Denon AVR-X4800H AVR Review

[peng]

This is my point. If 'SINAD versus pre out voltage' are comparable regardless of method change, X4800H is worse than X3800H below 1.3-1.4.

You mentioned 3 things to consider: SINAD at 2 V, SINAD versus pre out voltage, and SINAD at 5 W output
SINAD at 2 V: X4800H clear wins. It may be industry standard to measure at 2V. However, how many external amps need 2V?
SINAD versus pre out voltage: X3800H wins on lower end. This range is possibly in majority cases of normal listening. This is make me wondering how much is due to method change? Nobody knows unless you measure them using the same method. Further, if you don't convert the chart, you may not notice or think that this lower end performance is more or less important for your use case.
SINAD at 5 W output: X4800H and X3800H are comparable - 85~86.

Sounds like we are in agreement. "If", is the key word...

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

1.) You can't really improve SINAD performance if it's limited by the performance of the chip. But you can decrease it, if you are for example doing a bad PCB design.
2.) So maybe the PCB(s) of the X4800H are well designed, those of the X3800H not (less optimization). Or maybe it was just good/bad luck - a sample of the DAC which was above average in the X4800H and a sample below average in the X3800H. Or maybe they are binning the chips and use the better ones for the X4800H and the worse ones in the X3800H like they do in the market of CPUs and GPUs.
3.) That's a good question only amir may answer. We do know the measurements, but we don't know the standard deviation or variance.


So you know about the calculations of the prices at Dirac and Denon and also about their internal contract? Interesting...

Experience. Volume will eventually bring down price. This is a really big contract for Dirac.

 

[susanstone]

Experience. Volume will eventually bring down price. This is a really big contract for Dirac.

Unless Denon starts bundle Dirac, I doubt there is much contract between Dirac and Denon. It is very unlikely Denon bundle both Dirac and Audyssey at this time.

 

[ivo.f.doma]

Unless Denon starts bundle Dirac, I doubt there is much contract between Dirac and Denon. It is very unlikely Denon bundle both Dirac and Audyssey at this time.

An example can be seen here in the Onkyo Pioneer. It has Dirac in it and is cheaper overall.

 

[susanstone]

Sounds like we are in agreement. "If", is the key word...

If we are in agreement, then highlighting 95 at 'SINAD at 2V' while downplaying mid-to-high 80 at lower end of 'SINAD versus pre out voltage' would look fishy to me.

 

[susanstone]

An example can be seen here in the Onkyo Pioneer. It has Dirac in it and is cheaper overall.

Onkyo/Pioneer bundles Dirac. Dirac on Denon is optional. As I said, "unless Denon starts bundle Dirac", there is not much between Denon and Dirac. Bundling Diract pretty much means Denon would ditch Audyssey. It is possible only if Audyssey is far behind and company would not invest more on its R&D.

 

[Everett T]

Onkyo/Pioneer bundles Dirac. Dirac on Denon is optional. As I said, "unless Denon starts bundle Dirac", there is not much between Denon and Dirac. Bundling Diract pretty much means Denon would ditch Audyssey. It is possible only if Audyssey is far behind and company would not invest more on its R&D.

Currently DLBC is what most want and it's not bundled with Onkyo/Pioneer (at least it wasn't the last time I checked). So people are still paying for what they want. I don't see D/M ditching Audyssey after investing money into them just a couple a years ago and I view these add-ons just like I do plugins for a DAW, I pay for what I need.

 

[susanstone]

Currently DLBC is what most want and it's not bundled with Onkyo/Pioneer (at least it wasn't the last time I checked). So people are still paying for what they want. I don't see D/M ditching Audyssey after investing money into them just a couple a years ago and I view these add-ons just like I do plugins for a DAW, I pay for what I need.

Exactly! People need to pay for and to Diract if they want it. Denon or Diract won't subsidise you in the foreseeable future.

 

[peng]

This is my point. If 'SINAD versus pre out voltage' are comparable regardless of method change, X4800H is worse than X3800H below 1.3-1.4.

Since we agreed on everything, in fact you are saying the same things I said before, except one, that is, whether the 4800 is "worse" at lower pre out voltage, such that at lower volume the 3800 may even do better.

It was late last night so I only mentioned, your word "If" was key, until we have the answer to that question, we just don't know whether the 3800 did better at lower output voltage.

I have since looked a little deeper and may have found the answer (or a good part of it).

The graph in the datasheet for the volume IC is shown below at the end:

https://www.nisshinbo-microdevices.co.jp/en/pdf/datasheet/NJU72343_E.pdf

They made a big thing about switching from a LSI chip to this MSI chip that Denon Japan claimed co-developed with the manufacturer. So since they have not said anything about using a different one in the 2022/23 models, it is a safe assumption that the same chip is still in use.

You can see that since Amir changed his method to use fixed digital input level, that is 0 dBFS, the input to the volume chip will be constant at 2 to 2.1 V (the DAC chip's rated output), the SINAD measured at the preamp/dac output now will depend largely on the Volume position. This graph shows SINAD at volume = 0 dB is better and would decrease as the volume setting is decreased.

In his previous method, that is when measuring the 3800, he kept the volume at around 0 (80-82 in the absolute scale), and varied the digital input level instead. In that case, SINAD from the pre out/DAC output will depend largely on the DAC chip's characteristic graph, also pasted below:

In the DAC's SINAD vs input level graph, you can see that as the input voltage decreases, SINAD also decrease (as expected), but the rate of degradation with voltage down to the 0.3 V you mentioned before, isn't as significant versus that from dropping the volume setting by the same proportion.

I believe that is the reason why, as you pointed out, the 3800's SINAD at low output voltage level such as at 0.3 V, measured a little better than that of the 4800's. I am now confident to say that difference is due to the measurement method change, at least to a large extent. Agreed?


Volume IC, NJU72343
THD+N vs Input voltage (Vrms)

PCM5102
THD+N vs Input level (dBFS)

 

[tsammyc]

I think there is a cost to Dirac porting their software to the Denon/Marantz processor. They have done this for Dirac Live and are selling it now. DLBC is not finished yet and they are undecided on ART. It could be that they are looking at the Dirac Live sales to decide on whether it is worth it to port ART to Denon/Marantz

 

[peng]

If we are in agreement, then highlighting 95 at 'SINAD at 2V' while downplaying mid-to-high 80 at lower end of 'SINAD versus pre out voltage' would look fishy to me.

Agreed too, but please take a read of my new post with graphs and see what you think. Thank you.

 

[ivo.f.doma]

Since we agreed on everything, in fact you are saying the same things I said before, except one, that is, whether the 4800 is "worse" at lower pre out voltage, such that at lower volume the 3800 may even do better.

It was late last night so I only mentioned, your word "If" was key, until we have the answer to that question is, we don't know.
I have now looked a little deeper and may have found the answer for you. Take a look of the following:

The graph in the datasheet for the volume IC is shown below at the end:

https://www.nisshinbo-microdevices.co.jp/en/pdf/datasheet/NJU72343_E.pdf

They made a big thing about switching from a LSI chip to this MSI chip that Denon Japan claimed co-developed with the manufacturer. So since they have not said anything about using a different one in the 2022/23 models, it is a safe assumption that the same chip is still in use.

You can see that since Amir changed his method to use fixed digital input level, that is 0 dBFS, the input to the volume chip will be constant at 2 to 2.1 V (the DAC chip's rated output), the SINAD measured at the preamp/dac output now will depend largely on the Volume position. This graph shows SINAD at volume = 0 dB is better and would decrease as the volume setting is decreased.

In his previous method, that is when measuring the 3800, he kept the volume at around 0 (80-82 in the absolute scale), and varied the digital input level instead. In that case, SINAD from the pre out/DAC output will depend largely on the DAC chip's characteristic graph, also pasted below:

In the DAC's SINAD vs input level graph, you can see that as the input voltage decreases, SINAD also decrease (as expected), but the rate of degradation with voltage down to the 0.3 V you mentioned before, isn't as significant versus that from dropping the volume setting by the same proportion.

I believe that is the reason why, as you pointed out, the 3800's SINAD at low output voltage level such as at 0.3 V, measured a little better than that of the 4800's. I am now confident to say that difference is due to the measurement method change, at least to a large extent. Agreed?


Volume IC, NJU72343***************************************************PCM5102

View attachment 274619View attachment 274623

Now you have named exactly what I clearly failed to do in my posts! Well thank you. I think we all understand that now.

 

[peng]

Now you have named exactly what I clearly failed to do in my posts! Well thank you. I think we all understand that now.

You did make your point clear but there are 3 tests involved, method change affects 2 but not all 3. The one that most probably look at is the first one shown on the main dashboard and that's the one Amir uses for his SINAD ranking chart but that one does not involved Amir's method change. I thought you referred to that one, sorry..

 

[ivo.f.doma]

I have one more thought regarding the comments in this thread that Denon could be selecting better DAC pieces for the 4800.
I think TI already does it, so there are 5100, 5101 and 5102 .
Your opinion?

 

[peng]

Manufacturer goals are driven by these standards which is sustainable with manufacturing experiences and specific process controls. Denon is proud to share they have experience of more than 110 years. (Sounding like a "Fanboy" again).

On that, no fanboy for you as you are stating the fact.
They actually have a museum website. It says 100 year but the website clearly has not been updated yet.

DENON Museum - Model History

In the end, I am pleased with the performance of the 4800. There is no discernible issues, and I have been going through the paces of performance testing and trying to find the subtle flaw or issue that would be a weakness to the product. I have not found anything at all, in fact, it has performed better than I have expected.

By the way, your $2500 4800 has much higher SINAD (35 dB better) than Denon's $7600 flagship integrated amp

50 W per channel X2, double down to 4 ohm, 0.1% THD, or -60 dB

If I had the extra money I would love to drop ship one to Amir. Just to see if it would do better than specs.

 

[peng]

I have one more thought regarding the comments in this thread that Denon could be selecting better DAC pieces for the 4800.
I think TI already does it, so there are 5100, 5101 and 5102 .
Your opinion?

Nice thought, a quick Google search found something from the TI design support forum:

PCM5101A/PCM5102A Difference Between PCM5101A and PCM5102A - Audio forum - Audio - TI E2E support forums

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: PCM5102A , PCM5101A Hi, We believe that the differences of PCM5101A and PCM5102A are SNR, DR and THD+N. Are these devices different

e2e.ti.com

According to one such TI "guru", the 5101 and 5102 are different devices, designed for different performance specs. Not sure if that's an authoritative answer.

The difference in THD is only 1 dB, but the DR gap is significant, 12 dB between the 5100 and 5102.

 

[ivo.f.doma]

Nice thought, a quick Google search found something from the TI design support forum:

PCM5101A/PCM5102A Difference Between PCM5101A and PCM5102A - Audio forum - Audio - TI E2E support forums

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: PCM5102A , PCM5101A Hi, We believe that the differences of PCM5101A and PCM5102A are SNR, DR and THD+N. Are these devices different

e2e.ti.com

According to one such TI "guru", the 5101 and 5102 are different devices, designed for different performance specs. Not sure if that's an authoritative answer.

The difference in THD is only 1 dB, but the DR gap is significant, 12 dB between the 5100 and 5102.

funny "guru"

 

[susanstone]

Since we agreed on everything, in fact you are saying the same things I said before, except one, that is, whether the 4800 is "worse" at lower pre out voltage, such that at lower volume the 3800 may even do better.

This is why I (or some people) have doubt, why changed the method? so X4800H can look 'not worse' or there is no definite way to show it is actually 'worse' due to method change? What IF, X4800H indeed measures 'worse' (80s-90s) using same method in lower end but peaks at 2V? That is also a BIG DROP compare to x4700H, which has 101 at the same range. What would it look like if you overlay same measurement of X4800H on top of X4700H? or just take a guess based on method change? Do you think X4800H will peak at lower end like 3700/3800/4700 or peak at the 2V or greater? If the peak has the same shape, SINAD would be pretty similar as X4700H, which is 'definitely better' regardless of DAC change.

 

[sask15]

I thought RandomEar’s graph does show an interpolation of the SINAD data from Amir’s 4800 review in a similar fashion to the graph above. Someone would have to extend the SINAD db up higher and could maybe overlay in comparison to the 4700. The 4700 SINAD with the AKM was pretty much ideal as it peaked right in the range of most external amplifiers voltage compared to the 4800 peaking at 2V/test limit. Not sure why a similar/easy to interpret SINAD graph that was used in the 4700/3800 review wasn’t published for the 4800 without the need to create it. Please let me know if I am wrong as have said I am a beginner in this technical stuff. Thanks

 

[peng]

I thought RandomEar’s graph does show an interpolation of the SINAD data from Amir’s 4800 review in a similar fashion to the graph above. Someone would have to extend the SINAD db up higher and could maybe overlay in comparison to the 4700. The 4700 SINAD with the AKM was pretty much ideal as it peaked right in the range of most external amplifiers voltage compared to the 4800 peaking at 2V/test limit. Not sure why a similar/easy to interpret SINAD graph that was used in the 4700/3800 review wasn’t published for the 4800 without the need to create it. Please let me know if I am wrong as have said I am a beginner in this technical stuff. Thanks

As I said before, RandomEar did a good job making it easier to understand Amir's graph but that's a separate issue. The other issue, brought up by at least two posters, is about the measurement method, not the presentation.

As Amir stated, and I quoted him in post#518 (in bold)

Denon AVR-X4800H AVR Review

I would lean to sample variation as Amir only tested one sample of each and that does not make for a general conclusion. In the 3800 review, it seems he did consult the Denon people and seemed to come away that they did not seem surprised by his 3800 results. Production in Vietnam may also be...

www.audiosciencereview.com

The difference in SINAD due to the method change is impossible to determine, but the best I can tell is that any such differences are insignificant in real world use, based the curves in the PCM5102 and NJU72343's data sheet as shown in post#529.

The only to really compare, to satisfy the members who brought up the issue, is for Amir do both, on by varying the input level as he had been doing in the past, and the other by varying the volume as he did on the 4800. That would be up to Amir, obviously it would mean twice the work, for no good reason. In my opinion though, it would have been a good thing to do that once (that is, do it in both ways), when he introduced the new way of doing it for the first time just to put people mind at ease, that this is not done just to make the 4800 looks better. To me, while I understand their point about why the change in method, Amir clearly stated his rationale that does seem to make some sense.