The **OFFICIAL** DENON AVR-4520CI thread - Page 192 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
Thread Tools
post #5731 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 10:55 AM
Member
 
bcec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 23
thanks mates. So sounds like Audyssey is the #1 reason I should prefer the denon over pioneer. I know Pioneer has class d amps. Does Denon have class a/b? Does a/b sound better?

as far as the 2k flagship receiver, I will eventually extend to 7.1 in the not so distant future. My martin logan 40s are also 4ohms so need a slightly higher end to drive those.
bcec is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #5732 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 11:08 AM
Member
 
scbartling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 137
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Hi Folks,

Am just getting around to accepting the most recent firmware update for the 4520.

All prior updates have been easy to accomplish without any issues.

But I'm having trouble with the most recent update (the 9/9/2013 firmware update). When I select "get update", the main AVR display goes blank and I only see the passthrough video on the TV while the 4520 remains powered on.

After waiting for a couple of hours, I gave up and power cycled the 4520. Upon power up, it again tells me there is a firmware update available. If I select the "get update" option again, I simply repeat the initial behavior ... the AVR screen blanks out with the unit remaining powered. No other activity seems to occur.

Any ideas ?

- Steven
scbartling is offline  
post #5733 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 11:16 AM
Member
 
scbartling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 137
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by scbartling View Post

Hi Folks,

Am just getting around to accepting the most recent firmware update for the 4520.

All prior updates have been easy to accomplish without any issues.

But I'm having trouble with the most recent update (the 9/9/2013 firmware update). When I select "get update", the main AVR display goes blank and I only see the passthrough video on the TV while the 4520 remains powered on.

After waiting for a couple of hours, I gave up and power cycled the 4520. Upon power up, it again tells me there is a firmware update available. If I select the "get update" option again, I simply repeat the initial behavior ... the AVR screen blanks out with the unit remaining powered. No other activity seems to occur.

Any ideas ?

- Steven

More info. If I power up the dish network hopper DVR, audio and video continue to play. Also, the 4520 AVR display is now blank once the power up sequence is complete. The 4520 appears to continue to function as before but the main display is now switches off after the initial power up sequence (the display shows the usual sequence during power up, then switches off once the power up sequence completes).

- Steven
scbartling is offline  
post #5734 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 11:26 AM
Member
 
scbartling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 137
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by scbartling View Post

More info. If I power up the dish network hopper DVR, audio and video continue to play. Also, the 4520 AVR display is now blank once the power up sequence is complete. The 4520 appears to continue to function as before but the main display is now switches off after the initial power up sequence (the display shows the usual sequence during power up, then switches off once the power up sequence completes).

- Steven

Looks like I am solving my own problem.

For some reason, the receiver was in "pure direct mode". Someone must have selected that mode by accident when picking up the remote.

Interestingly enough, the 4520 stops displaying the usual visual menu overlays on the TV when the receiver is in pure direct mode. It also blanks the AVR display after the power up sequence is completed so that there is no feedback to the user as to the state of the receiver. Pressing the setup button on the remote did not pop the usual overlay on the video screen, so I got suspicious the receiver is in some funky mode and started experimenting.

When I put the 4520 into "movie mode", the unit now behaves normally with the main AVR display unit displaying the state of the receiver and/or menu prompts as well as the normal video overlay on top of the signal going to the TV. Now I could see that the 4520 was asking for me to take further action after the initial "go update" was selected. When the receiver is in pure direct mode, all subsequent video overlay prompt screens were suppressed for some reason.

I hope this information helps someone else if they experience similar concerns.

- Steven
scbartling is offline  
post #5735 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 11:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JohnAV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 6,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcec View Post

Hey guys, I am going back and forth between a 4520ci and Pioneer SC-77, but can't make up my mind. I have a 5.1 system with MartinLogan Motion 40 (2x front), 30 (1x center), 15(2x rear) and a sub. I listened to both at my local BB, they sounded almost the same, but maybe Pioneer was a tad brighter. Just purely speaking from the audio quality point of view, is there anything I should consider that makes 4520ci a better avr?
These two have been compared in several forums. Besides that room equalization. The Pioneer lacks analog inputs now, so it not like you can use a Oppo BDP-105 BD player with the AVR. The sound quality of a AB amp is a bit warmer. A class D amp will certainly put out higher watts to all channels loaded at once in a 4 ohm mode, because it is pulsed rather then continuous, but yes you will hear a bit brighter response then AB. In a real world you never see the surrounds all pumping as much watts as the front pair even if you have a 4 ohm system (5.1 -> 9,1). There was a bit of back and forth about Audyssey processing set to a maximum 48 kHz/ 24 bit but even if you input 96 kHz or 192 kHz /24 bit content, but again you would never hear any difference unless you had a ultra low distortion pre-pro/amp involved say in a studio. The AVR-4520CI has fans that will kick on if it reaches a certain thermal setting, while the SC-77 has no fans. The SC-77 can get extremely hot when inadequate airflow is provided, the AVR-4520 has a bit more heat sink structure, but can get very hot also in same situation. Both need to be put in rack with plenty of space above of the AVR. Love the 4520 web interface makes controlling what it does by remote very easy.

Oppo Beta Group
JohnAV is offline  
post #5736 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 11:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,718
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2554 Post(s)
Liked: 2260
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcec View Post

Hey guys, I am going back and forth between a 4520ci and Pioneer SC-77, but can't make up my mind. I have a 5.1 system with MartinLogan Motion 40 (2x front), 30 (1x center), 15(2x rear) and a sub. I listened to both at my local BB, they sounded almost the same, but maybe Pioneer was a tad brighter. Just purely speaking from the audio quality point of view, is there anything I should consider that makes 4520ci a better avr?

 

Audyssey MultEQ XT32, without question. Leagues ahead of MCACC which doesn't even EQ bass - the very frequencies that need it most.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #5737 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 12:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 8,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 260 Post(s)
Liked: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

MCACC which doesn't even EQ bass - the very frequencies that need it most.

not exactly true, kb

what it doesn't do is EQ the dedicated subwoofer or LFE output. there is a difference, obviously.

Pioneer EQ's 63, 125, 250 Hz bands in speakers. plus there is a parametric notch filter, that you can manually select 3 freq's center points, the Q value and cuts or let it select & EQ the 3 filters automatically; Pioneer calls it Standing Wave Filter.

while there's no question the current MCACC can't EQ subs which is a disadvantage compared to Audyssey and needs to be improved by Pioneer, it's not as bad as your statement implies.

btw - I think this is no secret to those who attended the Pioneer AVS demo day back in June, they do have plans for some very interesting changes to MCACC.

Steve
ss9001 is offline  
post #5738 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 12:18 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,278
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
Liked: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

not technically true, kb

what it doesn't do is EQ the dedicated subwoofer or LFE output. there is a difference, obviously.

Pioneer EQ's 63, 125, 250 Hz bands in speakers. plus there is a parametric notch filter, that you can manually select 3 freq's center points, the Q value and cuts or let it select & EQ the 3 filters automatically; Pioneer calls it Standing Wave Filter.

while there's no question the current MCACC can't EQ subs which is a disadvantage compared to Audyssey and should be improved by Pioneer, it's not as bad as your statement implies.

btw - I think some know this from the Pioneer AVS demo day back in June, they do have plans for some very interesting improvements to MCACC, including what you Audyssey users keep dissing it for wink.gif

Hi Steve - fancy seeing you here, like old times...tongue.gif

You might find this article interesting, particularly the MCACC vs. XT32 comparisons at the end. However, you'll need Google Translate or the equivalent to convert the Russian to English:

http://www.ixbt.com/multimedia/acoustics-correction.shtml

BTW I sold my AS-EQ1, so no 'grand experiment' of my own for MCACC+standalone sub EQ vs. Audyssey or Sherwood's Trinnov. If I use my old Pioneer with it, it's going to be the old-fashioned way you know and love.

Stuart

 

Denon 4311 with XT32 and Audyssey Pro

Oppo 93 and 103

Panasonic VT50

Sherwood R-972 with its version of the Trinnov Optimizer

MiniDSP 10x10 HD

PSB Imagine T2, Center, and Surrounds (as of 5/2014); HSU ULS-15 subs (2)

 

The Audyssey FAQ Guide can be found here:

http://www.avsforum.com/...

sdrucker is offline  
post #5739 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 12:30 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,718
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2554 Post(s)
Liked: 2260
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

MCACC which doesn't even EQ bass - the very frequencies that need it most.

not exactly true, kb

what it doesn't do is EQ the dedicated subwoofer or LFE output. there is a difference, obviously.

Pioneer EQ's 63, 125, 250 Hz bands in speakers. plus there is a parametric notch filter, that you can manually select 3 freq's center points, the Q value and cuts or let it select & EQ the 3 filters automatically; Pioneer calls it Standing Wave Filter.

while there's no question the current MCACC can't EQ subs which is a disadvantage compared to Audyssey and needs to be improved by Pioneer, it's not as bad as your statement implies.

btw - I think this is no secret to those who attended the Pioneer AVS demo day back in June, they do have plans for some very interesting changes to MCACC.

 

I am certainly no expert in Pioneer AVRs or MCACC. 

 

But this measurement is interesting - it shows the frequency response curve of the subwoofer before and after calibration with MCACC:

 

 

As can be seen, there is virtually no correction at all. My source for this is the comprehensive comparison of XT32, MCACC and YPAO found here:

 

http://www.ixbt.com/multimedia/acoustics-correction.shtml#mcacc-sub-eq

 
The original is in Russian so google translate is probably your friend if you care to read the article.

 

EDIT: amazingly I didn't see Stuart's post even though it was immediately under yours!  My link takes you directly to the relevant bit of the article. 

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #5740 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 12:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 8,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 260 Post(s)
Liked: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

Hi Steve - fancy seeing you here, like old times...tongue.gif

You might find this article interesting, particularly the MCACC vs. XT32 comparisons at the end. However, you'll need Google Translate or the equivalent to convert the Russian to English:

http://www.ixbt.com/multimedia/acoustics-correction.shtml

Hi Stu!

wow, that site's still around! I used to go there on occasion in my PC technology learning decade along with anandtech.com and many others wink.gif

IIRC, once upon a time, there was an AVSForum member who contributed to their site, maybe my memory is faulty on this but the member went by the handle Gordon MacGregor, his real name was Alex Strigonov and he was an avid Pioneer fan back in the VSX-49TXI era. It was either this site or another one with a similar name. but these guys did a lot of in depth performance evals of CPU's, memory, hard drives, etc.

Amazing that the Russkies & the Germans can do performance based testing & comparisons of room correction systems but no such animal exists in the US! tongue.gif Maybe they are more engineering inclined....no, I don't want to go there, it's Sunday and I've had my fill of American stupid BS politics for the week tongue.gifwink.gif

I'm bookmarking it and will read.

I'm waiting for Dirac or Trinnov in a normal priced unit. Say, speaking of Trinnov, how's Franken-processor working out?

Steve
ss9001 is offline  
post #5741 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 12:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 8,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 260 Post(s)
Liked: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I am certainly no expert in Pioneer AVRs or MCACC. But this measurement is interesting - it shows the frequency response curve of the subwoofer before and after calibration with MCACC:

As can be seen, there is virtually no correction at all.

kb

Didn't I say that? wink.gif

I said it doesn't do subs, so the measurements just confirm what everyone already knows about MCACC - it doesn't EQ subs rolleyes.gif

your original statement was it doesn't EQ bass, not sub output.

if the graph is truly just for the subwoofer out, then all it proves is that MCACC doesn't EQ subs, which has been known and stated for years. no surprise.

if you had stated Pioneer MCACC doesn't EQ subs I wouldn't have bothered to post since you would be correct but that's not what you stated.

I might add that for speakers set to Small, then MCACC starts those speaker's EQ at 125 Hz, not 63Hz. so if that graph is indicative of speakers set to Small, then it wouldn't be a surprise to find not much adjustment in overall bass response.

I have no debate with limitations of MCACC, I only meant to get statements of the limitation correct smile.gif

Steve
ss9001 is offline  
post #5742 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 12:50 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,278
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
Liked: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

Hi Stu!

wow, that site's still around! I used to go there on occasion in my PC technology learning decade along with anandtech.com and many others wink.gif

IIRC, once upon a time, there was an AVSForum member who contributed to their site, maybe my memory is faulty on this but the member went by the handle Gordon MacGregor, his real name was Alex Strigonov and he was an avid Pioneer fan back in the VSX-49TXI era. It was either this site or another one with a similar name. but these guys did a lot of in depth performance evals of CPU's, memory, hard drives, etc.

Amazing that the Russkies & the Germans can do performance based testing & comparisons of room correction systems but no such animal exists in the US! tongue.gif Maybe they are more engineering inclined....no, I don't want to go there, it's Sunday and I've had my fill of American stupid BS politics for the week tongue.gifwink.gif

I'm bookmarking it and will read.

I'm waiting for Dirac or Trinnov in a normal priced unit. Say, speaking of Trinnov, how's Franken-processor working out?

I have the components (Oppo-103, Sherwood R-972) but aside from our new distraction at home - two weeks old tomorrow wink.gif - I've gotten bogged down with finding out why my 'optimal' Audyssey run from March looks less optimal than I thought with a five months' later REW re-assessment. But since the Sherwood hits the end of the 30-day return window next Monday, it's happening sooner rather than later over the next week, at least to see if the R-972s a dog with fleas out of the proverbial box, even before running cals.

Stuart

 

Denon 4311 with XT32 and Audyssey Pro

Oppo 93 and 103

Panasonic VT50

Sherwood R-972 with its version of the Trinnov Optimizer

MiniDSP 10x10 HD

PSB Imagine T2, Center, and Surrounds (as of 5/2014); HSU ULS-15 subs (2)

 

The Audyssey FAQ Guide can be found here:

http://www.avsforum.com/...

sdrucker is offline  
post #5743 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 01:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 8,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 260 Post(s)
Liked: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

aside from our new distraction at home - two weeks old tomorrow wink.gif

and what a distraction it is! cool.gif

how you would even have time for Franken-processor is something I should have known the answer to redface.gif

got your PM wink.gif and will read the Russian article. I'm a glutton for punishment eek.gifbiggrin.gif

Steve
ss9001 is offline  
post #5744 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 01:27 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,278
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
Liked: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

and what a distraction it is! cool.gif

how you would even have time for Franken-processor is something I should have known the answer to redface.gif

got your PM wink.gif and will read the Russian article. I'm a glutton for punishment eek.gifbiggrin.gif

Enjoy haha...

But I while I may be slow and methodical don't give up on me....biggrin.gif

Stuart

 

Denon 4311 with XT32 and Audyssey Pro

Oppo 93 and 103

Panasonic VT50

Sherwood R-972 with its version of the Trinnov Optimizer

MiniDSP 10x10 HD

PSB Imagine T2, Center, and Surrounds (as of 5/2014); HSU ULS-15 subs (2)

 

The Audyssey FAQ Guide can be found here:

http://www.avsforum.com/...

sdrucker is offline  
post #5745 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 02:06 PM
mnc
AVS Special Member
 
mnc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Dallas, GA
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked: 83
I asked this a while back and don't think there was any response but, how does this Denon compare with the Marantz 7008? Is it worth the extra $500, talking about sound quality not features. Anyone tried both in their own system? Thanks.

NHT speakers, Denon 4520, 65VT50
mnc is offline  
post #5746 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 03:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundofMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE MI
Posts: 7,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 161

^Same question was recently discussed on the thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1430049/the-official-denon-avr-4520ci-thread/5520#post_23671460

 

I don't think anybody has A/B'd them, but the SQ is prob pretty similar. Marantz does not tend to be the best value in AVRs compared to the sister Denon models.  But if I were you I'd just call jd. He'll summarize the features and provide great on-line pricing so you can get an excellent value on the XT32-equipped processor that's right for your needs.


Yes, I still like playing with Dalis.

SoundofMind is offline  
post #5747 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 03:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
petetherock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Down Under
Posts: 1,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 46
I have owned the 2809, 4311, 4520 and honestly for stereo audio performance, I didn't hear much improvement .. Ymmv
So you will hear different sonic signatures between the 4520 and 7008 but I don't know if it's 'better'

And I mean in straight up PURE stereo, no enhancements...
petetherock is offline  
post #5748 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 05:38 PM
mnc
AVS Special Member
 
mnc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Dallas, GA
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Thanks for the link.smile.gif

NHT speakers, Denon 4520, 65VT50
mnc is offline  
post #5749 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 07:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundofMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE MI
Posts: 7,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 161

I've owned Denon AVRs 1909 (MultEQ w/DynEQ), 2808 (MultEQXT),  2809(MultEQXT w/DynEQ), 4310(MultEQXT w/DSX) and 4311(MultEQXT32 w/DSX).  The SQ distinctly advanced in both Stereo and MC to my ear, given decent material, with each more capable, successive version of Audyssey.   I'd feel pretty confident of good SQ from any model with XT32 regardless of the AVP OEM, despite my personally not having tried Integra, Marantz, etc. The exception is the otherwise value-laden Onk 818 as it is missing SubEQHT.

 

So I'd pick from those available based on feature set, reliability, price, etc. 


Yes, I still like playing with Dalis.

SoundofMind is offline  
post #5750 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 07:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundofMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE MI
Posts: 7,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 161

^Ah, OK Pete, I see now that you were astutely addressing the non-Audyssey aspect of the AVRs you've owned.  Good point. 


Yes, I still like playing with Dalis.

SoundofMind is offline  
post #5751 of 10791 Old 09-22-2013, 07:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
petetherock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Down Under
Posts: 1,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

^Ah, OK Pete, I see now that you were astutely addressing the non-Audyssey aspect of the AVRs you've owned.  Good point. 
IMHO, I believe that amps matter, and my Musical Fidelity stereo amp was far better, but in stereo, the improvements between the Denons was minimal. For HT, that's a different matter...
The Auto-Eq and Audyssey enhancements help, especially if one's room is not the bog standard one..
petetherock is offline  
post #5752 of 10791 Old 09-23-2013, 03:56 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,718
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2554 Post(s)
Liked: 2260
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I am certainly no expert in Pioneer AVRs or MCACC. But this measurement is interesting - it shows the frequency response curve of the subwoofer before and after calibration with MCACC:

As can be seen, there is virtually no correction at all.

kb

Didn't I say that? wink.gif

I said it doesn't do subs, so the measurements just confirm what everyone already knows about MCACC - it doesn't EQ subs rolleyes.gif

your original statement was it doesn't EQ bass, not sub output.

if the graph is truly just for the subwoofer out, then all it proves is that MCACC doesn't EQ subs, which has been known and stated for years. no surprise.

if you had stated Pioneer MCACC doesn't EQ subs I wouldn't have bothered to post since you would be correct but that's not what you stated.

I might add that for speakers set to Small, then MCACC starts those speaker's EQ at 125 Hz, not 63Hz. so if that graph is indicative of speakers set to Small, then it wouldn't be a surprise to find not much adjustment in overall bass response.

I have no debate with limitations of MCACC, I only meant to get statements of the limitation correct smile.gif

 

Fair enough. But IMO, failing to EQ the subs makes MCACC entirely without benefit. IIRC you said it wasn't as bad as I was making it out to be - but IMO, it is. Failing to EQ the subs makes it so. Just my opinion - but based on knowing that the bottom end is where EQ is really needed. I

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #5753 of 10791 Old 09-23-2013, 04:02 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,718
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2554 Post(s)
Liked: 2260
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post
 

^Same question was recently discussed on the thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1430049/the-official-denon-avr-4520ci-thread/5520#post_23671460

 

I don't think anybody has A/B'd them, but the SQ is prob pretty similar. Marantz does not tend to be the best value in AVRs compared to the sister Denon models.  But if I were you I'd just call jd. He'll summarize the features and provide great on-line pricing so you can get an excellent value on the XT32-equipped processor that's right for your needs.

 

I would ordinarily agree with you 100% on that - but recently I read an interview with Marantz's chief designer (UK mag, Home Cinema Choice) and they were discussing the differences between Denon and Marantz. To my surprise, the Marantz guy said it was deliberate policy to make Marantz amps more "musical". By that I assume he meant futzing with the FR to give a more 'pleasing sound' - using the amp as tone control. Those remarks killed Marantz stone dead for me - I want absolute transparency to the source as my goal.  If I can find the article on the net, I'll post the link.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #5754 of 10791 Old 09-23-2013, 05:26 AM
mnc
AVS Special Member
 
mnc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Dallas, GA
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I would ordinarily agree with you 100% on that - but recently I read an interview with Marantz's chief designer (UK mag, Home Cinema Choice) and they were discussing the differences between Denon and Marantz. To my surprise, the Marantz guy said it was deliberate policy to make Marantz amps more "musical". By that I assume he meant futzing with the FR to give a more 'pleasing sound' - using the amp as tone control. Those remarks killed Marantz stone dead for me - I want absolute transparency to the source as my goal.  If I can find the article on the net, I'll post the link.

Very interesting! I would like to read that.

NHT speakers, Denon 4520, 65VT50
mnc is offline  
post #5755 of 10791 Old 09-23-2013, 05:36 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,718
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2554 Post(s)
Liked: 2260
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnc View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I would ordinarily agree with you 100% on that - but recently I read an interview with Marantz's chief designer (UK mag, Home Cinema Choice) and they were discussing the differences between Denon and Marantz. To my surprise, the Marantz guy said it was deliberate policy to make Marantz amps more "musical". By that I assume he meant futzing with the FR to give a more 'pleasing sound' - using the amp as tone control. Those remarks killed Marantz stone dead for me - I want absolute transparency to the source as my goal.  If I can find the article on the net, I'll post the link.

Very interesting! I would like to read that.

 

I can't find it on the net - I'll dig through the back issues and see if I can find it there. 

 

EDIT: found it - it is Issue #225 of Home Cinema Choice magazine (UK). The article is called 'Brothers in Amps' <groan> and discusses the various differences between the Denon and Marantz brands.

 

They interview Takamitsu Hashimoto of Denon Europe. "When asked just how the two companies [Denon and Marantz] approach the tuning of their products, Hashimoto explains: 'The aim of a Denon product is to accurately reproduce the contents of the disc or file, while at Marantz the idea is to create musicality; the philosophy between the two brands is quite different.'"

 

Elsewhere the article discusses the "characteristic sound of all higher-end Marantz amplifiers" and the role Ken Ishiwata has played in developing these amplifiers. The article cites the Marantz SR7008 as an example of this philosophy. The article contrasts this Marantz unit with the Denon AVR-X4000 and says that these two units share many similarities including shipping from the same factory, having a common construction platform and use PCBs in common. It goes on to explore the fact, however, that the two units are very different, and this leads to the comments I have quoted above.

 

So the inescapable conclusion, direct from the horse's mouth, is that only Denon strives for transparency to the source "accurately [reproducing] the contents of the disc or file", while Marantz aim to "create musicality'' and their amps have a "characteristic sound".  

 

The idea of an amp having a 'sound' of its own is anathema to me. As I say, I want transparency - I want my amps to take an input signal and to turn it into an output signal entirely unchanged other than in amplitude. I can't see how any other approach is valid - once you get to the position that an amp has a 'sound' of its own, then you can never be entirely sure if what you are hearing is what is on the disc or what the amplifier designer wanted you to hear. I am able to decide for myself what I want to hear and if it is a more 'warm' or 'musical' presentation, then that is what tone controls are for (or PEQ rather). Not that I had ever been considering a Marantz product, but that article has ensured that I never will.

AustinJerry likes this.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #5756 of 10791 Old 09-23-2013, 05:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundofMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE MI
Posts: 7,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 I would ordinarily agree with you 100% on that - but recently I read an interview with Marantz's chief designer (UK mag, Home Cinema Choice) and they were discussing the differences between Denon and Marantz. To my surprise, the Marantz guy said it was deliberate policy to make Marantz amps more "musical". By that I assume he meant futzing with the FR to give a more 'pleasing sound' - using the amp as tone control. Those remarks killed Marantz stone dead for me - I want absolute transparency to the source as my goal.  If I can find the article on the net, I'll post the link.

 

I'd still expect the overall SQ to be pretty similar but you raise a good point.

 

Now that you mention it, it seems Marantz is being positioned to be the more audiophile of the sister brands. There has been discussion of several design differences on the threads.  Many have wondered if the flagship Mar pre/pro AV8801 sounds better than the AVR4520 used as a pre despite having many, many similarities. The 8801 is far more expensive, has no amps of course and has a supposedly superior analog section.  In addition, IIUC, it uses HDAM technology vs opamp in the Denon.  It is unclear whether Marantz has AL24 or likely similar/equivalent upsampling.  It is unclear how or if the Marantz can deal with jitter as effectively as DenonLink.


Yes, I still like playing with Dalis.

SoundofMind is offline  
post #5757 of 10791 Old 09-23-2013, 06:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,718
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2554 Post(s)
Liked: 2260
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 I would ordinarily agree with you 100% on that - but recently I read an interview with Marantz's chief designer (UK mag, Home Cinema Choice) and they were discussing the differences between Denon and Marantz. To my surprise, the Marantz guy said it was deliberate policy to make Marantz amps more "musical". By that I assume he meant futzing with the FR to give a more 'pleasing sound' - using the amp as tone control. Those remarks killed Marantz stone dead for me - I want absolute transparency to the source as my goal.  If I can find the article on the net, I'll post the link.

 

I'd still expect the overall SQ to be pretty similar but you raise a good point.

 

Now that you mention it, it seems Marantz is being positioned to be the more audiophile of the sister brands. There has been discussion of several design differences on the threads.  Many have wondered if the flagship Mar pre/pro AV8801 sounds better than the AVR4520 used as a pre despite having many, many similarities. The 8801 is far more expensive, has no amps of course and has a supposedly superior analog section.  In addition, IIUC, it uses HDAM technology vs opamp in the Denon.  It is unclear whether Marantz has AL24 or likely similar/equivalent upsampling.  It is unclear how or if the Marantz can deal with jitter as effectively as DenonLink.

 

All of that, for me, though pales into insignificance if Marantz's stated aim is to "create musicality". That means they are deliberately designing their amps to 'sound pleasant'. It's the exact polar opposite of what I am looking for. Obviously, others, who want a 'pleasing sound' as opposed to an 'accurate sound', will disagree.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #5758 of 10791 Old 09-23-2013, 06:43 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,388
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1180
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


I would ordinarily agree with you 100% on that - but recently I read an interview with Marantz's chief designer (UK mag, Home Cinema Choice) and they were discussing the differences between Denon and Marantz. To my surprise, the Marantz guy said it was deliberate policy to make Marantz amps more "musical".

And if you believe that...
Quote:
By that I assume he meant futzing with the FR to give a more 'pleasing sound' - using the amp as tone control.

Published independent lab tests seem to say "Not so much".
Quote:
Those remarks killed Marantz stone dead for me - I want absolute transparency to the source as my goal.  If I can find the article on the net, I'll post the link.

If I were producing Marantz and Denon I'd want to say what I could that would convince people that they wanted to pay more money for the more expensive products. I don't think that was a technical paper that you were reading, but rather just a sales pitch.
arnyk is offline  
post #5759 of 10791 Old 09-23-2013, 06:56 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,718
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2554 Post(s)
Liked: 2260
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


I would ordinarily agree with you 100% on that - but recently I read an interview with Marantz's chief designer (UK mag, Home Cinema Choice) and they were discussing the differences between Denon and Marantz. To my surprise, the Marantz guy said it was deliberate policy to make Marantz amps more "musical".

And if you believe that...
Quote:
By that I assume he meant futzing with the FR to give a more 'pleasing sound' - using the amp as tone control.

Published independent lab tests seem to say "Not so much".
Quote:
Those remarks killed Marantz stone dead for me - I want absolute transparency to the source as my goal.  If I can find the article on the net, I'll post the link.

If I were producing Marantz and Denon I'd want to say what I could that would convince people that they wanted to pay more money for the more expensive products. I don't think that was a technical paper that you were reading, but rather just a sales pitch.

 

You are right that it wasn't a technical paper - just a magazine article. But there can be no mistaking what was very clearly stated:

 

"The aim of a Denon product is to accurately reproduce the contents of the disc or file, while at Marantz the idea is to create musicality; the philosophy between the two brands is quite different.'"

 

"Creating musicality"?  There's only one conclusion that can be drawn from those remarks (I am assuming that the high-level D&M people quoted can be taken on face value and are telling the truth to the most highly respected UK home theater publication): Denon aim for total transparency and Marantz aim for 'musicality'. 

 

They may of course just be trying to draw some distinction between the two brands, but there are numerous other ways to do that without telling everyone that Marantz have decided to use the amp as a tone control. 

 

Would you want to buy an amp that had as its stated intention a distortion of the content on the disc?

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #5760 of 10791 Old 09-23-2013, 07:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
petetherock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Down Under
Posts: 1,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 46
Actually I see no issue with Marantz's strategy. Some people want a smooth sound and will pay for it. See how much Mac amps costs, and you will appreciate what D&M are trying to do.
The proof is in the number of amps the company sells all over the world.
Good play I say.
petetherock is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Denon Avr 4520ci Receiver
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