AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The "Official" Denon AVR-4311CI/AVR-A100 thread [NO PRICE TALK]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The "Official" Denon AVR-4311CI/AVR-A100 thread [NO PRICE TALK] - Page 17

post #481 of 21943
9/17/10 at 10:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darin View Post

Which begs the question: why? The 4311 is rated at 780 watts input. Factor in typical class A/B amp efficiency of 70%, and a little bit of power draw for the DSPs and other components, and you're looking at less than 60wpc, all channels driven. If there's no benefit to more than that, why did you spring for so much more power?

My first foray into ICEpower and specifically the 1000ASP module was based on glowing reviews of the sound quality far more than power. I actually bought some DIY units out of Denmark and really liked the sound and efficiency. I bought the PS Audio for around the same price as a good seven channel 150w unit. But when you consider Bel Canto sells the same modules at $2500 for one channel and I got three, plus four more channels equal to their M300 for close to the same price as one mono, IMO that's a good value. The fact it has that kind of power is just a bonus. The seven channel PS Audio probably weighs the same as the 4311 and the Bel Canto Ref1000 weighs a whopping 13 pounds by the way...

To get down to 60wpc with the 4311, not only would you need to have all channels driven but also with a constant load. That would simply never happen in real world applications.

It wasn't that long ago that 60wpc was considered a high powered amp...so what has changed? Did rooms all of a sudden get bigger? Speakers become more inefficient? Or did power become a selling point that ignorant masses bought into?
I think there's a lot of the latter in play because the magic number became 100wpc and manufacturers were doing everything in their power to hit that spec with either design or with "manufactured" specifications. I don't think it was because of genuine need.
Reply
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #482 of 21943
9/17/10 at 10:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

WiWavelength Ok to your argument, I think the Onkyo's have the dang ugliest cheapest fronts of practically any receiver out there. At any price point.

True, Onkyo AVRs are ugly. But that is a red herring. And you should know better than that. Ugly does not equal cheap nor does ugliness have anything to do w/ performance or build quality. Rather, Onkyo build quality is solid, certainly superior to that of Denon (of late). But if I were enamored of an Onkyo model, I would instead buy its Integra counterpart, simply for better aesthetics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

See we can all find fault, subjective or otherwise, if we want.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, the same for ugliness. And neither can be quantified. So, they are subjective. On the other hand, cost of parts can be quantified, as can measured performance. And Denon appears to be cutting corners that its competitors are not. That is not subjective. That is objective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

To me, who wants the 11.2, the Onkyo is the Kia and the Denon is the Lexus, you don't agree. But, I don't spend time at the Official Onkyo thread bashing the cheap little blue dot front panel of the Onkyo's or the total, utter, lack of 11 channel H + W capability.

Are you such an 11 channel H+W whore that you blind yourself to any discussion of potential shortcomings/weaknesses of the 4311CI? That the 4311CI may be the only 11 channel H+W AVR currently on the market (besides your fault prone 4810CI) does not mean that it is beyond reproach. And if my perceived criticism of Denon bothers you so much, then maybe you have to consider that I am bringing to light possible chinks in the armor that you do not want to see because you are so fixated on 11 channel H + W.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

That's it, why care about a receiver you'll never buy? I also find it a bit strange to put so much bad juju out about something you'll never own. What's the point? It's just bad kharma.

Do not make unwarranted assumptions. I am in the market for a new AVR or pre/pro and am weighing the pros & cons of all of the following:

Denon AVR-4311CI
Denon AVR-A100
Yamaha RX-A3000
Pioneer SC-37
Integra DHC-80.2
Marantz AV7005

AJ
Reply
Reply
post #483 of 21943
9/17/10 at 10:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

Last try on our fixation with weight here.

1) If weight were the goal, there would be no Carbon Fiber Sports Cars. Heck, a 4 ton Dusseldorf would still rule the racetrack.
2) Weight through a larger power supply, transformers, array of heavy duty capacitors and humongous heatsinks can work wonders for a Class A or Class AB amp section. But, weight and big power supplies are not necessarily required for many of the newer and hybrid amps out there today. Since Denon is using a new amp of some sorts in the 4311' until it's bench tested no one knows. Even the 4810 can produce da power, it just has limiters.

Darin is pretty spot on regarding the Max power idea on the back panel and I'm not here to defend any of the modern mega-multiple channel amps for total RMS output all channels driven. This need with 9 internal amps isn't all that helpful. The Heights and Rear Surrounds don't get that big a work out even at reference.

3) weight, just does not flat out have some linear relation to quality. Period. This argument can be seen in publications going back 30 years. There is always a subset of audio video enthusiasts who gravitate to poundage. I remember the days of the 1500 lb turntable base. So, I give you a few examples of weight. Granted you may not like the sound of these examples, but in their time and at their price points, they were revolutionary.

Carver Cube..... That would be my personal way back machine.
The First Magnepans (hey where's the driver?)
Now for today.... specs 1st.

500 W 8 ohms... 1000 W 4 Ohms....peak output current 45 amperes... 120 Db dynamic range. THD nonexistent. It does however handle 1500 W Max. Total weight....... Wow, it must suck....... 18 lbs. It's also loony expensive and looks like modern art. mono block so you need, 11 of them potentially so the weight of each box does add up. Anyone wish to guess the manufacturer and cost?

My point here is weight just can not be directly correlated to quality, performance, and cost. The difference between all the major receivers in weight is just not very relevant. Again, classic behavioral psychology, as The DAC battle. People want tangible, simple correlations to complex technology. hey, it weighs more, hey these guys are using a Burr Brown vs some other piece or part, hey this ones got gold feet inlays, hey this ones got some other measurable difference. Never mind the measurement is only a very small part of the whole component. Some people need very simple differentiators so they can justify their own decisions and more importantly skewed beliefs.

I'm just more up front about being quitecskewed. As stated, I think Onkyo stuff looks like junk on a shelf. I've got a feeling that I don't like it. That's all. I am not however going to spend a great deal of time trying to find little goofy shortcomings of another receiver to justify in my head my rather subjective dislike of all things Onkyoey. Even if I loved the stuff, it doesn't do 11.2 so again the comparison ends.

you want weight, buy a rock. If weight is totally related to quality, go back in a cave and pound a rather heavy rock. There is no need for a tool. Heck, the tool weighs less.

This in all in fun but can we get back to trying to understand the two receivers involved in this thread.

+1

I actually thought I had summed that up when I said that there are too many variables in play.
Reply
Reply
post #484 of 21943
9/17/10 at 10:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiWavelength View Post


Do not make unwarranted assumptions. I am in the market for a new AVR or pre/pro and am weighing the pros & cons of all of the following:

Denon AVR-4311CI
Denon AVR-A100
Yamaha RX-A3000
Pioneer SC-37
Integra DHC-80.2
Marantz AV7005

AJ

I'll bet you buy the heaviest one!
Reply
Reply
post #485 of 21943
9/17/10 at 10:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiWavelength View Post

And Denon appears to be cutting corners that its competitors are not. That is not subjective. That is objective.

What if Denon engineers think the DAC's they're using are the best sounding for their application regardless of price?
Reply
Reply
post #486 of 21943
9/17/10 at 10:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

Geez, still on a part. There has to be more to your life than this damn thing. I mean this respectively but if you are so passionate about this issue, start another thread. Write a 100 page "white paper"' get it published in popular science but let it die on the Denon 4311 AVR100 thread. We get your opinion loud and clear. If you are a Burr brown sales guy, I understand your desire to support the thing but give iit a rest.

Look, I want to like the 4311CI (or A100). I really do. But if Denon is moving to lower quality parts while its competitors are doing just the opposite, then that is a topic ripe for discussion. If Denon is indeed cutting costs on DACs, and that is okay, then what is not okay? Skimping on power transformers? Op amps? Binding posts? Sure, additional features are nice, but they not worth a damn if the build quality of the AVR is sacrificed to provide them. You of all people should know that from the network card headaches of the 4810CI.

AJ
Reply
Reply
post #487 of 21943
9/17/10 at 10:40pm
Wiwaver.

Yep, 11.2 is that good. A .10 cent difference on a DAC part is only .10 cents . Skipping out on two extra channels, the ability to shut down amps, and crappy front faces is cheap, cheap, and way cheap... Also one of the worst GUI's out their.

If you can't take solid reality checks. Oh well. You have a bias, it's clear. Pick a couple parts and a pound or two and you're done. It is not clear to me that Denon has cheapened out, now, in the past or who knows the future. The problem I have had with the 4810 was bad and pretty much totally involved a network card with functionality I did not need nor Onkyo could put in any of it's products, thus the 4311 purchase. You make an argument on pricing that, unless you are a reseller of parts is not that easy to determine. Tell a better tale or be done. Again, if you don't want the receiver........ Even before it's out and feel compelled to blab on and on about the same things, What value do you intend to impart or wisdom. All I read is snotty, abusive, and down right rude responses. I don't feel it helpful to call people names on a thread regarding a product you will never own. It is about Kharma and you have some bad stuff going on there buddy.

I'm done arguing with someone with such a negative agenda. Go find your Onkyo..... oh that's right, Integra at more cost. sort of wrecks the whole value proposition you started with in the first place.
Reply
Reply
post #488 of 21943
9/17/10 at 10:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnrgagne View Post

I'll bet you buy the heaviest one!

I honestly do not care about weight as much as you might expect, as I would prefer a pre/pro (or AVR in pre/pro mode) w/ external amplification. Unfortunately, there seems to be a direct correlation between component build quality and AVR weight. The premium parts tend to be found in the heaviest AVRs.

AJ
Reply
Reply
post #489 of 21943
9/17/10 at 11:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnrgagne View Post

What if Denon engineers think the DAC's they're using are the best sounding for their application regardless of price?

Could be. But if that were true, then the megabuck A1UDCI universal BD player would also use the AK4358, which has been in production for seven years already. No, the A1UDCI uses another AKM part, the AK4399, a premium 32 bit DAC.

Honestly, how much more likely is it that accountants, not engineers decided that $5 cost savings per AVR is more important than component quality commensurate w/ a $2000 AVR?

AJ
Reply
Reply
post #490 of 21943
9/18/10 at 2:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiWavelength View Post

Agreed, implementation may be just fine. But the potential use of cost cutter parts sends a troubling message.

Onkyo/Integra is willing to spend $1.98 per DAC channel for the (32 bit) PCM1795, and Yamaha is willing to spend $1.48 per DAC channel for the PCM1796, and Denon has in the past been willing to spend $1.13 per DAC channel for the (lowest of the three) PCM1791A.

If Denon is no longer willing to spend even $1.13 per DAC channel, does that speak well to Denon's commitment to high quality components in a $2000 AVR?

AJ

There are many factors involved here, but I think its pretty clear that "accountants" (well more likely it's MBA's fresh from grad school, fronted by an experienced management consultant) - were involved here:
http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Real_So...ustry/E7S6F8U2

In addition to having been recently purchased by venture capitalists who aim to turn a fast buck, Denon is part of a big portfolio of brands owned by said VC. Within this portfolio of brands Denon is closer to the "bottom rung" than the top run, so the likelihood that there is "optimisation" going on here at the expense of quality is high.

That said, from what I am led to understand the DAC market is more opaque than as one thinks and one cant draw a graph with a pure relationship between price and quality, as Burr Brown at the highest price point is made by a company that apparently is very big in that market and doesnt bother to compete on prices much. So not whatever Burr Brown DAC Denon was using may not have been where you might assume it was in the quality rankings.

And then there are issues of implementation etc.

But yes, the move of course has money written all over it, even if it might have zero impact on the sound.
Reply
Reply
post #491 of 21943
9/18/10 at 6:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjonkheer View Post

I couldn't agree more. Features don't excite me. Flat out quality does. Adding more and more features make it easy for these manufactures to charge more for one model against another.

+1.

my old Pio receiver hardly gets warm even at close to reference level for 2 hrs. The recent Denon (with a similar power rating) that replaces it, gets hot within just 30 mins. To me this is a very simple gauge of the engineering design.

I almost feel the receiver makers had learned the art of mobile phone companies: no model should last more than 2 yrs! A model lasting too long only hurts the bottom line. We need new features every year!
Reply
Reply
post #492 of 21943
9/18/10 at 7:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnrgagne View Post

Not really, it's like anything with technological advances, today's $1 DAC can probably compete with $10 DACs from years ago. Since the high rez codecs & HDMI 1.3 came in I've heard some $500 receivers that sounded far better as pre-amps than I would have imagined, no doubt due in part to that fact.

The 4311 will probably end up street-priced around $1600 after a few waves of sales, so it's not what I'd consider a "higher end" AVR - more of a middle of the road unit price wise.

Besides, it's like the old saying; "Don't bleed until you're shot!"... Denon is in the habit of using Burr-Brown DACs through their line up so IMO it's probably a much higher possibility that that's what they'll be using than the others.

Also they might have moved to a 'cheaper' dac but use them in different ways to get better results. For example they could be using 2 of them per channel in dual diff. mode. If they do that it will outperform most single dac options. Implementation is key its not just the brand or part number.

Daniel.
Reply
Reply
post #493 of 21943
9/18/10 at 7:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post

I suspect that Anchor Bay, Sigma, IDT and STM would beg to differ. In my personal experiece the VRS and REON are clearly the equal of whatever solution lives in my Kuro. Now, as previously mentioned, Denon may choose to block access to VRS features as opposed to more enlightened companies like Anthem but that's not the fault of Anchor Bay.

If they use ABT and thats probably true its not only denon stopping you. You pay for features you use. It might be denon blocking the use of PReP for example (one of the special ABT functions) or it might be ABT who wants to keep that feauture to a higher pricepoint or as external scaler only thing. Just because the chip can do it doesn't mean a brand can use it at will.

Daniel.
Reply
Reply
post #494 of 21943
9/18/10 at 7:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnrgagne View Post

Well that's a bit condescending isn't it...

For what it's worth, right now I am running an AVP A1HD pre amp and I run a

So what you are saying is that denon, put so much features and hype things in your avp receiver that they reduced, reduced and reduced the amp section until it was magically gone? Shame on them. But atleast you can now easy move it with its 5.9lbs

Daniel.
Reply
Reply
post #495 of 21943
9/18/10 at 8:02am
At the end of the day, I am very interested in both the Denon 4311 and the Onkyo 3008/5008. But by nature I am a pessimist. I ask myself, what did Denon sacrifice to get 11.2 available below $2k. I think it isn't unreasonable to ask what you lose to gain 11.2 and other features. I think this receiver is an easy buy if someone is going to use an external amp and just use this as a preamp. I think we won't really know how this receiver performs until we get a professional review.

I understand this kind of discussion can cause friction in audio threads between posters as you have the people who like this receiver want to buy it and then people who want to pick apart a receiver to see what you are gaining and losing verses another brand.
Reply
Reply
post #496 of 21943
9/18/10 at 8:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by c722 View Post

+1.

my old Pio receiver hardly gets warm even at close to reference level for 2 hrs. The recent Denon (with a similar power rating) that replaces it, gets hot within just 30 mins. To me this is a very simple gauge of the engineering design.

I almost feel the receiver makers had learned the art of mobile phone companies: no model should last more than 2 yrs! A model lasting too long only hurts the bottom line. We need new features every year!

That philosophy is what got Detroit in trouble. You'd think the Japanese would know that....

The good news is, we may be nearing the end of the tunnel as far as feature creep goes for the time being. If the industry decides to move away from HDMI 1.4, there will be a period of transition where it and whatever replaces it is offered in the same box.
Reply
Reply
post #497 of 21943
9/18/10 at 8:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnrgagne View Post

My first foray into ICEpower and specifically the 1000ASP module was based on glowing reviews of the sound quality far more than power.
...
It wasn't that long ago that 60wpc was considered a high powered amp...so what has changed? Did rooms all of a sudden get bigger? Speakers become more inefficient? Or did power become a selling point that ignorant masses bought into?

Again, I'm not saying that there's going to be an issue. It just seems a bit odd for you to say there's no benefit in higher power, when for yourself you bought the highest power unit from the line.

Since the 4311 isn't available yet, all we have to do while we wait is analyze what pieces of info we have. That's kind of what we do here. But I'm just puzzled by all the responses that go against logic. Despite what history has taught us from previous products, in THIS case, there are no negative ramifications of a weight reduction (in a technology where more current requires more copper and more iron), and in THIS case, the cheaper DACs might actually sound better than the higher end versions.

Unless this thing is revealed to be an absolute turd once it's released and reviewed, I plan to own one. In fact, I'm anticipating it: I've already bought an extra 2 channel amp, and the speakers for the extra channels. But even if/when I own it, I'm not going to kid myself into thinking there aren't any ramifications to the obvious cost cutting that is happening (not just in this receiver, and not just from Denon). But this really is the only choice for what *I* want, right now. I just don't understand why so many are blindly defending a product they haven't even seen yet.
Reply
Reply
post #498 of 21943
9/18/10 at 9:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by c722 View Post

+1.

my old Pio receiver hardly gets warm even at close to reference level for 2 hrs. The recent Denon (with a similar power rating) that replaces it, gets hot within just 30 mins. To me this is a very simple gauge of the engineering design.

I almost feel the receiver makers had learned the art of mobile phone companies: no model should last more than 2 yrs! A model lasting too long only hurts the bottom line. We need new features every year!

My experience with new receivers is the video processing board is one of the biggest culprits in generating heat. There wasn't the level of VP's there is now in older receivers, nor the amount of computer power. They're putting an awful lot of stuff in them now, and somethings got to give. It's not a Denon specific problem by any stretch.

You're 100% bang on on the new features race, but that's not a new marketing strategy by any means. How many times has Tide been new & improved?

What's drawing me to this thread and possibly considering this unit is the XT32 & SubHT with pro capabilities, I know what Audyssey does for a system and with the higher resolution and sub EQ'ing capabilities the final outcome of what this unit will do will far supersede any DAC differences or possible amplifier shortcomings for the MAJORITY of applications.

Someone mentioned sound quality earlier...room/speaker interaction is by far the biggest contributor to that end.

If someone is here complaining about build quality, and hasn't paid any attention to their room acoustics, the very simple truth is that they probably couldn't tell the difference between a $200 receiver and a $2000 receiver that room.

Also interesting me is the DL4; Denon Link if you haven't experienced it, is an excellent digital transfer, and now that it adds HDMI clocking so there's likely a tangible benefit to be had with HDMI sources as well.
Reply
Reply
post #499 of 21943
9/18/10 at 9:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darin View Post

I just don't understand why so many are blindly defending a product they haven't even seen yet.

I don't think anyone is blindly defending this product, but rather disputing overly simple assumptions of what the end result will be, and more so, the reasoning for those assumptions.
Reply
Reply
post #500 of 21943
9/18/10 at 9:58am
The two receivers I am looking into are the 4311 and the SC-37.

Onkyo is out for me as I have had nothing but problems with the Onkyo 606 and the 3007. My friend bought the 3007 roughly around the same time as me and has similar problems and is going to upgrade as well.

I never had any problems with my Pioneer Elites or my Denon 3808 which helps narrow down my choices between Pioneer or Denon. (Leaning more toward Denon)

I only watch movies/TV and do not use my receivers for music. My decision would be so much easier if the 4311 was just released already lol.
Reply
Reply
post #501 of 21943
9/18/10 at 9:59am
I have to say that the Denon has many many nice features. It is first class as for features. I used to own the 4310 and was somewhat happy. But now, I want to try one of the new Anthem MRX 500. I just ordered. At the end of the day, SQ to my ears is what I am looking for. I hope that I find what I am looking for with this new Anthem.
Reply
Reply
post #502 of 21943
9/18/10 at 10:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darin View Post

Again, I'm not saying that there's going to be an issue. It just seems a bit odd for you to say there's no benefit in higher power, when for yourself you bought the highest power unit from the line.

I think I explained that succinctly enough above. I've experimented with all kinds of amps and really like ICEpower stuff, but I could have easily lived with a 105wpc Anthem PVA7 or the 140wpc NAD M15 both of which I found outstanding for music.

I've also had some Class D, 10wpc amps that could get close to reference level with some very inefficient speakers. The true power requirements of a typical HT set up are nowhere near what people perceive them to be, especially when you throw a sub and crossover your speakers to it.
Reply
Reply
post #503 of 21943
9/18/10 at 10:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian-HD View Post

I have to say that the Denon has many many nice features. It is first class as for features. I used to own the 4310 and was somewhat happy. But now, I want to try one of the new Anthem MRX 500. I just ordered. At the end of the day, SQ to my ears is what I am looking for. I hope that I find what I am looking for with this new Anthem.

Receivers in this price point will sound far more alike than different. What will set them apart IMO is the room correction, and if the Anthem has the full ARC platform in it, it will be a serious step up from most AVR's. The 4311 (or comparable units) with XT32 could be the equal, but that remains to be seen.... sorry, heard
Reply
Reply
post #504 of 21943
9/18/10 at 10:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnrgagne View Post

I think I explained that succinctly enough above. I've experimented with all kinds of amps and really like ICEpower stuff

Understood. But couldn't you have gotten that from the similar but less powerful GCA-250, or even the GCA-100?
Reply
Reply
post #505 of 21943
9/18/10 at 10:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielo View Post

So what you are saying is that denon, put so much features and hype things in your avp receiver that they reduced, reduced and reduced the amp section until it was magically gone? Shame on them. But atleast you can now easy move it with its 5.9lbs

Daniel.

Ha, ha yeah instead of amps they put two of everything else in it! Kind of like the Noah's arc of parts LOL.

You and I both know that if they put a different name on it like Krell, they could get away with selling it for $20K or more, regardless of what parts are in it. ;-)
Reply
Reply
post #506 of 21943
9/18/10 at 10:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiWavelength View Post

Look, I want to like the 4311CI (or A100). I really do. But if Denon is moving to lower quality parts while its competitors are doing just the opposite, then that is a topic ripe for discussion. If Denon is indeed cutting costs on DACs, and that is okay, then what is not okay? Skimping on power transformers? Op amps? Binding posts? Sure, additional features are nice, but they not worth a damn if the build quality of the AVR is sacrificed to provide them. You of all people should know that from the network card headaches of the 4810CI.

AJ

AJ,

I'm considering some of the same AVRs you're considering more specifically the AVR-4311CI and the Yamaha RX-A3000. I've never personally bought into the weight of a component or the DACs as a sign of the quality of the component. I've heard bad implementations of very good components. I'm also reserving judgment until I've auditioned or have heard 1st hand accounts about the Denon's performance regardless of the components. I'm going to trust that Denon and other manufacturers know what they are doing when it comes to the parts and implementation of their products.

Some are pointing out perceived faults or shortcoming because of the DACs and power numbers without any justification. Also, the DAC prices you posted are pennies apart so I really don't think Denon's choice of DACs is a cost cutting measure, but more of a design and implementation decision. However, I do understand some concern, but let's just wait and see.

I think today's consumer grade components are more efficient than previous designs. Do you remember when a computer server occupied its own room and now server are housed in a desktop box? Which server is the better? The one that had its own zip code or the one in the desktop?

Onkyo's will always win the battle of weight, because that is a part of their design and they know that some consumers buy into the weight equation as it is always talked about. Onkyo has been building boat anchors for years and by most accounts a very competent boat anchor. Onkyo is not in my buying decision, because their units get to hot for my taste. If a product is getting that hot this can not be good for the internals of the component. I put my hand on a TX-NR1007 recently and it was almost frying pan hot to the touch and a recent owner of a TX-NR3008 confirmed that this has not changed.


Wllie
Reply
Reply
post #507 of 21943
9/18/10 at 10:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darin View Post

Understood. But couldn't you have gotten that from the similar but less powerful GCA-250, or even the GCA-100?

Well I'll explain and then hopefully we can move back to the 4311.

The unit I got was the last one Cullen Circuits (Wyred4sound) had back when they were the assembler for PS Audio, it was a "one-of" deal that hit my price point.

I also happen to think the 1000ASP is the best sounding of the modules regardless of power, but there's a lot of debate on that - all of which is purely subjective.

I have three of the 1000ASP's and the rest of the channels are the 250ASP's found in the GCA-100 for my surrounds and IB subs.
Reply
Reply
post #508 of 21943
9/18/10 at 10:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnrgagne View Post

Ha, ha yeah instead of amps they put two of everything else in it! Kind of like the Noah's arc of parts LOL.

You and I both know that if they put a different name on it like Krell, they could get away with selling it for $20K or more, regardless of what parts are in it. ;-)

Ahh now i understand why they sold me this 'avp receiver extention box' called the POA. they put 2 of each in and didn't have any room left for the amps.

Sorry i am a slow learner.

Daniel.
Reply
Reply
post #509 of 21943
9/18/10 at 10:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakerwi View Post

I put my hand on a TX-NR1007 recently and it was almost frying pan hot to the touch and a recent owner of a TX-NR3008 confirmed that this has not changed.

I think they still use the HQV Reon board which gets stupid hot on it's own. I had the Integra 9.8, while it's not a receiver, it got pretty hot and there was a significant difference in the heat it generated when the VP was bypassed vs having it on.

There's a reason why they're putting the VP boards at the top of AVR's these days.

If you look at the internal pics of the 4311 you can see the physical layout is such that the heat producing components basically form a circle and aren't stacked on top of each other like in some older topographies.
Reply
Reply
post #510 of 21943
9/18/10 at 10:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielo View Post

Sorry i am a slow learner.

But a happy one!
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The "Official" Denon AVR-4311CI/AVR-A100 thread [NO PRICE TALK]