-
Welcome to ASR. 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-X4700 AVR Review (Updated)
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
I have a question about the 4700. I've been off the forums and out of the know about quite a few of my old passions for the last two and a half years due to
Light-chain Amyloidosis and now I'm well enough to get back in.
Does the subwoofer distance as measured by the room correction need to be manually corrected or has that been fixed in an update? As I vaguely recall, after taking the Audyssey measurements to the subs, that distance needs to be multiplied by .85 and input manually. Please clarify. Thanks
Light-chain Amyloidosis and now I'm well enough to get back in.
Does the subwoofer distance as measured by the room correction need to be manually corrected or has that been fixed in an update? As I vaguely recall, after taking the Audyssey measurements to the subs, that distance needs to be multiplied by .85 and input manually. Please clarify. Thanks
No problem that I'm aware of, never heard of this 0.85 correction being needed. ???
Right.
ban25
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2022
- Messages
- 1,357
- Likes
- 1,478
D+M spitballed the speed of sound at 300 m/s instead of 343 m/s. This bug affects all pre-2022 D+M AVR/AVPs, unless you are using Audyssey MultEQ-X, which applies the correction on upload. So using the 4700, you are correct that you do need to multiply by 0.875 if using the on-screen calibration.
I stand corrected. 
The error had been hyped up to the nth degree by hearsay. D+M did not consider that an issue. In my own assessment of the issue, depending on the individual use case, it may or may not need to be corrected, though for those who don’t fully understand the details cited by various posters, the manual correction often suggested may make them feel better.
In reality, I would bet in most use cases, there won’t be audible difference. So, do it if it bothers you.
I stand corrected.
In my opinion, you didn't miss a thing anyway, the forum talks of a few AVF, AVSF, even Reddit posters are non sense, well intended but still, mostly based on misconceptions.
Just read the following post is enough, otherwise there are a ton of posts that are really a waste of time to read imo:
The silliest thing that I took away from many of those posts is that they seem to firmly believe Audyssey's mic would measure the time delays, send it to the AVR, then the AVR will convert the delays to distance using 300 m/s instead of 343 m/s, and then convert it back to time again to do the room corrections thing, that seems totally illogical and I doubt it very much Denon, and Marantz of course, would do such stupid things, but hey, who knows...
Regardless, if the OP is bothered, I see nothing wrong for him to apply the manual "correction", but in some cases, again it depends on the devils in the details, he may actually introduce an error by doing such correction (the multiplication factor of 0.87463) lol.......
To me, the OP would do better just do a good job, by following instructions to the letter when running Audyssey, and if obsessed with the best possible results, use REW to help tweaked the calibration results, then sit back and enjoy. Forget about that so called "error/bug/incorrection calculations", then Denon already said:
"It is no bug."
As to whether D+M has fixed the "bug" in the say 2022/23 models, chances are they must have, just to calm down those AVF, AVSF etc., posters who are obviously smart to have discovered, and understand it was, or could have been a real issue.
As we discussed before - this is a real bug and nothing that D&M should be proud off. It is minor, but then really depends on relative speaker distance.Even then hardly noticeable if at all.In my opinion, you didn't miss a thing anyway, the forum talks of a few AVF, AVSF, even Reddit posters are non sense, well intended but still, mostly based on misconceptions.
Just read the following post is enough, otherwise there are a ton of posts that are really a waste of time to read imo:
The silliest thing that I took away from many of those posts is that they seem to firmly believe Audyssey's mic would measure the time delays, send it to the AVR, then the AVR will convert the delays to distance using 300 m/s instead of 343 m/s, and then convert it back to time again to do the room corrections thing, that seems totally illogical and I doubt it very much Denon, and Marantz of course, would do such stupid things, but hey, who knows...
Regardless, if the OP is bothered, I see nothing wrong for him to apply the manual "correction", but in some cases, again it depends on the devils in the details, he may actually introduce an error by doing such correction (the multiplication factor of 0.87463) lol.......
To me, the OP would do better just do a good job, by following instructions to the letter when running Audyssey, and if obsessed with the best possible results, use REW to help tweaked the calibration results, then sit back and enjoy. Forget about that so called "error/bug/incorrection calculations", then Denon already said:
"It is no bug."
As to whether D+M has fixed the "bug" in the say 2022/23 models, chances are they must have, just to calm down those AVF, AVSF etc., posters who are obviously smart to have discovered, and understand it was, or could have been a real issue.
Thing of the past though - they brought as ART so they are in vogue. All the past is now gone. ART to behold.
I respect your opinions, as always, though in my opinion it really isn't technically a bug if it was intentional and would work as intended (you probably have seen the REW plots of my own, never had the issues of those who claimed it was an issue for them). As far as I am concerned the suggested "fix" by forum members is only going to do good if they know, obviously some do, how to verify that for what they did, it did improve based on their impulse response checks. For others it would be hit and miss, that is, could create an error by applying that fix. That really is the only reason why I posted on this controversial (I understand it is not controversial for those who insisted it was a "bug"
) topic again. I just hope people don't worry about nothing, when they could have spent more time enjoying their movies, yes Atmos included.I did post there a few times but gave up by just agreeing to disagree, as we are going to have to do now as well.
Audyssey did seem to call it a big, easy for them to say as it was the doing of D+M, but to be fair to them, they never did say it was a "bug" the way D+M did it. They knew better....Anyway, I have said things I felt like saying and I am not trying to defend D+M, as you know well, I like the brands and have used their AVP/AVR many times in the past. They 100% don't need me to defend them. They didn’t just say it wasn't a bug, they actually explained it in enough details, though the English as written seemed like "translated" so it wasn't too easy to read.
edit: quite a few typo, hopefully all caught and corrected, hate typing on my iphone especially with auto fill/correct on.
Last edited:
Are you thinking of ART?I respect your opinions, as always, though in my opinion it really isn't technically a bug if it was intentional and would work as intended (you probably have seen the REW plots of my own, never had the issues of those who claimed it was an issue for them). As far as I am concerned the suggested "fix" by forum members is only going to do good if they know, obviously some do, how to verify that for what they did, it did improve based on their impulse response checks. For others it would be hit and miss, that is, could create an error by applying that fix. That really is the only reason why I posted on this controversial (I understand it is not controversial for those who insisted it was a "bug"
I did post there a few times but gave up by just agreeing to disagree, as we are going to have to do now as well.
Anyway, I have said things I felt like saying and it not trying to defend D+M, as you know well, I like the brands and have used their AVP/AVR many times in the past. They 100% don't need them to defend me. They did just say it wasn't a bug, they actually explain it in enough details, don't the English seemed like "translated" so it wasn't too easy to read.
Much ado about nothing ?
At 75 I know my hearing sucks, it took a beating over the years. First in the Army Light Weapons Infantry spending lots of time in the RVN around a LOT of noise. Then a couple decades or so listening to rock at ear bleed levels thru a monster Hi-Fi.
Though I do try to ensure within my budget that I have a near SOTA multich playback system, I don't get my jockstrap in a bunch over the tiny details. For the last decade I've used Audyssey with the Editor app and REW to measure and tweak its results, I've been mostly satisfied with it's results, as was Amir listening to it on his system using his Salon2's, so how bad can it be ??? I've just received but haven't yet installed a new Marantz AV20 pre-pro in which I may or may-not install the Dirac ART app. In the balance are a couple details, the cost, the complexity of running the app, etc. I've watch a video or 2 on running Dirac Live and the set-up looks to be quite complex and involved ? There are other options, instead of Dirac I could get mitchco to do a custom room calibration and save me the brain pain? Time will tell.
I have no experience with ART but the concept is great. If they fix all the reported “bugs”, I think it will be a game changer.
I still plan on getting a cheap x3800h just to play with ART but will only get one if price drops to the $1,000 The licenses will cost another C$800 (if on sale) if i understood right.
I think there is a ART only license for $600.
That would work for me (if I had a processor that supports it) because I want to improve bass and my front and rears are Salon2s so there is an option to make better use of them.
- Rich
In my opinion, it really is much ado about nothing, or at least about very little.
Not being a trained technical writer, it may take me a few hours to write something up that could convince even the die hard posters who believed what they like to believe, but I don't have time at the moment. For those interested in some of poster's who seemed to share some of my beliefs, the following extracts cut and paste from AVF may be sufficient:
Firstly, from the one I linked earlier, here's the full contents of the post that included responses from SU:
I brought this to Sound United's attention and the response was "interesting", pretty much what most assumed they would say in that it is NOT a "bug", basically that 343m/s & 300m/s is not much difference and there may be some apparent DSP processing limitation, this is their response below,
"Thank you for your information. It is no bug.
It is regulation as Sound Speed is calculated as 300m/s.
It is commons for Dolby/DTS regulation also. It is also deeply related with speaker distance.
On the other hand, why it should be aligned the distance and time, do you know?
It is aligned for the time alignment for the multi channel surround.
For example, the ideal surround environment for the 5.1ch speaker setting is same distance from all speakers to listening position.
In this case, no need the time alignment for the surround.
Because, playback sound at the same time are reached the signal to listener's ear at the same time.
However, almost listening environment is different.
In this case, AVR should be aligned the signal with delay for the speakers except most far distance speaker.
Sound Speed in 1m is 3 msec=0.0033sec(300m/s Base) or 0.0029(343m/s). If speaker distance for front 3m center 2m. 3msec is delayed for center speaker.
In this calculation, 300 or 343 is no big difference.
And resolution(Step) of time alignment is also related hardware specification of DSP etc.
Therefore, it is common sense for the surround processing."
I tried to get a follow-up response from them as to why they felt having the Speed of Sound at 300/ms instead of the correct value of 343m/s was no big deal & that most D+M AVR owners would disagree, they basically said it is most certainly not needed to "enjoy" surround sound for customers in general,
"Do you know why the speaker distance calculation is needed for the surround system?
However, it is not needed to understand for the enjoy the surround by customer in general.
In addition, we say again 300 / 343 difference is no sense to discuss. Because, it is not bug. And it is one of specification of Audyssey at consumer products.
AVR is not measuring tool for the researcher.
In the several limitation for the hardware / cost based on the consumer product, we are developing and selling the products.
The speaker distance is calculated by measurement data by time period from speaker to mic. However, important is time period. (NOT calculated distance for speaker) Because, the time period is used based on measurement data for the time alignment for the surround gap.
NO USE the calculated distance.
If make the gap 1 msec between front and center. delay 1 msec for center from front signal output.
Therefore, the distance from the speaker is not used at the Audyssey measurement data.
In addition, the measurement process power is completely different for PC>App>AVR.
On the other hand, from User Inteface Point of view, AVR use the distance based on Dolby /DTS requirment
also. It is merged as grey zone points like a 300 sec/344 sec etc.
Conclusion is, it is not bug. Denon should develop the products with some hardware limitation and not only focus Audyssey. We should arrange the total specification.
Especially, Audyssey PC app is developed by Audyssey. Audyssey App for Android/iOS is certified by Audyssey also."
It seems Audyssey has "certified" the MultEQ Editor App despite it continuing to have this miscalculating time alignment distance compensation bug.
Below are some interesting arguments, or counter arguments depending on which camps they were in:
From OCA, the author of Audyssey one, AVO etc.:
I am not going to keep going as there are 13 pages just on this particular forum, AVSF would likely have more.
On the subjective side, some posters reported hearing differences, better or worse, while some reported no difference. I am on the objective side I have read little, or no convincing arguments for applying that sound speed error correction factor for reasons I briefly stated.
At 75 I know my hearing sucks, it took a beating over the years. First in the Army Light Weapons Infantry spending lots of time in the RVN around a LOT of noise. Then a couple decades or so listening to rock at ear bleed levels thru a monster Hi-Fi.
Time will tell.
Wow, AV20, congratulations! Have fun.. If you are getting good results with the $20 app like I had, then I would say DLBC/ART is definitely nice but not necessarily a priority for a lot of users. But then, the AV20 is quite pricey, so if you spend so much already on the hardware, another $700 doesn't sound too bad any more right?
I don't know the exact $ figure because the US$ to C$, and Dirac seems to be offering discounts more often than in the past, when it used to be mainly on Black Friday and Christmas/New Year only.
Yes I did, I never heard anything with the Editor app + my post tweaking using REW that made me yurn for something better.
Maybe I'm deef.
Ah maybe, but then after what I just said above, is another $800 for the full boat package worth it for me? I don't know.But then, the AV20 is quite pricey, so if you spend so much already on the hardware, another $700 doesn't sound too bad any more right?
I do see they offer some form of a $700 package on a 14 day trail, that could be interesting.
After I get the unit all set up and lived with for a while, I may give that 14 trial a run.
I imagine/hope I can switch between the two DRC's in some form and be able to compare them myself.
But then what if I chose to stay with Audyssey and post my results here, will I be slammed as a totally deaf neanderthal-troglodyte? Oh the shame! LOL
Congrats on AV20. Hope you will like it and enjoy it for many years to come. It is fantastic unit.Yes I did, I never heard anything with the Editor app + my post tweaking using REW that made me yurn for something better.
Maybe I'm deef.
Ah maybe, but then after what I just said above, is another $800 for the full boat package worth it for me? I don't know.
I do see they offer some form of a $700 package on a 14 day trail, that could be interesting.
After I get the unit all set up and lived with for a while, I may give that 14 trial a run.
I imagine/hope I can switch between the two DRC's in some form and be able to compare them myself.
But then what if I chose to stay with Audyssey and post my results here, will I be slammed as a totally deaf neanderthal-troglodyte? Oh the shame! LOL
I recently got ART on AV10 and it works great. I was never Dirac person, but ART made me switch teams in just couple of hours - and that is as I was taking my time
. In my case it was really simple to set it up. 9 measurements, then grouping of speakers and finally shelf filters and you are done. Yeah a bit of REW but graphs tend to turn out pretty so not too demanding. Would be surprised if you would opt to go back to Audy. I definitely will not.Same here, REW graphs show my different runs of Audy, DLBC etc., yet I have no particular preference in terms of using the best and worst results that varies between say +/- 1.5 dB and +/- 5 dB 20-300 Hz. Whether there were audible differences or not would be hard to say as I did not really do any quick A/B tests, let alone perfectly level matched, DBT etc.. Not that I was too lazy to do it, just that it would have been very difficult to do in at home with what I have.Yes I did, I never heard anything with the Editor app + my post tweaking using REW that made me yurn for something better.
Maybe I'm deef.
If they offer a 14 day trial, I would definitely do it, but I am confident I wouldn't hear improved sound quality, though I would be very happy to get a bunch of new REW graphs within the 14 days. If I can see the graphs, I would be able to hear/or imagine the improved sound quality, forum claims by users usually mean next to nothing to me.
I have read that people were doing such comparison using the presets, though I always wonder how effective it would be to do A/B by flipping between presets, because of the inherent delays of more than a few seconds.
There are also some senior (aka knowledgable) members that were surprised with REW results. I can tell you, for whatever it is worth, that ART has a sound signature that is very different than Audy or DLBC. It will announce its presence and it will be acknowledged.
I spend like 3 hours setting up ART and 2 days to test with movie content as had to travel, but what I heard is amazing. I still do have some questions, but on a first date I did fall in love.
Not sure if you have seen these. For 3 hours of tweak, this is more than I could ever hope for. More to come in due time.
Dirac ART is now running on beta FW for Denon Xx800H AVRs!
Could CEC from some connected HDMI device somehow cause this problem? As i have Pc and Bluray in and only Pc screen on output.
www.audiosciencereview.com
Similar threads
