Review and Measurements of Yamaha RX-A1080 AVR

[3dbinCanada]

I'm thinking it wouldn't be a pretty sight seeing the pink panther in pieces.

https://www.audioholics.com/av-preamp-processor-reviews/yamaha-cx-a5200-mx-a5200/conclusion reports a massive increase in noise in the balanced output when compared to unbalanced output.

Then quotes:

Yamaha confirmed my measurements and discovered the culprit to this increased distortion had something to do with how the volume control IC interacts with the XLR outputs. This is something they plan to resolve in future models but cannot make a hardware change to this current model.

Amir would rightly be disgusted it was put into production and worse still not recalled and fixed. Waiting for the next model to be addressed is disgraceful. I can't help feeling disappointed purchasers are being treated with contempt.

Having said that, if you can cope with unbalanced outputs it could be a worthwhile contender.

Interestingly it seems Surround:AI is best not be used with stereo music but is worthwhile with movies.

XLR outputs are only beneficial in a noisy EMI environment or for long interconnects. Other than that, there is no audible difference between XLR and unbalanced.

 

[Dj7675]

XLR outputs are only beneficial in a noisy EMI environment or for long interconnects. Other than that, there is no audible difference between XLR and unbalanced.

But... someone purchasing this unit is expecting their performance to be as good or better than the single ended connections. We aren’t talking about performance being about the same in this case. We are talking about a -23db hit on performance... taking it down to the level of poor performing AVRs. And customers thinking they are getting great performance. Yamaha’s response was completely wrong. When I was shopping for an AVR or Processor this unit was on my list. It quickly got crossed off after reading that.

 

[3dbinCanada]

But... someone purchasing this unit is expecting their performance to be as good or better than the single ended connections. We aren’t talking about performance being about the same in this case. We are talking about a -23db hit on performance... taking it down to the level of poor performing AVRs. And customers thinking they are getting great performance. Yamaha’s response was completely wrong. When I was shopping for an AVR or Processor this unit was on my list. It quickly got crossed off after reading that.

Agreed. My comment was made based on " if you could live with unbalanced outputs" which sends the wrong message that XLR is audibly better than unbalanced which it is NOT except when in noisy environments.

 

[Dj7675]

Agreed. My comment was made based on " if you could live with unbalanced outputs" which sends the wrong message that XLR is audibly better than unbalanced which it is NOT except when in noisy environments.

There seems to be quite a bit of gear that xlr test better. Not always, but more times than not it performs better. So in some cases this better performance could be audible in some circumstances. And you get the benefit of protection agains noise/hum.

 

[pedrob]

But... someone purchasing this unit is expecting their performance to be as good or better than the single ended connections. We aren’t talking about performance being about the same in this case. We are talking about a -23db hit on performance... taking it down to the level of poor performing AVRs. And customers thinking they are getting great performance. Yamaha’s response was completely wrong. When I was shopping for an AVR or Processor this unit was on my list. It quickly got crossed off after reading that.

I totally agree and I'm in the same position. If I only go for recommended at https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?pages/Audio_Equipment_Reviews/, the list is rather short. Although not everything has been tested.

Yet other reviews often rave about failed AVRs. So that's confusing.

I'm only after a pre/pro but AVRs are acceptable. Any considerations for a 5.2.4 setup would be appreciated. Without spending more than a top Denon, my criteria is best sound that might approach 2 channel reproduction. With current surround processing it is probably impossible. (I'd rather not turn direct on and off as it seems to mess with Audyssey).

 

[Dj7675]

I totally agree and I'm in the same position. If I only go for recommended at https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?pages/Audio_Equipment_Reviews/, the list is rather short. Although not everything has been tested.

Yet other reviews often rave about failed AVRs. So that's confusing.

I'm only after a pre/pro but AVRs are acceptable. Any considerations for a 5.2.4 setup would be appreciated. Without spending more than a top Denon, my criteria is best sound that might approach 2 channel reproduction. With current surround processing it is probably impossible. (I'd rather not turn direct on and off as it seems to mess with Audyssey).

As you have gathered from reviews so far, you aren’t going to get to the top tier DACs with an AVR or pre/pro. Makes it harder if trying to do one system and want the best performance possible. But performance can still be quite good in my opinion. SINAD gets close to 100 with a Denon x3600/3700. If you want better/more power you can add something like a monolith amp or hypex based amp and run the AVR in full preamp mode. Audyssey is very good, in particular in the bass region where it is needed most. Just be sure to get the app so you can tweak the room curve and limit correction to the lower frequencies to see what you prefer.
And when you refer to other reviews... many ”reviews” are little more than reviewing features and often glorified press release. Many are also paid so not really a lot of value there in my opinion.
And ignore those that say you need to use direct mode to get the best, most pure sound. You are correct that when you do so, Audyssey is disabled. Amir also tested direct mode and at least on the Denon/Marantz models...it doesn’t change anything.

 

[pedrob]

As you have gathered from reviews so far, you aren’t going to get to the top tier DACs with an AVR or pre/pro. Makes it harder if trying to do one system and want the best performance possible. But performance can still be quite good in my opinion. SINAD gets close to 100 with a Denon x3600/3700. If you want better/more power you can add something like a monolith amp or hypex based amp and run the AVR in full preamp mode. Audyssey is very good, in particular in the bass region where it is needed most. Just be sure to get the app so you can tweak the room curve and limit correction to the lower frequencies to see what you prefer.
And when you refer to other reviews... many ”reviews” are little more than reviewing features and often glorified press release. Many are also paid so not really a lot of value there in my opinion.
And ignore those that say you need to use direct mode to get the best, most pure sound. You are correct that when you do so, Audyssey is disabled. Amir also tested direct mode and at least on the Denon/Marantz models...it doesn’t change anything.

Seems we are on the same path as I have have hypex nc400s with a Denon x4300 as a pre/pro and I've been looking at the x3600/3700 models. I'm leaning towards the 3700, but I just can't decide if there'd any tangible improvement.

 

[3dbinCanada]

There seems to be quite a bit of gear that xlr test better. Not always, but more times than not it performs better. So in some cases this better performance could be audible in some circumstances. And you get the benefit of protection agains noise/hum.

If your talking about SNR and your unbalanced gives you -80db and XLR gives you -100db, the improvement is very much inaudable. It becomes a spec chasing exercise at this point with no real world improvement and more money tossed out for nothing.

 

[Dj7675]

If your talking about SNR and your unbalanced gives you -80db and XLR gives you -100db, the improvement is very much inaudable. It becomes a spec chasing exercise at this point with no real world improvement and more money tossed out for nothing.

Are you saying -80db is all that is required for full transparency in all situations? It seems this isn't supported by the research I have seen on the topic. Depending on how quite ones room is and how loud one listens to content are important factors on if -80db number you quote is all that is required. In particular the article @amirm has HERE and also the benchmark article HERE.
I'm not saying -80db isn't sufficient in some circumstances but to say it is all that is required in all situations I don't think is supported by the science. What are you basing the -80db number on?

 

[3dbinCanada]

Are you saying -80db is all that is required for full transparency in all situations? It seems this isn't supported by the research I have seen on the topic. Depending on how quite ones room is and how loud one listens to content are important factors on if -80db number you quote is all that is required. In particular the article @amirm has HERE and also the benchmark article HERE.
I'm not saying -80db isn't sufficient in some circumstances but to say it is all that is required in all situations I don't think is supported by what is supported by the science. What are you basing the -80db number on?

Did I say all situations? Im talking typical real life situations where background noise levels are not low. Again, you tend to push the arguement back to the theoretical or paper pushing exercise.

 

[Dj7675]

If your talking about SNR and your unbalanced gives you -80db and XLR gives you -100db, the improvement is very much inaudable.

You made a pretty blanket statement. There were no qualifications, so I assumed there were none.

Im talking typical real life situations where background noise levels are not low.

If you would have said in situations where background noise levels are not low, I would agree. However, many people have dedicated rooms and listening spaces where the noise floor is quite low and if they listen loudly -80db isn't good enough.
Also, in this day and age, manufacturers can do better than the -60 to -80db we have been seeing in some of the AVRs and processors. Instead of how low of a SINAD is ok, I prefer to go the other way.... pick something I can be fairly certain won't be an issue. For me that would be in the ballpark of 100. In the end it is a judgement call on the level of performance you want to use, I just thought your comment of anything over -80db is chasing things that aren't audible was too much of a blanket statement to be universally true.

 

[3dbinCanada]

You made a pretty blanket statement. There were no qualifications, so I assumed there were none.

If you would have said in situations where background noise levels are not low, I would agree. However, many people have dedicated rooms and listening spaces where the noise floor is quite low and if they listen loudly -80db isn't good enough.
Also, in this day and age, manufacturers can do better than the -60 to -80db we have been seeing in some of the AVRs and processors. Instead of how low of a SINAD is ok, I prefer to go the other way.... pick something I can be fairly certain won't be an issue. For me that would be in the ballpark of 100. In the end it is a judgement call on the level of performance you want to use, I just thought your comment of anything over -80db is chasing things that aren't audible was too much of a blanket statement to be universally true.

I agree with you that I should have been some restrictions around my statement earlier. In my situation, -80db is more than enough as I live in a townhouse with no dedicated room and cranking that loud where -80db would be insufficient would have the bi-law officers after me, let alone suffer from premature hearing loss. How low a background noise would one need where -80db is insufficient?

 

[peng]

I agree with you that I should have been some restrictions around my statement earlier. In my situation, -80db is more than enough as I live in a townhouse with no dedicated room and cranking that loud where -80db would be insufficient would have the bi-law officers after me, let alone suffer from premature hearing loss. How low a background noise would one need where -80db is insufficient?

I know what you meant, but obviously that's because.. I would even go further to say -80 dB SNR(if FBW, unweighted), or THD would be good enough for most HT users.

To your specific question, in theory, it would depend on the max peak spl you may listen to. So assuming the bi-law officers in your area would tolerate say, noise outside of your home due to 90 dB peak in your room at your seat, then if your background noise at your seat is 20 (mine is between 20 and 30) dB, THD+N of -80 dB means it would be low enough to get mixed in with the background noise, or 10 dB below it. Whether it would or would not be an audible issue depends on the masking effects that you have to rely on. I think 10 dB below the ambient noise level is most likely good enough, for me anyway.

If I understood right, Dj's point is that for it to be absolutely not audible, or discernible, THD+N would need to be much lower than -80 dB, such as -115 dB, and likewise SNR would need to be much higher than 80 dB (unweighted). That means you need to be buy something like a Benchmark BHB2 amp. There is a good reason why Benchmark explained it so well in the article linked below (also earlier by Dj), Amir did a good one too, short to the point and may be easier to read than Benchmark's.

Interpreting THD Measurements - Think dB not Percent! - Benchmark Media Systems

(1) Audibility of Small Distortions | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

He included a nice graph in the paragraph on "The Effect of Masking":

 

[Dj7675]

I know what you meant, but obviously that's because.. I would even go further to say -80 dB SNR(if FBW, unweighted), or THD would be good enough for most HT users.

To your specific question, in theory, it would depend on the max peak spl you may listen to. So assuming the bi-law officers in your area would tolerate say, noise outside of your home due to 90 dB peak in your room at your seat, then if your background noise at your seat is 20 (mine is between 20 and 30) dB, THD+N of -80 dB means it would be mixed in with the background noise, or 10 dB below it. Whether it would or would not be an audible issue depends on the masking effects that you have to rely on. I think 10 dB below the ambient noise level is most likely good enough, for me anyway. I think Dj's point is that for it to be absolutely not audible, or discernible, THD+N needs to be much higher, such as -115 dB, that means you need to be buy a Benchmark amps.

There is a good reason why Benchmark explains it so well in the article linked, Amir did a good one too, short to the point so easier to read.

Interpreting THD Measurements - Think dB not Percent! - Benchmark Media Systems

(1) Audibility of Small Distortions | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

He included a nice graph in the paragraph on "The Effect of Masking":

View attachment 96337

Thanks for posting. I haven’t read the Small Distortion one yet. So I have some more reading to do.

How low a background noise would one need where -80db is insufficient?

This I think is an important question... the basic question is.. how good of a measuring device do I need in my room at the maximum listening levels I listen to. I think a step by step guide to compute this would be interesting... for example step 1 measure the noise level of your room etc... I think some would find they may not need more than -80db in their environment, where others could benefit from better measuring devices. If something could be developed it would be a nice sticky and/or a mention/link in reviews.

 

[RichB]

I know what you meant, but obviously that's because.. I would even go further to say -80 dB SNR(if FBW, unweighted), or THD would be good enough for most HT users.

To your specific question, in theory, it would depend on the max peak spl you may listen to. So assuming the bi-law officers in your area would tolerate say, noise outside of your home due to 90 dB peak in your room at your seat, then if your background noise at your seat is 20 (mine is between 20 and 30) dB, THD+N of -80 dB means it would be low enough to get mixed in with the background noise, or 10 dB below it. Whether it would or would not be an audible issue depends on the masking effects that you have to rely on. I think 10 dB below the ambient noise level is most likely good enough, for me anyway.

If I understood right, Dj's point is that for it to be absolutely not audible, or discernible, THD+N would need to be much lower than -80 dB, such as -115 dB, and likewise SNR would need to be much higher than 80 dB (unweighted). That means you need to be buy something like a Benchmark BHB2 amp. There is a good reason why Benchmark explained it so well in the article linked below (also earlier by Dj), Amir did a good one too, short to the point and may be easier to read than Benchmark's.

Interpreting THD Measurements - Think dB not Percent! - Benchmark Media Systems

(1) Audibility of Small Distortions | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

He included a nice graph in the paragraph on "The Effect of Masking":

View attachment 96337

Translated into distortion measurements, -80dB = 0.01 and -115dB = 0.00018.

Many amp distortion levels are rates at full power where the S/N is best.
However, 1 watt or below is not specified and distortion and noise will likely be worse.

- Rich

 

[peng]

Translated into distortion measurements, -80dB = 0.01 and -115dB = 0.00018.

Many amp distortion levels are rates at full power where the S/N is best.
However, 1 watt or below is not specified and distortion and noise will likely be worse.

- Rich

We all agreed on that, but I do have a new thought, that is, at below 1 W, say 0.25 W, it would be an issue in terms of the higher distortions/noises but it would also depend on the listening level. 0.25 W, sitting 8 ft from some highly sensitive speakers would potentially be not good, but for someone with 85 dB/2.83V/1m speakers, sitting form 10 ft, at 0.25W output level, this someone would not likely be listening to peak spl more than 80 dB, then the higher THD+N, even at -75 dB may not be an issue even in a quiet room.

Regardless, I always look at both ends, i.e. below 0.5W, and at near the knee point of the graph.

 

[RichB]

We all agreed on that, but I do have a new thought, that is, at below 1 W, say 0.25 W, it would be an issue in terms of the higher distortions/noises but it would also depend on the listening level. 0.25 W, sitting 8 ft from some highly sensitive speakers would potentially be not good, but for someone with 85 dB/2.83V/1m speakers, sitting form 10 ft, at 0.25W output level, this someone would not likely be listening to peak spl more than 80 dB, then the higher THD+N, even at -75 dB may not be an issue even in a quiet room.

Regardless, I always look at both ends, i.e. below 0.5W, and at near the knee point of the graph.

Most amplifiers do not publish specifications at 1 watt and below.

The Salon2s are not particularly efficient. Here are my measurements where 2.83 volts was measured with stereo tones at my 11 foot listening position. The Salon2s are 4 Ohms for much of their frequency response so 2.83 volts is computed to be 2 watts.

The Revel F208Bes were used that has higher impedance and 3 dB more output at 1 watt., the output at .25 watt would be 83 dB in my room.
The room is 15x30x10 (average) or 45 cubit feet with a t 10 foot opening on one side and 5 in the rear.

1/4 watt can produce significant output for in many systems with normal efficiency.

- Rich

 

[peng]

Most amplifiers do not publish specifications at 1 watt and below.

The Salon2s are not particularly efficient. Here are my measurements where 2.83 volts was measured with stereo tones at my 11 foot listening position. The Salon2s are 4 Ohms for much of their frequency response so 2.83 volts is computed to be 2 watts.

View attachment 96473

The Revel F208Bes were used that has higher impedance and 3 dB more output at 1 watt., the output at .25 watt would be 83 dB in my room.
The room is 15x30x10 (average) or 45 cubit feet with a t 10 foot opening on one side and 5 in the rear.

1/4 watt can produce significant output for in many systems with normal efficiency.

- Rich

Just for argument sake then, if you looked at the graphs below you can do better with a Denon, but not too bad with a Marantz SR7015 either:
At 0.25 W, 4 Ohms, you still can get almost -80 dB THD+N, so listening at 77 dB probably means you the THD+N won't bother you because the harmonics/noise would be below the 0 dB inaudible territory. Obviously you have above average hearing so I would guess that's why you can benefit from the AHB2 because the Denon's 80 dB SINAD at 0.25 W will bother you during the peaks when the spl of the harmonics/noise will be above the 0 dB point, unless you room ambient noise is 20 dB or more. Even then, you still have to rely on how much get masked by the masking effect that Benchmark's article explained quite clearly.

That's where even 5 dB difference in SINAD may matter, take a look of the SR7015's, about 7 dB worse than Denon's and in you case it may be just a make or break when listening at low level even with the not so sensitive 4 ohm nominal Revel speakers.

The other obvious factor is, Amir's measurements were made using 1 kHz. The same curves for 5 and 10 kHz would push THD+N quite a bit higher and we will for sure be at the mercy of masking by the music signal, especially at higher output levels.

 

[Dj7675]

Just for argument sake then, if you looked at the graphs below you can do better with a Denon, but not too bad with a Marantz SR7015 either:
At 0.25 W, 4 Ohms, you still can get almost -80 dB THD+N, so listening at 77 dB probably means you the THD+N won't bother you because the harmonics/noise would be below the 0 dB inaudible territory. Obviously you have above average hearing so I would guess that's why you can benefit from the AHB2 because the Denon's 80 dB SINAD at 0.25 W will bother you during the peaks when the spl of the harmonics/noise will be above the 0 dB point, unless you room ambient noise is 20 dB or more. Even then, you still have to rely on how much get masked by the masking effect that Benchmark's article explained quite clearly.

That's where even 5 dB difference in SINAD may matter, take a look of the SR7015's, about 7 dB worse than Denon's and in you case it may be just a make or break when listening at low level even with the not so sensitive 4 ohm nominal Revel speakers.

The other obvious factor is, Amir's measurements were made using 1 kHz. The same curves for 5 and 10 kHz would push THD+N quite a bit higher and we will for sure be at the mercy of masking by the music signal, especially at higher output levels.


View attachment 96484

View attachment 96483

I have to make a comment on that graph... Note the NAD T758 on the graph....So many 758 users say it is the best sounding unit they have ever heard... around 25dB worse than the SR7015 and around 45dB worse than the benchmark... These would be great examples amps for a double blind test...

 

[peng]

I have to make a comment on that graph... Note the NAD T758 on the graph....So many 758 users say it is the best sounding unit they have ever heard... around 25dB worse than the SR7015 and around 45dB worse than the benchmark... These would be great examples amps for a double blind test...

Yeah, at below one watt the distortions was quite high for the NAD, can't be good with some highly sensitivity speakers.