Denon AVR-4810CI/AVR-4810 w/ 9.3ch, Dolby PLIIz/Audyssey DSX, October 09- - Page 60

The article is incorrect... the 4310 is 7.1, the 4810 is 9.3... one of the differentiations between the 2...

Thanks - this confirms what I thought. Based upon the published specs and the manual I just couldn't figure out how the 4310 could do anything beyond 7.1

I also thought, however, that it would be unusual for a reviewer to get such an important feature wrong, so I thought I might have been missing something.

The 4310 cannot do 9.1.

I don't know where the "noticeable and substantial" claim keeps coming up.. and according to Denon, they use the same DAC's, same video solution, and the same DSP chips... what are the quality differences you are talking about (besides amp power)?

Also, I cannot find "larger" operation difference / larger feature set besides 9.3 operation and Free Amp Assign between the two.. care to elaborate?

All the reviews about the 4310 have marveled at the sound quality.. while I don't doubt there are differences, I think to categorize them as substantial is a little bit of hyperbole without a A/B comparison...


Boomy low end is a common complain for users of Dynamic EQ.. while it may not be for you, it is a widely common criticism.. one way to offset the effect is to adjust the Reference Level value in the Audio/Video Adjust>Audio Parameters settings page.

From another review:

Tech Radar 4310 review

Filmmixer, My super bad on the 7 channels. I hadn't really deeply considered the 4310 and must fall on the sword regarding thinking it could pass two additional channels. My brain though it did and I didn't look deep enough in to it.

The 4310 and 4810 do use the same DAC's but only the 4810 can do Advanced AL 24 Processing on all channels. The 4310 can only on the front two (or three, I might be wrong on the center). I would believe that would lead to an argument that the 4810 has a higher grade parts bin for all channels. Please prove me wrong.

The larger "Feature Set" statement really covers(ed) connectivity options and the mentioned 12 channels of capability. I think Freeassign is a biggie here as are those 12 channels. It is the only receiver that can do DSX height and wide. The rear panel also allows greater connection flexibility. This includes additional subs (Arguably not a big deal). Oh, you also missed wireless ethernet. Wireless is a big deal for some and a major feature set item. Oh, you also missed Zone 4 Optical... Another biggie for getting around HDMI restrictions. I know I've missed some other things, but I stand by "Substantial".

As far as the quality statement, it comes down to connections and chassis. I assume better components internally as well just given the money put in to the back of the receiver. You can see the money just in the speaker connects. Totally different class of connection. It is a wholly different design than the lower Denon's I don't have proof of this (internally, as I have not opened them) and haven't taken them apart. The unit is a different dimension, has different connects, amps, so I guess there are more changes as well.

Also, to be honest here. I really doubt I could hear the difference in the DAC deployment (for lack of a better word - since they use the same DACs) However, it is a different claim/design. I do know my system sounds silent with a very low noise floor. I again am guessing the 4310 would be damn well the same.

Sorry about my bad comment regarding channels. So, I guess I'd recommend the 4810 over the 4310 even a bit more so, especially if you want DSX as a feature.

I've owned/own both the 4310 and the 4810.
And I've experiment with Height and Wide speakers, either or both at the same time.
In my opinion the 4310 is the value here.
I only say that because I'm over DPLIIz and DSX, I just don't think they add much, if anything, to the listening experience.
I'm perfectly content with 5.1 or 7.1.
Also Free Amp Assign while nice just isn't needed in most cases, or at least in my case.
I don't think there's much if any real world difference in their internal amps.
I like the speaker binding post and gold plated connectors of the 4810 better than the 4310's but how much difference does this really make......
That's about it are far as differences go between the two.... correct?
Oh yeah the 4810 let's you connect up to 3 subs... kind of cool, but....


just my 2 cents
DreamCatcher

I has nothing to do with higher grade parts... AL 24 is a DSP process.

AL 24/24 Plus/32 is only used on 16 bit sources, which in this day and age is relegated to audio CD.. that why it is only really important for stereo/LR.. since most all MC sources (DVD-A, MLP, multichannel codecs) are 24 bit, it isn't very beneficial to have it on all channels, IMO... while it's beneficial to have more bits/higher sample rate for signal processing, I can't attest to it's benefit sonically for CD's if you are listening in a Direct mode.



Free Assign is a necessity to using 9.1... if any other products in the line up were 9.1 capable, they would have the same option, so I don't think it can be considered a feature upgrade..

WiFi is a great feature for those without wired rooms... agreed. Not major, IMO, due to the availability of other options (WiFi bridges, which are now common and relatively cheap.)

And if you need 4 zones, the 4310 only does 3.. (note, however, zone 4 digital on the 4810 is still limited to bitstream DD, DTS or 2.0 PCM (CD), so it doesn't get around HDMI restrictions at all, and is still very limited as far as HD sources go, and can't be used with XM, HD Radio, Tuner, Phono, etc...)

And to add to those without Ethernet in their entertainment rack, the newer power line adaptors should be given serious consideration... high speed data access is becoming a great thing to have with Netflix, Pandora, Rhapsody, etc, and these services will grow immensely this year.

It is the only Denon receiver that can do 9.1, so, yes, it's the only option from them..

I respectfully disagree with the term "substantial" as they are both operationally equivalent outside of 9.3 and the addition Zone 4 connectivity...


If you divide the weight/channels, they are identical, but since amps don't make up for the entire chassis, you can also factor in the bigger chassis to heat, additional DAC circuitry, increased power section, more speaker connectors, etc.. I don't think there is a reasonable argument that necessarily mandates higher audio quality.

Regarding the speaker connects, and regardless of their rigidity or nice, clear binding connectors, I find it hard to believe that the construction of the speaker connectors will have any bearing on the quality of the sound from these two units... I would find it unlikely that the design or internal connection components aren't shared with the 4310, 4810 and 5308. (And, btw, the 4310 also runs in differential mode.)

I'm not trying to downplay what a great receiver it is... however, for those that cannot use 9.3, they need to have the correct information at hand when choosing between the two units.... it is up to a consumer to decide if the 33% price differential will matter in a 7.1 setup..

10W amp difference isn't enough, IMO, to have a substantial impact on the sound since they share the same DSP and DAC's... while the power supply, I would suspect, has been beefed up accordingly for more amps, I would only assume the usual benefit you gain from doing that is offset by the extra power demands of the added channels...

Seeing as these two products came out within months of each other, and share the almost exact the same functionality (outside of 9.1 and extra zones) I can only speculate that Denon, like every other company, shares as much engineering in the 4x10 lineup as they can to make as much money as they possible, and the price differential is more a function of marketing than added manufacturing and parts costs (I mean, how much more do you think they spent on the binding posts in bulk)... seeing the recent lab tests from the 4310, I suspect the 4810 would measure the same as a pre-amp.

And once again, I am not downplaying this great product.... I am a 4310 owner (and have owned 5803, 5803A, 5805, 5308 and 4308's also..)

I just want to make a point for those that don't need more than 7.1 (or a digital 5.1 zone 4) that they should seriously consider other ways to spend the $1000... for that, you could do a lot of things to your room, system and components that I suspect would far outweigh the benefits of going up to a 4810..

Of course, only my opinion, and not based on any subjective comparisons of the two directly.

I agree with you 100%. And based upon the comments of DreamCatcher about the impact of the extra two channels (either wide or high), I really might have to reconsider things.

I have been focusing on the comments from other folks about how the extra two speakers up front make a huge improvement (and as SeattleHTGuy points out, sometimes bad/weird things). And also at the fact that Audyssey would choose front wides over rear surrounds (which may just be marketing BS to justify their product).

If it turns out that the extra two channels are not that important, that frees up a lot of extra money - probably about $1,800 dollars in my case.

I was planning on buying the receiver and an external amp, some decent speakers for wides to match my current Paradigm setup, and some cheap speakers for the surrounds.

That extra $1,800 (receiver "downgrade" and no front wide speakers) could then be invested in quality surrounds to match my front speakers.

So for me it's really boiling down to which would sound better:

A. 9.1 setup using front wides and cheap surrounds; or

B. 7.1 setup with quality speakers all around.

Since there are people in both camps, I guess I have to find a way to listen myself. Unfortunately, I seriously doubt that I can find a dealer where I could A/B such a situation.

Bearing in mind that I haven't yet heard the process (I will have the opportunity to hear it soon..,) I am a bit of a purist and don't like "faux" surround processes.... Audyssey and Dolby both know how I feel about their processes in a professional capacity..

I'm a stereo guy for music, and don't find anything wrong with going from 5.1>6.1 or 7.1 since the cues for the extra channel extraction exist in the source.. I just don't like it when a DSP algorithm decides to steer audio around without some designed intention or purpose..

That being said, and due to the complexity of gaining height channels from material mixed around a single plain, I would agree with their assessment that wides are more beneficial than heights..

Make no mistake, I agree that more channels are better (I am working on doing a demo on a 384.8 channel system)... I just like to have control over how we get there.

OK, All points taken... All points not necessarily strongly in agreement with. But, there are still a lot of little things, which add up to "substantial differences" between the two. Now,whether they are worth $1,000, that is for the buyer/decision maker to determine. Also, $1,000 isn't anything but a retail number. The audio signal path is straight from the manual and Denon web site. I never said it was "way better" or good value but clearly some sort of an enhancement over the 4310.

Where I will totally agree upon is if you really don't think you will ever go beyond 7.1, or 5.1 with PLIIz, then it is hard to argue for the 4810. It doesn't matter if you are a purist or believe the two are basically the same. It's just probably not worth the bucks. I'm not hear to argue any of this. The two receivers probably do share a lot of the same components; only makes sense. The literature does point out a number real differences though. The Zone issues are critical for anyone attempting to send digital and analog signals to other zones. Far, far more flexible than the 4310.

I do think the DSX functions are amazing. I also like the Dynamic EQ. I am less enamored with Dynamic Volume but....... it does keep my wife from telling me to turn it down once the kids have crashed.... So, in reality, it is a very valuable feature (shared by both units, Volume and EQ that is).

I can't say enough though, there are a lot of little dollars that add up to the big differential in price. Again, not to say that the 4310 is not the better value. If you go back in this thread, I have said that same thing in the past. Filmmixer, you did ask me to site some differences other than the extra channels and free assign. I believe I did that..... Again, that may only be worth 10 cents to you and others but still differences no less. I am not equipped nor did you ask me to pontificate on whether the audio differences are noticable. You just asked for differences.

Last thing, again deep in this thread. IMHO set-up with 5.1 plus DSX wide would be far better (in most cases) than a 7.1 system. I even may try a 5.1 plus Wide Height once I figure out how to work with the heights. This is somewhat controversial but in most cases, I have found a more enjoyable experience with the fronts and see little use for the Dolbycreated rears created by PLIIx.

The flexibility of the 4810 puts it in a market of one, that can not be denied. It just may not be the market for everyone.

Probably the wrong place to post this since I am deciding against the 4810, but I think I'm going to opt for the more cost effective system:

Denon AVR-4310CI (new)
Emotiva XPA-3 (new)
Adcom GFA-555, mono bridged (to drive sub)
Paradigm Studio 100 v.4, fronts
Paradigm Studio CC-690 v.4, center
Paradigm Studio ADP-590, surrounds
Paradigm Atoms, rear (new)
SVS CS-Ultra subwoofer
Denon DVD-3800BDCI

Haven't decided upon a new display yet.

Thanks to everyone who has led me down this path.

I have no stake in the discussion but, since I'm pedantic I just had to point this out:


this is actually not true, Free Assign is in no way a "necessity" for 9.1. Free Assign is not the same as generic "amp assign" -- you can have a 9.1 setup running without using Free Assign mode. Free Assign is a special "bonus" amp assign mode that allows you to assign ANY amp channel, as opposed to lower level units in which you can only reassign the two surr.back channels.

Yes, any receiver can allow reassignment of certain amp channels but Free Assign is a distinct mode which allows assignment of ANY channel, e.g. if you have external amps for 7 channels you now have 7 free amps in the AVR that can be used to power any zone. The only thing that is a necessity for 9.1 is the ability to assign the last set of amps the "beyond 5.1" speakers...

Anyway, that is all, carry on

The 4810 manual, page 122, explains, >>“Advanced AL24 Processing” uses data interpolation along the time axis or upconverted sampling to achieve natural interpolation without losing the original data. A digital filter is used to further expand adaptability and perform optimum filtering calculations for ringing-free pulse response, pulsive music data and attack sounds. It also operates when the system is 7.1-channel or below.<<

So it appears it's not confined to 16-bit, 2-ch sources.

My question, is there an on/off switch? I see the indicator--but no means to switch it. I wonder what it does for the sound.

Roger.. you are correct.. however, if the depth is 24 bit already (and I don't recall seeing any 20 bit sources except for at work) the bit depth wouldn't be changed anyways with AL 24.

Advanced 24 AL added sample rate up converstion to the process ... in my experience over the years, doing this on it's own doesn't add to the sound quality, but can be beneficial when doing certain types of DSP processing...

Unless you are going to run the 3800 in Direct mode for it's analog path and don't need room eq, I would highly recommend going with another BD player and a Denon 2930 (for example) for DVD, CD, DVD-A and SACD... the ABT in the 4310/4810 will do a better job at up-converting SD DVD's than the 3800, and you can use Denon Link for the audio...

I have had a ton of BR players, and for BR playback, found my $250 LG 390 to offer as good BR quality as any other's I've tried, along with quick speed (as fast as a PS3 or Oppo) and the benefit of streaming, WiFi, etc.. there are a ton of good choices for BR only at this price point.

With all of the new features (Vudu, Netflix, Pandora, etc) and 3D coming down the pike, I think you can treat the ~$250 BR players today as "disposable" without fear of losing any quality from BR sources... as newer 1.4 players come down the pike later this year with dual HDMI outputs, you can use the moeny you saved today towards a new player, 3D display and the extra cables your need to feed both your display and Denon.

More food for thought....

bat..

Since there are a fixed amount of DAC's and DSP paths, and you are limited to 2 powered stereo zones, if used as a preamp for your main zone, you can only ever need 4 channels of amplification outside the main zone (in your example of 7 free amps, 3 will go unused if using external amps for your main zone, since the Denon's don't support 5.1 Zone's 2 or 3....

I mean what's the benefit of having the Center channel come out of any other terminal than the C one in a 5.1/6.1/7.1 system?

That's why I said it was a necessity in a 9.1 system.. I should've used the term "beneficial in a 9.1 system."

At that point, you may need to assign the internal amps, but I don't see the purpose if you are using 5.1 or 7.1... hope I clarified my comment, and hope you can add more clarity to it's benefits for me.

Filmmixer, I think pmd918 already owns the Denon BluRay. As you can see he doesn't have a "new" indicator next to it.

Other than that, 4810 or not... The system looks very nice.

So I've had the Denon AVR-4800 for many years, awesome receiver but I'm ready to upgrade ...

I have a 5.1 system and that's all I care about
I have the oppo Blu Ray player
Paradigm Studio 80 soeakers with the CC for center and Studio 20s for surround and the Velodyne SPL1200 sub

No interest in other zones ...
Hoping Audissey will help my system quite a bit

Based on this thread, I'm assuming the 4810 is overkill right? Is the 4310 the way to go then?

Can I use the extra amps to biamp my front speakers?

Finally, does the Audissey stuff apply in Dolby HD or DTS HD modes? I've read earlier in this thread that with some receivers they get bypassed and you have to use your player to decode ...

Any help would be much appreciated.

thanks,
Rony.

Yes, you definitely sound like an ideal candidate for a 4310. Forget paying the extra money just to bi-amp for a marginal improvement. Spend those savings on a good external amp.

EDIT: Oh, you may have been asking whether you can bi-amp on the 4310 using those two leftover amps. If so, I'm not sure, but I have to believe that Denon would have set up the 4310 for bi-amping. Grab the manual from Denon's product page and look in the early section on speaker connections.

Audyssey on the Denon 4310 and 4810 works with all formats....

You can Bi-Amp with both the 4310 and 4810...

I'm interested in the Denon 43/4810 as well. Has anyone had good luck with the refurb units on ecost?

We really need to start a post where we can identify "best deals". Like the section on Blu Ray players.

You can bi-amp on the 3310 and 4310. It is a good way to take advantage of the extra 2 amps if you are not using a 7.1 set-up, or another room.

Exactly. Wides are MUCH more useful than any type of height speaker. But this is assuming that your mains and center channel are in the correct place. I.E. 50%-75% the height of the image and all at the same height. Really the only people who can do this correctly have AT screens. I asked Chris from Audyssey this question directly during the Audyssey webinar: If my speakers are lined up and at the correct height (see above description) is there any reason to have height speakers? He said NO.

Having heard a demonstration of height channels at CEDIA, I can understand why many would prefer them over wides. That is because their center channel is below the image. The heights help to the raise the sound up to the screen.

If you are lucky enough to have an AT screen with your speakers set up fairly close to the way the mixer created the tracks, then wides do a fantastic job of filling in the gap in sound between the main L,R and the surrounds. This is how my system is set up and I can't ever see going back to the "old" 7.1.

BTW, I have a 4310 and love it. The 4810 was almost purchased though just so I could power my wides and a second zone for parties. In the end I'll just use a cheap 2 channel amp for the same purpose and have saved myself a lot of money.

maalourm. If it's 5.1 then, I'm not even sure the 4310 is necessary. You may wish to look at the 3310. Then, since it has pre-outs, you could go and put your saved money in to some nice used or on-line external amplification.

You should get a strong feauture set from the 3310 and you could save your coin for something else later. I think the 4810 is overkill for 5.1.

maalourm, I also think, and many others will agree, that bi-amping a single power supply mid powered receiver will add very little dynamic capabilities to your speaker/room. It's more a smoke and mirrors exercise than a doubling of front power capabilties. I know you end up with two dead channels, but not really as the amp capabilties will just naturally flow to the remaining active channels.

If I'm way off here, others pop in as you feel the desire.

I fully agree purchasing the 4810 is overkill for 5.1. The 3310 is a solid performer an offers the best bang for the buck. Certain etailers have this for under $900.

You would be paying more than double for the 4810. Not a wise choice with my cash flow.:eek

As far as bi-amping, if you do not have a 7.1 system you would be silly not to bi-amp. You have two extra amps not being used, so go ahead and bi-amp it.

I'm also thinking to buy a 4810 but unfortunatly the manuals are not so crystal about the fact of multizone multistreaming.
Is it possible to stream different audio/mp3s in the different zones (MAIN, ZONE2, ZONE3) or do all zones have to listen to the same "choosen" stream?
Those it the same also with the streaming of pictures e.g. jpgs?

Is it possible to use different HDMI sources at different HDMI outputs at the same time e.g. PS3 on HDMI1 -> HMDI A and BD on HDMI2 -> HDMI B

Nevertheless sorry for my bad english and thank you very much in advance for helping.

Thanks guys, I hadn't considered the 3310 I guess I should look into it ... the only other receivers I was looking at where the Integra which are also in the same price range, but I don't see hardly any talk about them on this forum.

Regarding using external amps along with whatever receiver I get, technically I can use my old 4800 can't I. That amp is probably on par with the 4810. Is there even an advantage to doing so?

Well, yes you could use the 4800 amps. There is a lot of theoretical talk about "The Old Denon Amps" just are better and then you get the whole "my receiver weighs more than your receiver" crowd. Certainly you could have fun seeing if you can tell any difference. Please report back to us all. If you hear a difference, that may be interesting.