How to Hot Rod a Denon AVR-X3600H?

[Bear123]

What? B&W are highly engineered speakers with a strong emphasis on measured performance.

I've seen enough B&W models(not all) with scary bad measurements that makes it hard to believe thats true. They seem more focused on producing speakers with highly colored sound that will stand out in Best Buy.

 

[rccarguy]

Well put in ruark in there too as with certain amps bit sibilant. Fixed with using ypao.

There is synergy between amp and speakers.

 

[Bear123]

You are deeply rooted in the subjective audiophile belief system/religion. Stick around, this place will help clear a lot of things up.

 

[beefkabob]

Well put in ruark in there too as with certain amps bit sibilant. Fixed with using ypao.

There is synergy between amp and speakers.

My cars left wheels have one inch less diameter than the right wheels, but my seat is installed 1 inch higher on the left. Synergy! Great car.

 

[GXAlan]

The denon avr measures beneath the theoretical limits of human hearing of disyortion, unlike some DACs and amps. It measures beyond 16 bits, though, so most of us are unlikely to be able to tell the difference.

But the damping factor is really low. So it might actually be audibly different with real loads.

edit: damping factor of the SR5011 which may have similar amplification stages

 

[beefkabob]

But the damping factor is really low. So it might actually be audibly different with real loads.

edit: damping factor of the SR5011 which may have similar amplification stages

I can't find the spec for the damping factor, but Denon claims that their have upgraded the amp to do better there than the previous gen.
I absolutely think a trained listener could, blind, tell the difference between this and an ABH2 at power levels under, say, 50watts. I'm not sure I could.

 

[preload]

I've seen enough B&W models(not all) with scary bad measurements that makes it hard to believe thats true. They seem more focused on producing speakers with highly colored sound that will stand out in Best Buy.

I happen to like the way B&W loudspeakers are tuned, particularly the 800 series. So do a lot of other people.
I'm not sure how long you've been in this hobby, but up until around 2010, you could only find B&W speakers at upscale audio retailers, so I'm not sure if your "highly colored sound for Best Buy listeners" assertion really holds weight.

And while I think folks here appreciate the importance of measurements, I think it's a far cry to say that you can reliably predict the way a loudspeaker will sound based exclusively on examining "curves." In fact, I would push back and say that if a well-regarded speaker has "poor" measurements, it may very well be that you're not measuring a property that correlates reliably with perceived sound quality and/or the measurements are not being interpreted correctly.

On that note, perhaps you can share measurements of an 800-series B&W that you thought predicted poor sound quality? I'd also be curious if you can cite a paper that demonstrates a tight correlation with highly positive listener perception and a specific measurement.

 

[rccarguy]

I happen to like the way B&W loudspeakers are tuned, particularly the 800 series. So do a lot of other people.
I'm not sure how long you've been in this hobby, but up until around 2010, you could only find B&W speakers at upscale audio retailers, so I'm not sure if your "highly colored sound for Best Buy listeners" assertion really holds weight.

And while I think folks here appreciate the importance of measurements, I think it's a far cry to say that you can reliably predict the way a loudspeaker will sound based exclusively on examining "curves." In fact, I would push back and say that if a well-regarded speaker has "poor" measurements, it may very well be that you're not measuring a property that correlates reliably with perceived sound quality and/or the measurements are not being interpreted correctly.

On that note, perhaps you can share measurements of an 800-series B&W that you thought predicted poor sound quality? I'd also be curious if you can cite a paper that demonstrates a tight correlation with highly positive listener perception and a specific measurement.

I believe abbey road mixing studio have high end b&w speakers?

I had 601 c1 they were ok for £200. Didn't match well with my audiolabs but fine with yamaha.

 

[Colonel7]

I'd also be curious if you can cite a paper that demonstrates a tight correlation with highly positive listener perception and a specific measurement.

Toole's decades of research and his book sound reproduction plus all of the AES papers on it. A summary of this is in his own comments reproduced in this thread here https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...ut-room-curve-targets-room-eq-and-more.10950/

The other most useful items that I've found at ASR from a top-level beginning standpoint are the audibility threshold measurement thread here https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...-thresholds-of-amp-and-dac-measurements.5734/

And look up Sausalito Audio Interpreting Spinorama Charts by LaCarrubba (it's short). Google is faster.

 

[Bear123]

I happen to like the way B&W loudspeakers are tuned, particularly the 800 series. So do a lot of other people.
I'm not sure how long you've been in this hobby, but up until around 2010, you could only find B&W speakers at upscale audio retailers, so I'm not sure if your "highly colored sound for Best Buy listeners" assertion really holds weight.

And while I think folks here appreciate the importance of measurements, I think it's a far cry to say that you can reliably predict the way a loudspeaker will sound based exclusively on examining "curves." In fact, I would push back and say that if a well-regarded speaker has "poor" measurements, it may very well be that you're not measuring a property that correlates reliably with perceived sound quality and/or the measurements are not being interpreted correctly.

On that note, perhaps you can share measurements of an 800-series B&W that you thought predicted poor sound quality? I'd also be curious if you can cite a paper that demonstrates a tight correlation with highly positive listener perception and a specific measurement.

This is probably a good forum to participate in if you want to learn the science behind how measurements correlate extremely well with subjective sound quality. Not sure off the top of my head about the 800 series, but 5 of the 6 models tested here https://soundstagenetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16&Itemid=140 have poor measurements, and would be highly likely to sound poor compared to well designed speakers.

Edit: Quick google search found some measurements on B&W800:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/bampw-800-diamond-loudspeaker-measurements

A poorly engineered speaker at any price from what I see, let alone a very expensive high end model. Your right though, there are many people who really like them. The measurements might not predict the right speakers with 100% certainty when considering speakers of similarly good sound quality, but the measurements would definitely rule this out from being considered as an option for me. There are far too many well designed speakers without on and off axis response issues that will color the sound of everything that is played through them.

If you take a handful of well designed speakers such as the KEF R3, the Revel F208, Buchardt S400....the measurements on all of these represent very well designed speakers. It would be difficult to determine which one most people would prefer based on the spins....so listening to these three in person would be worthwhile if someone wanted to be 100% sure of their preference. However, measurements can also tell us that any of these would be very likely to easily sound better to most people than the B&W800 linked above.

 

[preload]

@Colonel7 and @Bear123
I'm pretty familiar with the JAES publications from the Harman group, including Toole and Olive. From what I recall, in Olive's AES convention paper (2004), his group presented a regression formula to predict listener preferences of loudspeakers based on loudspeaker measurements, which is what I believe you are suggesting can be done, albeit with high reliability. You are even willing to go as far as to say that you can predict that the B&W 800 Diamond loudspeakers "are highly likely to sound poor" based on measurements published by Stereophile.

I find this claim hard to believe. Consider the regression formula that Olive developed to predict loudspeaker preferences based on their measurements:

Preference Rating = 12.69 − NBD_ON * 2.49 − * 2.99 NBD_PIR − LFX * 4.31 + SM_PIR

NBD_ON = Average Narrow Band Deviation (dB) in each ½-octave band from 100 Hz- 12 kHz of the ON-AXIS anechoic FR curve
NBD_PIR = Average Narrow Band Deviation (dB) in each ½-octave band from 100 Hz- 12 kHz of the weighted average of the on-axis, early-reflected, and sound power measurements curves
LFX = Low frequency extension (Hz) based on -6dB frequency point transformed to log 10
SM_PIR = Smoothness (r^2) in amplitude response based on a linear regression line through 100 Hz -16 kHz of the weighted average of the on-axis, early-reflected, and sound power measurement curves

What I couldn't help but notice was that, their paper, EVEN AFTER applying this analysis on 4 different measured curves for each speaker, some anechoic and some in-room (with and without a time window), the formula STILL could not reliably differentiate between the best loudspeakers. I mean, it was pretty good, but nothing to hang your hat on. Take a look at the chart below. For loudspeakers with the highest predicted scores (6-7 range), the perceived preferences were still scattered across the board between 5 and 8 (a very large relative range on their scale)! And there is considerable overlap between speaker preferences when comparing the top quartile with the 2nd quartile of measurement performance.

So, I guess my question is, if the Harman group can only "sort of" predict which loudspeakers will sound best after applying a complex formula which applies statistical analysis to a series of measured curves, why on earth would you think that you could simply "eyeball" a subset of those curves and somehow achieve greater predictive capability?

 

[Colonel7]

@Colonel7 and @Bear123
I'm pretty familiar with the JAES publications from the Harman group, including Toole and Olive. From what I recall, in Olive's AES convention paper (2004), his group presented a regression formula to predict listener preferences of loudspeakers based on loudspeaker measurements, which is what I believe you are suggesting can be done, albeit with high reliability. You are even willing to go as far as to say that you can predict that the B&W 800 Diamond loudspeakers "are highly likely to sound poor" based on measurements published by Stereophile.

I find this claim hard to believe. Consider the regression formula that Olive developed to predict loudspeaker preferences based on their measurements:

Preference Rating = 12.69 − NBD_ON * 2.49 − * 2.99 NBD_PIR − LFX * 4.31 + SM_PIR

NBD_ON = Average Narrow Band Deviation (dB) in each ½-octave band from 100 Hz- 12 kHz of the ON-AXIS anechoic FR curve
NBD_PIR = Average Narrow Band Deviation (dB) in each ½-octave band from 100 Hz- 12 kHz of the weighted average of the on-axis, early-reflected, and sound power measurements curves
LFX = Low frequency extension (Hz) based on -6dB frequency point transformed to log 10
SM_PIR = Smoothness (r^2) in amplitude response based on a linear regression line through 100 Hz -16 kHz of the weighted average of the on-axis, early-reflected, and sound power measurement curves

What I couldn't help but notice was that, their paper, EVEN AFTER applying this analysis on 4 different measured curves for each speaker, some anechoic and some in-room (with and without a time window), the formula STILL could not reliably differentiate between the best loudspeakers. I mean, it was pretty good, but nothing to hang your hat on. Take a look at the chart below. For loudspeakers with the highest predicted scores (6-7 range), the perceived preferences were still scattered across the board between 5 and 8 (a very large relative range on their scale)! And there is considerable overlap between speaker preferences when comparing the top quartile with the 2nd quartile of measurement performance.

So, I guess my question is, if the Harman group can only "sort of" predict which loudspeakers will sound best after applying a complex formula which applies statistical analysis to a series of measured curves, why on earth would you think that you could simply "eyeball" a subset of those curves and somehow achieve greater predictive capability?

View attachment 68325

I think you're mixing us together. You asked

"I'd also be curious if you can cite a paper that demonstrates a tight correlation with highly positive listener perception and a specific measurement."

That's what I was responding to- Toole's research. It can be summed up generally for this question, in ABX testing both skilled and unskilled listeners prefer flat responses at about an 85% correlation. The skilled listeners are tougher numeric scorers but still have same preference in speakers for ABX. This is why I linked to the spinorama interpretation piece bc it tells you a lot about how a speaker will perform and sound. And that's a lot, not everything. Toole's research doesn't address AFAIK what types of speakers a customer will purchase and prefers when they are not in tightly controlled research conditions.

The Olive preference score thing I generally ignore bc it has a lot of issues and I find it rather silly. It's taken on a life of it's own bc helpful members decided to calculate it once speakers started being reviewed. It's controversial just as Amir's "panther" recommendations have become even though that started out as fun.

 

[Lbstyling]

Anyway.... I would suggest a couple of things to investigate RE the title of the thread (which I don't think anyone has tried to address yet??

Sheilding the PSU to reduce RF between PSU and low level electronics ( I don't know if it's a SMPS or tranny.

Supplying a separate PSU to the power amp stage so it's performance doesn't Interfere with the digital and line level electronics.

 

[frangle]

The actual damping factor is really low on the SR5011 and the Denon is probably similarly bad.

I read somewhere that the damping factor (4ohm load) of the X4500 is about 40 which is ok but not great. So if the OP has lousy / long speaker cables, sub-optimal connections and / or speakers with a demanding impedance characteristic, you could get into tube amp territory with muddy and attenuated bass. So to hot rod this unit, I’d verify that I had low resistance on the round trip to the speaker, otherwise I think it should be fine.

I use my new 3600 with a multichannel power amp (with a DF way beyond what matters) more to keep heat out of the receiver, as this seems to be what kills these after a few years.

 

[frangle]

( I don't know if it's a SMPS or tranny.
.

 

[Head_Unit]

So you're saying all amps sound the same?

No, I don't really think so, but then there's this:
https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/denon-vs-parts-express-round-1.984507/
hopefully soon we'll try the other way, like with a 3-channel Arcam for the fronts or something.

 

[Head_Unit]

So my question is, what is the cleanest multichannel processor with room correction?

Do you mean best SINAD results?

Well, yes, though I wish Amir also tested just the raw noise floor as well which is somewhat different. We're working on wanting to test the "S/N far beyond human hearing will still somehow sound better" hypothesis because, why not. IS there even a multichannel processor with time-based room correction? (i.e. I'm excluding computerized parametric EQs as I feel they are less powerful for some situations).

 

[peng]

So you're saying all amps sound the same?

Funny I keep seeing such kind of questions, but don't recall ever seeing answers like yes, definitely, or some other affirmative ways. If someone has actually said "all amps sound the same" without any qualifications/caveats, I would like to know who said that...

 

[Jlm86]

I am coming in with new project lining up with thread...
Have Denon x3600 avr, jbl 530/520/hsu vtf15 sub..

Wanting to integrate vintage cerwin vega 2 channel classic rock setup with my Realistic Lab400 tt.

Need 2 channel amp recommendations please..
Thank you

 

[Jlm86]

Re: 2 channel output
Is the consensus of the group that avr's cannot be configured to output acceptable 2 channel?

Going to test Adcom 555 on preouts...

I still want to use HSU VTF15 sub though..