• 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 AV7705 Home Theater Processor Review

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
I agree, they tried to do too much. They argue that psychoacoustics can justify that.

I am not so sure, I think it could well be a mistake because it was not like that until the time Atmos was introduced. I am not saying that has anything to do with it but it was about that time, probably one of two FW updates around that time that messed up the surround effects. It seem to only affect the surround and surround back channels but not the Atmos and/or height channels. May be they will fix it eventually if enough people complain about it.
 

giuppo77

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
29
Likes
19
I am not so sure, I think it could well be a mistake because it was not like that until the time Atmos was introduced. I am not saying that has anything to do with it but it was about that time, probably one of two FW updates around that time that messed up the surround effects. It seem to only affect the surround and surround back channels but not the Atmos and/or height channels. May be they will fix it eventually if enough people complain about it.

It is not a mistake, it is there since the very beginning. And, if I am not wrong, it only boosts the surrounds (not the atmos or surround back speakers).
My first AVR was a Marantz SR6007 (no atmos at all) with Audyssey XT (not XT32) and the boost was there.
 

Vasr

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
1,409
Likes
1,922
Here is the snapshot of a REW measurement I took some time ago with DEQ enabled. I do not remember the level of the master volume but the DEQ offset level was 0.

It looks correct to me that with DEQ enabled the frequency response is not flat at all.

View attachment 109241
You have the correct observation but wrong understanding and inference from it.

The Reference XT32 target curve without DEQ also has a rolled off target curve and is not flat. The goal of DEQ is not to make it flat or less flat. It is to compensate for volume-related hearing differences. In theory, at 0dB volume, DEQ should not be doing anything to the output. So, if you have selected flat in XT32, the output will also be flat. DEQ will be a pass through in that scenario whether the selected target curve is flat or not.

As volume decreases it changes the relative tonal balance which of course makes the response not flat but this is to compensate for differential hearing ability not room modes as XT 32 does.

Because DEQ changes the relative tonal balance, the measured response changes and is typically not flat but this has nothing to do with what target curve is chosen in XT32. They are independent systems designed for two different goals.

Nothing prevents DEQ from being used on any type of target curve in XT32 preset or custom, flat or non-flat.
 

giuppo77

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
29
Likes
19
You have the correct observation but wrong understanding and inference from it.

The Reference XT32 target curve without DEQ also has a rolled off target curve and is not flat. The goal of DEQ is not to make it flat or less flat. It is to compensate for volume-related hearing differences. In theory, at 0dB volume, DEQ should not be doing anything to the output. So, if you have selected flat in XT32, the output will also be flat. DEQ will be a pass through in that scenario whether the selected target curve is flat or not.

As volume decreases it changes the relative tonal balance which of course makes the response not flat but this is to compensate for differential hearing ability not room modes as XT 32 does.

Because DEQ changes the relative tonal balance, the measured response changes and is typically not flat but this has nothing to do with what target curve is chosen in XT32. They are independent systems designed for two different goals.

Nothing prevents DEQ from being used on any type of target curve in XT32 preset or custom, flat or non-flat.

I like the fact that you infer I have not any clue of how DEQ works from two lines I have written here :)

I can assure you I know perfectly how it works. I try to explain myself better.

DEQ applies the proper corrections to achieve a proper tonal balance up to 0 db volume (not fully correct, it depends also on the reference level offset), where the tonal balance is thought to be correct and DEQ does nothing. And here is the assumption: Audyssey people think that at the reference level the right tonal balance is a flat frequency response. Since reference level is not defined for music, they have added the possibility to set a DEQ reference level offset (which for movies should always be 0).

I agree that you can enable DEQ with any custom curve you design (reference, flat or with the app) and that, regardless the "initial" curve, at 0 db volume DEQ does not apply any correction. At the same time, following Audyssey guidelines, that is not correct because it alters the tonal balance the way it is meant to be with DEQ.

That is why I have said that with DEQ enabled the "starting" curve should be flat. We may of course argue about the Audyssey assumption.

At the same time, with a custom curve that, for instance, adds 10 db at 50 Hz, enabling DEQ o top of it will boost low frequencies too much.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
It is not a mistake, it is there since the very beginning. And, if I am not wrong, it only boosts the surrounds (not the atmos or surround back speakers).
My first AVR was a Marantz SR6007 (no atmos at all) with Audyssey XT (not XT32) and the boost was there.

That is very interesting. I have been using Audyssey for years, and I am very sure the exaggerated surround effects (to me anyway) were not there, or at least not near as bad as it had become since may be 3, 4 (max) years ago. If you insist it was since the beginning, then may be the beginning to you was 2017/18 or literally the beginning meaning when DEQ was first made available, and that would be around 2008, going by memory.

I have had the 4308, 7005, 8801 and then 4400, never experience that issue until I replaced the 8801 with the 4400 in 2018 so I know for sure my 8801 with the latest FW in the fall of 2018 still did not have the exaggerated surround issue. If not, then we just have difference experience for whatever reasons. Also, it is possible that even back in early 2018 when I was still using the AV8801, the exaggerated effect was already but if so, the effects must have been mild enough for me not to notice, but as soon as I had the 4400, the effects became so obvious that it is to the point border on annoying enough that I had to turn DEQ off and forced to listen at levels louder than I like just to compensate for not using DEQ.
 

giuppo77

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
29
Likes
19
To conclude: assuming that in "normal" conditions we listen to music 10 or 20 db lower than the reference level, it is a matter of fact that with DEQ enabled (not taking into account the offset level effect) the frequency response is not flat.

I hope I have managed to explain myself.
 

giuppo77

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
29
Likes
19
That is very interesting. I have been using Audyssey for years, and I am very sure the exaggerated surround effects (to me anyway) were not there, or at least not near as bad as it had become since may be 3, 4 (max) years ago. If you insist it was since the beginning, then may be the beginning to you was 2017/18 or literally the beginning meaning when DEQ was first made available, and that would be around 2008, going by memory.

I have had the 4308, 7005, 8801 and then 4400, never experience that issue until I replaced the 8801 with the 4400 in 2018 so I know for sure my 8801 with the latest FW in the fall of 2018 still did not have the exaggerated surround issue. If not, then we just have difference experience for whatever reasons. Also, it is possible that even back in early 2018 when I was still using the AV8801, the exaggerated effect was already but if so, the effects must have been mild enough for me not to notice, but as soon as I had the 4400, the effects became so obvious that it is to the point border on annoying enough that I had to turn DEQ off and forced to listen at levels louder than I like just to compensate for not using DEQ.

From Chris, the mind behind Audyssey:

"Dynamic EQ is designed to raise the level of the surrounds as you turn down the master volume. This is because our research showed that surround envelopment decreases faster from the back as we lower the volume. So, we need to compensate for that to keep constant surround envelopment. "

Here the link: https://audyssey.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/212347383/comments/203990523
 

Vasr

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
1,409
Likes
1,922
I like the fact that you infer I have not any clue of how DEQ works from two lines I have written here :)
I am only describing the statements you have asserted that DEQ is what influences/requires XT32 curve to be flat. This is a wrong understanding of DEQ whether you know how DEQ works or not.
I agree that you can enable DEQ with any custom curve you design (reference, flat or with the app) and that, regardless the "initial" curve, at 0 db volume DEQ does not apply any correction.
Which is the argument that DEQ is independent of XT32 and unrelated to and not influencing any decision of XT32 as you incorrectly asserted.
At the same time, following Audyssey guidelines, that is not correct because it alters the tonal balance the way it is meant to be with DEQ.
This statement makes no sense. XT32, being independent of DEQ, makes no guidelines related to use of DEQ. XT32 attempts to output from speakers a corrected curve that compensates for room modes so that what you hear is not affected by room modes.
That is why I have said that with DEQ enabled the "starting" curve should be flat. We may of course argue about the Audyssey assumption.
This is an entirely wrong statement and you keep repeating this. There are no such Audyssey assumptions. In fact, since the default curve for XT32 is Reference, then you are NOT using a flat curve in XT32. You are trying to justify a wrong assumption that it is flat to start with!
At the same time, with a custom curve that, for instance, adds 10 db at 50 Hz, enabling DEQ o top of it will boost low frequencies too much.
If you are simply saying that two orthogonal systems can interact with each other, sure. However, the goal of DEQ is to maintain whatever sound that comes out of the speakers (with or without XT32) "audibly" be the same if you were to vary the volume.

So, it does not imply that you should use a flat curve instead or worse imply as you did before that XT32 is using a flat curve because of this.

In practice, the changes made by DEQ are very small relative to the kind of attenuations and boosts made by XT32 to correct room modes or to add room gain. So, if you really wanted some room gain for your preference. you do want the boost in XT32, not depend on DEQ.

DEQ is more like fine-tuning to account for human hearing sensitivity change. DEQ doesn't do much audibly at normal listening levels. Where it really comes into play is why loudness switches existed before. As you bring the volumes down considerably, the sensitivity of the ears change the tonal balance as perceived. Think of this as a smart loudness button. The idea is that if you liked 10db boost at normal listening levels, then at lower volumes you should perceive the same proportional boost even though your ears have lost their capacity to hear that relative boost. So an additive +12dB boost may happen and needed.
 

giuppo77

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
29
Likes
19
I am only describing the statements you have asserted that DEQ is what influences/requires XT32 curve to be flat. This is a wrong understanding of DEQ whether you know how DEQ works or not.

Which is the argument that DEQ is independent of XT32 and unrelated to and not influencing any decision of XT32 as you incorrectly asserted.

This statement makes no sense. XT32, being independent of DEQ, makes no guidelines related to use of DEQ. XT32 attempts to output from speakers a corrected curve that compensates for room modes so that what you hear is not affected by room modes.

This is an entirely wrong statement and you keep repeating this. There are no such Audyssey assumptions. In fact, since the default curve for XT32 is Reference, then you are NOT using a flat curve in XT32. You are trying to justify a wrong assumption that it is flat to start with!

If you are simply saying that two orthogonal systems can interact with each other, sure. However, the goal of DEQ is to maintain whatever sound that comes out of the speakers (with or without XT32) "audibly" be the same if you were to vary the volume.

So, it does not imply that you should use a flat curve instead or worse imply as you did before that XT32 is using a flat curve because of this.

In practice, the changes made by DEQ are very small relative to the kind of attenuations and boosts made by XT32 to correct room modes or to add room gain. So, if you really wanted some room gain for your preference. you do want the boost in XT32, not depend on DEQ.

DEQ is more like fine-tuning to account for human hearing sensitivity change. DEQ doesn't do much audibly at normal listening levels. Where it really comes into play is why loudness switches existed before. As you bring the volumes down considerably, the sensitivity of the ears change the tonal balance as perceived. Think of this as a smart loudness button. The idea is that if you liked 10db boost at normal listening levels, then at lower volumes you should perceive the same proportional boost even though your ears have lost their capacity to hear that relative boost. So an additive +12dB boost may happen and needed.

You are right about everything.

Let me just argue that it may not completely correct that "DEQ doesn't do much audibly at normal listening levels". Unless normal listening level for you is close to the reference level or you set a reference level offset of 10 db or higher. And that you can measure.

But, I mean, is there any need to be so aggressive here?
 

giuppo77

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
29
Likes
19
I have for sure mistaken using the word "flat". Since "reference" and "flat" only differ in the high frequency region, I treat them as the same for the low frequency region (and I usually use the term "flat" because both curves are flat up to 10 kHz).

I will do my best to be more precise with words.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
From Chris, the mind behind Audyssey:

"Dynamic EQ is designed to raise the level of the surrounds as you turn down the master volume. This is because our research showed that surround envelopment decreases faster from the back as we lower the volume. So, we need to compensate for that to keep constant surround envelopment. "

Here the link: https://audyssey.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/212347383/comments/203990523

There is no argument on that from me and I am aware of Chris explanation in the link. but we are talking abut "exaggerated", in other words, over compensated.. Again, that's just base on my own experience that the over compensation seems to have started about the time Atmos was introduced so in my case it would be the X4400H, SR7012, but possibly X4300H and SR7011 too. I don't mind the "compensate" that Chris talked abut in the FAQ, but not like the way it is "compensated" now, that to me is way too much and obviously to you also. It is something they can fixed via FW update, but I think unless there are enough people complain about it, they may just assume people like the "exaggerated/over compensation" effects. As it is now, the offset could work to a point but then it affects the bass so it is not a solution for me.
 

giuppo77

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
29
Likes
19
There is no argument on that from me and I am aware of Chris explanation in the link. but we are talking abut "exaggerated", in other words, over compensated.. Again, that's just base on my own experience that the over compensation seems to have started about the time Atmos was introduced so in my case it would be the X4400H, SR7012, but possibly X4300H and SR7011 too. I don't mind the "compensate" that Chris talked abut in the FAQ, but not like the way it is "compensated" now, that to me is way too much and obviously to you also. It is something they can fixed via FW update, but I think unless there are enough people complain about it, they may just assume people like the "exaggerated/over compensation" effects. As it is now, the offset could work to a point but then it affects the bass so it is not a solution for me.

OK, you are talking about over-compensation. I was talking about the compensation itself that has always been part of DEQ.

Honestly, I have not done any measurement about that (I have an SR6007 and an AV7003) and I cannot judge if recently the effect has been exacerbated.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
OK, you are talking about over-compensation. I was talking about the compensation itself that has always been part of DEQ.

Honestly, I have not done any measurement about that (I have an SR6007 and an AV7003) and I cannot judge if recently the effect has been exacerbated.

Yes, its not the first time this happens to me, I have to work on my communication skill.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,072
Likes
16,605
Location
Central Fl
Again, that's just base on my own experience that the over compensation seems to have started about the time Atmos was introduced so in my case it would be the X4400H, SR7012, but possibly X4300H and SR7011 too. I don't mind the "compensate" that Chris talked abut in the FAQ, but not like the way it is "compensated" now, that to me is way too much and obviously to you also.
I think you may be right but can't say for sure. Before the 7703 pre/pro I have now, I was using a 7701 and never noticed the exagerated increase in surround level but since I got my 7703 that has Atmos, I noticed the increase in surround level almost immediately. It has made DEQ mostly unusable for music unless I manually change the surround levels which then of course screws up the balance for movies which are normally played at much higher levels (for me)
I don't mind the "compensate" that Chris talked abut in the FAQ, but not like the way it is "compensated" now, that to me is way too much and obviously to you also. It is something they can fixed via FW update, but I think unless there are enough people complain about it, they may just assume people like the "exaggerated/over compensation" effects. As it is now, the offset could work to a point but then it affects the bass so it is not a solution for me.
Agreed. Where do you think would be the proper place for us to make enough noise about this to get it taken seriously?
Maybe we should get together on the wording first so not to be mis-understood during the presentation?
It just surprises me that they don't hear how completely wonky the current calibration makes DEQ for music at sub plaster cracking levels.
 

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
2,116
Likes
2,781
I think you may be right but can't say for sure. Before the 7703 pre/pro I have now, I was using a 7701 and never noticed the exagerated increase in surround level but since I got my 7703 that has Atmos, I noticed the increase in surround level almost immediately. It has made DEQ mostly unusable for music unless I manually change the surround levels which then of course screws up the balance for movies which are normally played at much higher levels (for me)

Agreed. Where do you think would be the proper place for us to make enough noise about this to get it taken seriously?
Maybe we should get together on the wording first so not to be mis-understood during the presentation?
It just surprises me that they don't hear how completely wonky the current calibration makes DEQ for music at sub plaster cracking levels.
I recently turned off DEQ due to the surrounds level boosting as well. DEQ works really well for the bass but just noticed the surround levels too much. I just increased the boost of bass up to 6db from 200 to 20hz and called it good. Sound fine. We typically listed at around the same volume most of the time (around -10 to-15) so it is fine.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
Agreed. Where do you think would be the proper place for us to make enough noise about this to get it taken seriously?
Maybe we should get together on the wording first so not to be mis-understood during the presentation?
It just surprises me that they don't hear how completely wonky the current calibration makes DEQ for music at sub plaster cracking levels.

I think the best way is try and convince either AH or ASR to convey our requests, (or petition), but I think ASR, @amirm would likely be more effective because of the larger number of active followers and he now has a direct communication link to D+M engineering.

Amir, if you are watching, would you consider doing this for us? Or should we do a poll, to gauge how much interest there is?
 
Last edited:

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
Marantz AV7706 also no review any different Marantz AV7705 vs Marantz AV7706

It is work in progress, by Audioholics so it won't be long before we see the results. AH typically now would release it via Youtube first.
Gene, did briefly mention in a video that the SR8015 measured significantly better than the AV7705 and AV7706. You can skip to approx. 8:15 for that part if you wish.

Marantz SR-8015 vs Denon AVR-X8500H: Which AV Receiver Should You Get? - YouTube

That tells me the SR8015's better HDAMs has not been filtered down to the AV7706 unfortunately; and I am pretty sure you will see the AV7706's SINAD will be very similar to that of the SR7015 (also a 2020 model) ASR has already measured. So I think we can expect the difference between the AV7705 and AV7706 would be similar to the difference between the SR7013 and the SR7015, that is, mainly the HDMI/2.1, 8K, in other words, features that don't affect the audio performance in terms of SINAD, SNR, IMD etc.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,072
Likes
16,605
Location
Central Fl
That tells me the SR8015's better HDAMs has not been filtered down to the AV7706 unfortunately; and I am pretty sure you will see the AV7706's SINAD will be very similar to that of the SR7015 (also a 2020 model) ASR has already measured.
Too bad, but fortunately the effects of poor measured performance by ASR, AH and others have started to to influence the manufacturers. If there was not time to get the SR8015's upgrades to the 7706, I have a feeling we will see it in the 7707. The lower cost 770x line are upgraded yearly while the TOTL 880x's don't get addressed till at least every 2 years. Maybe they want to wait for the next 880x to get it first, wouldn't want the 7706 outperforming the current 8805
 
Top Bottom