or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Marantz AV7005
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Marantz AV7005 - Page 303

post #9061 of 9615
Yeah, I understand that, but the onscreen display doesn't pull up when using the ARC. Not a big deal as I'm using my blu-ray for network rather than the TV (ARC).

I do have a video processing concern. What is the AV7005 doing to the video whether it's from a blu-ray player (playing 1080P content) or a cable box? I'm definitely a video processing newb. I had thought that the video would simply be passed right on through the 7005 and back to the panel, but since the 7005 has a video processor I'd like to become more informed.

Appreciated.
post #9062 of 9615
There are a lot of things it can do (scale, deinterlace, transcode format, set output resolution, etc.) or I believe you can shut it all off; pp. 70-71 of the manual describe the settings.
post #9063 of 9615
Hello Audio Experts!
I'm sure it has been covered somewhere in the 300+ pages of this thread (& elsewhere), but I'm only up to pg. 35.... frown.gif

I want to use a v. good 2ch. pre with the av7005 (or sr7005, whichever is cheaper when I buy), using a nice 2ch amp for the stereo speakers. Can someone pls tell me how to wire this setup? Do the AV & SR7005 have "HT bypass", or is this something that the 2ch. pre would have?

TIA! Murf cool.gif
post #9064 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanguardtm View Post

Hello Audio Experts!
I'm sure it has been covered somewhere in the 300+ pages of this thread (& elsewhere), but I'm only up to pg. 35.... frown.gif

I want to use a v. good 2ch. pre with the av7005 (or sr7005, whichever is cheaper when I buy), using a nice 2ch amp for the stereo speakers. Can someone pls tell me how to wire this setup? Do the AV & SR7005 have "HT bypass", or is this something that the 2ch. pre would have?

TIA! Murf cool.gif

The bypass would likely be on the preamp so you'd have to get a pre with that option. So you would connect the front channel outputs of the 7005 to the preamp, and then the preamp to the 2 CH amp, then connect all your music sources to the preamp. When you want to watch a movie, you would engage the HT bypass on the preamp. The 7005 does have a pure direct option so you could also connect the preamp to the 7005 analog direct inputs, but if you're after the purest analog path, the first option is the way to go.
Edited by red_5ive - 2/1/13 at 10:24am
post #9065 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by red_5ive View Post

The bypass would likely be on the preamp so you'd have to get a pre with that option. So you would connect the front channel outputs of the 7005 to the preamp, and then the preamp to the 2 CH amp, then connect all your music sources to the preamp. When you want to watch a movie, you would engage the HT bypass on the preamp. The 7005 does have a pure direct option so you could also connect the preamp to the 7005 analog direct inputs, but if you're after the purest analog path, the first option is the way to go.

Thanks Red,
Yes, the preamp does have an HT bypass button, but I was wondering if a modern HT pre like the av7005 did it in a different way.
I am after the best, purest, analog 2ch music sound, so I guess I have my answer!

Murf cool.gif
post #9066 of 9615
The notion that one should use different preamps for 2 ch vs 5.1 ch sources is a ridiculous marketing scam, designed by the greedy audio industry, in order to sell people twice as many preamps as they actually need. It is based on the fundamentally untrue notion that high quality A/V pre-pros like the AV7005 have low quality circuitry for the front left and right channels, hence there is good reason to bypass it whenever one can. This is simply not true.

I show a block diagram of how "HT bypass" is wired, taken from another author, here (post #7654), for anyone who might need more clarification of how "HT Bypass" is wired, and I describe how anyone could accomplish the exact same "benefits" simply by installing an A/B switch externally to their "good" preamp, rather than the internal one shown in the yellow circles of that diagram. No difference.

Keep in mind there are probably many posts from people who completely buy into this marketing ploy, hook line and sinker, but I challenge anyone here to find me a post or a published review, anywhere, in any forum or magazine they choose, where the tester compared the two signals only after carefully level matching the two sources using instrumentation, such that we can't immediately dismiss the "difference" they heard to the inevitable, small level differences that would occur if one were to simply "wing it. [It has been known for a long time that the ear is easily fooled into thinking that very small level differences, on the order of a fraction of a dB, are errantly perceived as quality differences, not quantity differences.]

To people who's only defense is to attack and denigrate my hearing or gear, save your typing, it is hackneyed . Existing third party links that level matched and/or scientific articles on the topic are what I'm challenging you to find. You can't find any.
Edited by m. zillch - 2/1/13 at 1:32pm
post #9067 of 9615
So if I understand you correctly, are you saying a $300 5.1 reciever would be the equal of anything out there in either 2 or 5.1 channel sound, at the same volume? Why bother spending the money on a 7005?
post #9068 of 9615
I said,
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

high quality A/V pre-pros like the AV7005 .
post #9069 of 9615
After 4 months - I've finally read through every post and learned a ton of info about the AV7005 -- and audio in general - even helped be elliminate an ugly ground loop hum from my sat. box! Thanks to the many knowledgable posters.

I have a question I'd like to pose to help me understand if I'm missing something with my subwoffer set up.

I'm running the front speaker output from the AV7005 into a Dalquist passive crossover
then splitting the front signal to a pair of JL subs and ML CLX fronts -- with Dalquist cross-over set at 60htz -- and the Front speakers set as "full" in the AV7005 .

I assume this is giving me true stereo subs -- and I'm sending everything below 60 htz to the subs ( the CLX low range is published as 56hz -- so they are not really full range speakers).

I use the system 80% for music (2 channel -- with the stereo subs) -- but it's also set up as a 7.1 HT with a 7 channel power amp and all the surround speakers etc..

Because I'm not using the LFE output channel on the AV7005 -- am I loosing this effect in the HT set up when watching movies with LFE signals.

I've read that most bass frequencies are summed L&R signals (mono) -- but I've also read that many recordings have distinct L&R low frequency signals. I'm wondering if I'm missing something by not running the LFE signal to one of the subs & having the subs set up as Master and Slave
(and loosing the true L/R stereo effect from the subs)

I'm real happy with the sound I have now - especially on two channel music -- but I'd like to know if I've overlooked any advantage or benefit I might get by using the LFE output -- or -- can I get the full LFE signal without using the LFE output on the AV7005.

Thanks for any help or advice you can offer
post #9070 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

The notion that one should use different preamps for 2 ch vs 5.1 ch sources is a ridiculous marketing scam, designed by the greedy audio industry, in order to sell people twice as many preamps as they actually need. It is based on the fundamentally untrue notion that high quality A/V pre-pros like the AV7005 have low quality circuitry for the front left and right channels, hence there is good reason to bypass it whenever one can. This is simply not true.

...and I describe how anyone could accomplish the exact same "benefits" simply by installing an A/B switch externally to their "good" preamp, rather than the internal one shown in the yellow circles of that diagram. No difference.

...a published review, anywhere, in any forum or magazine they choose, where the tester compared the two signals only after carefully level matching the two sources using instrumentation, such that we can't immediately dismiss the "difference" they heard to the inevitable, small level differences that would occur if one were to simply "wing it. [It has been known for a long time that the ear is easily fooled into thinking that very small level differences, on the order of a fraction of a dB, are errantly perceived as quality differences, not quantity differences.]

Hi Zillch,
Thanks for your opinion. To put an HT bypass on the preamp I am looking at costs ~ the same as a decent a/b switch, but I don't have to make more interconnects or buy the material for them.
There are hi quality pre/pros, and there are hi quality pre/pros; the difference is in the definition. But just as the av7005 sounds 'better' than some other HT pre, some can sound better than it. Or else we would all drive Toyotas....
This pcychoacoustic argument is a familiar one, as is the argument about whether a/b testing is valid or not in one form or another. Suffice to say, I have heard equipment that sounds better to my ears than other equipment does in 'tests' that work for me. YMMV!
I get to hear lots of live music here in NYC. My wife is a semi-pro singer, and my bro-in-law is a pro musician/songwriter. I want the best music sound I can afford, and I know what that sounds like. But I need help with what equipment will get me there.
We each have fun in our own ways.

Murf
Edited by vanguardtm - 2/1/13 at 2:10pm
post #9071 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by gilbar View Post

I have a question I'd like to pose to help me understand if I'm missing something with my subwoffer set up.

I'm running the front speaker output from the AV7005 into a Dalquist passive crossover
You mean an MX1?[ if not tell us what you mean.]
Quote:
I assume this is giving me true stereo subs

Stereo subs aren't desirable, they are best to be avoided for many reasons. Do you realize that units that cost thousands of dollars more than this AV7005, and that have "dual sub outs", are generally still sending the same mono signal to the two subs (albeit with differing levels, delay, etc.)?

By not using the subout you are not getting the benefits of the advanced processing that Audyssey can apply. Not a good idea.
Quote:
but I've also read that many recordings have distinct L&R low frequency signals
With LPs? Never. With CDs, on occasion, but reproducing it in stereo and not mono-izing it is a bad idea sonically.
post #9072 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanguardtm View Post

Hi Zillch,
Thanks for your opinion. To put an HT bypass on the preamp I am looking at costs ~ the same as a decent a/b switch, but I don't have to make more interconnects or buy the material for them.
But you have to buy two preamps {one for HT and one for 2 ch) in the first place, so the cost is quite high compared to buying just one. Why not simply buy some 5.1ch/7.1ch prepro which doesn't "degrade" the sound of two of its channels (the front L and R, it would seem according to you) from the get go, as I guess you fear the AV7005 does? [It doesn't]

Quote:
I want the best music sound I can afford
So do I, which is why I spend money where it counts and don't waste it where it doesn't count. This added money you have been duped by others into spending on buying multiple preamps would be better spent on different speakers, for example. Unlike preamps and power amps where the differences are subtle, at best, any two speakers sound completely different from one another. That matters.
post #9073 of 9615
gilbar and vanguardtm,

m.zilch didn't quite get around to saying that you'd both be well served by working on the acoustics of your listening rooms, if you haven't already done so.

When you start with a high quality stereo system, part of the requirements for that are high quality speakers in a high quality listening environment, both of which invove a substantial investment in money, time and effort. When you're already in that situation, if you're going to add a mid-range surround sound system for minimal cost, it is reasonable to continue to use a preamp with HT bypass, and using your existing amps to drive the existing front speakers. Until a few years ago, before the advent of room equalization software, this probably was your best option.

However, if you're willing to start over again in today's market, such a preamp+pre/pro+amp combination is overkill for no acoustic advantage. I'd disagree with m.zilch in his description of the AV7005. though. There are several better pre/pros available now, albeit at somewhat higher prices (and, of course, a few with exorbitantly higher prices). A pre/pro (or receiver with preamp outputs) which includes Audyssey MultEQ XT32 would produce more accurate sound than the AV7005, which has the next lower grade of Audyssey, MultEQ XT. Some examples are the Onkyo 5509/Integra DHC 80.3 pre/pros, Denon's AVR 4520 (receiver with preamp outputs), or the Marantz AV8801 pre/pro. The latter two became available in just the past couple of months, so they still have a few glitches in some of their features, which are quickly being fixed.

Of course, you do still have to invest in high quality amps, speakers and room acoustics. The smaller the defects that Audyssey has to ameliorate, the better the results will be. (Bear in mind that high quality is not synonymous with extremely expensive.)

I hope these comments help a little.
post #9074 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

You mean an MX1?[ if not tell us what you mean.]

I'm using a Dalquist DQ-LP1 Active cross-over with 2 JL Fathom 110 subs that have good room correction capabilites

Stereo subs aren't desirable, they are best to be avoided for many reasons. Do you realize that units that cost thousands of dollars more than this AV7005, and that have "dual sub outs", are generally still sending the same mono signal to the two subs (albeit with differing levels, delay, etc.)? Yes -- I did realize that -- hense my questioning the approach I've taken

By not using the subout you are not getting the benefits of the advanced processing that Audyssey can apply. Not a good idea.
With LPs? Never. With CDs, on occasion, but reproducing it in stereo and not mono-izing it is a bad idea sonically.

I assumed it was an appoach that would just extend the low frequency rangen on my front speakers


This article intrigued me & led me down this path -- but it was prior to getting the AV7005
Perhaps this is a good approach to take for a standard 2 channel syatem without Audyssey -- but not so much for a pre-pro
http://www.kenrockwell.com/audio/stereo-subwoofers.htm

I'll play around with it and see how it sounds Appreciate the feedback --
post #9075 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post

m.zilch didn't quite get around to saying that you'd both be well served by working on the acoustics of your listening rooms, if you haven't already done so..
Quote:
However, if you're willing to start over again in today's market, such a preamp+pre/pro+amp combination is overkill for no acoustic advantage. I'd disagree with m.zilch in his description of the AV7005. though. There are several better pre/pros available now,
Quote:
However, if you're willing to start over again in today's market, such a preamp+pre/pro+amp combination is overkill for no acoustic advantage. I'd disagree with m.zilch in his description of the AV7005. though. There are several better pre/pros available no...
Please don't "speak for me" and please spell my name correctly.smile.gif

I never said there aren't prepros with more advanced forms of room correction, what I said was that the notion that the sound of the L and R front outputs of a high quality prepro, like the AV7005, is audibly poor, so one "ought to" use a secondary preamp, cascading in after it and wired in "HT bypass" configuration, to handle the 2 channel sources directly [and I have no knowledge of any current 2 ch preamps with any brand of computer controlled "room correction" technology akin to Audyssey, so obviously in this scenario the "improved sound" would be compared to using the AV7005 in "Pure Direct" mode, i.e. no Audyssey] is a foolish waste of money.

The only premise that makes the "HT bypass" scam, erm I mean scheme, make sense is if one is of the mind that their A/V prepro in "pure direct" stereo mode degrades the sound so you have to have a separate dedicate preamp which doesn't degrade the sound for the two ch sources.
Edited by m. zillch - 2/1/13 at 4:35pm
post #9076 of 9615
Unfortunately, the lowest frequencies (below 80 Hz or so) interact quite differently with the listening room than do higher frequencies. A quick glance through the article did not reveal any mention of where the "stereo subwoofers" should be located in the room. Most people with experience with subwoofers will admit that two are better then one, but they have to be placed quite carefully. Ideally each has to be positioned where it will fill in the nulls created by the placement of the other. In other words, not where the main speakers are located. The two "full range" speakers advocated by the article's author certainly are not the best way to get the best bass..
post #9077 of 9615
m. zillch,

I apologize both for misspelling your handle and for somewhat misrepresenting what you wrote. To the extent that it doesn't provide quite as accurate audio as current (or perhaps future) higher grades of room equalization software could, I do think one could claim that the AV7005 does indeed degrade the sound, although perhaps not as much as a unit which provides no room equalization all. smile.gif

Another point of view is that we are writing about home entertainment systems, after all. Whatever combination of equipment, cables and other devices increases the entertainment that you get from your audio system is well justified. Some people get more entertainment from hearing their pennies scream, while others delight in the thought of all the expensive special materials being used. Accuracy often takes a distant back seat when one's emotions are involved.
post #9078 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by gilbar View Post

I assumed it was an appoach that would just extend the low frequency rangen on my front speakers


This article intrigued me & led me down this path -- but it was prior to getting the AV7005
Perhaps this is a good approach to take for a standard 2 channel syatem without Audyssey -- but not so much for a pre-pro
http://www.kenrockwell.com/audio/stereo-subwoofers.htm--
Ah so, I see where you got this notion. Ken Rockwell is dead wrong. [He should stick to photography] There are some good reasons to have two or more subs, sure, but not stereo; they should be mono.

THX, Dolby Laboratories, Tomlinson Holman, Audyssey, everybody I can think of, who is anybody in audio, agrees. What frequency to sum to mono and then send to the sub(s) is debatable, and dependent on the room and othe factors, however stereo reproduction from subs is bad. Unlike Ken, I come with references:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/papers/paper_25/paper_25.shtml
http://www.nousaine.com/pdfs/Stereo%20Bass.pdf
post #9079 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post

gilbar and vanguardtm,

m.zilch didn't quite get around to saying that you'd both be well served by working on the acoustics of your listening rooms, if you haven't already done so.

When you start with a high quality stereo system, part of the requirements for that are high quality speakers in a high quality listening environment, both of which invove a substantial investment in money, time and effort....

However, if you're willing to start over again in today's market, such a preamp+pre/pro+amp combination is overkill for no acoustic advantage. (Bear in mind that high quality is not synonymous with extremely expensive.)

I hope these comments help a little.

Hi Selden, and thanks.
Sometimes, room treatments can be the hardest part of a system to get the WAF. But I have sneaked in some treatments!
I am not starting over with my system, but have a nice amp (or two or three), DAC & CD transport. I built my own speakers w/ Dynaudio d/28-2 tweets, Seas mids & woofs (which might need an improved xover, though). Depending on how my new purchases sound, I may be able to sell some equipment, also. I want sound, and value. If I could spend big enough to get the complete system I want, that would be cool, but I have to do it in stages.
In a thread I started about a week ago, I asked what AV pre/pro for ~ 2k-2.5k would give better 2ch sound than my present Cary Cinema 6, movies be damned. Many said I should go for a separate 2ch. pre. It seems to be debatable which direction is best for me. I will still take recommendations for this hot AV pre/pro with great 2ch sq, but I think the 2ch pre I have my eyes on is going to beat your suggestions!
My big compromise will be on the AV prepro, and maybe on the AV amp (AV amp is now an HK Signature 2.1 (5ch)), especially if I get an A/V receiver. I might get a used AV/SR7005, or a refurb, or maybe a lesser machine (Emotiva!!). It's a balancing act to some degree. But in the end I will have a better sounding 2ch. system than now, and probably a better AV system (the Cary is a bit old for AV now...). I try to do it intelligently, but you pays yer money and make your choices.
Below are some of my room treatments...

Murf


post #9080 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post


The only premise that makes the "HT bypass" scam, erm I mean scheme, make sense is if one is of the mind that their A/V prepro in "pure direct" stereo mode degrades the sound so you have to have a separate dedicate preamp which doesn't degrade the sound for the two ch sources.

I think I can beat the sound of the AV/SR7005 at its best with a dedicated 2ch pre. And I might spend less money doing it....

Murf
post #9081 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post

m. zillch,

Another point of view is that we are writing about home entertainment systems, after all. Whatever combination of equipment, cables and other devices increases the entertainment that you get from your audio system is well justified. Some people get more entertainment from hearing their pennies scream, while others delight in the thought of all the expensive special materials being used. Accuracy often takes a distant back seat when one's emotions are involved.

Yous talkin' bout me? cool.gif
I don't want to hear the pennies scream, or the wife scream....

Murf
post #9082 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post

. To the extent that it doesn't provide quite as accurate audio as current (or perhaps future) higher grades of room equalization software could, I do think one could claim that the AV7005 does indeed degrade the sound.
Do you not realize that the Audyssey circuit is completely bypassed when using analog stereo sources in "Pure direct" mode on the AV7005? That's indeed the only valid way to theoretically compare it to a secondary, outboard 2 Ch only preamp in "HT bypass" mode (since it has no Audyssey of its own), so your discussion of "better versions of room correction" on other more expensive (or future) units is immaterial to the topic at hand.

To prove a secondary "HT Bypass mode capable" stereo only preamp makes sense as a secondary expenditure, you have to show that the AV7005 has a poor quality stereo analog output WHEN IN PURE DIRECT MODE.
You have to compare apples to apples here.
Edited by m. zillch - 2/1/13 at 5:42pm
post #9083 of 9615
Quote:
Many said I should go for a separate 2ch. pre.
Where any of them owners of the AV7005 who mentioned their dissatisfaction with its "inferior 2 ch sound"? Or did they "hear it from a friend"?wink.gif

edit to add: Perhaps there is a rule, "That all AV prepros must have junky 2 ch outs, even in pure direct mode", in which case getting comments from specific owners of the AV7005 wouldn't be necessary.rolleyes.gif
Edited by m. zillch - 2/1/13 at 6:07pm
post #9084 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

Where any of them owners of the AV7005 who mentioned their dissatisfaction with its "inferior 2 ch sound"? Or did they "hear it from a friend"?wink.gif

edit to add: Perhaps there is a rule, "That all AV prepros must have junky 2 ch outs, even in pure direct mode", in which case getting comments from specific owners of the AV7005 wouldn't be necessary.rolleyes.gif

No, they thought my Cary pre/pro would be hard to beat for 2ch stereo at that price. Even for a dedicated 2ch. pre, they were hard pressed with the price restraint. Can the 7005s beat the Cary Cinema 6?
Note that owners of any item, AV 7005ers included, will tend to favor their units in a comparo. This is why I , as the future purchaser, have to weigh your answers considering such bias.

Murf
post #9085 of 9615
Bias, you say? Is everyone prone to bias or just owners of the gear in question?
post #9086 of 9615
Just to try to clarify what I was trying to say....

Brief summary:
Although it is emotionally gratifying to have and use, even the best non-distorting, linear, analog electronics can't fix audio inaccuracies originating from other sources. That's why I'm biased toward the use of Audyssey or one of the other comparable packages.

More extensive comments:
Unless you actually measure your system's acoustics (using a calibrated microphone and spectrum analysis software like REW), you can't really know the accuracy of your system. (By "system", I mean all of the components of your listening environment: the source, cabling, preamp, amp, speakers and room.) Our hearing is easily biased by expectation, what we've gotten used to, and the rather poor accuracy of our recollection of subtle audio details. As adults, we tend to remember the "gist" of what we've experienced and not the actual details.

I've been horrified by the plots of the audio response of some of the expensive, supposedly high quality speakers reviewed in Stereophile. Often the speakers were given high praise in the accompanying subjective reviews, but too often the plots looked like mountain ranges or saw blades, with peaks and valleys everywhere.

Audio electronics which doesn't include one of the room equalization packages simply can't correct for those kinds of speaker defects, nor can passive room treatments. Many of the external audio equalizers (like those from Behringer) have limitations, too, and the best pure, direct, linear electronics paths simply can't do squat to fix them.

I'm definitely not saying that your audio system has those kinds of issues, but without measuring it, you can't know for sure.

And those beautiful room treatments won't tell you, either. Unless they howl and leave the room, of course. smile.gif Shedding must be a serious problem at times, but they obviously have other qualities which more than compensate for the disadvantages!

Still, in spite of any pursuit of more accuracy, how your sound system makes you feel is the important thing.
post #9087 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

Ah so, I see where you got this notion. Ken Rockwell is dead wrong. [He should stick to photography] There are some good reasons to have two or more subs, sure, but not stereo; they should be mono.

THX, Dolby Laboratories, Tomlinson Holman, Audyssey, everybody I can think of, who is anybody in audio, agrees. What frequency to sum to mono and then send to the sub(s) is debatable, and dependent on the room and othe factors, however stereo reproduction from subs is bad. Unlike Ken, I come with references:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/papers/paper_25/paper_25.shtml
http://www.nousaine.com/pdfs/Stereo%20Bass.pdf


Thanks again M.Zillch
looks like I'll be busy for the next few weeks !
post #9088 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

Ah so, I see where you got this notion. Ken Rockwell is dead wrong. [He should stick to photography] There are some good reasons to have two or more subs, sure, but not stereo; they should be mono.

THX, Dolby Laboratories, Tomlinson Holman, Audyssey, everybody I can think of, who is anybody in audio, agrees. What frequency to sum to mono and then send to the sub(s) is debatable, and dependent on the room and othe factors, however stereo reproduction from subs is bad. Unlike Ken, I come with references:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/papers/paper_25/paper_25.shtml
http://www.nousaine.com/pdfs/Stereo%20Bass.pdf


Thanks again M.Zillch
looks like I'll be busy for the next few weeks !
post #9089 of 9615
sorry for all the double posts -- not sure how or why that happened
post #9090 of 9615
I've run into a problem that I can't figure out. I've run Audyssey for a 2nd time today and the process worked as expected. My front L/R and sub were identified. I saved the settings and disconnected the mic. But when I fired up a blu-ray, there was no sound from the front L/R and only the sub. I switched to my cable box (SAT) input and experienced the same- absolutely no output from the front L/R and only the sub.

I've been using the 7005 for several days without any problems. I didn't change any connections or settings. I've tried everything including unplugging the 7005, turning off Audyssey, re-running Audyssey (the "ping" is not heard), manual test tone (again, no ping is output), etc. I'm baffled.

Appreciate any help.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Marantz AV7005