Pioneer VSX-LX505 AVR Review

[jomo]

Anyone know what DACs are in the RZ50/505 or RZ70/805?

The RZ50/505 use a Burr Brown PCM1690 for 8 main channels and BB PCM5101A on the remote channels.

The RZ70/805 uses 2, ESS ES9026PRO for the main channels and BB PCM5101A on the remote channels.

The LX805 is pretty impressive under the hood.

 

[EWL5]

The RZ50/505 use a Burr Brown PCM1690 for 8 main channels and BB PCM5101A on the remote channels.

The RZ70/805 uses 2, ESS ES9026PRO for the main channels and BB PCM5101A on the remote channels.

The LX805 is pretty impressive under the hood.

As I suspected, a comp for my LX701 was the RZ70/805. When I was in the market, these AVRs had very limited availability.

Edit: I just realized the DACs in my old school Denon DVD-3800BDCI Blu-ray player and Pioneer Elite DV-59AVi Universal Player has better DACs than the RZ50/505! They really don't make them like they used to!

 

[BJL]

A friend would like to use the Pioneer VSX-LX505 strictly as a preamplifier in a 5.1 setup. Are there any caveats to using the Pioneer VSX-LX505 as an AV processor ?

thanks

I have used my LX505 as a processor in a 7.1.4 set up and found it works very well. The Dirac license is full range and it works especially well from a laptop or desktop computer. There is a remote app for iPhone (maybe also Android?) that is regularly updated and quite handy. The only limitation that I have noticed is that you can only set one crossover point for any speakers that are bass managed.

It is a good budget priced unit as an AV processor with Dirac. There are more sophisticated options, but they are more expensive.

 

[jomo]

As I suspected, a comp for my LX701 was the RZ70/805. When I was in the market, these AVRs had very limited availability.

Edit: I just realized the DACs in my old school Denon DVD-3800BDCI Blu-ray player has better DACs than the RZ50/505!

The fact of the matter is that you cannot hear the difference of any of these DACs when music is playing. Note that the DAC implementation in the Onkyo/Pioneer is getting the most our of the PCM1690 because Amir's measured SINAD is better than the TI specification for the chip. Pretty close to the AKM chips before the fire.

The only limitation that I have noticed is that you can only set one crossover point for any speakers that are bass managed.

Note that this is a silly limitation for both the Pioneer and Integra versions of the AVR. The Onkyo RZ50 allows separate crossover points.

 

[EWL5]

The fact of the matter is that you cannot hear the difference of any of these DACs when music is playing. Note that the DAC implementation in the Onkyo/Pioneer is getting the most our of the PCM1690 because Amir's measured SINAD is better than the TI specification for the chip. Pretty close to the AKM chips before the fire.


Note that this is a silly limitation for both the Pioneer and Integra versions of the AVR. The Onkyo RZ50 allows separate crossover points.

I'm confused. PCM1690 datasheet shows max 113dB SNR. Did Amir have any measurements overshooting that in his review?

 

[popej]

I'm confused. PCM1690 datasheet shows max 113dB SNR. Did Amir have any measurements overshooting that in his review?

Amir is measuring THD+N, which is specified as -94dB. This DAC is comparable to PCM5102, which is 112dB and -93dB.

 

[EWL5]

Amir is measuring THD+N, which is specified as -94dB. This DAC is comparable to PCM5102, which is 112dB and -93dB.

Thanks for the education! I've been on ASR for nearly a year and I've learned quite a bit about the numbers side of this hobby now!

When a DAC spec sheet reads 0.0005% THD+N, how do you convert that to the dB equivalent?

 

[Golf]

The RZ50/505 use a Burr Brown PCM1690 for 8 main channels and BB PCM5101A on the remote channels.

The RZ70/805 uses 2, ESS ES9026PRO for the main channels and BB PCM5101A on the remote channels.

What’s the best way to find that out anyway, for any given model?

 

[MbphotoX]

so, unless you play your material at +30 dB or something, you cannot ever dream of hearing anything from those DACs?

if SINAD is 90 dB and your hearing threshold is 35 dB or so, you'd need a signal level at 125 dB to hear the noise floor during a quiet passage?
Considering how the average listening level will be around 65-75dB for most (that's -20 to -10dB setting) you cannot possibly hear anything from that DAC?
Or am I completely off here?


With regards to the Dirac limitation (only one crossover can be set)
Why is that such a big issue?
Is it because a lot of people use tiny cheapo Atmos speakers that cannot reach below 120 Hz, but they'd prefer it if they could cross over the fronts and surrounds at 80Hz per spec?
I would just make sure to get Atmos speakers that can play to 70-80 Hz and then I'd be happy with a global crossover of 80 Hz.. after all, if you setup your subwoofers (yes, two, potentially with individual PEQ and phase corrections, like the SVS pro models allow, iirc) correctly, you should get a smooth bass response all the way up to 100 Hz from them.

Having the option to individually adjust crossovers is cool, but does it really add anything to the sound quality?

 

[popej]

if SINAD is 90 dB and your hearing threshold is 35 dB or so, you'd need a signal level at 125 dB to hear the noise floor during a quiet passage?

SINAD is a composite value. It include noise and distortion. Hearing threshold for distortion is mainly determined by masking effect, and is in the range of 40-50dB.The same goes for noise background with active signal. You wont hear noise or distortion 50dB below music.
Other thing is with noise alone, when there is no music. Then you can apply absolute hearing threshold to estimate, what can be heard. The catch is, that without signal there is no distortion and you can't use SINAD value directly. For 90dB SINAD, device noise can be at -100dB or lower. See for example specification of DAC, it has SINAD 93dB but noise alone at -113dB.

 

[jomo]

so, unless you play your material at +30 dB or something, you cannot ever dream of hearing anything from those DACs?

With the "low" spec Burr Brown measuring at -98dBA SINAD and a SNR of -105dBA you won't hear a difference associated with the DAC without leaving your chair.

if SINAD is 90 dB and your hearing threshold is 35 dB or so, you'd need a signal level at 125 dB to hear the noise floor during a quiet passage?

SINAD over 80dB is more a bragging right than audible. The only thing to keep in mind is that there is a train of devices that add to the final SINAD like a DAC, preamp and amp. IMO, if you have electronics with a total SINAD of 80dB, SNR of 100, you are better off spending money on better speakers or room treatments.

With regards to the Dirac limitation (only one crossover can be set)
Why is that such a big issue?

If I had front speakers with deep bass capability, I would set the front frequency lower as compared to the other, smaller speakers. More bass sources should result in more, better distributed bass. This is especially true if you only have a single sub.

 

[MbphotoX]

With the "low" spec Burr Brown measuring at -98dBA SINAD and a SNR of -105dBA you won't hear a difference associated with the DAC without leaving your chair.


SINAD over 80dB is more a bragging right than audible. The only thing to keep in mind is that there is a train of devices that add to the final SINAD like a DAC, preamp and amp. IMO, if you have electronics with a total SINAD of 80dB, SNR of 100, you are better off spending money on better speakers or room treatments.


If I had front speakers with deep bass capability, I would set the front frequency lower as compared to the other, smaller speakers. More bass sources should result in more, better distributed bass. This is especially true if you only have a single sub.

Thanks
That's what I thought. So all the whining about SINAD and noise is really complaining about nothing, since the AVR is literally the only thing that would "contribute" to SINAD.. you have your source that feeds a digital signal (via Hdmi) and the AVR contains DAC, preamp, and amp all in one. (unless there's such a thing as noise via Hdmi, but I highly doubt that?)

With regards to your last part, I can totally relate.
This was my previous setup (haven't measured in months) where you could clearly see that the Sub crossed over at 80Hz had a negative impact:
purple is with Pioneer MCACC and subwoofer active, blue is pure direct mode with subwoofer turned off (yes, my room helps my big speakers a lot, lol) - UMIK-1 with REW

This was my old Pioneer SC-LX57 feeding the front right speaker in pure direct mode (blue line) and the front right crossed-over at 80Hz (purple) obviously, some MCACC magic going on there, too.... For whatever reason, the AVR thought it necessary to increase the treble by 5 dB.

The part that sticked out, though, was the fact that the subwoofer was "in a bad place" and played into a null mode at 50 Hz (at least, that's what I got from this), resulting in the impression of music (e.g. Reggae) being a lot more fun without a subwoofer active. (ok, looking at my speaker alone has you wondering why I even need that subwoofer, I guess..)
Anyways, after moving the Crossover to 50 Hz instead, the bass sounded a lot better, without having to move anything around.

I can see how one might want to have the freedom of being able to individually set crossovers in a case like this.

HOWEVER, in my case, moving the subwoofer already made a lot of a difference. (I will measure the new setup, with the LX505, in a week or so, if I have time)
That's why I said that I don't think it's really necessary. If you have a dedicated space, you don't make compromises. You do the sub crawl, or measure until your ears bleed, until you find the perfect spot for your subwoofer.
Of course, if you have two subwoofers, it becomes even easier. Because you can adjust them individually, correct for phase issues, fill out null modes, etc.

Using the speakers to "support your subwoofer" and "improve the bass response" can be a way to solve issues. But it also means that the speakers themselves will get "stressed" more. If they can handle it, why not?!
Is it necessary? Not so sure..

I mean, I can see how my speakers certainly help the subwoofer..
Don't know if I can activate "LFE + Main" or similar, to have the fronts play full range AND add the sub to that..
I'll just play around with different settings, since my room clearly enables them to play literally full range.

 

[EWL5]

With the "low" spec Burr Brown measuring at -98dBA SINAD and a SNR of -105dBA you won't hear a difference associated with the DAC without leaving your chair.


SINAD over 80dB is more a bragging right than audible. The only thing to keep in mind is that there is a train of devices that add to the final SINAD like a DAC, preamp and amp. IMO, if you have electronics with a total SINAD of 80dB, SNR of 100, you are better off spending money on better speakers or room treatments.


If I had front speakers with deep bass capability, I would set the front frequency lower as compared to the other, smaller speakers. More bass sources should result in more, better distributed bass. This is especially true if you only have a single sub.

Why we chase max SINAD

Over the years, I was able to amass a ton of audiophile audio equipment not because I had "golden ears" but because it was fairly inexpensive w/an employee discount. As you can imagine, I've been quite spoiled w/good hardware that I won't bother listing (they're in my prior posts). Last summer, I was in the market for a new receiver as my Pioneer LX701 was having massive HDMI issues w/the signal cutting in and out. Here is the list of candidates available to me at the time and their DAC specs according to literature and testing:

Pioneer Elite SC-LX701 (old receiver)
Primary DAC: ES9016S, DNR=124, THD+N=-110
Bench test: ???

Onkyo RZ50/Pioneer 505
Primary DAC: PCM1690, DNR=113, THD+N=-94
Bench test: ~97

Denon 4800
Primary DAC: PCM5102A, DNR=112, THD+N=-93
Bench test: ~95

Denon 3800 (current AVR)
Primary DAC: PCM5102A, DNR=112, THD+N=-93
Bench test: ~86!

Although I'm not able to find numbers for how the LX701 measured, even if we take the same delta drop as the 3800, I essentially went from an AVR that was theoretically 103 to 86! The difference in quality is audible despite a 17dB difference! I went w/the low cost leader and paying the price!

Ultimately, the reason why we chase high SINAD is because it gives the manufacturer that much more wiggle room to fall from the stated spec!

 

[antcollinet]

The difference in quality is audible despite a 17dB difference!

Audible? Or inaudible?

 

[EWL5]

Audible? Or inaudible?

Audible. Obviously memory plays a part but the older receiver felt like it eeked out more detail and dynamic range and made movie watching more immersive.

 

[antcollinet]

Audible. Obviously memory plays a part but the older receiver felt like it eeked out more detail and dynamic range and made movie watching more immersive.

It was your phrasing. You said audible despite a big difference. This makes no sense. Audible due to the big difference would make sense.


Having said that - it is quite unlikely you can hear a difference between 103 and 86dB Sinad. Most people, for example, can't hear distortion beyond about -45dB in real world listening tests.

 

[EWL5]

It was your phrasing. You said audible despite a big difference. This makes no sense. Audible due to the big difference would make sense.


Having said that - it is quite unlikely you can hear a difference between 103 and 86dB Sinad. Most people, for example, can't hear distortion beyond about -45dB in real world listening tests.

I didn't say 17dB was a big difference (you did). I quoted jomo who was arguing the same as you (that the dB difference should be inaudible).

FWIW, I sing a bit on the side w/a 2.5 octave range. My hearing should be halfway decent, no?

 

[popej]

My hearing should be halfway decent, no?

Or inhuman?
Please try test 8 v/s 16 bit, it is like SINAD 48dB v/s 96dB: https://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_16vs8bit.php

 

[EWL5]

Or inhuman?
Please try test 8 v/s 16 bit, it is like SINAD 48dB v/s 96dB: https://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_16vs8bit.php

Link not working?

 

[popej]

Link not working?

No idea, works for me on PC and smartphone.