• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Marantz AV10 AV Processor Review

Rate This AV Processor:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 4 1.4%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 21 7.2%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 81 27.7%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 186 63.7%

  • Total voters
    292

GXAlan

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
4,057
Likes
6,359
I know it has RSC that is an improved version to the original YPAO, but FIR?

That would be a huge surprise as I have never read anything about that anywhere. Got a link to the source info?

 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,936
Likes
5,509
Thanks, but I read that before,and don't recall it talked about FIR being used.

It seems to me that's still just PEQ based, as the name YPAO implied, R.S.C. (Reflective sound control) is just an added feature to it.

Edit: Even if they did mention the use of FIR in that version, I would like to read about it directly from Yamaha, not from a 3rd party.
 
Last edited:

Oddball

Active Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2024
Messages
186
Likes
157
Location
EU
YPAO - what that has to do with AV-10?
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,936
Likes
5,509
YPAO - what that has to do with AV-10?
Someone expressed disappointment that Marantz didn't include manual PEQ, that Yamaha did.

In fact, AV10 can do PEQ, not exactly PEQ, but sort of. That is, with the $200 app one can manually import PEQs such as those done with REW to it and it will implement those PEQ parameters with the FIR filters, that should be more effective anyway.

There are no shortages of YT videos on the topic, aside from Audyssey's.
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,333
Likes
2,587
Yamaha's manual PEQ is a lot better than the archaic Denon/Marantz GEQ. I thought they were going to implement it on the newer Marantz products based on some interview I saw with the Denon/Marantz spokesperson. I guess they didn't.
No need to, you can adjust what you want, where you want it, with either Audyssey or Dirac through their respective applications - and you get infinite control over the frequency of the adjustment... along with an effectively unlimited number of bands...
So both these tools provide true parametric eq.... you just have to make a paradigm shift in terms of the interface involved.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,936
Likes
5,509
No need to, you can adjust what you want, where you want it, with either Audyssey or Dirac through their respective applications - and you get infinite control over the frequency of the adjustment... along with an effectively unlimited number of bands...
So both these tools provide true parametric eq.... you just have to make a paradigm shift in terms of the interface involved.
Very well said.....Sometimes I wonder if people need to worry so much about that last dB or two of smoothness in the bass, when we already know most people are much less sensitive to distortion in the low bass range in terms of both distortions and a few dB of fluctuations.

Here's one of my REW graph that shows no major issues with the L/R towers and 2 dissimilar subs integrating reasonably smooth. From 20-150 Hz, there's less than +/- 1 dB variations with 1/24 smoothing. Using Psy, it was almost a flat line up to 140 Hz, there is no way I could hear a difference between such flat/smooth response between that, and potentially DLBC, ART, ARC G, or even Trinnov.

All achieved after hours of tweaking with the $20 app and the help of Ratbuddyssey, but it saved me spending $200 on the Mult EQ X. DLBC would be able to do better, but again, I am not sure if I could hear a difference, though in terms of just run it and forget it, then there would be major differences between the two, and I do believe DLBC would offer audible differences (better imo but ommv...).

Anthem ARC G fans can say all they want, and I do like it's performance as well, but in terms of effectiveness in achieving best response on paper, I have not seen any evidence posted that shows the claimed superiority of ARC G, tweaked or untweaked. In summary, I would say they are all good, in one wants pretty curves, tweaked it, if not just enjoy it and forget about any curves. To say one is so much better than the other audibly, that would be so subjective, that there may not be much point in making one's decision based on such hearsay reported by their users.

1714995813187.jpeg


1714996172927.jpeg
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,682
Likes
4,583
you can adjust what you want, where you want it, with either Audyssey or Dirac through their respective applications - and you get infinite control over the frequency of the adjustment... along with an effectively unlimited number of bands...
Oh, interesting. I had thought this was a point of difference in favour of MultEQ-X.

So a set of filters derived on REW can be loaded into Dirac as an overlay, without losing Dirac’s correction curve EQ?
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,333
Likes
2,587
Oh, interesting. I had thought this was a point of difference in favour of MultEQ-X.

So a set of filters derived on REW can be loaded into Dirac as an overlay, without losing Dirac’s correction curve EQ?
No, I am talking about Dirac's own GUI interface... you can pick any frequency and adjust it up (increase level) or down (decrease level) - and you can set as many of these points as you want... within the interface.

Between any two adjustment points, dirac calculates a smoothed line.... so you don't have full manual control in the same way, you have manual control in a different way.
With the multeq-X and ratbuddysey I believe you can interface directly with REW outputs... Dirac does not interface with REW in any way (that I know of).
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,682
Likes
4,583
OK thank you. I see that as a lesser level of control.

cheers
 

ban25

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 5, 2022
Messages
809
Likes
810
OK thank you. I see that as a lesser level of control.

cheers
That is certainly a gross mischaracterization. The ability to import a .csv file is nothing particularly impressive and if you think you can do a better multi-point measurement with REW than Dirac...well, good luck.
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,682
Likes
4,583
I’m speaking about control. You are speaking about result - well, in the bass at least.

I am particularly interested in doing auto RC for the bass, plus being able to edit the mid-treble to correct for any axial response errors in the rest of the frequency range, such as might be available from spinorama measurements.

That would be pretty sweet. If Dirac cannot do it, then it offers a lesser level of control.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,936
Likes
5,509
That would be pretty sweet. If Dirac cannot do it, then it offers a lesser level of control.
Dirac can do it, without 3rd party software. Audyssey can do it, but you need to spend $200 on the X app. The $20 app can do to it too, but then you need to use 3rd party software such as Ratbuddssey and likely a few others, some are free, some may cost a few dollars.
 
Last edited:

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,682
Likes
4,583
I think you are talking about pushing a target line up and down on a graph, then living with however close the software manages to track that target? I see that as crude.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,936
Likes
5,509
I think you are talking about pushing a target line up and down on a graph, then living with however close the software manages to track that target? I see that as crude.
Did you read @dlaloum post#928? He described what you can do with DL, that's a lot of "control", less crude than manual PEQ.:)
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,682
Likes
4,583
Yes I did, and I read it as pushing the target line up and down on a graph.
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,333
Likes
2,587
I think you are talking about pushing a target line up and down on a graph, then living with however close the software manages to track that target? I see that as crude.
So you prefer a 10 band "graphic equaliser" as opposed to being able to specify the specific center frequency being adjusted - and having dozens (if not hundreds) of potential adjustment points...

to each his own I guess
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,333
Likes
2,587
Yes I did, and I read it as pushing the target line up and down on a graph.
I feel like you aren't understanding how that interface works.

no it isn't pushing a target line, what you define are the specific adjustment points... which you can either just click on the chart to define, or click and then type the specific desired frequency...

The software chooses the type of filter, and steepness/Q, and then defines the "curve" around your chosen points.

havn't seen anyone use more than circa 15 points - but I cannot see any reason why you couldn't have 50 points of adjustment if that was what floated your boat....

The software will then calculate the target line, joining your selected dots together, and will choose the specific types of filters and the parameters of those filters to meet that line/set of adjustment points.
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,682
Likes
4,583
Thanks. Is there any way to online ‘play’ with the interface, or do you know of a good YT video walking us through it?

Because it’s a big expense, and I wouldn’t want to get a system that doesn’t suit my needs…
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,936
Likes
5,509
Thanks. Is there any way to online ‘play’ with the interface, or do you know of a good YT video walking us through it?

Because it’s a big expense, and I wouldn’t want to get a system that doesn’t suit my needs…
You can do that with Audyssey, just use Ratbuddyssey to type in the numbers you want instead of pushing the target curve up and down. The only cost is $20 for the Multeq editor app, Ratbuddyssey is free.

My post#926 shows what can be achieved, without using manual PEQ, minidsp, or any other gadget.

The flat curve is the starting point, after that, I can make all kinds of adjustments to shape it.
 
Last edited:

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,333
Likes
2,587
Thanks. Is there any way to online ‘play’ with the interface, or do you know of a good YT video walking us through it?

Because it’s a big expense, and I wouldn’t want to get a system that doesn’t suit my needs…
The filter design section in this one might be helpful:


Starting around 4:40
 
Top Bottom