Denon AVR-X4700H 2020 AVR Review

[Chromatischism]

In my case I'd likely buy an X3700 and not X4700 to prevent extra possible noise from Auro

Can you explain what you mean by this?

 

[demoncamber]

@amirm
*Update* Got a reply from a Denon Quality Engineer, lets hope this gains some traction!
As a side note, between the tweet and whoever else tried to contact Denon about the test results, I think this proves how crucial 3rd party testing on freshly released products is. Great job Amir

The reply:

Hi Nick,​

​

Thank you for alerting us to Amir’s findings in Audio Science Review. I have passed the article to our Japan QA & CS teams.​

​

Obviously, we are disappointed that the Denon AVR-x4700h did not measure well on their Audio Precision system (with regard to noise levels and jitter).​

​

Hopefully, we can help discover the root cause of the noise issue and fix it. I am not qualified to speculate on the problem, but as one forum poster indicated… some things can be solved with a software update (clock synchronization, for example), while others may be a limitation of the hardware (EMI due to board layout compromises, for example).​

​

Best Regards,​

Omitted due to privacy​

 

[Dj7675]

@amirm
*Update* Got a reply from a Denon Quality Engineer, lets hope this gains some traction!
As a side note, between the tweet and whoever else tried to contact Denon about the test results, I think this proves how crucial 3rd party testing on freshly released products is. Great job Amir

The reply:

Hi Nick,​

​

Thank you for alerting us to Amir’s findings in Audio Science Review. I have passed the article to our Japan QA & CS teams.​

​

Obviously, we are disappointed that the Denon AVR-x4700h did not measure well on their Audio Precision system (with regard to noise levels and jitter).​

​

Hopefully, we can help discover the root cause of the noise issue and fix it. I am not qualified to speculate on the problem, but as one forum poster indicated… some things can be solved with a software update (clock synchronization, for example), while others may be a limitation of the hardware (EMI due to board layout compromises, for example).​

​

Best Regards,​

Chris Baldelli​

Quality Engineer, QA​

Great beginning. I really hope that Denon will reach out to Amir directly to work through these issues. If things can be improved via firmware, great. If limited by hardware/design, it is what it is. But they will have the issue documented and maybe can be remedied in the next design cycle. Either way it is good news they have officially acknowledged the measurements and are looking into it.
Edit: I wanted to add that NAD never acknowledged the issues with their units nor showed any interest in commenting or work on verifying the results Amir found in the T758 V3 or others. Denon commenting and getting their team to look into the measurements is a great step and greatly appreciated. It isn’t a given a company will even do that these days, as NAD has shown.

 

[tparm]

Can you explain what you mean by this?

Let me qualify my statement but saying I am no engineer, rather an over-thinking (and probably over-spending) AV hobbyist. However, there are opinions present from people who I have more faith in than myself that the updated spec of the HDMI boards of the 2020 models have created the measurable noise. A few have gone further to say the addition of Auro 3D may be a source of additional noise. AL32 and DDSC HD are two more superfluous systems included in the X4700 the X3700 doesn't have but it's less likely they would be a source.

Now, how much of this is audible? I really don't know. However, if I have the option of three units I'd probably choose the one that tested the cleanest even if it's to satisfy my curious mind.

And thanks to @demoncamber, here's to hopping.

 

[BsdKurt]

bigguyca has posted an assessment of why the x3600h measures so good. It is above my pay grade but I know there are people here that are qualified to assess it:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-r...s-thread-faq-posts-1-8-a-28.html#post59836930

Perhaps in addition to the new HDMI board some of the design changes that made it into the x3600h didn't make it into the x4700h.

 

[tparm]

bigguyca has posted an assessment of why the x3600h measures so good. It is above my pay grade but I know there are people here that are qualified to assess it:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-r...s-thread-faq-posts-1-8-a-28.html#post59836930

Perhaps in addition to the new HDMI board some of the design changes that made it into the x3600h didn't make it into the x4700h.

This is interesting and also probably a far better explanation, along with the wiring layout (although he didn't provide a reference of layout for the 3600 to benchmark that statement by) than simply the HDMI clock.

 

[tparm]

Unfortunately I can't find a pic of the inside of a 3700 yet. But, bigguyca makes an interesting observation. @amirm any logic or credibility to the these observations (link above)? Do you have an X3700 in que? Want one?

 

[amirm]

@amirm any logic or credibility to the these observations (link above)? Do you have an X3700 in que? Want one?

I read his post a few days ago and what he says makes sense (although I did not try to look in the data sheets to verify). I don't know how he got all that detail info from though.

 

[amirm]

@amirm
*Update* Got a reply from a Denon Quality Engineer, lets hope this gains some traction!
As a side note, between the tweet and whoever else tried to contact Denon about the test results, I think this proves how crucial 3rd party testing on freshly released products is. Great job Amir

The reply:

Hi Nick,​

​

Thank you for alerting us to Amir’s findings in Audio Science Review. I have passed the article to our Japan QA & CS teams.​

​

Obviously, we are disappointed that the Denon AVR-x4700h did not measure well on their Audio Precision system (with regard to noise levels and jitter).​

​

Hopefully, we can help discover the root cause of the noise issue and fix it. I am not qualified to speculate on the problem, but as one forum poster indicated… some things can be solved with a software update (clock synchronization, for example), while others may be a limitation of the hardware (EMI due to board layout compromises, for example).​

​

Best Regards,​

Chris Baldelli​

Quality Engineer, QA​

That is a very good response. I also reached out to Denon on Sunday, introduced myself and expressed my willingness to help in any way I can to improve the performance of the unit.

 

[demoncamber]

aid that seeing how the measured performance of their products are all over the place. If th

channels are all that matter" crowd barge in here complaining that as long as a $2000 AVR makes sound we're good to go because movies are whatever. I don't appreciate the suggestion that I should have a second signal chain to listen to music. And some people seem to believe that what needs a review most is yet another barely mass market integrated stereo amplifi

I agree. I love multichannel music and when the mix is done right it offers so much more then 2 channel version. I also enjoy 2 channel music very much and care for stereo soundstage and understand the appeal and simplicity of it.
But i think that everybody that feels that surround sound is a gimmick is missing out on a beautiful experience. I don't want to name a lot of examples, but the fact that a lot of classical music is done in mch is telling something.
When done right, surround sound just adds to 2 channel mix, it expands it. But there are mixes that puts you in the middle of a band and that does sound gimmicky and presumably that is something that made people avoid mch music. OTOH, a better example of surround mix that puts you in the middle of music are Pink Floyd's Wish you were here and dark side of the moon where there is more sense in listening the album surrounded by music and effects poping out all over. I believe those surround mixes for some music make sense more then regular stereo mix. They were originally inteded for quadrophonic, if i am not mistaken.
The old argument "I have two ears and the band is always playing in front of me, never behind me" is just that, old. Whenever i attended live event, amplified or not, never was music and all sound just in front of me. You always hear something in surround, whether reverb or audience...
As for gear, I hate the fact that i have both the stereo preamp with ht bypass and a AV system integrated instead of a good AVR or AV prepro. But of all the AVRs I tried (granted, not a lot, but some) they sound awfull in 2 channel reproduction. AVRs sound like a toy comparing to a good stereo system and that is the also the reason most audiophiles shun surround sound.

Exactly...
Multichannel music vs Stereo music is as simple as this,
Stereo = watching the orchestra/band/artist from the seats
Multichannel music = Actually being on stage IN the orchestra!

Anyone that's not a believer in multi c. audio needs to simply listen to the Hans Zimmer Live in Prague bluray, try it in 2.1 then go to surround. It's night and day and I wouldn't have it any other way.

 

[rccarguy]

Hans Zimmer doesn't he just have one song, watched Muppets and exactly like pirates of the Caribbean soundtrack

 

[Baff]

Multichannel music = Actually being on stage IN the orchestra!

Yeah, I'd rather be on the conductor's podium, instead of way back in the cheap seats.

Properly done MCM is great. The stuff where they randomly move tracks around as a gimmick, not so much.

 

[peng]

This is interesting and also probably a far better explanation, along with the wiring layout (although he didn't provide a reference of layout for the 3600 to benchmark that statement by) than simply the HDMI clock.

I have to disagree with some of the suggested differences. I would purchase the service manual if it is available, just to see if it has some unique hardware and circuitry. I highly doubt it has but can't be sure without seeing the SM. It is just so unlikely that the 3600 would have some of the differences cited though, it makes no logical sense. Also, the AV8805 and 7705 had Auro3D too, they (at least the 8805) did okay. Auto 3D is not even added to the 4700, my 4400 has it too.

Anyway, we can all take our own guess, I took mine, but we are just speculating. Hopefully Denon will come through with some explanations.

 

[thepiecesfit]

I have to disagree with some of the suggested differences. I would purchase the service manual if it is available, just to see if it has some unique hardware and circuitry. I highly doubt it has but can't be sure without seeing the SM. It is just so unlikely that the 3600 would have some of the differences cited though, it makes no logical sense. Also, the AV8805 and 7705 had Auro3D too, they (at least the 8805) did okay. Auto 3D is not even added to the 4700, my 4400 has it too.

Anyway, we can all take our own guess, I took mine, but we are just speculating. Hopefully Denon will come through with some explanations.

If you ever consider sending the X4400H to Amir, I would gladly contribute to the shipping costs so we can build up the Denon database

 

[LTig]

Jitter I have been running. Multitone most of the time is not possible because it is encoded at 192 kHz. Most Toslink/Coax interfaces stop at 96 kHz so the test won't run.

Not necessarily. I can supply multitone tests as WAV files for 48 kHz and 96 kHz samplerate, with the same frequencies as calculated for 192 kHz samplerate (using the data in the table you've sent me). Behind the spoiler are two examples for multitone with 48 kHz samplerate.

Spoiler

Edirol UA25 playing multitone-32 at 48/24 with vlc-player, captured by RME at 48/24 using REW (red color, gray color is RME loopback for comparison):

Edirol UA25 playing multitone-32 at 48/24 with vlc-player, captured by RME at 192/24 using REW (red color, gray color is RME loopback for comparison):

Just let me know how long the WAV files shall be, or any other specifics (bit depth, number of channels), and I'll sent them with wetransfer.

 

[thepiecesfit]

Anyone that's not a believer in multi c. audio needs to simply listen to the Hans Zimmer Live in Prague bluray, try it in 2.1 then go to surround. It's night and day and I wouldn't have it any other way.

It's a nice concert but I found the bass to be a little overcooked. I understand its attempting to give that live venue concert feel but doesnt translate as well to a small listening space in my opinion. Still enjoyed it very much.

 

[amirm]

Not necessarily. I can supply multitone tests as WAV files for 48 kHz and 96 kHz samplerate, with the same frequencies as calculated for 192 kHz samplerate (using the data in the table you've sent me). Behind the spoiler are two examples for multitone with 48 kHz samplerate.

Spoiler

Edirol UA25 playing multitone-32 at 48/24 with vlc-player, captured by RME at 48/24 using REW (red color, gray color is RME loopback for comparison):
View attachment 70250

Edirol UA25 playing multitone-32 at 48/24 with vlc-player, captured by RME at 192/24 using REW (red color, gray color is RME loopback for comparison):
View attachment 70251

Just let me know how long the WAV files shall be, or any other specifics (bit depth, number of channels), and I'll sent them with wetransfer.

It wouldn't be the same test I have been running.

 

[Archaea]

Reference level or -0 MV is 75 dB but with 95 dB "peaks". And these "peaks" in my experience happen all the time during action movies. So it's really closer to the 95 dB mark which is way too loud

By the way, Audyssey does all of that for you.

Not quite
Reference is suppose to be 85db with 105dB peaks for mainspeakers and 115dB peaks for subs.
http://www.acousticfrontiers.com/2013314thx-reference-level/

Many AVR companies internally lower the volume of receiver generated test tones to 75dB to avoid damaging consumer speakers, but that is internally accounted and in the the final result you are supposed to be seeing 105dB peaks from the loud speakers with your cinema content at reference.

We did some testing on receivers auto calibration routines in 2014, and frankly the results were terribly unstandardized based on the bundled auto EQ mics - even with flagship AVRs.

Basically, don’t trust a receivers autoeq process to get you anywhere near a standardized volume and EQ.


https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-r...mparison-g2g-november-8-2014-kansas-city.html

This is the is the “calibrated” reference comparison of a handful of receivers with the mic positions taken at standardized positions. It was/is pathetic.


SAME DAY, SAME SPEAKERS, SAME SUBS, SAME PLACEMENTS on everything. And this result?
post 199 and subsequent in the avsforum link:

Observation from test results:

“The Madness
So what's the deal? Why was it madness? Well - here are the post calibration frequency responses from each entry. No funny business, just absurdity. The helpers and I set the mic in the same standardized positions for each system (unless specific places were actually required, IE Anthem, DIRAC, Yamaha) and the starting position for the initial calibration was the exact same spot for every processor. Stitch1 loaned a drum kit with a bunch of high hat stands (used as mic stands) - to ensure our mic capture positions weren't different from processor to processor. In theory, after calibration each processor should be close to the same SPL at least, if not generally reasonably close to a flatter frequency plot - RIGHT?? I mean that's the point of these systems -- RIGHT? To get the AVRs to a reference volume and try to flatten frequency response while doing so - so that each user's system in different rooms and different speaker setups has a similar audio experience?!?!?! Well, with eight different systems here is what was captured by omnimic for each as post calibration results. We followed instructions to let each auto processor optimize the room. The ONLY change we allowed post calibration was setting speakers to small and crossover to 80hz when the processor/AVR allowed. To capture the post calibration frequency response plots shown here I simply turned each AVR to -12dB on the main volume knob and played track 2 of the omnimic disk from the HTPC to the processor. The results are ridiculous. But that is the tested state of variance in these processors.”

 

[LTig]

It wouldn't be the same test I have been running.

You cannot calculate the distortion products between the peaks due to having no sync between sender and receiver but you can still see them visually (that's why I like it). Would you like to give it a try?

 

[amirm]

You cannot calculate the distortion products between the peaks due to having no sync between sender and receiver but you can still see them visually (that's why I like it). Would you like to give it a try?

It is not the same sample rate anymore.