The "Official" Denon AVR-4311CI/AVR-A100 thread [NO PRICE TALK] - Page 75 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2221 of 23398 Old 10-20-2010, 04:52 PM
Member
 
Kbueno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwantmythx View Post

topless pics please. you know what i mean.

+1
Kbueno is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2222 of 23398 Old 10-20-2010, 05:52 PM
Member
 
tephra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by unclemat View Post

So I am comparing 4311ci to Marantz SR7005. To my disappointment... the Marantz sounds quite a bit better. Hard to describe, but seems overall cleaner and more detailed, especially noticeable with vocals. Mostly comparing using Audyssey with DynEq enabled. Needless to say I calibrated both in exactly the same conditions, using the same locations for measurements.

Also 4311ci seems to be subdued in bass area. Interestingly 4311ci adjusted the subwoofer to -7 db, while SR7005 to -1 db. The bass is missing in the front speakers nevertheless as well. Seems like the Audyssey takes away the bass, since going to direct mode makes the difference (compared to the Marantz) bass-wise very small (if at all). DynEq brings some of it back but not quite.

Why don't you adjust the EQ curve manually to match the 7005? (or at least to match what your ears like)

I found that with my loaner AVR-1910 I had the same thing with my PMC's OMB1's - 6db on the bottom end... Sounded "less than full"... changed that to -2db and everything sounds much nicer..
tephra is offline  
post #2223 of 23398 Old 10-20-2010, 09:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
unclemat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 683
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

Well, Bummmer I guess...

A couple questions. If your sub was set so radically different, I am assuming the other speakers were set about thew same or you would have commented? This setting alone probably might account for the difference you heard. a 6db delta would be noticeable. Also, lower volume is one of the few real things we can tell (at least with this much difference) and therefore that lack of volume would be perceived as inferior sound. Just a thought.

I do think the amplifier design is somewhat different from Marantz. Marketing lingo makes little differences in to big ones. Personally, I think that I can hear differences in amps but not as to a definition of "cleaner". Every modern amp I have ever heard has been very clean. What type of processing did you use onn both units? Maybe something was set different between the two. My external amps seem "faster" and more "effortless". Never squelched and capable of getting very loud, very fast. Just as subjective as your comments and probably more in my head than anything.

What you are stating does not fit my perceived sense of tighter treble and more content for things like shattered glass and other high tones. Did you re-run EQ? Perhaps it was a bad read. Who knows?

It could also be the Marantz was/is just better in your room. Then, if so, I'd keep the Marantz; especially if you don't need/want 11.2. Frankly, I would probably seriously consider the Marantz if not for the features of the 4311. In fact, if you look at my HTPC in the rack I previously posted, my HTPC looks suspiciously like a Marantz unit. Eerily like, I might add.

Let us know how the system sounds with the Bass re EQd or perhaps even manually lifted in volume.

Ok, so I redid the calibration on both receivers. Back to back, same spots (roughly, I did not mark them). Results (distance, correction):

Marantz:

FL: 3.27 m, -2.5 dB
C: 3.06 m, -1.5 dB
FR: 3.30 m, -3.5 dB
SL: 1.86 m, -1.5 dB
SR: 2.01 m, -1.5 dB
SBL: 2.31 m, -3 dB
SBR: 2.40 m, -2.5 dB
FHL: 3.60 m, +1 dB
FHR: 3.66 m, -0.5 dB
SW: 2.22 m, +1 dB

Crossovers (F/C/S/Back/Height): 40/80/60/40/40 Hz

Denon:

FL: 3.30 m, -3.5 dB
C: 3.06 m, -2 dB
FR: 3.33 m, -3.5 dB
SL: 1.89 m, -2 dB
SR: 2.01 m, -2 dB
SBL: 2.31 m, -4 dB
SBR: 2.40 m, -3.5 dB
FHL: 3.63 m, 0 dB
FHR: 3.66 m, -1 dB
SW: 2.25 m, -5 dB

Crossovers (F/C/S/Back/Height): Full/60/60/40/40 Hz


Note, amazingly close distance measurements.

So... the difference in the subwoofer level is there. I dialed back the sub a tiny bit to bring it closer to the 75 dB XT32 calls for during calibration, hence got -5 dB now vs -7 dB before, still 6 dB difference vs. Marantz.

Anyway.... after more listening involving more kinds of music I am starting to... prefer the Denon! I also got my wife involved and she had clear preference for the Denon's sound, particularly for classical and vocal pieces - practically right off the bat (and she could not care less, nor knew which one I set up).

Marantz appears more dynamic but now I think it is somewhat misleading. It has more edge, and gives impression of more detailed sounds, but perhaps in reality it's just harsher - brighter? Also the bass is indeed more pronounced, even with Audyssey disabled (very small difference but we both agreed it was there). With Audyssey + DynEq it actually puts out too much bass. I liked it for some rock/pop pieces, but after listening to some classic, jazz I think it just way exaggerates it. For example after listening to a piece with some string bass Marantz was clearly overdoing the bass, and the string bass instrument did not sound like one, it was just one deep boomy mess, while it sounded just right with Denon.

I also per the Audyssey guy's suggestion (from the official Audyssey thread) set front speakers to small, despite them being detected as large. This is indeed better choice, the bass sounds cleaner.

So here it is. I totally like results, since having the fronts on all the time without having to choose between them and backs is great. Ratatouille's opening sequence with rain is flat out awesome.
unclemat is offline  
post #2224 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 01:03 AM
Senior Member
 
jdc115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 455
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by fookoo_2010 View Post

There is already speculation on the Audyssey sticky thread that the 4311CI will be discontinued and that Audyssey MultEQ XT32 Sub EQ HT will be kicked up to higher ($3K+) and more expensive Denon models, as what apparently happened with XT. In that case, the 4311 may actually appreciate in value, along with the vaunted A100.

I don't think that is a rumor, just somebody's wild speculation based on the thoughts in his head and hardly makes sense to me.
jdc115 is offline  
post #2225 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 01:42 AM
Senior Member
 
Hugo S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: France
Posts: 453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Hi,

OK here we go:

1- the package is tough and even if it's not quite a double boxing, it's almost that... see picture.

2- the total weight of the box is 23.2kgs and the A100 itself weights 18.5kgs... on my scale... the impression given is a product VERY tough, compact, dense...

3- yes it is made in Japan, as far as this European version is concerned,

4- the black glossy finish is very nice (see picture). In my opinion it is very sober and feels definitively High End. It is something close to the Pioneer Elite finish. This is esthetical matter, subjective by definition, but in my opinion it clearly gives the impression that you get what you pay for...

5- the picture took from above (sorry there won't be any "topless"...) seem to indicate that the (amplifier) radiators than those of the 4311. This as far as the published pictures of the 4311 are concerned. (see picture)

Now concerning the AVR A100 itself. The availability of this product (as far as France is concerned) is limited to 100 pieces only. My dealer (well known Parisian dealer) got only 5 pieces of this product even if he ordered 20 of them (and I got one of these few )...

The price here is 2500€ (yes that's the list price...) and at this present moment no discount is offered (even to "good old" clients)... so we'll discuss "value" after the installation .

Now I'm going to install this product today, it will take the place of my actual Onkyo 5007 + SVS AS EQ1.

I'll keep you posted with the first impressions. Even though this would have been better if Audyssey have made available their 3.4 Pro software for an Audyssey Pro calibration of this A100, as I have the Audyssey Pro Kit...

Hugo
LL
LL
LL

Hugo S is offline  
post #2226 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 05:03 AM
Member
 
InterestedUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Congrats Hugo.

Interested to hear of the differences compared with the Onkyo/AS-EQ1. I wonder if your Manual specifies what DACs are used?
InterestedUser is offline  
post #2227 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 06:39 AM
Member
 
Brett Miles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: KS
Posts: 195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I posted a question to the Denon Facebook page the other day asking if there was an update on the release of the Airplay download. Today they replied with the following:

"As a follow up, Apple is upgrading what Airplay's capabilities and is now expecting a release the end of November."

I wonder what the "upgraded capabilities" will be .
Brett Miles is offline  
post #2228 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 07:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Djoel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 7,506
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Congrats Hugo..Looks great, any chance of getting a rear shot? The Binding post suppose to be different as well? Or is it just the in's/ and outs?

Thanks

Djoel
Djoel is online now  
post #2229 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 08:29 AM
Member
 
mattsplat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Great pics! Definitely has a more high end look than the 4311. The binding posts are supposed to be upgraded, I have seen pictures where they are clear plastic as opposed to the red/black of the 4311.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brett Miles View Post

I posted a question to the Denon Facebook page the other day asking if there was an update on the release of the Airplay download. Today they replied with the following:

"As a follow up, Apple is upgrading what Airplay's capabilities and is now expecting a release the end of November."

I wonder what the "upgraded capabilities" will be .

Forgot to mention: when I talked to Denon tech support, she said the Airplay update will be FREE (contrary to some rumors, it's not an upgrade).

As for upgraded capabilities ... anyone thinking video streaming? We can hope!
mattsplat is offline  
post #2230 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 09:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SeattleHTGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Puget Sound, WA
Posts: 1,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Unclemat and others.

It is interesting to see how very close the speaker placement was by Audyssey between the two receivers. Also, in most cases the boost db range for each setting was very, very close. This is probably why your answers (as are mine) often subjective in regards to actual sound playback. The sub, being so far off between the two would be apparent. Glad to hear you are getting it dialed down. Frankly, the differences between most modern receivers as far as sound goes, IMHO is more related to the EQ features and less to what type of amp topography is utilized.

So hear is where I have a question. I set my mains to 60HZ crossover as well as most of my surrounds. Only the smaller heights and Rear Surrounds did I set to 80Hz. Audyssey initially set the Left and Right to Full. So, as noted, I over rode as I use to do with the 4810. I also have the subs taking LFE and Main. I listen to most stuff at around -10 db to -20 db on the Denon and use Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume (Day or Evening - Evening after the kids crash).

So.... unlike Unclemat, I seem to be getting too much bass (For my taste). For the first time since owning them, my little B&W ASW 2500s are getting slogged around nightly. No flailing subs yet but boy, there is quite a bit of content going in and roughing up my subs. :-)

Should I ditch the LFE + Main setting and let my quite capable fronts play non LFE material down to the mid 30ish HZ range? Will this take any load off the subs? I set the front sub to around 78 79 db and the rear to around 75db when I did my initial EQ. As noted, I am no engineer. I just assumed the Denon EQ process smoothed this out to volume match as long as the subs were in the range required to take a reading. If I set the subs down a notch and re-EQ'd would this bring down overall sub output, say 3db or so?

I really like the sound from my subs, it's just that the volume is a bit surprising vs the old 4810. Low Bass sounds quite tight but I am concerned that when I finally do get to play a reference level action movie, it will just be too much Bass. I know that Dynamic Volume is boosting the Bass at non reference levels and at reference this will be turned off, but just looking for ideas.
SeattleHTGuy is offline  
post #2231 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 09:53 AM
Member
 
GollyJer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: T-Town, WA
Posts: 65
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo S View Post

Hi,

OK here we go:

4- the black glossy finish is very nice (see picture). In my opinion it is very sober and feels definitively High End. It is something close to the Pioneer Elite finish. This is esthetical matter, subjective by definition, but in my opinion it clearly gives the impression that you get what you pay for...

5- the picture took from above (sorry there won't be any "topless"...) seem to indicate that the (amplifier) radiators than those of the 4311. This as far as the published pictures of the 4311 are concerned. (see picture)

Not to be a douche... but here I go

It may be those pictures don't do it justice but from where I stand the A100 does not look different enough to warrant the price difference.
If (4311 sound quality) = (A100 sound quality) then (price difference) = not worth it.

The fact that my AVR is squirreled away in a cabinet may be swaying my judgement.
However, for me, paying the A100 premium is like paying for cosmetic surgery and then moving to Antarctica. No one will see it!

That being said I still want one. But... my gear must be more awesomer than yours! I'd fly My Precious back to Japan and convince high profile Denon employees to dremel inscribe their signatures on the top panel. Cheif among them Mr. Denon himself. He's been there 100 years! Oh, and I'd get them to twist one extra coil in there somewhere so the insides of My Precious WILL be different.

At most this will add a few thousand dollars to the price of the A100. But, even though I'm 33 mom still pays for everything. I "have" the money so why not right?

It is a tough call though. After typing this all out it seems a little impractical... wait... I just found a discount code! It's on!
GollyJer is offline  
post #2232 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 09:55 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 23,880
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 210 Post(s)
Liked: 968
SeattleHTGuy -- the LFE+MAIN setting is actually irrelevant when speakers are set to SMALL. It only affects the bass of full band speakers (allowing the low end to go to the sub for "double bass"). So that isn't the problem

did you remember to dial down the Reference Offset? You might have had that setting adjusted (e.g. by 10dB) on the 4810 but forgot to do it on new unit. That is usually the cure for bloated bass from the cable box and music sources...

batpig's "Denon-to-English Dictionary"
Setup Guide and FAQ
http://batpigworld.com/

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is online now  
post #2233 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 10:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SeattleHTGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Puget Sound, WA
Posts: 1,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

SeattleHTGuy -- the LFE+MAIN setting is actually irrelevant when speakers are set to SMALL. It only affects the bass of full band speakers (allowing the low end to go to the sub for "double bass"). So that isn't the problem

did you remember to dial down the Reference Offset? You might have had that setting adjusted (e.g. by 10dB) on the 4810 but forgot to do it on new unit. That is usually the cure for bloated bass from the cable box and music sources...

Thanks, I usually set the Reference Offset to default 0. also, thanks for the LFE + Main explanation. I think that I'll need to dig deeper on this. I actually was getting too much Bass for my tastes with a Blu Ray "Star Trek" viewing last night. It was and is a fantastic audio track. I really didn't want to tone down using the Reference Offset feature for high quality movies but this may do it.
SeattleHTGuy is offline  
post #2234 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 10:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 23,880
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 210 Post(s)
Liked: 968
hmm, it's interesting that you are getting that issue with a Blu-ray. Did you view this same film with the 4810?

it's a bit weird that there would be a big bass/LFE difference between the two units...

batpig's "Denon-to-English Dictionary"
Setup Guide and FAQ
http://batpigworld.com/

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is online now  
post #2235 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 10:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SeattleHTGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Puget Sound, WA
Posts: 1,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

hmm, it's interesting that you are getting that issue with a Blu-ray. Did you view this same film with the 4810?

it's a bit weird that there would be a big bass/LFE difference between the two units...

Yes, I did review. This is why I am confused. It is a substantial difference. I'm not sure why and deciphering the manual, I am at a loss. It's not like it's bad and perhaps with the EQ XT 32 more like it should be but given UncleMat's observation of being dialed down a ton from the Marantz, this is where our first impressions differ greatly. For good TV 5.1 content, I can definitely say I prefer the 4311, for movies (the somewhat elevated Bass is great), I am almost a bit concerned of trying at full reference until I figure out what I have heard so far. The B&Ws will protect themselves but at -12 db with the last movie, the little subs were playing pretty hard.
SeattleHTGuy is offline  
post #2236 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 10:26 AM
Advanced Member
 
unclemat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 683
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

Thanks, I usually set the Reference Offset to default 0. also, thanks for the LFE + Main explanation. I think that I'll need to dig deeper on this. I actually was getting too much Bass for my tastes with a Blu Ray "Star Trek" viewing last night. It was and is a fantastic audio track. I really didn't want to tone down using the Reference Offset feature for high quality movies but this may do it.

Btw, I have the reference offset set to 15 dB for DynEQ - only for music. For movies, I keep it at 0 dB (per the manual recommendation).
unclemat is offline  
post #2237 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 11:40 AM
Member
 
mattsplat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

Yes, I did review. This is why I am confused. It is a substantial difference. I'm not sure why and deciphering the manual, I am at a loss. It's not like it's bad and perhaps with the EQ XT 32 more like it should be but given UncleMat's observation of being dialed down a ton from the Marantz, this is where our first impressions differ greatly. For good TV 5.1 content, I can definitely say I prefer the 4311, for movies (the somewhat elevated Bass is great), I am almost a bit concerned of trying at full reference until I figure out what I have heard so far. The B&Ws will protect themselves but at -12 db with the last movie, the little subs were playing pretty hard.

Remember that DynEQ is making a compensation to bring the bass back to reference levels, in terms of the way humans perceive it (equal loudness). At reference, DynEQ should not be making ANY compensation whatsoever. So you shouldn't be hearing elevated bass when you're actually at reference volume, at least not due to DynEQ.

I think it'd be worth a try, as you mentioned those B&W subs have good protection ... unless you're hearing distortion or excessive cabinet vibration you're OK. I wonder if you've even heard them play that loud before! Worse comes to worse you could always make manual adjustments via the tone controls or the sub level control. Or, at less than reference, the DynEQ offset, it is a user preference setting so you shouldn't feel like you're sacrificing anything by changing it. I played with it quite a bit until I found 10dB was my preferred setting for music.
mattsplat is offline  
post #2238 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 11:54 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

I really like the sound from my subs, it's just that the volume is a bit surprising vs the old 4810. Low Bass sounds quite tight but I am concerned that when I finally do get to play a reference level action movie, it will just be too much Bass. I know that Dynamic Volume is boosting the Bass at non reference levels and at reference this will be turned off, but just looking for ideas.

Lower the sub level?

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #2239 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 12:00 PM
Member
 
Kbueno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by GollyJer View Post

Not to be a douche... but here I go

It may be those pictures don't do it justice but from where I stand the A100 does not look different enough to warrant the price difference.
If (4311 sound quality) = (A100 sound quality) then (price difference) = not worth it.

The fact that my AVR is squirreled away in a cabinet may be swaying my judgement.
However, for me, paying the A100 premium is like paying for cosmetic surgery and then moving to Antarctica. No one will see it!

That being said I still want one. But... my gear must be more awesomer than yours! I'd fly My Precious back to Japan and convince high profile Denon employees to dremel inscribe their signatures on the top panel. Cheif among them Mr. Denon himself. He's been there 100 years! Oh, and I'd get them to twist one extra coil in there somewhere so the insides of My Precious WILL be different.

At most this will add a few thousand dollars to the price of the A100. But, even though I'm 33 mom still pays for everything. I "have" the money so why not right?

It is a tough call though. After typing this all out it seems a little impractical... wait... I just found a discount code! It's on!

If my receiver was hidden away in a cabinet or behind glass, I'd have a 4311 now...but my current set-up has the receiver centered just below the TV. The finish of the A100, IMHO, is head & shoulders above the 4311 and that was the main reason for me why I went that route. I would think you'd get some extra resale $$ due to its exclusivity and of course the special block condensors and the gold bling posts are a must have...LOL.
Kbueno is offline  
post #2240 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 12:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SeattleHTGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Puget Sound, WA
Posts: 1,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post


Lower the sub level?

Damn, so retro...... I guess that is a solution.....
SeattleHTGuy is offline  
post #2241 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 12:53 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
JimP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Wetumpka, AL
Posts: 15,294
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by unclemat View Post

So I am comparing 4311ci to Marantz SR7005. To my disappointment... the Marantz sounds quite a bit better. Hard to describe, but seems overall cleaner and more detailed, especially noticeable with vocals. Mostly comparing using Audyssey with DynEq enabled. Needless to say I calibrated both in exactly the same conditions, using the same locations for measurements.

Also 4311ci seems to be subdued in bass area. Interestingly 4311ci adjusted the subwoofer to -7 db, while SR7005 to -1 db. The bass is missing in the front speakers nevertheless as well. Seems like the Audyssey takes away the bass, since going to direct mode makes the difference (compared to the Marantz) bass-wise very small (if at all). DynEq brings some of it back but not quite.

Bit bummer, because 4311ci is clearly a winner in features department, for me mostly due to the nine amps - I installed fronts heights and like them and I'd rather use them together with the rears. This is rather unexpected since SR7005 is ostensibly based on 3311ci, which is a lesser grade Denon (also SR7005 is much lighter than 4311ci ). Marantz claims better components (HDAM) and current feedback amplifier, something that is not mentioned in the literature of either of the Denons, but who knows how much of this is marketing spin.

The difference in audio quality is not huge (except the bass where it's very noticeable) but is there (for me). Of course take this for what it is - my opinion in my listening environment and equipment (btw I am using Polk RTI A5 speakers as fronts). I am not an audiophile, I am coming from a 10 years old Onkyo stereo shelf system. And I don't believe one bit in audiophile grade speakers cables or interconnects


Time to double check all your connections to be sure that you don't have something wired backwards.

Also, do both units have the same version of Audyssey? I thought the Marantz has the version before 32. Is that incorrect?

Do the differences still exist when you turn off Audyssey in both?

Samsung 64F8500, Panasonic 65VT50, Oppo 95, Tivo Roamio for OTA, Dish VIP722, Marantz AV8801 preamp, Rotel Amps, Atlantic Tech 8200 speakers, Seaton Submersive HP, Calman 5, Chromapure, Accupel DVG-5000, i1Display3pro, i1pro2, eecolor colorbox.
JimP is offline  
post #2242 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 01:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,831
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 244 Post(s)
Liked: 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

Yes, I did review. This is why I am confused. It is a substantial difference. I'm not sure why and deciphering the manual, I am at a loss. It's not like it's bad and perhaps with the EQ XT 32 more like it should be but given UncleMat's observation of being dialed down a ton from the Marantz, this is where our first impressions differ greatly. For good TV 5.1 content, I can definitely say I prefer the 4311, for movies (the somewhat elevated Bass is great), I am almost a bit concerned of trying at full reference until I figure out what I have heard so far. The B&Ws will protect themselves but at -12 db with the last movie, the little subs were playing pretty hard.

I don't recall--did you measure your sub levels with the SPL? After XT32 calibration, my combined sub level was approximately 5 dB lower than the satellite levels. I raised the combined sub trim level in the AVR and it sounds normal to me.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #2243 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 01:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
ghstudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Is there really a good reason to spend the extra $500 for the A100? I will only be using the processor side of the 4311 and not sure I'll even get beyond 7:2 but I want audyssey xt32. Use will be 99% Home theater with bluray's and FIOS HDTV.

Your thoughts please.... I'd like to get one of them on order. I need to upgrade my lexicon DC-2...it's time
ghstudio is offline  
post #2244 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 01:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CoreyM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghstudio View Post

Is there really a good reason to spend the extra $500 for the A100?

If you have to ask the question the answer is probably no.
CoreyM is offline  
post #2245 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 01:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SeattleHTGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Puget Sound, WA
Posts: 1,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post


I don't recall--did you measure your sub levels with the SPL? After XT32 calibration, my combined sub level was approximately 5 dB lower than the satellite levels. I raised the combined sub trim level in the AVR and it sounds normal to me.

Gee, great idea. I'll hit the SPL Meter tonight. didn't even think of it, too busy watching stuff. I will report back as it appears others have noted lower sub output.
SeattleHTGuy is offline  
post #2246 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 01:57 PM
Member
 
GangGreenD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: MA
Posts: 50
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghstudio View Post

Is there really a good reason to spend the extra $500 for the A100?

To me the main reason to get the AVR-A100 is because you are a denon enthusiast, have plans to purchase other 100-year Anniversary gear, and want it all to aesthetically match.
GangGreenD is offline  
post #2247 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 02:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
ghstudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoreyM View Post

If you have to ask the question the answer is probably no.

Thank you for your most helpful response.
ghstudio is offline  
post #2248 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 02:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,831
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 244 Post(s)
Liked: 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

Gee, great idea. I'll hit the SPL Meter tonight. didn't even think of it, too busy watching stuff. I will report back as it appears others have noted lower sub output.

There is always the issue of the RS SPL's response at low frequencies. To minimize this, I used the SPL level-setting tool in REW, with the RS SPL calibration file loaded. This should give you a ball-park reading of the sub level versus the level of your satellites. I'm looking forward to what you discover.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #2249 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 02:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CoreyM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghstudio View Post

Thank you for your most helpful response.

I'm not being a jerk.

The people buying the A100 seem to be money is no object "I want the best even if there's no difference" and the people buying the 4311 seem to be "this is the biggest bang for the buck on the market right now".

So if you are thinking to yourself "Is this worth $500" then I'm going to put you in the no camp just for asking the question.

Or you can sit back and watch another 2-3 pages of arguments back and forth between both camps whether or not the A100 has better DACs or some other black magic going on inside.
CoreyM is offline  
post #2250 of 23398 Old 10-21-2010, 02:17 PM
Member
 
Kbueno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghstudio View Post

Is there really a good reason to spend the extra $500 for the A100? I will only be using the processor side of the 4311 and not sure I'll even get beyond 7:2 but I want audyssey xt32. Use will be 99% Home theater with bluray's and FIOS HDTV.

Your thoughts please.... I'd like to get one of them on order. I need to upgrade my lexicon DC-2...it's time

Besides the differences mentioned which are chiefly aesthetic, the fact that its hand crafted means its received special attention and less likely to fail, hence the long 5 year warranty. That alone is worth a few hundred to me.
Kbueno is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Audyssey , Denon Avr 4311ci 9 2 Channel Network Multi Room Home Theater Receiver With Hdmi 1 4a , Denon Avr A100 100th Anniversary 9 2 140w , Denon
Gear in this thread

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off