Thanks! Yeah, that's what I thought as well...
-
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 SR6014 AVR Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Thanks! I'd send my 1710 for testing, but it's neither ecological nor economical to ship it from Germany.... but I'd be really interested in the results.I can tell you the difference in test results for the Marantz/Denon preamp/DAC would likely be minimal if the Marantz he measured was the HDAM-less NR model. It is just an educated guess because on the fact that the audio signal chain would be near identical (no HDAMs). If we were to know for sure, someone would have to send a NR model to Amir for test.Until, I am going to assume you are in great shape the way you are using the NR1710.
For for improvements, I don't know anything about bridging two of those amps, so it may or may not result in audible improvements if you replace them with power amps measured SINAD>85 to 90 dB from say 100 mW to rated output, depending on other factors.
What about Marantz 6015? Also not recommended? I could buy Denon x3700h (cheeper, normal front display) but Marantz has 7.1 RCA input which I need for my SACD player at the moment. Both have DSD via HDMI which may be useful for me.
Last edited:
If you believe there are audible benefits of using the 7.1 RCA inputs then the X3700H obviously can't satisfy you. My players, including the Oppo BDP-105 can use the 7.1 inputs too but I never bothered because there really is no benefits and you lose the ability/convenience of using Audyssey.
Regarding DSD via HDMI, as I mentioned before, yes it will play but when it shows DSD mult in, 88.2 kHz, it tells me it cannot decode natively and therefore convert it to PCM. I don't find it an audible issue though when I tried both native and converted using my separate devices.
If you play DSD files on an USB drive or from your network music server the Denon would show DSD direct and the correct sample rate such as 2.8 or 5.6 MHz, but that's the limit. It cannot play DSD files at higher sample rate such as 11.2 MHz (Yamaha's can).
I'm still more disc preferable so files are less important.
7.1 RCA needed only for my old Denon player. It has HDMI 1.1 but this version doesn't support SACD 5.1. Of course I am considering buying a new sacd or combo player eg.Pioneer LX500, and then HDMI in Denon/Marantz should be enough maybe.
So Denon x3700h or Marantz sr6015 plays music better? Some of you have them or heard them.
Okay, so you have no choice and I know the feeling because I have a SACD capable Denon DVD-3910 that if I remember right, cannot play SACD via HDMI at all, it would only play the CD layer. That expensive thing (paid much more than I paid for the Oppos) is still hooked up but haven't got use for a few years now. Unless you have to flag ship Denon universal player such as the 5910, then yes the X3700H and SR6015 should be better especially the X3700H that measured much better than the SR7015 and the AV7705.
You know he has already measured the SR6014 right? There is no reason to believe the SR6015 would do much different on the bench, I would expect the results to be within a couple dB, + or -.
I thought there may be bigger progress. Maranzt was said to be more musical than Denon.
7.1 RCA input is all I need more in x3600h or x3700h...
Again, if you need 7.1 ext in then it makes things simple, Marantz is your friend!
As far as what people say about more musical than Denon, that's subjective, and in this case even imaginary, not based in science. Just compare their specs, circuitry, parts list, and test results and you won't find one shred of evidence to support such claim. There is one condition under which Marantz has a slight gradual drop from about 10 kHz and down by about 2 dB by the time it reaches 20,000 Hz. You need almost perfect hearing to hear the difference, and that applies to 44.1 and 48 kHz mainly. In analog there is no difference except Marantz added the HDAMs that might have been the reason for the higher distortions+noise. For test results comparison there are 3 2020 Denon and 1 Marantz (the SR7015) measured so far.
The SR6015 should measure about the same as the SR6014 and SR7015, there is no reason to expect the SR6015 could do better.
Flying_truck
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2021
- Messages
- 2
- Likes
- 1
Hey everyone, I just joined this forum and I don’t claim to understand all the measurements but am trying to learn. I do have one quick question on my current set up tho. I have a Marantz SR6012 and I have the input from my chrome cast audio connected the CD analog input and then the front speaker pre outs go to an external amplifier. So when I set the marantz to be in “pure direct” mode does it pass through the input signal to the pre out without adding any additional distortion?
Welcome Aboard @Flying_truck.
Flying_truck
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2021
- Messages
- 2
- Likes
- 1
thank you!
I see again a lot about HDAM from Marantz. I don't think it will add anything to the quality of sound. It is impossible to improve a signal which is comming from a digital to analog converter which has opamps technologie in it. And for analog well you only allow dynamic compression to the orignal sound with a record. Maybe if you have the original tape recordings than maybe there can be a difference. An opamp has the shortest signal path. Also remember the worst part will be the distortion a speaker will add to it. To produce a clear true sound you need a feedback system which measures the actual sound from the speaker and than alters the input signal between pre and end amplifier. And that is exactly what is done when setting up a receiver. Actually marantz sounds different because of the usage of some different digital components. You only think it is HDAM you hear.
I wish we were provided w/ 2 Conclusions for these tests, one for high level volumes [like we’re currently given] and one for normal listening levels like the majority of us use. For instance, this 6014 that receives a “Cant Recommend” based on reference level results has basically the same SINAD as Denon 3700 & 4700 at normal volumes. We were provided a chart to see what the 6014’s SINAD looks like at normal volumes [see below], so we can at least deduce for ourselves, but many of the other AVR tests didn’t offer such graph, so we have no idea how they actually perform at normal levels.
So as you can see above, the 6014 is being judged on a volume of 82.5 on the knob, which would destroy most of our ears for those of us who don’t have large theaters. In my living room I couldn’t get the knob above 72, and in my 12x14 home theater I’m in the mid to high 60’s at max listening volume, which is LOUD…. and mid 60’s to 73.5 is where the 6014 performs the best, which you can see on the chart [96-97 SINAD].
Compare it to the Denon 3600:
We’re getting 103 SINAD… at a volume of 85, which basically none of us will ever touch. Scale back to normal levels and we’re at the same SINAD as the 6014. Incidentally, I use an Outlaw 2200 for my center which has a sensitivity of 1.7 and my center has never come close to clipping.
With the way in which these AVRs are bashed, one might think they’re nothing but distortion machines, but I had a friend over who has a simple entry level HT and I sampled my 6014/Dynaudio setup for him… and he was thoroughly impressed by the level of clarity.
So as you can see above, the 6014 is being judged on a volume of 82.5 on the knob, which would destroy most of our ears for those of us who don’t have large theaters. In my living room I couldn’t get the knob above 72, and in my 12x14 home theater I’m in the mid to high 60’s at max listening volume, which is LOUD…. and mid 60’s to 73.5 is where the 6014 performs the best, which you can see on the chart [96-97 SINAD].
Compare it to the Denon 3600:
We’re getting 103 SINAD… at a volume of 85, which basically none of us will ever touch. Scale back to normal levels and we’re at the same SINAD as the 6014. Incidentally, I use an Outlaw 2200 for my center which has a sensitivity of 1.7 and my center has never come close to clipping.
With the way in which these AVRs are bashed, one might think they’re nothing but distortion machines, but I had a friend over who has a simple entry level HT and I sampled my 6014/Dynaudio setup for him… and he was thoroughly impressed by the level of clarity.
If I understand correctly, HDAM is a Marantz gain module which uses all discrete components.
The advantage of using discrete parts instead of monolithic ICs is that with discrete parts you can have more accurate resistor and capacitor values, closer to the design values; it is also possible to select and closely match the semiconductor devices used. This CAN result in higher linearity prior to the application of negative feedback, and there are some advantages to this. Using large amounts of feedback to overcome some inherent shortcomings of monolithic op-amps isn't without consequence. Can you actually hear the difference? I think it depends on the engineer who is doing the design, and the engineering process and standards that are applied. I've seen some very sloppy designs using ICs in circuits that are designed and built to a price. And I've seen designs with discrete parts that seem to promote the marketing idea that a gain stage with discrete parts is ALWAYS better than one using ICs.
The advantage of using discrete parts instead of monolithic ICs is that with discrete parts you can have more accurate resistor and capacitor values, closer to the design values; it is also possible to select and closely match the semiconductor devices used. This CAN result in higher linearity prior to the application of negative feedback, and there are some advantages to this. Using large amounts of feedback to overcome some inherent shortcomings of monolithic op-amps isn't without consequence. Can you actually hear the difference? I think it depends on the engineer who is doing the design, and the engineering process and standards that are applied. I've seen some very sloppy designs using ICs in circuits that are designed and built to a price. And I've seen designs with discrete parts that seem to promote the marketing idea that a gain stage with discrete parts is ALWAYS better than one using ICs.
You and I have had a lengthy discussion on this before. I am in general agreement, that in many real world applications, the SINAD of the Marantz versions are just as good. However, one should keep in mind that even for those who don't crank the volume up near 80, the output voltage could still shoot pass 1.5 V during peaks depending on the source contents, the level settings, Audyssey boost etc., even when digital inputs are used. If analog inputs are used, it would also depend on the output level of the analog device. In order to have a comfortable margin, 2 V does seem like a reasonable level. That's just in general, as you said in your case probably even 1.2 V is plenty.
Last edited:
Agreed there could be advantages of using discrete parts vs ICs, but have you considered the fact that the HDAMs in the Marantz SR6014 are situated at the end of the preamp signal path, and is seemingly as an extra buffer stage for the preamp output? Given that fact, even if the HDAM module is a perfect buffer (not really a gain module because it has a gain of 1, so called unity gain), the preamp/dac's overall performance will still be limited by the preceding parts (the weakest one) such as the DAC, switches, volume control and opamp ICs right? This extra buffer stage might actually add distortions and noise, hopefully the effects are totally insignificant though. HDAM may be of value as claimed by Marantz, in their integrated amps where they may be located upstream of the signal path, and used in place of IC opamps, but not as an extra buffer stage at the end of the preamp/DAC signal path as shown in the schematics of the SR6014.
Still, HDAMs in the SR6014 may potentially help in preserving the signal quality at higher output level, when matched with power amps that have relatively lower input impedance.
Edit: Just remember something, for some reason Marantz has added an opamp after the HDAM for the FL and FR channels only, so the HDAM is now effectively sandwiched between the volume control and the opamp and the opamp becomes the final stage at the end of the preamp signal path. The SR6012 does not have that opamp at the end of the signal path, not sure about the SR6013.
Last edited:
I don't think Marantz is doing anything useful except marketing with their HDAMs here. I was not commenting on Marantz' use of discrete component opamps in my post- I was making a general comment to the effect that when used correctly and for the right purposes, there are reasons to use discrete component gain stages. I don't think they are helping sound quality in the Marantz unit here.
Maybe Marantz had a big pile of HDAMs in the warehouse and needed to find places to use them.....
Maybe Marantz had a big pile of HDAMs in the warehouse and needed to find places to use them.....
I can asure you that the Marantz equipment are marketing driven. Just to attract people who don't like the Denon design and need something to talk about which is not that technically. Why is it the best yes because of HDAM. hmm just purcahges a Denon which is spending more money on the quality part and less on the unnacessary urban touch. I am not really attracted to a watch sized display on big receiver and hide a nice display. But many are so that is good for Marantz.
Similar threads
