Denon Replaces AKM AK4458 DAC IC in X4700H and X6700H

[KMO]

Thanks for your reply KMO way back in post 369. I didn't understand this part of your post. What do you mean by "analogue Direct involves a whole bunch of extra circuitry and paths and programming"? The analog direct takes the analog signal straight to the amp and speakers, albeit via some switches. Perhaps it's the convoluted switch path that you meant?

I meant fitting extra stuff in the box. The switches and logic to provide the extra short path. It's probably not a huge deal in terms of physical parts, tbh - I believe most of it ends up inside switching ICs - but it's extra effort in complexity.

I've looked again at my AVR-4308's schematic, and yes, it is actually all inside one IC - the custom APPA300 switching chip.

• That receives all the 2-channel analogue inputs, and the 7.1 EXT IN.
• It has a 2-channel output to the ADC, and 7.1-inputs from the DAC.
• And it has 7.1 outputs to the pre-out stages.

Then the FL pre-out, for example, just has to have a switch controlling whether it receives the signal from a 2-channel input FL, EXT-FL, or DAC-FL.

So it's not much of a big deal, compared to, say, all the big relays fitted to let it shuffle the 7 amplifiers between the 11 binding posts for the various bi-wire/bi-amp/zone modes.

At least for Denon's 4308 design, where all that switching logic is already placed in one custom IC, with every core analogue signal in the box going through it. I can imagine a simpler design that just had standalone 8-way switch feeding the 2-channel inputs to an ADC without a custom IC. It would involve extra stuff on the board to fit the extra direct path there.

Arguably that custom chip exists in order to make the analogue direct and 7.1 EXT IN possible. So maybe that is the cost we're looking at - a custom IC.

Edit: Your diagram puzzled me for a while cos I couldn't find the switching between MAIN-L, DA-FL and EXT-FL - I just found it in the top-left "7in-3out Analog SW". You can see that they're having to distribute the multiway switching for each channel between multiple non-custom chips with number of switch poles that don't provide exactly what they need. Dropping EXT IN would save one pole each on eight channels, and dropping analogue direct would save one pole each on two channels. So dropping EXT IN probably saves one complete switch chip, whereas dropping analogue direct wouldn't.

 

[lewdish]

AKM stated that they're resuming shipping samples out for 2022. But they're discontinuing a large number of the recent generation chips for a new generation, I assume due to changes in fabrication. Hopefully Denon/Marrantz switches back to using whatever they can get from AKM.

https://audioxpress.com/article/the-return-of-velvet-sound-and-news-about-self-powered-speakers

 

[Everett T]

My unit (4700) shipped will be here by 8pm tomorrow, was backordered for a month. I'll be doing a tear down as far as necessary to confirm DACs.

 

[Jkaiser3]

My unit (4700) shipped will be here by 8pm tomorrow, was backordered for a month. I'll be doing a tear down as far as necessary to confirm DACs.

I can save you hours, sound United confirmed DAC makes and models used in revised denon x4700h with me. It is the ti pcm 5102a. Not to mention not void your warranty.

 

[Oski1997]

I can save you hours, sound United confirmed DAC makes and models used in revised denon x4700h with me. It is the ti pcm 5102a. Not to mention not void your warranty.

Marantz also confirmed with me they’re using the Texas Instruments PCM DACs in the v2 models.

 

[Everett T]

I can save you hours, sound United confirmed DAC makes and models used in revised denon x4700h with me. It is the ti pcm 5102a. Not to mention not void your warranty.

Thanks, was hoping that this latest batch would reveal something better. Looking at the Ti spec sheet it should work fine for it's intended usage for me, I will just wait till the end of next year to see what shapes up.

 

[alik1006]

Thanks, was hoping that this latest batch would reveal something better. Looking at the Ti spec sheet it should work fine for it's intended usage for me, I will just wait till the end of next year to see what shapes up.

Sounds like a good decision. Quite a few people already came to the same conclusion (including me). If you can afford - it's better to wait. Given chip shortage, supply chain disruption, mess around HDMI 2.1, less than conscientious behavior of some brands (we-know-who)... wait and see looks like a sound strategy.
However IMO you should expect prices to only go up.

 

[valerianf]

PCM 5102 is used in many entry level AVRs since several years.
I did not expect to find this DAC in expansive AVR lines.
Clearly I will wait for performant DAC to come back.

My 10 years old Yamaha AVR is already equipped with a DAC more performant than the PCM 5102.

 

[Oski1997]

Sounds like a good decision. Quite a few people already came to the same conclusion (including me). If you can afford - it's better to wait. Given chip shortage, supply chain disruption, mess around HDMI 2.1, less than conscientious behavior of some brands (we-know-who)... wait and see looks like a sound strategy.
However IMO you should expect prices to only go up.

Price hike is why I decided to by my AVR now. The updated 2020 units (with the fixed HDMI 2.1 port) already went up about $400-$600 depending on the model. It wouldn't surprise me if the 2022 x3800, x4800, x6800 went up another $400-$600 (especially if the freight rates continue to be 280%+ compared to pre-covid prices).

 

[Everett T]

PCM 5102 is used in many entry level AVRs since several years.
I did not expect to find this DAC in expansive AVR lines.
Clearly I will wait for performant DAC to come back.

My 10 years old Yamaha AVR is already equipped with a DAC more performant than the PCM 5102.

Are you referring to the 5102 or 5102a?

 

[Oski1997]

Are you referring to the 5102 or 5102a?

wow, I didn't know there was a 5102"a" version compared to a 5102. I just found a quote from Texas Instruments: the PCM5102 is not recommended for new designs, and you should use the PCM5102A. PCM5102A 2.1 VRMS, 112/106/100 dB Audio Stereo DAC with PLL and 32-bit, 384 kHz PCM Interface was launched in 2012 (I believe).

 

[Everett T]

wow, I didn't know there was a 5102"a" version compared to a 5102. I just found a quote from Texas Instruments: the PCM5102 is not recommended for new designs, and you should use the PCM5102A. PCM5102A 2.1 VRMS, 112/106/100 dB Audio Stereo DAC with PLL and 32-bit, 384 kHz PCM Interface was launched in 2012 (I believe).

I assume, since I didn't look, that they are the A designation.

 

[Oski1997]

I assume, since I didn't look, that they are the A designation.

The "A" version of 1502a has "improved tolerance to clock jitter".

 

[valerianf]

The Yamaha RX-V6A and RX-V685 have a 1502a DAC.
Amir measured the Hdmi input to Rca with a Sinad of 71.2dB.
"What is not good is the distortion+noise at full 2 volt output of just 71 dB"

I prefer to wait 1 or 2 years more to get a better DAC after the end of the components shortages (let us keep some hope).

 

[Everett T]

The Yamaha RX-V6A and RX-V685 have a 1502a DAC.
Amir measured the Hdmi input to Rca with a Sinad of 71.2dB.
"What is not good is the distortion+noise at full 2 volt output of just 71 dB"

I prefer to wait 1 or 2 years more to get a better DAC after the end of the components shortages (let us keep some hope).

That dosen't mean that's what the Denon is going to measure, FWIW. We've seen countless times to identical dacs that measure different because of implementation. I have no idea of what it will spec at, but based on published Ti numbers, it could be higher.

 

[peng]

That dosen't mean that's what the Denon is going to measure, FWIW. We've seen countless times to identical dacs that measure different because of implementation. I have no idea of what it will spec at, but based on published Ti numbers, it could be higher.

Agreed to a point, while implementation matters a lot, I would say it has been relatively rare that devices using identical DAC IC (obviously you meant just the IC, i.e. the chip itself) measured significantly different. If the differences happened to be significant, say 99 dB vs 90 dB SINAD, it would likely be due to the other parts in the signal chain such as the volume control IC, OPA buffers (such as Marantz HDAM) but not the DAC board itself, so in that case implementation would mean the whole audio signal chain. Again, implementation clearly is important, but even a dongle DAC/headphone amp could outperform so expensive ones such as Hegel's (forgot the model by was tested on ASR recently). If they have a great "implementation scheme", why not use DAC chips that has at least better than average performance specifications?

So I think there is no excuse, at least for mid range AVRs, AVPs not to use better DAC chips than the likes of the PCM5102A. I am sure D+M has a reason to use that particular chip, and I am really curious to know the real reason.

 

[Everett T]

Agreed to a point, while implementation matters a lot, I would say it has been relatively rare that devices using identical DAC IC (obviously you meant just the IC, i.e. the chip itself) measured significantly different. If the differences happened to be significant, say 99 dB vs 90 dB SINAD, it would likely be due to the other parts in the signal chain such as the volume control IC, OPA buffers (such as Marantz HDAM) but not the DAC board itself, so in that case implementation would mean the whole audio signal chain. Again, implementation clearly is important, but even a dongle DAC/headphone amp could outperform so expensive ones such as Hegel's (forgot the model by was tested on ASR recently). If they have a great "implementation scheme", why not use DAC chips that has at least better than average performance specifications?

So I think there is no excuse, at least for mid range AVRs, AVPs not to use better DAC chips than the likes of the PCM5102A. I am sure D+M has a reason to use that particular chip, and I am really curious to know the real reason.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not pleased with the choice but I'm hoping that it will suffice for the next year, as I've been shuffling AVRs around the house. I tried to get the Lexicon RX6 but they're not sure when they would even be back in stock (knowing that it too has it's downsides).

I'll just start playing with the new Audyssey X to keep my mind off the situation, lol.

 

[Oski1997]

Agreed to a point, while implementation matters a lot, I would say it has been relatively rare that devices using identical DAC IC (obviously you meant just the IC, i.e. the chip itself) measured significantly different. If the differences happened to be significant, say 99 dB vs 90 dB SINAD, it would likely be due to the other parts in the signal chain such as the volume control IC, OPA buffers (such as Marantz HDAM) but not the DAC board itself, so in that case implementation would mean the whole audio signal chain. Again, implementation clearly is important, but even a dongle DAC/headphone amp could outperform so expensive ones such as Hegel's (forgot the model by was tested on ASR recently). If they have a great "implementation scheme", why not use DAC chips that has at least better than average performance specifications?

So I think there is no excuse, at least for mid range AVRs, AVPs not to use better DAC chips than the likes of the PCM5102A. I am sure D+M has a reason to use that particular chip, and I am really curious to know the real reason.

I returned my Denon and bought a Marantz for the HDAM advantage. It's my first AVR (ever) so I don't know how an AKM DAC sound differs from a PCM1502a DAC with HDAM. At this point, ignorance is bliss. I was able to get a free VS3003 HDMI 2.1 switcher so that alone makes me feel better about my purchase.

The Marantz VS3003 HDMI Switcher allows up to three 8K devices to be connected to select Marantz 8K AV receivers: https://www.marantz.com/en-us/product/av-receivers/vs3003

 

[peng]

I'll just start playing with the new Audyssey X to keep my mind off the situation, lol.

I just did too, but the free demo only. Did you buy the real one? It is a nice tool for sure, though from what I can see so far, the MultEQ Editor App, for $20 can do 99% of it but will take more time and will have to use Ratbuddyssey for data entry and REW to see the results.

 

[peng]

I returned my Denon and bought a Marantz for the HDAM advantage. It's my first AVR (ever) so I don't know how an AKM DAC sound differs from a PCM1502a DAC with HDAM. At this point, ignorance is bliss. I was able to get a free VS3003 HDMI 2.1 switcher so that alone makes me feel better about my purchase.

The Marantz VS3003 HDMI Switcher allows up to three 8K devices to be connected to select Marantz 8K AV receivers: https://www.marantz.com/en-us/product/av-receivers/vs3003

That's part of the fun in this hobby, each have their own preference and in this case we have the exact opposite preference. There is no right or wrong.. I went back and forth between the two and finally back to D to avoid the M's HDAM.