Oski1997
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2021
- Messages
- 112
- Likes
- 43
I got a VS3003 switcher for the same reason
-
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 Replaces AKM AK4458 DAC IC in X4700H and X6700H
- Thread starter bigguyca
- Start date
I really don't know, as you may know I have posted the original DAC board for the 4700 side by side with the supposedly new one more than once on this forum and cautioned that it looked like an 8 channel chip with 48 pins, same as the AK4458. You are now doing the same I did
but the fact is, one member has since use a scope camera to see what the heck it really is and he said it was indeed the rumored PCM5102A. May be those sold in Japan are using the 8 channel DAC ICs, who know, it has been a frustrating exercise for those too curious to get to the bottom of the mystery? It would be great if our Japanese members could do some investigation for us in Japan, preferable those within driving distance to the Denon or Marantz head office lol....
By the way, if you compare the datasheets, even if it is the PCM1690 (that would contradict with the scope camera's finding), the THD+N of the 1690 is only 1 dB better than the 5102A so there is no way it can measure better than the AVRs that have the AK4458 chips. It's a -107 dB vs -93 dB, a huge gap.
I doesn't make sense to implement multiple two channel dac's on a dedicated DAC-board which is designed for two 8 channel DAC's. I think the member you are referring to has examined a 3700. In this AVC/AVR the lay-out of the DAC-board is different from the higher end AV's (4700 and 6700) Apparently the 6700 also has dedicated DAC power supply according to https://kakakumag.com/av-kaden/?id=15644. So it would make much more sense to adapt with alternative DAC which also is 8 channel (PCM1690)I really don't know, as you may know I have posted the original DAC board for the 4700 side by side with the supposedly new one more than once on this forum and cautioned that it looked like an 8 channel chip with 48 pins, same as the AK4458. You are now doing the same I did
It would be great if our Japanese members could do some investigation for us in Japan, preferable those within driving distance to the Denon or Marantz head office lol....
By the way, if you compare the datasheets, even if it is the PCM1690 (that would contradict with the scope camera's finding), the THD+N of the 1690 is only 1 dB better than the 5102A so there is no way it can measure better than the AVRs that have the AK4458 chips. It's a -107 dB vs -93 dB, a huge gap.
Indeed you are right it's 'official' THD+N spec is much lower. In real life tests however in the 800 it performs way better. Hence my initial question. In the tests performed by user 'User-22' on his revised 800 with the PCM1690 DAC it shows great performance. Of course we can only know for sure if Amirm will test a revised 3700, 4700 and 6700. I'm not really bothered too much since I use it mainly for home cinema but occasionally i PLAY stereo in pre-amp mode with an external power amp. To be fair though probably the power amp the would still be the weakest link in the chain towards my ears. Or wait... I guess it will be my ears
I doesn't make sense to implement multiple two channel dac's on a dedicated DAC-board which is designed for two 8 channel DAC's. I think the member you are referring to has examined a 3700. In this AVC/AVR the lay-out of the DAC-board is different from the higher end AV's (4700 and 6700) Apparently the 6700 also has dedicated DAC power supply according to https://kakakumag.com/av-kaden/?id=15644. So it would make much more sense to adapt with alternative DAC which also is 8 channel (PCM1690)
Indeed you are right it's 'official' THD+N spec is much lower. In real life tests however in the 800 it performs way better. Hence my initial question. In the tests performed by user 'User-22' on his revised 800 with the PCM1690 DAC it shows great performance. Of course we can only know for sure if Amirm will test a revised 3700, 4700 and 6700. I'm not really bothered too much since I use it mainly for home cinema but occasionally i PLAY stereo in pre-amp mode with an external power amp. To be fair though probably the power amp the would still be the weakest link in the chain towards my ears. Or wait... I guess it will be my ears
Again, you are making similar points that I have made in several posts way back, below is one of those:
Denon Replaces AKM AK4458 DAC IC in X4700H and X6700H
The 3700 or 3xxx range not sold in Japan. Drop to 2700 or jump to 4700, 4500. Disappointing since 3700 offers MultEq xt32 as well as other features in 4700 but not quite as expensive. Guess Denon wants folks to choose up or down for margins maybe leave mid tier to Marantz ? Anyway sucks for...
www.audiosciencereview.com
So you can see that I fully agreed with you, but since then time has moved on and we now have multiple posts from members who got their responses from multiple Denon and Marantz support teams that contradict what you and I have found from the Japan websites.
Take a look of the latest post#443 from member hda, he was told even the flagship SR8015 is using 8 pieces of PCM5102A. To me it defies logic, and clearly you and I are on the same page, but what else can we say..
I also agree the power amp section is still likely to be the weakest link but for those who use the AVR as preamp, they would obviously prefer the original DAC whether the difference is audible or not. To me, it is more about transparency, that SU needs to be more transparent about their published specs.
Last edited:
Since I want to play Hi-Res music from Apple Music I anyway will opt for an external DAC. In my current config (iPad USB-C -> AVC HDMI) I don't get the hi-res support I want. Do I need it? No, probably not considering the poor 'ear'-performance due to age... But I can so I will (want). When the AVC is decoding the Dolby codecs in the movies I'm watching and I am bombarded with a lot of surround sound, I probably will not hear the surround noise (floor) However I fully agree with you United Music should be more transparant. Still I'm really curious hów it will perform when tested by Amirm. Too bad I live in another timezone on a different continent
they told me that the italian marantz website will be update with the correct info in the next days. Honestly i found wrong information only in the italian web site
Unfortunately not only Italy, also in North America. I just check on the Marantz website and you are right, they have removed the reference to the AKM DAC, now it just say 32-bit D/A converter. In the HK website, it still refers to the AK4458, not it looks like Marantz at least has started the update process but Denon hasn't yet.
Below is a link to the Denon X3700H info sheet and it still says AK4458, same for the X4700H, the datasheet also refers to the AK4458.
So, not that it really matters or helps, I decided to do some further research It is clear Denon still also in the EU (Netherlands) is advertising for AKM DAC's in the 4700.
I've been going through some of the pictures I was able to collect the last few weeks on this forum and elsewhere. What I see is Denon advertised with a DAC-board picture of the earlier 4500 at the launch of the 4700. You can determine based upon the lay-out. The picture Denon Japan now is showing on it's website is indeed of the 4700 but is the initial AKM equipped DAC-board. You can see by comparing the picture of one of the forum members who took it of his DAC-board in his 4700. If you compare the lay-out ánd the code on top of the board you can see they are almost identical up to a few last characters behind the dash. It's something like 'CUP13103Z-.........' You can just see it on top of the picture.
This, and the forum members who got response from local/regional United Music distributors about the DAC changes, unfortunately makes the case stronger for assuming the whole 2020-> range of Marantz and Denon now is equipped with inferior DAC's. Since I don't like being mislead before sourcing a (at least here in NL) € 1.649,00 costing AVC, I consider at least bringing this up with the European or NL distributor. Like many said; in real life one can wonder about the net result of such a change. However it does matter if you go through pre-out to a 'clean' power amp and some high-end speakers. Or perhaps when listening through a wired headphone of particular quality. Anyway, I don't like being mislead. So the only thing for me that could, sort of at least, give me some comfort, would be knowing that in real life the revised 4700 plays (about) in the same ballpark as the one I thought I was buying.
Since Amirm's evaluating the performance of AVR's on DAC-performance, it definitely would be great to hear from him and better; get som updatet test results. Because also, until today at leats, Amirm is continuing to recommend the 3700, 4700, 6700 and the Marantz 8015. It would make sense to reconsider witnessing such expression of 'worry' on your own forum. For me as a consumer forums like these are so much more reliable than the ones related to magazines and commercial websites. So please Amir; share your thoughts and even better, updated test results.
Forum member's 4700, you can, when you expand, just read the code on top of the board. Right next to it the DENON.jp picture of the so called modified board. The lay-out is the same and different from the 4500 DAC-board. Almost same code on top; CUP13103Z-........
The 4500 DAC-board
The picture of the launch of the 4700 showing, apparently at least, the 4500 DAC-board
The EU fact sheet:
It is clear Denon still also in the EU (Netherlands) is advertising for AKM DAC's in the 4700.I've been going through some of the pictures I was able to collect the last few weeks on this forum and elsewhere. What I see is Denon advertised with a DAC-board picture of the earlier 4500 at the launch of the 4700. You can determine based upon the lay-out. The picture Denon Japan now is showing on it's website is indeed of the 4700 but is the initial AKM equipped DAC-board. You can see by comparing the picture of one of the forum members who took it of his DAC-board in his 4700. If you compare the lay-out ánd the code on top of the board you can see they are almost identical up to a few last characters behind the dash. It's something like 'CUP13103Z-.........' You can just see it on top of the picture.
This, and the forum members who got response from local/regional United Music distributors about the DAC changes, unfortunately makes the case stronger for assuming the whole 2020-> range of Marantz and Denon now is equipped with inferior DAC's. Since I don't like being mislead before sourcing a (at least here in NL) € 1.649,00 costing AVC, I consider at least bringing this up with the European or NL distributor. Like many said; in real life one can wonder about the net result of such a change. However it does matter if you go through pre-out to a 'clean' power amp and some high-end speakers. Or perhaps when listening through a wired headphone of particular quality. Anyway, I don't like being mislead. So the only thing for me that could, sort of at least, give me some comfort, would be knowing that in real life the revised 4700 plays (about) in the same ballpark as the one I thought I was buying.
Since Amirm's evaluating the performance of AVR's on DAC-performance, it definitely would be great to hear from him and better; get som updatet test results. Because also, until today at leats, Amirm is continuing to recommend the 3700, 4700, 6700 and the Marantz 8015. It would make sense to reconsider witnessing such expression of 'worry' on your own forum. For me as a consumer forums like these are so much more reliable than the ones related to magazines and commercial websites. So please Amir; share your thoughts and even better, updated test results.
Forum member's 4700, you can, when you expand, just read the code on top of the board. Right next to it the DENON.jp picture of the so called modified board. The lay-out is the same and different from the 4500 DAC-board. Almost same code on top; CUP13103Z-........
The 4500 DAC-board
The picture of the launch of the 4700 showing, apparently at least, the 4500 DAC-board
The EU fact sheet:
The mysterious part is, as you mentioned, at launch time the 4700's DAC board is the same as the one for the 4500, but the replacement board as shown by Denon.jp shows a slightly different board, one that shows two 8 channel DAC chips that looks just like the AK4458, but the board is definitely different as you can see in my post that shows both. So if the new one has 8 pieces 2 channel PCM5102A then what the heck is the one still being shown on Denon.jp, and again it is definitely not the same as the one in the 4500 and the original 4700 (at launch time).
Just to add to confusion... Denon advertise the 800 as 32 bit DAC in NL. The TI spec-sheet on the PCM1690 says it's a 24 bit DAC. Or am I mixing things up here? This would mean the 'main board' DAC on the 800isn't 32 bit whereas the 'simpler' DAC's for ZONE2 and NETWORK probably are 32 bit... Making Denon not liars...
Denon advertise the 800 as 32 bit DAC in NL. The TI spec-sheet on the PCM1690 says it's a 24 bit DAC. Or am I mixing things up here? This would mean the 'main board' DAC on the 800isn't 32 bit whereas the 'simpler' DAC's for ZONE2 and NETWORK probably are 32 bit... Making Denon not liars...I belief Denon is very much aware of what they are doing and are not at all transparant about it. Posting an updated DAC-board on their site containing 7 TI PCM5102a's would create more discussing on fora then through how they did it now.
What I still can understand is the THD+N performance user-22 measured on the 1690 DAC and also the Network (=HEOS) performance on the simple PCM5100 DAC's. Officialy they measure 90 dB SINAD and here we are seeing in the revised 800 94 dB. Again, good reason the 'officially' test again by Amirm.
Different test gear and may be different methodology could explain that, there are also manufacturer tolerances, though that should not account for such a big gap. If it is measured the same way on Amir's bench I am 99% sure the result would not be better than 90 dB +/- 3 dB and I think I am being generous. If it did manage even 90 dB, then I think it is more than good enough when you compared that to the Marantz AV7705's 75 dB and the $5,000 AV8805 and 8805A's 92 dB. Practically speaking I think the PCM5102A is okay, again the issue is about D+M/SU transparency and accuracy in their marketing practice.
-pekr-
Member
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2021
- Messages
- 23
- Likes
- 11
Isn't Denon and / or Marantz suggested just because those are the only ones tested? E.g. on some Czech forums, at least Denon is not preferred, especially in regards to stereo music reproduction and Yamaha seems to be often preferred just because of that.
I would have to say no.. They are recommended on ASR based on their better test results not because they are the only one tested, or because some people claimed they "sound better" or worse than others. The claims by users and/or reviewers that they are worse or better for music listening than Yamaha and/or other brand's comparable models or not are often not objectively confirmed. There are always going to be forums in different parts of the world where some people would claim that brand X sounds better for music whereas brand Y sounds better in movies, or something else. You will find people on North American forums who believe in the same kind of things too.
rockphotog
Member
How are the delivery around the world? I ordered a 3700H last year before a $200 price bump, but the "anticipated in stock" date in Norway is now February 18th. I hope those container ships are sailing.
Well there are definitely other AVR/AVP including Pre Pro on this forum that were tested by @amirm but not recommended. Check here:
Audio Electronics Review and Measurements Index
Master table and index of all audio equipment reviews and measurements.
www.audiosciencereview.com
-pekr-
Member
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2021
- Messages
- 23
- Likes
- 11
Well there are definitely other AVR/AVP including Pre Pro on this forum that were tested by @amirm but not recommended. Check here:
Audio Electronics Review and Measurements Index
Master table and index of all audio equipment reviews and measurements.
Your "definitely" means, that there is basically no Yamaha AVR being tested, apart from one vintage model.
Similar threads
- Poll
