• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Review and Measurements of Marantz AV8805 AV Processor

Sancus

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
476
Likes
964
#41
4. Trinnov, Harman/JBL Synthesis ARCOS
The cost to get access to either of these seems pretty prohibitive, what's the lowest cost option? Altitude16 @ $17000 just for a processor? Pretty insane.
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
25,125
Likes
52,284
Location
Seattle Area
#44

GoMrPickles

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
77
Likes
73
#45
The Marantz AV8805 features premium grade AK4490 32-bit DACs on all channels and XLR input and outputs. There's a balanced XLR stereo input that's assignable as well as 15.2 balanced XLR outputs, which includes the two subwoofer outputs, front height/width outputs and overhead channels. This extensive balanced XLR compatibility ensures high-end performance in the home and the studio, while 15.2 pre-outs (RCA jacks) provide additional compatibility with multiple power amplifier types.
Just FYI. The AV8802A uses the same chip, and probably performs the same. (I bought a used 8802A last year; fortunately, I got a good deal on it.)
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
25,125
Likes
52,284
Location
Seattle Area
#49
In linearity of amplitude response you measured after RoomPerfect EQ and what @mitchco posted.
At the risk of stating the obvious, I am not aware of anyone running any other tests on my system. You can't compare two completely different efforts on different systems. I ran one set of quick tests with RoomPerfect, it sounded good and I stopped there.

That said, I have used REW's automatic parametric EQ system. It generated a much more ideal curve than I could do manually. Yet, it sounded worse than my manual system. So again, you can't go by how good of a curve you get. You must use your ears.
 

cjfrbw

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2018
Messages
396
Likes
387
#50
I use the room correction on my Yamaha mainly to bracket a starting point, then tune by ear. It is very useful for bass management (four subwoofs) and getting the phasing of the various speakers right, but the volumes of each speaker are usually off a bit when judging by ear and need to be adjusted. I have a few layers of volume knobs, including on the subwoofers, so touch ups are quick and easy and don't always require challenging the AV room correction interface beyond the initial setup to get phasing, equalization and volume set. I only use the front channel equalization with digital. The Yamaha has a handy android interface to turn a tablet or phone into a remote control, which is also nice, and allows on-the-fly adjustments of bass, treble, digital enhancer, dialog adjustment, surround modes, inputs etc.
I really like the room equalization features, but they are not a perfect robot, and I am not sure they were intended to be.
 
Last edited:

graz_lag

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 13, 2018
Messages
1,294
Likes
1,409
Location
Le Mans, France
#51
I use the room correction on my Yamaha mainly to bracket a starting point, then tune by ear. It is very useful for bass management (four subwoofs) and getting the phasing of the various speakers right, but the volumes of each speaker are usually off a bit when judging by ear and need to be adjusted. I have a few layers of volume knobs, including on the subwoofers, so touch ups are quick and easy and don't always require challenging the AV room correction interface beyond the initial setup to get phasing, equalization and volume set. I only use the front channel equalization with digital. The Yamaha has a handy android interface to turn a tablet or phone into a remote control, which is also nice, and allows on-the-fly adjustments of bass, treble, digital enhancer, dialog adjustment etc.
I really like the room equalization features, but they are not a perfect robot, and I am not sure they were intended to be.
Indeed, I do the same with my Z7.
 

Krunok

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
4,600
Likes
2,766
Location
Zg, Cro
#52
That said, I have used REW's automatic parametric EQ system. It generated a much more ideal curve than I could do manually. Yet, it sounded worse than my manual system. So again, you can't go by how good of a curve you get. You must use your ears.
I can hardly believe that a more linear response can sound worse unless something else was wrong.
 

pierre

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
209
Likes
220
Location
Switzerland
#53
Where do I find 13.2 content?
I generate them with an up mixer:
Roon -> rme loopback -> reaper -> upmixer (plenty of parameters to play with) -> convolver -> rme -> 5.2.4 (in my case)

verdict: not bad for music, I got used to the surround sound and when i remove it I find stereo lacking ...
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
25,125
Likes
52,284
Location
Seattle Area
#54
I can hardly believe that a more linear response can sound worse unless something else was wrong.
I just provided proof of that already:


System #6 attempts to linearize the frequency response yet it is rate to be worse than doing nothing. System #5 is also barely worse. These are published, controlled tests.
 

Krunok

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
4,600
Likes
2,766
Location
Zg, Cro
#55
I just provided proof of that already:


System #6 attempts to linearize the frequency response yet it is rate to be worse than doing nothing. System #5 is also barely worse. These are published, controlled tests.
Without seeing amplitude responses of those systems it is impossible to comment anything.
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
25,125
Likes
52,284
Location
Seattle Area
#57

Krunok

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
4,600
Likes
2,766
Location
Zg, Cro
#58
Strangely enough, guys from EBU (Tech. 3276 – 2nd edition) think that linear response is important..


2. Technical requirements

2.1. General

The specifications in this Section are the minimum objective requirements for a reference monitor loudspeaker.
However, a loudspeaker which meets these requirements may not necessarily be suitable as a reference
monitor loudspeaker; an evaluation by subjective listening tests is necessary when selecting a type of monitor
loudspeaker for this critical function.
Measurements on loudspeakers are taken in an anechoic chamber or other measurement environment allowing
the loudspeaker to operate at its normal settings under free–field conditions.
The measuring distance is selected taking into account practical conditions such as the size of the loudspeaker
and the characteristics of the measuring room. The measuring distance should be great enough (about
2 m) to ensure that the conditions at the measuring point correspond to the direct sound conditions at the normal
listening distance.
In the specifications which follow, all the sound pressures, voltages etc. are given as RMS values. When
an absolute sound level value is of importance it is given for a reference distance of 1 m.
An accuracy of the order of +0.2 dB should be obtained for the measurement of the electrical parameters.
The measurement inaccuracy caused by imperfect sound field conditions in the anechoic measuring chamber
should be less than +1 dB over the whole response range. It may be appropriate to use a time–windowing
measuring technique in order to achieve this requirement.

2.2. Frequency response
The frequency response curve is measured in 1/3–octave bands, with a pink noise test signal. The measurements
are taken on the main axis (directional angle = 0°). The curve should fall within a tolerance band of
4 dB over the frequency range from 40 Hz to 16 kHz.

Frequency response curves measured at directional angles +10° and +30° should not differ from the
frequency response measured on the main axis (directional angle = 0°) by more than the following permissible
deviations:
+3 dB for directional angles in the range +10°
+4 dB +30°
 

Kal Rubinson

Major Contributor
Industry Insider
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
1,574
Likes
1,763
Location
NYC/CT
#59
I agree it's all about the feature set.
Same here. I have reviewed several other processors in the price range (<$10K) which sound better playing unprocessed analog or digital sources than the AV8805. However, none of them have a comparable array of features and, notably, none of them have been quite so competent or convenient in their use.
 

Kal Rubinson

Major Contributor
Industry Insider
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
1,574
Likes
1,763
Location
NYC/CT
#60
inconsistent results of Audissey: each time I ran Audissey it seems to come to different results, and it was necessary to listen and decide whether I like it or not. Since I was not able to save the current settings for later retrieval it was hard to decide to do another repetition because the new result might be worse than the previous.
If you use the Audyssey app, you can save and re-use multiple Audyssey results.
 
Top Bottom