Denon AVR-X3800H Review

[Trell]

The full package with DL, and multi-sub DLBC is around US$800

So yes, it takes the AVR up to a completely different pice category!

Given what you gain, and given the D&M AVR's already have Audyssey onboard, I would find this price difficult to justify.

If you are keen on the Dirac based solutions, I would probably wait for a Dirac based AVR with DLBC... it would most probably end up cheaper than optioning up a D&M AVR.... (and you are not expected to be able to option up the D&M AVR's with DLBC until at least 1Q24.... so it will be a while!)

I'm hoping Onkyo will jump into this market segment.

My Denon AVR-X4200W seven years old and still doing great, so unless it breaks down I’ll keep using it. I’ve fans on top of it so hopefully that extends its lifetime.

I wonder how many will opt for DL+DLBC for multiple subwoofers on the Denon receivers.

 

[peng]

So I guess It would be better to wait for the 4800 to be released. I have an ATI 3channel amp to use for the LCR specifically. I believe that will allow better voltage go to the ATI Amp and possibly less distortion?

Why are you so concerned about using the center channel preamp with the internal amp remained connected? Do you know if your center speaker needs more than 1.6 V (SINAD higher than 80 dB at that point)? Even if it needs 2 V or higher, the 4700 (the older ones that has the AKM IC) pre out SINAD will still be better than people who use their "separate" Marantz AV7705 or any Marantz AVR below the SR8015 that they seem to enjoy and not complaining about audible distortions. Over thinking?

The 4700 with the PCM IC has not been measured, so SINAD may drop a few more dB, but even if it drops to 70 dB at 2 V, are you sure you can hear the difference between that and 95 dB when watching movies or music? 70 dB is about 0.03% THD+N, 95 dB is about 0.0018%, many times lower for sure but many power amps would have much higher distortions let alone speakers. Take the Monolith 200 W amp as example, when pushed with 2 V, it would output 315 W into 8 ohms, distortions at that point would be >=0.1%, that is 60 dB SINAD.

I would prefer the 4800 too, but for other reasons, and I wouldn't buy it over the 3800 only because I want to disconnect the center channel internal amp. I have been using my X4400H with all external channel amps and never notice any distortions or audible degradation because the center channel amp is not disconnected to its pre outs.

 

[tsammyc]

I don't use my Denon 4700 for anything but movies. For stereo, I use the RME ADI-2 FS connected to a MBP running Audirvana. MBP (Audirvana) -> ADI-2 FS -> Purifi amp -> Revel F328Be. This combination offers a clarity of sound with music that my 4700 can't match. In answer to your question, I would suggest turning the AVR off for stereo listening.

As far as ATMOS movies I have not had any problems with the Denon 4700 performance. I wouldn't recommend or buy a Denon 3800. It's not the value proposition I look for and adding an external DAC to it doesn't improve the sound as much as simply removing the AVR from the chain.

I don't disagree that a dedicated stereo amp does better than an AVR and indeed I have a similar setup to yours in another room. However, I often listen to Tidal in the home theater for convenience and I think an external DAC/streamer (which I already have) will solve the 3800's 2 channel problem. My more pertinent question would be whether (regardless of the value proposition) how much you think the 3800 will compromise movie Atmos sound over the 3700/4700? That might be a deal breaker for me.

 

[tsammyc]

Your 110 dB SINAD dac using analog input and direct mode will not change the fact that those D+M avr will still be limited to about 96 to 100 dB SINAD at the preamp output, limited by the vol IC. Still 96 dB SINAD is very good for an avr or integrated amps.

Do you know if the 3800's SINAD at the preamp output is worse than the 3700? Which AVR brand would be the best?

 

[tsammyc]

We would all love to see AVR's with 110db SINAD & Dynamic Range - but it just isn't out there.

And as soon as you run your DAC output into the AVR, and ask the AVR to apply RoomEQ and Surround Mixing - the AVR will re-digitise it (run it through its ADC) - and then process and put it out through its DAC's.

Although you might think that the drop from your 110db DAC to the AVR's 80db or thereabouts is dramatic - in the overall scheme of things, your speakers will have a SINAD substantially worse than that - and the benefits gained from RoomEQ, will most likely completely overwhelm any loss of SINAD.

As a perfectionist - I too look a bit askance at some of the SINAD specs of AVR's - but pragmatically, Audyssey &/or Dirac have a far greater impact!

I do notice that for a cappella vocals and jazz singers that there is a clear difference between an AVR applying RoomEQ (or indeed any processing) vs Pure Direct mode. The difference is sufficient that I generally never listen to 2 channel music processed, no matter what the strength of the processing. Whatever improvement in soundstage etc from processing like RoomEQ, I just can't get over the loss in clarity. The key question for me would be would whether there is any receiver with a good AKM DAC can redigitze, apply RoomEQ and output through its DAC in such a way that the loss of clarity is negligible.

 

[tsammyc]

According to the manual they do:

About HDMI AVC-X3800H

manuals.denon.com

Thanks. I will try this and report when I get the unit

 

[Dj7675]

I don't disagree that a dedicated stereo amp does better than an AVR and indeed I have a similar setup to yours in another room. However, I often listen to Tidal in the home theater for convenience and I think an external DAC/streamer (which I already have) will solve the 3800's 2 channel problem. My more pertinent question would be whether (regardless of the value proposition) how much you think the 3800 will compromise movie Atmos sound over the 3700/4700? That might be a deal breaker for me.

Just a few comments..
-Denon should have done better here at this price point and put out a unit with worse performance than previous versions. The step back is disappointing
-SINAD is THD(distortion) + Noise. Distortion can be extremely difficult (impossible?) to hear at these levels. I think you can be safe to say you can’t hear it at these levels with real content. Noise is a different matter. Since this is distortion dominated, I don’t think you have to worry about it for all practical purposes.
-Would this performance bother me if I was in the market for something? Yes. Would this step back in performance be a consideration purchasing? Probably. At the end of the day, if I needed HDMI 2.1, 4 sub outs and the other features it has, would I still possibly purchase it, probably. If I didn’t need 4 sub outs or care about future Dirac I would just grab an x3700. But if they roll out Dirac as expected, and if they add DLBC, it is an extremely competitive product. Without those things or if you don’t need 4 sub outs, the older units are a better value and would go there instead. The thing is, without DLBC to manage subs, sub integration, I think that Dirac is not complete. Their stated estimated of 2024 for DLBC (if Dirac was the driving factor) would be why I would pass on this unit and wait for DLBC to actually be released or just wait for the next version of the x3xxx series.

 

[tsammyc]

Just a few comments..
-Denon should have done better here at this price point and put out a unit with worse performance than previous versions. The step back is disappointing
-SINAD is THD(distortion) + Noise. Distortion can be extremely difficult (impossible?) to hear at these levels. I think you can be safe to say you can’t hear it at these levels with real content. Noise is a different matter. Since this is distortion dominated, I don’t think you have to worry about it for all practical purposes.
-Would this performance bother me if I was in the market for something? Yes. Would this step back in performance be a consideration purchasing? Probably. At the end of the day, if I needed HDMI 2.1, 4 sub outs and the other features it has, would I still possibly purchase it, probably. If I didn’t need 4 sub outs or care about future Dirac I would just grab an x3700. But if they roll out Dirac as expected, and if they add DLBC, it is an extremely competitive product. Without those things or if you don’t need 4 sub outs, the older units are a better value and would go there instead. The thing is, without DLBC to manage subs, sub integration, I think that Dirac is not complete. Their stated estimated of 2024 for DLBC (if Dirac was the driving factor) would be why I would pass on this unit and wait for DLBC to actually be released or just wait for the next version of the x3xxx series.

Absolutely agree with you and good to hear that movie sound might be ok. Just that I need something now and can't get Onkyo or Pioneers here, and anything other brand with full HDMI 2.1 outs is more expensive. I sort of like that its upgradable in the future and something I can continue to expand the home theater with whether its Dirac or more subs. My 1,000W SVS is already too much and set to 10% gain so I may have to get four smaller subs for directional bass.

 

[amper42]

Just a few comments..
-Denon should have done better here at this price point and put out a unit with worse performance than previous versions. The step back is disappointing
-SINAD is THD(distortion) + Noise. Distortion can be extremely difficult (impossible?) to hear at these levels. I think you can be safe to say you can’t hear it at these levels with real content. Noise is a different matter. Since this is distortion dominated, I don’t think you have to worry about it for all practical purposes.
-Would this performance bother me if I was in the market for something? Yes. Would this step back in performance be a consideration purchasing? Probably. At the end of the day, if I needed HDMI 2.1, 4 sub outs and the other features it has, would I still possibly purchase it, probably. If I didn’t need 4 sub outs or care about future Dirac I would just grab an x3700. But if they roll out Dirac as expected, and if they add DLBC, it is an extremely competitive product. Without those things or if you don’t need 4 sub outs, the older units are a better value and would go there instead. The thing is, without DLBC to manage subs, sub integration, I think that Dirac is not complete. Their stated estimated of 2024 for DLBC (if Dirac was the driving factor) would be why I would pass on this unit and wait for DLBC to actually be released or just wait for the next version of the x3xxx series.

Denon's Dirac pipe dream is incomplete without sub implementation and asking customers to wait until 2024 is absolutely nuts. Not to mention the cost could be $800+. The AVR may not even be working by 2024 or soon after. With the financial difficulties MASI is going through we don't know what Denon will look like in 2023 let along 2024 or if it will even exist. If you desire Dirac buy the Onkyo RZ50. There is no reason to pay now for a feature that may or may not exist in the future. If you don't like the RZ50 you can return it. Not the case with an AVR you have had for a year or two waiting for promised features.

The marketing of future features to sell current product which you may or may not be happy with is a poor business practice. When companies sell a product - it should be complete. These marketing practices remind me of Whimpy in the old Popeye cartoons. "I'll pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."

 

[Dj7675]

If you desire Dirac buy the Onkyo RZ50.

No DLBC but if one is comfortable adding a minidsp to combine subs with a good response either manually or with something like MSO, then the RZ50 would be a great option. But the RZ50 as is, I would consider it too incomplete. Others may of course disagree (which is fine of course). The door remains open if Onkyo will walk through it.... and release their higher end units and beat Denon/Marantz both in total price with Dirac/DLBC. It would be great for consumers if they did.
Edit: And I agree, never buy a unit on a future feature. But it based on what it can do now. Too many times companies, for a variety of reasons, do not deliver.

 

[beaRA]

I don't disagree that a dedicated stereo amp does better than an AVR and indeed I have a similar setup to yours in another room. However, I often listen to Tidal in the home theater for convenience and I think an external DAC/streamer (which I already have) will solve the 3800's 2 channel problem. My more pertinent question would be whether (regardless of the value proposition) how much you think the 3800 will compromise movie Atmos sound over the 3700/4700? That might be a deal breaker for me.

I would not deny myself the benefits of a subwoofer and room correction for a SINAD increase I probably won't notice. You say you are coming from a 20 year old Yamaha AVR, so I'm not sure you've experienced good room correction properly set up.

 

[peng]

Do you know if the 3800's SINAD at the preamp output is worse than the 3700? Which AVR brand would be the best?

We all know it is worse than the 3700AKM based on measurements but likely won't sound worse for most people. There is no published measurements for the 3700/4700 PCM to compare with the 3800.

 

[peng]

No DLBC but if one is comfortable adding a minidsp to combine subs with a good response either manually or with something like MSO, then the RZ50 would be a great option. But the RZ50 as is, I would consider it too incomplete. Others may of course disagree (which is fine of course). The door remains open if Onkyo will walk through it.... and release their higher end units and beat Denon/Marantz both in total price with Dirac/DLBC. It would be great for consumers if they did.
Edit: And I agree, never buy a unit on a future feature. But it based on what it can do now. Too many times companies, for a variety of reasons, do not deliver.

About the minidsp use with AVR subouts, I am curious about why no one seems to have concern about its 2V max spec (for the 2X4HD) when so many worry about the AVR's 75 dB SINAD at 2 V in non prep mode. You would think that for subwoofers, one would want at least 4 V if only for headroom? Not that I think 2 V is a real concern, just being curious.

 

[Trell]

I would not deny myself the benefits of a subwoofer and room correction for a SINAD increase I probably won't notice. You say you are coming from a 20 year old Yamaha AVR, so I'm not sure you've experienced good room correction properly set up.

That twenty year old YPAO room EQ is far less advanced than Audyssey XT32 or Dirac Live. That said, not all like the effects of room EQ, but some years ago Denon made a $20 app that could be used to set the upper frequency of correction for Audyssey, so one could apply roomEq only in the bass region where it's needed the most.

 

[GalZohar]

About the minidsp use with AVR subouts, I am curious about why no one seems to have concern about its 2V max spec (for the 2X4HD) when so many worry about the AVR's 75 dB SINAD at 2 V in non prep mode. You would think that for subwoofers, one would want at least 4 V if only for headroom? Not that I think 2 V is a real concern, just being curious.

I think the subwoofer having a variable gain makes it less critical to be able to output high voltage to it. Although some say 1v of the regular minidsp is still not enough, but the 2v of the 2x4HD is plenty for normal use cases. In the end the exact answer depends on the possible gain values of the subwoofer and possible voltage output levels of the AVR.

 

[peng]

I think the subwoofer having a variable gain makes it less critical to be able to output high voltage to it. Although some say 1v of the regular minidsp is still not enough, but the 2v of the 2x4HD is plenty for normal use cases. In the end the exact answer depends on the possible gain values of the subwoofer and possible voltage output levels of the AVR.

Sure, but the max 4 V input may still bother the perfectionists if they are aware of that limit, and over think it a little.

For two subs I never found the mini made any improvements over just subeqht.

 

[bigguyca]

Hi @sask15 ,
Thanks for the update, the release date is good news. The DAC change was wishful on my part. Not sure if there can be an improvement in performance with the 4800 over the 4700 or 3800, but it has a couple of features that can be beneficial. I am married to the 4 sub outs capability and the Dirac upgrade. Hoping the Jitter Chip and Monolith Amp construction/larger PS offer improvements.

In models below the X8500H and the upcoming A1H spending more delivers very little more in the amplifier muscle category or preamp quality. Selection between these models should likely be done based on features. Price is also important; most people believe they are getting a better product when they pay more.

X3800H - Transformer - 9.2 lbs.

X4800H - Transformer - 10.8 lbs.

X6700H - Transformer - 11.7 lbs. - Little meaningful difference between models - except in price

X8500HA - Transformer - 17.6 lbs. - More like it.

A1H - Transformer - 24.5 lbs. - Now that's a transformer at least in AVR land.


X3800H - Amp. power supply capacitance - 12,000 uF

X4800H - Amp. power supply capacitance - 15,000 uF

X6700H - Amp. power supply capacitance - 15,000 uF - Again, little meaningful difference between models - except in price

X8500HA - Amp. power supply capacitance - 22,000 uF - More like it.

A1H - Amp. power supply capacitance - 33,000 uF - More like it, but still far from that found in separate power amplifiers


Monolithic power amplifiers - one board per channel - Typically worse performance

In ASR measurements the monolithic amplifiers have worse measurements than the single board amplifiers. Also note; the monolithic board amplifiers circuit design and board layout are the same in all of the models that use them. This is from cheapest to highest cost Denon and Marantz AVR's.

In almost all ASR and Audioholic measurements typically at least one monolithic board from a pair or set, offers worse performance than the others, that is, production quality is evidently inconsistent.

Heat dissipation from monolithic boards (power transistors) into the heat sink is also more uneven than in single board power amplifiers due to the location of the power transistors on the heat sink vs. the heat sink fins.

The monolithic amplifier boards are found in more expensive AVR's so once again there is the advantage, clearly felt by many, that the boards effectively cost more!

 

[GalZohar]

Sure, but the max 4 V input may still bother the perfectionists if they are aware of that limit, and over think it a little.

For two subs I never found the mini made any improvements over just subeqht.

How did you test? Did you run MSO and check multiple positions? Did you compare the results between minidsp with optimal delay vs SubEQ HT delay? What did you get?

I don't have 2 subs, but for my 1 sub I needed to adjust the delay significantly to improve integration with the mains.

 

[dlaloum]

I do notice that for a cappella vocals and jazz singers that there is a clear difference between an AVR applying RoomEQ (or indeed any processing) vs Pure Direct mode. The difference is sufficient that I generally never listen to 2 channel music processed, no matter what the strength of the processing. Whatever improvement in soundstage etc from processing like RoomEQ, I just can't get over the loss in clarity. The key question for me would be would whether there is any receiver with a good AKM DAC can redigitze, apply RoomEQ and output through its DAC in such a way that the loss of clarity is negligible.

I would have agreed with you in the past, when I used Audyssey XT32 - now with Dirac Live, I find that not to be the case - the setup sounds better with Dirac, than in Pure Direct.

I did (during the change over) compare the old AVR to the new one - and in pure direct, they sounded identical (to my ears)... but the old one on 2 channel stereo music, was consistently better in pure direct than in Audyssey XT32, the new AVR is consistently better on 2ch music with Dirac active than in Pure direct.

There are obviously numerous potential caveats - but for myself, I have found that Dirac has put forward a very very convincing case for its benefits, regardless of the material being listened to. - The key Caveat, is that I was using Audyssey on a 2013 vintage AVR - there was no option to turn off the MRC default - and that 2kHz BBC "dip" that is built in (supposed to compensate for common issues in crossovers between midrange and tweeter) - really impacts on the midrange - BADLY. - Current D&M AVR's with the associated apps, give you the option to disable MRC... and my experience MIGHT have been different.

In your case - assuming a D&M AVR, have you turned off MRC before comparing the EQ vs the nonEQ for 2 ch music?
Also - have you tried to use the EQ, without any target curve... (that requires matching the target curve to the measured curve as closely as possible, so processing is then limited to impulse/phase and frequency EQ is minimised) - that would allow a comparison of the processing without altering the voicing of the system... this is essential, as both Audyssey and Dirac do both things, processing and voicing - and if you want to know the efficacy of the processing, you need to take the voicing part of the equation off the table!

 

[dlaloum]

No DLBC but if one is comfortable adding a minidsp to combine subs with a good response either manually or with something like MSO, then the RZ50 would be a great option. But the RZ50 as is, I would consider it too incomplete. Others may of course disagree (which is fine of course). The door remains open if Onkyo will walk through it.... and release their higher end units and beat Denon/Marantz both in total price with Dirac/DLBC. It would be great for consumers if they did.
Edit: And I agree, never buy a unit on a future feature. But it based on what it can do now. Too many times companies, for a variety of reasons, do not deliver.

January CES, possible launch of RZ70?