Marantz AV7705 Home Theater Processor Review

[digicidal]

Talking about the depressing state of modern "mass market" AV processors, any thoughts about this thing:
Denon Pro DN-700AVP https://www.denonpro.com/index.php/products/view3/dn-700avp ?

It certainly is stripped of many features, but then again it costs half as much and perhaps has even better audio outputs? For someone with no more than 7.1 system it could be a great deal, then again there is Emotiva MC-700...

I seriously considered it before pulling the trigger on the Marantz (well it was the previous model DN-500AV) but the lack of room correction - aside from simple impulse timing and minimal tone controls at least - to me was worth the difference. Had I paid full price for the Marantz... or had miniDSP had their nanoAVR available at the time... I'd have likely gone that route.

 

[leftside]

So you believe a poor DAC implementation is causing you boomy bass?
Please explain how that occurs?

Don't know the technical details, but when I use a different DAC the sound is less "boomy" and sounds cleaner/tighter. Would the measurement from the original review explain these sort of sound differences? Or perhaps it's some other processing in the unit that is causing these differences?

 

[Casey Leedom]

It might be ice to measure the new Emotiva Preprocessors: the RMC-1 and RMC-1L are somewhat different form factors of the same design with 16 AKM4490s operating in Dual Monaral Mode for each of the channels, and the XMC-2 which only has the front three channels operating in that manner with the remainder running two channels per AKM4490. Emotiva says that sound quality was one of their top priorities.

And yes, Emotiva has indeed been struggling with a lot of bugs since these new Preprocessors rolled out — predominantly in the HDMI/HDCP area. These seem to be slowly getting dealt with ...

Casey

 

[jhaider]

Am I missing something, or do 7705 and 8805 seem to have more or less the same audio performance? Yet 7705 is half the price. It seems the only reason to get 8805 over the 7705 is 7.1.4-channel Auromatic upmixing. The 770x models only do 5.1.4-channel Auromatic.

 

[Sal1950]

Or perhaps it's some other processing in the unit that is causing these differences?

That's much more probable. It's highly unlikely that the DAC is affecting the frequency response in a audible way.

Am I missing something, or do 7705 and 8805 seem to have more or less the same audio performance? Yet 7705 is half the price. It seems the only reason to get 8805 over the 7705 is 7.1.4-channel Auromatic upmixing. The 770x models only do 5.1.4-channel Auromatic.

That's about right, not only the measured response but the Marantz published specs are identical. And going all the way back to at least the 7701/8801 that I've checked. ??????????????????????????????????????????? LOL
BTW, the 7703 ^ models do 5.2.4 and the 8805 do 7.2.4. A very nice feature of the later Audyssey to correct time, gross level, and FR separately for dual subs.

 

[J-Sine]

Am I missing something, or do 7705 and 8805 seem to have more or less the same audio performance? Yet 7705 is half the price. It seems the only reason to get 8805 over the 7705 is 7.1.4-channel Auromatic upmixing. The 770x models only do 5.1.4-channel Auromatic.

According to manual the 7705 does 11.1 which is 7.1.4(height). likely 7.2.4 with 2 subwoofers. So only difference between 8805 and 7705 is DACS?

I currently run 5.2.4(height) on my Denon X4400 with 2 separate subwoofers and can still add a center height for GOD sound AURO. Maybe 1 day add "god" center height but only true AURO Blu-rays utilize it. So negligible if worth it.

Save a $1000 and get x4400/x4500/x4600 series. Instead of 7705. The XLR seems to add no benefit to sound quality unless you need that 2.4v vs 1.2v to drive a balanced amp.

 

[amirm]

Am I missing something, or do 7705 and 8805 seem to have more or less the same audio performance?

No, the 8805 had much less distortion at 4 volts versus 7705.

 

[Sal1950]

I currently run 5.2.4(height) on my Denon X4400 with 2 separate subwoofers and can still add a center height for GOD sound AURO. Maybe 1 day add "god" center height but only true AURO Blu-rays utilize it. So negligible if worth it.

Read your manually closely before you jump. With my 7703, if you want to add the VOG speaker you have to give up separate Audyssey tuning of the dual subwoofers.

 

[Sal1950]

No, the 8805 had much less distortion at 4 volts versus 7705.

OH GOODY.

 

[jhaider]

No, the 8805 had much less distortion at 4 volts versus 7705.

OK...but if your bed channel amp is rated at, e.g. 1.6V for full output (according to the manufacturer's specifications) is that important on a practical level?

According to manual the 7705 does 11.1 which is 7.1.4(height). likely 7.2.4 with 2 subwoofers. So only difference between 8805 and 7705 is DACS?

No: 770x only supports 5.1.4 where it counts (Auromatic), but 8805 supports 7.1.4 Auromatic upmixing.

BTW, the 7703 ^ models do 5.2.4 and the 8805 do 7.2.4. A very nice feature of the later Audyssey to correct time, gross level, and FR separately for dual subs.

I am not impressed with Audyssey's technique or results for handling multiple subwoofers. In every case I can think of, one should use a manual calibration for multiple subwoofers and only one of the subwoofer outputs.

 

[J-Sine]

Read your manually closely before you jump. With my 7703, if you want to add the VOG speaker you have to give up separate Audyssey tuning of the dual subwoofers.

Good to know so I don't misinform on VOG ability. In regards to Audyssey with the x4400, I gave up on it as it kept adding way too much high frequency and its bass correction was extreme at certain frequencies. Yes I have bass nodes but some were at less used frequencies. Instead I defaulted to using a Monolith 10" for its linear response and roll with the nodes. Others have had similar issues with Audyssey above 500hz especially over boosting of 5k+. I also use constant directivity horned speakers which allow the mids/highs to hit me more directly negating the need to room correct with Audyssey. Since my speaker system is rather linear and isn't a mixing desk, I just roll with bass peaks as my brain seems to adjust better to it then what I was able to get from Audyssey. With this caveat, I used a single mic location to tune distances and levels then micro adjust levels with SPL meter.. I did however have better audyssey response with the single mic placement. The move the mic during calibration actually creates compromises which some have undertaken exhaustive testing to determine.
I am still a strong advocate for AURO sound. Atmos can only be activated by Atmos encoded source where as AURO 3D can used on any surround/dolby/atmos or even stereo source.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Marantz have vanished into Sound United, and their products are now essentially identical to Denon. Luckily Sound United ended plans to add Pioneer and Onkyo to the stable. Otherwise the market would have started to look very skewed.

Like most of the purveyors of domestic AV gear, Sound United have decided that there is a market for specialised pre-pro devices. But rather than actually design a proper product, they all simply strip the power amps and power supply out of the unified AV receiver, and add a tiny output board that provides balanced outputs, replacing the speaker terminals with XLRs. No surprise the specs are just as woeful, or that the box is remarkably light. Rather than redesign the DAC stage to provide standard levels (which they could), they just feed a balanced line driver from the unbalanced source they already had intended to drive the internal amplifiers. There is exactly no performance gain with the balanced output, indeed it is likely just a bit worse.

Just to add insult, they will often sell you a dedicated power amp, which is just the same AV receiver, but this time without the signal processing bits, and leaving the power amp in place. Just adding cruddy balanced line receivers to feed the same amplifiers you would have got had you just bought the AV receiver in one box. You have the privilege of paying twice for the same device, and get an arguably poorer result.

The market power weilded by Sound United and the other big AV amp makers is worrying. It is very hard of smaller players to get in, and this seems to be a result of difficulties in licensing DTS and Dolby IP. I supect there is a lot of pressure applied making it hard for a quality product to be marketed. The step up to real pre-pro devices is unreasonably huge.

Denon, Marantz, Pioneer, and Onkyo all owned by one megalithic company selling Schiitty product. Oh, for the days when antitrust actually meant something.

 

[Lotus97]

I tried to use an external 5 channel amp from Emotiva with my Yamaha AV receiver, it was useless, I learned it was because the preouts from Yamaha AV receiver were less than 1v.

 

[J-Sine]

No: 770x only supports 5.1.4 where it counts (Auromatic), but 8805 supports 7.1.4 Auromatic upmixing.

Not to argue but for clarity sake?
Is this sourced from a specific thread of actual 7705 users? According to Marantz 7705 product page it indicates 7.1.4 Auro 3d capability. I also see nothing regarding limitations with "auro-matic" mixing in the 7705 manual. See: https://www.us.marantz.com/us/Products/Pages/ProductDetails.aspx?CatId=AVSeparates&ProductId=AV7705
Maybe I missed something in the 338 page manual?

 

[Blumlein 88]

Am I missing something, or do 7705 and 8805 seem to have more or less the same audio performance? Yet 7705 is half the price. It seems the only reason to get 8805 over the 7705 is 7.1.4-channel Auromatic upmixing. The 770x models only do 5.1.4-channel Auromatic.

As Sal already confirmed, Marantz gear generally meets or just barely exceeds specs. And the specs haven't changed in a decade. On all of their processors at all prices.

 

[Sal1950]

Others have had similar issues with Audyssey above 500hz especially over boosting of 5k+. I also use constant directivity horned speakers which allow the mids/highs to hit me more directly negating the need to room correct with Audyssey.

Your aware that the 4400 is compatible with the Audyssey Editor app. With it you can limit the freq Audyssey does it's correction to any point you desire. IE, won't touch anything above 500 hz or anything, your choice.

 

[J-Sine]

Your aware that the 4400 is compatible with the Audyssey Editor app. With it you can limit the freq Audyssey does it's correction to any point you desire. IE, won't touch anything above 500 hz or anything, your choice.

When dealing with nodes and audyssey, mic placement factors heavily. So yes moving it around can compensate but then you wind up with an averaging which is another form of compromise. I myself did find better results to my ear with single mic placement in calibration.(per previously linked thread on audyssey-single mic) Eq chasing nodes is practical but the room will still sound like the room it is. So resorting to having faith in speaker/subwoofer linearity and letting me brain "adjust" to environment seems more organic and natural. I used to spend hours on exact speaker placement in a given room and so wished I had something like Audyssey or dirac live to compensate. Over time I learned time alignment and speaker FR linearity combined with Constant directivity to be most important in multi-channel. Essentially the Harman science approach.

Oh I have to admit I didn't buy the app for audyssey. I have good reasons, The network module failed on my x4400 and needs to be serviced. The usb port as well. At least it only effects network related uses except the most important one. Firmware updates. Fortunately I got the Atmos one before it failed. I called denon and I can warranty it but it's like $60ish to ship to service center and will make dormant my home theater for weeks. ahhhh First world problems...

 

[milosz]

1. Most home theater users are not audiophiles. If it's multichannel, loud and has giant low frequency effects, the system makes the users happy.
2. Most content watched by most home theater users has crappy off-air or off-cable Dolby AC3. Better DACs & amplification would be wasted with those artifact-laden, compressed audio signals. Yes, optical disk and some streams can have lossless audio, but of all the home theater owners I know, only two are aware of that and only one knows how to enable it.
3. Our economic system has positive feedback built into it to extract maximum profit with no systemic consideration for product quality. If you subscribe to the myth that the Invisible Hand Of The Market will ensure quality, you are delusional. In the case of products like these mass-market home theater gizmos, the buyers in the marketplace have no clue what constitutes quality and no way to know which products exhibit it... except now with ASR consumers are given information to guide their choice- but it's likely that too few consumers of these products will be influenced by this science and so the information will have little -if any - impact on the market, and these products will probably continue to be engineered to maximize profit with just enough engineering and quality so that they don't catch fire- at least not during the warranty period.

 

[Gedeon]

1. Most home theater users are not audiophiles. If it's multichannel, loud and has giant low frequency effects, the system makes the users happy.
2. Most content watched by most home theater users has crappy off-air or off-cable Dolby AC3. Better DACs & amplification would be wasted with those artifact-laden, compressed audio signals. Yes, optical disk and some streams can have lossless audio, but of all the home theater owners I know, only two are aware of that and only one knows how to enable it.
3. Our economic system has positive feedback built into it to extract maximum profit with no systemic consideration for product quality. If you subscribe to the myth that the Invisible Hand Of The Market will ensure quality, you are delusional. In the case of products like these mass-market home theater gizmos, the buyers in the marketplace have no clue what constitutes quality and no way to know which products exhibit it... except now with ASR consumers are given information to guide their choice- but it's likely that too few consumers of these products will be influenced by this science and so the information will have little -if any - impact on the market, and these products will probably continue to be engineered to maximize profit with just enough engineering and quality so that they don't catch fire- at least not during the warranty period.

Most of those statements could be applied to every consumer product out there.

And I'd like to double-blind test how many users/audiophiles/aficionados are out there able to discriminate, in a normal room with good to really good equipment, at non ear-bleeding spl levels, between a 94dbs SINAD and 105dbs SINAD source.

Not trying to defend bad practices or no-sense prices, or cheating in specs, which we could find lots of samples in every kind of element in this hobby, just trying to put a bit of perspective and real use case.

 

[audioBliss]

1. Most home theater users are not audiophiles. If it's multichannel, loud and has giant low frequency effects, the system makes the users happy.
2. Most content watched by most home theater users has crappy off-air or off-cable Dolby AC3. Better DACs & amplification would be wasted with those artifact-laden, compressed audio signals. Yes, optical disk and some streams can have lossless audio, but of all the home theater owners I know, only two are aware of that and only one knows how to enable it.
...

1. Imo it's the other way around if by audiophile you mean 2-channel listeners that buy expensive 2 channel gear. Usually 2 channels guys buy into the snake oil and rarely have any acoustic treatments in their room, never do any measurements and so on. The home theater community is filled with DIY subs, measurements, REW, advanced EQ like MSO, Dirac etc., big into treating the room and so on. In many respects HT guys are ahead of the game here. I know a lot of people with home theaters that have 7.1+ that care mostly about 2-channel but enjoy movies as well or multi channel music.

2. Probably true but there are streaming services which provide higher bitrates. If you buy a movie through Apple TV you can get audio bitrate at around 2Mbit. AppleTV+ has total bitrates around 41Mbit peak. I listen to a lot of music and movies and what I have found is that basically all streams that are not Dolby Digital+ 7.1 or Dolby Atmos has very inferior sound quality. But those movies and shows that are in Atmos are pretty good - not as good as UHD discs but pretty damn good audio.

I run 2 channel through Roon with Tidal and CDs ripped to wav that I run from my NAS. Even though these are very high quality files the issue with 2 channel is that the mastering on 99% of everything is extremely horrible. I mean there is almost no music that is mastered with high dynamic range and pristine quality. This is the issue for me. It doesn't matter how good gear I have the content isn't really there. Movies/series/multi channel music is usually mastered way better and with a high dynamic range system in mind which more than makes up for the lower bit rates.

Unless you only listen to classical music from Telarc, 2L etc. you are out of luck with 2 channel. I typically don't listen to classical that much so there we are.