Marantz Cinema 50 AVR Review

[rexian]

Who's speculating "X4800H clearly above Cinema 50 in audio quality", can you please link the source so I can read the whole thing to avoid taking it out of context? I fully agree with you that any such claim (if in fact stating that without qualitifications/caveats) would be sX4800H clearly above Cinema 50 in audio qualitypeculative and meaningless if based on actual subjective measurements).

No one said exactly that but the comments like below can make newbies believe so. No measurements I found for 40 or 4800 after many searches so please share if you have - I first thought it was a typo.

Based on specs and measurements, the Cinema 40 and x4800h are the equivalents. The C50 is more comparable to the x3800h but has a slightly stronger power supply.

How do you know if the 4800 is not up a little now to be closer to the 6700? It is now made in Japan too. The 4700 was made in Vietnam.

We already know 4800 doesn't have 13-channel processing or 11 amps like 6700, were you not talking about quality there?

What exactly will be revealed, you mean Amir will do a tear down of both to compare what's inside and/or read the service manuals? If not, how is Amir going to tell us whether the X4800H should be compared to the C50 or C40.

Whether X4800H or Cinema 50 has superior processing over X3800H. We may not know what DACs are used but to me that's not as important. I care about the actual output and I am more focused on preamp stage because I plan to get amps for my front stage.

You already have published specs and manuals for you to compare the two, and you don't seem to want to accept that there are no compelling reasons to suggest the C50 should be compared to the X4800H, but there are enough reasons to compare the C40 to the X4800H, in the same way we compare the SR7015 to the AVR-X4700H.

I can see that ban25 also tried to tell you the same.

There is some misunderstanding on where I stand and why - I tried to clear but obviously did a poor job. My point was that we can't conclude from the available specs or our experience with the previous generation that X3800H and Cinema 50 are equivalent just because number of zones / HDMI etc are the same, and X4800H is superior - until the test results are available. A lot of people will upgrade to X4800H skipping X3800H expecting better audio quality even if they don't need the extra power/ zone / HDMI etc. I already said that if X4800 is found to have better processing than Cinema 50, I'll get that - I am not in any specific camp but need results to verify assumptions.

Again, see ban25's comment on the measurements you are comparing, but you also missed Amir, and thinblue's own comments on why the difference, speculative at the moment but they do make logical sense.

Marantz Cinema 50 AVR Review

And if you don't want to spend so much money, maybe a RZ50 with Dirac included could be your choice

www.audiosciencereview.com

If you take the time to read those follow up posts you will understand why there were some minor difference. Regardless, when comparing such results measured by two different persons, on different test benches using different instruments, you can really say a few dB difference in one or two tests can tell you more than it does, as ban25 said "Or it's just measurement variation between two different test benches and reviewers..."

I don't know why you think I missed those - if you had read my below comment from the previous page could have saved some effort but thanks for trying to educate me.

Also from OP's review, Cinema 50 seems to be better than X3800H with SINAD at 5W (89dB for RCA) being slightly higher than X3700H though I'd wait for Amir's review before arriving at a conclusion just to make sure it's the same bench used for measurements and also, the HDMI input matters more to me than optical / RCA.

 

[peng]

No one said exactly that but the comments like below can make newbies believe so. No measurements I found for 40 or 4800 after many searches so please share if you have - I first thought it was a typo.

Why, if it wasn't said, and from what I can see, not even implied that one was above the other in audio quality? Why make things up? If anything, I have been saying 95 dB SINAD does not mean sound quality will be better than 85 dB SINAD. SINAD is just one metric and it is not one that corelates well with perceived sound quality to begin with.

There is some misunderstanding on where I stand and why - I tried to clear but obviously did a poor job. My point was that we can't conclude from the available specs or our experience with the previous generation that X3800H and Cinema 50 are equivalent just because number of zones / HDMI etc are the same, and X4800H is superior - until the test results are available. A lot of people will upgrade to X4800H skipping X3800H expecting better audio quality even if they don't need the extra power/ zone / HDMI etc. I already said that if X4800 is found to have better processing than Cinema 50, I'll get that - I am not in any specific camp but need results to verify assumptions.


I don't know why you think I missed those - if you had read my below comment from the previous page could have saved some effort but thanks for trying to educate me.

You are missing the point that people are just saying if you want to compare Marantz avrs with cousin Denon's then based on the trend set by the previous generations, you could compare the C50 with the X3800H, though as I pointed out, the C50 appears to have a slightly larger power supply, otherwise the specs are mostly the same for the most part; and the C40 can be compared to the 4800, because they have again, same specs for the most part, and in this case even the power supplies seem to be about the same, hence the same output specs at the same 0.05% THD. Clearly they are not identical though, at least not physically, but we shouldn't have to state the obvious.

By the way, I re-read some of the posts, and actually you are the one who started this very discussion on comparing a Marantz model to a Denon model:

You stated the following in post#169

In my opinion, the comparison between Cinema 50 (many in the forum have it) and X4800H (preorders starting to show up) is fair because they are priced similarly and have some audio enhancements in the specs that Cinema 60 or X3800H doesn't (Cinema 60 is definitely the weakest of them all). In terms of specs, I don't see X4800 standing out over Cinema 50 in quality, just has slightly higher output / extra HDMI / zone.

You said it was fair, but not really, ban25 reacted, in his post#177, that's when I noticed the word "equivalent" was used, and because I agreed with him, so I reacted to your post too. The rest is history.., incredible!

No one said exactly that but the comments like below can make newbies believe so. No measurements I found for 40 or 4800 after many searches so please share if you have - I first thought it was a typo.

I have not seen any measurements of the 4800 either, but that's immaterial. Are you saying if there are measurements then you will be able to say whether the C50, or C40 should be the one compared to the X4800H? I hope not!!

There is some misunderstanding on where I stand and why - I tried to clear but obviously did a poor job. My point was that we can't conclude from the available specs or our experience with the previous generation that X3800H and Cinema 50 are equivalent just because number of zones / HDMI etc are the same, and X4800H is superior - until the test results are available.

Of course people compare feature and specs, that's normal. Measurements are great, I want to see more measurements all the time, but in general people in the process of comparative shopping do, and often have to rely on just features and specs because measurements are no readily available for all models. Surely you stand this right?

That's why there are websites that provide easy ways to compare different models. The popular Zkelectronics:

Denon AVR-X4800H vs Marantz Cinema 40 Detailed Comparison

Read our detailed comparison of the Denon AVR-X4800H vs Marantz Cinema 40 to find out their common strengths and weaknesses, advantages and disadvantages, and decide which one to choose.

www.zkelectronics.com

This site has been linked often on forum, not me though, this is the first time I link it, just for you, so you know a popular comparing tool that helps the shopper may not always include measurements. Again, I do think measurements are important, but there is nothing wrong to say if a Marantz fan wants to try a Denon this time, they should go from a SR7015 to a Denon AVR-X3600H because the X3600H has significantly better SINAD. I would absolutely suggest such person to go with the AVR-X4700H.
Or, if you insist on using measurements to determine which Marantz correspond to which Denon, then in year 2017 through 2021, you won't be able to find on, because all of the Marantz models measured significantly poorer than Denon's. Does that make any sense, I think not, and I think you may even agree, when I put it his way.

I don't know why you think I missed those - if you had read my below comment from the previous page could have saved some effort

I did read what you wrote before I responded, and I hope you have done the same.

Lastly, on Audioholics.com, there is a post that you may be interested to read.

The Marantz "Cinema Series" "2022-2023" AV Pre-Launch Thread

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2022-2023 Marantz Cinema Series Stereo 70s......Replaces NR1200.....Expected Q4 2023 Cinema 70s....Replaces NR1711.....Expected Q4 2022 Cinema...

forums.audioholics.com

I don't know if AVinsider actually works for Sound United, Denon or Marantz, or it's just a username. If interested, may be you can PM him and ask where he got the information from.

He stated in that post:

Cinema 50......Replaces SR6015.....Expected Q4 2022

Cinema 40......Replaces SR7015.....Expected Q3 2023

Well, I happen to agree with those statements. And, yes, I heard that the Cinema 40 is actually closer to the SR8015 now and is made in Japan, but the X4800H, now also made in Japan, may also be closer to the X6700H than the X4700H now. So the C40 and the X4800H are still going to be comparable.

Oh, I read what you wrote before I respond, and I hope you have done the same. If you did, we would have saved lots of time repeating the same thing.

but thanks for trying to educate me.

Appreciated, and I have sincerely tried my best and have now responded to you post point by point. Hopefully it helps clearing things up a little, though so far it hasn't been working all that well. If not, I have to move on anyway, more fun watching movies and enjoying music.

One last thing, on Audioholics.com, there is a post that you may be interested to read.

The Marantz "Cinema Series" "2022-2023" AV Pre-Launch Thread

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2022-2023 Marantz Cinema Series Stereo 70s......Replaces NR1200.....Expected Q4 2023 Cinema 70s....Replaces NR1711.....Expected Q4 2022 Cinema...

forums.audioholics.com

I don't know if this AVinsider actually works for Sound United, Denon or Marantz but if interested may be you should PM him and ask where he got the information from.
He stated in that post:

Cinema 50......Replaces SR6015.....Expected Q4 2022
Cinema 40......Replaces SR7015.....Expected Q3 2023

Again, let me repeat just one more time, when I, or others compare "equivalent" or if you don't like that term, fine, let's just say "comparable" models, we tend to compare feature set and audio specifications, and are not necessarily (not me anyway) talking about sound quality, or measurements (unless they are available). Sound quality, when referring to midrange AVRs such as these $2,000 to $4,000 AVRs are subjective by nature, people can only give their own opinion based on their own perception in their listening environments. I will not tell you, or anyone that certain Denon models are "above" certain Marantz models in sound quality. If any newbie misread what I wrote then it is on them, not me.

 

[techsamurai]

Storage caps are 2X22,000 uf.

Just curious where did you find the size of the capacitors for the SR8002? It's hard for me to read the manual.

Is it really only 22,000? I'd expect it to use the 27,000 that the 8200 used which are also 63V (see below)

https://hifiduino.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/img_1154.jpg

https://hifiduino.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/img_1158-001.jpg

 

[peng]

Just curious where did you find the size of the capacitors for the SR8002? It's hard for me to read the manual.

Is it really only 22,000? I'd expect it to use the 27,000 that the 8200 used which are also 63V (see below)

https://hifiduino.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/img_1154.jpg

https://hifiduino.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/img_1158-001.jpg

Sorry, I read it wrong and should have been alerted when I saw 63 V, such 100 W class AVRs typically use 71 V for the bridge storage caps.
Just read the pages again and it was actually 71 V/18,000 uf X2. I PM'ed you the source info.

The SR8200 is a more powerful unit, weighs almost 10 lbs more, interestingly it's caps are in fact 63 V rated, no idea why.

 

[techsamurai]

Sorry, I read it wrong and should have been alerted when I saw 63 V, such 100 W class AVRs typically use 71 V for the bridge storage caps.
Just read the pages again and it was actually 71 V/18,000 uf X2. I PM'ed you the source info.

The SR8200 is a more powerful unit, weighs almost 10 lbs more, interestingly it's caps are in fact 63 V rated, no idea why.

Good find! 2x18,000 for 7 channels isn't bad.

The 8015 has 2x22,000 for 13 channels so not sure if that's necessarily better on a per channel basis. So the 8002 has almost the same capacitors as the Cinema 50 which I assume are the Nichicon 15,000μF/71V for 9 channels.

The SR8200 is interesting - heavier, better capacitors by 50% over the 8002 for 7 channels but not more powerful as Marant's ratings show (120 vs 125 both THX select certified). It'd probably be impossible to tell the 8200 from the 8002 apart in sound tests even for Ken Ishiwata. The 8002 was a darling with reviewers as it popped as the reference AVR in reviews of the other high-end AVRs just like Gene and Andrew Robinson use the 8015. Its lightweight and small chassis was probably the only time that it worked in favor of a Class AB receiver in the history of receivers.

It's really hard to find this information. I checked the Denon 5806, Yamaha TX-RZ11, and Rotel RAP 1580MKII just for kicks.

The 5806 had 132,000 storage capacity!

The RZ11's power supply consists of two 27,000uF/75V capacitors for the seven main power amplifiers and two 8,200uF/50V caps for the presence channels. The audio pre-amp section, utilizes a bulk of capacitors that sum to about 30,000uF.

I'm guessing it's in the 60,000 range combined but I can't tell for sure.

The RAP 1580 has 4 capacitors each rated at 10,000 50volt if my eyes don't deceive me.

The Rotel uses 50V which is even lower than the 8200's 63V - is voltage less important and just dependent on the unit rather than an indication of quality?

 

[peng]

Good find! 2x18,000 for 7 channels isn't bad.

The 8015 has 2x22,000 for 13 channels so not sure if that's necessarily better on a per channel basis. So the 8002 has almost the same capacitors as the Cinema 50 which I assume are the Nichicon 15,000μF/71V for 9 channels.

For real world use, the 8015's 2X22000 uf 80 V is significantly better because the 7 channel driven talks are way overrated. Yes, there are likely lots of movie contents that has such simultaneous peaks that push 7 channel or more to very high level, but if and when that happens, the duration will be very short, likely in ms., so short that 22,000 or 2,000 uf would make no difference. So I would take the 2X22,000 any time over less, as it will definitely help driving speakers with dips that span an octave or two in the deep to mid bass range.

The SR8200 is interesting - heavier, better capacitors by 50% over the 8002 for 7 channels but not more powerful as Marant's ratings show (120 vs 125 both THX select certified). It'd probably be impossible to tell the 8200 from the 8002 apart in sound tests even for Ken Ishiwata. The 8002 was a darling with reviewers as it popped as the reference AVR in reviews of the other high-end AVRs just like Gene and Andrew Robinson use the 8015. Its lightweight and small chassis was probably the only time that it worked in favor of a Class AB receiver in the history of receivers.

I wouldn't mind one either, but at the time I had the Denon AVR-3805 and AVR-4308CI that have better current capability. It does seem to have better HDAMs. Those avrs, even the 3805 were among the very few that passed AVtech's 1 ohm torture test. Lots of reviewers like Marantz in general because (I think) of the warm/musical sound myth, that I am sure would fail in any properly conducted blind tests, even single blind test. The whole thing is silly in technical term, as Amir said once, those HDAMs didn't add enough distortions to be the reasons for the alleged Marantz sound. I am passionate on this topic, may be because I am a number person, give me the numbers and I'll give such talks more thoughts and may believe it myself. Any, don't mean to side track, just trying to rationalize why gents like Robinso said those things.

The Rotel uses 50V which is even lower than the 8200's 63V - is voltage less important and just dependent on the unit rather than an indication of quality?

For dc rail voltages in the range of 65 to 70 V, higher voltage rating caps are of benefits for sure. Besides better longevity, consider the forumla:

Q = CV

so for the same capacitance, such as 18,000 uf, higher V would mean more Q (charges in couloumbs) can be stored.

 

[techsamurai]

For real world use, the 8015's 2X22000 uf 80 V is significantly better because the 7 channel driven talks are way overrated. Yes, there are likely lots of movie contents that has such simultaneous peaks that push 7 channel or more to very high level, but if and when that happens, the duration will be very short, likely in ms., so short that 22,000 or 2,000 uf would make no difference. So I would take the 2X22,000 any time over less, as it will definitely help driving speakers with dips that span an octave or two in the deep to mid bass range.

I'm a bit confused - you said 22,000 or 2,000 makes no difference but 22,000@80V is a massive difference over 18,000@71. I agree that in my use case of using 7 channels, I'd rather have the 22,000 of the 8015 or the 132,000 of the 5806. It might be overkill but I'd take it as long as the weight and chassis stayed identical (more on that later).

I'm a bit surprised that Rotel's capacitors have such low voltage, if it matters.

I wouldn't mind one either, but at the time I had the Denon AVR-3805 and AVR-4308CI that have better current capability. It does seem to have better HDAMs. Those avrs, even the 3805 were among the very few that passed AVtech's 1 ohm torture test. Lots of reviewers like Marantz in general because (I think) of the warm/musical sound myth, that I am sure would fail in any properly conducted blind tests, even single blind test. The whole thing is silly in technical term, as Amir said once, those HDAMs didn't add enough distortions to be the reasons for the alleged Marantz sound. I am passionate on this topic, may be because I am a number person, give me the numbers and I'll give such talks more thoughts and may believe it myself. Any, don't mean to side track, just trying to rationalize why gents like Robinso said those things.

I'm a huge fan of the Robinsons - he reviewed the B&W 703s that I own and he had owned the 802s. I'd read the review a few times over the past 15 years but I wasn't aware that it was his until I read the name last year. Many reviewers who reviewed the 703s had also reviewed/owned/listened to the 802s. His review was spot on and I've probably listened to the 703 more than anyone else in the world. His review of the 702 Signature matched my 5 minute audition of the 702 S2 where I simply gave up after we used all the $3,000+ AVRs and checked the connections to the speaker. Even my teenage daughter who was with me said "dad, I think our $30 bluetooth speaker on the tennis court sounds better".

I definitely suffer from confirmation bias but my bias for my speakers and my AVR are not misplaced. If I heard a better AVR, I would instantly recognize it as superior because I'm in search of superiority to replace my gear. For instance, I auditioned the TX-RZ11 and the Focal 1028BE (or 1038 possibly - don't remember the woofers). I played Michael Buble's bombastic I'm Feeling Good at loud levels. It sounded amazing as you'd expect that combination to sound but did it sound noticeably better than my own system? Nope, it didn't and it actually surprised me because the system was nearly 3 times more expensive and I had lofty expectations. The reviews of the 8002 and 703 explained why - the combination is easily comparable to anything in the $10,000-$15,000 range. I looked at Marantz AV separates and there we listened for an hour with the dealer getting annoyed by me. I walked away thinking that the AV separates sounded just a tiny bit better (5%) - it's Marantz vs Marantz after all and they don't have 200-300 watt amps. I just checked and the MM8077 benches lower than the 8002 but has better SNR and perhaps crosstalk is same or close but it does have 100,000 capacitors at 71 volts - I was right, it wasn't going to thrash the 8002 and it's not like I didn't put the effort int to prove Marantz right.

As for Denon, I purchased a Denon almost 15 years ago and I used it for 1 week with my older speakers, the B&W 601 S3 before returning it. Sure, the 601 speakers are cheap but few speakers can play Diana Krall and the sax in Why Should I Care? better than it did with the Marantz SR5200 - I still get goosebumps thinking of the sound. The Denon had massive attack in movies and made the drivers dance but there was something off in the sound especially in music. I tried to like it and keep it and I loved parts of it but the difference in music was massive. So, there's definitely a difference, at least for me there was otherwise I'd own 3 Denon AVRs, not 3 Marantz 8000 series AVRs.

I think Denon makes amazing AVRs but I would not buy one based on my personal experience. It's also possible that the Denons are much closer in musicality since they merged with Marantz as they share so many parts and may have converged with the Marantz potentially even losing a bit of its musicality. Perhaps, they need a Marantz user expert like myself to listen to the 8015 and let them know if it's technically still a Marantz since my ears have 0 taint to them

 

[peng]

I'm a bit confused - you said 22,000 or 2,000 makes no difference but 22,000@80V is a massive difference over 18,000@71. I agree that in my use case of using 7 channels, I'd rather have the 22,000 of the 8015 or the 132,000 of the 5806. It might be overkill but I'd take it as long as the weight and chassis stayed identical (more on that later).

I'm a bit surprised that Rotel's capacitors have such low voltage, if it matters.



I'm a huge fan of the Robinsons - he reviewed the B&W 703s that I own and he had owned the 802s. I'd read the review a few times over the past 15 years but I wasn't aware that it was his until I read the name last year. Many reviewers who reviewed the 703s had also reviewed/owned/listened to the 802s. His review was spot on and I've probably listened to the 703 more than anyone else in the world. His review of the 702 Signature matched my 5 minute audition of the 702 S2 where I simply gave up after we used all the $3,000+ AVRs and checked the connections to the speaker. Even my teenage daughter who was with me said "dad, I think our $30 bluetooth speaker on the tennis court sounds better".

I definitely suffer from confirmation bias but my bias for my speakers and my AVR are not misplaced. If I heard a better AVR, I would instantly recognize it as superior because I'm in search of superiority to replace my gear. For instance, I auditioned the TX-RZ11 and the Focal 1028BE (or 1038 possibly - don't remember the woofers). I played Michael Buble's bombastic I'm Feeling Good at loud levels. It sounded amazing as you'd expect that combination to sound but did it sound noticeably better than my own system? Nope, it didn't and it actually surprised me because the system was nearly 3 times more expensive and I had lofty expectations. The reviews of the 8002 and 703 explained why - the combination is easily comparable to anything in the $10,000-$15,000 range. I looked at Marantz AV separates and there we listened for an hour with the dealer getting annoyed by me. I walked away thinking that the AV separates sounded just a tiny bit better (5%) - it's Marantz vs Marantz after all and they don't have 200-300 watt amps. I just checked and the MM8077 benches lower than the 8002 but has better SNR and perhaps crosstalk is same or close but it does have 100,000 capacitors at 71 volts - I was right, it wasn't going to thrash the 8002 and it's not like I didn't put the effort int to prove Marantz right.

As for Denon, I purchased a Denon almost 15 years ago and I used it for 1 week with my older speakers, the B&W 601 S3 before returning it. Sure, the 601 speakers are cheap but few speakers can play Diana Krall and the sax in Why Should I Care? better than it did with the Marantz SR5200 - I still get goosebumps thinking of the sound. The Denon had massive attack in movies and made the drivers dance but there was something off in the sound especially in music. I tried to like it and keep it and I loved parts of it but the difference in music was massive. So, there's definitely a difference, at least for me there was otherwise I'd own 3 Denon AVRs, not 3 Marantz 8000 series AVRs.

I think Denon makes amazing AVRs but I would not buy one based on my personal experience. It's also possible that the Denons are much closer in musicality since they merged with Marantz as they share so many parts and may have converged with the Marantz potentially even losing a bit of its musicality. Perhaps, they need a Marantz user expert like myself to listen to the 8015 and let them know if it's technically still a Marantz since my ears have 0 taint to them

I said no difference for very short duration peaks only. For the longer duration peaks it will make a lot of difference.

Having watched a few of Robinson's recent video reviews, that's enough for me as I thought he offered the typical kind of subjective measurements and sounded contradictory at times. Nothing personal, just never a fan of subjective reviews, though I watched some for entertainment when I had nothing else to do. I do like Gene's, he typically would present more balanced views.

 

[techsamurai]

I said no difference for very short duration peaks only. For the longer duration peaks it will make a lot of difference.

Okay, but when you say longer, it's 20% longer.

If the Rotel has 4 10,000 capacitors for a total of 40,000 then it seems like 30,000-44,000 is kind of the range for mid-range to high-end AVRs.

Still the SR8002 has better capacitors than the Cinema 50 and Cinema 40 by 20% which have 30,000.

Having watched a few of Robinson's recent video reviews, that's enough for me as I thought he offered the typical kind of subjective measurements and sounded contradictory at times. Nothing personal, just never a fan of subjective reviews, though I watched some for entertainment when I had nothing else to do. I do like Gene's, he typically would present more balanced views.

Gene is great but does he do as many reviews and cover as many products? I've learnt so much from him and every time he talks about ignorant folks on forums, I can help but feel that he's talking about me. By the way, thanks for the info. I learnt a lot from it.

 

[techsamurai]

I'm not sure going to Cinema 50 will be an upgrade in my case coming from the old SR8002 and 5 channels bi-amping L&R.

Here's my scorecard of the Cinema 50 vs the SR8002:

Cinema 50

Pros
HDMI 2.1 (finally, it only took them 6 years!)
Audyssey XT 32 (big one but I'd prefer DIRAC)

Neutral (for my use case)
More channels (no value - I only use 7)
Atmos - (schm-atmos with 5 channels)
Better looks (marginal value - it sits in my BDI cabinet and will be invisible - porthole hidden)
Almost zero older connections compared to 8002 (I'm sure I'll need a S-Video or Component connection eventually and will rue this)
Support for >1 subwoofers - (no value - I own a single SVS Micro 3000 that's hidden behind an acoustic guitar)

Cons
Power - 65-70% of 8002's with 2-7 channels
Toroidal vs EI (sure they are the same but given the choice I'd prefer the 50 to have a toroidal)
DAC unknown (cheap TI vs Crystal) - I'm guessing better because of the age but I doubt the Crystal DAC in the SR8002 is a dog.
Less capacitor storage (36,000 vs 30,000)
$2,500 for an AVR that cost $1,500 (or less on sale) not long ago
3 year warranty (worse parts than 8002 which had 5 year warranty)
No one will use the Cinema 50 as a reference AVR
Edit: Not sure it can drive B&W 700 towers
Edit: Not sure there's any point in bi-amping due to lower power

Verdict
The Cinema 50 doesn't seem like a reasonable upgrade path - it's a modernization path.

Thoughts on Cinema 40
I'm sure the Cinema 40 will notch closer to the 8002, however, all that closeness is drowned by the extra $1,000 for the unit that was on sale for $1,300 not that long ago. I'm not sure I want to pay $1,500-$2,200 more than others paid for their 7000 series AVRs no matter what plastic they use for the front. If I'm paying more for something, I want something extra in return whether it be DIRAC for free or a stellar DAC

 

[bo_knows]

First of all, we can compare them and say which one is better without both tested by the same person, same bench on the same day using everything the same. Secondly, the "better", depending on which measurement you compare, even when done by two different operators, using different AP on different benches, would seem to be within 0.5 dB SINAD, that has no significance at all statistically speaking.

Without splitting hair though, I would say they are comparable and that's consistent with all the other Denon and Marantz AVRs measured on ASR, on amp output. That is not surprising either because those AVRs (except Denon's top 2 and the Marantz top models) shared the same power amp sections, right down to the rail voltages, bias voltages etc., in the past (say 2017-2019 for sure). It is possible that the 2022/23 D+M models no longer share the power amp sections but we don't know that.

BINGO! "shared the same power amp sections" This was confirmed by a technician who worked on my 8500 and Marantz 8015 on the same bench.

 

[techsamurai]

BINGO! "shared the same power amp sections" This was confirmed by a technician who worked on my 8500 and Marantz 8015 on the same bench.

Between all the sharing, perhaps they should start sharing the same prices too. Would you be interested in the new Cinema 70 for $1,300 or the 7015 for $1,500? Hmm, tough one!

 

[bo_knows]

Between all the sharing, perhaps they should start sharing the same prices too. Would you be interested in the new Cinema 70 for $1,300 or the 7015 for $1,500? Hmm, tough one!

In the future, I would be interested in AVR-A1H but currently happy with my 8500.

 

[techsamurai]

In the future, I would be interested in AVR-A1H but currently happy with my 8500.

What would be the point of that other than to get a bit of exercise at the risk of pulling your back? I can refer you to a trainer who charges much less than that per session and you won't risk any injury

j/k - I'm guessing the answer is Dirac but it's such an expensive way to Dirac.

 

[bo_knows]

What would be the point of that other than to get a bit of exercise at the risk of pulling your back? I can refer you to a trainer who charges much less than that per session and you won't risk any injury

j/k - I'm guessing the answer is Dirac but it's such an expensive way to Dirac.

The point will be to drain my bank account.
71lbs is still ok for my back.
Dirac - I can care less, I rely on my room treatments.

 

[techsamurai]

The point will be to drain my bank account.
71lbs is still ok for my back.
Dirac - I can care less, I rely on my room treatments.

Wouldn't an external amp or a better sub be a smarter way to drain it? But I'm guessing you already have 1-2 external amps

 

[bo_knows]

Wouldn't an external amp or a better sub be a smarter way to drain it? But I'm guessing you already have 1-2 external amps

Yes, most definitely it would be, and no I don't have external amps. The extra sub would be nice, agree. A better center channel would be extra nice! LOL

 

[techsamurai]

Yes, most definitely it would be, and no I don't have external amps. The extra sub would be nice, agree. A better center channel would be extra nice! LOL

I think you're golden in terms of electronics. That's a world class AVR.

 

[peng]

Some people prefer the single box solution even if the box is big and heavy.

 

[ivo.f.doma]

Biased possibly. I just know when listening to it, I do think it sounds good but the more I listen to movies I feel there is a veil/something missing and feel blah about the sound. The dynamics seem much softer and I think that's the biggest issue for me. I don't use it for music, just movies. Music I use a Cary Slp98 F1 version with BHK 250 amp. Maybe I am expecting too much from it? I like the Audyssey, upgrade path to Dirac and 4 sub output. The Hdmi video worked flawless. I am going to try the 4800H because I have nothing to lose being able to return it. You never know it may just work out better for me. I originally purchased an Onkyo RZ50 and really loved the sound but when you changed source or stopped movie it would trigger my BHK250 amp to go into protective mode. I think it is something with the rca output design. The Soundstage on it was very open, big and detailed. I was bummed out that it didn't play well with my amp.

Hi Carycinema, was the TX-RZ50 sound better than the Cinema50? And didn't you try to at least try / compare them both with only their built-in amplifiers? Without your power amplifier. I'm also more inclined towards Onkyo/Pioneer than D/M.