The "Official" Denon AVR-4311CI/AVR-A100 thread [NO PRICE TALK] - Page 13

Good info. The "Detailed Specifications" link on the 4311CI page must have gone live in just the past few days.

Anyway, the AKM AK4358 DAC listing is disconcerting. If true, it is the same monolithic 8 channel DAC as in the 3311CI. And it is Denon being chintzy.

I hope that this is not a trickle across effect from Marantz. Marantz has commonly used higher end Cirrus discrete stereo DACs in its universal DVD players but lower end Cirrus monolithic 8 channel DACs in its AVRs, even in its high end AV8003 pre/pro, as if analog connections from player to AVR are more important than digital room correction.

That said, I question the AK4358 listing, as a monolithic 8 channel DAC will not cut it for the 13 channels of D/A conversion that the 4311CI requires for 11.2 channel operation.

AJ

THX is not "only a marketing certification," it is a multichannel post processing suite. W/ the Audyssey curve, true, THX Re EQ may be redundant. But many other processes are unique to THX. And, while you may not care about its inclusion, others do. Regardless, at the $2000 level, THX should be standard.


Try 20 ft runs across the room or under the floor to external amps for the surrounds at the back of the room. Additionally, balanced XLR outputs almost always have higher output levels (than the unbalanced RCA 1 V pre outs on many AVRs these days) that may jive better w/ external amps w/ lower input sensitivities.

AJ

I have been driven to doubt by the detailed specs which call out THX-U2 (but there's no THX in the manual), AL24+, Advanced AL24 multi-channel and HDMI 1.3a.

PCM1791A 192kHz/24-bit digital-to-analog converters, if this DAC is true then I will consider the A100.

If the DACs are identical between the 3311 and 4311, yet the 4311 can handle DSD over HDMI while the 3311 cannot, is Denon simply disabling that capability in the 3311 or are there other components necessary to make DSD over HDMI possible that the 3311 does not have?

There are some small discrepancies when looking at the product comparison between the 3311 and the 4311 compared to the detailed specifications tab for the 3311. Specifically, the detailed specifications for the 3311 lists the DAC as the AK4358VQ but the ADC as the AK5358B whereas in the product comparison, the VQ and the B are reversed to match the 4311 specifications (AK4358B and AK5358VQ). Probably a simple error on Denon's part.


Josh

why are you guys finding the detailed spec on the a100..in terms of DACs etc..

Likely disabled just as some of the features of the ABT 2015 video chip (PReP, mosquito noise reduction, edge enhancement) are disabled in the models using the 2015 chip (2311/891/3311/991/4311).

SeattleHTGuy,

If I'm not mistaken I believe the new Onkyo TX-NR3008/5008 can do H + W at the same time. However, my eyes are fixed on the AVR-4311CI. The Onkyo's seem to be fine units, but I personally can't get past how hot those units get, which probably has nothing to do with its long term performance.


Willie

Is PReP disabled in the denon 4311? It's a feature I'm interested in due to the crappy deinterlacing of my iptv box.

/Per

Quite honestly, if the onkyo's (3008 and 5008) could do 11.X, they'd be an easy choice for me, what with the superior DAC's (arguable sig bene, I realize), a VP at least on par with the Denon's ABT 2015, THX Ultra II cert (again perhaps a marginal bene, especially for those like me who use external amplification), and an extra HDMI input, I really see no upside to the Denon's, other than the ability to run digital inputs to the Z's 2 and 3, and again of course the 11.X Audyssey.

Last, the prices on the 3008 and 5008 are nearly unbelievable, to boot.

Still, this will be a lasting purchase for me, and I just don't seem to be able to give up my surround backs for the maginally better DAC's, THX cert, and the extra HDMI input with the Onk's.

James

It's "not implemented" in the 4310 (and below) as well as the 3311 (and below) so no reason to believe it will be "implemented" in the 4311.

Splitting hairs.....

When you are writing firmware for control of a DSP or other type of silicon device, you don't "disable" some feature, you just don't implement it.

Oh disappointment, I also looked in the 4311 manual, and no mention of PReP at least
I was hoping to find a nice receiver for my upgrade that had AB tech with PReP and XT32 correction. That certainly takes away one of my + points for the denon vs onkyo 3008.

/Per

In my direct experience DSD decoding is stand-alone function (good thing since mine is borked).

While I can understand the vast majority of VP knobs being hidden from the consumer hiding PReP is ... annoying. Of course my BD player also hides the PReP knob, but they have it turned on.

The Denon manuals or spec pages don't even mention using an ABT chip period. The focus of AVR selection should usually be for it's "audio" processing cabilities, for if "video" processing is not being handled well enough by your HDTV or BDP, then look towards a dedicated "video processor" (eg. DVDO Edge) for a higher quality video solution.

It appears the 5oo8 can do H + W however, according to page 51 of the Onkyo manual you then lose the rear surrounds. This is confirmed in troubleshooting Page 100. The fact it only has 9 pre-outs also leaves me doubtful. Clearly, I could be wrong about this but that's what it says. The ability to play real 11 speaker configurations is the primary reason I have gone with Denon. Please feel free to tell me I misinterpret the capabilities of the Onkyo.

This one, rather huge difference kills my interest in the Onkyo.

I'll disagree with this. My current AVR exposes a (small) number of REON knobs (the only ones I use are calibration patterns, zoom and aspect ratio controls) and the level of software effort/support is low (compared say to the DSP). It's silly to spend $1,000 just to get PReP and AR controls since I have to buy a collection of ports and features I don't need along with the couple I want.

If you call it an AVR then make video management as good as audio management.

AJ -- why are you so hung up on stereo sub outs? The 4311 has essentially state-of-the-art dual subwoofer correction, who cares if the sub channel is mono? What actual benefit would one get from stereo sub outs? Is that really a needed feature?

You seem to be the only person (at least on this thread) beating that drum...

I also disagree with this notion. The whole point of an AVR is that it's an all in one solution. At $2K, I think it's reasonable to want some extra features. Some of the competition is doing it, the components that are installed are capable of it, so why NOT include the capability? The three year old product I will be replacing this with has some of this functionality. Moving to a newer, even more expensive unit, you would think it'd be able to have it. Besides, one of driving factors for upgrading to a new AVR is for HDMI 1.4. How many video processors at this point are 1.4 compliant? It's bad enough that we have to upgrade the AVR just for a new HDMI revision. I'd hate to add more components into that cluster.

I can't personally vouch for any differences one way or the other, but in the stereo audio world, there are many who claim summed bass to be evil. There is some logic to that thought: summation would necessarily, electrically, cancel any out of phase content. Reproduced discretely all the way to the speakers, not necessarily so, given the complex nature of waves emitting from different points within a room.

I think the point (in both cases) is that these would be relatively easy and inexpensive to implement, so why not in a product of this class? Of course, the potential answer is always: to save something for higher end units.

Um, I tend to think summed bass is sub-optimal but for the audiophile the correct solution to that isn't stereo sub-woofers. It's decent fronts. At present I only send LFE to my sub. Of course I listen to a lot of chamber music.

Regarding the sub issue. This appear to be a classic case of a feature (onkyo's) searching for a problem. Riddle me this.... How is it necessary to have discrete stereo sub output for signal that does not exist to ears that can not discern directionality of that level of frequency? My guess, is that since there is no solution to fix, Denon chose not to add this.

I also, don't get the THX EQ, DAC configuration, blah, blah blah argument. If a competitors receiver does not do 11 channel DSX and I want that feature, it's game, set, match. Vs the comp. As cost goes, how much money is saved by, well, er, not putting in 11 channels, 11 pre outs, and the ability to defeat an amp section? Man, I hate this victory by spreadsheet argument. Doesn't anyone ever use this stuff?

If we all bought autos like some people compare specs on receivers, we'd all be driving fully loaded Kia's. Hey, the Kia has two extra upholders, comes in purple, has a Bluetooth sync feature, the fuel cover cap has a cool manual key. Damn, that Aston Martin lacks a cup holder. the Kia must be better. Well, the Kia lacks the V12. I want the V12. The 4311 does 11 channels, the Onkyo.... Not so much. The comparison ends for me at this point. If you want purist pre sections, neither of these two companies would do well. They are deep into the nuclear arms race of features.

I have owned THX EQ stuff before, I find it heavy handed. I can't tell the difference in DAC's, my gut tells me neither can others, the sub argument is way beyond practical and deep in to goofy.

Finally, since this thread has gone all Onkyo vs Denon and people are trying to make decisions on value and what to buy. The 3008 costs $2k, the 5008 $2.7k, the 4311 $2k. I own the 4810. It has been troublesome, to say the least but Denon took it back, customer service has been exceptional, and I am satisfied with how they have treated me. Try and find someone in camp-onkyo who can say that. From what I've read ownership is not always a happy experience.

Great point, there is another argument I alluded to earlier. I challenge anyone to find music content that actually plays stereo below 40hz. Even symphony music with canon fire usually involves but one cannon. How do you fire two cannons in stereo? This is crazy. I am not an engineer but I stick with the challenge. Give us all any content that has in it's signal stereo uber deep bass. If it's a live recording, do we have a piece with two battling timpani players, playing at opposite sides of Carnagie Hall, while only smacking the biggest drum? Is there a dueling single note tuba battle royal out there to be listened to?


In my real world experience, I have two B&W 803S's. With Audyssey EQing, the process shows these speakers as being capable of "full". I normally override this to 60 hz. When I played many pieces recorded by Peter Gabriels studio via Flac file format, I have never actually gotten the subs to get anything but very minimal content. This has been tried with deep rock to symphony to jazz. Same result. People buying $2k receivers normally have decent fronts. So, I don't seem stupid, yes I set the stereo content to go through the sub, not just LFE. Now LFE content is another beast. Let me know when they make stereo, or heck 11 channel discrete LFE content. Now that would be one pile of subs.... (kidding)

Darin provided an excellent answer, took the words right out of my mouth....


If you listen mostly to manufactured audio (e.g. studio pop/rock, movies), then summed bass may be completely benign, as those sources likely contain little or no phase differences at bass frequencies. Conversely, large scale orchestral recordings (or anything recorded w/ spaced omni mics in a large venue) can most certainly contain phase differences between channels. For example, if the timpani is 40 ft from the L omni and 50 ft from the R omni, then bass from the timpani will arrive at both mics approximately equal in level but 9 ms later at the R omni. As 55 Hz has a wavelength of 20 ft, that 10 ft or 9 ms difference between the mics means that 55 Hz sound from the timpani will arrive at the L omni in phase and at the R omni 180° out of phase (i.e. one half wavelength later). That bass does not cancel in the hall. It does not cancel on the recording. But it does cancel in playback if bass management electrically sums all channel bass frequencies below the crossover point. Separate L/R bass management, however, can at least partially preserve that phase difference in the listening room.

Finally, the Yamaha A3000 is a $1900 competitor to the Denon 4311CI. The A3000 offers separate L/R (or even front/surround) bass management, showing that such can be implemented in a product priced even less than the 4311CI.

AJ

Oddly enough, I was already writing an example using the timpani while you posted your questions. See below:




Thus, there need not be two timpani or two tubas at opposite sides of the hall. Stereo differences come not only from differences in instrument placement but also from differences in mic placement.

AJ

Grab an oar, as we are likely in the same boat. Just a few posts above yours, I left the following which I believe is 100% accurate:

"Quite honestly, if the onkyo's (3008 and 5008) could do 11.X, they'd be an easy choice for me, what with the superior DAC's (arguable sig bene, I realize), a VP at least on par with the Denon's ABT 2015, THX Ultra II cert (again perhaps a marginal bene, especially for those like me who use external amplification), and an extra HDMI input, I really see no significant upsides to the Denon, other than the ability to run digital inputs to the Z's 2 and 3, and again of course the 11.X Audyssey.

Last, the prices on the 3008 and 5008 are nearly unbelievable, to boot.

Still, this will be a lasting purchase for me, and I just don't seem to be able to give up my surround backs for the maginally better DAC's, THX cert, and the extra HDMI input with the Onk's."

James

Flac Support
Can anyone clue me in as to the differences the way Denon is giving support to Flac vs. the SC-37 which has a featured built in "FLAC Decoder". I would like to understand the ease of streaming to one or the other
-Dave H

Ok AJ,I think I follow your argument with your timpani exercise. But again, if only marginal signal is going to my sub, remember fronts. Can anyone tell? One 55 hz signal from one timpani recorded in a concert hall with 1000 + people in it and a mic that's only 16 feet across.... Can you now tell the difference? Seriously, can you tell this stuff? Do you ask the sound engineer for music hall utilization of fabrics and what studies have been assigned to the use of popcorn ceiling material?

I could also probably show that a Sorrento given the right circumstances might beat the Aston Martin off the line if external temperature is +- 3 degrees Celsius, in a snow storm with an ice base.... Again, my point is can you tell that you created a small null point at 55 Hz given a mic 20 feet apart? Sounds like theoretical book trumps real world listening here, or a verifiable needed receiver function? Put another way, how many of us are listening with bookshelf fronts in stereo with 2 subs? I see this beast as a media front end with minimal aspirations for playing dual subs and micro monitors.

Again, Onkyo 9.2 max. Denon 11.2. Onkyo costs more. Give me an onkyo that can do 11.2 and perhaps we can all buy that non-existent receiver.

I find it interesting that the comments keep getting deeper in technical thought but do not answer the base questions. Do these difference amount to anything of real value?

Is the sub issue even discernible for practically any content. Or put another way, should I now request mic schematics for all my music in the event my receiver destroys the signal? Can we make a button or macro for that?
Do you or anyone have ears good enough to tell the two different DAC parts?
Does THX offer anything over the Denon's processing set, other than it's THX?

I usually make decisions on practical stuff not unusual circumstance theoretically explained by where a mic is placed.

Oh, did I mention 11.2? Doesn't that cost something? Why not comment on the lack of this (I guess should cost nothing) feature.

I don't see why this has to be an Onkyo vs. Denon argument. To me, it's product X vs. product Y, and Z, and whatever else. Onkyo, Denon, Yamaha, whatever, they all have their pros and cons. No need to assume that just because someone is interested in certain features, that it's because of the name on the front of the product that has some of those features. Like you, I'm more interested in 11.x than stereo subs, so the 4311 is it for me. But I certainly don't discount the interest others may have in other features.


But I thought spending lots of money for traits that may not be discernible is what HiFi was all about? I can tell you that LONG before these products were even thought of, the benefits of stereo bass have been proclaimed by many. There is some sound reasoning behind it, but it's not something I have any interest in chasing myself. But more power to those that do... chasing perfect reproduction is major factor of what this hobby is.

I joined you..

good argument guys - since we are doing comparisons:

what about the 4311 vs 3311 vs 2311

I don't care about 11.1 or 9.2, or really 7.2... I will (at least for the foreseeable future) only be running 5.1

Apart from the power differences with those 3 amps is there anything of any real significance that I should be paying attention too.. EQ XT32 looks good, but do I really need it? especially if I am only running 5.1...

I just want good stereo sound and good HT features...