Owner's Thread for Anthem 60, 720 and 1120 Receivers - Page 12 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 3077Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #331 of 4093 Old 11-16-2015, 01:25 PM
Senior Member
 
jamesmil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 370
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 62
I think the "x" in 7.x.4 represents subwoofers, and looking at the back of the MRX 1120 (as seen here), it does have two subwoofer outputs, which would mean "7.2.4" should be possible.

What is less clear is whether the ARC room correction can target/manipulate the two subs independently or not.
jamesmil is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #332 of 4093 Old 11-16-2015, 01:53 PM
Advanced Member
 
bkeeler10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woods Cross, Utah
Posts: 850
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 341 Post(s)
Liked: 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by man's View Post
I'm a bit confuse.. mrx 1120 support 7.1.4 or 7.2.4?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post
"7.2.4" is not a thing.
It is true that 7.2.4 is not an official thing. But, to be a bit more helpful, the MRX series has one subwoofer pre-out jack, not two. Not significant however. If you have two subs, use a Y-splitter.

Edit: Looks like it does have two sub pre-outs - my bad. But I'm near certain that ARC treats them as a single, mono signal. That has always been the case with ARC


Last edited by bkeeler10; 11-16-2015 at 01:57 PM.
bkeeler10 is offline  
post #333 of 4093 Old 11-16-2015, 03:20 PM
Senior Member
 
Apgood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 325
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkeeler10 View Post
It is true that 7.2.4 is not an official thing. But, to be a bit more helpful, the MRX series has one subwoofer pre-out jack, not two. Not significant however. If you have two subs, use a Y-splitter.

Edit: Looks like it does have two sub pre-outs - my bad. But I'm near certain that ARC treats them as a single, mono signal. That has always been the case with ARC
That's correct Nick has previously stated that if two subs are connected (i.e. one to each sub out) then they will just be treated as one for room correction and sound output purposes. Basically it just saves you buying a y-splitter cable.
Apgood is offline  
 
post #334 of 4093 Old 11-16-2015, 06:20 PM
Member
 
man's's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apgood View Post
That's correct Nick has previously stated that if two subs are connected (i.e. one to each sub out) then they will just be treated as one for room correction and sound output purposes. Basically it just saves you buying a y-splitter cable.
so,for dual subs you cannot rely on arc to get the best performance compare to xt32?
man's is offline  
post #335 of 4093 Old 11-16-2015, 06:33 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 22,570
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3704 Post(s)
Liked: 2060
For dual subs it's up to you to get them level and phase matched, but then you can rely on ARC for the best performance.
stanger89 is online now  
post #336 of 4093 Old 11-16-2015, 10:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Apgood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 325
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 51
What it means is that you may need to set level &\or delay / phase manually for you subs depending on your setup to make sure they are summing their signal before you use ARC to apply room correction.

In practice this means that you adjust the phase / delay knob on one of the subs while playing a test tone to both subs. When the sound at the main listening position is loudest then the two subs are in phase or at least as close as possible to in phase.
jamesmil likes this.
Apgood is offline  
post #337 of 4093 Old 11-17-2015, 07:30 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nick @ Anthem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 315 Post(s)
Liked: 243
^ Phase adjustment only affects the crossover region and is meant for sub-sat balancing, not sub-sub. Sub-sub delay adjustment is another means to the same end as eq, which is to flatten in-room response. Don't forget sub-sub level adjustment which also affects combined response.

Just run Quick Measure, adjust sub levels until their combined response looks best, then run eq. It's not that difficult nor time consuming to get flat response this way, and the Quick Measure part is often not needed either. At worst a sub may need to be repositioned if equalized result can't meet target, but the chance goes down as the number of subs playing simultaneously goes up since this alone makes pressure more consistent around the room.

The most important noise floor is in your head. Always remember to protect your hearing.
Nick @ Anthem is offline  
post #338 of 4093 Old 11-17-2015, 07:34 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nick @ Anthem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 315 Post(s)
Liked: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesmil View Post
if my HTPC decodes a 5.1 signal but sends it to the receiver as a 7.1 signal (with the rears having silence) can DSU still expand it to use all the speakers?
To the decoder, a blank channel is no different than a silent passage in the soundtrack. If the source says it's 7.1, the decoder treats it as 7.1.

The most important noise floor is in your head. Always remember to protect your hearing.
Nick @ Anthem is offline  
post #339 of 4093 Old 11-17-2015, 08:31 AM
Senior Member
 
jamesmil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 370
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem View Post
To the decoder, a blank channel is no different than a silent passage in the soundtrack. If the source says it's 7.1, the decoder treats it as 7.1.
Yeah, that's what I figured, thanks for confirming.
jamesmil is offline  
post #340 of 4093 Old 11-21-2015, 03:04 AM
Senior Member
 
Applemike68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: The Woodlands, TX
Posts: 243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Any idea when the new receivers will show up on anthems website along with the manuals? I think they are due in January, so just around the corner
Applemike68 is offline  
post #341 of 4093 Old 11-25-2015, 01:26 PM
Member
 
vodil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SFO
Posts: 168
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Question Can ARC 2 handle 2 subs?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkeeler10 View Post
It is true that 7.2.4 is not an official thing. Not significant however. If you have two subs, use a Y-splitter.
That is certainly not true. There are AVRs that do have 2 independent sub-out channels and use the ".2" designations. Furthermore, Audessy can adjust them independently--which is not easy to do by yourself. ARC could not do that. So questions:

Can the levels be independently adjusted for the two subs like Marantz/Denon has allowed for years or is it truly an internal Y-connector?

Does ARC2 do any better than ARC1 on subs?
vodil is offline  
post #342 of 4093 Old 11-25-2015, 03:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
bkeeler10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woods Cross, Utah
Posts: 850
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 341 Post(s)
Liked: 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by vodil View Post
That is certainly not true. There are AVRs that do have 2 independent sub-out channels and use the ".2" designations. Furthermore, Audessy can adjust them independently--which is not easy to do by yourself. ARC could not do that.
Well, we have to distinguish between hardware, software and layout designations. The 5.1 and 7.1 designations originally specified the number of discrete channels encoded in the source. Since LFE was always mono, there really is no such thing as 7.2 from the software perspective. You may have had multiple subs, but they were all fed from a mono signal (although potentially each sub was subject to different delays, levels or EQ profiles applied to them behind the source material).

And of course, that is what some AVRs do with two sub pre-outs. They can adjust delays and levels for each sub pre-out independently, and manufacturers may use the 5.2 or 7.2 designation to communicate this capability to the market. But this is a hardware implementation. The hardware may be 7.2 but the source is still 7.1.

And then some have taken to using the 7.1 designation to express the number of sub units in their system. They may say that they have a 7.6 system if they're using six subs.

And now, even Dolby has confused this nomenclature by using it to express the number of speakers in an Atmos system, even though each speaker is not a channel in the mix anymore. For example, one could have a 9.1.4 Atmos home system. But there are still only 7.1 channels in the software, with the rest of the speakers playing sound objects that are not assigned to a particular speaker channel but a location. The Atmos renderer decides what sounds go where based on your layout. IOW, there is also no such thing as a 7.1.4 mix or a 5.1.2 mix. The nomenclature no longer refers to just software.

So the waters have been very muddied over the years in this regard. DS21 started this conversation by replying to someone asking about whether the MRX were 7.2.4 or not, saying that 7.2.4 is not a thing. He didn't specify what he meant, but I knew what he meant and in the context he was thinking, he is correct. Of course, he could have read between the lines to see what the poster meant and been a little more helpful. That's what I tried to do with my post.

Quote:
So questions:

Can the levels be independently adjusted for the two subs like Marantz/Denon has allowed for years or is it truly an internal Y-connector?
No, I don't believe they can. Pretty sure it is just an internal Y-connector.

Quote:
Does ARC2 do any better than ARC1 on subs?
I'm not familiar with the changes made to the algorithms between the two versions, but I bet Nick@Anthem knows a thing or two about it.

bkeeler10 is offline  
post #343 of 4093 Old 11-25-2015, 03:49 PM
Member
 
vodil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SFO
Posts: 168
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkeeler10 View Post
Well, we have to distinguish between hardware, software and layout designations. The 5.1 and 7.1 designations originally specified the number of discrete channels encoded in the source. Since LFE was always mono, there really is no such thing as 7.2 from the software perspective. You may have had multiple subs, but they were all fed from a mono signal (although potentially each sub was subject to different delays, levels or EQ profiles applied to them behind the source material).

And of course, that is what some AVRs do with two sub pre-outs. They can adjust delays and levels for each sub pre-out independently, and manufacturers may use the 5.2 or 7.2 designation to communicate this capability to the market. But this is a hardware implementation. The hardware may be 7.2 but the source is still 7.1.

And then some have taken to using the 7.1 designation to express the number of sub units in their system. They may say that they have a 7.6 system if they're using six subs.

And now, even Dolby has confused this nomenclature by using it to express the number of speakers in an Atmos system, even though each speaker is not a channel in the mix anymore. For example, one could have a 9.1.4 Atmos home system. But there are still only 7.1 channels in the software, with the rest of the speakers playing sound objects that are not assigned to a particular speaker channel but a location. The Atmos renderer decides what sounds go where based on your layout. IOW, there is also no such thing as a 7.1.4 mix or a 5.1.2 mix. The nomenclature no longer refers to just software.

So the waters have been very muddied over the years in this regard. DS21 started this conversation by replying to someone asking about whether the MRX were 7.2.4 or not, saying that 7.2.4 is not a thing. He didn't specify what he meant, but I knew what he meant and in the context he was thinking, he is correct. Of course, he could have read between the lines to see what the poster meant and been a little more helpful. That's what I tried to do with my post.
Fair enough. In the beginning channels were speakers and so there was no difference. One could say that was broken up when 5.1 came around because it was really 6 channels, but the choice was made to use the .1 because it was a different kind of speaker.

To the end user it has always been about speakers not channels. That is what they buy and that is what they plug in. How it was encoded it a detail they shouldn't have to worry about.

This trend continues now that we are encoding objects. The 7 (.1) legacy channels become a hinderance to doing what we wanted to do all along. (uro3D encoding does not require it) Utlimately we want the processor to make the right sound appear for whatever strange scattering of speakers it is stuck with. Using the X.Y.Z nomenclature for speakers may be useful in the future. Channels will soon be a thing of the past.
vodil is offline  
post #344 of 4093 Old 11-25-2015, 08:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nick @ Anthem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 315 Post(s)
Liked: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by vodil View Post
Can the levels be independently adjusted for the two subs
Not in the menu but please see post 337.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vodil View Post
Does ARC2 do any better than ARC1 on subs?
Yes, in the sense that as more people use MRX, more people send us their results in case there's room for improvement in their system. At the same time we look for improvements on our end by refining the ways that ARC interprets the wide variety of real-world measurements and if there's something we haven't seen before, it's added to the things that ARC looks after, and goes into software updates.
Nugget likes this.

The most important noise floor is in your head. Always remember to protect your hearing.
Nick @ Anthem is offline  
post #345 of 4093 Old 11-28-2015, 04:52 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nick @ Anthem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 315 Post(s)
Liked: 243
Imported from another thread to avoid crashing it:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post
Any word on whether ... suffer from the same DSP horsepower limitation that precludes using Dolby Volume and more than 7.1 channels, like ... the forthcoming Anthem AVMRX's (as Nick reported in the Anthem thread)?
I said that 11.1-channel Dolby Volume firmware isn't available for the DSP hardware. The chip is a new quad-core design and if its potential was an issue then the solution would have been to include a second one. MRX x00 uses two DSP chips, as do all our prepros which contain ARC and precede the AVM 60.

The most important noise floor is in your head. Always remember to protect your hearing.
Nick @ Anthem is offline  
post #346 of 4093 Old 11-28-2015, 06:02 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 692
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 538 Post(s)
Liked: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem View Post
Imported from another thread to avoid crashing it:

I said that 11.1-channel Dolby Volume firmware isn't available for the DSP hardware. The chip is a new quad-core design and if its potential was an issue then the solution would have been to include a second one. MRX x00 uses two DSP chips, as do all our prepros which contain ARC and precede the AVM 60.
Nick - do you know if the new PW link will have ARC, and when it might be available?
Contuzzi is offline  
post #347 of 4093 Old 11-28-2015, 06:17 AM
Member
 
Speaker Robert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 24
I'm a bit puzzled as to the appearance of a re-badge of the MRX 310 to the MRX 520 [with HDMI 2.0a/HDCP 2.2 support thrown in] and the price increase & difference to the next step up to the MRX 720. I talked about this with a local dealer and the MRX 510 & MRX 710 are the higher sellers, but they didn't move many 310 models.

Anything over 2k and I would start to consider separates anyways. It seems that Anthem is positioning themselves to compete more at the upper high end of the audio equipment lineup than at the start of the high end range. The 1k to 2k price range is pretty popular and Anthem doesn't offer anything really compelling at that price point, let alone a reason for any current MRX 510 7.1 owners to switch to the updated HDMI/HDCP 520 model. Granted, the margins at the 1k to 2k price range are likely more cutthroat as there is fierce competition in that area. Just my opinion on this of course.

Could I send my MRX 510 in to Anthem's service department for a digital board & firmware upgrade to the the new HDMI/HDCP specs? Just a thought.
rossi46 likes this.

Last edited by Speaker Robert; 11-28-2015 at 06:35 AM.
Speaker Robert is offline  
post #348 of 4093 Old 11-28-2015, 09:13 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,656
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 995 Post(s)
Liked: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem View Post
Imported from another thread to avoid crashing it:

I said that 11.1-channel Dolby Volume firmware isn't available for the DSP hardware. The chip is a new quad-core design and if its potential was an issue then the solution would have been to include a second one. MRX x00 uses two DSP chips, as do all our prepros which contain ARC and precede the AVM 60.
Thanks for the clarification.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
DS-21 is offline  
post #349 of 4093 Old 11-29-2015, 11:20 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
HeffeMusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 294 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Hello all,
The preview of the AV60 says the Latest version of ARC can also be used on analog. Why would this be significant if there is no 5.1 analog inputs? Would it only work on 2 ch audio? Is there a pure audio on the analog signal on these amps? Also once you introduce ARC into the path wouldn't this digitize the analog signal? Another question is if I have a MRX700 and want to have a 5.1.2 would it make more sense to get the 720 as a pre amp and use my 700 with the more powerful amp to power the system. Or would the AV60 be better as the preamp. What Advantage would this add over the 720 setup?

Regards
Jeff
HeffeMusic is online now  
post #350 of 4093 Old 12-10-2015, 02:19 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeffeMusic View Post
Hello all,
The preview of the AV60 says the Latest version of ARC can also be used on analog. Why would this be significant if there is no 5.1 analog inputs?

Regards
Jeff
Good call
nadyn is offline  
post #351 of 4093 Old 12-10-2015, 03:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nick @ Anthem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 315 Post(s)
Liked: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeffeMusic View Post
The preview of the AV60 says the Latest version of ARC can also be used on analog. Why would this be significant if there is no 5.1 analog inputs? Would it only work on 2 ch audio? Is there a pure audio on the analog signal on these amps? Also once you introduce ARC into the path wouldn't this digitize the analog signal? Another question is if I have a MRX700 and want to have a 5.1.2 would it make more sense to get the 720 as a pre amp and use my 700 with the more powerful amp to power the system. Or would the AV60 be better as the preamp. What Advantage would this add over the 720 setup?
ARC was always usable with analog sources. The signal has to be turned into digital audio so ARC, bass management, surround modes etc can work. Except in MRX x00 series, analog inputs can be set to straight analog mode though reasons to do so are questionable considering the improvements that room compensation and bass management offer, and how far AD conversion quality has come since digiphobia was born.

5.1 pre-in is for DVD-A/SACD players that predate HDMI-out. It was niche back then, and niche within a niche for more than the past decade.

Amp-in, which mates with pre-out, started disappearing from integrated amps 20+ years ago, let alone AVRs ever having it. Even if MRX 700 did, the power difference vs 720 is too small to make a practical difference.

In general, external amplification is called for if the speakers need more power than internal amplification puts out before clipping.
Nugget likes this.

The most important noise floor is in your head. Always remember to protect your hearing.
Nick @ Anthem is offline  
post #352 of 4093 Old 12-10-2015, 07:01 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
HeffeMusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 294 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem View Post
ARC was always usable with analog sources. The signal has to be turned into digital audio so ARC, bass management, surround modes etc can work. Except in MRX x00 series, analog inputs can be set to straight analog mode though reasons to do so are questionable considering the improvements that room compensation and bass management offer, and how far AD conversion quality has come since digiphobia was born.

5.1 pre-in is for DVD-A/SACD players that predate HDMI-out. It was niche back then, and niche within a niche for more than the past decade.

Amp-in, which mates with pre-out, started disappearing from integrated amps 20+ years ago, let alone AVRs ever having it. Even if MRX 700 did, the power difference vs 720 is too small to make a practical difference.

In general, external amplification is called for if the speakers need more power than internal amplification puts out before clipping.
Thanks Nick for you reply. I understand what you are saying I have already discussed this issue in depth with you when I purchased my MRX 700 all those years ago. I guess what I want to know will the 720 sound as good as the AVM 60,
Or does the preamp have better DACs etc.. Besides the extra channels and XLR inputs what am I gaining If I purchased the AVM60?
HeffeMusic is online now  
post #353 of 4093 Old 12-10-2015, 08:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dan webster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: western mass.
Posts: 1,062
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
Liked: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeffeMusic View Post
Thanks Nick for you reply. I understand what you are saying I have already discussed this issue in depth with you when I purchased my MRX 700 all those years ago. I guess what I want to know will the 720 sound as good as the AVM 60,
Or does the preamp have better DACs etc.. Besides the extra channels and XLR inputs what am I gaining If I purchased the AVM60?
I would also like to know if there is a significant difference sonically between the 720 and 60 using all external amplification?

Dolby Atmos 7.2.4 Marantz AV8802a processor Gemstone 200x7 Emotiva upa-500 amps
Oppo 103 Sony UBP-X800 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray Jvc RS500 projector Vivitek 1186 projector
Carada 110"BW screen Monster HTS 5100 MK11 power conditioner
Golden Ear Triton 5 L&R &super center XXL triton 7's sides Martin logan motion 12 rears
4 RSL C34 in ceiling SVS PB2-plus sub Outlaw LFM-1-plus sub
dan webster is offline  
post #354 of 4093 Old 12-14-2015, 06:06 PM
Newbie
 
AntheParadig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Sydney AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan webster View Post
I would also like to know if there is a significant difference sonically between the 720 and 60 using all external amplification?
Just joined the from down under, wondering the same thing and also in terms of 2CH listening. Also for over all audio would AVM50 be better than 60?
There are some second hand 50s floating around in the local market and wondering if I should get one or wait for 60 to come out. I am not frantic about HT/video processing and won't probably go any bigger than my existing 7.2 setup but I am in to audio and love my music both 2CH (2.1 actually with a sub) and also 7.2 concert listening. I have full Paradigm Signature speaker setup with S8s as fronts and 2 M1s for the fronts. Remaining are being powered by a RX-A3020 which is also being used as pre for M1s. I have been hair splitting if I should go for high end preamp (must support at least one sub) to supplement M1s for 2CH and leave 3020 for powering other channels for multi channel listening or get a AVM50 or 60 and a 5 channel Anthem power amp such as PVA5/MCA50. Would AVM50 or 60 be as good as a high end pre + M1s for 2Ch listening
AntheParadig is offline  
post #355 of 4093 Old 12-17-2015, 12:21 PM
TWD
AVS Forum Special Member
 
TWD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Any updates on availability of the new MRXs?

TWD
TWD is offline  
post #356 of 4093 Old 12-17-2015, 01:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
blastermaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sunny Okanagan
Posts: 1,912
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 501 Post(s)
Liked: 634
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWD View Post
Any updates on availability of the new MRXs?
^This. For the love of all things holy, just take my money!
Nugget likes this.
blastermaster is online now  
post #357 of 4093 Old 12-17-2015, 02:09 PM
Senior Member
 
Nugget's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Houston Texas USA
Posts: 292
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 159
I've already got a deposit down and an order in with my local dealer, just a waiting game at this point...

I like cars, airplanes, running, and coding || current gear: two eyes, two ears, one brain, and some other junk.
Nugget is online now  
post #358 of 4093 Old 12-17-2015, 07:01 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
blastermaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sunny Okanagan
Posts: 1,912
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 501 Post(s)
Liked: 634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nugget View Post
I've already got a deposit down and an order in with my local dealer, just a waiting game at this point...
Going to my local dealer tomorrow to see if he will let me give him my money.
blastermaster is online now  
post #359 of 4093 Old 12-17-2015, 07:16 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 692
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 538 Post(s)
Liked: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWD View Post
Any updates on availability of the new MRXs?
Early January supposedly. Can't wait. I'm amazed this thread isn't like the number 1 thread on AVS Forum. So disappointing to see so many who aren't exposed to Anthem.
Contuzzi is offline  
post #360 of 4093 Old 12-19-2015, 04:03 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nugget View Post
I've already got a deposit down and an order in with my local dealer, just a waiting game at this point...
Courageous man, without listening/demo it first ? That's Anthem commitment no doubt.
nadyn is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Anthem , anthem mrx720 , firetv , mrx 1120 mrx 720 mrx 520 , MRX720 , nick@anthem

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