When do the 2013 Denon's come out? Any new features we should expect? - Page 3

It begs the question about why there's even a need to release new consumer A/V equipment in the first place, rather than simply support the existing lines for another year or two (as Denon's done with, say, the 4311 or 4810). But the perception that a brand will lose its equity and more importantly, not get the 'new product' purchase blip is overwhelming, I suppose....at least in a telecom world. But even there, there's the argument that Apple's profitability is being subsidized by the bundled phone/contract plans that keep telecoms from charging full price for new smartphones. Ask AT&T for example....and there isn't an Apple/AT&T model in the A/V world (unless you put Audyssey in the role of Apple, and the manufacturers in the role of AT&T - and even that's only a market dominance proposition than profit leading IMHO)

Funny you mention Anthem earlier - I was doing some reading up on them, and in some ways they have the _right_ idea with a single AVR product, mostly differentiated by the # of amps but essentially the same "OS". But in that price range, the 4311 is much more in the hall of fame, as you put it, of value, for what you get. But to the extent it matters, you don't get the 'full' ARC the way you can with XT32+Audyssey Pro, if what I read is correct

You may very well be right here -- I know next to nothing how much processing power is required by an AVR.

But my thinking was that it can't be that much, since Anthem actually offloads some of the room correction calibration work to an attached PC, so that they don't have to dumb down their algorithms. So, in a $3k AVR one should be able to stuff a pretty robust processor and sufficient amount of memory.

^^^

here's a link to a post from m-code that i saved that shows the cost breakdown of a 5-600 dollar avr... not that they would directly extrapolate to a $3k avr, but at least it gives an you an idea...

click me

That is interesting. Thanks for the link.

habit, more than anything else... same reason there's "new" car models every year, i suppose... as you note, perception is a major factor...

even in the 4311 thread, people will occasionally complain that the 4311 is somehow behind the times, simply because it was released 2 years ago... i would imagine that in the lower models, a cem would get killed if they didn't keep up with the joneses... even if it's simply a cosmetic change, they can't be left behind...

i can't disagree with the apple/at&t commentary...

Interesting, thanks.

Although, we can't know if this amount includes processor which can handle decent room correction.

On the other hand, if the audio processing part is only about $25-$27, I'd imagine getting some real power in there wouldn't be more than $200-$300 on the high end.

Since the vast majority of new features are in the software realm, it'd be well-worth it to many end-users. Then the manufacturer can simply charge for new features and upgrades, the way it's done on the personal computer side.

Oh, and and while in wishful mode, imagine AVRs running common OS versions, so that third party developers can offer features in a brand independent AVR App Store....

So when are you trading in your iPad 2 for iPad 3? We have three iPads at home, so I can sympathize (and one's barely used, honestly). But I'm lusting after Siri too.....contracts can be shackles.

I can point to two 'perceived' physical differences in what the 4311 offers vs. comparable AVRs: the video processing chip being more 'modern' (which makes a difference on legacy sources with poor quality content or maybe streaming; certainly with my Tivo Series 3 SD vs. what's in the box) and amps being Class AB vs. Class D. And even if those were included in the 4311 as it stands, how different could the price point really be? Certainly not 30% more over MRSP! Not by themselves, anyway.

That leaves the esoteric perceptions for what makes a 'better' unit: a better looking OSD (ala the Sony example in the Audioholics 'review'), esoteric features that have limited use but sound more powerful (how many people use multi-zones and anything fancier than 7.2?), and piling up on audio-processing modes. And adding apps that would be redundant to folks with more modern sources, but useful to your customer base that still has a four year old DVD player without Netflix, Vudu, Youtube etc. capability. The rest is already there, in concept, even AirPlay and control A/V from iDevices.

And even if Audyssey Pro gets bundled into more expensive 4311/4810 successor - which it should, in some form, simply to sell convenience to hi-end users - who's going to make the money off of it? Probably _not_ Denon, given the support issues that might arise and royalty costs. So ultimately that puts us back to the car/telecom model. Sell new because new sells. Or change the sales model.

OTOH, you said it yourself: even with the 4311 (or for now, my SC-57), are you _really_ going to hang onto it for umpteen years because we're at the end of A/V history? Of course not.....there will always be something greener out there, whether it's the Trinnov 3D calibration that's not implemented in any consumer AVR (Sherwood only has a simplified verison, and is at best a niche product), fancier video processing (4K if/when any device ever has it and supports it), etc. etc. Lust for new is always exciting, as we both know.....

Now you're talking - an Audyssey add-on that can set your house curve and calibrate your speaker setup to sound like whatever room you want from a drop-down list, regardless of room size and treatment? Get your Carnegie Hall house curve in your house here! Or can ID instruments in a mix and bring them up/down according to taste? Turn up that 12-string rhythm guitar and have it pan on front wides.....what a scary thought.....

The iPad 3 is going to be sweet If all the rumors are true. The retina display and quad core processor equals awesomeness. I know I'll have mine the day it comes out.

As far as the 4311, I can't see any reason not to buy one now despite how long it's been out. I want to get one once the 4313 comes out because I think I'll be able to find one under 1000 by then.

I'd like to see a line from Denon that cut out most of the networking features so that they could put cost towards the sound at a more reasonable price. Perhaps they could have a line of receivers with enough connections and audio processing (e.g. Audessey), but then put most of their money towards such features as quality amps, structure for superior sound, etc. Call the line "Simply Sound" or something.

Looking at that breakdown for the cost of making a receiver, if you were to cut out some of the cost that goes into streaming-type networking features and added that cost to sound, that would rock!

Besides upgrading the basic software for compatibility between components, I can't see a good reason for adding more "internet features."

There are too many superior external "boxes" (e.g., bluray, roku, apple tv, tv's, xbox, playstation 3, etc.) that stream already. For example, when it comes to the higher end Denons, they'll add more HDMI connections to a particular receiver. Well, what devices are being connected to it, if one's connecting that many? Surely the likelihood of some of those devices having internet capabilities is only increased (thereby nullifying the need for the receiver internet streaming capabilities on a receiver).

Dude, Denon ain't cutting back on audio quality because of network features. I'm not sure where you got the idea that this cost was significant enough to warrant lesser quality amps by looking at that list. The cost is minimal.

The good reason for adding internet features - it's what people want. It also makes sense, for many reasons. None of the boxes you mention comes anywhere close to the codec support of the receiver, in fact none of them is superior boxes for streaming audio at all. Source and destination in the same box, and the convenience of network control - it rocks my world that I can stream FLAC directly to my receiver from my NAS and control it - any zone - from anywhere in my house.

Back on topic, I'd like to see HDMI over Ethernet.

Denon has done this with the 1712 which includes the higher version of Audyssey MultEQ XT found on the "CI" models but without the networking feature.

These days AV receivers cut costs by skimping on heat-sinking while adding protection circuits that many users find cuts in overly aggressively. I've seen a lot of comments on the xx12 Denon receivers in this regard.

People do want streaming audio -but they want better than what AV receivers provide. If you have a decent music collection navigating it via AV receiver is a no-go. Far too primitive to be launching in this day and age. No receiver comes close to the music navigation/streaming experience you can get from a hundred dollar Squeezebox radio. And none of their apps can match the control/navigation capability of the 10 dollar iPeng app? Why?

You'd think one of the Av receiver makers would up their game to this level or licence or buy it. But they won't. These things are the type of steps they need to be taking if they bother to launch new products every year.

Why not just look at other brands. There are plenty of "audiophile brands" out there that don't do a lot of features and say they just focus on sound quality. Look at Nad. I presonally wouldn't pay 1500 for a reciever with a stripped down verison of Audyssey but apprently somebody still buys these Nads.

I dont see why the consumer should be forced into an artificial choice between sound quality and features. Technology today allows both to be done, but AV receiver are bogged down in some weird segmentation game they must have adopted from the airlines.

NAD btw is one of the underachieving niche players I mentioned earlier. Too little imagination, too little daring, too little grasp of how to appeal. An "audiophile " consumer, if that is their specialised market, is a music lover but NAD seems to think the term refers to technophobic monks or something.

Hey Nethawk,

Now I didn't say do this with all lines from Denon, I just said it would be nice if they had a line of receivers that focused on this. So, like JD mentions, take something like the 1712 and compare it to the 1912 or 2112--there's a significant extra amount of cash you have to shell out to buy the higher numbers, with no change to the sound (I use "sound" generically to incorporate most everything hardware-wise involved).

Or, consider the 2312 or 3312. What if there were a receiver without networking, but with the same amps and internal components (aside from networking features) found in the 3312? An 850 dollar street priced 3312 would turn into a 650 dollar street-priced receiver. I'd pull the trigger on that without flinching.

Out of curiosity, what codecs in particular can you not stream through the boxes I mentioned? I can stream FLAC files through the Xbox360, or if needed, through my HTPC, or through itunes with a simple modification. I'm reading testimony from folks on AVS who say that the Airplay functions and "sound" are better through the Apple TV than the receivers' Airplay.

^^^

nope... it wouldn't make for a cheaper model... it would likely make costs rise across the line...

The market for a more expensive receiver with less features is next to zero. Besides with the cost of production nowadays they use virtually the same components across the line. They simply add more of them to charge more. Without additional features there would be no reason to upgrade your receiver or pick it over any the other brand. Heck even the models look nearly identical today... take the 1312 and 3312. When I walk down the aisle at Fry's I can't tell one from the other. You'd think they could spend a couple of bucks and bring back the flap.

^^^

yup... while a few may clamor for a "minimalist" design*, that dog won't hunt... for a myriad of reasons...

* of course, not so minimalist that it eliminates features that they want...

Reading what Onkyo just announced (http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/17/o...tibs-for-2012/), could the direction be:

- InstaPrevue
- 4K Support?
- Superior Zone2/3 support?

I am surprised that Onkyo did not include Airplay support. I have to replace my receiver and was going to buy 2312ci but am now holding out to see what 2013 receivers get.

Hey guys,

I guess my thought process was that there are so many components nowadays that overlap in features, when it comes to Internet applications (including Internet streaming of any kind). I don't have a clue as to what the market research indicates or anything like that--this was more of just an idea, and it's based on my limited "sample pool" if you will. Everyone I know does not use the Internet features on their receiver. They do, however, use them from the television or bluray, etc.

I just know that it's difficult to find a receiver (I'm talking mid-range here--not in the 1500 dollar range, but then again, I suppose everything is relative, price-wise) that takes out the features, except for the 1712. Out of all the receivers on the market, there's nothing else of its kind that I'm aware of, so I'll amend my suggestion: just extend that network-less option to the higher models. Would it cost them more to have a little brother version of the 2312 and 3312? Say the 1712 (only sound) was the little brother to the 2112 (sound plus networking); then you could have a little brother version of each receiver (call it the 2312b, 3312b, or whatever).

There are a lot of folks who don't care about that aspect of networking, because they've already paid for it with other devices (the same is true with video conversion). But if it turned out that it cost them more to do this, or that the added networking features only cost the manufacturer an extra 10 bucks (or something of the like), then yeah of course, it's not going to work. But the 1712 seems to be working.

@mallu...

- gimmick, but no doubt will be held up as a shining example of something the others don't have...

- pointless at this price point, and pointless in general at this juncture in time... but again, a good bullet point item...

- didn't see anything that would imply superior zone 2/3 support...

My 2 channel receiver for audio is the Onkyo TX-8050, a networked receiver that also includes various online services. Sure, I'd like it to improve, but it works quite well and the Android application allows for remote navigation. This is definitely not a "no-go". If my wife can connect to her library, turn on the receiver (amps are demand-powered) and play what she wants without my intervention then its a smashing success. Squeezebox is great, I have one in my HT environment (until I get a network receiver), but its another box, another application, another step in the process both from the perspective of education and processing. MUCH more complicated.

You cannot play FLAC files on xbox without jumping through hoops, there is no native support. Other than Oppo there are no other blu-ray players that support FLAC, but it was big at CES 2012 so they're coming. iTunes and Airplay support compressed audio, but only ALAC. Roku, nope - it has to be transcoded before it reaches the box. Playstation, same thing. Technically you are correct, you can play your FLAC files on these devices, but its not FLAC when it gets there.

FLAC is just one codec, please don't ask for a comparison of others.

Its a moot point anyway.

I don't feel that way at all. With the inclusion of room correction, I think receivers have better sound quality now than they did 10 years ago. Power has decreased some over the years but there are receivers out there with excellent sound quality and every feature you can imagine. I don't see why you would have to choose one or the other.

I agree 100% with the Nad comments.

Yamaha did just that and you can buy it now. They have a 4-port hub at the back of some of their receivers (I think starting with the RX-A1010).

Now... Where Denon is shining for me is the quality of their customer service. I called Denon's installation line and got an intelligent person being able to discus what I wanted (too bad the answer was: can't do; but I think now nobody does what I want in an AVR even though every single cheap 3D display does it, namely letting me tell the device what my 3D format is instead of relying on HDMI frame info). I also called Yamaha's customer service (they don't have installation support) and the guy was clueless and giving information that was the very opposite of Yamaha's documentation... and he certainly didn't understand anything about 3D or what the Yamaha GUI does

Incorrect.
1010, 2010 & 3010 have a single network connection..


Good to hear that Denon has knowledgeable support..
Maybe you connected up with jdsmoothie...
Most AVR brands outsource their support, and in the majority of cases they don't know much..
Unfortunately it is a sign of the times for most AVR brands..

Just my $0.02...

My bad. I swear I saw an AVR with a 4 port hub but I've been looking at TOO MUCH stuff lately. Maybe an H/K? A Sony?

Anyway... All I meant to say is that yes it's a great idea, and yes someone has done it and it can be bought today.

Edit: here you, go, it's the Sony STR-DA3700ES that I read about: http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/r...da3700es-video

Denon 4311 with MRSP $2000, Denon 4810 with MRSP $3000...

The alledged 4313 will be the new "flagship" model with a probable MRSP of about $3000.... what can we expect/hope for with this new beast due out later this year (sounds like the announcement will be not till summer, not when the lower end models are announced this April)?

I expect that it will include DTS Neo:x, plus Audyssey LFC, as well as everything the 4311 has, including 9 amps and the ability to utilize Audyssey DSX and/or DTS Neo:x with external amps.

I hope that it will include an upgraded video chip that does 4K resolution (like the Marvell Qdeo that the Onkyo 3009 has, or something similar from Anchor Bay, et al.).

Possibly since it's "flagship" THX Ultra 2 Plus certification.

Above and beyond these features, I'm not aware of anything terribly exciting that could be included...

What do ya think?

^^^

sounds about right, other than the thx part...

sadly, none of it is terribly exciting to me... for the first time in a long time, there won't be a new avr/pre-pro purchase this year...

no new bling makes chris sad...