Marantz AV10 AV Processor Review

[kawauso]

Sorry but your the one posting shotgun style, why are you asking me here again?
I'm just trying to coral the ART discussions, is English your second language?
PLEASE Stop.

To be honest, I wasn’t annoyed earlier, but your recent replies changed that.
Maybe take a moment to consider why your posts rarely get many likes.
There’s usually a reason for that.

 

[KenMasters]

Sorry but your the one posting shotgun style, why are you asking me here again?
I'm just trying to coral the ART discussions, is English your second language?
PLEASE Stop.

The second language comment seems unnecessary, nothing wrong with kawauso's communication skills.

I didn't have a good experience with ART, but in my time with it, it was clear to see it was very effective in what it does - and what it does is something no other system at the price point can offer.

Unlike the conventional approach, there is no crossover, DLBC is still used to optimise the subs, but from there ART blends speakers and subs based on capability, prioritising the preservation of the bed layer's direct sound, a best of both worlds in the summed vs discrete sub debate:

Some systems let you configure subwoofers for bass management with directional bass. This means
that participating subwoofers will be positioned near a main speaker for a discrete content channel
and be fed bass content specifically from that channel. Dirac Live ART will have this behaviour as a
natural consequence of the concept of main and support speakers, giving each main channel as
ideal properties as possible, including extending their bass capabilities while not sacrificing their
imaging properties.

Furthermore, the co-operative management of resonances works very well at the frequencies you could not reasonably tackle in your room yourself. This is also not something any other room correction system at this equipment level can manage. So ART is indeed unique.

 

[TimoJ]

I didn't have a good experience with ART, but in my time with it, it was clear to see it was very effective in what it does - and what it does is something no other system at the price point can offer.

If you try ART again, and if the results are still bad, we should check how Dirac filters are working and if something weird is happening. "Show filters" checkbox allows that. You can check each speakers' Dirac correction curve (and frequency range) and also each support speakers' support curve for that particular speaker.
I don't recall if we checked those for front L/R speakers?

 

[KenMasters]

If you try ART again, and if the results are still bad, we should check how Dirac filters are working and if something weird is happening. "Show filters" checkbox allows that. You can check each speakers' Dirac correction curve (and frequency range) and also each support speakers' support curve for that particular speaker.
I don't recall if we checked those for front L/R speakers?

I did check the filters and I was using those to guide experimentation with various support levels and ranges - nothing seemed to make a difference.

I plan to buy it again if Dirac has a Black Friday special. I've cleared and reinstalled my Denon's firmware in case there was an issue on that side (considering the initial problem with no subwoofers). I'm not expecting different results (I suspect the passage I quoted in my previous post to be responsible for the issue), but I am hoping for them.

 

[kawauso]

I did check the filters and I was using those to guide experimentation with various support levels and ranges - nothing seemed to make a difference.

I plan to buy it again if Dirac has a Black Friday special. I've cleared and reinstalled my Denon's firmware in case there was an issue on that side (considering the initial problem with no subwoofers). I'm not expecting different results (I suspect the passage I quoted in my previous post to be responsible for the issue), but I am hoping for them.

If you want to reduce distortion on the LS50 Meta, try raising the support range to something like “100–150.”
Just note that if any other sub-groups are still set to “50–150,” Dirac won’t let you raise the range correctly. All groups need to be updated to the same range for it to work.

By the way, thank you for your earlier comment, Ken.
The part about the “second language” remark being unnecessary really meant a lot. Nothing wrong with my communication skills… hearing someone else say that out loud helps.

 

[Sal1950]

The second language comment seems unnecessary, nothing wrong with kawauso's communication skills.

Maybe your right, but when you try so hard to get thru and run into a brick wall you got to wonder what the problem is.
Is it a communication issue or are they just messin with ya?

 

[KenMasters]

If you want to reduce distortion on the LS50 Meta, try raising the support range to something like “100–150.”
Just note that if any other sub-groups are still set to “50–150,” Dirac won’t let you raise the range correctly. All groups need to be updated to the same range for it to work.

I did try that, 100 for all speakers, I also tried deselecting the speakers entirely - still the same problem with the bass.

It’s not the increased distortion that I consider an issue, rather I take it as indication of the presence of speakers at frequencies they shouldn’t be operating at (despite settings).

Hoping there was something else going on and restoring my X6800H solves it (after ART was cancelled, I lost the use of the subs with DLBC also, hence the firmware reinstall).

 

[Newman]

Is this still the AV10 thread?

 

[Newman]

[to KenMasters] ...Is the frequency response and level the same, or different? Because if it is different (and would pass a blind test), that will almost certainly dominate the perception of change. In which case it is not a DA effect, it is an EQ effect and does not require DA....

[to Newman] You should go somewhere and listen to a properly working ART system. You just can't do the same with EQ, PEQ, levels or any normal adjustments.

You don't know that. You are just making a blanket claim that you hope, just by saying it, will cancel out my valid points. It won't.

cheers

I do have lots of experience of EQ, PEQ and regular Dirac. None of those do the thing that ART does. And also, I started using ART in August 2022, way before the hype started. And from the first bass note I heard, it was obvious that something special has happened to bass.

Still doesn't cancel out any of my valid points.

Try this: apply DA and measure the resulting FR at the listening position. Now turn off DA and replicate that FR using EQ tools capable of doing it accurately enough that the FR difference itself is below the hearing threshold. Now conduct a series of trials comparing the two under controlled (blind, level matched) conditions and analyse the statistics of the result.

If you don't have the tools, time or ability to do that properly, (and TBH I probably don't), then you can't claim what you said above that I made bold. If you haven't already done it, which I admit I assumed, then you certainly shouldn't have made the claim.

If you do carry out the trials and publish the results, then one of my gaps in evidence for DA will have been usefully informed. And I would be grateful.

Remember: my comment at the top, that started your dialogue with me, was that if DA is changing the FR, we really need to take that variable out of the comparison, before we can make assertions about what DA does (decay) that EQ doesn't do. I wasn't being contentious, it is routine to control for the variables that could influence the result but aren't the variable under test.

cheers

 

[Hayabusa]

Still doesn't cancel out any of my valid points.

Try this: apply DA and measure the resulting FR at the listening position. Now turn off DA and replicate that FR using EQ tools capable of doing it accurately enough that the FR difference itself is below the hearing threshold. Now conduct a series of trials comparing the two under controlled (blind, level matched) conditions and analyse the statistics of the result.

If you don't have the tools, time or ability to do that properly, (and TBH I probably don't), then you can't claim what you said above that I made bold. If you haven't already done it, which I admit I assumed, then you certainly shouldn't have made the claim.

If you do carry out the trials and publish the results, then one of my gaps in evidence for DA will have been usefully informed. And I would be grateful.

Remember: my comment at the top, that started your dialogue with me, was that if DA is changing the FR, we really need to take that variable out of the comparison, before we can make assertions about what DA does (decay) that EQ doesn't do. I wasn't being contentious, it is routine to control for the variables that could influence the result but aren't the variable under test.

cheers

you do it yourself...

 

[Newman]

you do it yourself...

I haven't made any claims with zero valid data.... it's on the claimant to back it up, not the sceptic to disprove it.

 

[TimoJ]

Still doesn't cancel out any of my valid points.

Try this: apply DA and measure the resulting FR at the listening position. Now turn off DA and replicate that FR using EQ tools capable of doing it accurately enough that the FR difference itself is below the hearing threshold. Now conduct a series of trials comparing the two under controlled (blind, level matched) conditions and analyse the statistics of the result.

If you don't have the tools, time or ability to do that properly, (and TBH I probably don't), then you can't claim what you said above that I made bold. If you haven't already done it, which I admit I assumed, then you certainly shouldn't have made the claim.

If you do carry out the trials and publish the results, then one of my gaps in evidence for DA will have been usefully informed. And I would be grateful.

Remember: my comment at the top, that started your dialogue with me, was that if DA is changing the FR, we really need to take that variable out of the comparison, before we can make assertions about what DA does (decay) that EQ doesn't do. I wasn't being contentious, it is routine to control for the variables that could influence the result but aren't the variable under test.

cheers

 

[masterhw]

Many users have compared their REW results with DLBC to ART and the frequency response is within margin of error identical. Which makes sense because ART isn’t operating in the frequency domain.

What we know of how ART works, and what is reflected in the waterfall graphs, is a faster decay time for low frequencies. I understand @Newman’s point of contention to be does this faster decay time correlate to improved fidelity and user preference even when blind? We would have to look to the audio science for that, when I have an opportunity to comb through Floyd’s new book for the relevant section I will.

 

[KenMasters]

In my case ART does address cancellations I can’t get rid of through DLBC or manual EQ:

 

[Sal1950]

Is this still the AV10 thread?

I hope so. It's gone so far off-topic it would be hard to find anything else in here besides ART jabber.

 

[KenMasters]

I hope so. It's gone so far off-topic it would be hard to find anything else in here besides ART jabber.

Perhaps a mod could move the relevant posts over to the ART thread? Sorry for my replies adding to the problem. I try to keep them brief and only in response, but will refrain entirely.

 

[nick-v]

Should we expect the AV20 to perform similarly to the AV10?

My system is 5.2.4 so I don't need the extra channels. Currently using JBL Synthesis SDP-55.

 

[masterhw]

Should we expect the AV20 to perform similarly to the AV10?

My system is 5.2.4 so I don't need the extra channels. Currently using JBL Synthesis SDP-55.

according to Denon’s measurements, it should actually perform a few dB cleaner. but both are 105-110 dB SINAD so hardly a difference.

 

[Sal1950]

Should we expect the AV20 to perform similarly to the AV10?

I'm just settling in with my AV20, only had it about a week now. It's sound quality here is amazing but that's a purely subjective response.
I regret not having it drop-shipped to Amir first for testing but you know how it is when your excited over getting a new toy. Maybe not too far
in the future Amir will be able to check one out.

 

[fzst]

I would also love to see Trinnov vs Storm showdown measurements in a reference level theater, but that is apparently not widely available. My best guess is that properly set Trinnov could be better, but then 8 subs is a fortune and positioning very challenging. ART has results that are much more attainable by enthusiasts with different levels of systems and rooms. And compared to Trinnov pricing is extremely attractive.

I think there were quite a few comparisons of the Trinnov and Storm albeit probably none that would meet scientific standards... I never really read any extensively though since frankly, what's the point? I can't afford either product anyways... still, I agree it could be very interesting.

There are also a few videos around, this one is mostly just a German product placement video... but could still an entertaining watch

Of course it would be even more interesting - and more relevant to this thread - if we had a comparison between the AV10 and the Trinnov/Storm.