in each of them.
You're also not specifying what settings/configurations that were used, making it even harder to compare.

Also, can you please include HDMI measurements as a standard procedure?
People purchase A/V receivers for this very purpose, thank you.

This receiver has the best HDMI performance?
I will use the internal amplification, recommendations are welcome.

 

[peng]

@amirm

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...r-x3600h-av-receiver-review.12676/post-377846

So is this measurement with the internal amplification turned ON or OFF?
I have a very hard time comparing your reviews to one another, you seem to have different workflows in each of them.
You're also not specifying what settings/configurations that were used, making it even harder to compare.

Also, can you please include HDMI measurements as a standard procedure?
People purchase A/V receivers for this very purpose, thank you.

This receiver has the best HDMI performance?
I will use the internal amplification, recommendations are welcome.

For SINAD to be that high, the internal amps (front left/right channels) must have been disconnected. By the way, it's not "on" or "off", it is about "connected vs "disconnected", just technically speaking.

You can see the "connected" vs "disconnected here:
Denon AVR-X3600H AV Receiver Review | Page 14 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum