Is the preamp solved?

[rdenney]

Great. So you think you did a good job setting your room correction. BTW did you have a chance to compare in your room other available options?

No. But why would I need to?

Doing better would require more than electronics, I think.

Rick "uses what he has" Denney

 

[Oddball]

Because it does not look good until you pass 200hz? Whatever EQ you are using is not that effective. But then they all have their quirks and takes time to set them up right.

The way I like it is like this. Can make much prettier graphs and without the hump on the back but this one sounds best for me and obviously includes the steep house curve.

 

[rdenney]

EQ doesn’t fix room modes. If it did, those nulls would not be there.

What do you think an automatic EQ can do that any good manually set parametric EQ can’t do?

I have no problem with automated EQ—I’ve used it on two different HT systems and with commercial sound systems. But this works, too, to the extent the room will let it.

Rick “limited by WAF for needed wall treatments behind the LP” Denney

 

[FrantzM]

Yes, preamps are "solved". It's just a control center (unless it has a phono preamp) and is more-often attenuating than amplifying. A receiver gives you the most for your money, including a preamp, power amp, and tuner. Many receivers (and all AVRs) have digital inputs.

+1
And I would add that I preconise an AVR in place of a Preamp.. these often come with DSP/DRC using DIRAC and Audyssey or equivalent ...
IMHO an AVR, should be the "control center" of any system, Stereo or MCH.

 

[Oddball]

EQ doesn’t fix room modes. If it did, those nulls would not be there.

What do you think an automatic EQ can do that any good manually set parametric EQ can’t do?

I have no problem with automated EQ—I’ve used it on two different HT systems and with commercial sound systems. But this works, too, to the extent the room will let it.

Rick “limited by WAF for needed wall treatments behind the LP” Denney

You can see a slight room mode in my graph - a 25hz bump - but for a reason that I don't want to tame it. Very little content in that area, but I do roll off my subs steeply at that point as surrounding structures start to resonate at 100dB or so and that can't be easily fixed. So this is the last bump I can feel - and its there for that reason.

You are looking at what automatic EQ can do, if yours is manual then let the best guy win.

 

[TehMowat]

Still apples and oranges. For the cost the WiiM servers a certain market and makes sense for many for specific rooms.

Im not denying that at all. I have a Wiim Ultra into a Rotel integrated amp with B&W 706 s2's in one room. Fantastic system, that if that was all I had, I would be very happy. But it doesn't sound as good as my Classé pre-amp paired with my Proceed HPA-2 and Dali Oberon 7s. These two systems are wildly different, I get it, but I moved the Wiim to the little system because it didn't sound as good my Cambridge CXN100. I'm not disputing the quality of the Wiim for the money. I am simply responding to OP who was trying to hash out if there is any difference between old "expensive" pre-amps, a Wiim, or a Denon whatever. All I said, was that there is absolutely a difference between a Denon mass market box and some well designed pre-amp. Again, I am not disputing that many modern devices are more capable than ever before, but that doesn't make them necessarily equal.

 

[TehMowat]

I think you should - you could be surprised if the speakers are at least standard quality, there are subs involved and Denon is on full Dirac package.

I don't have to consider it, I know it. Ive been installing residential and commercial AV systems for 20 years. I've probably heard more combinations of electronics and speakers than 95% or more of this forum. A $1000 Denon with "standard quality" speaker and Dirac may sound pretty good, but it's still going to sound like something you bought from Best Buy. Dirac is cool, but you people act like it is the holy grail. They are really only good for fixing subtle issues, and I frequently find they don't do much to improve the sound in most situations, at least in the way the majority of consumers are using them.

 

[Oddball]

I don't have to consider it, I know it. Ive been installing residential and commercial AV systems for 20 years. I've probably heard more combinations of electronics and speakers than 95% or more of this forum. A $1000 Denon with "standard quality" speaker and Dirac may sound pretty good, but it's still going to sound like something you bought from Best Buy. Dirac is cool, but you people act like it is the holy grail. They are really only good for fixing subtle issues, and I frequently find they don't do much to improve the sound in most situations, at least in the way the majority of consumers are using them.

Appreciate your experience but can't really reconcile to my much more modest experience.

BTW - there is a whole Dirac ART thread on this forum and people are bedazzled. Dirac Live that takes over after 150hz is definitely not a holy grail, but is probably best short of Trinnov. But then Trinnov has a very demanding solution for low bass control.

With the hardware being sufficiently transparent starting from $1K Denon - what do you then think, based on your vast experience, is the holy grail?

 

[rdenney]

You can see a slight room mode in my graph - a 25hz bump - but for a reason that I don't want to tame it. Very little content in that area, but I do roll off my subs steeply at that point as surrounding structures start to resonate at 100dB or so and that can't be easily fixed. So this is the last bump I can feel - and its there for that reason.

You are looking at what automatic EQ can do, if yours is manual then let the best guy win.

I don’t even have subs in the graph I showed. I could fill those nulls just by adding well-positioned subs, but the room(‘s other occupant) just doesn’t support it. Those nulls are portrayed wider than they are, of course, because of smoothing, and are probably hard to notice in real music. The system does not ring, however, and that’s something I can hear. Nulls are caused by cancellation, and adding amplifier power to fill them doesn’t work and can certainly cause the amp (or even preamp) to clip.

I used the Yamaha built-in automated EQ in our TC-watching system, which is a 5.1 system using a hodge-podge of mostly cheap speakers. It worked fine—the sub is transparent and non-localizable and music sounds natural. But that system’s use case wasn’t worth critical measurement with REW, so I don’t know with much precision how well it did. (Aside: Before the Yamaha AVR, I used an Onkyo AVR, preceded by a Kenwood AVR, preceded by two Sony AVRs, most of which had calibrated mics and automated EQ systems that all worked. That informs my desire to keep such software outside of expensive hardware—those AVRs all had to be replaced because they did not support the connectivity and interface requirements imposed by changing technology. They all still work but are unusable with current peripherals. Just more e-waste. Grrrr!)

I used the automated system in a dbx DriveRack processor in a church sound system. That system has, as a result, never experienced feedback, and I’ve had many tell me they don’t even realize the system is turned on until it isn’t. That system fulfills its requirements. No graph needed.

I used the calibrated microphone with a JVC equalizer for my listening system starting in the 80’s. That was with Advent speakers, a (good) Onkyo preamp, and a Spectro Acoustics amp. When EQ’d, recorded ambient noise opened the listening room, while without EQ it excited room resonances which were noticeable and intrusive. What I learned from that—give me narrow nulls over resonant peaks in the response curve any day. That EQ lacked parametric precision, but it certainly was able to fix the easily heard resonances, spectral tilt, and broad response errors. We didn’t have graphs, but we did have RTA displays with pink noise.

Recently, I helped a friend set up his new sound system. Denon 4800 AVR, Revel speakers (Performa be series), 7.2. The Audyssey automated system worked fine but took several attempts. Remaining problems weren’t solvable with electronics—I’d have liked more flexibility in sub placement—but the system sounds superb.

I’ve been doing this for a while. The objective isn’t a visual straight line in a graph, the objective is what we can hear: full-range response that is spectrally flat with no audible resonances or broad response errors. Automated systems get there, and are especially convenient with multichannel systems, but they aren’t the only path.

Back to topic…I’ve owned something like seven preamps over the years—that Onkyo, an SAE, two Adcoms (including a GFP-565), a Kenwood C-1, an B&S MC-101, and now a Holman. The Holman is the oldest, obviously. They pretty much all sound the same, but have a mix of different features. I’m still using the Kenwood and the B&S is other systems, but the B&S has developed a buzz and needs to visit Mr. Bench.

Rick “a day-off mini-rant” Denney

 

[Everett T]

Appreciate your experience but can't really reconcile to my much more modest experience.

BTW - there is a whole Dirac ART thread on this forum and people are bedazzled. Dirac Live that takes over after 150hz is definitely not a holy grail, but is probably best short of Trinnov. But then Trinnov has a very demanding solution for low bass control.

With the hardware being sufficiently transparent starting from $1K Denon - what do you then think, based on your vast experience, is the holy grail?

Considering the price of the pro version of Trinnov (vs the McIntosh stand alone version) thats what I would use (not the beospoke edition either). DIRAC is definitely the best value to result, I'm just lazy these days lol.

 

[Oddball]

Considering the price of the pro version of Trinnov (vs the McIntosh stand alone version) thats what I would use (not the beospoke edition either). DIRAC is definitely the best value to result, I'm just lazy these days lol.

Could not agree more. Went nuts on Dirac ART tweaking for a months or so - only to accomplish little to what was the initial calibration and settings. A bit of a difference between graphs, but they are all amazing so had to choose by ear.

Trinnov does have that mic that can arguably give you better correction results across the range, but then their ART equivalent - waveforming is just not feasible in most setups. Definitively not in mine.

 

[Oddball]

I don’t even have subs in the graph I showed. I could fill those nulls just by adding well-positioned subs, but the room(‘s other occupant) just doesn’t support it. Those nulls are portrayed wider than they are, of course, because of smoothing, and are probably hard to notice in real music. The system does not ring, however, and that’s something I can hear. Nulls are caused by cancellation, and adding amplifier power to fill them doesn’t work and can certainly cause the amp (or even preamp) to clip.

I used the Yamaha built-in automated EQ in our TC-watching system, which is a 5.1 system using a hodge-podge of mostly cheap speakers. It worked fine—the sub is transparent and non-localizable and music sounds natural. But that system’s use case wasn’t worth critical measurement with REW, so I don’t know with much precision how well it did. (Aside: Before the Yamaha AVR, I used an Onkyo AVR, preceded by a Kenwood AVR, preceded by two Sony AVRs, most of which had calibrated mics and automated EQ systems that all worked. That informs my desire to keep such software outside of expensive hardware—those AVRs all had to be replaced because they did not support the connectivity and interface requirements imposed by changing technology. They all still work but are unusable with current peripherals. Just more e-waste. Grrrr!)

I used the automated system in a dbx DriveRack processor in a church sound system. That system has, as a result, never experienced feedback, and I’ve had many tell me they don’t even realize the system is turned on until it isn’t. That system fulfills its requirements. No graph needed.

I used the calibrated microphone with a JVC equalizer for my listening system starting in the 80’s. That was with Advent speakers, a (good) Onkyo preamp, and a Spectro Acoustics amp. When EQ’d, recorded ambient noise opened the listening room, while without EQ it excited room resonances which were noticeable and intrusive. What I learned from that—give me narrow nulls over resonant peaks in the response curve any day. That EQ lacked parametric precision, but it certainly was able to fix the easily heard resonances, spectral tilt, and broad response errors. We didn’t have graphs, but we did have RTA displays with pink noise.

Recently, I helped a friend set up his new sound system. Denon 4800 AVR, Revel speakers (Performa be series), 7.2. The Audyssey automated system worked fine but took several attempts. Remaining problems weren’t solvable with electronics—I’d have liked more flexibility in sub placement—but the system sounds superb.

I’ve been doing this for a while. The objective isn’t a visual straight line in a graph, the objective is what we can hear: full-range response that is spectrally flat with no audible resonances or broad response errors. Automated systems get there, and are especially convenient with multichannel systems, but they aren’t the only path.

Back to topic…I’ve owned something like seven preamps over the years—that Onkyo, an SAE, two Adcoms (including a GFP-565), a Kenwood C-1, an B&S MC-101, and now a Holman. The Holman is the oldest, obviously. They pretty much all sound the same, but have a mix of different features. I’m still using the Kenwood and the B&S is other systems, but the B&S has developed a buzz and needs to visit Mr. Bench.

Rick “a day-off mini-rant” Denney

Won't go into the history that was also not poor, and included tubes as well .

Setup that you did on 4800H is probably the best you could do as Audy takes you only so far. Same setup with ART would really take it to another level. Speaking from experience and pretty large speaker setup. Even my Atmos are good to 50hz.

Times are changing and pre-amps are IMO loosing to AVRs/AVPs. Speaking of SINAD, my AV10 is now above the Classe and with all the additional bells and whistles not available on Clasee.

I really do enjoy my setup . And the bed in the middle of the room is just a cherry on the top.

 

[mhardy6647]

^^^ certainly looks like you have a view!

 

[rdenney]

Won't go into the history that was also not poor, and included tubes as well .

Setup that you did on 4800H is probably the best you could do as Audy takes you only so far. Same setup with ART would really take it to another level. Speaking from experience and pretty large speaker setup. Even my Atmos are good to 50hz.

Times are changing and pre-amps are IMO loosing to AVRs/AVPs. Speaking of SINAD, my AV10 is now above the Classe and with all the additional bells and whistles not available on Clasee.

I really do enjoy my setup . And the bed in the middle of the room is just a cherry on the top.

View attachment 510835

Can one actually hear the improvement of Dirac-ART over, say, Audyssey, if both achieve a flat spectral tilt, attenuation of resonances, correction of broad response errors, and full range?

People become ecstatic over technology that makes things easier—and that has value—but I wonder what real data (vs. ecstatic anecdotes) are behind the statement that ART “would really take it to another level”.

In any case, if I wanted it, (and pursuant to the thread) I’d integrate a MiniDSP into my system and use that only for EQ, rather than freight my expensive preamp with software that people will abandon when the next big thing comes along.

Rick “count me skeptical” Denney

 

[Oddball]

Can one actually hear the improvement of Dirac-ART over, say, Audyssey, if both achieve a flat spectral tilt, attenuation of resonances, correction of broad response errors, and full range?

People become ecstatic over technology that makes things easier—and that has value—but I wonder what real data (vs. ecstatic anecdotes) are behind the statement that ART “would really take it to another level”.

In any case, if I wanted it, (and pursuant to the thread) I’d integrate a MiniDSP into my system and use that only for EQ, rather than freight my expensive preamp with software that people will abandon when the next big thing comes along.

Rick “count me skeptical” Denney

All you have to do is to go to the ART thread so you can witness what many other members are saying. Audy is not even close . There is plenty of graphs aka real date in that thread so enjoy. The key word is cleaning up decay in low end that provides clarity across the entire range.

 

[TehMowat]

Appreciate your experience but can't really reconcile to my much more modest experience.

BTW - there is a whole Dirac ART thread on this forum and people are bedazzled. Dirac Live that takes over after 150hz is definitely not a holy grail, but is probably best short of Trinnov. But then Trinnov has a very demanding solution for low bass control.

With the hardware being sufficiently transparent starting from $1K Denon - what do you then think, based on your vast experience, is the holy grail?

I don't have a holy grail, and don't think there is only one way to do any of this. I've heard some wildly different systems that all blew me away. I've never heard a $1000 anything AVR that blew me away. I'm not saying that you can't make a very satisfying system starting with a Denon. But I've never had one of those moments where you know you are hearing something special with that type of product.

 

[Oddball]

I don't have a holy grail, and don't think there is only one way to do any of this. I've heard some wildly different systems that all blew me away. I've never heard a $1000 anything AVR that blew me away. I'm not saying that you can't make a very satisfying system starting with a Denon. But I've never had one of those moments where you know you are hearing something special with that type of product.

Whatever blew you away is the past. In the present, $1K AVR can blow you away big time. Just for reference - look at the speakers I posted above. You will get blown away as much as the speakers, amps, and room correction will allow.

I do have a bit of more expensive gear for pre-amp, but could do the same thing with 3800H (for less channels though). I have no illusions that 3800H would not deliver same performance in pre-amp mode. It is just that I wanted more channels and AVP that runs cool - and because my budget is flexible.

 

[TehMowat]

Whatever blew you away is the past. In the present, $1K AVR can blow you away big time. Just for reference - look at the speakers I posted above. You will get blown away as much as the speakers, amps, and room correction will allow.

I do have a bit of more expensive gear for pre-amp, but could do the same thing with 3800H (for less channels though). I have no illusions that 3800H would not deliver same performance in pre-amp mode. It is just that I wanted more channels and AVP that runs cool - and because my budget is flexible.

I'm not retired man, I am still neck deep in this industry, but thanks for dismissing me.

 

[john61ct]

I posted this link earlier but without comment

Apparently that is against the rules, so it got deleted.

The topic of the video is: "When You Need a Preamp, and When You Absolutely Don't"

The reason I posted it: I believe it is relevant to the topic of this thread.

I am not claiming to 100% agree with it, but believe the creator is sincere and knowledgeable.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

The topic of the video is: "When You Need a Preamp, and When You Absolutely Don't"

what's the verdict? the reason we're required to include commentary with video links, after all, is so members aren't forced to watch to find out if they're valid or BS.