Marantz Cinema 50 vs Denon X3800H - is there a difference in audio?

[EWL5]

One thing I am confused by is that the X3800H was reviewed poorly on ASR, but the Marantz 50 measurements were praised by everyone.

Do people generally like the X3800H sound?

Where have you seen the Cinema 50 measured?

Amir's comments on the 3800 have to be taken with a grain of salt. He was disappointed that the SINAD regressed from the prior 3700 (which was excellent and running AKM DACs at the time). However, the absolute SINAD rating of the 3800 still falls in the "inaudible" range! I've had my 3800 for nearly a year and along with Dirac Live, it's the best setup I've had in some time!

Just get the 3800 and wait for Black Friday/Boxing Day for Dirac's annual 30% discount on licenses!

 

[viper900]

Amir did not review the C50, did he, may be I missed..?

No he did not - but this thread here

Marantz Cinema 50 AVR Review

My Friends C50 and I don't know the price of this item. You can see what I saw. This is what it looks like. 4ohm, optical in, front LR, 20k 4ohm, optical in, front LR, 22.4k 4ohm, optical in, front LR, 40k 4ohm, rca in, front LR, 20k 4ohm, rca in, front LR, 22.4k 4ohm, rca...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Everyone seems to be really happy with these graphs but I must concede - it looks completely alien to me.

 

[peng]

It is tricky to try and compare two devices measured by two different reviewers on different test benches. Still, if we must compare those two, the differences are not that significant.

For example, let's compare SINAD at 5 W output, 4 ohms:

Thin Blue's:

Amir's:

One used HDMI input, the other analog input, and then Toslink, the test conditions are not identical to begin with. That's just 5 W SINAD, it is hard to compare the other test results with much accuracy, but in terms of ball park, I would say they are equally good/bad.

 

[EWL5]

What ever happened to Thin Blue? Anyone know?

 

[Karls_speaker_works]

Need a receiver to drive my 5.1.2 setup including the KEF R5 and R2c.

What would be the better choice between the two?

Whichever one you like the looks of better.

 

[viper900]

I wanted to update this thread as I went ahead purchased BOTH the X3800H and Cinema 50. I wanted to share my subjective review on both.

I ran Audyssey XT32 before making any comparisons.

I've spent hours listening and comparing both receivers with the same music played over and over again.

I have no doubt the Marantz Cinema 50 sounds better to my ears. The sound is less harsh/clinical when playing music. It's defintely a more laid back presentation versus the Denon, which seems to be more 'forward'. The bass impact also appears to be greater. I can feel/hear greater low end grunt.

Whilst I appreciate the products are 99% identical internally, I am assuming there is some extra or different processing/EQ on the Marantz which is providing a different sound signature.

Other bonuses: Better looking exterior, superior remote. Much better finish to the receiver overall. I think the price difference between the two is insignificant so happier to pay the extra for the Marantz. The X3800H cost me £1000, the Cinema 50 cost me £1250. The latter seems much more premium as a product. The X3800H looks cheaply made (from an exterior perspective).

I personally will be sticking to Marantz as a brand for all AV receivers from here on.

 

[EWL5]

I wanted to update this thread as I went ahead purchased BOTH the X3800H and Cinema 50. I wanted to share my subjective review on both.

I ran Audyssey XT32 before making any comparisons.

I've spent hours listening and comparing both receivers with the same music played over and over again.

I have no doubt the Marantz Cinema 50 sounds better to my ears. The sound is less harsh/clinical when playing music. It's defintely a more laid back presentation versus the Denon, which seems to be more 'forward'. The bass impact also appears to be greater. I can feel/hear greater low end grunt.

Whilst I appreciate the products are 99% identical internally, I am assuming there is some extra or different processing/EQ on the Marantz which is providing a different sound signature.

Other bonuses: Better looking exterior, superior remote. Much better finish to the receiver overall. I think the price difference between the two is insignificant so happier to pay the extra for the Marantz. The X3800H cost me £1000, the Cinema 50 cost me £1250. The latter seems much more premium as a product. The X3800H looks cheaply made (from an exterior perspective).

I personally will be sticking to Marantz as a brand for all AV receivers from here on.

Can you confirm that you level matched both AVRs before your critical listening comparisons? What did you use to accomplish this?

 

[Oddball]

I wanted to update this thread as I went ahead purchased BOTH the X3800H and Cinema 50. I wanted to share my subjective review on both.

I ran Audyssey XT32 before making any comparisons.

I've spent hours listening and comparing both receivers with the same music played over and over again.

I have no doubt the Marantz Cinema 50 sounds better to my ears. The sound is less harsh/clinical when playing music. It's defintely a more laid back presentation versus the Denon, which seems to be more 'forward'. The bass impact also appears to be greater. I can feel/hear greater low end grunt.

Whilst I appreciate the products are 99% identical internally, I am assuming there is some extra or different processing/EQ on the Marantz which is providing a different sound signature.

Other bonuses: Better looking exterior, superior remote. Much better finish to the receiver overall. I think the price difference between the two is insignificant so happier to pay the extra for the Marantz. The X3800H cost me £1000, the Cinema 50 cost me £1250. The latter seems much more premium as a product. The X3800H looks cheaply made (from an exterior perspective).

I personally will be sticking to Marantz as a brand for all AV receivers from here on.

Interesting and thanks for the comparison. I am glad you found the winner and hope you will enjoy it for years to come.

Cinema 50 has a "lazy" DAC filter that rolls off earlier and is often subject to audiophile rant. Denon would have the one that rolls off more "accurately". With AV-10 I have both (Cinema 30 also has this option, but not 40 or 50) and while there is a difference (although did not do a blind test), most of people don't really hear it (sample of 20+ casual listeners). Obviously AV-10 is different design as 3800H, so just a side not for unit that has both DAC filters. Some people would achieve the same result as lazy DAC filter using EQ, and that would be their preference. It is just that with Cinema 50 you would have to use the opposite filter to keep it straight.

Otherwise, it is really difficult to compare 2 Audy runs as often on the same unit and with apparently same measuring positions (enthusiast attention level, not lab level) they will be sounding quite differently, especially if using full room correction. As noted above, Cinema 50 would need a different curve than 3800H to sound similar above 10khz. There is no apparent reason why bass would be any better or different on Cinema 50, other than it is just the Audy lottery. I can say confidently that after probably 200+ Audy calibrations (could have been more though, just conservative estimate) in various rooms and systems, you do recognise when you have a winner and keep that one as it might take you 10 more runs to get to the result you like.

 

[viper900]

Can you confirm that you level matched both AVRs before your critical listening comparisons? What did you use to accomplish this?

I simply used Audyssey calibration - which I assume did all the level matching. I don't have any additional equipment or testing hardware.

I appreciate this is not the most scientific comparison.

I can equally appreciate some people will prefer the Denon but it sounded more clinical/harsh on the top end to me; which was more fatiguing to listen to. The Marantz seems to have a smoother, rolled off top end.

 

[viper900]

Interesting and thanks for the comparison. I am glad you found the winner and hope you will enjoy it for years to come.

Cinema 50 has a "lazy" DAC filter that rolls off earlier and is often subject to audiophile rant. Denon would have the one that rolls off more "accurately". With AV-10 I have both (Cinema 30 also has this option, but not 40 or 50) and while there is a difference (although did not do a blind test), most of people don't really hear it (sample of 20+ casual listeners). Obviously AV-10 is different design as 3800H, so just a side not for unit that has both DAC filters. Some people would achieve the same result as lazy DAC filter using EQ, and that would be their preference. It is just that with Cinema 50 you would have to use the opposite filter to keep it straight.

Otherwise, it is really difficult to compare 2 Audy runs as often on the same unit and with apparently same measuring positions (enthusiast attention level, not lab level) they will be sounding quite differently, especially if using full room correction. As noted above, Cinema 50 would need a different curve than 3800H to sound similar above 10khz. There is no apparent reason why bass would be any better or different on Cinema 50, other than it is just the Audy lottery. I can say confidently that after probably 200+ Audy calibrations (could have been more though, just conservative estimate) in various rooms and systems, you do recognise when you have a winner and keep that one as it might take you 10 more runs to get to the result you like.

I can't explain the bass differences. I set my SB-1000 Pro at -15 dB on the app, ran Audyssey once on both receivers, and compared. I kept the mic in the exact same position and ran x8 from the single MLP (my office chair).

That is not to say the bass isn't lacking on the Denon, but in certain songs there is significantly more tactile feel on the Marantz. I could feel the 'rumble' whilst seated on my desk and with my feet on the floor more often with the Marantz.

 

[Oddball]

I don't think there is any blame on you, but as I noted, different Audy calibrations could come out quite differently in apparently similar conditions. When you say you set level at -15dB on the app that is SVS app right? Your Audy calibration should result in subs measuring at least -11.5dB trim as 12dB is the limit so if you hit that trim after calibration you will not actually know if you are above it.

 

[Karls_speaker_works]

Whichever one you like the looks of better.

And the better looking one won.

 

[yelloguy]

I simply used Audyssey calibration - which I assume did all the level matching. I don't have any additional equipment or testing hardware.

Thanks for sharing the comparison. I am curious about several aspects-

1. Is this for movies or music?
2. Have you tried listening to music with Audyssey off or Pure Direct mode on both the receivers?

The sound qualities you are describing can easily be attributed to the Audyssey calibration results.

In the interests of full disclosure, I own Marantz and Denon AVR's. I replaced my old Denon with a Marantz in my HT and moved the Denon upstairs. I found their sound to be identical but I could do more tweaking on the Marantz - which allowed me to further improve the sound I was getting in my room.

 

[EWL5]

I simply used Audyssey calibration - which I assume did all the level matching. I don't have any additional equipment or testing hardware.

I appreciate this is not the most scientific comparison.

I can equally appreciate some people will prefer the Denon but it sounded more clinical/harsh on the top end to me; which was more fatiguing to listen to. The Marantz seems to have a smoother, rolled off top end.

Was the volume level the same when making your comparison b/w the 3800 and the Cinema 50? This can only be confirmed via an SPL or similar meter. If they were not the same, then usually the louder AVR has the edge and perceived as "better" (introduces bias that should not be there)!

 

[viper900]

Was the volume level the same when making your comparison b/w the 3800 and the Cinema 50? This can only be confirmed via an SPL or similar meter. If they were not the same, then usually the louder AVR has the edge and perceived as "better" (introduces bias that should not be there)!

I listened to -17 dB on the receiver if that matters.

And the better looking one won.

The receiver looks beautiful - most look like ugly VCR boxes from the 90s!

Thanks for sharing the comparison. I am curious about several aspects-

1. Is this for movies or music?
2. Have you tried listening to music with Audyssey off or Pure Direct mode on both the receivers?

The sound qualities you are describing can easily be attributed to the Audyssey calibration results.

In the interests of full disclosure, I own Marantz and Denon AVR's. I replaced my old Denon with a Marantz in my HT and moved the Denon upstairs. I found their sound to be identical but I could do more tweaking on the Marantz - which allowed me to further improve the sound I was getting in my room.

Audyssey on for both.
Music only - I was happy with what I heard when playing music, so the Cinema 50 was the receiver I kept. Plus it looks nicer and has a better remote.

 

[peng]

I have no doubt the Marantz Cinema 50 sounds better to my ears. The sound is less harsh/clinical when playing music. It's defintely a more laid back presentation versus the Denon, which seems to be more 'forward'. The bass impact also appears to be greater. I can feel/hear greater low end grunt.

Whilst I appreciate the products are 99% identical internally, I am assuming there is some extra or different processing/EQ on the Marantz which is providing a different sound signature.

Highly unlikely, if true, there would have been tons of measurements posted to show the differences, there were none.

Other bonuses: Better looking exterior, superior remote. Much better finish to the receiver overall. I think the price difference between the two is insignificant so happier to pay the extra for the Marantz. The X3800H cost me £1000, the Cinema 50 cost me £1250. The latter seems much more premium as a product. The X3800H looks cheaply made (from an exterior perspective).

For such not too significant difference, I would likely prefer the C50 as well, just for the look and better build quality. Happy for you..

 

[yelloguy]

I listened to -17 dB on the receiver if that matters.

The way to do this is by using an SPL meter. I have an app on my phone. I leave it on for a few minutes close to my ear position and let it average the sound level. I prefer music around 75dB avg. In your case, the AVR's were Audyssey calibrated so they should be close if they were both showing -17 volume level. But if they were even 1dB different, you would prefer the louder one.

I also hope you used the mic that came with each receiver for running Audyssey. The mic's in the box are paired with the receiver. Even though they are not calibrated individually, the batches are, and the calibration file is baked into the AVR. So if you used only one mic to calibrate both the AVR's the calibration could be slightly off giving you the sound quality differences you described.

 

[viper900]

The way to do this is by using an SPL meter. I have an app on my phone. I leave it on for a few minutes close to my ear position and let it average the sound level. I prefer music around 75dB avg. In your case, the AVR's were Audyssey calibrated so they should be close if they were both showing -17 volume level. But if they were even 1dB different, you would prefer the louder one.

I also hope you used the mic that came with each receiver for running Audyssey. The mic's in the box are paired with the receiver. Even though they are not calibrated individually, the batches are, and the calibration file is baked into the AVR. So if you used only one mic to calibrate both the AVR's the calibration could be slightly off giving you the sound quality differences you described.

Yes I used the respective mic for each receiver.

Highly unlikely, if true, there would have been tons of measurements posted to show the differences, there were none.



For such not too significant difference, I would likely prefer the C50 as well, just for the look and better build quality. Happy for you..

As I said, all my subjective experience. It just seemed the Marantz was less harsh to my ears. It's also possible my brain could be playing tricks.

I'm happy with the C50 and that is the receiver I decided to keep after my A/B testing.

 

[antcollinet]

Where have you seen the Cinema 50 measured?

Amir's comments on the 3800 have to be taken with a grain of salt. He was disappointed that the SINAD regressed from the prior 3700 (which was excellent and running AKM DACs at the time). However, the absolute SINAD rating of the 3800 still falls in the "inaudible" range! I've had my 3800 for nearly a year and along with Dirac Live, it's the best setup I've had in some time!

Just get the 3800 and wait for Black Friday/Boxing Day for Dirac's annual 30% discount on licenses!

Before going for Dirac, check out Audessey One script from @OCA - using that i'm getting results from Audessey that, for me, are audibly as good as Dirac on my MiniDSP.

 

[Oddball]

The way to do this is by using an SPL meter. I have an app on my phone. I leave it on for a few minutes close to my ear position and let it average the sound level. I prefer music around 75dB avg. In your case, the AVR's were Audyssey calibrated so they should be close if they were both showing -17 volume level. But if they were even 1dB different, you would prefer the louder one.

I also hope you used the mic that came with each receiver for running Audyssey. The mic's in the box are paired with the receiver. Even though they are not calibrated individually, the batches are, and the calibration file is baked into the AVR. So if you used only one mic to calibrate both the AVR's the calibration could be slightly off giving you the sound quality differences you described.

I was not aware of the fact that AVRs had any calibration files. I did hear that batch calibrated Audy mics are checked on “batch” basis so every now and then.

While they appear pretty accurate based on various forum feedback (but have no stats to back that up), they are more or less +\- 2bB accurate, with some lemons on the side.

The ones that they sell separately with Windows app are individually calibrated and their calibration file is indeed shared with the AVR and interface. This should give you +\- 1 dB which might or might not make it worth the $75 or whatever it costs nowadays.