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

Marantz AV7005 - Page 307

post #9181 of 9615
A quibble: things can sound good but not be accurate.

It depends on what you're used to listening to. A goal of many people here on AVS is to try to get the sound emitted by their systems to be as accurate as possible, even if it doesn't seem to sound quite as good as they had gotten used to hearing previously. Often people have found that a system sounding "good" was the result of having an inaccurate enhancement of some ranges of frequencies, usually in the bass region.

The use of a calibrated microphone and spectrum analysis software like REW can be reassuring.
post #9182 of 9615
There is more to sound quality than frequency response. Sure, frequency response cannot be dismissed and using any tool available to understand what's going on with that aspect is a good thing. But hi-end speakers and supporting electronics are not carefully engineered (sometimes over many years) with the use of aftermarket EQ in mind. Now, we can all disagree on when and how to use active EQ and we can disagree that today's most reputable leaders in hi-end audio actually know what they are doing, but there's no reason to walk the line of personal attacks. We all have unique experiences and one man's science is another's voodoo (or at the very least, a "science" that is missing a few puzzle pieces). This is a fun hobby. F-u-n!
post #9183 of 9615
Agreed Selden.

Also, I'd say roughly 90% of the time, when things do sound different in audio, it is ultimately due to the frequency response at the ear, or level.
post #9184 of 9615
I am setting up my Marantz AV 7005 processor. I have already ran Audyssey, and I am currently "tweaking" the results. I have set all my speakers to small and set all my crossovers to 80 HZ in the manual setup menu and manually SPL'd my speakers. I have also enabled Audyssey.

Dynamic volume and Dynamic EQ are among the many settings in the audio menu. I don't think I need Dynamic Volume because loud commercials don't bother me. LOL Please correct me if it serves another purpose. But I am confused about the Dynamic EQ setting. Is Dynamic EQ something that most people enable ? I read on another forum that I should enable Dynamic EQ fot TV , but disable it for music and movie watching.

I would apppreciate the advice of anyone who would care to chime in on this. THANKS !!

Jim
post #9185 of 9615
It is a personal choice. This explains Dyn volume in more detail:
http://www.audyssey.com/audio-technology/dynamic-volume

I don't use either, but I can see how in some situations/households I probably would consider it.
post #9186 of 9615
Hi AVS buddies,

I'm new to this forum, but I have been active a lot on Dutch audio forums (yes I'm Dutch). I have joined this forum because of this interesting thread about the Marantz AV-7005. At this moment I have a testing unit at home, because I want to make sure the quality is better than the Onkyo PR-SC5509.

For your information I'm using PMC loudspeakers (Stereo EB1+ , CB6i center and DB1+ for surround) with Perreaux Prisma 350 and Prisma 6160 power amplifiers and a brand new OPPO BD-105.

In stereo listening mode I use OPPO's balanced XLR out directly to my Prisma 350 and the sound is really phenomenal!

My first question: Can I maintain this setup while hooking up the AV-7005? (In my opinion I can, but I won't be able to use audyssey properly.)

The second question: in surround mode I have an issue, when I select subwoofer on (I forgot to mention my old undersized REL Quake 201E sub) the low frequencies of my front speakers decreases in volume (I mean in dB's, so no roll off nor any filtering is turned on). This also happens with my subwoofer disconnected, so this can't be a fase problem or any other acoustical effect. Some of you will say this is no problem because the subwoofer will help to amplify this frequency region, but if you have heard the EB1's you don't want to miss anything of its full potential. Does anyone know what causes this problem and how I can resolve this?

Your help will be much appreciated! Thank you guys in advance!

Cees
post #9187 of 9615
I'm not arguing that Audyssey and the subsequent room corection that gets applied is perfect and without any faults, I have no current stand on that, but this pervasive myth that:

"When the sound for the L and R speakers comes from a high quality, 2CH music source, 'Audyssey room correction' should be bypssed, but when the sound comes from a 5.1/7.1 movie, that's when you should use it."

makes no sense. Your L/R speakers and your room are all unaware where the sound comes from and they either benefit from the modification or they don't, end of story. Sound is sound.
Quote:
At this moment I have a testing unit at home, because I want to make sure the quality is better than the Onkyo PR-SC5509]

So what's more important to you, what you hear at home with your gear ,in your room? Or what strangers on the internet without those benefit guess it will sound like?

That Onkyo unit costs a lot more, is THX certified (for whatever that's worth), and has the stronger, higher resolution Audyssey XT32, instead of the XT found on the AV7005. Why exactly would you think the Marantz "should" be "better"?
Edited by m. zillch - 2/28/13 at 2:54pm
post #9188 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

I'm not arguing that Audyssey and the subsequent room corection that gets applied is perfect and without any faults, I have no current stand on that, but this pervasive myth that:

""When the sound for the L and R speakers comes from a high quality, 2CH music source, 'Audyssey room correction' should be bypssed, but when the sound comes from a 5.1/7.1 movie, that's when you should use it."

makes no sense. Your L/R speakers and your room are all unaware where the sound comes from and they either benefit from the modification or they don't, end of story. Sound is sound.
So what's more important to you, what you hear at home with your gear ,in your room? Or what strangers on the internet without those benefit guess it will sound like?

That Onkyo unit costs a lot more, is THX certified (for whatever that's worth), and has the stronger, higher resolution Audyssey XT32, instead of the XT found on the AV7005. Why exactly would you think the Marantz "should" be "better"?

I will explain: I have had a Marantz SR7500 in the past which sounded very good for its money. To improve my system I bought an Onkyo TX-NR808 which had lots of features for its price but the sound qulaity was poor vs the Marantz. Especially in Stereo mode the Marantz is twice as good and listening to music is more important to me than watching movies.I wanted to go back to Mrantz because of my better experiences, but now I can buy a new PR-SC5509 for only 100 euro more than the AV-7005. Hopefully this will help you understand my situation.

I have tried the Marantz and Onkyo in stereo pure direct mode, but both doesn't meet the quality of the direct balanced connection with the OPPO.

Thank you in advance for your reactions...
post #9189 of 9615
These sorts of prepro units sound different because of different:

- room correction [RC] measuring technologie: XT, XT32, etc
- subsequent RC alterations applied to the sound
- number of mic locations averaged
- your room decor slightly changing between mic test runs [you moved the ottoman or the glass coffee table has fewer books on it during one mic test run, so it reflects more, as examples]
- settings [some of which are proprietary to THX units, for example]
- microphones (sometimes)
- your exact mic placement when you did the test runs, down to the millimeter
- probably a few other that don't come to mind off the top of my head
- volume levels [0dB on the Onkyo's volume display might play at, say, 84.5 dB SPL, but on the Marantz it is 85.1 dB SPL, for example.] Humans have been shown to typically misconstrue small level differences of under 1 dB as quality differences even though they are are simply quantity differences! Some claim they have read about this in scientific experiments but that they themselves are immune to it. They are full of crap. Even understanding that auditory illusions exist and being a scientist who studies them professionally still makes one vulnerable to the problem. Just ask this scientist.]

Here's what rarely, (if ever) matters:

- the preamp section
- where the sound decoding from digital to analog occurs (disc player vs prepro)
- XLR instead of RCA analog connections for short runs, say of 1-2 meters

Here's what matters every single time, for everyone, always, in all situations, and in a profound way:

- your speakers (including the sub)
- their placement including spacing from each other, spacing from room boundaries, height, tilt, angle, and toe-in.
- your room size, dimensions, shape, decor, reflectivity, etc.
- your placement as a listener in this room
Quote:
Marantz AV-7005... Onkyo PR-SC5509... Perreaux Prisma 350 ... Prisma 6160 power amplifiers...OPPO BD-105... Marantz SR7500... Onkyo TX-NR808

Instead of jumping around between units which hardly matter, if at all, other than small variations in how loud they are even when set to the same display level [which can trick us, even when we know it can trick us!], how you've set their controls, and done the mic test runs, why not focus on changing what really does matter, ALWAYS? [Psst...#2 on that list is probably the most important and totally free, it just takes some time, testing and a bit of internet research on your part to get you going]
Edited by m. zillch - 2/28/13 at 9:38pm
post #9190 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrhooper1963 View Post

I am setting up my Marantz AV 7005 processor. I have already ran Audyssey, and I am currently "tweaking" the results. I have set all my speakers to small and set all my crossovers to 80 HZ in the manual setup menu and manually SPL'd my speakers. I have also enabled Audyssey.

Dynamic volume and Dynamic EQ are among the many settings in the audio menu. I don't think I need Dynamic Volume because loud commercials don't bother me. LOL Please correct me if it serves another purpose. But I am confused about the Dynamic EQ setting. Is Dynamic EQ something that most people enable ? I read on another forum that I should enable Dynamic EQ fot TV , but disable it for music and movie watching.

I would apppreciate the advice of anyone who would care to chime in on this. THANKS !!

Jim

Dyn EQ is generally recommended for all sources all the time as it boosts the bass/surround audio at master volume levels below 0db/80 which for the vast majority is "all the time for all sources". For music and TV viewing which don't use a "reference" level, you can adjust the Reference Level Offset to 10 to reduce the bass/surround boost and improve the quality of the center channel dialogue.
post #9191 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

These sorts of prepro units sound different because of different:

- room correction [RC] measuring technologie: XT, XT32, etc
- subsequent RC alterations applied to the sound
- number of mic locations averaged
- your room decor slightly changing between mic test runs [you moved the ottoman or the glass coffee table has fewer books on it during one mic test run, so it reflects more, as examples]
- settings [some of which are proprietary to THX units, for example]
- microphones (sometimes)
- your exact mic placement when you did the test runs, down to the millimeter
- probably a few other that don't come to mind off the top of my head
- volume levels [0dB on the Onkyo's volume display might play at, say, 84.5 dB SPL, but on the Marantz it is 85.1 dB SPL, for example.] Humans have been shown to typically misconstrue small level differences of under 1 dB as quality differences even though they are are simply quantity differences! Some claim they have read about this in scientific experiments but that they themselves are immune to it. They are full of crap. Even understanding that auditory illusions exist and being a scientist who studies them professionally still makes one vulnerable to the problem. Just ask this scientist.]

Here's what rarely, (if ever) matters:

- the preamp section
- where the sound decoding from digital to analog occurs (disc player vs prepro)
- XLR instead of RCA analog connections for short runs, say of 1-2 meters

Here's what matters every single time, for everyone, always, in all situations:

- your speakers (including the sub)
- their placement including spacing from each other, spacing from room boundaries, height, tilt, angle, and toe-in.
- your room size, dimensions, shape, decor, reflectivity, etc.
- your placement as a listener in this room
Instead of jumping around between units which hardly matter, if at all, other than small variations in how loud they are even when set to the same display level [which can trick us, even when we know it can trick us!], how you've set their controls, and done the mic test runs, why not focus on changing what really does matter, ALWAYS? [Psst...#2 on that list is probably the most important and totally free, it just takes some time, testing and a bit of internet research on your part to get you going]

I'm sorry but I don't think you understand me well. When I play a blu-ray disk with my Oppo (without any subwoofer connected to my system) and I turn on the subwoofer in the Oppo menu my PMC EB1 low frequency (I'm talking about 19 till 80 Hz region) decreases with at 8 dB according to my SPL meter. So something is happening with the signal distribution in the Oppo that I want to eliminate. Audyssey isn't involved with this situation!

Other question: do you guys think the Onky PR-SC5509 performs better than the AV-7005 sound wise? I know the XT32 ststem performs better, but with pure direct XT32 is disabled... And the liability of SC5508 wasn't that great.
post #9192 of 9615
Oh, I may have misread what you wrote. Sorry.

Considering your PMC speaker's transmission line design, if the part of the bass frequencies which produces "snap" (or "slam" as we call it in the US) and visceral impact is most important to you, I would say spending the extra money and buying the better PR-SC5509 will make the most sense, especially if you focus more on music, not movies. Most importantly, as you'll see on page 53 of its PDF owner's manual, you will want to turn on the enhanced subwoofer mode called "Double Bass", which is the only way to take advantage of your large speaker's extended bass:

"Turn this setting on to boost bass output by feeding bass sounds from the front left, right, and center channels to the subwoofer.
Note
• This function can be set only if the “Subwoofer” setting is set to
“1ch” or “2ch”, and the “Front” setting is set to “Full Band”.


When using the Oppo 105 in direct mode for a more purist sound using its DACs, it has full control over the bass (obviously) and any further questions about that should be directed to Oppo or a forum thread devoted to the Oppo, not this one.

Since this forum is largely made of members of the US, very few of us have heard your PMC speakers, since they have almost no distributors here. You might want to check out a thread in a forum where people will have potentially heard the speaker/prepro/amp combinations you actually are considering. The similar sounding forum in the UK/EU called AVFORUMS, instead of this one, AVSFORUM, has an active discussion about the better PR-SC5509 prepro and how to optimally hook it up to an Oppo 105 (or the very similar 95)
Edited by m. zillch - 3/1/13 at 12:05am
post #9193 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

Oh, I may have misread what you wrote. Sorry.

Considering your PMC speaker's transmission line design, if the part of the bass frequencies which produces "snap" (or "slam" as we call it in the US) and visceral impact is most important to you, I would say spending the extra money and buying the better PR-SC5509 will make the most sense, especially if you focus more on music, not movies. Most importantly, as you'll see on page 53 of its PDF owner's manual, you will want to turn on the enhanced subwoofer mode called "Double Bass", which is the only way to take advantage of your large speaker's extended bass:

"Turn this setting on to boost bass output by feeding bass sounds from the front left, right, and center channels to the subwoofer.
Note
• This function can be set only if the “Subwoofer” setting is set to
“1ch” or “2ch”, and the “Front” setting is set to “Full Band”.


When using the Oppo 105 in direct mode for a more purist sound using its DACs, it has full control over the bass (obviously) and any further questions about that should be directed to Oppo or a forum thread devoted to the Oppo, not this one.

Since this forum is largely made of members of the US, very few of us have heard your PMC speakers, since they have almost no distributors here. You might want to check out a thread in a forum where people will have potentially heard the speaker/prepro/amp combinations you actually are considering. The similar sounding forum in the UK/EU called AVFORUMS, instead of this one, AVSFORUM, has an active discussion about the better PR-SC5509 prepro and how to optimally hook it up to an Oppo 105 (or the very similar 95)

Thank you for this very useful reply! I'm going to try the double bass boost option and I will check out the UK forum immediately.
post #9194 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post


Here's what rarely, (if ever) matters:

- the preamp section
- where the sound decoding from digital to analog occurs (disc player vs prepro)
- XLR instead of RCA analog connections for short runs, say of 1-2 meters

This advice is inaccurate as it implies that:

1) The design of the analog output stage bears no significance on the output signal
2) All DAC implementations are virtually identical and sound the same
3) All balanced designs are the same whether "fake" or true full balanced

The analog stage in particular has an incredible impact on the resulting sound quality. Ask any engineer at Marantz, Oppo, Bryston, Classe, etc if they put any effort into the analog stage and if so, why they do so. As for DACs, there are so many aspects to a DAC beyond the chipset. I won't even bother expanding on this. As for single-ended vs. balanced, how can anyone have a view on this without having heard an end to end balanced (differential) system? No Marantz offered today is end to end balanced. This applies only the Oppo 105: "The balanced output features a true differential signal path all the way from the DAC to the 3-pin XLR connector. By transmitting a pair of differential signals, the balanced output provides better common-mode noise rejection and improves signal quality."

My stereo system, for example, is balanced from the CD player analog outputs all the way to the power amp. Not inexpensive, but if you want the sound of silence ("black background"), then balanced is the way to go. And if we had an expert from Marantz, they would explain than these designs are expensive and sophisticated and that if it fit the budget, they'd have done it (for the additional fidelity).
Edited by jh901 - 3/1/13 at 4:24am
post #9195 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by jh901 View Post


This advice is inaccurate as it implies that:

1) The design of the analog output stage bears no significance on the output signal

Excluded middle argument. There are a goodly number of output stage designs that produce analogous results. Some were contrived to get past patents, etc. Others were contrived to save costs or use certain readily available devices. In many cases the output stage design was cribbed from some device manufacturer's application notes.

Then there is the law of diminishing returns, psychoacoustics edition. Output stage development continued hot and heavy for what we now know in retrospect was at least decade (or maybe 2) past the day when someone designed an output stage that was for all reasonble purposes "good enough". Not great, but good enough to slide under the fairly modest sensitivity of the human ear. We used to think that ears were far more sensitive to distortion than we now know, and by up to 3 orders of magnitude. So people rattled on developing improved output stage after improved output stage based on sighted evaluations.

The existence of many output stage designes is a matter of history, egocentrism, commercial realitites, etc. All of the really bad ones have been abandoned. Most AVRs outperform the ears by at least one order of magnitude.
Quote:
2) All DAC implementations are virtually identical and sound the same

Same basic argument, except that the diversity of current production aduio DAC designs is far less than the diversity of power amplifier designs. Today it is sigma-delta or nothing.
Quote:
3) All balanced designs are the same whether "fake" or true full balanced

Look, I'm a professional recordist and live sound engineer who also has about 40 years of experience with home audio. The big benefit of balanced I/O is that it makes it easy to set up noise free very large and complex systems. If all you want to do is hook a blu-ray to an AVR you don't need it, after all the connection should be digital. BTW under the covers, HDMI is usually implemented as a transformerless balanced analog path for a digital I/O scheme.
Quote:
The analog stage in particular has an incredible impact on the resulting sound quality. Ask any engineer at Marantz, Oppo, Bryston, Classe, etc if they put any effort into the analog stage and if so, why they do so.

Most of those guys are in the business of building overkill, overpriced gear. Not the guys to ask about how to do things efficiently.

Quote:
As for DACs, there are so many aspects to a DAC beyond the chipset. I won't even bother expanding on this.

Come on guy, do it! I need some raw meat to chew on! ;-)

Quote:
As for single-ended vs. balanced, how can anyone have a view on this without having heard an end to end balanced (differential) system?

Been there done that virtually every day of my life. For a system as simple as home audio, balanced is often overkill. Besides, with all of these digital interconnections, we're in a different world with different rules.
post #9196 of 9615
Arnold- I don't believe you addressed any of my points directly. Is a Porsche 911 Turbo overkill? I was speaking, generally, to sound quality. Each of my points is accurate as the resulting signal will be vastly different in the most highly and widely regarded hi-end gear. The sound quality is most certainly vastly different (lower resolution, etc) in a component system of well received lower end gear. Whether or not the benefits are necessary for a home theater or whether or not there is relative value for such eningeering, is another matter. I personally would not invest an equivalent amount that I would into the sound quality of a dedicated stereo system and a home theater.

I'm not sure how your background relates to this topic, but you summarily reject the notion that views from those in the field could possibly have value. Short-sighted at best. I suppose we'd avoid the views of the top auto engineers if we were to discuss their performance?
post #9197 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by jh901 View Post

This advice is inaccurate as it implies that:

1) The design of the analog output stage bears no significance on the output signal
2) All DAC implementations are virtually identical and sound the same
3) All balanced designs are the same whether "fake" or true full balanced
Please don't put words in my mouth by rewording what I've written and announcing to all "what he is really implying is", as you have in the above quote. I also made it clear that those three things I listed weren't 100% absolute conditions without possible exceptions by my use of the word "rarely".
Quote:
As for single-ended vs. balanced, how can anyone have a view on this without having heard an end to end balanced (differential) system?

By reading independent test reports of third parties, rather than blindly accepting the exaggerations of the manufacturers and dealers, which show that using a unit's balanced connections are not "automatically" superior, at all. Take for example one of the amps very commonly used with the AV7500, Marantz's own MM7055. It has measurably inferior performance using its balanced connections in terms of distortion, crosstalk, and noise:

"THD+N from the amplifier was less than 0.007 percent at 1 kilohertz when driving 2.83 volts into an 8-ohm load using the RCA input. When using the XLR input under the same conditions, THD+N was less than 0.014 percent. Crosstalk at 1 kHz driving 2.83 volts into an 8-ohm load was –85.57 dB left to right and –84.22 dB right to left using the RCA inputs and –81.05 dB left to right and –81.09 dB right to left using the XLR inputs. The signal-to-noise ratio with an 8-ohm load from 10 hertz to 24 kHz with “A” weighting was –111.44 dBrA using the RCA input and –98.63 using the XLR input.—MJP "

Source: Home Theater magazine Marantz AV7005 Surround Processor and MM7055 Amplifier HT Labs Measurements

[Not that I'm claiming this is typical of RCA vs XLR, however. I'm just showing that "it depends".]

Using XLR connections doesn't inherently have less noise in a small wire run, consumer system. The noise of the source device (the disk player and prepro in this case) is added to the noise of the next device in the chain (the amp) with either form of connection, which as I've demonstrated (in the linked to example) may actually have more noise in the case of the XLR method. A balanced connection, including a "truly fully balanced all the way from start to finish" system, simply has a better mechanism in place to reduce the pick up of extraneous noise entering the wire itself, called "common mode noise" [technically, it picks up the noise too, but it cleverly picks it up twice and uses one of the two in reverse phase, combined with the other one, to cancel out the common mode noise picked up along the way]. All systems have some noise, at least if you stand close enough to your speakers to hear it, but this noise is not generally from extraneous sources we must fend off, [being picked up through the wire transmission], rather it is mostly just inherent to the devices themselves, internally, even if they weren't connected to anything.

The classic noise this does, at times, stop from entering is 60 Hz AC hum, especially problematic with long (+2 meter) cable runs. This is not a common complaint within the 9000+ posts I've read in this thread (since I was here since the very beginning), of AV7005 owners (not to be confused with ground loop induced noise, which does occur with both RCA and XLR equally. The balanced design doesn't help that.) In some even rarer instances balanced connections also may reduce AC radio interference and some, but not all forms, of "buzz noise" (also more typically ground loop induced, in my experience, hence no advantage with XLR there either, but this is not always the case).

But now the most important part. That constant level "hiss" sound one hears when they place their ear inches away from their front speakers while their disk player is in pause mode? NADA. No improvement with XLR over RCA [not that most of us are in a position to easily test that because one would first have to verify that the amp, etc., had identical performance using both RCA and XLR connections, which as we've seen is not always the case, since only then would we know for sure that it was the wiring we were using (and not the devices themselves) that was altering the noise level.]

That faint, constant level hiss without a pattern, beat, or specific frequency [we hear when sticking our heads next to the speakers] is just the sum of all the components' inherent noise, mostly Johnson–Nyquist (thermal) noise, all added together. Wiring has no way to reduce that, in fact the job of good wiring is to perfectly preserve whatever comes out of one device and faithfully pass it along to the next without alteration, hiss and all. This is very important to me so I typically buy my wires at Radio Shack, Monoprice, Amazon basics, and sometimes hardware stores (thick lamp cord, for example), rather than the snake oil often peddled by audio dealers, which sometimes mucks around with the wire's L, C, and R to effectively equalize the frequency response subtly, a classic method they use to hoodwink unsavvy consumers by introducing a non-flat frequency response to make it audibly "better". [Not to imply that the cheapest, thinnest stuff one can find almost anywhere is always adequate, but perfectly acceptable wires with "perfect" audible performance, in even the best of systems, can often be quite inexpensive].
Edited by m. zillch - 3/1/13 at 12:38pm
post #9198 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

Please don't put words in my mouth by rewording what I've written and announcing to all "what I am really implying". I also made it clear that those three things I listed weren't 100% absolute conditions without possible exceptions by my use of the word "rarely".

I provided the quote as you wrote it. I did not reword anything nor did I make any such pronouncement. I would agree with you that not all XLR connectors are equal. The Marantz cited would cost quite a bit more if it had higher quality inputs. Not all of us are in the market for "the very best" at any given time, but that doesn't mean that, in this case, all power amps are equal.


http://www.hometheater.com/content/marantz-av7005-surround-processor-and-mm7055-amplifier

"I can confidently say that the Cary was the most accomplished-sounding front-end piece I’ve had in my system."

^ In this professional review (Fremer), it is noted that the Cary Cinema 11a (now, the 12) bested the AV7005. This was not due to the room or to optimization software. It is the fact that the Cary has fully balanced analog outs preceded by superior DAC implementation and better processing. Fremer was not alone in his views. It costs more to buy and more to build and the result, which is the listening, cannot be mistaken. Isn't it amazing that the top hi-end guys (such as those at Cary) who have bigger budgets will design and build better sounding gear!? I'd argue that this not a rare situation unless one is only comparing gear at the same price point.
post #9199 of 9615
Another example of a device that has more noise, not less, when using XLR balanced connections instead of RCA, would be your Cary SLP-05:

"The unbalanced signal/noise ratio, taken with the input shorted but with the level and volume controls set to their maximums, was a good 82dB (unweighted, wideband figure ref. 1V output), this improving to 90dB when A-weighted. The balanced figures were all around 15dB worse. " ...

..."the balanced output offers more than twice the distortion of the unbalanced. "...

"...I was a little disappointed with its behavior in balanced mode, however.—John Atkinson "

- Stereophile
Edited by m. zillch - 3/1/13 at 12:58pm
post #9200 of 9615
Ah, one of many over-the-top glowing reviews of a world class pre-amp! Couldn't agree more with review and I recommend taking any opportunity to hear this unit. I've been enjoying the balanced inputs and outputs for some time now. Perhaps a review of the unbalanced will make my agenda someday.

Bottom line, clearly, is that your views as summarized in #9189 are short-sighted unless you wish to clarify "these sorts of prepro units". Perhaps you were excluding Cary, Classe and Bryston? Along with AV8801 also?
post #9201 of 9615
how do you guys have your subwoofer connected. Should I go preamp, amp, sub. Or preamp, sub, amp. Also should I use the left and right outs on the pre. Or should I just use one out with a Y connector. I have tried all different ways but am not sure if there is a correct one.
post #9202 of 9615
^^^
I have mine connected to the subwoofer output of the pre/pro. And, generally speaking, you don't need to "Y" into both inputs of the sub when using the subwoofer connection. In some cases the gain of the sub system increases by using a "Y" to the sub inputs but more often than not that's irrelevant because between the gain control on the sub and the trim level in the processor the level gets to where it needs to be.
post #9203 of 9615
Greetings!

I have one really unnoing issue - my AV7005 is connected to PC (using HDMI) and while running 1080p files or any resolution yourtube videos in fullscreen mode - the screen becomes black for 2-4 seconds. Tha same thing after returning to windowed mode.....

Any suggestions about fixing this ?

Thanks in advance)))


UPDATE: fixed it by disable Video converter but on-screen menu also disappeared.... Looks like there is no way to make them both work mad.gif

UPDATE 2: the solution is simply selecting "game" video mode... It looks like everything works for now! Maybe my thread will help smdb else)
Edited by BOOMbastiK - 3/5/13 at 9:41am
post #9204 of 9615
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Excluded middle argument. There are a goodly number of output stage designs that produce analogous results. Some were contrived to get past patents, etc. Others were contrived to save costs or use certain readily available devices. In many cases the output stage design was cribbed from some device manufacturer's application notes.

Then there is the law of diminishing returns, psychoacoustics edition. Output stage development continued hot and heavy for what we now know in retrospect was at least decade (or maybe 2) past the day when someone designed an output stage that was for all reasonble purposes "good enough". Not great, but good enough to slide under the fairly modest sensitivity of the human ear. We used to think that ears were far more sensitive to distortion than we now know, and by up to 3 orders of magnitude. So people rattled on developing improved output stage after improved output stage based on sighted evaluations.

The existence of many output stage designes is a matter of history, egocentrism, commercial realitites, etc. All of the really bad ones have been abandoned. Most AVRs outperform the ears by at least one order of magnitude.
Same basic argument, except that the diversity of current production aduio DAC designs is far less than the diversity of power amplifier designs. Today it is sigma-delta or nothing.
Look, I'm a professional recordist and live sound engineer who also has about 40 years of experience with home audio. The big benefit of balanced I/O is that it makes it easy to set up noise free very large and complex systems. If all you want to do is hook a blu-ray to an AVR you don't need it, after all the connection should be digital. BTW under the covers, HDMI is usually implemented as a transformerless balanced analog path for a digital I/O scheme.
Most of those guys are in the business of building overkill, overpriced gear. Not the guys to ask about how to do things efficiently.
Come on guy, do it! I need some raw meat to chew on! ;-)
Been there done that virtually every day of my life. For a system as simple as home audio, balanced is often overkill. Besides, with all of these digital interconnections, we're in a different world with different rules.

So ARNYK, do you think that home systems coming out with balanced connections are just a fad of the times? Couldn't you just ground all the chassis of your equipment together and get the same effect? (if there is any)
post #9205 of 9615
A fad? Dunno about that but I think more like a solution to a problem that largely doesn't exist. Admittedly, I use the balanced connections on mine because I use pro amps that have balanced inputs. Previously I had amps with only unbalanced inputs so I used the unbalanced outputs. Works fine either way.

Still use the unbalanced output for sub/LFE because my powered subs have only unbalanced input. There is roughly 35 ft of cable in the main subwoofer run, cable that I made from some basic shielded twisted pair I had laying around, and there is no hum, stray noise, etc.

Grounding (techincally it would be bonding) all the chasiss together doesn't replicate the function of balanced connection, if that's what the same effect question is about.
Edited by whoaru99 - 3/7/13 at 5:18am
post #9206 of 9615
Grounding (techincally it would be bonding) all the chasiss together doesn't replicate the function of balanced connection, if that's what the same effect question is about.[/quote]

So what is the difference then?
post #9207 of 9615
Balanced outputs provide two signals with opposite polarity -- call them +S and -S. When one goes positive, the other goes negative. Noise is picked up equally on both wires and has the same polarity on both -- call them +N and +N. The balanced input on the amp inverts the negative signal and adds them together. This reinforces the original signal (+S + -(-S) = 2S), but cancels the noise: (+N + -(+N) = 0).

Wiring the chassis together is supposed to sure the signal voltages are referenced to the same ground potential.
post #9208 of 9615
Quick question. May have already been brought up but I couldn't find it. Are the 2 HDMI outputs assignable? If I have 2 video sources can I choose either for each output. So if i'm watching a bluray using hdmi input 1, can i switch between 2 different tv's using hdmi out 1 or 2.
Edited by Rinkledorf - 3/10/13 at 4:57pm
post #9209 of 9615
You can toggle between the two HDMI outputs manually, either from the front panel or the supplied remote. At one point Marantz introduced new IR codes for people who use aftermarket universal remotes so that there could be discrete, direct commands for HDMI 1 and HDMI 2, instead of simply a toggle command of "go to the other one", however they can't be assigned to anything, say a given input for example, AFAIK. [You could build a macro (a sequence of commands) in an aftermarket remote to do that, though, now that there are discrete codes]
Edited by m. zillch - 3/10/13 at 6:58pm
post #9210 of 9615
That's good because sometimes I want to watch tv from the cable box or dvd player and other times I'll pull down the screen and watch it with the projector.
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