Marantz AV10 AV Processor Review

[IamJF]

So they "feel" that they sound different? Cause when you don't do a really good 1:1 listening test (levels matched at leat 0,3dB, blind switching) you can't define these rather small differences.
Doesn't mean that this "feel" isn't important for the owner! And experienced users don't need to be wrong with this "feel", it's probably a good hint!

But I would not say unit A sonds better as B when not done a proper comparison. (which is not easy with such complex devices)

 

[bigguyca]

With big enough S/N I prefer digital volume control. Non of the problems you have with analog volume control and when artefacts are pushed below hearing threshhold ... I don't hear them!
One of the big benefits of crazy high S/N systems. (for me a hypex DSP module with digital input does the trick. So not even that expensive and dynamic range in the 115dB area)

So you are recommending that all AVR's and AVP's would be improved if they used digital volume control only instead of analog and digital volume control.

 

[hwest]

The real question, assuming your above-mentioned comparison was level-matched, is whether you would be able to replicate that preference in a controlled listening test.

If yes, then the sound waves actually are detectably different to you, and the difference has a clear preference in favour of the Anthem to you.

If not, then you are suffering confirmation bias, and you don't actually have a preference for the sound waves of one over the other. Your bias could be due to many influences, but the obvious bias would be knowing that the Anthem has put special emphasis on sound quality...at least in the spec sheet and marketing blurb.

In general, for DAC/preamp combos with good specs and flat frequency responses, it would not be expected for you to even distinguish them in a controlled listening test, never mind have a clear preference.

In your comparison, you would also want to account for the AV10's DAC Filter 1 vs Filter 2. The default, Filter 1, has a slow rolloff and might, barely conceivably, have a just slightly detectable rolloff at the absolute top of the audible treble range. See post #1 in this thread. But even if that were the case for you, one only has to switch to Filter 2 for it to disappear.

Comparing the performance level of the AV10 with the limits of human hearing, it is clear that the AV10 can deliver absolute transparency in audibility. You can't get (audibly) better than that, you can only get worse.

That is why the odds are strongly in favour of your result being confirmation bias. Which is unrelated to the sound waves themselves.

cheers

Not my first rodeo, I'm not suffering from a confirmation bias as I have heard soo many systems and soo many configurations I know what sounds good these days vs bad. Of course it's easy to hear a full sounding system with good imaging vs a thinner sounding system that has deadness where life should be let's say.

 

[hwest]

Weird. What did you listen to?

Same amplifier and speakers and room. Just a switch out same XLR cables? Ugh thats right the Anthem sucks with XLR.

With that being said there is some theory that the DACs are superior for the front Left and Right on the AVM90. But pound for pound the AV10 parts and electronics and power supply just seem superior.

With that being said I will take either for $4,999.95

Everything in the build on the AVM90 is better including the board itself and yes the DAC's. Pound for pound Marantz is just a big box brand with no life in the sound, I have heard them long enough to know the difference, it just can't compare. You have to ask yourself on the XLR if your ears can even pickup the miniscule difference between the two I think it's 3. I can side by side these two units with everything the same, which I have done and the difference is clear in the quality of sound, if you like video processing it's a good unit for you.

 

[hwest]

Even more amazing is that some people pay MSRP.

Did they even do a proper listening test in the video? I scrolled through and they just talk about tech data and software?

The main Reason to buy the Marantz is - when it get's Dirac ART! It's the cheapest way to get a propper ART Preamp.
Everything else ... is nice to have. And as long as ART is not running properly it's all just theory.

Much of the Dirac is marketing we all know you have to tweak far beyond what Dirac base lines for you. Even with ARC Genesis which is quite a powerful tool loaded with features and ability to control 4 independent Subs. To bring out the characteristics of your speakers you have to go beyond as we know, I still do some serious tweaking to improve the sound.

 

[Newman]

Not my first rodeo, I'm not suffering from a confirmation bias as I have heard soo many systems and soo many configurations I know what sounds good these days vs bad. Of course it's easy to hear a full sounding system with good imaging vs a thinner sounding system that has deadness where life should be let's say.

Let’s just say that “it doesn’t work that way”.

 

[Shimrra Jamaane]

Even more amazing is that some people pay MSRP.

What you know a guy who can get me one that fell off the back of a truck?

 

[quattro98]

Sometimes this is all you need to form an opinion.

 

[Oddball]

Everything in the build on the AVM90 is better including the board itself and yes the DAC's. Pound for pound Marantz is just a big box brand with no life in the sound, I have heard them long enough to know the difference, it just can't compare. You have to ask yourself on the XLR if your ears can even pickup the miniscule difference between the two I think it's 3. I can side by side these two units with everything the same, which I have done and the difference is clear in the quality of sound, if you like video processing it's a good unit for you.

A new member here, so would appreciate if you could clarify as not sure I follow. Perhaps a bit slow, but really interested in evaluating the best AVP for my HT.

While DACs might be a 2dB better, to what extent would the AVM-90 board be better, especially given AV-10's elaborate 4-layer board design. I must be missing something. Also, somewhat confused by the fact that AVM 90 has a fan which apparently can be annoying as opposed to AV-10's cool and quiet design? If I look into the internals, AV-10 seems quite a bit more complex and well-thought through while AVM 90 seems to share quite a bit with its lesser version AVM 70? Finally, how would AV-10 measure marginally better than AVM-90 with this inferior design?

Really interested how did you "side by side these units with everything the same". That is quite an endeavor and would like to understand how is that being done without bias and objectively? Also, not sure why are you referring to video processing - my understanding is that AVPs are not meant to do any video processing unless you have really old gear that is not capable of upscaling, otherwise video components should take care of the video processing. Have not heard before that video processing was put into the pot for evaluating the AVP performance.

 

[hwest]

A new member here, so would appreciate if you could clarify as not sure I follow. Perhaps a bit slow, but really interested in evaluating the best AVP for my HT.

While DACs might be a 2dB better, to what extent would the AVM-90 board be better, especially given AV-10's elaborate 4-layer board design. I must be missing something. Also, somewhat confused by the fact that AVM 90 has a fan which apparently can be annoying as opposed to AV-10's cool and quiet design? If I look into the internals, AV-10 seems quite a bit more complex and well-thought through while AVM 90 seems to share quite a bit with its lesser version AVM 70? Finally, how would AV-10 measure marginally better than AVM-90 with this inferior design?

Really interested how did you "side by side these units with everything the same". That is quite an endeavor and would like to understand how is that being done without bias and objectively? Also, not sure why are you referring to video processing - my understanding is that AVPs are not meant to do any video processing unless you have really old gear that is not capable of upscaling, otherwise video components should take care of the video processing. Have not heard before that video processing was put into the pot for evaluating the AVP performance.

There is no fan noise coming out of the AVM90, I have access to quite a bit of equipment. Before buying the 90 I connected it up to an Mcintosh AMP and Revel PerformaBe F328Be speakers and played various songs that high various frequency ranges using Tidal. The Marantz produced what I would describe as a but flat with poor imaging and separation of sounds, I don't really care how it measures these things were obvious in the sound. I then connected the AVM90 and could really hear the separation, imaging, lively sound and it was easy on your ears. I think borrowed the Marantz brought it home connected it to my B&W 804 D3's, Tidal again, AMP's (Emotiva Differental Gen 3's) played all the songs and movies that hit all the ranges and gave it a legitimate chance after tuning it, tweaking it sounded pretty good. Then I hooked up the AVM90 and just turning it on I was already in a better place sound wise, after a few tweaks it was noticeably better. This proved that in a perfect studio and in my home with completely different speakers and AMP's the AVM90 won out bigtime. You can say it's personal preference but I have heard way too many systems to not understand what quality sound is. I suggest trying some demos if you can see what you think of both even if you can't use the same exact speakers or amps you will likely hear the difference yourself. Just get in front of the gear you can throw all the theories you want out there without hearing it you won't know but that's my expereince.

 

[hwest]

Let’s just say that “it doesn’t work that way”.

I know there is plenty of that out there. Of course I always do my measurements but measurements only get you so far, I know everyone here thinks measurements are everything but once close it does work that way as I have seen these big box brands, heard their sound vs what I have heard in other brands and it's clear to me from many years of critical listening. I never said it was easy to set aside all your biases and listen critically because it's not for 99% of the population.

 

[hwest]

Weird. What did you listen to?

Same amplifier and speakers and room. Just a switch out same XLR cables? Ugh thats right the Anthem sucks with XLR.

With that being said there is some theory that the DACs are superior for the front Left and Right on the AVM90. But pound for pound the AV10 parts and electronics and power supply just seem superior.

With that being said I will take either for $4,999.95

I paid 6K for my AVM90 but I have some connections. DAC's are definitely superior and that -3 you will never hear in a human ear that's for sure because both tolerances are very good. Anthem put some quality into this unit that you can hear, 6 layer board, ESS Saber 9038 Q2M, but it's not even really about the DAC's it's about the implementation with better quality components internally that's where this good sound comes from, it's not magic, if you research and look at each component they do call out the electronics in a few different articles and it's not the run of the mill stuff to get the sound I'm hearing my choice was the 90 or going up to the Lyndorf but didn't quite hear a huge difference to warrant the extra dollars about 14K. Don't get me wrong the Lyndorf sounded good, better but not a significant jump up. Now you can say the Marantz sounds as good as a Lyndorf but then I wouldn't really believe anything coming out of your mouth at that point.

 

[Dj7675]

There is no fan noise coming out of the AVM90, I have access to quite a bit of equipment. Before buying the 90 I connected it up to an Mcintosh AMP and Revel PerformaBe F328Be speakers and played various songs that high various frequency ranges using Tidal. The Marantz produced what I would describe as a but flat with poor imaging and separation of sounds, I don't really care how it measures these things were obvious in the sound. I then connected the AVM90 and could really hear the separation, imaging, lively sound and it was easy on your ears. I think borrowed the Marantz brought it home connected it to my B&W 804 D3's, Tidal again, AMP's (Emotiva Differental Gen 3's) played all the songs and movies that hit all the ranges and gave it a legitimate chance after tuning it, tweaking it sounded pretty good. Then I hooked up the AVM90 and just turning it on I was already in a better place sound wise, after a few tweaks it was noticeably better. This proved that in a perfect studio and in my home with completely different speakers and AMP's the AVM90 won out bigtime. You can say it's personal preference but I have heard way too many systems to not understand what quality sound is. I suggest trying some demos if you can see what you think of both even if you can't use the same exact speakers or amps you will likely hear the difference yourself. Just get in front of the gear you can throw all the theories you want out there without hearing it you won't know but that's my expereince.

Just clarifying… are you saying that you believe you could tell apart the AVM90 and the AV10 in the following conditions..
-No EQ applied (pure direct)
-Full range/no subs with just a stereo pair of speakers
-same amps
-Precisely level matched
-A/B switching

 

[dsd4life]

I paid 6K for my AVM90 but I have some connections. DAC's are definitely superior and that -3 you will never hear in a human ear that's for sure because both tolerances are very good. Anthem put some quality into this unit that you can hear, 6 layer board, ESS Saber 9038 Q2M, but it's not even really about the DAC's it's about the implementation with better quality components internally that's where this good sound comes from, it's not magic, if you research and look at each component they do call out the electronics in a few different articles and it's not the run of the mill stuff to get the sound I'm hearing my choice was the 90 or going up to the Lyndorf but didn't quite hear a huge difference to warrant the extra dollars about 14K. Don't get me wrong the Lyndorf sounded good, better but not a significant jump up. Now you can say the Marantz sounds as good as a Lyndorf but then I wouldn't really believe anything coming out of your mouth at that point.

I will test the HDAM-SA3 and configurable roll offs in the AV10. I want to see if it sounds equivalent to Model 30. If you correlate the population that wants these machines they will want DTS to play soundtrack out of their front-wide speakers.

I though Audio Advice had AVM90 on sale.

 

[peng]

Just clarifying… are you saying that you believe you could tell apart the AVM90 and the AV10 in the following conditions..
-No EQ applied (pure direct)
-Full range/no subs with just a stereo pair of speakers
-same amps
-Precisely level matched
-A/B switching

It's not the first time I read about such rave subjective reviews. Try the AVSF AVM owners thread you will see the same kind of claims. Anthem fans, in general seem a little more dedicated than Marantz's though, and I think I know the reasons.

Regardless, if most people feel the same or even close to what he said about the so called "sound" (that I expect to be just neutral/accurate...) they described, the AVM90 would have been out of stock/on back order all the time lol.. I auditioned it in the dealer's demo room once, and I did not find anything special about the "sound" quality, it just sounded transparent, as expected.

I can say the same about a lot of gear too. To me, Dirac Live, or even Anthem ARCG or Audyssey, if well tweaked, could make more audible improvements, vs just switching from one AVP/AVR to another, but then of course ommv. That's why imo, objective measurements are much more meaningful, than just subjective ones by reviewers, expecially owners.

 

[hwest]

Just clarifying… are you saying that you believe you could tell apart the AVM90 and the AV10 in the following conditions..
-No EQ applied (pure direct)
-Full range/no subs with just a stereo pair of speakers
-same amps
-Precisely level matched
-A/B switchig

The answer is yes, before any tweaks of course level matched direct first. However, even with tweaks the was a big improvement above what I could achieve on the Marantz.

 

[Oddball]

I second that I have heard nothing special from AVM 90. It was a great preamp as it should be for that price-tag, but ARC bass output was not really up to par with Audessey (8500HA as pre-amp) or DLBC (JBL 55) for 7.4.4 system (7 Arendal 1723 towers powered with 500W Brystons, 2 SVS ultras and 2 Arendal 1723 2Vs) . At that time ARC bass module was beta, but pretty close to final. After 2 days of 5-6 hour mostly movie sessions, guests seemed to prefer JBL 55. I liked 8500HA better (Audy-X with double bass). Out of 6 people (only 3 HT fans) nobody chose AVM 90 and the host kept JBL 55. Both AVM 90 and 8500HA were at disadvantage as the pro calibrator had less experience with Audy and ARC than with DLBC.

What I liked with 8500HA, I like even more with AV-10 in system with big towers all around. Audy-X provides almost unlimited flexibility and D&M bass management options, including the controversial double and triple bass. It is likely room/system specific, but for me works great. Looking forward to ART though as that should, in theory, work much better.

 

[peng]

I second that I have heard nothing special from AVM 90. It was a great preamp as it should be for that price-tag, but ARC bass output was not really up to par with Audessey (8500HA as pre-amp) or DLBC (JBL 55) for 7.4.4 system (7 Arendal 1723 towers powered with 500W Brystons, 2 SVS ultras and 2 Arendal 1723 2Vs) .

For almost a year, that's my frustration with ARCG/phase optimization, but finally, they fixed it in the last FW update (in the deep bass range, I needed to spend lots of time tweaking prior) such that I can now live with it though still found Audyssey and Dirac better in that range, at least based on my REW graphs (visually definitely good enough now). Funny thing is, there has got to be many die hard fans, on blind faith, didn't realize what they missed, or they simply prefer major suckouts in the below 50 Hz range lol...

At that time ARC bass module was beta, but pretty close to final. After 2 days of 5-6 hour mostly movie sessions, guests seemed to prefer JBL 55. I liked 8500HA better (Audy-X with double bass). Out of 6 people (only 3 HT fans) nobody chose AVM 90 and the host kept JBL 55. Both AVM 90 and 8500HA were at disadvantage as the pro calibrator had less experience with Audy and ARC than with DLBC.

What I liked with 8500HA, I like even more with AV-10 in system with big towers all around. Audy-X provides almost unlimited flexibility and D&M bass management options, including the controversial double and triple bass. It is likely room/system specific, but for me works great. Looking forward to ART though as that should, in theory, work much better.

Another funny thing is, Anthem clearly stated that they didn't design for a "sonic flavor", yet many of those fans seem to say they heard xyz%&*#..... when compared to other gear in stereo without dsp effects. To me, I am happy that the AVMs simply have very low distortions, flat FR and do seem to sound transparent to me, but then gain I can say the same about D+M's and my 2 channel separate gear, the X8500HA, that I never auditioned, bound to sound transparent based on it's great measurements, for AVRs measured on ASR, nothing did better than it's >100 dB SINAD yet (obviously that's just one metric but...), though I suspect the Cinema 30 will, if and when it gets measured.

 

[Oddball]

Obviously AVM 90 is a very fine AVP, especially if ARC handles bass better now. I don't think anyone would be unhappy with it. But this is all about spliting hairs into tiny bits and pieces

I had really good experience with Audy-X on 6700H, and when they kind of announced ART support for newer models, that really sealed the deal for AV-10. Perhaps my preference is such because I run 6 towers and big center for bed channels and like to have their support in the bass area as much as I can. Not very common to use such setup and not the best value for money, but it did help greatly with the proper speaker placement in my HTs. So just trying to get most milage out of it.

 

[IamJF]

So you are recommending that all AVR's and AVP's would be improved if they used digital volume control only instead of analog and digital volume control.

No. Only the ones with REALLY good D/A conversion.
You could also switch the "physical" output in 2-3 steps if you really want to go crazy and do the rest digital. But that's probably to expensive for this channel amount.