• 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

trivium

Active Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
169
Likes
48
More food for thought re your question on whether HDAM adds intentional distortions for the intended "marantz sound".

You mentioned you have a PM6006 with THD+N spec: 0.08%. That's at the power amp output, at pre amp output, where HDAM has effects, for sure it would be lower, likely less than 0.005%. It is 0.005% for the SR6014, I expect the PM6006 can do better.

Did you know their flag ship integrated amps were 0.005%, and that's at the power amp output so the pre out's would likely be in the order of 0.001%!!

Those integrated amps have the much higher end HDAMs and are situated in the right place, that is upstream, instead of at the power amp input like they are in the AVRs and AVPs.

At 0.005% distortion/noise level, you can rule out the effects of any "intentionally added distortions", how could it be, if they did add distortions then why would be so low? What would it be if no distortions were added, 0.002%? Can we hear the difference between 0.005% and 0.002%, I guess not.

By trying to answer your question, I am now fully convinced, by logic alone, that while HDAM would in fact add a little bit of THD+N. but no it wouldn't be intentionally done... It adds distortions and noise because that's what electronic amplifiers do, HDAMs are unity gain buffer amp stage so with that extra stage, you get extra distortions and noise. As to why would they do it that way, with the HDAM, I have an idea but I would rather keep it to myself this time.:D May be bigguyca wouldn't mind telling us what he thinks the real reasons may be...;)


Yes i see what you mean that there is no way that distortion is intentional, as than all their higher end models would also carry the same amount of distortion to have that "Marantz" sound. My other point/possibility though was that the HDAM does something desirable (to their ears anyways since they claim to tune by ear) to the signal, but in the process adds distortion aswell shown in the measurements. They talk about the benefits of HDAM in their website which im sure you've read, however many of their claimed benefits are hard to measure without taking the amp apart and spending a ton more time. Noise and a low slew rate for example they claim is one benefit, the SNR of the PM6006 is 102DB which i though was pretty high for its price range. Or here:

"This results in lower noise and an improved slew rate for richer, more dynamic sound that accurately reproduces slight high-frequency details."

The statement from their website above is very subjective; im not sure how one would go about measuring "accurate reproduction" and "dynamic sound". What sounds natural or accurate reproduction of high frequencies to my ears may be different than someone else. Some people like paper cone woofers, others aluminum ,some like silk tweeters others metal.

Source:
https://www.marantz.com/en-gb/blog/...mic-amplifiers-modules-do-for-your-home-audio

I have to believe it was a tradeoff to the marantz engineers/listeners to integrate their HDAM technology at the expense of added distortion since we are arguable dealing with inaudible amount distortion being inadvertently added. If not than i just bought a MSRP $950 CAD amp that performs like a $100 SMSL A18, lol...at least mine has a cool analogue volume pot that uses a motor when you adjust the volume with the remote....its pretty cool :p
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
Yes i see what you mean that there is no way that distortion is intentional, as than all their higher end models would also carry the same amount of distortion to have that "Marantz" sound. My other point/possibility though was that the HDAM does something desirable (to their ears anyways since they claim to tune by ear) to the signal, but in the process adds distortion aswell shown in the measurements. They talk about the benefits of HDAM in their website which im sure you've read, however many of their claimed benefits are hard to measure without taking the amp apart and spending a ton more time. Noise and a low slew rate for example they claim is one benefit, the SNR of the PM6006 is 102DB which i though was pretty high for its price range. Or here:

"This results in lower noise and an improved slew rate for richer, more dynamic sound that accurately reproduces slight high-frequency details."

The statement from their website above is very subjective; im not sure how one would go about measuring "accurate reproduction" and "dynamic sound". What sounds natural or accurate reproduction of high frequencies to my ears may be different than someone else. Some people like paper cone woofers, others aluminum ,some like silk tweeters others metal.

Source:
https://www.marantz.com/en-gb/blog/...mic-amplifiers-modules-do-for-your-home-audio

I have to believe it was a tradeoff to the marantz engineers/listeners to integrate their HDAM technology at the expense of added distortion since we are arguable dealing with inaudible amount distortion being inadvertently added. If not than i just bought a MSRP $950 CAD amp that performs like a $100 SMSL A18, lol...at least mine has a cool analogue volume pot that uses a motor when you adjust the volume with the remote....its pretty cool :p

Yep I read all those marketing talks so many times I got them memorized lol..

There are likely some benefits in having an extra buffer for driving external power amps that have relatively low input impedance, but not the slew rate thing, that's really BS because they put the HDAMs at the end of the preamp /dac path so faster slew rate won't improve on the overall slew rate at the end.

Denon doesn't have them at all, the Slimeline NR series also don't have them either so there is no slew rate to worry about. Keep in mind the HDAMs are an extra stage, in theory, you can bring it to a shop to have them removed if you don't mind voiding the warranty. Another hype debunked by simple logic!! No issue with the way they are used in their integrated amps though.
 

trivium

Active Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
169
Likes
48
Yep I read all those marketing talks so many times I got them memorized lol..

There are likely some benefits in having an extra buffer for driving external power amps that have relatively low input impedance, but not the slew rate thing, that's really BS because they put the HDAMs at the end of the preamp /dac path so faster slew rate won't improve on the overall slew rate at the end.

Denon doesn't have them at all, the Slimeline NR series also don't have them either so there is no slew rate to worry about. Keep in mind the HDAMs are an extra stage, in theory, you can bring it to a shop to have them removed if you don't mind voiding the warranty. Another hype debunked by simple logic!! No issue with the way they are used in their integrated amps though.

Why would you say there is no issue on the integrated amps?, but they cause issues on the AVRs? Well I’m still hoping Amirm is able to test the marrantz PM 6006 since it had such a buzz in the uk. If I lived in the US I would ship mine, from Canada though it doesn’t make sense.
 
Last edited:

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
Why would you say there is no issue on the integrated amps?, but they cause issues on the AVRs? Well I’m still hoping Amirm is able to test the marrantz PM 6006 since it had such a buzz in the uk. If I lived in the US I would ship mine, from Canada though it doesn’t make sense.

I am not sure about the models below the PM8000 series, but I do know the PM8000 has the higher end version HDAM, but more importantly, or logically, the claimed benefits of HDAM such as current feedback, ultra high slew rate would make sense because there seem to be no other active electronic devices other than the DACs and the "must have" parts such as the selectors/switches in the signal chain to drag down the overall performance. Note: I could be wrong, and missed an OP amp or two in the signal path.

In the case of the SR6014, because the HDAM is used as an extra buffer stage, even if its specs are as good as the higher versions in the integrated amps, it cannot logically improved on slew rate as such because even if its so ultra fast that the rate is infinite, the overall performance will still be limited by the upstream preamp/volume control IC. The PM8000 series does not seem have this same issue because the HDAMs there are part of the preamp section that does not have any volume control IC, so you have only the DAC, OPAs and the HDAMs to worry about, so for example, if the slew rate of one of the OPA is the worse, than it would set the performance limit, in terms of slew rate, or if the HDAM is the worse, then it would be the bottleneck. The DAC will not likely be the limiting factor. The block diagram copied from HTHF may help:

AVR-Audio Video Reciever-Build Quality: Part V - HomeTheaterHifi.com

That's typical for a 7 channel device but the logic is the same for two channel. Imagine if you insert a HDAM stage in between the NJU72343 and the power amp, and that's exactly what you have in the SR7014, and even the top dog AV8805.

You can see that even if the HDAM has perfect THD+N, slew rate and whatever, you can see that the overall performance would still be limited by the NJU72750A (, the DAC, or ADC/DAC depending on the input, and the NJU72343, or just the NJU72750A and the NJU72343 ICs for analog input in direct/pure direct mode. I don't know what the slew rate spec is for the NJU72343 volume control IC, but it probably would be comparable to that of an average OPA. For example, the SR6014 seems to have added an OPA, NJM8080G after the HDAM, I believe bigguyca is the one who first found out Marantz (Denon too) had added this extra OPA at the end of the pre out signal chain for the FL/FR channels to some recent models. It is sort of strange that if Marantz really believe in the superior performance of the discrete HDAMs, why would they add the "inferior" OPA at the end, to the most important FL and FR channels?

The specs of that OPA is downloadable:

Dual Audio Operational Amplifier: Low Noise Amplifiers (njr.com)

So it doesn't matter if the HDAM in use is perfect, the SR6014 pre out cannot perform better than the limits of the NJM8080G. In reality, the HDAM, a discrete analog device bound to add some noise and distortions, however negligible it may be. You can ask Marantz until cows come, home, you can expect them to tell you anything different than what they have already told us on their websites. To be fair, other manufacturers do the same, they all have their marketing talks, Denon, Anthem, NAD, Hegel, Yamaha, there is any exception. It is up to us to figure out what to believe and how much to take in.

What I have said about the HDAMs have nothing to do with the detailed specs and performance, I don't have to be an amplifier expert to say those things because it is just by logical deduction. Take a look of bigguyca's comments too.

(1) Marantz SR6014 AVR Review | Page 6 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum
(1) Marantz SR6014 AVR Review | Page 13 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

There are also discussions on the topic on AVSF:
"OFFICIAL" 2020 Denon AVR Owner's Thread + FAQ (Posts 1-8) | Page 200 | AVS Forum




1614090064687.png
 
Last edited:

trivium

Active Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
169
Likes
48
I am not sure about the models below the PM8000 series, but I do know the PM8000 has the higher end version HDAM, but more importantly, or logically, the claimed benefits of HDAM such as current feedback, ultra high slew rate would make sense because there seem to be no other active electronic devices other than the DACs and the "must have" parts such as the selectors/switches in the signal chain to drag down the overall performance. Note: I could be wrong, and missed an OP amp or two in the signal path.

In the case of the SR6014, because the HDAM is used as an extra buffer stage, even if its specs are as good as the higher versions in the integrated amps, it cannot logically improved on slew rate as such because even if its so ultra fast that the rate is infinite, the overall performance will still be limited by the upstream preamp/volume control IC. The PM8000 series does not seem have this same issue because the HDAMs there are part of the preamp section that does not have any volume control IC, so you have only the DAC, OPAs and the HDAMs to worry about, so for example, if the slew rate of one of the OPA is the worse, than it would set the performance limit, in terms of slew rate, or if the HDAM is the worse, then it would be the bottleneck. The DAC will not likely be the limiting factor. The block diagram copied from HTHF may help:

AVR-Audio Video Reciever-Build Quality: Part V - HomeTheaterHifi.com

That's typical for a 7 channel device but the logic is the same for two channel. Imagine if you insert a HDAM stage in between the NJU72343 and the power amp, and that's exactly what you have in the SR7014, and even the top dog AV8805.

You can see that even if the HDAM has perfect THD+N, slew rate and whatever, you can see that the overall performance would still be limited by the NJU72750A (, the DAC, or ADC/DAC depending on the input, and the NJU72343, or just the NJU72750A and the NJU72343 ICs for analog input in direct/pure direct mode. I don't know what the slew rate spec is for the NJU72343 volume control IC, but it probably would be comparable to that of an average OPA. For example, the SR6014 seems to have added an OPA, NJM8080G after the HDAM, I believe bigguyca is the one who first found out Marantz (Denon too) had added this extra OPA at the end of the pre out signal chain for the FL/FR channels to some recent models. It is sort of strange that if Marantz really believe in the superior performance of the discrete HDAMs, why would they add the "inferior" OPA at the end, to the most important FL and FR channels?

The specs of that OPA is downloadable:

Dual Audio Operational Amplifier: Low Noise Amplifiers (njr.com)

So it doesn't matter if the HDAM in use is perfect, the SR6014 pre out cannot perform better than the limits of the NJM8080G. In reality, the HDAM, a discrete analog device bound to add some noise and distortions, however negligible it may be. You can ask Marantz until cows come, home, you can expect them to tell you anything different than what they have already told us on their websites. To be fair, other manufacturers do the same, they all have their marketing talks, Denon, Anthem, NAD, Hegel, Yamaha, there is any exception. It is up to us to figure out what to believe and how much to take in.

What I have said about the HDAMs have nothing to do with the detailed specs and performance, I don't have to be an amplifier expert to say those things because it is just by logical deduction. Take a look of bigguyca's comments too.

(1) Marantz SR6014 AVR Review | Page 6 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum
(1) Marantz SR6014 AVR Review | Page 13 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

There are also discussions on the topic on AVSF:
"OFFICIAL" 2020 Denon AVR Owner's Thread + FAQ (Posts 1-8) | Page 200 | AVS Forum




View attachment 114381
Gotcha, well I venture to guess the PM6006 does not have the same top shelf components as the Pm8000 but I was not able to find any op amps on it. I looked because I was interested in trying to see what op amps were used when I bought it but was surprised to find none. That being said it sounds like marantz is a music first company and they put all the effort and research into their integrated amps. In an effort to stay in the market because 90% of people buy AVRs, they tried to integrate some of their trickle down technology from their flagship integrated amps into the AVRs without a complete redesign but maybe it backfired a bit. So what you are saying is that the AVR's have OP amps aswell as the HDAM chips, so they are basically lying in their website when they mention the HDAM chips replace the OP Amps?

So really buy Denon for AVRs and marantz for integrated?
 
Last edited:

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
So what you are saying is that the AVR's have OP amps aswell as the HDAM chips, so they are basically lying in their website when they mention the HDAM chips replace the OP Amps?

No, I did not say they were lying, I was only saying the better slew rate would not logical improve the overall performance because of the presence of the volume control IC and OP amps in the signal path would then be the limiting factor. If they were to replace all of those ICs with discrete circuits like the HDAMs then it would be possible, logically speaking.

They just emphasized the good and avoiding the underlying limiting factors. For example, if I knew the AV8801 that has those beautiful HDAM modules in them, yet it was not all discrete, but in fact has op amps in (or as they put it, sandwiching them, I would not have bought it. Unfortunately, I did read the review too late.:D It might have been out after my purchase. Sounds great in one of my two channel system with Audyssey on, so I am complaining much. It definitely did not sound any different than my AVR-X4400H that displaced it.

Marantz AV8801 11.2 Surround Sound Processor (SSP) - HomeTheaterHifi.com

When questioned about the OPAs on board, Marantz responded:

"Here is the response from Paul Belanger, Technical Product Manager for Marantz:
“We use a discretely designed circuit in lieu of a standard Op-amp. The HDAM itself is sandwiched between 2 Op-amps in a diamond buffer configuration – the 8801 features 13 of these “discrete” HDAM boards – 1 for each channel. The HDAM SA2 is the circuitry sitting between the OP-Amps and is mainly defining the characteristic of the sound. The OP-Amps might not look best on the data sheet, however in this configuration with the HDAM and current feedback topology it was our choice for a good balance in sound."


Guess what, after being sort of called out by HTHF, they went ahead and replace those OPAs with discrete cct., so the HDAM boards in the newer Marantz AVPs and AVRs now all have OPA free HDAM boards. They doesn't change a lot because it just shift the bottleneck to the ICs/OPAs outside of the HDAM modules.


1614102473013.png


So really buy Denon for AVRs and marantz for integrated?

Not me, I don't like integrated amps, that's why I have only one. For two channel systems I would stick with separates, or an AVR if I want to use Audyssey, or Dirac. I prefer ones and zeros, not something in between.:D

As for choices between M and D, if I had to choose I would likely go with M, because the D costs way too much.
The top D and M integrated amp models cost more or less the same, $7,000 to $8,000, but the $7,000 Denon only gives you 50 W per channel, double down to 100 W into 4 Ohms.

With the Marantz PM10, you get 200/400 W into 8/4 Ohms, and HDAMs included!!:D

SoundStage! Hi-Fi | SoundStageHiFi.com - The Best of the Tokyo International Audio Show 2019


1614103484780.png
 

trivium

Active Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
169
Likes
48
No, I did not say they were lying, I was only saying the better slew rate would not logical improve the overall performance because of the presence of the volume control IC and OP amps in the signal path would then be the limiting factor. If they were to replace all of those ICs with discrete circuits like the HDAMs then it would be possible, logically speaking.

They just emphasized the good and avoiding the underlying limiting factors. For example, if I knew the AV8801 that has those beautiful HDAM modules in them, yet it was not all discrete, but in fact has op amps in (or as they put it, sandwiching them, I would not have bought it. Unfortunately, I did read the review too late.:D It might have been out after my purchase. Sounds great in one of my two channel system with Audyssey on, so I am complaining much. It definitely did not sound any different than my AVR-X4400H that displaced it.

Marantz AV8801 11.2 Surround Sound Processor (SSP) - HomeTheaterHifi.com

When questioned about the OPAs on board, Marantz responded:

"Here is the response from Paul Belanger, Technical Product Manager for Marantz:
“We use a discretely designed circuit in lieu of a standard Op-amp. The HDAM itself is sandwiched between 2 Op-amps in a diamond buffer configuration – the 8801 features 13 of these “discrete” HDAM boards – 1 for each channel. The HDAM SA2 is the circuitry sitting between the OP-Amps and is mainly defining the characteristic of the sound. The OP-Amps might not look best on the data sheet, however in this configuration with the HDAM and current feedback topology it was our choice for a good balance in sound."


Guess what, after being sort of called out by HTHF, they went ahead and replace those OPAs with discrete cct., so the HDAM boards in the newer Marantz AVPs and AVRs now all have OPA free HDAM boards. They doesn't change a lot because it just shift the bottleneck to the ICs/OPAs outside of the HDAM modules.


View attachment 114410



Not me, I don't like integrated amps, that's why I have only one. For two channel systems I would stick with separates, or an AVR if I want to use Audyssey, or Dirac. I prefer ones and zeros, not something in between.:D

As for choices between M and D, if I had to choose I would likely go with M, because the D costs way too much.
The top D and M integrated amp models cost more or less the same, $7,000 to $8,000, but the $7,000 Denon only gives you 50 W per channel, double down to 100 W into 4 Ohms.

With the Marantz PM10, you get 200/400 W into 8/4 Ohms, and HDAMs included!!:D

SoundStage! Hi-Fi | SoundStageHiFi.com - The Best of the Tokyo International Audio Show 2019


View attachment 114412

I don’t factor in using room correction and bass management with the AVR because I use a laptop as a pre-amp/DSP using REW as I like having the extra control and visibility. Who knows what the AVR's room correction is doing to your sound. Obviously for those that don’t want to dedicate a laptop or intel atom with windows to their listening space that wouldn’t apply. I feel that buying an AVR to just use two channels and none of the codecs and software is a waste of money and sacrifices quality of those two channels.

That said there is probably no audible difference between an AVR and integrated amp or power amp at safe listening levels. My mind though plays tricks on me and tells me its supposed to sound better lol so that’s another reason why I went integrated. The brain can be very powerful in our perception.

“It definitely did not sound any different than my AVR-X4400H that displaced it.”

So basically everything here is based purely on the measurements and graphs because there was no audible difference?
 
Last edited:

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
I don’t factor in using room correction and bass management with the AVR because I use a laptop as a pre-amp/DSP using REW as I like having the extra control and visibility. Who knows what the AVR's room correction is doing to your sound. Obviously for those that don’t want to dedicate a laptop or intel atom with windows to their listening space that wouldn’t apply. I feel that buying an AVR to just use two channels and none of the codecs and software is a waste of money and sacrifices quality of those two channels.

That said there is probably no audible difference between an AVR and integrated amp or power amp at safe listening levels. My mind though plays tricks on me and tells me its supposed to sound better lol so that’s another reason why I went integrated. The brain can be very powerful in our perception.

“It definitely did not sound any different than my AVR-X4400H that displaced it.”

So basically everything here is based purely on the measurements and graphs because there was no audible difference?

Not at all, it was based on cost, C$4,500 less at the time!! I haven't even seen the measurements at the time. Fool me once is enough! There is no way I can hear a difference watching movies.

I only use the AV8801 in one of my two channel system because I wanted to try Audyessy in the two channel system where I had also tried Dirac Live (trial version). It obviously improves the bass but I have to use my REW graphs to figure out the JRiver PEQ filters I need to EQ the mid and high frequencies.

If someone would pay me $300+shipping I would probably sell it as I have more than enough preamps anyway.
 

trivium

Active Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
169
Likes
48
Found an interesting blind test looking to see if we can detect noise at varying DB's. At the 72DB setting i cant tell the difference. Not sure what this means as far as SINAD but i would think that past a certain point we cant hear the difference so there is no point in throwing money into something to get high SINAD values.

https://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_dynamic.php?dyna=72
 

trivium

Active Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
169
Likes
48
Hello everyone, I'm going to buy myself a Marantz SR5104 https://downhomedigital.net/receivers/home-theater-receivers-under-1000/ here they described the pros and cons and it suits me, here I saw your review, it is more detailed, I would like to know from you 6104 is something different from the 5104 except that it supports the 9.2 system?
I would suspect not, the measurements would definitely not be better than the 6014. Your Choices are either to base your purchasing decision on science based reviews here or listening/usage based reviews, if the former than the measurements dont measure very well compared to Denon for example. That said all the reviews i've read were glowing including my own experience, although i admit i dont own the 6014 but the PM6006 which is their entry level integrated amp.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
Found an interesting blind test looking to see if we can detect noise at varying DB's. At the 72DB setting i cant tell the difference. Not sure what this means as far as SINAD but i would think that past a certain point we cant hear the difference so there is no point in throwing money into something to get high SINAD values.

https://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_dynamic.php?dyna=72

Thank you for the link. I don't know how accurate those tests are, but in terms being comprehensive/variety, it is the best I have seen.
 

trivium

Active Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
169
Likes
48
Thank you for the link. I don't know how accurate those tests are, but in terms being comprehensive/variety, it is the best I have seen.
Just made me realize that I need cyber enhanced hearing at 29 so I can spend more on audio equipment :p
 

Dimifoot

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Messages
506
Likes
746
Location
Greece

trivium

Active Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
169
Likes
48
That’s impressive, what did you use to test it? I used my Hifiman 400i headphones, I figured they were revealing enough. So perhaps some people can actually hear a difference, I guess I can’t. On the plus side i guess that means I can save a lot of money on audio equipment. If you used speakers that’s even more impressive, headphones are more revealing for small differences I find. They also eliminate room noise which would make it a lot harder to detect I imagine.
 

Dimifoot

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Messages
506
Likes
746
Location
Greece

ah-ra

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2021
Messages
48
Likes
51
Location
Germany
Hi there, I've been reading back and forth through the different tests of Marantz and Denon AVRs to check whether l can learn anything for my setup, but I'm not sure...
I am using a NR1710 as preamp with two IOTAVX PA3 power amps (each bridged with approx 180W into 4 ohms). I went back to an AVR because it didn't sound any worse than a pure 2ch amp (had PM6006 and PM8004) and I love what Audyssey can do, especially when you want to integrate subs.
So the NR1710 doesn't have these HDAM parts in the signal path and my PA3 should have input sensitivity of only, 200mV as per spec sheet
If I only drive 2ch and use 2 subs with x-over at 80hz should l experience a degrading on sound due to the test results of the Marantz/Denon AVRs?
In 2 ch Mode I'm not using any of the internal amps and even the power amps should not really have to deliver mich power due to the use of two subs...
After calibration the input sensitivity of front l/r is at -10.5db, Sub at -9db and normal listing level is at -30db.... Should there be any "problems" with noise, dynamics and/or distortion (based on measurements of e.g.the sr6014)....?
Actually I'm more than happy with the sound for 2ch and Cinema (4.2), but would like to know if something could be improved in this setup...
 

trivium

Active Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
169
Likes
48
Hi there, I've been reading back and forth through the different tests of Marantz and Denon AVRs to check whether l can learn anything for my setup, but I'm not sure...
I am using a NR1710 as preamp with two IOTAVX PA3 power amps (each bridged with approx 180W into 4 ohms). I went back to an AVR because it didn't sound any worse than a pure 2ch amp (had PM6006 and PM8004) and I love what Audyssey can do, especially when you want to integrate subs.
So the NR1710 doesn't have these HDAM parts in the signal path and my PA3 should have input sensitivity of only, 200mV as per spec sheet
If I only drive 2ch and use 2 subs with x-over at 80hz should l experience a degrading on sound due to the test results of the Marantz/Denon AVRs?
In 2 ch Mode I'm not using any of the internal amps and even the power amps should not really have to deliver mich power due to the use of two subs...
After calibration the input sensitivity of front l/r is at -10.5db, Sub at -9db and normal listing level is at -30db.... Should there be any "problems" with noise, dynamics and/or distortion (based on measurements of e.g.the sr6014)....?
Actually I'm more than happy with the sound for 2ch and Cinema (4.2), but would like to know if something could be improved in this setup...

Not unless you have superhuman hearing like Dimifoot, i think alot of the measurements are on here for 99% of people wont be audible. The measurements are certainly educational and fun though and they also provide a way to measure performance so that we can check here before we purchase something. Even if the 99% cant hear a difference i still doesnt make sense to spend thousands more on a product that performs worse on paper. Nothing about Marantz im just generalizing.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,168
should l experience a degrading on sound due to the test results of the Marantz/Denon AVRs?
In 2 ch Mode I'm not using any of the internal amps and even the power amps should not really have to deliver mich power due to the use of two subs...

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.:D Until, I am going to assume you are in great shape the way you are using the NR1710.

For further 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.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom