Marantz AV10 AV Processor Review

[Newman]

Onkyo has the RZ50, 7100 and equivalent Pioneer's to fill the gap, but they over did it by providing 2 sub outs that are connected to the same output, effectively just a .1.

You mean they did this, but on the inside?

 

[dlaloum]

I agree that 4 sub outs >2 sub outs, but that resulted in another frustration for people who would like to have the options to pay less for AVPs/AVRs that are limited 5.2 through 7.2 that probably are enough for most hobbyists. As it is now, D+M mid range AVRs come with 11.4 processing so they have to pay for the additional hardware and potentially associated licensing costs for things they will most likely never used or benefit from it. Onkyo has the RZ50, 7100 and equivalent Pioneer's to fill the gap, but they over did it by providing 2 sub outs that are connected to the same output, effectively just a .1.

Yes, if we need a Y adapter, most of us are perfectly capable of organising it!

 

[multichannel_guy]

Price of the nice processor went up, it appears. Only thing that didn't go up is my salary.

I curse thee Marantz for forcing me onto a Ramen noodles diet to try and afford your processor.

 

[Spenav]

See the review at Audioholics...

Marantz AV 10 15.4CH 8K AV Processor Bench Test Results

The Marantz AV 10 15.4CH 8K AV Processor produced excellent bench test results. This $7K AVP has bass management features no other competitor has at this price. We thoroughly test to show you how it works.

www.audioholics.com

Yes it performs exceptionally well in stereo...

The most important benefit a device like the AV10 brings to the table, is the Room EQ/Treatment provided by Dirac - this has a more substantial impact on sound quality, than the DACs or Amps...
For it to process the sound with Dirac, it requires a Digital signal - if you use an external DAC and feed it with analogue, the AV10 will pass it through its own ADC, convert it to digital, before processing it and putting it out its own DAC. - This is 2 additional processing steps, with associated sound degradation along the way (whether those steps are above the audibility threshold is a different question!)

Best results are therefore achieved via feeding the AV10 directly from your source, and letting it do the DAC work alongside it doing the room processing.

There is a mode for 2-channel music called pure direct that bypasses the DSP processing and pushes the analog signal out unprocessed. If you like your DAC better than the onboard DAC, you can use it.

 

[peng]

There is a mode for 2-channel music called pure direct that bypasses the DSP processing and pushes the analog signal out unprocessed. If you like your DAC better than the onboard DAC, you can use it.

I am sure he knows that, but his point is, that it is better to use digital inputs, so that you can use Audyssey or Dirac Live. If you use pure direct or direct mode with analog input, you cannot use Audyssey or Dirac.

 

[Spenav]

I am sure he knows that, but his point is, that it is better to use digital inputs, so that you can use Audyssey or Dirac Live. If you use pure direct or direct mode with analog input, you cannot use Audyssey or Dirac.

Ok, I see. That’s how I use mine. I don’t miss the DSP when I listen to music. I would advise people to try it first before getting rid of their DACs. Thanks.

 

[Newman]

I am sure he knows that, but his point is, that it is better to use digital inputs, so that you can use Audyssey or Dirac Live. If you use pure direct or direct mode with analog input, you cannot use Audyssey or Dirac.

That’s right. Better bass quality is highly correlated with preference.

Ok, I see. That’s how I use mine. I don’t miss the DSP when I listen to music. I would advise people to try it first before getting rid of their DACs. Thanks.

Sorry, but DAC tasting isn’t a thing that involves preferences between the actual sound waves. The differences are not detectable unless one DAC is acting like a tone control…in which case use an actual tone control and get the right amount of it.

 

[Spenav]

That’s right. Better bass quality is highly correlated with preference.

Sorry, but DAC tasting isn’t a thing that involves preferences between the actual sound waves. The differences are not detectable unless one DAC is acting like a tone control…in which case use an actual tone control and get the right amount of it.

I like the way you tell people what is detectable and what isn’t. At any rate, I listen to music for my own pleasure and spend my own money to buy my gear, so I will decide for myself what is detectable and what’s not. For what it’s worth,, nobody tastes DACs unless they are made of chocolate.

 

[Newman]

Unless you are conducting controlled listening tests...and you aren't...then science (not me) gets to tell you what is or is not detectable.

This is not personal, so your attempt to make it so is missing the mark.

 

[Spenav]

Unless you are conducting controlled listening tests...and you aren't...then science (not me) gets to tell you what is or is not detectable.

This is not personal, so your attempt to make it so is missing the mark.

I am not making anything personal, however I know science enough to know that it evolves and changes constantly. That’s why most of what we think we know about it is called theories and not laws. By the way, it’s not the content of your comment that is offensive, it’s your tone.

 

[peng]

I am not making anything personal, however I know science enough to know that it evolves and changes constantly. That’s why most of what we think we know about it is called theories and not laws. By the way, it’s not the content of your comment that is offensive, it’s your tone.

For dacs, it isn't hard to reach beyond the point of diminishing return. The AV10's dac chip is one of ESS's several reference class models that has SINAD of about 120 dB, and DNR of 127 dB.

ES9018K2M PDF

Part #: ES9018K2M. Description: 32-bit Stereo Mobile Audio DAC. File Size: 65.24 Kbytes. Manufacturer: ESS Technology,Inc.

pdf1.alldatasheet.com

Even for those who have great speakers in near acoustically perfect rooms, the likes of the AV10, AVM90/70, Onkyo RZ70, or even the C30, AVR-X6800H should be able to get great SQ without using analog inputs with ext. Dacs.

As to not using dsp vs using dsp for Dirac Llive or Audyssey, I think it is a no brainer, but I agree with you, if in doubt, one should try both, then decide. It is easy to do, and dacs are easy to return, if found not needed.

 

[Newman]

The DAC in the AV10 is no slouch. Somehow, I get a little more with the LUMIN X1 In my system and in my environment. To be honest, it’s a matter of preference. I would not be surprised if someone else prefers the AV10.

Maybe you missed my point. In practically every case, DAC-tasting via the sort of uncontrolled listening tests we do in our homes, turns out not to be about the sound waves themselves.

Instead, the perceptions that we think are coming from the sound waves, are actually perceptual distortions arising from non-sonic factors: the so-called cognitive biases. That, and not properly level-matching the devices under comparison.

Now, although it is known that some DACs are so heroically misconceived as to not be audibly transparent, they can be universally considered to be ‘fails’, when an audibly transparent DAC is readily available. Why choose a tone-controlling DAC, when vastly superior control of tone is available from an actual half-decent tone control?

Hence there is absolutely no point, in terms of the sound of the sound waves, in using an external DAC and the AVR’s analogue preamp.

PS there is nothing objectionable in my ‘tone’. I am passing on factual information. You are just not handling it well.

 

[welwynnick]

PS there is nothing objectionable in my ‘tone’. I am passing on factual information. You are just not handling it well.

Who decides about the tone of a message?
The writer or the reader?

 

[Hayabusa]

Who decides about the tone of a message?
The writer or the reader?

the writer decides about the 'tone' he wants to put in the message.
the reader decides what 'tone' he reads in the message.
In many cases these two 'tones' will not be same.

 

[Spenav]

the writer decides about the 'tone' he wants to put in the message.
the reader decides what 'tone' he reads in the message.
In many cases these two 'tones' will not be same.

An interesting question is: why did you decide to bud in? The writer and the reader both made their decisions as stated by you. What are you adding to the discussion?

 

[Hayabusa]

An interesting question is: why did you decide to bud in? The writer and the reader both made their decisions as stated by you. What are you adding to the discussion?

you asked A 'bit broad' question, and just thought I could answer it..

 

[Spenav]

Maybe you missed my point. In practically every case, DAC-tasting via the sort of uncontrolled listening tests we do in our homes, turns out not to be about the sound waves themselves.

Instead, the perceptions that we think are coming from the sound waves, are actually perceptual distortions arising from non-sonic factors: the so-called cognitive biases. That, and not properly level-matching the devices under comparison.

Now, although it is known that some DACs are so heroically misconceived as to not be audibly transparent, they can be universally considered to be ‘fails’, when an audibly transparent DAC is readily available. Why choose a tone-controlling DAC, when vastly superior control of tone is available from an actual half-decent tone control?

Hence there is absolutely no point, in terms of the sound of the sound waves, in using an external DAC and the AVR’s analogue preamp.

PS there is nothing objectionable in my ‘tone’. I am passing on factual information. You are just not handling it well.

If that’s the case, you and I we have no quarrel. I am enjoying my music in my system, bias included and you are enjoying yours based on your knowledge. Please don’t make me look up, I am having a lot of fun. I don’t think it’s productive to me nor you to make me “unhear” what I think I am hearing. My listening room is more of a sanctuary than a laboratory. I only believe what I can hear, not what others hear or think I should. At the end of the day, it’s all about creating an illusion, no? No harm, no foul. Thanks for trying to open my eyes. I am comfortable with them close, at least when am enjoying my music.

 

[Spenav]

you asked A 'bit broad' question, and just thought I could answer it..

Actually, you are the first person I asked a question to? Obviously you don’t have an answer. Thanks for playing.

 

[Hayabusa]

Actually, you are the first person I asked a question to? Obviously you don’t have an answer. Thanks for playing.

Game over

 

[dsd4life]

Versus the AVM 90, it covers both subjective and objective:

Did I get this right? The AV10 has 10 DAC chips? The AVM90 has 2 x higher end DAC chips?