Thx for the details, appreciate your summary after the week :)

Well, Alimentall, if the Denon is a mid-fi product, what does that make the Meridian, Theta, Lexicon, and Halcro?

Good question.

I agree it is a nice Prepro, but John and others, will need time to get past the Denon name. We have to face it that lately, Denon has been considered mid-fi.

Until more people associated with Hi End gear, hear and report on the Denon, people will judge it primarily by it's name.

Why do you have to base anything in a class? This is audio and the product either performs or doesn't, for home theater it either has the options/features or doesn't.

This is kind of what I mean about true 'high-end' - an almost absurd, over the top, whatever it takes approach with little to no excess and exotic parts. I could kind of understand the confusion if we were on the regular forum, but this *is* the over $20K forum, last I checked

Ok so you posted a picture, please tell me what "parts" are better or exotic?

Good question.

Why do you have to base anything in a class? This is audio and the product either performs or doesn't, for home theater it either has the options/features or doesn't.



I typically don't put things in a class. This is a follow to other posts where people did put the Denon in a class (mid-fi). You should read up on the thread, before posting snied comments. Then you'd have the perspective of the conversation.

http://www.10audio.com/images/BAT_VK31SE.jpg

This is kind of what I mean about true 'high-end' - an almost absurd, over the top, whatever it takes approach with little to no excess and exotic parts. I could kind of understand the confusion if we were on the regular forum, but this *is* the over $20K forum, last I checked ;)

The AVP-A1HDCI, while it is not itself $20K, would be an ingredient of an over $20K HT system. As for "over-the-top" under the hood shots... 107310

107311

To the "infinite wallet", the main problem with the Denon is, that the engineers "must have made sacrifices" to get the unit to 7K. That alone, although it might be devoloped to the most stringent and real audible standards, is reason enough for disbelieve. Sometimes, no matter how loud you yell, you will not be heard :(

I just heard from a good friend of mine (professional sound engineer/musician) that the music capability is not impressive. It doesn't come close to a Lexicon MC-12 BAL HD. Nor does it come close to a Theta Casablanca with Xtreme DACS. By default I would say the Meridian is also superior. And the new Mark Levinson 502 will be superior yet still.

I am not saying that it is garbage... but in relation to the equipment I am used to working with, Denon is NOT high end.

Just because someone charges more money for a product doesn't classify it as high end. It has to prove itself to belong in that category.

Maybe the thread title should read, "Best Denon Processor that can do 7.1"?

The only positive thing going for the Denon is that it can do bitstream decoding of TrueHD and DTS MA HD (if I'm not mistaken). The problem lies in it's D/A converters.

The problem lies in it's D/A converters

That is true. Denon mentioned in an email to an interested buyer that engineers decided to use selected 1796 with an average s/n of 122db. However, if we leave all other stuff away influencing s/n, that is personally much louder in terms of what I want get my ears exposed to and do expose. However, indeed, for all record SPL breakers the choice of the DACs maybe a tad too much compromised.....

The discussion, in my understanding, was never about the Denon being the best. Personally I could not understand the classification mid-fi along with no substance arguments brought up.

Real arguments are absolutely accepted !!!

I just heard from a good friend of mine (professional sound engineer/musician) that the music capability is not impressive. It doesn't come close to a Lexicon MC-12 BAL HD. Nor does it come close to a Theta Casablanca with Xtreme DACS. By default I would say the Meridian is also superior. And the new Mark Levinson 502 will be superior yet still.

I am not saying that it is garbage... but in relation to the equipment I am used to working with, Denon is NOT high end.

Just because someone charges more money for a product doesn't classify it as high end. It has to prove itself to belong in that category.

Maybe the thread title should read, "Best Denon Processor that can do 7.1"?

The only positive thing going for the Denon is that it can do bitstream decoding of TrueHD and DTS MA HD (if I'm not mistaken). The problem lies in it's D/A converters.

Oh....so you've heard from a friend who's an expert? Well I guess that settles it.

I just heard from a good friend of mine (professional sound engineer/musician) that the music capability is not impressive. It doesn't come close to a Lexicon MC-12 BAL HD. Nor does it come close to a Theta Casablanca with Xtreme DACS. By default I would say the Meridian is also superior. And the new Mark Levinson 502 will be superior yet still.

I am not saying that it is garbage... but in relation to the equipment I am used to working with, Denon is NOT high end.

Just because someone charges more money for a product doesn't classify it as high end. It has to prove itself to belong in that category.

Maybe the thread title should read, "Best Denon Processor that can do 7.1"?

The only positive thing going for the Denon is that it can do bitstream decoding of TrueHD and DTS MA HD (if I'm not mistaken). The problem lies in it's D/A converters.

Well, if that's what your friend thinks (and I assume he has had hands-on experience with the Denon AVP?) then we'll have to wait for additional user comments, and see if a consensus develops. Some others with hands-on experience seem to differ with your friend.

About the DACs, my understanding is that 4 are used per channel, run in "dual differential" mode...the result being (allegedly) excellent. I'm don't really know what dual differential means technically, so maybe someone else could enlighten me.

Oh....so you've heard from a friend who's an expert? Well I guess that settles it.

That argument always seems to hold water when it's a positive comment, as evidenced by all the quoting going on.

Everyone has a different definition of high-end, so there's no way you're going to get everyone to call it high-end and that seems to be the only outcome a few of you will accept. I consider it to be mass-market, not because of its unknown to me performance, but because of its intended audience and its 'throw in the kitchen sink' design philosophy. It needs to lose about 80% of its back end, for one thing. A high-end product has the features people need, rather than tons of features that 90% of its owners won't ever use. It would almost certainly be a better machine if it lost the excess. I have a saying that the Japanese don't ever build the greatest stuff because they simply have no restraint. If they can conceive of a feature, they *have* to put it in, even if it just becomes a big noise antenna.

Besides, all they appear to have done is take the 5308 receiver and replace the power amp section with balanced outs. The back end is exactly the same otherwise.

Please feel free to help yourselves to some more fresh squeezed Kool-Aid. Oh Yeah!

It needs to lose about 80% of its back end, for one thing....If they can conceive of a feature, they *have* to put it in, even if it just becomes a big noise antenna.

I don't understand how you can just assume these qualities in analog bypass mode, and in the same post admit that the unit has, in your words, "unknown to me performance". I guess it is just your normal mode of operation to simply assume the worst about any product you don't sell in your store, even if you haven't had hands on experience with it, and there is as yet limited input from people who have?

Besides, all they appear to have done is take the 5308 receiver and replace the power amp section with balanced outs. The back end is exactly the same otherwise.

Just plain wrong. To quote DenonJeff, "The AVP shares only the DSP section and chassis from the 5308CI. It has dual torrodial transformers, 6 seperate power supplies, the aforemention DAC section, differential volume control, differential A/D conversion on all inputs including the external multi-channel inputs."

You can also get a clue from the weight of the unit, which is pretty much the same as the receiver, even though the prepro has obviously lost all the amplification in the receiver. You wouldn't see that if the only difference was balanced outs.

In summary, my view is that in your eagerness to diss any competing product that is within about 5x the price of the stuff you carry in your store, you assume an awful lot, without having hands on experience or bothering to study the facts terribly well.

Please feel free to help yourselves to some more fresh squeezed Kool-Aid. Oh Yeah!

Still curious to hear about the extent of your friend's experience with the Denon unit.

That argument always seems to hold water when it's a positive comment, as evidenced by all the quoting going on.

Everyone has a different definition of high-end, so there's no way you're going to get everyone to call it high-end and that seems to be the only outcome a few of you will accept. I consider it to be mass-market, not because of its unknown to me performance, but because of its intended audience and its 'throw in the kitchen sink' design philosophy. It needs to lose about 80% of its back end, for one thing. A high-end product has the features people need, rather than tons of features that 90% of its owners won't ever use. It would almost certainly be a better machine if it lost the excess. I have a saying that the Japanese don't ever build the greatest stuff because they simply have no restraint. If they can conceive of a feature, they *have* to put it in, even if it just becomes a big noise antenna.

I agree that there's no way we'll get everyone to call it high end. "Everyone" includes those in the know and those not in the know. At the outset of a revolutionary ground-breaking product concept, many self-proclaimed "experts" can't appreciate all the new content. It's beyond there technological grasp. Apart from their xenophobic predelictions, they are stuck in the mindset that less is more -- mono is better than stereo, tubes sound better than solid state, analogue is better than digital, straight wire with gain, etc., etc. Not until a widely recognized high-end domestic moniker validates a new digital feature by including it in their newest most up-to-date introduction does it become the new standard. The real groundbreaking designs, like those of Farnsworth, are overlooked until history sets the record straight.

Well, there's nothing terribly revolutionary about the Denon, except raw feature content though. it is very cool and probably perfect for installers where the customer will never have to see, let alone deal with, the back, set up or even have to use the typically bad Denon remotes.

on the other hand, what you describe is pretty much the mindset that killed NHT's Xd system. it never reached profitability, so they killed it. But it was far more revolutionary and out there than the Denon.

interesting perusing this thread. its amazing how quickly some identify themselves as the audio snobs ! as far as they are concerned unless it has the right brand name on the box its pretty unlikely theyd think any otherwise.

Little matter guys that theres owners of the denon avp-a1hd that have passed on their lexicons, krells, Halcros and theta's...no matter the brilliant engineering of the avp, the attention to detail and quality parts used under the hood. Have they seen the massive power supplies used ?, have they seen the quality of the individual analog boards ?, does it matter that it all works seamlessly and with outstanding result ?. Unfortunately it would seem as long as it doesnt have the right name on the box theres no pleasing the brand junkies.

Dont waste your time on these guys, fellows..even if they got to experience its brilliance one day..theyd never be convinced !

In summary, my view is that in your eagerness to diss any competing product that is within about 5x the price of the stuff you carry in your store, you assume an awful lot, without having hands on experience or bothering to study the facts terribly well.

Uh... I do have the ability to sell Denon. I never said it is a bad product. I just said it's NOWHERE near hi end. Maybe if your point of reference is "insert major brick and mortar store here" then it would be high end to you.

The Denon is at the wrong price point. It's too expensive for the average consumer, and isn't as good as the higher priced products.

Only die hard fans will buy one.

The only product that is selling is the 3800 BD player. And that will end when the newer 2.0 profile players come out. I can't wait till Arcam releases their BD player. I feel tainted.

Put it this way: A Mark Levinson No40 for music will blow the Denon away! Now take a dCs Scarlatti and it will annihilate the denon!!! That is my point of reference. And I'm sure there are even better products than those 2.

I'm not here to put down the Denon for what it is. I just don't believe it should be classified as a high end "Audiophile" product if I may use the word.

Pretty soon they'll start to call me Peter Jr. LOL

Still curious to hear about the extent of your friend's experience with the Denon unit.

For movies it was ok. For music is was not fine. I'm trying to be polite.

We need to extent a bit here, on what influenced here what and by how much. Denon mentioned in what I quoted above that the difference in s/n to 1792 are roughly 7db, so 1796er with an average s/n of 122db, 1792 with an average s/n of 129db. However, Denon engineers could not hear a difference in a bench mark listening.

As said s/n is much more influenced at the final output of the RCA/XLR jacks by more factors, as what is measured there drops typically by ca. 15 to 25 db. The pure technical facts of the Denon DAC choice remains true. Now, the question is left, how much can one hear the pure DAC difference ?

Jim, when your friend listened to the Denon in music mode, was that stereo ? Was Audyssey deactivated in stereo ? Could he switch between units ? For how long did he have it ?

I tend to beleave that at such high level of the DACs, the room eq, as well as other components have a greater effect on SQ. I'm not pro, nor against the Denon, just looking for a/b facts, instead of opinions to classify it's performance.

Uh... I do have the ability to sell Denon

My comment had been directed toward Alimentall. If you have the ability to sell Denon, and if you (or your friend) have had substantive hands-on experience with the AVP, then I do find your opinions more credible. But yours is one opinion among a number of opinions, some of which are notably more favorable to the Denon, even as compared to erstwhile high-end units. I think I'd like to wait and see what additional users have to say.

Jim, when your friend listened to the Denon in music mode, was that stereo ? Was Audyssey deactivated in stereo ? Could he switch between units ? For how long did he have it ?

I tend to beleave that at such high level of the DACs, the room eq, as well as other components have a greater effect on SQ. I'm not pro, nor against the Denon, just looking for a/b facts, instead of opinions to classify it's performance.

I agree 100% that properly treated rooms make the largest improvement prior to electronic selection. It's not an option in our rooms. It's a requirement. I am not one to put words into peoples mouths. I only asked his professional input on what he thought. I have not been in the room but it was acoustically treated. Had higher end/priced equipment for amplifiers, cabling, and speakers.

I trust my friend, and his lifetime experience to not BS me. He's a straight shooter. If something impresses him, he'll get excited and use some choice expletives to describe how wonderful it is (my observation). He said he didn't like the performance for music. He thought the L7 music surround algorithm from the MC-12 sounded better at other installs. I did not ask detailed questions as to the settings. For movies he mentioned it was alright. The picture was F'ing AMAZING (*and it should as the projector is over $100K) to give you an idea of the difference in description.

Look, if someone believes in the product and wishes to help stimulate our economy. Please buy one and be happy. At the end of the day, you are the one who has to listen to it. Just don't kid yourself that it's a Ferrari, or similar type. Just as I don't kid myself that my Casablanca 3 with Xtreme DACs is the best. I'm certain there will be better. I hope soon (Monday at the earliest).

our economy or the japanese economy? While some of every audio dollar will make it overseas, i try to keep people helping our economy, not europe's or japan's especially if there's an advantage to doing so.

our economy or the japanese economy? While some of every audio dollar will make it overseas, i try to keep people helping our economy, not europe's or japan's especially if there's an advantage to doing so.

This is not about politics, nationalism, or globalism. We should be discussig the intrinsic merits of the AVP irrespective of its country of origin.

Just don't kid yourself that it's a Ferrari, or similar type.

If it turns out that the AVP earns reference standard marks from the majority of knowledgeable, experienced users and reviewers (as opposed to hearsay and assumptions about brand pedegree), who would be kidding whom?

If it turns out that the AVP earns reference standard marks from the majority of knowledgeable, experienced users and reviewers (as opposed to hearsay and assumptions about brand pedegree), who would be kidding whom?

Who? The ones that accept advertising dollars for a magazine? Or articles/reviews that are purchased by a magazine? No thanks. I don't recall a single review saying a product was poor, that accepted advertising dollars from the same company. Money makes the world go round.... and it's called Peddling..whoops I mean Marketing. That is the true Big Brother. Wait and see.

Sorry for getting off track for a moment.

To the "infinite wallet", the main problem with the Denon is, that the engineers "must have made sacrifices" to get the unit to 7K.

How so? With the denon you do not have to pay for the huge mark up of the high end name.

Just because someone charges more money for a product doesn't classify it as high end. It has to prove itself to belong in that category.

I agree but that is all the high end does like lexicon, halcro, meridian.

The problem lies in it's D/A converters.

Again what is the problem? It runs 4 DAC's per channel. The theta extreme DAC only runs 2 per channel.

It would almost certainly be a better machine if it lost the excess.

Lose the excess so it can have a lower price?

Put it this way: A Mark Levinson No40 for music will blow the Denon away! Now take a dCs Scarlatti and it will annihilate the denon!!!

No that is your opinion.

our economy or the japanese economy? While some of every audio dollar will make it overseas, i try to keep people helping our economy, not europe's or japan's especially if there's an advantage to doing so.

You mean how you sell NAD but most of its products are made in china?

This is not about politics, nationalism, or globalism. We should be discussig the intrinsic merits of the AVP irrespective of its country of origin.

Perhaps, but there are American/Canadian companies that are building things that i find much preferable to Denon gear, let alone typical Japanese gear, for the same or even less money.

How so? With the denon you do not have to pay for the huge mark up of the high end name.?

Actually this is the only Denon product with nice margin to the dealer. Just looked it up.

Again what is the problem? It runs 4 DAC's per channel. The theta extreme DAC only runs 2 per channel.

All DACs are not the same, and they are all not implemented the same. It's the whole package. I will have to call in to confirm your statement. You're saying the Denon supports 384KHz (8x Over Sampling)? I don't care how many DACs you use if the end result doesn't match up to other products. 4 pennies are not the same as 2 quarters. Both are money, but totally different.

You mean how you sell NAD but most of its products are made in china?

No I don't sell NAD. Not interested in NAD. I'm not a fan of China's craftmanship based on real life experiences. That's not to say that they won't improve, or that it's all garbage. That would be ignorant. However they have a nasty track record of taking shortcuts.

If any product comes my way, I have learned to be open minded before having an educated opinion. In my toolbag the Denon has it's usefulness. Just not for my higher end clients. And it will stay that way until proven differently.

Perhaps, but there are American/Canadian companies that are building things that i find much preferable to Denon gear, let alone typical Japanese gear, for the same or even less money.

But most of the NAD is built in china.

4 pennies are not the same as 2 quarters. Both are money, but totally different.

Which DAC's does the theta run? I could not find out what they use.

No I don't sell NAD. Not interested in NAD. I'm not a fan of China's craftmanship based on real life experiences. That's not to say that they won't improve, or that it's all garbage. That would be ignorant. However they have a nasty track record of taking shortcuts.

This was a comment for Alimentall.

Just not for my higher end clients. And it will stay that way until proven differently.

You are right because so much is base on name and nothing more.

You are right because so much is base on name and nothing more.

I disagree whole heartedly. I have listened/seen every product we offer. Otherwise how can you sell it (in good conscience)?

Some products I don't see the value, while most I do. No one should be installing products based on the money they make. It should be to the benefit of the customer the best solution within their budget. If it's a Denon budget, so be it. If it's a Mark Levinson/Nordost budget then great. The goal is a happy customer. If I can't make the client grin from ear to ear everytime they fire up their system, then I'm not really interested in selling them, regardless of equipment.

I'm not defending the prices of "higher end" equipment. I'd rather buy them for a penny and sell them for $1000.00. But I can't. I can not dictate the prices. Either you choose to sell it - base on its merits, or don't. At the end of the day I sleep just fine knowing I treated the customer as if it was myself.

Theta does use the Burr-Brown PCM-1704 is some of their products so I do not see how you can say that the denon can not compaire.

I disagree whole heartedly. I have listened/seen every product we offer. Otherwise how can you sell it (in good conscience)?

And so be it but that is your opinion.

The goal is a happy customer. If I can't make the client grin from ear to ear everytime they fire up their system, then I'm not really interested in selling them, regardless of equipment.

But the customer does not know or care about specs and how similar these products are, they want a system based on name to show off.

No I don't sell NAD. Not interested in NAD. I'm not a fan of China's craftmanship based on real life experiences. That's not to say that they won't improve, or that it's all garbage. That would be ignorant. However they have a nasty track record of taking shortcuts.

I think that was probably aimed at me, which is hard to see unless quoted as I'm not terribly interested in "Doug"'s opinion on the subject. Of course, I don't consider the NAD T175 to be true high-end, it's really upper mid-fi to entry-high-end as well. I give it some extra points for avoiding ridiculous overkill (a sign of high-end sensibility), for performing better than I'd thought (HUGE upgrade over predecessor), and for having paid more attention to the important details, rather than the marketable ones. Unlike the M15 which is a true high-end processor design, the T175 is a platform design, similar to the Denon. However, NAD has a *huge* track record in the entry-high-end realm that Denon does not. You can call it pedigree or name, but I'd really characterize it as experience and consistency.

I certainly wouldn't kick the Denon out of my system, but part of every upscale purchase is having confidence in the company that you won't be disappointed later. Denon is a very competent company, but doesn't have a track record of delivering high-end, so building a preamp into a receiver box and calling it high-end isn't going to make upscale people feel that secure, though Denon fans would assuredly feel great about it. Even if the Denon's objective or subjective performance is deemed to be better than something like a T175 or even M15, it is *still* aimed at the upper mass market - people with money who want all the bells and whistles, that look at a product more for what it does than how it sounds.

On a related subject - truly, how many Denon customers need even 2 or 3 analog ins, let alone 10? Or *any* S-video? Or, even component video? Let's face it, put 3 composite A/V inputs on there via a legacy card and nothing else but digital ins and you have everything that any owner of a $7 product would likely ever need. I don't even need the analog at all, though I can understand how a few could come in handy. All that extra wiring is either creating noise, or capturing it. Part of the difference between high-end and mass market is knowing your purpose, targeting it and having the restraint to delete useless features. Denon doesn't have that yet. And that's why it's not going to get the street cred, whether it deserves it or not.

so building a preamp into a receiver box and calling it high-end isn't going to make upscale people feel that secure

What does something as simple as a chassis have to do with anything?

On a related subject - truly, how many Denon customers need even 2 or 3 analog ins, let alone 10? Or *any* S-video? Or, even component video? Let's face it, put 3 composite A/V inputs on there via a legacy card and nothing else but digital ins and you have everything that any owner of a $7 product would likely ever need.

How do you know what everyone needs? Its called having the option available in case you need it.

All that extra wiring is either creating noise, or capturing it.

What is this based on? Are you saying that by just having the extra connections and wires it will some how change the sound of the unit?

Thx for the details Jim. Just to clarify:

1) what I ment with "room eq" was not the room, but the fact that the Denon will allow the use of it's room EQ (Audyssey) also for the stereo mode. In case you choose "linear balance" for the eq, the eq will linearize the speakers. So my point was, and my "assumption", the room eq (of the Denon) can/will have a greater effect on SQ in stereo mode, than the pure difference between the next better DACs, 1796 -> 1792.

2) However, point 1) is obsolete, as you clarified Logic7, as the main driving factor was chosen, which has nothing to with the sound balance of a pure stereo output vs. the inner components. Usually stereo mode is what high end people compare their pieces against each other. Personally, for stereo sources I use stereo as well and only (like 95%). Neither PL2x nor Logic7 did the job ever completly right for me....So actually, in pure stereo mode the Denon can still sound better than other high end components.

@Dough: That point "infinite" wallet was ment in a different way. We know the Denon engineers made a compromise, that we know already as a fact ! On DACs (there are better ones) and some caps, which I could read elsewhere from somebody that looked at the Denon's circuitry diagramm. However, I was more after the general infinite wallet attitude, that makes the assumption of inferior SQ by the price tag than an a/b comparison.

All the early adopters and testers report no noticeable noise floor, no cross talk, no RF interference. This is understandable as Denon goes to great lengths to create the shortest possible wire runs, to isolate the various sections, and to include lots of dedicated power supplies. So the extra ins and outs do not bring with them bad things.

As for whether YOUR customers have need of the features and capabilities, this may very well be. If they put their trust in your judgement and are not themselves enthusiasts, they will, no doubt, be in hog heaven. Ignorance is bliss. But Denon really didn't build this pre/pro for high-end boutiques. This product is aimed at HT enthusiasts and sophisticated custom integrators. Most other high-end pre/pros have yet to include HDMI connectivity, let alone all the many other ingredients that make the AVP so versatile. For example, I just discovered that you can apply the Silicon Optics (Realta) processing independently to any of the various video sources. That's pretty cool.

Who? The ones that accept advertising dollars for a magazine? Or articles/reviews that are purchased by a magazine? No thanks. I don't recall a single review saying a product was poor, that accepted advertising dollars from the same company. Money makes the world go round.... and it's called Peddling..whoops I mean Marketing. That is the true Big Brother. Wait and see.

I think he meant users of the product, not magazine reviews. Thus far, it seems that a number of people who have tried the Denon in their own homes have compared it favorably to other high end gear they have owned in the past, like Theta, Lexicon, Meridian, Halcro, and Proceed. Your friend is an exception. Perhaps he has ears that are "more golden" than the others (some of whom I've quoted in this thread), but I'm not going to assume so. Yes we should wait and see what further user commentary brings to light. But so far, your friend is in the minority.

But Denon really didn't build this pre/pro for high-end boutiques. This product is aimed at HT enthusiasts and sophisticated custom integrators.

You're starting to get it my point exactly.

You're starting to get it my point exactly.

Super! I'm glad we agree on this point. It's appeal to HT enthusiasts and sophisticated custom integrators, however, does not preclude it from being worthy of description as a "high-end" pre/pro. I suspect we may still differ with one another on this.

Super! I'm glad we agree on this point. It's appeal to HT enthusiasts and sophisticated custom integrators, however, does not preclude it from being worthy of description as a "high-end" pre/pro. I suspect we may still differ with one another on this.

Exactly. We just have slightly different definitions of 'high-end', which is somewhat arbitrary and personal anyway. I never expected everyone else to share my definition, and that is fine. Notice that I never precluded the idea that the Denon could sound as good as it gets, though I really don't know either way.

But the customer does not know or care about specs and how similar these products are, they want a system based on name to show off.

Again I disagree. Our last client didn't know Lexicon, Genelec, Arcam, VuTec, Richard Gray, Nordost, or Lumagen. He knew Runco from magazines.

Visitors who don't know name brands could care less. They just see electronic boxes neatly stacked in a rack. It's the picture and sound that impresses his friends and family. His colleagues; if they are interested in personal cinema, will ask what he has.

If a customer knows of a product and it goes against our design, they sign a disclaimer detailing why we advise against it.

We educate the client why he/she should have the product. Not because we say so. We also like to give 2 or 3 options if possible so the customer is involved in the process. We talk specs if it's relevant to the discussion if the interest is there.

So no we don't force people to buy something they don't know anything about. At the end of the day, they will know something about their products based on how much info they can retain.

Also from a resale point of view. You can't carry every line known to man. You have to pick and choose 2 or 3 similar products that offer a range. And that is sometimes why people see dealers steer their customers one way. Just like Toyota dealers steering customers to Toyota products. It's a fact of life. You have quotas to fill if you wish to continue to sell the products you like to carry. I don't agree with quota's but it has an impact. I hope to sell past my quota, but not at the expense to the customer. That's just wrong.

I'm off my soap box. Never meant for this to go this far. And I'm sure you can apply our philosophy with other dealers that are members of this site.

But so far, your friend is in the minority.

This was never stated to be the ultimate verdict on the product. It was meant to be constructive feedback based on an professional sound engineer whom I trust implicitly when it comes to audio.

Arguing with DougWinsor/bluray1080p is pretty dumb.

Anybody who is of the belief that if you take two components with the same chips and put them in different boxes, they will sound identical. (never mind power supplies, layout of traces, programming to the chips, wiring, and grounding, etc) is not going to be able to know what the argument is about in the first place.

I will aggree with john on one element about the nad/Denon argument. While i will be honest that i have not seen the nad, i get frightened looking at the back of the denon. it scares the crap out of me. And if you do not know my background, i spent 9 years at Extron as the senior trainer. i can design systems with 128 in and out going to all sorts of places and back to itself, and god knows what. but that denon is a nightmare. far too much connectivity. trying to wire it and have it be neat and tidy and not cause additional problems... yikes.

And as far as features, because it does so much (and it may do an excellent job of things) the complexity for any system that does not have a crestron on the front end would kill many people.

i mean come on... look at this remote. My DVR remote has less buttons.
http://usa.denon.com/RC1067_RC1070_AVPA1HDCI_rdax_510x961.jpg

http://media.audiojunkies.com/a1hd-rear.jpg

http://avforum.no/avnytt/data/15/8271NADT175_rear_rs-large.jpg

And I'm trying to convince them to delete half of this!

Keep in mind that no company truly shooting for the high-end market would put a phono preamp in a surround preamp. They'd let people choose/use their own because they'd know that a high-ender wouldn't be satisfied with an integrated phono section. It's only MM on the Denon too. It's just an example of the difference in mass market and high-end thinking. I just thought of that because I noticed the phono button on the remote.

http://www.hifimarket.cz/obrazky/nad/HTRM-big2.jpg

I'm not saying this is the best remote ever, but you'd think Denon could do better.

http://media.audiojunkies.com/a1hd-rear.jpg

http://avforum.no/avnytt/data/15/8271NADT175_rear_rs-large.jpg

And I'm trying to convince them to delete half of this!

Keep in mind that no company truly shooting for the high-end market would put a phono preamp in a surround preamp. They'd let people choose/use their own because they'd know that a high-ender wouldn't be satisfied with an integrated phono section. It's only MM on the Denon too. It's just an example of the difference in mass market and high-end thinking. I just thought of that because I noticed the phono button on the remote.

I think some "high-enders" would be completely satisfied with the Halcro DM10 integrated phono stage. Granted, the DM10 is not a full fledged surround processor, but it is a 2 channel preamp with integrated phono stage.

Excerpt from Stereophile review. But as good as the Steelhead is—and it's superb—the dm10's phono stage is even better. I know of no other full-function preamp that comes standard with such a stellar phono stage, though mbl and Burmester offer modular preamps that can be equipped with phono stages. I have heard neither of these worthies, but within the realm of my experience, the Halcro dm10 is not only a superb line stage, it stands alone as the everything-included-for-one-price preamplifier. Incredibly, Bruce Candy has done it again.

If you believe the review, this proves that an integrated phono stage can be extremely good. I am not saying that the Denon's phono is world class, but it can be done.

Also consider the Theta Cass III. If you were to purchase a lot of cards, it could have a lot of inputs as well.

The main question here is can the Denon perform extremely well with all these inputs. The answer is Yes. Hence, just think of these additional inputs as bonus.

Anybody who is of the belief that if you take two components with the same chips and put them in different boxes, they will sound identical. (never mind power supplies, layout of traces, programming to the chips, wiring, and grounding, etc) is not going to be able to know what the argument is about in the first place.

Actually, the point is more, whether we can conclude by the pure audio performance/sound quality, that the Denon is "high end" or not, which was doubted in the first place. It's actually not about whether the AVP is the best, but it appears to perform quite well. This is more of a foundamental discussion on what really influences sound quality than anything else. As many people do not follow stringent a/b comparison rules, a lot of myth is added to high end, and also to what influences eventually that, that reaches the final output jacks. Alone the fact that alot of passive speakers are known to suffer input load dependencies, makes it quite hard, listening to various SPL levels instead of the same, without a/b, for anyone to really tell what was heard and why it sounded different.

Now, can we conclude, the Denon is soundwise high end or not, say in pure stereo without any EQ ??? Because, if we can, than all that this discussion right now, right here, on too many input jacks, on the remote, on anything else, is a pure waste of time.

Keep in mind that no company truly shooting for the high-end market would put a phono preamp in a surround preamp. They'd let people choose/use their own because they'd know that a high-ender wouldn't be satisfied with an integrated phono section. It's only MM on the Denon too. It's just an example of the difference in mass market and high-end thinking. I just thought of that because I noticed the phono button on the remote.

The Denon manual says use of the phono input with a phono cartridge requires a separate preamp: so I don't think it is built in (have not checked it)

Any input can be mapped and renamed so I think the phono input can be used for regular line level signals

I think some "high-enders" would be completely satisfied with the Halcro DM10 integrated phono stage. Granted, the DM10 is not a full fledged surround processor, but it is a 2 channel preamp with integrated phono stage.

Big difference! Most stereo preamps with phono sections are built up around the phono and that is half the attraction to the piece. Putting an ultra low level signal amplifier directly into a box rife with RF is kinda shaky and just is part of my whole "what the heck is that doing on a supposedly high-end piece' argument. Of course, i wonder how many people with $7K A/V preamps would have a turntable even in the same system, but still. I remember a Sony receiver that''s phono section amplified so much that it caused serious bleed through if any other source was playing.

Denon did make an outboard, fairly high-end phono preamp at one point.

The Denon manual says use of the phono input with a phono cartridge requires a separate preamp: so I don't think it is built in (have not checked it)

Any input can be mapped and renamed so I think the phono input can be used for regular line level signals

Well, could be, though they do say it has an MM phono input on their website.

But NOT the XLR !!!!! PLEASE

Now, can we conclude, the Denon is soundwise high end or not, say in pure stereo without any EQ ??? Because, if we can, than all that this discussion right now, right here, on too many input jacks, on the remote, on anything else, is a pure waste of time.

Depends on whether high-end is a subjective performance level (then everything and nothing is 'high-end') or a measured performance level (do we even have the tools to definitively tell?) or a design philosophy (then we disagree on what that is). IMO, the only way to have a discussion that even makes sense *for me* is to think of it in terms of the design philosophy, and to me, high-end is all about simplicity and an obsessive, possibly even ungrounded, focus on pure performance Maybe a new definition needs to be made for home theater preamps where throwing in the kitchen sink isn't necessarily earn demerits but I'm fine with the more common, entrenched one. Or, we can always say 'high-end, well, you know, for an AV piece'. ;)

Big difference! Most stereo preamps with phono sections are built up around the phono and that is half the attraction to the piece. Putting an ultra low level signal amplifier directly into a box rife with RF is kinda shaky and just is part of my whole "what the heck is that doing on a supposedly high-end piece' argument. Of course, i wonder how many people with $7K A/V preamps would have a turntable even in the same system, but still. I remember a Sony receiver that''s phono section amplified so much that it caused serious bleed through if any other source was playing.

Denon did make an outboard, fairly high-end phono preamp at one point.

But it does not matter. The point is that you can group functions in the same chassis as long as you do it right. You should not bias your opinion on how good or poor this phono section is unless you have tested it. Right now, no one knows how well it performs.

In high-end, perception not only matters, it's everything. You still keep making the mistake that i think of high-end as some arbitrary objective or subjective performance level.

discussion that even makes sense *for me*

Well, we could start a discussion then although is doesn't make sence *for you*, by simply looking at "the facts" :p Is that an option ? As said, and funny as it is, we obviously do not need a re-definition in the video world where facts count, but when it comes to the holy grail of audiophile wisdom we all seem lost "in space", well, some more than others :D

It's actually not about whether the AVP is the best, but it appears to perform quite well. This is more of a foundamental discussion on what really influences sound quality than anything else.


power supplies, layout of traces, programming to the chips, wiring, and grounding, etc


and there are plenty of high end pieces that fail in these regards. high end in too many cases is based up cachet and name recognition and perception.

But NOT the XLR !!!!! PLEASE

What is the problem with balanced connections? (so long as they are actually connected properly internally.)

What is the problem with balanced connections? (so long as they are actually connected properly internally.)

I'm in agreement. Balanced XLRs are favorable with longer cable runs and you also get a dB increase over non XLR.

I even prefer the AES/EBU over the consumer SP/DIF connections.

I think maybe he meant the XLRs aren't assignable or something?

Well, we could start a discussion then although is doesn't make sence *for you*, by simply looking at "the facts" :p Is that an option ? As said, and funny as it is, we obviously do not need a re-definition in the video world where facts count, but when it comes to the holy grail of audiophile wisdom we all seem lost "in space", well, some more than others :D

Well, if you're an objectivist, there's little to no reason to spend $7k on a preamp that won't function any better than the Onkyo.

In high-end, perception not only matters, it's everything. You still keep making the mistake that i think of high-end as some arbitrary objective or subjective performance level.

I stand by all my statements based on the following definition of high-end.

High-End = High Performance (measurable, audible, and consistent performance). All other aspects are immaterial.

Obviously if you have a different definition, our discussion is not at the same basis of understanding.

If the Denon passes my requirements, it is high end.

Well, if you're an objectivist, there's little to no reason to spend $7k on a preamp that won't function any better than the Onkyo.

right: this over $20k forum is full of objectivists [sic] who will only buy the least expensive unit without any unneeded features or functions

:D

Well, if you're an objectivist, there's little to no reason to spend $7k on a preamp that won't function any better than the Onkyo.

Function or sound ? The point is not, if the Onkyo or Denon "functions" better. The point is can you hear a clear difference between the two and between the AVP and the ML40. And if you do, to what extent ?. Are we talking 1MHz of more horizontal resolution when compared to video, which for SD can be quite dramatic. Or are we talking about some "airy something" ? Is some "airy something" the same a SD when compared to HD ? What would be room treatment then, maybe 8 to 16K resolution ?

I stand by all my statements based on the following definition of high-end.

High-End = High Performance (measurable, audible, and consistent performance). All other aspects are immaterial.

Obviously if you have a different definition, our discussion is not at the same basis of understanding.

If the Denon passes my requirements, it is high end.

By that standard, a $3 Casio watch is a 'high-end' watch.

Besides, i was on the opposite side of the argument with Sonos vs Q-Sonix and Sooloos, the argument that the latter two were 'high-end' and the Sonos was 'mass-market'. Well, that's true. But, of course, I'm perfectly fine with Sonos and its mass-market design. The others have a slicker interface and a more 'high-end' attributes. I don't need it to be 'high-end' to enjoy it and i certainly don't need other people's approval to feel good about owning it.

Denon? Is that you? ...What an ugly front panel! Doesn't suit you at all! Take it off... That's better! Never be ashamed of who you are... You're mass market... be proud.

right: this over $20k forum is full of objectivists [sic] who will only buy the least expensive unit without any unneeded features or functions

:D

Hey, i resemble that! :)

Hehehehehe, looks like Best Buy is trying to buy Denon and Marantz. i guess everyone should enjoy the 15 minutes of 'high-end' ;)

http://www.japancorp.net/Article.Asp?Art_ID=17690

Balanced XLRs are favorable with longer cable runs and you also get a dB increase over non XLR.

Well-designed balanced outputs can be helpful in rejecting noise over long runs, but they will not intrinsically give you an increase in signal strength. That's more of a side-effect of the way many balanced outputs are implemented.

I even prefer the AES/EBU over the consumer SP/DIF connections.

I can't agree with this. AES/EBU is terrible for digital audio.

--Andre

Denon is the first to admit that their remotes leave something to be desired. They are not in the remote business. The assumption is that the custom integrators will use their own favorite control system. That being said, the second (less complicated) remote actually is fairly easy to use once you get accustomed to it.

I can't agree with this. AES/EBU is terrible for digital audio.

I wonder if it doesn't help cancel radiation though in a studio environment.

Denon is the first to admit that their remotes leave something to be desired

that is an understatement at best

But Denon always provides good documentation for RS232 control: that is the way to control it if you can

high end is about fit and finish and user experience.

the comment
the second (less complicated) remote actually is fairly easy to use once you get accustomed to it.

gets to the heart of the matter. for a high end product, one should be able to use it without any training needed.

Of course that is only one side of the equation. the other side is supposed to be uncompromised design and quality.

that part is very hard to nail down. especially since the same folks that claim they want the best, eschew measurements in many cases and prefer to go with long winded hyperbole.

Well-designed balanced outputs can be helpful in rejecting noise over long runs, but they will not intrinsically give you an increase in signal strength. That's more of a side-effect of the way many balanced outputs are implemented.



I can't agree with this. AES/EBU is terrible for digital audio.

--Andre

The sound studios I have seen use AES XLR connections for digital audio. Especially when you have a word clock to synchronize the data stream. AES/EBU is the professional version of SP/DIF (which is the consumer version). AES/EBU has additional data bits for parity checks: The parity bit is included to validate the transmission of audio data. A parity error indicates an audio data error was cased either by the transmitting device or the connecting cables.

The implementations of balanced XLR setups that I have run across has shown a small dB increase. I'm looking at the end result. Not how we get there.

*Maybe I should qualify. I'm speaking about analog over XLR say from the processor/preamp to the amplifier, not the Digital Interconnects.

I wonder if it doesn't help cancel radiation though in a studio environment.

It can actually radiate more because most digital XLR cables use conventional XLR shells which terminate the shield in a pigtail so there is both a gap in the shielding and an antenna for transmision (and reception) in the pigtail. A high-speed cable needs a complete 360-degree circumferential termination of the shield, like when you crimp a coax cable onto a BNC.

AES/EBU is the professional version of SP/DIF (which is the consumer version).

Sorry, I was talking about the physical interface not the protocol, which can be transmitted over any reasonable digital cable.

The implementations of balanced XLR setups that I have run across has shown a small dB increase. I'm looking at the end result. Not how we get there.

Yes, but that's not true for all balanced implementations. I'm just trying to make sure that people who don't know about balanced signalling don't unrealistically expect a signal increase just because they're using balanced connections.

--Andre

It can actually radiate more because most digital XLR cables use conventional XLR shells which terminate the shield in a pigtail so there is both a gap in the shielding and an antenna for transmision (and reception) in the pigtail. A high-speed cable needs a complete 360-degree circumferential termination of the shield, like when you crimp a coax cable onto a BNC.

Something about that doesn't sound right to me. Are you sure about that?

Yes, but that's not true for all balanced implementations. I'm just trying to make sure that people who don't know about balanced signalling don't unrealistically expect a signal increase just because they're using balanced connections.

--Andre

I am in agreement. I modified/qualified my post above. I was speaking about analog XLR signals from the processor/preamp to the amplifier... not the XLR digital interconnects. You don't want an increase in voltage (over spec) for the digital signal via the digital interconnects.

Something about that doesn't sound right to me. Are you sure about that?

Yes. Which part sounds fishy? Neutrik even makes a special XLR connector that has a crimped shield, but they're hard to get.

--Andre

By that standard, a $3 Casio watch is a 'high-end' watch.

You are absolutely correct.

... for a high end product, one should be able to use it without any training needed

Where is the stone tablet on which this 'rule' is written? A good integrator will simplify the operation for the layperson by overlaying a simple-to-use control system -- even though a single finger press may trigger a complex set of connectivity commands. The AVP is not a cash-and-carry item unless the customer is technically knowledgable or, at least, adventurous. That should not disqualify it from being 'high end'.

to me, high-end is all about simplicity and an obsessive, possibly even ungrounded, focus on pure performance

You don't see this philosophy applied by most people to other products, so why should anyone do so with prepros?

Let's take the other products that have been mentioned on this thread...watches and cars.

With watches, you don't see high end companies taking a minimalist approach. Quite the opposite, generally...doesn't a Breitling look rather complicated? Don't a number of high end watches sport "features" like dual-time zones, self-winding, etc?

With cars, high end sedans and SUVs are chock full of gizmos. With sports cars this is less the case...but that's largely because the speed/acceleration-at-all-costs orientation will sometimes mean that features are dropped in order to keep weight down. With prepros, keeping weight down isn't normally a design goal.

But even if we accept your definition, that basically "features" don't matter, or are even harmful at the high end, and that the high end should in your words "focus on pure performance"....You still haven't shown that the Denon AVP's features degrade performance, particularly when the user chooses to use one of the bypass modes; except for Jim's friend, the preponderance of actual owners (who have also owned high end gear from other brands) have concluded that the Denon's performance is really good. IMO, your preference shouldn't be termed one for "high end" but rather one for "minimalist design"...which isn't quite the same thing.

You are absolutely correct.

ooookay.

Yes. Which part sounds fishy? Neutrik even makes a special XLR connector that has a crimped shield, but they're hard to get.

--Andre

Just the idea of that it would become any kind of noticeable antenna. not saying it wouldn't, just surprised if it would.

Just the idea of that it would become any kind of noticeable antenna. not saying it wouldn't, just surprised if it would.

For most audio equipment and the typical length of a pigtail, that's probably true, and not something to worry about. But the break in the shield, and the pigtail's own inductance is something to worry about.

I guess my point is that if coax and BNCs solve all the known problems with digital cables, and XLRs cost more, and have worse performance, why use XLRs in the first place?

--Andre

For most audio equipment and the typical length of a pigtail, that's probably true, and not something to worry about. But the break in the shield, and the pigtail's own inductance is something to worry about.

I guess my point is that if coax and BNCs solve all the known problems with digital cables, and XLRs cost more, and have worse performance, why use XLRs in the first place?

--Andre

Audiophiles that have already spent a kagillian dollars on their balanced line amps will generally not consider a pre/pro that is not also balanced.

Audiophiles that have already spent a kagillian dollars on their balanced line amps will generally not consider a pre/pro that is not also balanced.

Unfortunately, this is true. i think most companies put the balanced outputs on as a high-end "feature" not as a method achieving high-end performance. Doing balanced well enough to be a true advantage costs silly amounts of money. And for what? Just in case you put the preamp two rooms away?

Audiophiles that have already spent a kagillian dollars on their balanced line amps will generally not consider a pre/pro that is not also balanced.

Perhaps, but we were talking about AES/EBU digital connections. For analog, people should always use XLRs and balanced. Doing analog balanced well actually doesn't cost much more money than unbalanced. There's no need for so-called fully-balanced or differential topology.

--Andre

...if coax and BNCs solve all the known problems with digital cables, and XLRs cost more, and have worse performance, why use XLRs in the first place?I think you've just defined "high end".

Sanjay

Perhaps, but we were talking about AES/EBU digital connections. For analog, people should always use XLRs and balanced. Doing analog balanced well actually doesn't cost much more money than unbalanced. There's no need for so-called fully-balanced or differential topology.

If there's no need for differential designs to try to lower noise floor, then i don't see how balanced offers *any* benefit whatsoever. Because without that, it's got nuthin' unless you're running long distances.

I think you've just defined "high end".

Sanjay

What to do for HDMI? As far as I know all cables are made overseas. Not certain with Nordost... 3 companies I've spoken to came clean on where they are made.

Where is the stone tablet on which this 'rule' is written? A good integrator will simplify the operation for the layperson by overlaying a simple-to-use control system -- even though a single finger press may trigger a complex set of connectivity commands. The AVP is not a cash-and-carry item unless the customer is technically knowledgable or, at least, adventurous. That should not disqualify it from being 'high end'.

i never included any references to stone tablets. and i agree. if the control system is written well, then this does remove the variables. however most control system pages suck. i have seen VERY FEW that one can walk up to with no AV knowledge and just use it. this has been an obsession of mine for years. And that equates to about 18 years looking at control systems.


And looking at the RATS NESTS that many systems are... i would want balanced interconnects. not for noise rejection over long distances, but for noise rejection in the back of some crappy rack with wires all over the place and name poorly built products.

However, having said that, XLR is not needed but does look cool. (hence the high end perception) although no pro product could be released that does not have balanced connections of some kind. XLR for live gear and captive screw for install gear.

The reality is that you could take some nice gear, take it to guys that REALLY know what they are doing and get the noise floor dropped a whole bunch the S/N increased and have a mush nicer product.

But that is not what the high end is about... nobody has heard of that. on the most part (whether you can accept it or not) high end is male jewelery. And that is it.

If there's no need for differential designs to try to lower noise floor, then i don't see how balanced offers *any* benefit whatsoever. Because without that, it's got nuthin' unless you're running long distances.

Well, yes, technically you don't need balanced analog interconnects. But I love balanced XLR interconnects because:

they lock down and do not get pulled out accidentally
they are not so tight to avoid (1) that you need a high pressure ram to connect them, or pliers to disconnect them
they never develop the "cracklies" due to invisible connector seating problems, especially when you have been in to the back of your rack to work on something completely unrelated
they run at a higher dBu, so for the same noise floor voltage you get better SNR
I have never had a hum problem with them, while it frequently happens with RCA.
they don't pick up the CN Tower RF bath I live in
I have gear that can use them and they look cooler :)

If there's no need for differential designs to try to lower noise floor, then i don't see how balanced offers *any* benefit whatsoever. Because without that, it's got nuthin' unless you're running long distances.

XLRs are better than RCAs mechanically: they have positive lock, and they make ground first and break it last, so you can hot plug without making funny sounds.

The XLR wiring layout, if properly done, does not suffer from ground hum problems that RCAs do. A side consequence of this is that shielding (for analog line-level signals, not higher-speed digital signals) is also much better than unbalanced since there are separate connections for the shield and ground.

Balanced interconnection is for transmitting a signal unchanged from point A to point B, so it does not lower noise-floor. It can only prevent injection of unwanted noise and preserve the existing noise floor.

Differential amplifier design has its very useful place in many parts of the audio chain, but its use is entirely orthogonal to a balanced interconnection's function.

And yes, for many people balanced interconnection really only matters for long runs. But since we're talking about a purist, high-end philosophy, it seems like an appropriate way to transmit all analog audio signals.

--Andre

Balanced interconnection is for transmitting a signal unchanged from point A to point B, so it does not lower noise-floor. It can only prevent injection of unwanted noise and preserve the existing noise floor.

Semantics!

We are on page 12, can we already conclude the AVP is high end sounding or mid-fi? Or are we still in the circling process to look for trifles that have nothing to do with sound ? We have covered the company to be sold, where the company is comming from, we have covered the remote, we are now at the basics of connections......what's next ? Maybe some a/b testing from owners compared to MC12HD, 861, Nr. 40 ? Sorry.....I was probably day dreaming.

By the way, maybe beachcomber is still reading this and we can still make suggestions to him of what "high end" processors are out there and which "sound" or function better ?

We are on page 12, can we already conclude the AVP is high end sounding or mid-fi? Or are we still in the circling process to look for trifles that have nothing to do with sound ? We have covered the company to be sold, where the company is comming from, we have covered the remote, we are now at the basics of connections......what's next ? Maybe some a/b testing from owners compared to MC12HD, 861, Nr. 40 ? Sorry.....I was probably day dreaming.

By the way, maybe beachcomber is still reading this and we can still make suggestions to him of what "high end" processors are out there and which "sound" or function better ?

Yes...we have concluded without any doubt that the AVP is High End and it sounds spectacular(<:

Well, at least we covered the audiophilia nervosa thing in depth! "please let my gear be deemed high-end by others, PLEASE!!!!"

OK gentleman's !
Let's talk about ML 502vs N°40 (for ex)

Well, at least we covered the audiophilia nervosa thing in depth! "please let my gear be deemed high-end by others, PLEASE!!!!"

Or perhaps we covered the audio elitest thing: "Sorry, you're gear does not emanate from a proper family name and, therefore, cannot be admitted to the club."

I have the Denon AVP A1Hd and it sounds excellent. I had an Anthem D1 and the Denon is much better to my ears for HT. At least as good or better for 2-channel. I also had a Krell S1000 and it can't hold the light to the Denon. High end is how it sounds to me and the AVP A1HD is excellent.

High end is how it sounds to me and the AVP A1HD is excellent.

See, that's all the matters, isn't it?

Well, at least we covered the audiophilia nervosa thing in depth! "please let my gear be deemed high-end by others, PLEASE!!!!"

We also covered the alimentall nervosa thing in depth! "If my store doesn't carry it and it isn't at a super-high price, then it isn't a high-end product, no matter how great it performs. Because I say so."

I have the Denon AVP A1Hd and it sounds excellent. I had an Anthem D1 and the Denon is much better to my ears for HT. At least as good or better for 2-channel. I also had a Krell S1000 and it can't hold the light to the Denon. High end is how it sounds to me and the AVP A1HD is excellent.

thats great news. could you elaborate a little more on what differences (sonically) you found when comparing the denon to the d1? i used to own the avm30 which i found was excellent for HT, not bad for 2 channel, but the d1 was a step up when i auditioned it. also, what other preamps have you listened to and can compare to?

thanks.

OK gentleman's !
Let's talk about ML 502vs N°40 (for ex)

I don't believe either of these have HDMI connectivity or ability for decoding the new HD audio codecs. But no doubt they sound very good.

I have had two citations in the past as well as the AVM20 and the D1. The Denon has a more enveloping sound stage with HT than the others. Also it has the Codecs for HD audio which is incredable. The Audyssey(I have the pro installer kit) really makes a difference. It just has a clearer, cleaner sound. I am very happy with the choice. I'm not rich, but I'm in a position where if I didn't like it, I would get rid of it right away.

This page contains testimonials from new AVP owners who have also owned other high end components: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1006957&page=25

Semantics!

Oh no, we're not going down that path again! :)

We are on page 12, can we already conclude the AVP is high end sounding or mid-fi?

Does it matter? People who buy it and are happy with it couldn't care less. I'm happy that it's around just to push the high-end prepro people to get off their collective asses. That is, those who actually know they're on their asses.

--Andre

I know you guys are really enjoying your little fight, but you might be missing out on something a bit more fun:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1019385

Seems Monster Cable issued a Cease & Desist order against Blue Jeans Cable about their Tartan cables. The only problem is that the president of Blue Jeans Cable is an experienced attorney. Oops!

Instead of mucking up this fine thread with further off-topic posts, I recommend you head over to the thread I linked to above for more info; or, for a quick fix, read this:

http://www.audioholics.com/news/industry-news/blue-jeans-strikes-back

Wow, it sure is nice for you to come into a Prepro thread and tell us what we really should be reading about. What would we do without your direction?

You're welcome my good man! I am glad to be of service :)

(Come on, lighten up, man! I'm enjoying this thread too, but admit it, it went off the rails quite some time ago... Besides I am sure there is a high intersection between people interested in this thread and in the Monster story.)

You're welcome my good man! I am glad to be of service :)

(Come on, lighten up, man! I'm enjoying this thread too, but admit it, it went off the rails quite some time ago... Besides I am sure there is a high intersection between people interested in this thread and in the Monster story.)

Actually, I agree the cable fight is amusing, but it warrants its own thread as it could go on for months. :D

I also agree the thread has been off track. The OP wanted to know what 7.1 High end processors were out there ,and he got a long debate about what high end is. That is kinda like asking someone what time it is, because you don't want to miss your train, and being sat down and told how to build a clock.

Darrell

Agreed! Here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1019385) is the appropriate thread, started by Kurt of Blue Jeans Cable no less. Now let us return to our regularly scheduled bickering.

Actually this thread belongs in a different forum.

Michael

Thanks to you for bringing lightness to an otherwise (IMO) useless thread that started off with good intent and has deteriorated to nothing but a waste of bandwidth.
As I was reading some newer posts this mornning I was thinking to myself that it resembles the out and out wars that start on cable threads and as if your ears were burning you posted the Blue Jeans vs Monster cable issue.

I vote for Michael Grant for moderator because he only tried to lighten all of you up whereas I am surprised that Mark Rubin hasn't closed the thread.

Welcome back Michael. Always good to read your posts.:)

Agreed! ... Now let us return to our regularly scheduled bickering.

Thanks Michael. Ok, where were we? Oh yeah...

My Prepro can beat up your Prepro, with one HDMI port tied behind it's back cover.

Does it matter?

Hi Andre,

what matters, what doesn't ? This is a foundamental discussion, we should not start ;) We have already lost focus on SQ in this thread alot....

BtW: actually with the complete "Page 12" remark I was simply trying to be ironic. 12 Pages, say minus 2 or 3, and we were still fiddling around with anything else, besides SQ ! A snail runs faster to 60 :D

I am surprised that Mark Rubin hasn't closed the thread.

Part of this is myth busting ! Some call such discussions a waste of bandwidth, some are happy that we get closer where we should be already....

Part of this is myth busting ! Some call such discussions a waste of bandwidth, some are happy that we get closer where we should be already....

IMO you aren't close to anything of substance:(

Actually this thread belongs in a different forum.

Yes. The mid-fi forum. ;)

I don't believe either of these have HDMI connectivity or ability for decoding the new HD audio codecs. But no doubt they sound very good.

Yes the 502 will have HDMI. Which iteration is to be decided. Rumor has it to be 1.1 or 1.2. Still waiting for the official announcement/press release.

IMO you aren't close to anything of substance

I asked for some substance, but only got audiophile fog. Sorry, and that ain't clearly my fault ! However, if anybody can share something on SQ with substance, there is still lot's of room in this thread. Until then, we have to assume the Denon (as an example) is not better, but also not any worse sounding than what some consider high end sound. We could also flip the question. Is the Lexicon MC12HD high end or high end sounding ? Is the Halcro high end sounding ? What is ? And how is that proven ?

See, we started out with the initial advice on interim solutions, until stuff comes out that many people "want to have" (not what necessarily sounds better). Alone from this perspective, the discussion could have been avoided. But somebody had to jump in. I couldn't care less, if people want to throw 20K+ away for just equal or more "airy" sound that is close to imagination. In the end everybody has the right to his own problems.

I have just spent a decent amount of time reading this thread.

Some of the people here have a decent head on their shoulders.

But some of you...I am baffled at how transparent you are, and that it is only good if it is something no one else can afford.

You might have money, but that doesn't make you argue your points any better. I thought I would read this and hear some really decent commentary. But you like your HT stuff like Paris likes here jeans...Designer.
If the high end stuff can't play the Blu-Ray 7.1 DTS properly then it isn't as good. The 2x $7K Denon seperates I guess is High end if it is all that exists, or the Pioneer Sc09 with Ice technology and some other really fancy stuff. Because that is all there is. But because it has a consumer name associated with it, you treat it like it came from Wal-Mart (just an example).
Snobs. My fathers ex wife was one...What a B*tch.
I bet most of you would not put your money where your mouth was, and walk into a room blind folded and do high (i.e. Krell) vs. mid high (Denon Seperates or consumer flagships) taste test. More than likely, most of you (only the ones I refer to as transparent) would end up not having a clue to the difference. Having money doesnt give you better heaing than the average person. It also doesn't make you better. :o
Although, I am sure one or maybe 2 of you would actually have a clue. This is where the transparent ones perk up and say they have done it and passed with sailing colors etc etc (Comparing a $100.000 system to a $2.000 HT doesnt compare, any idiot can tell the difference with that type of comparison). The guys you don't hear from too much, if at all, as far as what they have or how they can tell the difference are usually the more discerning and conservative crowd, patience built in and mellow to a fault. Because they can.

The best part is, this will probably get deleted, and or I will have a bunch of hate mail for it. Thats ok either way. I just wish you could hear yourselves from someone elses perspective.

I will stick to the regular threads from hear on in.

I think now we need to say...

thread closed