Marantz AV7005 - Page 256

yeah, you are completely correct. i don't know what i was drinking this morning, but maybe someone gave me decaf!

Ahhh, I'd forgotten that I'd checked out your nice thread and enviable room in the past. Nice work! Based on my limited experience with several analog HT bypass preamps, they vary considerably in overall SQ, coloration and features such as bass management options.

Thanks. I also appreciate the experience and feedback from your link. A lot of time and research went into that, something we can all benefit from. For the record, I don't use my sub in 2CH, the monster Swans really pump out in the low end. Finding a potential AV7005 replacement (or seperate preamp) that will clearly improve on that path will win me over.

In the end, it's all a matter of $. A $$$ processor or a $$ preamp? No problem sir, we will fulfill your every wish...

So I guess that's where I stand at the moment, within my chain's weakest link.

Yes, thanks Norm. That's not what I had thought exactly so I did learn something. Here's a block diagram I just found from the Klipsch forum member mdeneen, which seems to concur with your description:

Essentially, "HT bypass input" is nothing more than one input of an A/B switch placed just before the front L&R power amp, that's buried inside the "HT bypass" featured preamp. Input A is the pre-pro and input B is the purist, 2ch preamp's output.

Thing is, one could easily replicate this feature with an outboard A/B selection box switcher (some even coming with remote control) just as easily for any preamp one might want, but since HT bypass solves a "problem"* I don't even buy into from the get go, it's not for me.

I'm glad I understand it better now though, so thanks.

*[The AV7005, to the best of my knowledge, does not digitize the stereo RCA ins when in "pure direct modes", so I see no reason to have a secondary, dedicated preamp just for 2ch sources. The AV7005 is no slouch.]

Where to purchase a SR7005 for a deal ? pm me please

My AV7005 is on a shelf to the right of my TV. When seated, the huge volume control knob blocks the view of the IR eye which is just to the left of volume. I searched this & other forums for insite on IR repeaters, and the flasher jack. Here is a repeater that plugs into the flasher and works great. http://www.amazon.com/Cables-Go-Acou...9299454&sr=8-1 . It's the Cables to go- Impact Acoustics repeater 40430. It has a 12v block that feeds from the 12V jack on the 7005, so I didn't need another wall wart. It plugged right into the Flasher port so I also did not need the emitters that came with the kit. You have to provide the plugs for the flasher & 12V jacks. It's receiver eye does not conflict with the eye on the 7005 when your remote can see both. This unit is just what I needed, but I'm annoyed to have to go through the trouble & expense of buying a repeater to control one device. However, it works like a charm.

Have you ever introduced a high end preamp into your system like I have? Can your system reproduce micro details that would enable you to hear the difference?

Like I stated in my earlier post, one can most definitely improve on the 2CH analog performance of the AV7005, if the rest of the chain can also pick up on it.

Has anyone been able to do an A/B comparison between the Marantz AV-7005 and Rotel RSP-1572? My local dealer did not have either in stock. I am looking for a comparison on the same input source, amplifiers, and speakers. I am debating with myself as to which processor to purchase.

My source priorities: Verizon FIOS TV, Denon Blu-ray player in Source Direct Mode, DVD-Audio, Netflix and DLNA streaming, and CD/FLAC. I still want music to sound really good (2-ch or multi-channel DVD-Audio).

I hear Stereophile is publishing a review of the RSP-1572 in the March issue. I am waiting patiently

The issue is out now, at least for digital subscribers, and Kal gives it a thumbs up. The caveats are: fewer bells and whistles and streaming sources than some of the competition. And the room EQ is entirely manual, but very capable (as in similar to the kind of highly configurable and effective system used by Classe). Once dialed in via third party measurement software, he compares it favorably to Anthem and Integra offerings in the same price category. He doesn't mention the Marantz by name, so you'll have to draw your own conclusions.

For me, the deciding factor (if I wasn't able to hear both, properly dialed in, in my own listening space) would be whether I was ready to set up a third party measuring system or hire a professional to do so. If I was, then the Rotel would be a contender. If I wasn't, then something with auto-EQ like the Anthem, Marantz, or Integra/Onkyo (or a Denon receiver) would likely be more appealing.

I'm actually intrigued by the Rotel enough that I might pick one up, so if you are looking for a lightly used Marantz, I may be able to set you up!

Does your Denon player have DenonLink3 or 4? If so, I strongly encourage you to consider a Denon AVR4311 (about $1.3K street) and use the jitter-reduction DenonLink (CAT5) cable along with the powerful new DSP RC technology of Audyssey MultEQXT32. (And Audyssey Pro adds even better SQ and polish, but that's $700 more.) I have the Denon DBP A100 (edit equiv to DBP4010 -not 4310) universal BRP connected via DenonLink to my AVR A100 (4311) and it distinctly beat out digital and analog from the Oppo BDP83SE univ BRP. It yields superb SQ in my HT for stereo and MC SACD, DVDA and even for RBCDs.

Denon link sounds better than HDMI? Interesting. Again an example that bits are not just bits, but the timing in their delivery appears to have audible impact?

That is assuming there really was a difference and not just a perceived difference (i.e. it was better because he wanted it to be better???). The same argument you see about Amps on AVS ....they all sound the same vs they don't all sound the same. No skin in the game but just something to consider.

^Yup, nathan, that's my findings. I was skeptical of Denon-Link; after all, Denon also recommends bi-amping to improve SQ per statements in the OM. And I really didn't want to invest in a Denon player, being very happy with Oppo universal players. So I started a "Does DenonLink work?" thread to ask for data from others. Finally I bought a DenonLink-equipped player and did a bunch of level-matched BAB tests using identical music discs of all three types in both machines. Bottom line: I've sold my beloved Oppo I'm so happy with the Denon music SQ. BTW, I was a professional musician and involved with recording so I have high expectations.

I really can't explain it all scientifically even to my own satisfaction, as the whole jitter thing gets mind-bogglingly complex to me. There really very few folks who use Denon-Link as it's only in top models and even fewer folks are willing to put the effort into controlled tests, but posts about DenonLink tend to be positive.

You lost me when I found out the A100 retailed for $2500, nearly 3x the cost of the Oppo.

^ True, but the DBPA100 is most likely sonically indistinguishable from the std model DBP4010 which can be had for far less street than its $2K MSRP. I got both my A100s (AVR and DBP) used at over 50% off MSRP. I'm pleased with the value of the purchases.

I apologize for taking the thread OT.

Actually, my system is superior to most. It can pick up nano details. Can yours, I wonder?


And one can also easily fall prey to expectation biases and naively buy into marketing hype that "sophisticated" users with "fine taste" really ought to use multiple preamps in their systems (or power amps, pairs of main speakers, etc., basically whatever they're pushing that year) , all while dismissively pooh-poohing any others (who might question such a belief system) as having "lower quality gear so they might not detect the improvement" and/or inferior or "untrained" hearing, often through the use of innuendo.

I am going to get the Denon DBP-1611UD Blu-ray player. My thought process is to get the cheapest player that supports Source Direct mode and can read DVD-Audio. I just want to grab the data off the disc and let the preamp/processor do the work. IMHO a disc transport should be dirt-cheap ($50) but the pricing guys have us by the "you-know-whats." I shy away from DenonLink because it is proprietary and locks me in to their brand. HDMI is the industry standard and has future-proof capabilities.


It is an age-old debate (and up to personal taste) if you should go with a unit having many bells & whistles (jack of all trades, master of none) versus a plain and simple unit (do one thing and do it right). From reputation, Marantz/Denon/Integra/Onkyo add features and Rotel puts audio quality as first priority. I don't want the processor to network stream because the Denon 1611 does Netflix and DLNA and I have a Western Digital media player in case I find the interface lacking in the Denon.

First and foremost, I want to try to learn if the AV-7005 or RSP-1572 sounds better. What an objective question, huh (insert sarcasm here)!

My other debate is the video upscalar. Since my disc transport sends Source Direct, is there a big difference between the AV-7005's Anchor Bay and RSP-1572's Faroudja Torina chipsets? The applications would be upscaling my DVD collection and Netflix. The video is secondary to the audio capabilities, though.

As a geek I like the idea of the auto room EQ but if I can dial-in my EQ settings to make myself happy, great. I found what looks like a really nice piece of free software to do 2-channel acoustics analysis with a Radio Shack SPL Meter, a $25 USB sound card, and a computer: http://www.hometheatershack.com/roomeq/. It should be easy to do these measurements on all surround channels to adjust your EQ manually.

Really tough question!

Page 3 of Michael Fremer's review compares the AV7005 with the Rotel 1570. By his ears they are close in sound quality. Rotel does make some respectable gear although I hope you don't use Macs as your PC of choice at home as they are not supporting firmware updates at this time through OS X.

http://www.hometheater.com/content/m...plifier-page-3

Let me guess, because all preamps sound the same to you too?

So a preamp with a relay-switched resistor volume control and a much better power supply will sound exactly like the AV7005's?

= Flame bait. n.

"1) Flame bait is a message posted to a public Internet discussion group, such as a forum, newsgroup or mailing list, with the intent of provoking an angry response (a "flame") or argument over a topic the "troll" (original poster provoking angry response) often has no real interest in, and finds humour, or entertainment in reactions."

-Source

Not falling for it.

It was a serious question.

You don't fall for it, you create it. Big difference!

From reading the Rotel manual it seems that the Rotel does not process the hdmi signal at all, just a pass through so it will not do any scaling. It does scale and convert the analog inputs.

Funny you mentioned that as I do have the ability to make such comparison. I did not do a full A/B comparison as such but one does not sound distinctly different/better than the other one. That is not to say they sound exactly the same, I really don't know for sure but nothing I heard warrant spending more time settng the two up for a proper comparison, but that's just me.

Cool. Some units make that very hard to accomplish, and I guess with the Rotel, one wouldn't have to worry.

You've also got to be prepared to bring them back after you've bought a new couch or anything else that might change your room accoustics......

Norm

Thanks for the review link. It makes the decision harder to make! At risk of being flamed, I know better than to use Apple products I run Linux on all my computers and am an Android smartphone user. I am able to run WinXP on one machine if I need to update the Rotel.

Hey guys should be getting my av7005 with mm7055 soon what xlr connectors r u using???????

Sure. I've got quite a few friends who prefer Linux, so no worries! For me, I prefer Darwin Unix... ;-)

^You shouldn't be using XLR connections actually, you should be using RCA, assuming you want to keep your noise floor as low as possible. Usually there's no difference in the performance at all*, but in the particular case of your equipment, using the RCA jacks should yield roughly 3dB lower noise.

*XLRs are common in a recording studio or for stage performers because their cable runs are often ten times as long as a typical home stereo rack, or even longer. In their environment these long straight runs act as antennae and can pick up noise such as hum. XLRs are better at rejecting that noise due to their internal construction [which interestingly still picks up the noise, but then cancels it out at the end, essentially]. Wires in a home rack that are 1 to 2 meters in length don't typically have this problem though. The noise, including hum, one hears there, at home, was already there in the signal from the electronics themselves. None (effectively) was added as it passed through the RCA wire from the pre-pro to the amp.

Using special/different/redundant connections and gear makes some people feel "professional" though, just like using double speaker wires (bi-wiring), double amplifiers (passive bi-amplifying), and double preamps ("HT bypass") do, and many "audiophiles" you speak to will probably recommend some or all of these things, but in truth they are generally a complete waste of a consumer's money and have little if any audible consequences, but since they pad the profit margin of the retailers, they'll (of course) endorse them. [Why sell the consumer just one when you can convince them they need double, of each? ]

P.S. You might want to check out the Hometheater magazine review of your gear. Hope you enjoy them.