• 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 Sony STR-ZA1100ES AVR

restorer-john

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
2,358
Likes
3,748
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
#61
There's way too much I don't know, haven't seen, or have documentation on, Sal. But thanks anyway. :)

All the tube/valve era is a mystery to me (I was born in '66) and that is a vastly important hole for a potential audio historian. My special subject is Japanese (and to a lesser extent US and UK) HiFi of the 1970s to the early 2000s and components/electronics/computers in general through that period. That's the era where all my audio acquisitions, restorations and repairs have always been focused, apart from some 60s gear for friends and family. And some current/recent stuff.

When I was in audio retailing, it was the start of the 90s and of course, I kept every brochure, file, price list I could...

Keeping every piece of documentation and brochure/catalogue since, forever, has been a curse because when someone asks or mentions something, I can 'see' the article, review or the specs and have to go find it. Can't help myself.
 

maty

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2017
Messages
1,360
Likes
553
Location
Tarragona (Spain)
#62
Transformer and breathing holes so common in AVR are the first problems to attack. And then try to change the inlet with an RF/EMI Schaffner filter or to build a cable with the filter and an inlet.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ements-of-nord-one-nc500-amp.7704/post-187805

The AVR will be more protected in a piece of furniture with an upper shelf, to which we have pasted underneath a 1 mm galvanized stainless sheet to protect the audio processing circuitry -where audio signals are weak- from RF/EMI atmospheric.
 
Last edited:

Sal1950

Major Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
5,733
Likes
3,220
Location
Central Fl
#63
Casual observance of the internals of the typical AVR makes me think there is usually one hardware design for all the channels,
That's been my experience as well, all channels using the same hardware modules and chips. Probably the cheapest way to do it in the long run.
But there's a whole world of gear out there, too much to make blanket statements.
 

restorer-john

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
2,358
Likes
3,748
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
#64
Casual observance of the internals of the typical AVR makes me think there is usually one hardware design for all the channels, and I wouldn't expect any difference among them.
Pretty much all the channels of high quality modern AVRs are identical. That's a good thing. The easiest way to tell is pop the cover and count the packages and channels, along with the circuitry driving the output stages. Sometimes VA stages in the effects channels can be IC based, where the main channels are discrete.

Often the lower range AVRs economize on silicon, they'll use paralleled output Trs for the main and centre channels and only single Trs for the front effects and rear effects. Better low impedance performance on the mains vs the effects, but same headline numbers.

Back in the day, they used to say the surround channels didn't need the power or the quality in effects speakers. I remember having a heated discussion with the Yamaha National Sales Manager about their choice to use 32K/16bit sampling on DSP effects channels on a range of receivers and DSPs and measly 25W chip amps, when it was clear there was full range, potentially full power in some effects channels. DD had just arrived and it was only about 6 months later when all the front amp channels went to identical powers, then the rears and finally I think they even ran all the effects channels with the same silicon complement.
 

Sal1950

Major Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
5,733
Likes
3,220
Location
Central Fl
#65
All the tube/valve era is a mystery to me (I was born in '66)
Why you young whipper snapper, even Ray's older than that. :p
You need to start studying the RCA Receiving Tube Manual
RCA Manual (2).jpeg
Back in the day, they used to say the surround channels didn't need the power or the quality in effects speakers
Now with 24/96 on 9 channels of both movies and 5.1 multich music recordings, that baloney has gone out the window. Demands are usually lower but you can't make any rules by it.
 

restorer-john

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
2,358
Likes
3,748
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
#66
You need to start studying the RCA Receiving Tube Manual
$1.25 must have been quite a lot for you in 1940, Sal. I looked up the average wage- $0.40 per hour. :p

I'm kidding of course. But I do have my first copy of Towers International Transistor Selector I bought as a boy. Yes, it is full of germanium transistors, and those modern silicon ones...

Anyway, time to get off your lawn I guess? :)
 

Wombat

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
3,875
Likes
2,169
Location
Australia
#67
Back in the mid-70s(last century) a workmate noticed my interest in electronics and said he had something to give me.

It was a copy of the Radiotron Designers Handbook(Fourth Edition).

514eHNRXTRL__SX373_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
514eHNRXTRL__SX373_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg


He was a conscript signalman in the Vietnam war and was glad to be rid of it.

It is 90% on tubes and related components plus all the associated math. I have read it(and applied the knowledge so much)that the binding is falling apart.

You can get it for free, here: http://www.tubebooks.org/Books/RDH4.pdf . All 1538 pages in .pdf.

And, no, I can't transfer the knowledge in a few forum replies. :cool:
 
Last edited:

Sal1950

Major Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
5,733
Likes
3,220
Location
Central Fl
#68
It was a copy of the Radiotron Designers Handbook(Fourth Edition).
A hard cover copy no less. Must have been a rich signalman. LOL
Might even have met him. my company with the 1 Cav was doing security duty for a bunch of radio operators on a mountain top north of Phuoc Vinn in 69-70
image_12.jpg
 

RayDunzl

Major Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
7,065
Likes
3,389
Location
Riverview, FL
#70
Last edited:

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
20,583
Likes
25,363
Location
Seattle Area
#71
Yes, it is full of germanium transistors, and those modern silicon ones...
When I started to learn electronics, I could only afford Germanium transistors! Silicon ones were too expensive and a luxury.

The Germanium transistors were crappy but you could scrape off the paint from them and turn them into photocells!
 

restorer-john

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
2,358
Likes
3,748
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
#73
The Germanium transistors were crappy but you could scrape off the paint from them and turn them into photocells!
I did that too. The OC-7X glass ones (with black paint and white lettering- red blob for collector) with the wafers exposed in the envelope they became very light sensitive.
 

Roen

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 14, 2018
Messages
587
Likes
199
#76
This looks to have the same feature set as the STR-DN1080. Bet its the same unit in a different shell.
That would be the STR-ZA810ES, which I own.

I'm tempted to send the 810ES in as well, to see how a lower tier receiver compares against its big brother.

I wonder what's the audiophile processor to get, one that supports all the of the HT feature sets, but has ASR top-tier DAC for stereo music playback?
 
Joined
Mar 12, 2019
Messages
76
Likes
57
#77
That would be the STR-ZA810ES, which I own.

I'm tempted to send the 810ES in as well, to see how a lower tier receiver compares against its big brother.

I wonder what's the audiophile processor to get, one that supports all the of the HT feature sets, but has ASR top-tier DAC for stereo music playback?
I don't have much hope for audiophile processors - Amir did the flagship marantz ($8000?) and it did quite poorly, i think
 
Joined
May 15, 2019
Messages
47
Likes
20
Location
Columbus, Ohio
#78
Digital input produces the same performance since the DAC is better than the amplifier
@amirm I'm not sure how to interpret this comment--THD+N for amp looks ~7dB worse with digital input vs RCA direct (and ~9dB worse than the pre-out). Almost like coherent summing of the two D+N numbers plus a little extra. Was the digital measurement taken in direct mode as well? I realize this review is a few months old and you may not have that info, but I'd appreciate the info if you have it.

--An aside: Would it be possible to test a DD TrueHD or DTS-HD MA source on one of these receiver reviews, or as a side measurement? Not as a regular measurement but once on a representative AVR (your new Pioneer could work for this purpose). I'm curious how close these units come to LPCM performance with lossless compressed sources.
 
Last edited:

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
20,583
Likes
25,363
Location
Seattle Area
#79
--An aside: Would it be possible to test a DD TrueHD or DTS-HD MA source on one of these receiver reviews, or as a side measurement? Not as a regular measurement but once on a representative AVR (your new Pioneer could work for this purpose). I'm curious how close these units come to LPCM performance with lossless compressed sources.
You mean just to see how lossy codec compares? If so, simply signals we use for testing will not be representative of what they do with read content.
 
Joined
May 15, 2019
Messages
47
Likes
20
Location
Columbus, Ohio
#80
You mean just to see how lossy codec compares? If so, simply signals we use for testing will not be representative of what they do with read content.
Actually I'm more interested in the lossless codecs, and not so much the codec performance (which should be perfect in itself), but the signal processing performance of AVRs when decoding lossless content. I'd like to see what, if any, additional noise and distortion is produced relative to an LPCM stream. When dealing with test tones, a lossless codec should not have the issues a lossy codec might have, correct?

I see two benefits to this information: It would be interesting to me, since some movies offer both an LPCM and a lossless encoded track, and if the AVR performs better with one over the other, I could choose that option. And since lossless codecs are the only way to get access to Atmos or X immersive content, I think it's worthwhile to see how the AVRs are performing.
 
Top Bottom