Marantz AV10 AV Processor Review

[Dj7675]

Thanks. That must have been announced after the AV10, because I checked at the time.

But he said "and is about half the cost".

Picked up a new in box (open) full manufacturers warranty for $r4k if that counts. Or you if you need 2 less channels Denon A10H or. 6800.

 

[JRR]

That's the problem with just looking at numbers, it doesn't tell the whole story perfect curves don't equate to great sound we all know that.

You’re on the wrong forum. Not to worry, many if not most other fora will agree with you.

 

[dlaloum]

That's the problem with just looking at numbers, it doesn't tell the whole story perfect curves don't equate to great sound we all know that.

Sort of....

The trouble is, that we don't really understand the relationship between the measurements and the subjective experience.

As a result we often focus on specific measurements, which tell only a very limited part of the picture.

The prime example is in room frequency response - which of course blends room effects and reflections into the overall F/R... resulting in substantially different results from lab anechoic tests.... and the in room response is very sensitive to the directivity of the speakers.

Omni's (or wide directivity speakers) will often have a boosted high end due to the contribution of reflections.... using the properly can involve placement as well as room treatment, to ensure that the reflections reaching the MLP are sufficiently delayed, for our brain to simply ignore them - done properly you get excellent imaging and fabulous soundstaging .... with a F/R graph that says all sort of things are wrong, while your ears tell you otherwise!

Time gated measurements (REW can do those!) can provide a mechanism for providing F/R measurements that are more akin to anechoic, and more reflective of what we subjectively experience.....

It isn't that "looking at numbers" is the issue... it is understanding what a specific set of numbers means / implies... if you have relevant numbers and you understand what they imply, then they are hugely valuable.

Of course company marketing information will pick and choose numbers that they believe shows their equipment off in the most positive light - and will often misrepresent what the numbers actually mean.... so caveat emptor!

 

[dlaloum]

You’re on the wrong forum. Not to worry, many if not most other fora will agree with you.

It's a great forum on which to learn the meaning of the "numbers"...

 

[Sal1950]

That's the problem with just looking at numbers, it doesn't tell the whole story perfect curves don't equate to great sound we all know that.

Nope, complete numbers will reveal everything you need to know about a component like Amir posts here.
You just have to take the time to learn how to read them correctly.
It's not really all that difficult if you take the time to learn them.
That's what so many do here, it's try to educate the closed minded.

 

[Newman]

Picked up a new in box (open) full manufacturers warranty for $r4k if that counts.

It doesn't. A1H RRP is $7200 and the AV10 RRP is $8000. Deals come and go for both products, so compare RRP for fair comparisons.

 

[peng]

No, it's Denon/Marantz's issue for not adding it. It's not a part of Dirac and probably never will be.

It may not be a D+M issue either, if it has to do with licensing and patents. Dirac could have implemented something that works, without infringing on Audyssey's patents/trademarks etc., but I guess they don't think DEQ is necessary, not really sure about it, someone should ask them and see if they have something to say about their reasons for not offering it.

 

[peng]

I don't test that way, I test various units in house, same speakers same room same cables. Typically if you go to a dealer that has that type of setup where you can switch between brands and in the baseline you'll hear the difference, it's not always perfect but at home I can and do create scenarios where just the unit is swapped out baseline first then room correction capabilities, now that's how I would test it but that's me.

I thought this topic (or related topics) has been discussed on audio forums too many times, one thing that doesn't change is, even if one has done all the right thing to do their comparison listening, if they don't do it in DBT it won't mean a whole lot. Anyone can just say things like, there's night and day difference, anyone can hear it, no need to do it blind, or the favorite saying, like "trust me.."

 

[peng]

They DO, it's a part of Audyssey, a Dirac install removes it.
What part of that don't you understand?


And IMHO that is a Major Failing of Dirac !
What's their problem with including a tonal shelving application that's a proven part of the human hearing?
A "equal-loudness contour" has been included on most every receiver/preamp since 1933 ?
Just because Dirac insists on excluding it doesn't make them right.

Since you are using their product, would you please email Dirac support and ask them why they would not (and/or are they planning on doing it eventually) off something that would do the same or better than Audyssey Dynamic EQ? I am really curious about this as I am sure Dirac is capable of offering something like DEQ (different name obviously to get around trademark/patent related issues but perform better than Audyssey's. So there must be a simple reason, and I suspect they will offer something as a paid upgrade eventually, hopefully soon.

 

[Dovydas]

It may not be a D+M issue either, if it has to do with licensing and patents. Dirac could have implemented something that works, without infringing on Audyssey's patents/trademarks etc., but I guess they don't think DEQ is necessary, not really sure about it, someone should ask them and see if they have something to say about their reasons for not offering it.

I was thinking, that maybe after ART calibration I won't need DEQ as well, but that's not the case. I still miss it from Audyssey.

 

[voodooless]

Here are some pointers to at least mimic Dynamic EQ:

Can You Emulate Audyssey Dynamic EQ with Dirac Live? - Simple Home Cinema

- Can You Emulate Audyssey Dynamic EQ with Dirac Live?

simplehomecinema.com

 

[peng]

Thanks. That must have been announced after the AV10, because I checked at the time.

But he said "and is about half the cost".

The AVR-A10H may not cost half the cost, but if on sale (AVRs tend to go on sale more often than AVPs) I think it may come close, and it does offer the same channel count, same processing (DSP), DAC, Volume ICs, measurements should be (have to see it to be sure of course) almost as good too. Obviously it is a matter of choice, some prefer AVRs, others prefer AVPs for various reason, good to have both options available, by basically one same company, aka formerly D+M or D&M group.

 

[peng]

Nope, complete numbers will reveal everything you need to know about a component like Amir posts here.
You just have to take the time to learn how to read them correctly.
It's not really all that difficult if you take the time to learn them.
That's what so many do here, it's try to educate the closed minded.

Agreed, but I think we all know why so many people would just do the "trust my ears" approach, it is much easier to do, and after they heard all the internet hearsay, manufacturer marketing info, and their dealer sales rep's convincing blurbs, they will hear what they would have been conditioned/biased to hear, and then to them there is no need to do blind listening, and/or read detailed but sometimes too technical to them review/bench test measurement results.

 

[TimoJ]

It may not be a D+M issue either, if it has to do with licensing and patents.

Adding regular loudness or proper tone controls to their DSP code is not a license or patent issue.

 

[TimoJ]

I never said that did I? The original discussion was about D+M "failed", or "not" offering Audyssey's dynamic eq when Dirac Live is in use, that's what I was responding to, by sharing my thoughts.

My original message was about regular loudness.

 

[Newman]

The AVR-A10H may not cost half the cost, but if on sale (AVRs tend to go on sale more often than AVPs) I think it may come close, and it does offer the same channel count, same processing (DSP), DAC, Volume ICs, measurements should be (have to see it to be sure of course) almost as good too. Obviously it is a matter of choice, some prefer AVRs, others prefer AVPs for various reason, good to have both options available, by basically one same company, aka formerly D+M or D&M group.

2 less channels

 

[peng]

2 less channels

okay I thought it could process 15 channels, guess wrong..

 

[hwest]

Sort of....

The trouble is, that we don't really understand the relationship between the measurements and the subjective experience.

As a result we often focus on specific measurements, which tell only a very limited part of the picture.

The prime example is in room frequency response - which of course blends room effects and reflections into the overall F/R... resulting in substantially different results from lab anechoic tests.... and the in room response is very sensitive to the directivity of the speakers.

Omni's (or wide directivity speakers) will often have a boosted high end due to the contribution of reflections.... using the properly can involve placement as well as room treatment, to ensure that the reflections reaching the MLP are sufficiently delayed, for our brain to simply ignore them - done properly you get excellent imaging and fabulous soundstaging .... with a F/R graph that says all sort of things are wrong, while your ears tell you otherwise!

Time gated measurements (REW can do those!) can provide a mechanism for providing F/R measurements that are more akin to anechoic, and more reflective of what we subjectively experience.....

It isn't that "looking at numbers" is the issue... it is understanding what a specific set of numbers means / implies... if you have relevant numbers and you understand what they imply, then they are hugely valuable.

Of course company marketing information will pick and choose numbers that they believe shows their equipment off in the most positive light - and will often misrepresent what the numbers actually mean.... so caveat emptor!

I agree, if you see anomalies in frequencies and distortion or measurable concerns that are glaring red flags that's your baseline for determining bad sounding equipment but most of the units we look at don't have any glaring errors until you get down into the less expensive systems or off brands, of course there are also those inexpensive units that have great measurements if you looking for two channel stuff and can deal with some bugs.

 

[peng]

My original message was about regular loudness.

I responded to your post#1447, in that post you referred to @Sal1950 post#1429 that was your response to Sal 1950's post#1429, in which he stated "That's Dirac's issue for not supplying any bass EQ like Audysseys DEQ..." Neither he or you mentioned regular loudness, or tone control, not at in that post. If @Sal1950 was in fact talking about regular loudness or tone control, then okay I misinterpreted his post.

I am not going to argue for the sake of arguing, so that's it on this.

 

[TimoJ]

I responded to your post#1447, in that post you referred to @Sal1950 post#1429 that was your response to Sal 1950's post#1429, in which he stated "That's Dirac's issue for not supplying any bass EQ like Audysseys DEQ..." Never he or you mentioned regular loudness, or tone control, not at that point. If @Sal1950 was in fact talking about regular loudness or tone control, then okay I misinterpreted his post.

I am not going to argue for the sake of arguing, so that's it on this.

My original message was #1412