That's a million dollar debate if one hears any difference in DACs and it is my personal experience that ESS sounds different to my ears when I compared it with Cirrus Logic. Again it is my personal experience. Is it a placebo effect or mind play? I do not know .You don't hear any advantage of the ESS DAC though. YPAO with RCS is still crap as is does not correct well in the Bass region.
don't think you'll be disappointed.I always liked the build and sound quality of the Yammies... but my search for a decent RoomEQ has taken me elsewhere... Audyssey up till now (unsatisfyingly) - and now I am keen to try Dirac.
Maybe “prefer” isn’t an accurate wording choice. The implementation of Audyssey via the Denon and the phone app gives an amazing amount of control once completed to fine tune based on REW values taken after the fact. So does Yamaha’s parametric EQ. I haven’t used the NAD, Adcom or Onkyo but the two former appear to have had implementation difficulties. Additionally, from watching DIRAC videos, it appears you can send preferred target curves to your device, but as anyone knows the target isn’t exactly what you’ll get, so editing the results are paramount, yet the videos I’ve seen don’t seem to allow it. This could just be terrible directions on those two products DIRAC implementation but I’ve stayed far away from their products exactly because of what appears to be the inability to minutely adjust the final DIRAC EQ.Why do you prefer Audyssey over Dirac?
First proviso - I have yet to get my long awaited, pre-ordered Dirac capable AVR...Maybe “prefer” isn’t an accurate wording choice. The implementation of Audyssey via the Denon and the phone app gives an amazing amount of control once completed to fine tune based on REW values taken after the fact. So does Yamaha’s parametric EQ. I haven’t used the NAD, Adcom or Onkyo but the two former appear to have had implementation difficulties. Additionally, from watching DIRAC videos, it appears you can send preferred target curves to your device, but as anyone knows the target isn’t exactly what you’ll get, so editing the results are paramount, yet the videos I’ve seen don’t seem to allow it. This could just be terrible directions on those two products DIRAC implementation but I’ve stayed far away from their products exactly because of what appears to be the inability to minutely adjust the final DIRAC EQ.
If this is a DIRAC issue and manufacturers are forced to implement it this way, then I will say I prefer Audyssey and YPAO to DIRAC. If it’s the manufacturers implementation then I await a better implementation. If it’s terrible marketing on their websites and YouTube videos that don’t show these final calibration options, then I’ll also stay away from these manufacturers because for me a product encompasses everything, and customer service, instructions, return policies are all part of my purchase decision. If they suck at writing instructions they probably suck at creating firmware updates, as I’ve been burned by Anthem in the past and watched the horror stories of the Adcom users.
There is probably more crap above 2k. I would take a 3700 over multiple products that are double the cost.Denon X3700H. I prefer Audyssey over DIRAC.
But that's about it. Amazing how much crap is out in the 9.2 AVR category in, especially under $2k.
Maybe “prefer” isn’t an accurate wording choice. The implementation of Audyssey via the Denon and the phone app gives an amazing amount of control once completed to fine tune based on REW values taken after the fact. So does Yamaha’s parametric EQ. I haven’t used the NAD, Adcom or Onkyo but the two former appear to have had implementation difficulties. Additionally, from watching DIRAC videos, it appears you can send preferred target curves to your device, but as anyone knows the target isn’t exactly what you’ll get, so editing the results are paramount, yet the videos I’ve seen don’t seem to allow it. This could just be terrible directions on those two products DIRAC implementation but I’ve stayed far away from their products exactly because of what appears to be the inability to minutely adjust the final DIRAC EQ.
The new windows app does let you tweak more. You also can adjust the frequency range ..which for my room makes all the difference. I keep it under 500hz or less. Makes music sound good.Audyssey also doesn't let you tweak much beyond just changing the target curve, which may or may not give you want. I don't think it's any different to Dirac and Arc in that respect, and the main difference is the interface for changing the target curve.
That said, what else do you need? If after setting a target curve something was not corrected, it is probably because the algorithm decided it isn't beneficial to try to correct it. Do we really want to mess with these kinds of things? And again it seems to be common to all 3 systems.
The new windows app does let you tweak more. You also can adjust the frequency range ..which for my room makes all the difference. I keep it under 500hz or less. Makes music sound good.
In Dirac this is called the "curtain" - but yes it has the same abilityThe new windows app does let you tweak more. You also can adjust the frequency range ..which for my room makes all the difference. I keep it under 500hz or less. Makes music sound good.
You keep saying "Adcom" but do you mean "Arcam"?the horror stories of the Adcom users.
Mid 90’s or better SINAD is fine for me, mid 70’s is unacceptable at the price point we’re discussing.
Having had an Anthem/ARC, unless it has changed, you are correct. However, Yamaha let’s you get into the weeds and manually fine tune the result. With ARC I looked at their target curve and measured with REW before and after. While better after, it wasn’t close to the target curve - I mean “not even close”. Obviously I haven’t tested DIRAC, but because rooms are so different I doubt any system matches the intended curve, so why not build in a parametric EQ to allow changes. Yamaha does, so even though YPAO isn’t great, I can make it great.Audyssey also doesn't let you tweak much beyond just changing the target curve, which may or may not give you want. I don't think it's any different to Dirac and Arc in that respect, and the main difference is the interface for changing the target curve.
That said, what else do you need? If after setting a target curve something was not corrected, it is probably because the algorithm decided it isn't beneficial to try to correct it. Do we really want to mess with these kinds of things? And again it seems to be common to all 3 systems.
Yes I did see but as Gene has mentioned - it is not audible and clearly recommends to not consider this -23dB distortion as the one to reduce sonic clarity.
I have driven the front LR channels to high levels and atleast I am unable to hear any sign of distortion. I do not even know if Yamaha has rectified it as I just purchased it 2 weeks ago. On the other hand, I have to admit I do not even know how distorted sound sounds like . I know how a damaged speakers produces a distorted sound but I have never heard or experienced a distortion produced by a AVP.
Here is what Gene says "While 23dB sounds like a really big number, it's important to note that the overall distortion level is still quite low for the CX-A5200 model and below the threshold of audibility in my testing. While I'm not happy about this result, as it certainly is NOT State-of-the-Art (SOTA), it never diminished my enjoyment of this product even during my critical listening sessions."
Having had an Anthem/ARC, unless it has changed, you are correct. However, Yamaha let’s you get into the weeds and manually fine tune the result. With ARC I looked at their target curve and measured with REW before and after. While better after, it wasn’t close to the target curve - I mean “not even close”. Obviously I haven’t tested DIRAC, but because rooms are so different I doubt any system matches the intended curve, so why not build in a parametric EQ to allow changes. Yamaha does, so even though YPAO isn’t great, I can make it great.
Why do you prefer Audyssey over Dirac?
Because I start with the automatic PEQ and then run REW to see the current result. YPAO seems to subdue the bass response under 500 hz, but does a very good job over 500 hz. My Yamaha has a copy option, so I just take the YPAO measurement, copy it, and adjust the bass region until my REW results match my target curve.Why do you think that a limited PEQ can match your target in a room better than a automatic approach with much higher resolution correction that does spatial averaging?