Want more immersive? Try increase crossover 90/100hz for front/center, 110/120hz for surrounds.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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
SpiritGeometry
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2021
- Messages
- 13
- Likes
- 2
Thank you Benedium. I will give those numbers a try!
SpiritGeometry
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2021
- Messages
- 13
- Likes
- 2
I have setup my new Denon 4700, and after cailbration it did a good job of sounding more impressive. @Benedium I used your cross over settings and works a treat. Testing music was more likable than the Marantz. After 24 hours I will do some further fine tuning and see how it performs again. So far so good. The sound is detailed and has better dynamics than the Marantz. Marantz is much softer. I am only dialling in at 45 and sounds terrific.
I'm looking for a good receiver or processor that can handle 11 channels of processing. It also needs eARC support.
I'll be using the Benchmark AHB2 for front LR, and don't really care about the quality of the other 9 channels. I do care about the quality of the preamp on the front LR.
Considering all possible options of receiver and processor from all brands for less than £5000, am I right in thinking the 4700H or the 6700H are amongst my best options, if used in pre-amp mode (I'd use Emotiva XPA-9 for the remaining amps)? Pre-amp/DAC wise I think the 6700H tested better in @amirm's reviews, but to what extent could the differences be due to testing variation or unit variation? Aren't these basically the same design products with the same components, and the 4700H just has fewer amps?
Basically, do I need to pay extra for the 6700H to get better pre-amp and DAC performance, even though I won't be using any of its amps or additional channel processing?
I'll be using the Benchmark AHB2 for front LR, and don't really care about the quality of the other 9 channels. I do care about the quality of the preamp on the front LR.
Considering all possible options of receiver and processor from all brands for less than £5000, am I right in thinking the 4700H or the 6700H are amongst my best options, if used in pre-amp mode (I'd use Emotiva XPA-9 for the remaining amps)? Pre-amp/DAC wise I think the 6700H tested better in @amirm's reviews, but to what extent could the differences be due to testing variation or unit variation? Aren't these basically the same design products with the same components, and the 4700H just has fewer amps?
Basically, do I need to pay extra for the 6700H to get better pre-amp and DAC performance, even though I won't be using any of its amps or additional channel processing?
SpiritGeometry
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2021
- Messages
- 13
- Likes
- 2
I would say video, sound steering is identical to the Marantz 7015 I had, and 4700 sounded the same so far but was louder on lower volumes.
I agree with @red_kk Will not be a noticeable difference on sound. But you may notice the bass will be overwhelmingly more present on 6700 which is referenced in reviews. What Hifi do a decent review on the 6700. I am still becoming acquainted with 4700 after having the Marantz SR7015 and I would also say the Marantz is no different from the 4700 either.
I don't even believe that is a fact but I respect what others heard what they heard. Just that I believe it could have been because of something else, such as not compared under the same conditions. The preamps, DACs and power amps between the 4700 and 6700 are near identical.
SpiritGeometry
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2021
- Messages
- 13
- Likes
- 2
I can only agree with your facts. What if the What Hifi team tested 2700, 3700, 6700 and 8500 in the same room and with same equipment. I know some reviewers could be bias as What Hifi do not like reviewing the Marantz models. But what is fascinating how they compare the models. They have not reviewed the 4700. I am testing the 4700 now and it kills the Marantz 7015 and in same room and conditions. Best Amp I have experienced so far. Music is great on 4700.
Hey, letting you guys know I will be listing my gently used X4700 in the classifieds in the next day or two. Been used only in preamp mode and includes rack mounts and all original packaging, accessories, etc. If interested I am also selling Parasound A 52+ 5CH amp and two Emotiva A-150 2CH amps. Buying an X8500 and an A 31. Thanks.
Hey I currently own an A31, I'm just curious why you are selling the A52 and buying A31?
That is only piece of my upgrade that I am unsure of. The 52+ is fine, but with the ability to turn off individual channels on the 8500 I kinda want to buy a more legacy Parasound product. There is no plan for a 31+ in the near future so I can spend a few hundred bucks and get a "better" amp for my LCRs. But, I may just keep the 52+ depending on how the market is.
D
Deleted member 28640
Guest
Hi folks, a question about the X4700. I have a separate amplifier that I use for LCR, if I were to turn off the L/R amps in the X4700 and use the X4700 to only power two rear surrounds and two height speakers, approximately how many RMS watts/channel would the four speakers receive? They are 4ohm and I use a 60hz crossover for them. Thanks
Amir's review indicates 173W would be available for stereo channels. Four channels for Height and Surrounds with 60Hz crossover could easily be powered by the 4700 in the configuration described.
D
Deleted member 28640
Guest
What set of four speakers did you have in mind that would be easily powered by the 4700? The quoted answer implies, "All surround and height speakers with a 60hz crossover can easily be powered by the 4700"--which is not true. I'm afraid you answered a question I didn't ask, I asked if anyone knew approximately how many RMS watts/channel the 4700 would output with 4 channels driven.
The power of the Denon 4700 is rated at 125W per channel by Denon. However, Amir measured 173W at 4 ohms and 124W in 8 ohms. With four speakers configured I would calculate approximately 85-90% of that power rating being available depending on the source and crossover used.
D
Deleted member 28640
Guest
Thanks, no I don't believe 150-ish watts each will be enough in my case. They are hard to drive DIY speakers, dual 7" Dayon RS-180 woofers in a sealed cabinet, a 4" mid, and a ribbon tweeter.
You might be surprised. Most of us are using less than 5W for normal listening levels. If it was my setup I would try the speaker with the Denon internal amp before automatically thinking I need 200W on each speaker. You can always add an external amp later and compare the difference.
It seems like a die hard myth, that if the speaker is hard to drive then a 100 W or less amp cannot get the best out of it. The fact is, may be, may be not, because it depends on the maximum SPL needed from the listening position.
Just a couple examples below to show why it is a may be may be not case. That is, no such thing as I need a big amp because my speaker is hard to drive:
1) Easy to drive speakers and you listen to high spl:
You can have a big Klipsch speaker rated 150 W cont. and 600 W peak, (whatever they meant..), and sensitivity rated 98 dB/2.83V/1m (let's assume they exaggerated, so actual may be just 93 dB/2.83V/1m), but if one listens from only 12 ft, then even an AVR rated 105 WPC can drive such speaker to reference level with just 1 speaker, who listens that loud though? And to listen to 10 dB below reference level (again just 1 speaker) like a lot of people do, there will be a heathy 10 to 13 dB headroom/reserve on hand for unexpected or special moments.
2) So called hard to drive speakers:
Example: A Dynaudio bookshelf, used under the same condition as in 1):
Sensitivity: 86 dB (specs), 84 dB (actual, measured)
Impedance: 4 Ohms
Power handling: 180 W (IEC)
This one will do about 93 dB, that's 12 dB less than the big Klipsch used in 1), so for reference level one will need about 1600 W to get "the best out of it". Unfortunately, the speaker's power handling spec says 180 W so the most powerful amp one should use with it based on good/best practice would probably be about 360 W into 4 Ohms. Still, I can understand why some would consider the little Contour 20 hard to drive based on its impressive IEC power handling of 180 W, but I thought it almost laughable when I saw people claiming their tiny KEF LS50, rated:
"Amplifier requirements: 40–100W. Maximum output: 106dB. " hard to drive!! Also claimed they love a lot of power, need a lot of power to sound good....etc.etc..
How hard can it be if 100 W is required? Just about every Denon, Yamaha, Marantz AVRs can drive, based on measurements.. They can produce more than 106 dB (from 1 meter) without too much distortion anyway!! Owners of the LS50 may say, specs/measurements don't tell everything, well I happen to have a pair and had them used with amps from 7W to 500 W into 4 Ohms, and AVRs as well, and I know the answer (to the question whether they need a lot of power..) is still may be may be not.
Just a couple examples below to show why it is a may be may be not case. That is, no such thing as I need a big amp because my speaker is hard to drive:
1) Easy to drive speakers and you listen to high spl:
You can have a big Klipsch speaker rated 150 W cont. and 600 W peak, (whatever they meant..
), and sensitivity rated 98 dB/2.83V/1m (let's assume they exaggerated, so actual may be just 93 dB/2.83V/1m), but if one listens from only 12 ft, then even an AVR rated 105 WPC can drive such speaker to reference level with just 1 speaker, who listens that loud though? And to listen to 10 dB below reference level (again just 1 speaker) like a lot of people do, there will be a heathy 10 to 13 dB headroom/reserve on hand for unexpected or special moments. 2) So called hard to drive speakers:
Example: A Dynaudio bookshelf, used under the same condition as in 1):
Sensitivity: 86 dB (specs), 84 dB (actual, measured)
Impedance: 4 Ohms
Power handling: 180 W (IEC)
This one will do about 93 dB, that's 12 dB less than the big Klipsch used in 1), so for reference level one will need about 1600 W to get "the best out of it". Unfortunately, the speaker's power handling spec says 180 W so the most powerful amp one should use with it based on good/best practice would probably be about 360 W into 4 Ohms. Still, I can understand why some would consider the little Contour 20 hard to drive based on its impressive IEC power handling of 180 W, but I thought it almost laughable when I saw people claiming their tiny KEF LS50, rated:
"Amplifier requirements: 40–100W. Maximum output: 106dB. " hard to drive!! Also claimed they love a lot of power, need a lot of power to sound good....etc.etc..
How hard can it be if 100 W is required? Just about every Denon, Yamaha, Marantz AVRs can drive, based on measurements.. They can produce more than 106 dB (from 1 meter) without too much distortion anyway!! Owners of the LS50 may say, specs/measurements don't tell everything, well I happen to have a pair and had them used with amps from 7W to 500 W into 4 Ohms, and AVRs as well, and I know the answer (to the question whether they need a lot of power..) is still may be may be not.
