Denon AVR-X3700H AVR Review

[peng]

Thanks...its been often mentioned to limit Audyssey's EQ to about the 300Hz-500Hz....where do you limit yours? If one were to limit it to say 500Hz then there's no point in doing the EQ curve via Ratbuddyssey above 500Hz right?

I have tried from 250 to about 15,000 Hz and settled on about 1000 Hz if I remember right. That is right, there is no point to enter any cuts/boosts to frequencies above the upper limit you set. You can do it though, so that if you want to flip between the two you can just open the file, change the limit and the HF EQ will be in effect based on what you keyed in before. It will however, imo be a pointless exercise because unless it is truly an AB comparison that is done within seconds, humans cannot reliably tell which one is which, some people think they can though.

The good thing about using the App to tweak is that, by my own logic only, Audyssey will still be in charge of figure out the new/modified filters. So the data you keyed in basically works like the feedback loop use in amplifiers to reduce distortions. Your entered data is based on measurements (e.g. REW) that basically feed Audyssey with the errors at frequency points you want to affect (Output - Input) so Audyssey could/would make the necessary changes to the filter set to try and reduce the error. Not exactly the same obviously but sort of..

You can do something similar on Yamaha's too by using the PEQ set they provided in a way that the user can apply on top of the YPAO's auto created filters, but then you have to figure out the "Q" yourselves; and the PEQ filters are fixed/limited to whatever they allowed whereas the Audyssey App allow you to enter as many frequency anchor points as you wish, though I think (just logically speaking again), you should do the minimum necessary.

 

[peng]

I have had an AVR-X3400H with two HSW subs for some time. (3700 will be here this weekend) I have also had a UMIK-1 mic for a few years and have used it to help me position the subs and validate my MultEQ calibrations.

This year I also picked up a minidsp 2x4 HD to see if I could improve the subs and after validating everything through multiple calibrations etc I can tell you without a doubt in my mind that REW with a minidsp 2x4 HD produces a better calibration for multiple subs. With the tools within minidsp and REW you simply have more control, from better time alignment between the subs themselves to compete control over how peaks are cut, to being able to roll off the bottom end to keep your sub within its abilities.

TBH I ended up also using both but was sure to make sure the minidsp only cut peaks and didn’t boost any. Here is a pic of my results

If you have more than two subs, I can see that.. With two subs, in my experience, Audyssey+App+Rat allows me to get within less than +/- 1 dB, whereas with the mini, even when used with Audyssey together, I could not get better than about +/- 2.5 dB, 1/12 smoothing.

 

[kejar31]

If you have more than two subs, I can see that.. With two subs, in my experience, Audyssey+App+Rat allows me to get within less than +/- 1 dB, whereas with the mini, even when used with Audyssey together, I could not get better than about +/- 2.5 dB, 1/12 smoothing.

Yeah what I showed here was with two subs no smoothing which give me about a +- of about 2db until 120hz. Are you using smoothing for sub measurements?

Also, what process did you follow to integrate the subs together using the minidsp? Here is a great video that pretty much walks you though the process

Another thing, one that should be done even before that process, is to make sure you are not placing the subs in an area that standing waves cancel our one another out creating nulls in your sub region. I used room mode calculators followed up with verifications via measurements for this. There is a great tool within REW for this, you can also use this calculator from harmon.

Choosing a location was the most difficult situation for me personally as I had three major requirements

1. needed each of the subs measurements to complemented one another (if one had nulls in one freq the other could not)
2. wanted to maximize the volume that the subs were producing at my seated location. Otherwise after calibration you could end up with other areas of the room having way way more bass in some freq than your seated location. This not only minimizes power requirements of your sub amps it also stops family members from telling you to turn it down as much lol. Sub crawl works very well for this.
3. needed to make sure that the subs integrated well with the main front two speakers.

based on 1 and 2 I had two options.

1. One sub in the front right corner and the other in the rear left (8 inches away from both the rear and side walls)
2. Both subs in the rear corners (8 inches away from both the rear and side walls)

I ended up landing on both subs in the rear due to issues with phase issues and my main speakers.. With one in the front and rear corners no matter what I did one of the subs would cancel out one of the fronts at the crossover region causing issues with integration.

 

[peng]

Yeah what I showed here was with two subs no smoothing which give me about a +- of about 2db until 120hz. Are you using smoothing for sub measurements?

When I tweak with the App/Rat I did not use any smoothing so I can see where the opportunities are more clearly.

Also, what process did you follow to integrate the subs together using the minidsp? Here is a great video that pretty much walks you though the process

I don't remember now, it was about 3 years ago the last time I used it, but I did follow the best instructions I could find/gather at the time and that would have included the minidsp websites, hometheatershack, avsforums, AVNirana etc.

Thank you for the links. I will certainly take a good look just to learn.

On the practical side, for what I managed to achieve without the mini, I won't bother hooking it up again even if it can help a little more. Since you ask, I just pick one the REW plots to show how flat I could get within for the range 20-125 Hz, basically within less than +/- 1.5 dB with no smoothing. I have many plots, the one below is definitely not the best because I remember seeing +/- about 1.2 dB with no smoothing, and less than +/- 1 dB with 1/12 smoothing.

If I don't use the App+Rat, that is, XT32 only, the best I remember achieving was about +/- 3 dB, and using the mindsp would get it closer to +/- 2.5 dB.

SPL vs Freq, no smoothing.

This is obviously just my base curve, and I did implement some kind of a slope for the low end, though I actually found the flat curve very listenable. I have also plotted with the mic move side way, up, and down (6 to 10 inches between each position) and the average of 6 to 9 mic positions look very similar, may lose only about 1 dB or less iirc..

 

[kejar31]

When I tweak with the App/Rat I did not use any smoothing so I can see where the opportunities are more clearly.



I don't remember now, it was about 3 years ago the last time I used it, but I did follow the best instructions I could find/gather at the time and that would have included the minidsp websites, hometheatershack, avsforums, AVNirana etc.

Thank you for the links. I will certainly take a good look just to learn.

On the practical side, for what I managed to achieve without the mini, I won't bother hooking it up again even if it can help a little more. Since you ask, I just pick one the REW plots to show how flat I could get within for the range 20-125 Hz, basically within less than +/- 1.5 dB with no smoothing. I have many plots, the one below is definitely not the best because I remember seeing +/- about 1.2 dB with no smoothing, and less than +/- 1 dB with 1/12 smoothing.

If I don't use the App+Rat, that is, XT32 only, the best I remember achieving was about +/- 3 dB, and using the mindsp would get it closer to +/- 2.5 dB.

SPL vs Freq, no smoothing.

This is obviously just my base curve, and I did implement some kind of a slope for the low end, though I actually found the flat curve very listenable. I have also plotted with the mic move side way, up, and down (6 to 10 inches between each position) and the average of 6 to 9 mic positions look very similar, may lose only about 1 dB or less iirc..

View attachment 109227

How did you get this graph again? It shows both fronts and subs all at the same time. Also could you increase the range to show a one DB scale (numbers should show 5db changes on the side)

like this graph of my right channel showing integration with my sub which is crossed over at 60hz (DEQ and REF on)

Aside from that how did you achieve this via RAT. Did you edit the curve of MultEQ to get the desired response?

 

[peng]

How did you get this graph again? It shows both fronts and subs all at the same time. Also could you increase the range to show a one DB scale (numbers should show 5db changes on the side)

It was 1 dB per division but I guess when I did the capture thing something got messed up.
I detailed the steps I took in the linked below:
The Audyssey MultEQ Editor app users thread (with facts and tips) | Page 3 | Audioholics Home Theater Forums

did it again later:
The Audyssey MultEQ Editor app users thread (with facts and tips) | Page 8 | Audioholics Home Theater Forums

Jon AA did it in similar but different ways:
The Audyssey MultEQ Editor app users thread (with facts and tips) | Page 5 | Audioholics Home Theater Forums

At first I only tweak by entering data to the combined subwoofers curves but I did play with the front left and right, focused on above 100 Hz to about 200 Hz.

With my XO set to 80 Hz for the FL, FR and 90 Hz for the Center, I thought it is good to see how the FL, FR and the two subs play together. I plotted the individual left, right, subs and other combinations too just to if there is anything weird that needed investigation but found no glaring issues.

 

[kejar31]

oh I seee so you are manually adjusting the curve to get your desired response..

Some Q's if you don't mind? when you edit the curve that does not override the actual MultEQ adjustments right? I believe you are making changes on top of the adjustments? Have you looked at your graphs to be sure you are not clipping or driving up the distortion at these frequencies?

I would be very interested in seeing distortion graphs..

 

[peng]

oh I seee so you are manually adjusting the curve to get your desired response..

Some Q's if you don't mind? when you edit the curve that does not override the actual MultEQ adjustments right? I believe you are making changes on top of the adjustments? Have you looked at your graphs to be sure you are not clipping or driving up the distortion at these frequencies?

I would be very interested in seeing distortion graphs..

Yes to all.. The way I see it, at least the way I did it, by adding cuts and boosts to the frequency points chosen based on the REW FR plot post Audyssey run, I am basically providing feedback to Audyssey that they failed to achieve the "flat curve" they intended. So the entered data via the App/Rat would appear to be customizing the target curve when in fact it is telling Audyssey that in order to hit their target flat curve, they have to aim for a non flat curve. It is sort of cheating the software, to compensate the inaccuracy. An analogy could be say you aim at the target with your arrow but found that you miss it by a foot to the right because of the wind effect, so next time you shoot you would aim 1 foot to the left in order to hit the target. Since it works so well this way, I am convince that Audyssey's algorithm to calculate the filters are actually quite good and accurate, but it is the data collection with the mic and the operator that failed to provide it with accurate information. So Audyssey itself would be like a good archer/bowman who is at the mercy of the wind but in this case it is at the mercy of the mic, the operator and whatever undesirable room conditions.

In that thread at AH, I emphasize the need to aim for a low target level to avoid the need to use any boosts. Also, Ratbuddyssey does display the humps and dips for each channel, so you can use the information guide you if you do have to apply boosts. Once the curve is flattened, if the 20-120 to 200 Hz range is two low relative the say the 1-2 kHz range, then one can increase the sub trim level by a few dB (not needed in my case). It's not going to result in clipping unless the subs are undersized to begin with. My two main subs have their volume set to not even 1/3, both at about 9 O'clock position at the most and trim level as found by Audyssey were -7 and -7.5.

 

[Dj7675]

Yes to all.. The way I see it, at least the way I did it, by adding cuts and boosts to the frequency points chosen based on the REW FR plot post Audyssey run, I am basically providing feedback to Audyssey that they failed to achieve the "flat curve" they intended. So the entered data via the App/Rat would appear to be customizing the target curve when in fact it is telling Audyssey that in order to hit their target flat curve, they have to aim for a non flat curve. It is sort of cheating the software, to compensate the inaccuracy. An analogy could be say you aim at the target with your arrow but found that you miss it by a foot to the right because of the wind effect, so next time you shoot you would aim 1 foot to the left in order to hit the target. Since it works so well this way, I am convince that Audyssey's algorithm to calculate the filters are actually quite good and accurate, but it is the data collection with the mic and the operator that failed to provide it with accurate information. So Audyssey itself would be like a good archer/bowman who is at the mercy of the wind but in this case it is at the mercy of the mic, the operator and whatever undesirable room conditions.

In that thread at AH, I emphasize the need to aim for a low target level to avoid the need to use any boosts. Also, Ratbuddyssey does display the humps and dips for each channel, so you can use the information guide you if you do have to apply boosts. Once the curve is flattened, if the 20-120 to 200 Hz range is two low relative the say the 1-2 kHz range, then one can increase the sub trim level by a few dB (not needed in my case). It's not going to result in clipping unless the subs are undersized to begin with. My two main subs have their volume set to not even 1/3, both at about 9 O'clock position at the most and trim level as found by Audyssey were -7 and -7.5.

Agree with you on your Audyssey thoughts for sure. In particular as you have shown with the great results and documented process of how to do it. My question is if it can do it with additional REW measurements and the ratbuddysey app, why isn’t it doing it better with the original mic/measurement with Audyssey?

 

[kejar31]

So something I asked earlier that didn’t seem like anyone had an answer too. I got my AVR-X3700H today and was wanting to run a 50/50 setup with music and movies. Having an external amp on my front channels (monolith 2) I wanted to be able to run that with the fronts set to pre out for music. AKA turn off the internal amps for stereo. I found that while pre-out is an all or nothing ordeal with this model, you can set a preset with two different speaker/amp assignment and a new MultEQ config. This will work perfect for me. When I want to listen to music I just need to change my preset to preset 2, movies preset 1

 

[TomekNet]

Why wouldn't you want your Monolith amp to power fronts in movie mode also?

 

[kejar31]

Why wouldn't you want your Monolith amp to power fronts in movie mode also?

Oh the monolith will still power the fronts in movie mode. What I didn’t want was the internal amp on when listening to music

 

[TomekNet]

Oh the monolith will still power the fronts in movie mode. What I didn’t want was the internal amp on when listening to music

This Amp Assign setting turns off the amps for R&L channels:

 

[kejar31]

This Amp Assign setting turns off the amps for R&L channels:

Yeah that works until you don’t actually assign 11 channels.

 

[amper42]

Yeah that works until you don’t actually assign 11 channels.

Yes, that's true. You won't get the screen to use the fronts with pre-outs unless you have amp assign setup in 11.1 mode. That really limits the ability to select that option. Luckily, as you found - you have several ways to get around this.

1. Use the front pre-outs without selecting that option in amp assign. (as pre-outs are all live anyway)
2. Setup 11.1 amp assign with front pre-outs selected.
3. Set amp assign to preamp mode and save it to Preset 2 so you can easily select stereo mode with amps inactive.

 

[ciotime]

Below is a more detailed explanation re the pre-outs of the Denon X3700H which applies also to the other 2020 models.

" Yes, all pre-outs are hot at all times, you can externally amp anything you want.

You would set amp-assign to 11.1, and set pre-out to height 2. Floor: 7.1, height: 4ch.

NOTE: the "pre-out" setting is simply picking between either FL & FR, or HEIGHT2 L & R to be the 2 amps that are disconnected, to allow for all internal amps to be used elsewhere. It is simply a required choice when doing 11.1, to select a pair of internal amps between them, so that the other internal amps can be used. It is not indicating that those are the only pre-outs being used, simply they are the one pair of pre-outs that MUST be used. "

 

[peng]

Agree with you on your Audyssey thoughts for sure. In particular as you have shown with the great results and documented process of how to do it. My question is if it can do it with additional REW measurements and the ratbuddysey app, why isn’t it doing it better with the original mic/measurement with Audyssey?

I think to say "customize" the target curve with the App is somewhat misleading. It is not wrong, just misleading. The way I use it is an example, my customized target curve is far from "flat", but that's the ticket for me to end up with a "flat" curve . In other words, to get a flat curve that can be confirmed by measurement after the fact, I need the "customized" non flat target curve. So my desired (verified by measurement) curve is actually the Audyssey target curve and I only customized it (the Audyssey target curve) so that the end results will actually be a "flat" curve. It is only after the goal is achieved, then I would do the actual customization, such as by tilting it up from say around 120 Hz towards 15/20 Hz, and that would be another trial and error exercise albeit much easier to do because I would be starting from a real flat curve.

Analogy I used earlier was the bow and arrow/target example. I know I am having hard time to explain my point, and I hope it won't confuse people.

 

[kejar31]

IDK maybe everyone here is not aware.

If you use the pre-outs on an external amp that needs more that ~1.4 volts, which is around volume 80 (0), your distortion jumps way up. This is because even if you use the pre-outs the (assigned) internal amp is still running and at this volume clipping and causing noise even across the pre-outs.

The only way to avoid this is to either use an external amp that gets to full volume at 1.4 volts or to not assign an internal amp to the channels with an external amp.

With the AVR-X3600H you could simply turn off the internal amp on the front channels only.

On this years model you can turn off the internal amps on all pre-out but as I said, it’s and all or nothing ordeal. That is unless you are using 11 channels and assign the fronts to pre-outs that do not have an internal amp.

This leads me to what I was trying to say. If you use this receiver to listen to music and have an external amp for the front two (like I do) but do not use all 11 channels (so you can assign your fronts to one without an internal amp). You can use the preset function to setup a stereo mode (2.1 channel) that does not use any of the assigned internal amps for music.

 

[amper42]

Denon receiver retail and dealer prices will increase $50 to $100 on Feb. 1.

 

[kejar31]

Denon receiver retail and dealer prices will increase $50 to $100 on Feb. 1.

Yeah I called a local shop to try and purchase one last week (always try to purchase local if I can). While he didn’t have stock he did say if I could find one to not hesitate and buy it now (even at full retail) as prices were going up feb 1st. He said that he was short on stock of all receivers due to a shortage of AKM DAC chips which is a result of a fire in November. My guess is that with this shortage also comes an imbalance of supply and demand. That, or they need to rework the line to use ESS Sabre dacs.