Hyperion APR-16 AV Processor Review

[voodooless]

So why does the higher noise floor of the lower frequencies not show up here?

 

[daniboun]

The design is nice, but let's just say that with $8000 I could buy quite a few Big Macs.

 

[Mnyb]

Yes its expensive but its 16 balanced channels that's 500$ per channel with DSP . So for a specialist niche product with support its not completely unreasonable ?
Maybe too expensive for me rigth now ? I had a meridian G68 that thing costed more than this 20 years ago and performed much worse ( if you used analog ouputs ).

This kind company probably supports their products extensively . And having good software and UI costs a bit too

 

[welwynnick]

I was curious that the problem didn't seem to manifest itself in the multi-tone test, which looked really good for an AV product.

So why does the higher noise floor of the lower frequencies not show up here?

I was wondering the same thing - except that maybe it is the higher noise floor.
Looking back over the tests for the Denon A1-H, Anthem AVM90 and Marantz AV10, the Hyperion is better than all of them at everything - except the LF signal noise floor.
If you look at Amir's separate test, the noise floor rises from around -150dB to around -130dB when the test signal is dropped to 100Hz.
However the multitone noise floor is roughly -120dB, so perhaps that is indeed the elevated noise floor?
I would guess not, though.

 

[NTTY]

The noise floor rising as such with low frequencies looks like the beginning of an interpolator being overloaded (amplitude rise of random quantization errors?). I would try the same 50Hz SINAD test at lower digital levels, just to check.
But I think that’s what we saw with the IMD sweep, and I’m surprised it starts as soon as -40dB. So the explanation might be somewhere else.

 

[NTTY]

View attachment 537708
So why does the higher noise floor of the lower frequencies not show up here?

It shows the same. With a DR of 116dB or so, the noise floor should be a good 15dB lower (centered at -130dB, not -115dB) on that view. This is the view we get from a CD player (16bits), not from a high resolution device.

 

[voodooless]

To me it shows the same. With a DR of 116dB or so, the noise floor should be a good 15dB lower (centered at -130dB, not -115dB) on that view. This is the view we get from a CD player, not from high resolution device.

Welll, a CD doesn't have 19 bits of resolution, but close enough, I guess.

But yes, I was foolishly expecting the noise floor of the <300 section to be higher than the rest, but that is obviously not the case. The whole noise floor is raised due to the low-frequency contents.

 

[peng]

I was wondering the same thing - except that maybe it is the higher noise floor.
Looking back over the tests for the Denon A1-H, Anthem AVM90 and Marantz AV10, the Hyperion is better than all of them at everything - except the LF signal noise floor.

I thought it did worse in IMD too, but maybe I remember wrong. Regardless, on paper the differences between the 3 you mentioned seem insignificant.

 

[NTTY]

Welll, a CD doesn't have 19 bits of resolution, but close enough, I guess.

This is not the true noise floor that you see on that view, because of the FFT gain that visually lowers it.
It is calculated as FFT gain = 10log(FFTLenght/2).

Depending on the FFT length that Amir used (512k?), you might see the random uncorrelated noise floor somewhere 40 to 50dB lower than where it really is.

Edit: example from one of my CD players review:

This is also 19bits of distortion free range (roughly 115dB clean). But that is distortion only, not noise.

 

[PGAMiami]

I reached out to the sales rep at the manufacturer and they suggested I reach out by phone to their Technical Support. Will post their response as I get it. In the meantime Amir has my unit so he can do further testing or firmware updates as needed.

 

[EWL5]

Except it hasn't been tested yet. What if it fails something like this did? It's also way more than 3500 for us residents because of tariffs taxes and shipping.

I'll tell you one thing: even if the failure is the same on the Tide16, I think folks would rather pay the $3500+tariffs, taxes, and shipping vs $8k!

I may be be misremembering but do both devices share a similar platform?

 

[welwynnick]

I'll tell you one thing: even if the failure is the same on the Tide16, I think folks would rather pay the $3500+tariffs, taxes, and shipping vs $8k!

MiniDSP published their own AP IMD measurement for the Tide16, and it's comparable with stereo DACs:

I may be be misremembering but do both devices share a similar platform?

No, definitely not. I'll try to find the link. EDIT: Here it is:

Is Tide16 an ODM product? Did you really design everything?

When we announced Tide16, a few people immediately asked whether we were using an ODM—basically, another company owning all the IP while miniDSP just feeds them ideas. Sounds tempting, right? Less work for us… in theory ? But no—Tide16, just ...

support.minidsp.com

When we announced Tide16, a few people immediately asked whether we were using an ODM—basically, another company owning all the IP while miniDSP just feeds them ideas. Sounds tempting, right? Less work for us… in theory ?​

But no—Tide16, just like every other miniDSP product, is fully engineered in‑house. Hardware, firmware, software… the whole stack is ours. No third‑party doing the heavy lifting behind the scenes.
Now, the honest part:
The downside:
This was hands‑down the most painful project we’ve ever taken on.
The upside:
We’ve taken full ownership of every detail in this platform. Because we designed it from the ground up, debugged it, and wrestled with every twist along the way, we know exactly what’s happening under the hood. Sure, outsourcing might have been faster or cheaper — but that’s not how we roll. Our engineering team thrives on challenges, and this project gave us plenty to sink our teeth into. The result? A system we understand inside‑out, built with the kind of care and persistence that makes it uniquely ours.

 

[PGAMiami]

I'll tell you one thing: even if the failure is the same on the Tide16, I think folks would rather pay the $3500+tariffs, taxes, and shipping vs $8k!

I may be be misremembering but do both devices share a similar platform?

The video and hdmi capabilities of these two products are quite different, as is the intended market. The APR-16 looks to me targeting the high end home theater market where it’s priced well below Storm and Trinnov

 

[EWL5]

The video and hdmi capabilities of these two products are quite different, as is the intended market. The APR-16 looks to me targeting the high end home theater market where it’s priced well below Storm and Trinnov

I do appreciate the fact that it has 7 HDMI ports. Not having to deal w/ARC/eARC is a plus in my book!

 

[welwynnick]

The video and hdmi capabilities of these two products are quite different, as is the intended market. The APR-16 looks to me targeting the high end home theater market where it’s priced well below Storm and Trinnov

I think the APR-16 is also showing the benefits of it's superior DACs - the linearity and jitter results were better than any other AV product.

 

[peng]

I think the APR-16 is also showing the benefits of it's superior DACs - the linearity and jitter results were better than any other AV product.

It uses a better DAC IC, though the low power version, than the AV10 so I expected a few dB better in SINAD, the Tide 16 uses the IC that is at least 2-3 notches below, yet I expect it to measure better in SINAD and IMD, too bad they just don't use the flagship ICs and the associated parts such as OPAs, and double differential circuitry. Instead they typically either use the best ICs, or the lesser ones but do more in implementation with better OPAs and circuitry, would be nice if they do both, may be the next Trinnov, I guess but there seems no hope any of them would do near the price range of the AV10, that imo is still the best value so far for SINAD chasers.

 

[welwynnick]

....... I guess but there seems no hope any of them would do near the price range of the AV10, that imo is still the best value so far for SINAD chasers.

I have a feeling that every expensive AVP makes the Denon A1H / A10H and Marantz A10 / AV20 look rather good, now that they have Dirac ART.

 

[peng]

I have a feeling that every expensive AVP makes the Denon A1H / A10H and Marantz A10 / AV20 look rather good, now that they have Dirac ART.

Don’t tell Andrew Robinson lol!

 

[Billy Budapest]

16 channels is not enough for system with 8k USD processor, in my opinion. 9.x.4 is a minimum for immersive setup, so unless you invest into separate sub controllers you end up with 3 subs, which is also suboptimal.

I think you forgot to add the wink emoji. Or even the laugh emoji.

The number of channels any one setup needs will be governed by room size and other factors. There is no set number of channels required for an effective Atmos setup. I have a 9.4.3 setup but truthfully, I could have gone without my front wides and rear Atmos and gotten 95% there. As for the “.3,” that is achieved through two front speakers with built-in subs (Gallo 3.5’s with their woofers’ second voice coils driven by a subwoofer amp) and a separate subwoofer, so it might not be a true .3 setup. The three subs are integrated through a DSPeaker 8033 Cinema.

 

[Fidji]

I think you forgot to add the wink emoji. Or even the laugh emoji.

The number of channels any one setup needs will be governed by room size and other factors. There is no set number of channels required for an effective Atmos setup. I have a 9.4.3 setup but truthfully, I could have gone without my front wides and rear Atmos and gotten 95% there. As for the “.3,” that is achieved through two front speakers with built-in subs (Gallo 3.5’s with their woofers’ second voice coils driven by a subwoofer amp) and a separate subwoofer, so it might not be a true .3 setup. The three subs are integrated through a DSPeaker 8033 Cinema.

If you take CEDIA RP-22 - how would you rate your setup?