Can anyone make a recommendation between these two, esp if you've used both? My understanding is that the main important difference is that the Arcam will take analog in, allowing me to use the Oppo DAC, and the Anthem will take only digital, but then the Anthem's ARC room corrections appears to be better than Arcam's equivalent, and beyond that, I don't know if I should be valuing the Oppo DAC so highly over the AVR DACs anyway.
Further relevant threads are: Anthem MRX vs Arcam AVR400 feature comparison and Anthem MRX receivers. Since the feature comparison thread was dropped, has any community consensus on these two systems developed?
I have not heard ARC in a setting where I could say how it performs, but it's well reviewed and well liked around here.
The main relevant difference between the two seems to be whether one values legacy inputs (analog multichannel in, S-video) or superior room correction software more highly.
Also, cost. The MRX-700 is cheaper, right? Also, Anthem's lower line AVR's don't seem to give up much (just a smidgen of power, along with internet and HD radio features) but reduce costs quite a bit.
My choice would be the Anthem (depending on whether HD radio is important to you, probably the MRX500 or MRX300) with the cheaper Oppo player. Don't think you'd lose anything, but you'd gain ARC.
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog
I vaguely remember from the Hometheater.com reviews that the characteristics distortion curves on the amplification were rather different when one reviewed the measured performance (MRX 300 vs MRX 700. Was a little more to it than just sheer power.
eta: distortion characteristic between the graphs in the two top reviews looks identical to me other than the 300's running out of power sooner. Much has been made on the internet over the MRX 700's all-channel power but it's all based on one erroneous measurement in what just happened to be the first MRX review. There is nothing to support it, not even the possibility of a bad sample since its overall performance would have also suffered. But wait there's more - at the very end the S&V review reports significant rolloff above 5 kHz when using the USB input. We re-checked performance after that but have never seen or heard of anything like what's reported from anywhere else. I can only guess that ARC was left on when USB-in frequency response was measured.
Audiosceptics accept audio trials using 25 people. A recent Oxford study with over 353,000 patient records from 639 separate clinical trials shows for every 1,000 people taking diclofenac or ibuprofen there would be 3 additional heart attacks, 4 more cases of heart failure and 1 death every year.
-Bowers and Wilkins CM9s
-Bowers and Wilkins CM center 2
-Paradigm Studio ADP-590
-undecided (Epik? JTR Cap? the corresponding B&W? totally open here...)
Can anyone comment if they see something here as a mistake/poor choice/poor mix, or can recommend something better? Suggestions? Advice?
The room is a high-aspect-ratio approximate rectangle, with a slanted, partially vaulted ceiling on the front half, and openings to a den, small kitchen, and hallway at the back which immediately turns to the side; the room is ~4k ft^3, discounting adjoining open rooms. I live in an apt and have neighbors to the left, right, and below, and while I want to be able to fill the space, I do not want to annoy them if possible.
I don't think I need the analog in from the Arcam, and I think my room will benefit highly from the Anthem's ARC room correction. The only thing I really have going for it is the carpeted floor and preponderance of couches (three.)
B&W CM9 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwtJmI3YjIc
Paradigm Studio 100 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7qDZ...eature=related
B&W N804 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KORkO...eature=related