Denon AVR-X3800H Review

[tjcinnamon]

And that SINAD penalty will not likely penalize your ears that you cannot hear the difference from 97 dB to 76 dB SINAD, but might penalize the eyes/brains that can see/remember the lower numbers.

That always blows my mind. Looking at the SINAD charts creates a big expectation that 97 is good and 76 is terrible and should not be purchased… yet audibly they are the same

 

[peng]

That always blows my mind. Looking at the SINAD charts creates a big expectation that 97 is good and 76 is terrible and should not be purchased… yet audibly they are the same

Agreed, but do keep in mind if the 76 is noise dominated that audibly speaking, you may hear noise (hiss, and/or him) depending on you listening habits, distance, and speakers, whereas 97 dB would typically mean no audible noise in most cases (>90% I guess).

For example, in some cases, I could hear the noise when using the Marantz AV8801, but after I replaced it with the Denon AVR-X4400H, the noise became inaudible under any use conditions and I actually enjoyed the silence even though the Marantz was not actually a problem for 99% of my use conditions. It sounds contradictory, I know..

 

[01svtL]

Because Tmukh asked if X4800H would have a better sinad than X3800H. So I suggest to look at Anthem.
They don't have Dirac, but Arc Genesis is the equivalent of DL + DLBC. So if you spend 1700$ for a X3800H and add 350+650 (?? Not sure), You'll spend the same as a mrx740 without waiting 1 year to have the bass control.
My personal 0.2 cent opinon, obviously

Uh, how do you figure that? In an ARCG sweep, it doesn't even send tones to the two sub channels separately like Audyssey 32 does. Audyssey XT32 easily did a better job with the bass in my room than ARCG did on a new MRX 540. ARCG sees the two sub channels as ONE sub, so essentially the setting is either sub On or sub OFF. I confirmed this with an Anthem engineer after running ARCG multiple times with different mic placements (aside from MLP obviously) all yielded worse bass results than Audyssey XT32 on the X3700H I'm also demoing. There's ZERO chance ARCG is the same as DL+DLBC.

 

[peng]

Uh, how do you figure that? In an ARCG sweep, it doesn't even send tones to the two sub channels separately like Audyssey 32 does. Audyssey XT32 easily did a better job with the bass in my room than ARCG did on a new MRX 540. ARCG sees the two sub channels as ONE sub, so essentially the setting is either sub On or sub OFF. I confirmed this with an Anthem engineer after running ARCG multiple times with different mic placements (aside from MLP obviously) all yielded worse bass results than Audyssey XT32 on the X3700H I'm also demoing. There's ZERO chance ARCG is the same as DL+DLBC.

I am quite sure AARCG sees two subs individually but I agreed it doesn't do as good as job as Audyssey and Dirac Live. I have sent my calibration files to Anthem twice for comments and tell me if there is anything else I could try to get better results, so far no response. So I would suggest you double check your speaker profile setups, it could be one reason why you are not getting better bass response.

It is easily understandable where Arturokiwi is coming from, one just have to visit Anthem AVP/AVR threads and ARCG threads and will be swamped with nice comments from owners. The irony is that on Audyssey and Dirac threads you typically see actual measurements (REW graphs etc.) posted with varying results, but you rarely see Anthem owners post their measured graphs. Talks are cheap though, anyone can say anything nice or not nice about the "sound" they heard.

Edit: I should know better that one cannot assume. The MRX1140 does have two independent subouts, but the 540 has two in parallel, not independent.

 

[ArturoKiwi]

At the moment I'm reading comment from every side: ArcG, Audessey and Dirac.
Forum are plenty of people that says Audissey is a crap, but I didn't listen them because I understand that the good in any room correction is in the skills and patience of the user.
You Peng are very good with Audissey and always take the Audessey flag high, but I never accuse you to just make propaganda. Instead I always wrote you are good in Audessey, stop.

 

[ArturoKiwi]

At the end I think that all the three room correction are equally good.
ArcG is paid with then gear, in Italy are more expensive.
Audissey will cost you about 200€, of you want the most complete, and a LOT of time and patience.
Dirac will cost a lot of money.
This is my 0.1 cent opinion.

 

[peng]

At the moment I'm reading comment from every side: ArcG, Audessey and Dirac.
Forum are plenty of people that says Audissey is a crap, but I didn't listen them because I understand that the good in any room correction is in the skills and patience of the user.
You Peng are very good with Audissey and always take the Audessey flag high, but I never accuse you to just make propaganda. Instead I always wrote you are good in Audessey, stop.

Thank you for the kind words. You can't accuse me of making propaganda anyway because I have measurements to show results, and I never said one sounded better than another, just comparing measurements that's all. I also said Dirac Live is very good, even Anthem ARCG is very good, just that it's deep bass needs tweaking, more so than the other two, if one wants better results. I would also caution that it is just based on my own experience, others may have different experience, though I know I am not the only one reported similar issues. People who claimed one is better than the other is fine for me as it is their opinions, I simply commented that it would be nice if they would post some actual results based on measurements, not predicted.

It is like ASR reviews, people can complain Amir puts too much emphasis on the importance of measurements such as SINAD, IMD etc., but those are facts, and the results are repeatable, if measured under the same conditions using the same methodology using the same instruments. Whereas people's claims of one amp or avr sounding better than another, are just their own perception that are subjective by nature and may not apply to another person, especially if used under different conditions, with different equipment in different rooms.

Another example, I have never claimed, probably never will, that my AVM70 sounds better than my previous AVR-X4400H and AV8801. All I could say was something like when I tried to compare them, even with my separates, I couldn't tell a difference between them and that's just my own experience that may not apply to others. I will never tell anyone to buy Anthem, because they sound better than Marantz, or Onkyo, or vice versa.

So if people said Audyssey is crap, I would be curious to know on what basis they said that, was it by ears, measurements, or both? And did they follow instructions to the letter, as you alluded to, it depends on the user's skill and patience too.

 

[peng]

At the end I think that all the three room correction are equally good.
ArcG is paid with then gear, in Italy are more expensive.
Audissey will cost you about 200€, of you want the most complete, and a LOT of time and patience.
Dirac will cost a lot of money.
This is my 0.1 cent opinion.

Are you talking about the MultEQ X app, yes that costs US$200, but the Editor App costs $20 and that's the only app I have ever used on Audyssey, though I also used the free 3rd party user interface, known as Ratbuddyssey. Ratbuddyssey is only used for data entry when editing the target curve, it has nothing to do with the actual filters that are only done by the Editor app.

Are you using a Denon or Marantz AVR that is compatible with the Editor app? If so, for $20, or 20€ in Italy, I assume, you should try it and you won't regret it. It is very easy to use, no extra time required unless you want to tweak. Even without tweaking, Audyssey XT32 can typically get you within about less than +/- 5 dB with 1/12 smoothing from 20 to 120 Hz based on my own measurements and other users posted graphs. Again, I only comment on measured results posted on forums by users.

 

[CyrusTheGreat_600BC]

That always blows my mind. Looking at the SINAD charts creates a big expectation that 97 is good and 76 is terrible and should not be purchased… yet audibly they are the same

In my own experience, it depends on volume level. If you listen to very high volumes, the lower SINAD receiver is distinguishable in some scenes.

 

[tjcinnamon]

Are you talking about the MultEQ X app, yes that costs US$200, but the Editor App costs $20 and that's the only app I have ever used on Audyssey, though I also used the free 3rd party user interface, known as Ratbuddyssey. Ratbuddyssey is only used for data entry when editing the target curve, it has nothing to do with the actual filters that are only done by the Editor app.

Are you using a Denon or Marantz AVR that is compatible with the Editor app? If so, for $20, or 20€ in Italy, I assume, you should try it and you won't regret it. It is very easy to use, no extra time required unless you want to tweak. Even without tweaking, Audyssey XT32 can typically get you within about less than +/- 5 dB with 1/12 smoothing from 20 to 120 Hz based on my own measurements and other users posted graphs. Again, I only comment on measured results posted on forums by users.

I’d highly recommend MQX. The REW import is a fantastic feature and Audysse converts the generic PEQ REW output to FIR filters.

The predicted results matched the measured quite accurately.

It sounds magnificent!

 

[GalZohar]

I’d highly recommend MQX. The REW import is a fantastic feature and Audysse converts the generic PEQ REW output to FIR filters.

The predicted results matched the measured quite accurately.

It sounds magnificent!

Just because the predicted and measured are matching doesn't mean it's an advantage of the REW import feature. Even a flatter measured result is not necessarily better.
When you use the Audyssey measurements (the normal way) rather than REW (which is a bit of a hack, but works), you let the Audyssey algorithm do the spatial averaging, and decide what should and shouldn't be corrected. I don't know what Audyssey algorithm actually does internally, but depriving it of information and just using deleted measurements with target curve that matches your REW corrections shouldn't be inherently better, and in fact I'd expect it to be equal or worse to just using Audyssey the normal way, assuming Audssey algorithm doesn't have any major flaws (and I've seen none were proven so far). At least until proven otherwise (blind listening test on top of measurements).

 

[dlaloum]

That always blows my mind. Looking at the SINAD charts creates a big expectation that 97 is good and 76 is terrible and should not be purchased… yet audibly they are the same

Once you get past roughly 60db ... THD is basically inaudible (probably inaudible well before that!)

Noise on the other hand can be quite obvious at 70db!

So when looking at specs it is worthwhile checking the signal to noise, seperately from the THD... there are heaps of amps out there that sound fantastic and have SINAD in the 60's - but their S/N is typically over 100db

 

[peng]

So when looking at specs it is worthwhile checking the signal to noise, seperately from the THD... there are heaps of amps out there that sound fantastic and have SINAD in the 60's - but their S/N is typically over 100db

I agree with you on this, but it may be worth noting that if those heaps of amps out there that sound fantastic and have SINAD in the 60's, why couldn't they have SINAD in the 90's, or higher, or at least 80's? If we are talking about budget friendly amps then it is understandable. For the manufacturer, in order to stay within the given budget, something has to go, so the manufacturer has to spend money wisely/or smartly on things like convenience features, usability and reliability etc., than going after higher SINAD.
For example, what would be the reasons (I mean good reasons) for midrange products such as the new Marantz (Denon's may be excusable because of their much lower prices, in US and Canada anyway) AVRs to use a DAC chip that limits its potential SINAD to below 93 dB from the previous generation's 107 dB, when Onkyo, Yamaha and Anthem's can use better chips that allow their AVRs to reach SINAD in the mid 90's if implemented well? If they were to use the ES9010K2M that Anthem's are using, and increase the selling price to cover the extra costs for the better chip (a few dollars, may be even $20?), would they think enough customers would not buy the products to the point they might lose overall?

Thanks to ASR, Amir and members, at least in one of those Maximo video, the presenter (Oliver) did mention not that AKM chips are available again, it might be possible that in the future Denon+Marantz (not sure if that was in the Denon or Marantz video but it's the same Oliver who mentioned it) might consider AKM chips again. So that kind of tell us they are now aware of the many user complaints, that have little or nothing to do with audibly degrade sound quality, but a matter of principle that, as Amir called it, "regression", that should not be easily embraced by the informed consumers. DAC chip is just one example, anyone can think of a few more if they don't like the dac chip example.

 

[CyrusTheGreat_600BC]

I agree with you on this, but it may be worth noting that if those heaps of amps out there that sound fantastic and have SINAD in the 60's, why couldn't they have SINAD in the 90's, or higher, or at least 80's? If we are talking about budget friendly amps then it is understandable. For the manufacturer, in order to stay within the given budget, something has to go, so the manufacturer has to spend money wisely/or smartly on things like convenience features, usability and reliability etc., than going after higher SINAD.
For example, what would be the reasons (I mean good reasons) for midrange products such as the new Marantz (Denon's may be excusable because of their much lower prices, in US and Canada anyway) AVRs to use a DAC chip that limits its potential SINAD to below 93 dB from the previous generation's 107 dB, when Onkyo, Yamaha and Anthem's can use better chips that allow their AVRs to reach SINAD in the mid 90's if implemented well? If they were to use the ES9010K2M that Anthem's are using, and increase the selling price to cover the extra costs for the better chip (a few dollars, may be even $20?), would they think enough customers would not buy the products to the point they might lose overall?

Thanks to ASR, Amir and members, at least in one of those Maximo video, the presenter (Oliver) did mention not that AKM chips are available again, it might be possible that in the future Denon+Marantz (not sure if that was in the Denon or Marantz video but it's the same Oliver who mentioned it) might consider AKM chips again. So that kind of tell us they are now aware of the many user complaints, that have little or nothing to do with audibly degrade sound quality, but a matter of principle that, as Amir called it, "regression", that should not be easily embraced by the informed consumers. DAC chip is just one example, anyone can think of a few more if they don't like the dac chip example.

I agree with you 100%, they should’ve spent a few more dollars specially after price hike, but someone here mentioned possible future chip shortage, and it may be valid, so Denon took the easy way out and went after the chip that nobody wants (TI), so they can secure their production for foreseeable future. Probably Yamaha and Anthem won’t produce/sell as many units as DM, so they don’t care. Again, they could’ve better planned this, but probably after x700 AKM to version 2 fiasco, they wanted a safe launch.

 

[peng]

I agree with you 100%, they should’ve spent a few more dollars specially after price hike, but someone here mentioned possible future chip shortage, and it may be valid, so Denon took the easy way out and went after the chip that nobody wants (TI), so they can secure their production for foreseeable future. Probably Yamaha and Anthem won’t produce/sell as many units as DM, so they don’t care. Again, they could’ve better planned this, but probably after x700 AKM to version 2 fiasco, they wanted a safe launch.

I picked the 9010 because it is also a 2 channel IC, same as the TI IC), are quite comparable in price at quantity up to 100 (based on Mouser), in fact, at Mouser, the TI chip cost a little more. So you might have hit the nail in the head, that volume might have a lot to do with their decision. The TI chip has been out for a very long time so it is possible that they can offer much lower price at much higher quantity. We can only guess, we don't know if there are any special deals between TI and mass producers such as Maximo and Yamaha, or Sony. Someone also complained about Denon not using gold plated connectors on the X4800H, while I have no use for gold plated, that members also has a point, that is, why not? On that, I think the only reason is, Maximo (started with United Sound), wanted to differential Marantz as their premium line so they might have decided to introduce as much visual hint as possible. The price difference between so called gold plated and/or silver plated must be negligible anyway, but it is for the look, corrosion issue for the non-gold plated ones are not really an issue as most people don't keep their AVRs for longer than 20 years lol.. Sorry, I digressed..

https://www.mouser.com/c/?q=pcm5102a

https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/ESS-Technology/ES9010K2M?qs=sPbYRqrBIVkOHauV5xTLbw%3D%3D

 

[CyrusTheGreat_600BC]

I picked the 9010 because it is also a 2 channel IC, same as the TI IC), are quite comparable in price at quantity up to 100 (based on Mouser), in fact, at Mouser, the TI chip cost a little more. So you might have hit the nail in the head, that volume might have a lot to do with their decision. The TI chip has been out for a very long time so it is possible that they can offer much lower price at much higher quantity. We can only guess, we don't know if there are any special deals between TI and mass producers such as Maximo and Yamaha, or Sony. Someone also complained about Denon not using gold plated connectors on the X4800H, while I have no use for gold plated, that members also has a point, that is, why not? On that, I think the only reason is, Maximo (started with United Sound), wanted to differential Marantz as their premium line so they might have decided to introduce as much visual hint as possible. The price difference between so called gold plated and/or silver plated must be negligible anyway, but it is for the look, corrosion issue for the non-gold plated ones are not really an issue as most people don't keep their AVRs for longer than 20 years lol.. Sorry, I digressed..

https://www.mouser.com/c/?q=pcm5102a

https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/ESS-Technology/ES9010K2M?qs=sPbYRqrBIVkOHauV5xTLbw%3D%3D

I only keep my AVRs at most 2-3 years with Covid be an exception. So I agree with you, I’ve no use for gold plated jacks, but isn’t silver or copper more conductive than gold??

 

[peng]

I only keep my AVRs at most 2-3 years with Covid be an exception. So I agree with you, I’ve no use for gold plated jacks, but isn’t silver or copper more conductive than gold??

Yes, but that member's point is not about conductivity, but resistive to corrosion, over time. I had my AVR-3805 for at least 17 years and there are no signs of corrosion, but in some moist area that could be a factor. It is a valid point, technically speaking but not practically speaking in most cases. The question is also, the quality of the plating, poor quality gold plated connectors may look golden, but it may not offer the intend advantage anyway.

 

[techsamurai]

I only keep my AVRs at most 2-3 years with Covid be an exception. So I agree with you, I’ve no use for gold plated jacks, but isn’t silver or copper more conductive than gold??

Really, I'm the opposite. I'm sporting 3 Marantz 8002 from 2009-2010

Their chassis is copper plated and screws are even copper-plated.

Here's an interesting article that I just read. The guy is listening to headphones and he's ultra familiar with them so any change will be instantly noticeable just as my Marantz.
https://orronoco.blogspot.com/2021/05/copper-vs-aluminum-chassis-case-real.html

I finished my basement and used double drywall and some sound insulation so I can't hear the 2 systems playing on top of each other. I played music on my main floor and the first thing I noticed was that my system seemed to have shrunk - it was instant, I'm like the Pink Panther Amir uses . I had to re-run Audyssey. The entire basement was acting like a giant extra speaker cabinet. I lost Audyssey the other day (my fault) and I knew something was off as I was pressing the Auto button on everything half a dozen times in case it was in another mode.

I might just try a Denon 4800h just to see how it sounds.

 

[Trell]

Really, I'm the opposite. I'm sporting 3 Marantz 8002 from 2009-2010

Their chassis is copper plated and screws are even copper-plated.

Here's an interesting article that I just read. The guy is listening to headphones and he's ultra familiar with them so any change will be instantly noticeable just as my Marantz.
https://orronoco.blogspot.com/2021/05/copper-vs-aluminum-chassis-case-real.html

I finished my basement and used double drywall and some sound insulation so I can't hear the 2 systems playing on top of each other. I played music on my main floor and the first thing I noticed was that my system seemed to have shrunk - it was instant, I'm like the Pink Panther Amir uses . I had to re-run Audyssey. The entire basement was acting like a giant extra speaker cabinet. I lost Audyssey the other day (my fault) and I knew something was off as I was pressing the Auto button on everything half a dozen times in case it was in another mode.

I might just try a Denon 4800h just to see how it sounds.

Not one measurement is offered by that due in any way or shape, nor any blind testing, just the usual audiophool language.

That dude is writing things like the following so he can be safely ignored: "Previously, using the copper chassis also give the bass more tight and impactful. This difference is recognize easily because in this aluminum chassis, I easily spot the missing of the bass nuance from this amplifier."

 

[peng]

Really, I'm the opposite. I'm sporting 3 Marantz 8002 from 2009-2010

Their chassis is copper plated and screws are even copper-plated.

Here's an interesting article that I just read. The guy is listening to headphones and he's ultra familiar with them so any change will be instantly noticeable just as my Marantz.
https://orronoco.blogspot.com/2021/05/copper-vs-aluminum-chassis-case-real.html

I finished my basement and used double drywall and some sound insulation so I can't hear the 2 systems playing on top of each other. I played music on my main floor and the first thing I noticed was that my system seemed to have shrunk - it was instant, I'm like the Pink Panther Amir uses . I had to re-run Audyssey. The entire basement was acting like a giant extra speaker cabinet. I lost Audyssey the other day (my fault) and I knew something was off as I was pressing the Auto button on everything half a dozen times in case it was in another mode.

I might just try a Denon 4800h just to see how it sounds.

I had read many of those interesting articles in the past. Most of those are great in term of build quality. Also can be effective in minimizing electromagnetic interferences if done well.

In terms of measrable performance gains though, they often could not, and didn't make up for the difference in performance versus using stronger power supplies of decent quality, opamps, adc, dacs, volume controls, power amp sections, heatsinks dsps etc.

Just compare the av8805 vs sr6014, avr-x3600h measurement, you can see the effects, or lack off. There are plenty of measurment that support money can better spent on things that matter more, for more measurable audio performace.

I am only commenting on objective facts, not sound quality performace cited by people in sighted, not tightly controlled AB comparison listening tests.