The Official Marantz SR7005 Receiver Page!! - Page 16 - AVS Forum
First ... 14  15  16 17  18  ... Last
Receivers, Amps, and Processors > The Official Marantz SR7005 Receiver Page!!
ccotenj's Avatar ccotenj 07:08 AM 12-13-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by BingleyJoe View Post

Thanks for the explanation!

I kind of figured that it only worked as a simple 'push' (although the different ways to push that jkozlow3 outlines make it fairly interesting from that regard).

It's a shame though that discovery of shared libraries isn't a component of AirPlay compatibility for devices not running iTunes, but which have the capability of displaying playlists, tracks, album art, etc.. Hopefully they'll broaden the standard at some point to allow for that, since it would be a great feature to have.

you are welcome... and yes, there are some interesting applications for this...

airplay is intended to carry video, but i highly doubt we'll see that implemented in "our" units...

wilbur_the_goose's Avatar wilbur_the_goose 10:55 AM 12-13-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

i'd take a wag that it's likely 10,240 songs...

i wouldn't hold my breath for a firmware update to change it...

FWIW, 'Twas Marantz that told me about the 10K limit.
wilbur_the_goose's Avatar wilbur_the_goose 11:00 AM 12-13-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by henningh View Post

It's nice that I can stream directly from my iPhone to my stereo. I use it often. Plus, when my friends come over and want to share some music with me, they can just connect to my system and play music directly. Good stuff.

I don't own any Apple stuff. I can't figure out why I'd want compressed audio to play on a home theater/stereo system. Guess I'm old fashioned and go after pristine audio quality.
ccotenj's Avatar ccotenj 11:12 AM 12-13-2010
^^^

hint: alac...
LarryPana's Avatar LarryPana 11:20 AM 12-13-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilbur_the_goose View Post

I don't own any Apple stuff. I can't figure out why I'd want compressed audio to play on a home theater/stereo system. Guess I'm old fashioned and go after pristine audio quality.

I generally wouldn't equate Apple with lossy. I am admittedly biased (own an ATV), but bought only after realizing that perfect lossless formats are supported by the ATV and, I believe, all apple products. Its my understanding that a major feature of airplay is that it enables friend's iPods/Phones etc to be played by the Marantz. All this being said, I agree with you that playing lossy formats is way down my priority list but I can see where some folks would be interested....although there is a port on the front that can also quickly allow an iPod to be played in any case....
ccotenj's Avatar ccotenj 11:36 AM 12-13-2010
also, if anyone would like to learn about lossy compression (and learn how to do some testing that just might surprise you), go to hydrogen audio and check your notions/ego at the door...
wilbur_the_goose's Avatar wilbur_the_goose 02:58 PM 12-13-2010
Honestly, I do have some compressed audio stored (I had about 2000 CDs to rip). But I've gone down the Microsoft Zune path - I just prefer it to the Apple products.

Fortunately, I can play my Zune Pass stuff through my XBOX 360 to my Marantz.
BingleyJoe's Avatar BingleyJoe 03:08 PM 12-13-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

^^^

hint: alac...

Does the 7005 decode ALAC, or is that just in reference to the ability to stream ALAC files from an i-device to the Marantz once AirPlay arrives?

I finally sat myself down and read through the manual and was happy to see it supports FLAC. Does anyone know if it can handle FLAC files converted for use in iTunes via Fluke?
LarryPana's Avatar LarryPana 03:35 PM 12-13-2010
[quote=BingleyJoe;19642400]Does the 7005 decode ALAC, or is that just in reference to the ability to stream ALAC files from an i-device to the Marantz once AirPlay arrives?

My understanding is that the device (iPod, iPhone, AppleTV) decodes ALAC internally and then streams (uncompressed in this case) to the Marantz. I have all lossless files on my ATV (ALAC format), with the ATV to Marantz via hdmi....plays just fine, connects to iTunes when I want, no need for my pc to be on also. Come to think of it, not sure why I would need airplay at all based on what I understand the benefits of airplay to be.
wilbur_the_goose's Avatar wilbur_the_goose 07:06 PM 12-13-2010
Having trouble getting the angle of your IR remote correct with the SR7005? Try this: http://www.cleverandeasy.com/Multime...e-control.html
ghgoldberg's Avatar ghgoldberg 08:18 PM 12-13-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilbur_the_goose View Post

Having trouble getting the angle of your IR remote correct with the SR7005? Try this: http://www.cleverandeasy.com/Multime...e-control.html

Now, THAT is cool! I'll experiment with it when my receiver arrives tomorrow. I love fixes like this. Thanks for the tip.
sgupta's Avatar sgupta 11:40 PM 12-13-2010
Just to add to the playing compressed audio discussion, most of my MP3's are fairly high quality (either variable or 192 KB). Also, the M-DAX expansion feature of the Marantz actually does a really nice job of making MP3's sound clearer - frankly, I'm not sure how, but I'm impressed.
wilbur_the_goose's Avatar wilbur_the_goose 05:12 AM 12-14-2010
I agree - the M-DAX works!
BingleyJoe's Avatar BingleyJoe 05:31 AM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilbur_the_goose View Post

Having trouble getting the angle of your IR remote correct with the SR7005? Try this: http://www.cleverandeasy.com/Multime...e-control.html

That is .... AMAZING! Assuming it works, I can't wait to fix all the stupid IR receivers littering my house! Good find
jkozlow3's Avatar jkozlow3 09:24 AM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgupta View Post

Just to add to the playing compressed audio discussion, most of my MP3's are fairly high quality (either variable or 192 KB). Also, the M-DAX expansion feature of the Marantz actually does a really nice job of making MP3's sound clearer - frankly, I'm not sure how, but I'm impressed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wilbur_the_goose View Post

I agree - the M-DAX works!

I'm a bit confused by these statements. According to ABX listening tests, compressed audio at higher bitrates (i.e. 192k) is indistinguishable from the original recording by nearly 100% of the population on most samples. Some people can pick up the occasional compression artifact on "difficult" samples if they are listening very critically for it, but this is more common on bitrates of 128k and under and requires a trained ear.

So at 192k and up, if the compressed version is indistinguishable from the original recording for most people on most samples, then M-DAX is artificially coloring the music by boosting highs, lows, etc. It might sound "better", but different than the original recording for sure.

I really think things like M-DAX are meant to be used on 128k and under compressed audio sources for this reason, but maybe I'm wrong. It just seems that if the high bitrate (192k+) compressed audio is indistinguishable from the original for >99% of the population (proven time and time again on ABX tests), we shouldn't be "altering" the recording with M-DAX, no?
LarryPana's Avatar LarryPana 11:50 AM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkozlow3 View Post

I'm a bit confused by these statements. According to ABX listening tests, compressed audio at higher bitrates (i.e. 192k) is indistinguishable from the original recording by nearly 100% of the population on most samples. Some people can pick up the occasional compression artifact on "difficult" samples if they are listening very critically for it, but this is more common on bitrates of 128k and under and requires a trained ear.

So at 192k and up, if the compressed version is indistinguishable from the original recording for most people on most samples, then M-DAX is artificially coloring the music by boosting highs, lows, etc. It might sound "better", but different than the original recording for sure.

I really think things like M-DAX are meant to be used on 128k and under compressed audio sources for this reason, but maybe I'm wrong. It just seems that if the high bitrate (192k+) compressed audio is indistinguishable from the original for >99% of the population (proven time and time again on ABX tests), we shouldn't be "altering" the recording with M-DAX, no?

Interesting. Just about every time I've ever listened to compressed audio, at more than minimal vol levels, and on a decent avr with commensurate speakers, I've noticed seemingly flatter sound quality. However, I am not sure what the bitrate was and am aware of variables from setup to setup. I've also never noticed poor quality when playing back on small stereos/in a car etc. I am curious now and will try the test tonight for fun.

On the other hand, all the talk in these forums of FLACs (ALACs in Apple's case) and various other lossless codecs must have been based on something...? Moreover, why would Marantz have come up with this improvement if its useless >128k, differences cannot be heard (I've not used MDAX yet but one would imagine the instructions indicating its best used for <128k tracks) and costs money (maybe to keep up with the competition?). Also, not sure why CDs would then need to ever have full lossless versions encoded on them, as it would almost never be needed....and again, probably costs money. Just trying to think this through.....I will try tonight and see if I can get wifey to do the blind switch for me.
wilbur_the_goose's Avatar wilbur_the_goose 12:59 PM 12-14-2010
To me, the biggest factor in music is the CD's engineering team. A poorly engineered CD, even if ripped to a lossless format will still sound poor compared to a well engineered CD ripped to a lossy format.
jkozlow3's Avatar jkozlow3 01:00 PM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryPana View Post

Interesting. Just about every time I've ever listened to compressed audio, at more than minimal vol levels, and on a decent avr with commensurate speakers, I've noticed seemingly flatter sound quality. However, I am not sure what the bitrate was and am aware of variables from setup to setup. I've also never noticed poor quality when playing back on small stereos/in a car etc. I am curious now and will try the test tonight for fun.

On the other hand, all the talk in these forums of FLACs (ALACs in Apple's case) and various other lossless codecs must have been based on something...? Moreover, why would Marantz have come up with this improvement if its useless >128k, differences cannot be heard (I've not used MDAX yet but one would imagine the instructions indicating its best used for <128k tracks) and costs money (maybe to keep up with the competition?). Also, not sure why CDs would then need to ever have full lossless versions encoded on them, as it would almost never be needed....and again, probably costs money. Just trying to think this through.....I will try tonight and see if I can get wifey to do the blind switch for me.

Well, some people simply don't like the idea of "lossy"/compressed audio whatsoever, so they use lossless formats such as FLAC/ALAC considering storage space isn't very expensive these days. However, most people who have tried to hear difference in blind listening tests, have been unsuccessful with higher bitrates.

Instead of having your wife swap tracks, I would try some ABX software with a good pair of headphones (or through your receiver/speakers if you have a means of getting the audio there from your computer) and see if you can tell a difference. You'd just need some software for the ABX testing and to encode a few tracks as lossless vs. lossy (128k/192k/256k) to see if you can hear differences when blindly flipping between the 2 samples. The software will tell you how many you got "right" at the end.

Here are some links re: ABX testing:
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=ABX
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...pic=45644&st=0
http://soundexpert.org/encoders - this page is good as it shows public ABX listening test results for various bitrates/encoders.
LarryPana's Avatar LarryPana 02:11 PM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkozlow3 View Post

Well, some people simply don't like the idea of "lossy"/compressed audio whatsoever, so they use lossless formats such as FLAC/ALAC considering storage space isn't very expensive these days. However, most people who have tried to hear difference in blind listening tests, have been unsuccessful with higher bitrates.

Instead of having your wife swap tracks, I would try some ABX software with a good pair of headphones (or through your receiver/speakers if you have a means of getting the audio there from your computer) and see if you can tell a difference. You'd just need some software for the ABX testing and to encode a few tracks as lossless vs. lossy (128k/192k/256k) to see if you can hear differences when blindly flipping between the 2 samples. The software will tell you how many you got "right" at the end.

Here are some links re: ABX testing:
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=ABX
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...pic=45644&st=0
http://soundexpert.org/encoders - this page is good as it shows public ABX listening test results for various bitrates/encoders.

I can agree to the extent that, basically 90% of folks out there have equipment that is not of Marantz quality, and consequently would not hear any difference and therefore may not have the a/v capacity to properly differentiate. I strongly believe its related to audio setup....particularly after visiting your third link, in their Testing Room, where: "Testing is really easy and looks more like fun. You don't need to have extraordinary hearing abilities or expensive audio equipment. Any PC with soundcard and headphones is OK. Any person, being able to hear, can be an expert in SoundExpert testing room." Given their PC/soundcard testing criteria, I will stick with my wife pressing one button on the Marantz (changing input from CD to ATV that I will preload with the compressed version of the same music; 128k & 256k vs. full ~1000-1500k uncompressed) and will listen.
jkozlow3's Avatar jkozlow3 02:54 PM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryPana View Post

I can agree to the extent that, basically 90% of folks out there have equipment that is not of Marantz quality, and consequently would not hear any difference and therefore may not have the a/v capacity to properly differentiate. I strongly believe its related to audio setup....particularly after visiting your third link, in their Testing Room, where: "Testing is really easy and looks more like fun. You don’t need to have extraordinary hearing abilities or expensive audio equipment. Any PC with soundcard and headphones is OK. Any person, being able to hear, can be an expert in SoundExpert testing room." Given their PC/soundcard testing criteria, I will stick with my wife pressing one button on the Marantz (changing input from CD to ATV that I will preload with the compressed version of the same music; 128k & 256k vs. full ~1000-1500k uncompressed) and will listen.

Cool, well let us know if you can hear a difference. Of course, it's only valid if you're blindfolded and the levels of the 2 sources are matched IDENTICALLY. If one is even a little louder than the other, it's not a valid test. This might be difficult to accomplish. Additionally, the CDP and Apple TV would both have to be hooked up via a digital cable so that the receiver was decoding the audio on both instead of letting the CDP decode to analog for example.

I have a better idea since you have an Apple TV. Install some software that allows ABX testing and run the samples from your computer. Then, download a free trial of the "Airfoil" software which will stream audio from any program you choose to the Apple TV. I use this software for streaming Pandora to my Apple TV every day as the Pandora One desktop player streams at 192k vs. 128k in the receiver. Anyway, the Airfoil trial is free but it overlays the audio with static after 10 minutes. Just quit and relaunch the program whenever that happens. Additionally, there is no setup required with Airfoil to use it with your Apple TV. Just choose Apple TV as the output device, set it to active, choose the software you wish to stream audio from, and make sure the volume bar is set to max in Airfoil and the software playing the audio on your computer. That's it. Music will then stream to your Apple TV with no additional setup.

This will allow you to do real ABX testing on perfectly matched sources through your receiver and speakers with no degradation of quality. All you need to do is rip a few songs at various bitrates, including lossless. This is safer than switching sources as the levels will be identical and the switch is instantaneous with ABX software - there is no delay at all. Switching sources on your receiver is too slow and the tracks will be at different points by the time you perform the switch. With ABX software, it starts playing both songs when you press play but only outputs the sound from one at a time. Then you guess which one is the higher bitrate. When you're done, it tells you your % of accurate guesses. Trust me, this method is a lot better than the one you proposed and it's free and doesn't annoy the wife either! Of course, you'd need a laptop in your lap vs. a computer in the other room to do this properly. Hopefully you have a laptop.

Try it with a few songs at various bitrates and let us know how you fare. You may find that the compressed audio is indistinguishable after all. At which point, I would stand by my statement that we probably shouldn't be "enhancing" the compressed tracks with M-DAX if they are in fact indistinguishable from the original uncompressed version in the first place.
m. zillch's Avatar m. zillch 03:05 PM 12-14-2010
*Yawn*, just another "super duper D-Lux circuit" " guaranteed to make compressed audio sound like butter!"

It's just this year's gimmick, as far as I'm concerned. I've never even pressed my button for it on my AV7005; I have no interest unless a technical explanation of what it does is presented to me first. I wouldn't be surprised if it's nothing more elaborate that a slight level boost with mild EQ circuit. Dirt cheap for them to add, audibly "better" (just has to be discernably audible and they can't be proven wrong that it isn't *cough* "better"), an extra bullet point on the spec sheet, and most importantly keeps up with the competitor's rival "DuM-Az" technology..."Now new and improved using AI!"

To quote myself from another thread regarding Onkyo's version:

Everyone and their brother has a version of this "Super Duper Enhanced Compressed Audio Enhancer Circuit Enhancer" . Nothing new here, guys. I wouldn't worry about it.

Sony, Yamaha, Denon, Kommon Hardon, Marantz, Pioneer, Clairion:

"Clarion’s ADF, or Anti-Distortion Filter, was created specifically for the purpose of enhancing the listening experience of your MP3 and WMA music collections. During compression, the fidelity of your music is drastically reduced so you can fit more files onto one recordable CD. That’s where ADF comes in. Smoothing out the audio signals so that high and low frequencies remain audible, ADF restores your MP3 and WMA music files so they sound like the original recording. Best of all, there’s no added frequency boost, which can result in dull, muffled sound. So, if you want your MP3 and WMA music files to sound cleaner and crisper, engage the ADF feature ... becaue at Clarion, we believe your compressed music collection shouldn’t have to sound compressed."
LarryPana's Avatar LarryPana 05:16 PM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkozlow3 View Post

Cool, well let us know if you can hear a difference. Of course, it's only valid if you're blindfolded and the levels of the 2 sources are matched IDENTICALLY. If one is even a little louder than the other, it's not a valid test. This might be difficult to accomplish. Additionally, the CDP and Apple TV would both have to be hooked up via a digital cable so that the receiver was decoding the audio on both instead of letting the CDP decode to analog for example.

I have a better idea since you have an Apple TV. Install some software that allows ABX testing and run the samples from your computer. Then, download a free trial of the "Airfoil" software which will stream audio from any program you choose to the Apple TV. I use this software for streaming Pandora to my Apple TV every day as the Pandora One desktop player streams at 192k vs. 128k in the receiver. Anyway, the Airfoil trial is free but it overlays the audio with static after 10 minutes. Just quit and relaunch the program whenever that happens. Additionally, there is no setup required with Airfoil to use it with your Apple TV. Just choose Apple TV as the output device, set it to active, choose the software you wish to stream audio from, and make sure the volume bar is set to max in Airfoil and the software playing the audio on your computer. That's it. Music will then stream to your Apple TV with no additional setup.

This will allow you to do real ABX testing on perfectly matched sources through your receiver and speakers with no degradation of quality. All you need to do is rip a few songs at various bitrates, including lossless. This is safer than switching sources as the levels will be identical and the switch is instantaneous with ABX software - there is no delay at all. Switching sources on your receiver is too slow and the tracks will be at different points by the time you perform the switch. With ABX software, it starts playing both songs when you press play but only outputs the sound from one at a time. Then you guess which one is the higher bitrate. When you're done, it tells you your % of accurate guesses. Trust me, this method is a lot better than the one you proposed and it's free and doesn't annoy the wife either! Of course, you'd need a laptop in your lap vs. a computer in the other room to do this properly. Hopefully you have a laptop.

Try it with a few songs at various bitrates and let us know how you fare. You may find that the compressed audio is indistinguishable after all. At which point, I would stand by my statement that we probably shouldn't be "enhancing" the compressed tracks with M-DAX if they are in fact indistinguishable from the original uncompressed version in the first place.

Thanks for this but, for myself, a little complicated when one can press play on the tracks (virtually simultaneously), leave volume untouched and simply change the input from one hdmi source to another....
jkozlow3's Avatar jkozlow3 05:25 PM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryPana View Post

Thanks for this but, for myself, a little complicated when one can press play on the tracks (virtually simultaneously), leave volume untouched and simply change the input from one hdmi source to another....

OK, but hopefully you have an SPL meter and an audio test disc so that you can set the levels of the 2 sources so that they are identical. People almost always choose the "louder" track as the better one otherwise.
wilbur_the_goose's Avatar wilbur_the_goose 05:44 PM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilbur_the_goose View Post

Having trouble getting the angle of your IR remote correct with the SR7005? Try this: http://www.cleverandeasy.com/Multime...e-control.html

Well, I just got home from work and broke out a small piece of frosted Scotch tape. It worked!
LarryPana's Avatar LarryPana 08:50 PM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkozlow3 View Post

Try it with a few songs at various bitrates and let us know how you fare. You may find that the compressed audio is indistinguishable after all. At which point, I would stand by my statement that we probably shouldn't be "enhancing" the compressed tracks with M-DAX if they are in fact indistinguishable from the original uncompressed version in the first place.

I did it and it sounds like my speakers were covered with a sheet, (flatter shade, tinnier); two channel source direct mode - although with some songs it was admitedly harder. Also, when engaging MDAX, sound seems to be just louder, slightly more amplified with each degree. Overall, I'm satisfied that, given my setup and ears, I noticed a difference. I also very much agree with the earlier post where sound may be reflected in how a cd or BD is encoded. Anyhow, love playing with the Marantz! Cheers.
LarryPana's Avatar LarryPana 09:01 PM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilbur_the_goose View Post

Well, I just got home from work and broke out a small piece of frosted Scotch tape. It worked!

This is interesting....thanks. Did you cover the whole sensor area or just a part? I guess one would probably want to just cover it all for uniformity's sake.
jkozlow3's Avatar jkozlow3 11:27 PM 12-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryPana View Post

I did it and it sounds like my speakers were covered with a sheet, (flatter shade, tinnier); two channel source direct mode - although with some songs it was admitedly harder. Also, when engaging MDAX, sound seems to be just louder, slightly more amplified with each degree. Overall, I'm satisfied that, given my setup and ears, I noticed a difference. I also very much agree with the earlier post where sound may be reflected in how a cd or BD is encoded. Anyhow, love playing with the Marantz! Cheers.

Interesting. Using the setup I recommended (ABX software on laptop>Airfoil stream>AppleTV>Receiver>$300 Beyerdynamic DT880 headphones) I have a very difficult time reliably telling 128k MP3 apart from lossless tracks personally. Granted, I've done pretty limited testing, but the ABX logs are proof that my ears aren't as golden as I think they are - at least not with the music selection I've used for ABX testing anyway. It would be interesting to see if your results were the same using a more scientific approach.
wilbur_the_goose's Avatar wilbur_the_goose 06:43 AM 12-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryPana View Post
This is interesting....thanks. Did you cover the whole sensor area or just a part? I guess one would probably want to just cover it all for uniformity's sake.
Larry - I covered the entire circular area. I actually went bigger and folded the tape over on both ends so I could easily remove it. Eventually I'll trim it down so it covers only the IR receiver.
tkbryant's Avatar tkbryant 03:53 PM 12-16-2010
Ordered mine late last night. Looking forward to hopefully getting this bad boy before Christmas.
kevin_mahaney's Avatar kevin_mahaney 07:25 PM 12-16-2010
Out of curiosity, is anyone running 4-ohm speakers with the sr7005?
Tags: Marantz , Marantz Sr7005 Audio Video Receiver Black
First ... 14  15  16 17  18  ... Last

Up
Mobile  Desktop