• 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 DN-200BR Professional Bluetooth Receiver Review

Rate this balanced Bluetooth receiver

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 28 25.9%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 65 60.2%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 11 10.2%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 4 3.7%

  • Total voters
    108

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,679
Likes
241,104
Location
Seattle Area
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Denon DB-200BR professional balanced Bluetooth receiver. It was kindly drop shipped to me by a member and costs US $129.
Denon DN-200BR Balanced Professional Bluetooth Receiver Review.jpg

The form factor and functionality of the DB-200BR is perfect. While consumer gear uses SMC connectors for BT antenna, we have the more popular BNC connector:
Denon DN-200BR Balanced Professional Bluetooth Receiver Antenna Review.jpg

The antenna puck is magnetic which should make it easy to slap on the top or side of the rack.

As you see we have balanced XLR output which is very hard to find in consumer bluetooth receivers. The last one we tested from Kali had very poor noise performance. Hope is that we do better here.

Denon DB-200BR Measurements
The unit only advertised SBC codec which is better than aptX but not as good as LDAC. Using that, here is our dashboard with volume at max:
Denon DN-200BR Balanced Professional Bluetooth Receiver Measurement.png


I was disappointed that with max volume, we could not get more than 1.6 volt. This is about 6 dBu which beats the 4 dBu spec but still, for a professional product we need to get 4 volts. Let's reserve judgement on the SINAD until we test another product to compare to (see below). The really good news is that we get 15 bits of dynamic range which easily beats the 12 bits of Kali:
Denon DN-200BR Balanced Professional Bluetooth Receiver Dynamic Range Measurement.png


To see how good we could do, I pulled off the recently reviewed Topping D70 Pro Sabre DAC and drove it with the same SBC codec:
Topping D70 Pro Bluetooth SBC Measurement.png


SINAD is identical which indicates the problem is there, not in the implementation post the BT receiver. The topping though outputs 3.3 volts which while still shy of 4 volts, is far better than the 1.6 volt that DN-200BR produces. This lets the D70 Pro to easily eclipse the dynamic range of the Denon:
Topping D70 Pro Bluetooth SBC DNR Measurement.png


But this is not the best the Topping can do. Let's switch to LDAC BT DAC:
Topping D70 Pro Bluetooth LDAC Measurement.png


This matches our testing before showing superiority of LDAC codec in the way it essentially produces transparency for high res audio. Dynamic range is also sharply increased, again matching wired connection:
Topping D70 Pro Bluetooth LDAC DNR Measurement.png


This is with LDAC in "best effort" mode with a distance of a few feet from my Samsung S23 Ultra streaming to it using Roon player.

Conclusions
The DB-200BR nails the functionality and form factor for a professional Bluetooth Receiver. Alas, it is a let down with its low output voltage which doesn't even rise to what we like to see over RCA let alone XLR. Given that handicap, it still does well with 90 dB dynamic range. It would be nice to see a box like this support LDAC so we get full transparency for people who want to use it in their home scenario (not going to matter for Pro).

Personally I can't recommend the Denon DN-200BR due to its low output voltage. But if that is not an issue for you, we have a performance solution here within the bounds of SBC codec.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
 
Last edited:

IAtaman

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 29, 2021
Messages
2,409
Likes
4,165
Right, the relative height and frequency of the spikes seems to be identical between two devices indeed. Maybe they are where the sub band boundaries are? I will try to find and read the specs. Thank you.

Denon Topping SBC.png
 

Talisman

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2022
Messages
955
Likes
2,794
Location
Milano Italy
Difficult to make sense of this product, by now there are many LDAC bluetooth receivers with digital audio output, to be able to comfortably use the balanced outputs of your dac.
The limited support only to the SBC speaks to us of an obsolete product.
No reason to exist.
Thanks Amir
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,679
Likes
241,104
Location
Seattle Area
In what situations do pros use a unit like this? What is the intended user case?
For home use would be to add BT capability to a DAC that doesn't have it. That way, you can quickly stream some tunes to it.

For pros, I am not sure but I am assuming it allows someone to push their music to their system without wired connectivity.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,679
Likes
241,104
Location
Seattle Area
If i didn't know any beter i would have said that this line is AI generated :p.
That's what you get for a review done at 1:00am. :) Corrected. Now I am going to sleep....
 

PeteL

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 1, 2020
Messages
3,303
Likes
3,846
In what situations do pros use a unit like this? What is the intended user case?
Professional lines of products refer to the distribution channels. It is not necessarily that the pros will use it, although they can and they will, but it's the professionals that will install it. When an audio-visual Integrator gets a contract to install an audio system in any public facility, they don't run to best buy to purchase a BT Receiver. This will be in the catalog with some Audio-Visual pro distributors, the same places they will purchase the rest of the equipment. Think any place where background music is needed Restaurants, stores, Gymnasiums, dance schools, office spaces, anywhere really. It needs to be balanced because long runs of cable may be needed since the amps and mixers may be far away in an electrical closet and may feed all the speakers in the building.
 

Rja4000

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
2,767
Likes
4,709
Location
Liège, Belgium
In what situations do pros use a unit like this? What is the intended user case?
I guess that's to allow broadcasting background music or content without having to deal with connectivity variations/complexity.
It's probably not worse than a direct PC sound card.

Connection stability and universal CODEC are more important than higher performance for this kind of use, so SBC is a logical choice, I suppose.

The level is also probably not an issue for this type of use, since it will most likely be connected to a balanced inputs pair on a mixer, which provides a large input level range.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 24, 2022
Messages
5
Likes
6
Location
Stuttgart, Germany
Wait, what? I thought aptX is vastly superior to SBC, the quality is only second to LDAC anf LHDC.
 

Michou

Active Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2022
Messages
104
Likes
108
I don't think the following statement is correct: "The unit only advertised SBC codec which is better than aptX but not as good as LDAC."
SBC clearly stands at the bottom of the foodchain as far as Bluetooth codecs are concerned. AFAIK, the order is from worst to best SBC < AAC < AptX < LDAC.


 

Ken Tajalli

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 8, 2021
Messages
2,080
Likes
1,882
Location
London UK
This comment is about LDAC and other codecs, not the devices.
In standard measurements, LDAC seems transparent, and indeed it is the best of BT codecs and Topping implementation is second to none.
But . .
LDAC is not that reliable over distances of few meters. This is as much an issue with transmitter as it is with receiver .
Also, subjectively, any lossy codec robs the sound of some life and vitality. LDAC does it the least, but does it never the less.
LDAC on my Topping DX7 pro is excellent, but it is no match for its direct inputs. So I never use it!
instead, I stream over wifi to the PC that is connected direct to it.
I suppose the only advantage of SBC BT is its low latency, and reliable connection.
What's the latency on LDAC ?
 
Last edited:

DavidK442

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 7, 2020
Messages
30
Likes
112
This comment is about LDAC and other codecs, not the devices.
In standard measurements, LDAC seems transparent, and indeed it is the best of BT codecs and Topping implementation is second to none.
But . .
LDAC is not that reliable over distances of few meters. This is as much an issue with transmitter as it is with receiver .
Also, subjectively, any lossy codec robs the sound of some life and vitality. LDAC does it the least, but does it never the less.
LDAC on my Topping DX7 pro is excellent, but it is no match for its direct inputs. So I never use it!
instead, I stream over wifi to the PC that is connected direct to it.
I suppose the only advantage of SBC BT is its low latency, and reliable connection.
What's the latency on LDAC ?
I’m pretty sure that Amirm’s test results show that LDAC, on the Topping at least, does not rob the sound of vitality or life.
 

sarumbear

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
7,604
Likes
7,324
Location
UK
The limited support only to the SBC speaks to us of an obsolete product.
No reason to exist.
In what situations do pros use a unit like this? What is the intended user case?
There are various BT connected musical instruments that needs to catered for at live events or in recording studios.

There’s an audio world outside your living room…
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom