The Great $1k Receiver Debate - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 61 Old 11-27-2012, 11:18 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
bunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am beginning to think more and more about buying a new receiver to replace my aging Denon AVR-3803, with which I've frankly never been all that thrilled. It has always been great for movies, but for some reason music generally sounds terrible through it. I actually preferred the performance of my old Sony STR-DA555ES, but that one didn't have 7.1 support. My current speakers are the Boston VR-M series, with the VR-M90 for mains.

Here are the units that I'm considering, and would appreciate any/all comments on performance, build quality, reliability, interface, features, etc. The MSRP of each one is listed below, but the current "street" (Amazon) prices are all within $100 of that coveted thousand dollar mark:

Yamaha RX-A2010 ($1600)
Yamaha RX-A1020 ($1200)

Sony STR-DA2800ES ($1000)
Sony STR-DA5700ES ($1500)

Denon AVR-2313 ($900)
Denon AVR-3313 ($1200)

If I pulled the trigger today, I'd probably go with the Yamaha A2010... mostly because a) the six year old $250 Yamaha stereo receiver that I have connected to a set of Boston VR-M60 speakers sounds great, and b) it seems like a great bang-for-the-buck option. I'd probably even consider the Sony DA5700ES over one of the Denons, based on my most recent experiences with both brands... but am willing to be convinced otherwise.

Other thoughts? Thanks in advance, folks!

P.S. - For the record, I'm also planning to go listen and play with these in a store somewhere as well, assuming I can find them locally.
bunder is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 61 Old 11-27-2012, 11:21 AM
Newbie
 
Action925's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Call around and you will be able to get the AVR-3313 for $850-ish... That definitely changes the competitive landscape vs the other receivers you've listed. To be fair, however, the prices for the others are going to be significantly lower when calling these same places.
Action925 is offline  
post #3 of 61 Old 11-27-2012, 11:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,233
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 656 Post(s)
Liked: 1133
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunder View Post

I am beginning to think more and more about buying a new receiver to replace my aging Denon AVR-3803, with which I've frankly never been all that thrilled. It has always been great for movies, but for some reason music generally sounds terrible through it. I actually preferred the performance of my old Sony STR-DA555ES, but that one didn't have 7.1 support. My current speakers are the Boston VR-M series, with the VR-M90 for mains.

Here are the units that I'm considering, and would appreciate any/all comments on performance, build quality, reliability, interface, features, etc. The MSRP of each one is listed below, but the current "street" (Amazon) prices are all within $100 of that coveted thousand dollar mark:

Yamaha RX-A2010 ($1600)
Yamaha RX-A1020 ($1200)

Sony STR-DA2800ES ($1000)
Sony STR-DA5700ES ($1500)

Denon AVR-2313 ($900)
Denon AVR-3313 ($1200)

If I pulled the trigger today, I'd probably go with the Yamaha A2010... mostly because a) the six year old $250 Yamaha stereo receiver that I have connected to a set of Boston VR-M60 speakers sounds great, and b) it seems like a great bang-for-the-buck option. I'd probably even consider the Sony DA5700ES over one of the Denons, based on my most recent experiences with both brands... but am willing to be convinced otherwise.

Right now my recommended receiver selection scheme is to buy the cheapest receiver that has Audyssey XT32, which would probably be some kind of Denon, but something about half the price of what you are talking about.
arnyk is online now  
post #4 of 61 Old 11-27-2012, 11:26 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
bunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

...right now my recommended receiver selection scheme is to buy the cheapest receiver that has Audyssey XT32...

Interesting... I'll do some reading on that. Is it that much of a difference versus earlier tuning technologies?
bunder is offline  
post #5 of 61 Old 11-27-2012, 11:30 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
bunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Action925 View Post

...call around and you will be able to get the AVR-3313 for $850-ish...

I take that to mean you're a fan of the newer Denon models? I really wanted to like my current one more than I ever did, but perhaps they've improved since then. I know it's one year older, but the A2010 can be had for about $100 more than that, and seems like a killer receiver. Any experience with those?
bunder is offline  
post #6 of 61 Old 11-27-2012, 11:48 AM
Newbie
 
Action925's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Not necessarily a fan of any AVR yet.. I have never owned one, so I'm actually stuck right in the same place you are -- in shopping mode, evaluating options. The problem is that I have no ground to start from since everything will be "new" to me.

Yamaha makes good receivers that are easy to use from what I've read (clearly reviews, as well as anecdotal "sharings" by others).

I think I'd probably go with Onkyo if they had Airplay, despite the possible quality issues. However, since they don't, this leaves me with other brands, such as Denon (Yamaha doesn't have this feature either, until the newer models just released).

Some people may suggest an older higher-end model like the 4311.. This can be had for a little over $1K and it has more features than what most people would need...
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunder View Post

I take that to mean you're a fan of the newer Denon models? I really wanted to like my current one more than I ever did, but perhaps they've improved since then. I know it's one year older, but the A2010 can be had for about $100 more than that, and seems like a killer receiver. Any experience with those?
Action925 is offline  
post #7 of 61 Old 11-27-2012, 12:16 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
bunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Action925 View Post

I have never owned one, so I'm actually stuck right in the same place you are -- in shopping mode, evaluating options.

Well that might just be a good thing... we can share what we discover. It's been 10 years since I researched receivers, so it might as well be all new to me as well at this point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Action925 View Post

I think I'd probably go with Onkyo if they had Airplay, despite the possible quality issues.

I'm kind of an "anything but Apple" guy myself, so that's not really an issue... would still very much like to hear what you find and decide upon, however.

Because of the fact that the Onkyo NR818 has Audyssey XT32 (and all of the Denon models in the price range only seem to have XT), I'm considering that one now as well.
bunder is offline  
post #8 of 61 Old 11-27-2012, 04:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,377
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Right now my recommended receiver selection scheme is to buy the cheapest receiver that has Audyssey XT32, which would probably be some kind of Denon, but something about half the price of what you are talking about.

Arny,

Why Audyssey XT32 over ARC?

An Anthem MRX300 fits in the OP's budget as well, and would be my recommendation.

ARC doesn't have the midrange notch Audyssey foists even on users who don't have crappy speakers, and IMO its target curve with "room gain" makes the upper bass sound perceptually more "right" than Audyssey's flatter target curve.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #9 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 06:22 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
bunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks for the tip! I wasn't aware that Anthem did receivers, let alone that they had something in my price range. Looks like there are a couple of local dealers... I'll have to give it a listen. Sounds like the 300 is rated at 80 watts per channel, though... think that's beefy enough? Those Boston speakers aren't exactly the most efficient things on the planet.
bunder is offline  
post #10 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 06:31 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,233
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 656 Post(s)
Liked: 1133
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Right now my recommended receiver selection scheme is to buy the cheapest receiver that has Audyssey XT32, which would probably be some kind of Denon, but something about half the price of what you are talking about.

Why Audyssey XT32 over ARC?

Are they any different?

http://www.ikmultimedia.com/products/arc/

"ARC uses Audyssey MultEQ® XT32 patented technology to improve your monitoring system so what you hear is not affected by distortions caused by room acoustics."

Oh, I guess you mean ARC - Anthem Room Correction. We are trapped in a world of whirling letters.

I don't know anything about Anthem Room Correction. What is actually known about it?
arnyk is online now  
post #11 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 06:42 AM
Member
 
clanmjc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I'm shocked you don't have any Pioneers in the list. I just picked up the Denon 3312 yesterday because the store I went to didn't have the pioneer-sc61 in stock. The pioneer has its own D3 amp with solid power based on bench testing (not personal experience). I like my Denon though. I only had a chance to calibrated once because family wouldn't stay in the bedroom any longer than 8 position reads. I didn't get a chance to check my sub level until after, I was rushed, it was at -12db, so I turned the sub volume down manually and had to do my demos in this state. All the other speakers were set great, for a first time audyssey user it was simple. At reference level demoing dark of the moon was where this puppy shined. Panning sounds have never been sweeter, this really brought my budget polls and premier accoustic speakers to life. I'm pretty satisfied with the purchase this weekend I'll calibrate again and really stress test this bad boy.

VIZIO E601i-A3
AVR: Denon 3312CI
Front L/R: 2 Polk M60's
Center: Polk CS2
Surround L/R: Premier Acoustic PA-6s
Sub: PA-150 Subwoofer
clanmjc is offline  
post #12 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 06:55 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
bunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

...probably be some kind of Denon, but something about half the price of what you are talking about...

From what I can tell, it looks like the cheapest thing with XT32 would be the Onkyo 818, which can be had for around $900.... the only Denon models that seem to have it are the AVR-4520CI, AVR-4311CI, and AVR-A100... which are all more expensive than either the Onkyo or the Anthem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clanmjc View Post

I'm shocked you don't have any Pioneers in the list.

That's only due to lack of familiarity with them on my part. I know that they are well regarded by many people... I've just never owned/used or even listened to one. I'll have to do some research and see which one might be in the running....
bunder is offline  
post #13 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 07:19 AM
Member
 
clanmjc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
The SC-61 (7 channel) can be have for 750-950 depending on where you get it. The SC-55, last years model 9 channel THX Select Plus 2 certified can be had right around 1k, this is the one I really wanted but they sold out over the weekend and were not replacing stock on them. I think the SC-63 would also be in your price range and maybe even the SC-65, this years 9 channel. I was coming from a Yamaha receiver that had no auto calibration. I had to manual set everything, level, distance, EQ etc. I didn't use any metering tools or software. Just a tape measure and many many iterations of tweaking. The difference between my manually setup system and the Audyssey calibrated one is subtle. It is not night and day, not at nominal listening volumes, however, at reference and partly due to the new receiver having double the power of my old one especially when most the speakers are being driven there is a significant improvement in sound quality. I don't know how much of that is from Audyssey or from sheer power. I think it's more power. What Audyssey did do well (and remember my Sub is not correctly calibrated yet @ -12db and then manually lowered a good amount) where sounds on the time access. Because of this I feel like the sound is very spacious or direct depending on how it was meant to be heard. As I said before panning sounds have never sounded better or more believable. I feel this was the greatest improvement over the manually EQ'd system, that said, I think any of the auto calibration systems can do this part well. When I first was looking for a 1k receiver I was solely looking at Denon, Onkyo strictly because it had Audyssey, and without personal experience on any of the auto calibrations I researched myself into the conundrum of which auto cal was better or right for me. We all want to get the best for our money. Now that I've had a chance with the Audyssey MultEq XT it's clear to me that I over analyzed what auto cal room correction can/will do. It's definitely an improvement over my non EQ'd system and I'd much rather have it than not have it, but if I had to live without it and use another auto cal system I wouldn't even hesitate, it wouldn't even cross my mind now. Before this wouldn't be the case, before I would be giving any Audyssey receiver vs some other proprietary auto cal system a big advantage just because of the calibration software and not the power/features of said receiver. Remember, I'm coming from a rinky dink 32 watts per channel driven with all 5 channels driven to an 82 watts per channel driven with all 5 channels driven, manually EQ'd receiver and there is a difference especially at louder levels and I honestly expected to be honeymooning on this forum today but I find myself not. I think I expected more from the auto calibration and like I said it is an improvement and I'm glad I have it, in no way am I dissatisfied with the product or what I am hearing I think I just expected to be blown away and we watch all our movies at reference or near reference level and have been for some time and it really shines there. Why am i beating the auto calibration with a stick? Because i think when you do a little more research you will find a lot of peoples opinions revolve in some way around the auto calibration system the receiver has and you may find yourself in the same conundrum I did, which I now believe to be a complete non issue.

VIZIO E601i-A3
AVR: Denon 3312CI
Front L/R: 2 Polk M60's
Center: Polk CS2
Surround L/R: Premier Acoustic PA-6s
Sub: PA-150 Subwoofer
clanmjc is offline  
post #14 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 07:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunder View Post

From what I can tell, it looks like the cheapest thing with XT32 would be the Onkyo 818, which can be had for around $900.... the only Denon models that seem to have it are the AVR-4520CI, AVR-4311CI, and AVR-A100... which are all more expensive than either the Onkyo or the Anthem.
That's only due to lack of familiarity with them on my part. I know that they are well regarded by many people... I've just never owned/used or even listened to one. I'll have to do some research and see which one might be in the running....

Guys, the real difference between room correction systems comes when you not only compary Audyssey's MultEQ (any flavor except 2EQ), but MultEQ + DynamicEQ together. This combo comes into play when in a typical home environment one can not boost the volume to 0 dB movie reference level, but has to set it to a much more convenient (an neighbour friendly) level of say -10 dB or even to -15 dB.

And that's where Dynamic EQ chimes in by taking care of tonal balance (equal loudness contours) and front & surround imaging balance at the same time. This all in a nutshell, there are plenty of more fine details worth studying on Audyssey's implementations. Once you get the hang of it you're gonna be surprised what more the Audyssey features are there for an improved SQ. And when you try to look into Yamaha's and Pioneer's implementations you won't find anything comparable to DynamicEQ, yet.

Just my 2 cents. smile.gif
mogorf is online now  
post #15 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 07:38 AM
Member
 
clanmjc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

level of say -10 dB or even to -15 dB.
And that's where Dynamic EQ chimes in by taking care of tonal balance

I agree, after I got to demo @ 0db I had to roll it down to 25-30 the rest of the night, I still went through my normal demo media and I was happy to still have the nice surround and spacious sound stage because of this feature.

That said Denon is not the only one that has this feature, all THX certified receivers (as far as I know) have THX Loudness Plus, which is the same thing as Dynamic EQ, only it's THX's technology. Which one is better I have no idea... http://www.thx.com/consumer/thx-technology/thx-loudness-plus/ All the Pionneers that are THX certified have this as far as I know.

VIZIO E601i-A3
AVR: Denon 3312CI
Front L/R: 2 Polk M60's
Center: Polk CS2
Surround L/R: Premier Acoustic PA-6s
Sub: PA-150 Subwoofer
clanmjc is offline  
post #16 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 07:45 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
bunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

...MultEQ + DynamicEQ together...

And what's the lowest cost of entry for that? smile.gif
bunder is offline  
post #17 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 08:22 AM
Member
 
clanmjc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
For Denon the "cheapest" is the AVR-1611
Onkyo SR706 maybe the cheapest (it's also THX certified)?

VIZIO E601i-A3
AVR: Denon 3312CI
Front L/R: 2 Polk M60's
Center: Polk CS2
Surround L/R: Premier Acoustic PA-6s
Sub: PA-150 Subwoofer
clanmjc is offline  
post #18 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 08:30 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
ccotenj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: the toxic waste dumps of new jersey
Posts: 21,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 89
@clan...

paragraphs would be helpful...

also, reading the audyssey faq's/setup guide and asking questions in the audyssey thread would be helpful for you as well...

if you did not use measurement tools, there is zero way you manually eq'd the modal zone of your room... none...

unless your previous avr was going into protection or clipping the "sounding better because of more power" is simply placebo...

there's more, but i'm having a hard time picking out stuff from your post...

- chris

 

my build thread - updated 8-20-12 - new seating installed and projector isolation solution

 

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1332917/ccotenj-finally-gets-a-projector

ccotenj is offline  
post #19 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 09:34 AM
Member
 
clanmjc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

@clan...
paragraphs would be helpful...
also, reading the audyssey faq's/setup guide and asking questions in the audyssey thread would be helpful for you as well...
if you did not use measurement tools, there is zero way you manually eq'd the modal zone of your room... none...
unless your previous avr was going into protection or clipping the "sounding better because of more power" is simply placebo...
there's more, but i'm having a hard time picking out stuff from your post...
I wrote that from my phone =\

The only "real" manual setup I did was distance/level and then some "ear" calibrated EQing based of EQing I've done with headphones in the past. I did a lot of research for Audyssey and asked questions on the Audyssey forum before I ever got my new receiver. Honestly that setup part was pretty trivial, I should have checked my subwoofer level after my first measurement but that was the only step I omitted due to being rushed by the family. I was actually happy with the auto config.

Your right though there is no way for me to calibrate all the tonal, modal and other room correction and real EQing without tools. And like I said, what Audyssey did for my system was good, it was subtle and better but it was good.

I think my previous avr was clipping, at low volumes the two AVR's sound the same and I was sad about that... at first, heck I wanted the placebo effect to make me happy with my purchase. At reference level there is a definite improvement in sound in a home theater environment where there is a lot going on (the only scenes I tested were the really congested scenes) and that is also where I noticed the improved sound. It's definitely not placebo there, because honestly, when it is just people talking or almost nothing but center they sound the same to me, even at reference.

VIZIO E601i-A3
AVR: Denon 3312CI
Front L/R: 2 Polk M60's
Center: Polk CS2
Surround L/R: Premier Acoustic PA-6s
Sub: PA-150 Subwoofer
clanmjc is offline  
post #20 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 12:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by clanmjc View Post

I agree, after I got to demo @ 0db I had to roll it down to 25-30 the rest of the night, I still went through my normal demo media and I was happy to still have the nice surround and spacious sound stage because of this feature.
That said Denon is not the only one that has this feature, all THX certified receivers (as far as I know) have THX Loudness Plus, which is the same thing as Dynamic EQ, only it's THX's technology. Which one is better I have no idea... http://www.thx.com/consumer/thx-technology/thx-loudness-plus/ All the Pionneers that are THX certified have this as far as I know.

Hi clanmjc,

First of all, AFAIK, THX is not a technology company, they don't produce anything, no hardware, no software, but they are a certification company. They test and cerftify and in case hardware/software complies with their standards they issue a THX cerfiticate allowing the producers to use the THX logo on the final product for better marketing. Some makers comply and pay for the logo (Pioneer, Onkyo, etc.) while some others even though they comply (or exceed) but do not pay and do not use the THX logo (like Denon).

So, in this regard THX Loudness Plus can not be the same thing as Audyssey's DynEQ, coz while DynEQ is a product (software) THX Loudness Plus is a standard but not a product.

Now, let's see a bit of finer details of DynEQ. When the MV (Master Volume) is set to 0 dB, DynEQ does nothing coz there is nothing to be compensated for. We start to reduce the MV, so, as a first step DynEQ will start to kick-in, meaning that the proper "equal loudness curve" is being applied that is calculated for that given MV setting. And then, since at any given MV setting there will always be louder and softer parts in the program material, the second step of DynEQ starts to work by way of re-adjusting the "equal loudness curves" again based on the volume change of the passage. Be aware, this is done on the fly, i.e. in real-time. I think this is one really fantastic and exclusive feature of DynEQ working so smoothly one can not notice, but will become apperant when taken away. Be it an AVR with or without the THX logo, once the Audyssey DynEQ is on board it will work in any case.

Convinced? smile.gif
mogorf is online now  
post #21 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 12:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,377
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunder View Post

Thanks for the tip! I wasn't aware that Anthem did receivers, let alone that they had something in my price range. Looks like there are a couple of local dealers... I'll have to give it a listen. Sounds like the 300 is rated at 80 watts per channel, though... think that's beefy enough? Those Boston speakers aren't exactly the most efficient things on the planet.

The difference between 80W/ch and 120W/ch isn't much. Both are sufficient for most people, driving most speakers, in most rooms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Oh, I guess you mean ARC - Anthem Room Correction. We are trapped in a world of whirling letters.

I don't know anything about Anthem Room Correction. What is actually known about it?

Whirling letters indeed. There's also ARC the Audio Return Channel.

I'm looking forward to Dr. Rich's review of the Anthem MRX (he mentioned it in his review of some Phase Technology speakers), but until then nothing concrete has been published since Dr. Olive's room correction test at Harman.

But the main differences between ARC and XT32 are as follows:

ARC doesn't flatten out the upper bass, but rather just keeps the basic rise and smooths it out.
ARC doesn't introduce Audyssey's 2kHz midrange notch
XT32 works over the whole spectrum, offering a couple target curves up top, but ARC does nothing above 5kHz. (And can also be programmed to have a lower "don't touch" cutoff.)
XT32 runs entirely on the AVR, but ARC requires either Mac running windows in Parallels/Boot Camp or a not-a-Mac to run. One plugs the AVR into a serial port on the computer (or uses a serial->USB adapter) and the mike into another serial port on the computer.
ARC seems to use nicer measuring gear, with a nice-looking mike and an included stand.

Both seem to do basically what they claim to do with careful setup. Earlier versions of both did poorly in Dr. Olive's comparison; an early version of ARC was statistically tied with "no correction," and pre-32 Audyssey MultEQ XT was preferred considerably less than "no correction."

But, the Anthems have another feature that IMO makes anything else a poor choice for anyone who doesn't already own measurement gear: their "Quick Measure" feature in the ARC software that allows one to quickly take measurements in the course of setting speakers up. Makes set-up go a lot faster, and more than compensates for their power disadvantage compared to other boxes at the same price point

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #22 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 12:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,377
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Guys, the real difference between room correction systems comes when you not only compary Audyssey's MultEQ (any flavor except 2EQ), but MultEQ + DynamicEQ together. This combo comes into play when in a typical home environment one can not boost the volume to 0 dB movie reference level, but has to set it to a much more convenient (an neighbour friendly) level of say -10 dB or even to -15 dB.

And that's where Dynamic EQ chimes in by taking care of tonal balance (equal loudness contours) and front & surround imaging balance at the same time. This all in a nutshell, there are plenty of more fine details worth studying on Audyssey's implementations. Once you get the hang of it you're gonna be surprised what more the Audyssey features are there for an improved SQ. And when you try to look into Yamaha's and Pioneer's implementations you won't find anything comparable to DynamicEQ, yet.

DynamicEQ is IMO the best part of the Audyssey suite. But Dolby Volume's "volume modeling" seems to do the same thing in my actual use (previously used Denon 4308 and 3808 with MultEQ XT and DynamicEQ, replaced both with Anthem MRX300's). I would say that one of the two technologies should be on every AVR.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #23 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 12:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

DynamicEQ is IMO the best part of the Audyssey suite. But Dolby Volume's "volume modeling" seems to do the same thing in my actual use (previously used Denon 4308 and 3808 with MultEQ XT and DynamicEQ, replaced both with Anthem MRX300's). I would say that one of the two technologies should be on every AVR.

Fully agree. Just one comment. Try to turn off all Audyssey features on your AVR and press the button for DynEQ only. Bingo! With DynEQ automatically MultEQ turnes on as well. An inseparable twin feature, eh? smile.gif
mogorf is online now  
post #24 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 01:04 PM
Member
 
clanmjc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Hi clanmjc,
First of all, AFAIK, THX is not a technology company, they don't produce anything, no hardware, no software, but they are a certification company.

THX Loudness Plus is a technology and uses several technologies to accomplish it's goal, the link I provided above is from THX website. How it sounds, how comparable it is to DynamicEQ I don't know.
Quote:
Now, let's see a bit of finer details of DynEQ. When the MV (Master Volume) is set to 0 dB, DynEQ does nothing coz there is nothing to be compensated for. We start to reduce the MV, so, as a first step DynEQ will start to kick-in, meaning that the proper "equal loudness curve" is being applied that is calculated for that given MV setting. And then, since at any given MV setting there will always be louder and softer parts in the program material, the second step of DynEQ starts to work by way of re-adjusting the "equal loudness curves" again based on the volume change of the passage. Be aware, this is done on the fly, i.e. in real-time. I think this is one really fantastic and exclusive feature of DynEQ working so smoothly one can not notice, but will become apperant when taken away. Be it an AVR with or without the THX logo, once the Audyssey DynEQ is on board it will work in any case.
Convinced? smile.gif

This is pretty much the same thing THX Loudness does. According to Audyssey their technology is better, in practice, in my room your room, who knows, I've only tried Dynamic EQ and it's good. I wouldn't say I'd prefer one over the other, can you? I also listen to movies, which is what my HT is for, at or very close to reference level which defeats the purpose of DynamicEQ/THX Loudness Plus

VIZIO E601i-A3
AVR: Denon 3312CI
Front L/R: 2 Polk M60's
Center: Polk CS2
Surround L/R: Premier Acoustic PA-6s
Sub: PA-150 Subwoofer
clanmjc is offline  
post #25 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 01:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by clanmjc View Post

THX Loudness Plus is a technology and uses several technologies to accomplish it's goal, the link I provided above is from THX website.

Nope. Once again, ...please, ...THX is not a manufacturing company, they do not produce anything, THX Loudness Plus is not a product,...and they are not an AVR maker and they are not a Software House, or whatever. They set forth design standards and specifications and issue THX certifications to those who comply and wish to use the THX logo. THX logos are even available for,...err,... HDMI cable makers. Full stop. cool.gif
mogorf is online now  
post #26 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 02:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,377
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

First of all, AFAIK, THX is not a technology company, they don't produce anything, no hardware, no software, but they are a certification company. ***
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

***THX Loudness Plus is not a product,...

You're off the mark about THX just being just about certifications. They also design things, and their chief engineer is industry heavyweight Laurie Fincham, who made his name at KEF and burnished it at Infinity.

A year or two back the showed their own proprietary efficient amp design at CES. It's not a Class D amp. I know nothing about circuit design, but suspect it has some genes in common with the old Quad "current dumping" designs, given that the KEF people such as Mr. Fincham and Quad people were quite friendly "back in the day." I consider energy efficiency a good thing, and hope if it's good something comes of it.

As for THX Loudness Plus, it does appear to be another riff on the same concept as Dolby Volume's "volume modeling" and DynamicEQ per THX's website.

No idea how THX Loudness Plus compares to Dolby Volume or DynamicEQ in use, as I'd never heard of it until this thread let alone used it. But it appears to be every bit as much a "product" as Dolby Volume and Audessey DynamicEQ are.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #27 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 02:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

You're off the mark about THX just being just about certifications. They also design things, and their chief engineer is industry heavyweight Laurie Fincham, who made his name at KEF and burnished it at Infinity.
A year or two back the showed their own proprietary efficient amp design at CES. It's not a Class D amp. I know nothing about circuit design, but suspect it has some genes in common with the old Quad "current dumping" designs, given that the KEF people such as Mr. Fincham and Quad people were quite friendly "back in the day." I consider energy efficiency a good thing, and hope if it's good something comes of it.
As for THX Loudness Plus, it does appear to be another riff on the same concept as Dolby Volume's "volume modeling" and DynamicEQ per THX's website.
No idea how THX Loudness Plus compares to Dolby Volume or DynamicEQ in use, as I'd never heard of it until this thread let alone used it. But it appears to be every bit as much a "product" as Dolby Volume and Audessey DynamicEQ are.

Again, and lastly,...THX Loudness Plus IS NOT A PRODUCT, BUT A SPECIFICATION!!!!!!!!!eek.gif

http://carltonbale.com/new-thx-spec-for-home-theater-thx-loudness-plus/
mogorf is online now  
post #28 of 61 Old 11-28-2012, 05:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,377
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

You're off the mark about THX just being just about certifications. They also design things, and their chief engineer is industry heavyweight Laurie Fincham, who made his name at KEF and burnished it at Infinity.
A year or two back the showed their own proprietary efficient amp design at CES. It's not a Class D amp. I know nothing about circuit design, but suspect it has some genes in common with the old Quad "current dumping" designs, given that the KEF people such as Mr. Fincham and Quad people were quite friendly "back in the day." I consider energy efficiency a good thing, and hope if it's good something comes of it.
As for THX Loudness Plus, it does appear to be another riff on the same concept as Dolby Volume's "volume modeling" and DynamicEQ per THX's website.
No idea how THX Loudness Plus compares to Dolby Volume or DynamicEQ in use, as I'd never heard of it until this thread let alone used it. But it appears to be every bit as much a "product" as Dolby Volume and Audessey DynamicEQ are.

Again, and lastly,...THX Loudness Plus IS NOT A PRODUCT, BUT A SPECIFICATION!!!!!!!!!eek.gif

http://carltonbale.com/new-thx-spec-for-home-theater-thx-loudness-plus/

Your own link, headline aside, strongly suggests otherwise. "THX Loudness Plus solves this by making two adjustments: 1) applying a volume gain curve to the surround and sub speaker levels, maintaining the proper balance regardless of where the volume knob is set, and 2) applying a frequency correction curve to the high and low surround frequencies to better balance with the main front speakers."

That sounds a lot like a piece of software for the DSP, analogous to Dolby Volume's volume modeler component or Audyssey DynamicEQ, no?

A "specification" generally doesn't "make adjustments."

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #29 of 61 Old 11-29-2012, 04:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

Your own link, headline aside, strongly suggests otherwise. "THX Loudness Plus solves this by making two adjustments: 1) applying a volume gain curve to the surround and sub speaker levels, maintaining the proper balance regardless of where the volume knob is set, and 2) applying a frequency correction curve to the high and low surround frequencies to better balance with the main front speakers."
That sounds a lot like a piece of software for the DSP, analogous to Dolby Volume's volume modeler component or Audyssey DynamicEQ, no?
A "specification" generally doesn't "make adjustments."

Here's some good reading about THX:

THX (Wikipedia)

The THX Story

How do products get THX certified?
mogorf is online now  
post #30 of 61 Old 11-29-2012, 04:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
ccotenj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: the toxic waste dumps of new jersey
Posts: 21,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 89
feri, "thx" includes both certification AND a suite of products... wink.gif

- chris

 

my build thread - updated 8-20-12 - new seating installed and projector isolation solution

 

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1332917/ccotenj-finally-gets-a-projector

ccotenj is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

User Tag List

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