AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The **OFFICIAL** DENON AVR-4520CI thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The **OFFICIAL** DENON AVR-4520CI thread - Page 84

post #2491 of 4868
1/28/13 at 11:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kromc5 View Post

The 4520 is much lighter and smaller overall dimensionally. When looking on the insides the 4806 is absolutely stuffed with no space left anywhere. Everything is immense from the size of the transformer to the massive dissipating bars. When looking at the insides of 4520 the phrase comes to mind "where's the beef". The inside is extremely spartan with lots of open space. The the transformer looks anemic when compared to its older sibling if you were only judging by looks.

I know exactly what you mean. I have a 2003 model Pioneer Elite that weighs more than all of the current SC models that Pioneer has in their lineup. Whenever I prospect new AVRs I always give the old pull test with my thumb to get a sense of the overall weight. I laughed at one occasion when I lifted an SC-67 and (expecting it to weigh more than it did) it practically slammed the top of the shelf. I guess they don't make them like they used to. This is one of the reasons I have steered away from Pioneer and looked into Integra, Denon, Onkyo, and Marantz.

I feel like that with all these cutbacks that the electronics manufacturers are making, there is going to be a generation of sub-par units where the quality is obviously not there. I wonder if this will be a continuing trend in the home theater world once the economy improves.
Reply
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #2492 of 4868
1/28/13 at 11:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kromc5 View Post

The 4520 is much lighter and smaller overall dimensionally. When looking on the insides the 4806 is absolutely stuffed with no space left anywhere. Everything is immense from the size of the transformer to the massive dissipating bars. When looking at the insides of 4520 the phrase comes to mind "where's the beef". The inside is extremely spartan with lots of open space. The the transformer looks anemic when compared to its older sibling if you were only judging by looks.
But what sounds better? cool.gif
Reply
Reply
post #2493 of 4868
1/28/13 at 11:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kromc5 View Post

The 4520 is much lighter and smaller overall dimensionally. When looking on the insides the 4806 is absolutely stuffed with no space left anywhere. Everything is immense from the size of the transformer to the massive dissipating bars. When looking at the insides of 4520 the phrase comes to mind "where's the beef". The inside is extremely spartan with lots of open space. The the transformer looks anemic when compared to its older sibling if you were only judging by looks.

So then I wonder what gives? Have there been vast improvements that has enabled better performance while saving weight and space? Are the newer units truly as good as their predecessors? And who do we have to thank for this, the Space Program at NASA?
Reply
Reply
post #2494 of 4868
1/28/13 at 11:45am
This may have been discussed previously, but does the 4520 have a switching power supply that would negate the need for a larger transformer?
Reply
Reply
post #2495 of 4868
1/28/13 at 11:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kromc5 View Post

The 4520 is much lighter and smaller overall dimensionally. When looking on the insides the 4806 is absolutely stuffed with no space left anywhere. Everything is immense from the size of the transformer to the massive dissipating bars. When looking at the insides of 4520 the phrase comes to mind "where's the beef". The inside is extremely spartan with lots of open space. The the transformer looks anemic when compared to its older sibling if you were only judging by looks.

Open space in electronics is a good thing - better airflow and thermal management. Many of the features that required separate boards or chips have been combined in current models as they have become better worked out and commoditized over time.

Here's another way to look at it. How many wires jumpered between chips/solder points/boards in the 4806 compared to the 4520? I recently opened up my old Denon 3300 and it looked like spaghetti inside vs. my A100 which has almost no point to point wiring fixing post IC board layout issues.
Reply
Reply
post #2496 of 4868
1/28/13 at 11:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kromc5 View Post

The 4520 is much lighter and smaller overall dimensionally. When looking on the insides the 4806 is absolutely stuffed with no space left anywhere. Everything is immense from the size of the transformer to the massive dissipating bars. When looking at the insides of 4520 the phrase comes to mind "where's the beef". The inside is extremely spartan with lots of open space. The the transformer looks anemic when compared to its older sibling if you were only judging by looks.

Would not greater circuit integration explain the more compact circuitry? AD/DA converters and DSP circuitry is much smaller these days.
Reply
Reply
post #2497 of 4868
1/28/13 at 11:51am
I'd expect the digital circuit boards to be smaller, bogh because some of the circuits are more integrated, and many are probably surface mounted, while their previous-generation equivalents would have had external leads, making their "footprints" significantly larger.
Reply
Reply
post #2498 of 4868
1/28/13 at 12:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theresa View Post

Would not greater circuit integration explain the more compact circuitry? AD/DA converters and DSP circuitry is much smaller these days.

I agree with your statements concerning greater integration. My post was more of a jovial statement than condemnation of my 4520. Being in the tech industry it amazes me at the abilities to continue the die shrink, from my old 800 pound servers to high density blades. That is why I added the caveat that if you only judging by looks.
Reply
Reply
post #2499 of 4868
1/28/13 at 1:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadClams View Post

So then I wonder what gives? Have there been vast improvements that has enabled better performance while saving weight and space? Are the newer units truly as good as their predecessors? And who do we have to thank for this, the Space Program at NASA?


To be honest I do not understand what message you are trying to convey concerning my post. I do not know if it is rhetorical or indeed asking? I try to answer anyone that is providing helpful content to the discussion.
Reply
Reply
post #2500 of 4868
1/28/13 at 2:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by kromc5 View Post

To be honest I do not understand what message you are trying to convey concerning my post. I do not know if it is rhetorical or indeed asking? I try to answer anyone that is providing helpful content to the discussion.

I think the first 3 comments speak for themselves. The last part was a joke, and none of it was directed at you, per se, so I'm glad you didn't burden yourself with your idea of an answer. Lighten up.
Reply
Reply
post #2501 of 4868
1/28/13 at 2:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeantYnot View Post

I know exactly what you mean. I have a 2003 model Pioneer Elite that weighs more than all of the current SC models that Pioneer has in their lineup. Whenever I prospect new AVRs I always give the old pull test with my thumb to get a sense of the overall weight. I laughed at one occasion when I lifted an SC-67 and (expecting it to weigh more than it did) it practically slammed the top of the shelf. I guess they don't make them like they used to. This is one of the reasons I have steered away from Pioneer and looked into Integra, Denon, Onkyo, and Marantz.

I feel like that with all these cutbacks that the electronics manufacturers are making, there is going to be a generation of sub-par units where the quality is obviously not there. I wonder if this will be a continuing trend in the home theater world once the economy improves.
Doesn't really sound like a fair comparison...
ALL Pioneer (Elite) SC(-LX) models are Class-D receivers, which are by nature more efficient, and requires much less cooling so there is no need for much heavy heatsinks. And also the powersupply's are quite different to the traditional Class A/B receivers used in Onkyo,Denon,Yamaha and Marantz and others.
Reply
Reply
post #2502 of 4868
1/28/13 at 2:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgwalsh View Post

This may have been discussed previously, but does the 4520 have a switching power supply that would negate the need for a larger transformer?

It is a switching power supply. There are no filtering capacitors. Lots of heat and a cheap humming transformer. They don’t make them the way they used to but you get what you pay for…
Reply
Reply
post #2503 of 4868
1/28/13 at 3:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prietz0r View Post

Doesn't really sound like a fair comparison...
ALL Pioneer (Elite) SC(-LX) models are Class-D receivers, which are by nature more efficient, and requires much less cooling so there is no need for much heavy heatsinks. And also the powersupply's are quite different to the traditional Class A/B receivers used in Onkyo,Denon,Yamaha and Marantz and others.

Not all of the weight is in the heatsinks or transformer. Part of that weight reduction I am referring to is the lack of an all aluminum face to a resin composite; fancy plastic but still plastic.

For a more fair comparison, I would be interested in an explanation on why a class A/B from Denon, say a 4520, has a less overall power rating when fully driven than that from a similar class AVR they made 6 years ago like the 4308.
Reply
Reply
post #2504 of 4868
1/28/13 at 3:13pm
and why it is less powerfull then the AVR-3808A too! I wish they would make a higher end unit with the Toroidal power transformer..........like the AVR-5803A.
Reply
Reply
post #2505 of 4868
1/28/13 at 4:36pm
Hello,
I agree about the hopes for a Toroidal Transformer. Moreover, while there has been discussion of pre recession weights on past Denon AVR;s, I really think it is more of a post Bain Capital Ownership situation.

That being said I am purchasing a 4520 tomorrow as I have 11 channels of outboard amplification (Parasound HCA-3500, Parasound HCA-2205AT, Parasound HCA-1000a, Aragon 8008bb) While with efficient speakers, I am sure the Denon would do fine. However, I am using Martin Logan Electrostatic Speakers for all channels (Vantage, Stage Vista) and I would never dream of using an AVR to power them as they dip down to around 1 ohm.

For $2500, I do expect a heavier duty amplifier stage. However, I do believe the 4520 is going to make for a splendid SSP.
Cheers,
AD
Reply
Reply
post #2506 of 4868
1/28/13 at 4:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe6P View Post

It is a switching power supply. There are no filtering capacitors. Lots of heat and a cheap humming transformer. They don’t make them the way they used to but you get what you pay for…

Sounds like an upgrade job for the clever modder. Though it would void warranty.
Reply
Reply
post #2507 of 4868
1/28/13 at 5:13pm
Wow, what's with all the doom and gloom about power? It's one test that nobody can read that is inconsistent with U.S. publications such as Home Theater which for example tested the step down Marantz 7007 (Denon 3313 clone) and still got over 70 wpc with 7 channels driven. BTW, the 4520 has 10 lbs on the 7007/3313. Also, Home Theater tested the 4310 a couple of years ago which is a couple of pounds lighter than the 4520 and recorded 114 wpc with 5 channels driven and 105 wpc with 7 channels driven into 8 ohms so I don't see what all the concern is about with reduced weight - obviously these results show that weight is not always tied to output. Furthermore, the review referenced points to some very low numbers for the Onkyo 5010 which certainly isn't short on power (it's THX Ultra2 certified) and Home Theater's test of the step down 3010 shows over 110 wpc with 7 channels driven.

I think we need some perspective, assuming a worst case scenario - that the 4520 has no more power than the 3313 and produces just 70wpc instead of for example 110wpc with 7 channels driven what would that really mean - a 1.5 db difference? I think we can all agree that in real world terms that doesn't amount to much.
Edited by EVT - 1/28/13 at 8:34pm
Reply
Reply
post #2508 of 4868
1/28/13 at 5:38pm
I am by NO means a subject matter expert on this stuff, but I can't help but wonder about how all this can add up? While I envy the 4520 for it's more advanced Audyssey and 3D capabilities, I still wonder about how things can be trimmed down and not sacrifice SOMETHING along the way. Denon touts the 4520 as this years "flagship", all while trimming the fat (weight) and, when compared to my 4810ci, trimming MSRP by $500 bucks along the way? And after 2 more years of the US dollar doing it's magic??? Oh, and the 4810 was NOT the 2010 "flagship" model...

This is NOT a slam on the 4520, and I'm sure it will be great for many (maybe even me) but I can't help but be reminded of the saying "there is no free lunch!".
Reply
Reply
post #2509 of 4868
1/28/13 at 6:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKR1963 View Post

and why it is less powerfull then the AVR-3808A too! I wish they would make a higher end unit with the Toroidal power transformer..........like the AVR-5803A.
In my HT the 4520 is definitely more impressive SQ wise than the 3808 was(and I loved my 3808). Also I can listen to tv on -54 and hear it clearly on 4520. On the 3808 I had to use headphones because loud enough to hear (at least -42) would wake my daughter up. I am really sure it is the improved audyssey, but it is an excellent improvement. Also this 4520 at the same volume setting is way louder than the 3808 was. I don't think it is a fair comparison, technology improvements seem to have had a big effect on sq in this case. I don't think I am missing a toroidal power supply; denon's implementation of parts they choose is usually great, plus the last 5808 line is $5000 so not a fair comparison.
Reply
Reply
post #2510 of 4868
1/28/13 at 7:28pm
One thing I have noticed which I was concerned about but doesn't seem to be an issue is heat output. It does not seem to get as hot as my Onkyo 705 did when watching movies at relatively loud (-10) volume setting. I never notice the fans going on either, like I did on the Onkyo.
Reply
Reply
post #2511 of 4868
1/28/13 at 10:03pm
Does anyone know where to plug analog (RL channel RCA jacks) wireless headphones into this thing and get it to output from digital sources to my analog headphones?? I assume I can us the adapter and plug into the headphone jack but it's a messy look so I am trying to find another option.
Reply
Reply
post #2512 of 4868
1/29/13 at 4:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by avatar9 View Post

Does anyone know where to plug analog (RL channel RCA jacks) wireless headphones into this thing and get it to output from digital sources to my analog headphones?? I assume I can us the adapter and plug into the headphone jack but it's a messy look so I am trying to find another option.

What about connecting them to the R/L pre-output?
Reply
Reply
post #2513 of 4868
1/29/13 at 5:10am
Speaking of weight....I need to remove my Emotiva xm-3 from the shelf before I can move the furniture piece it sits in. It is that heavy!!!
Reply
Reply
post #2514 of 4868
1/29/13 at 5:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by knoxtn View Post

Speaking of weight....I need to remove my Emotiva xm-3 from the shelf before I can move the furniture piece it sits in. It is that heavy!!!

I've got an XPA-3, UPA-5, and UPA-2 in my rack, with a plasma on the top shelf, its really hard to move.
Reply
Reply
post #2515 of 4868
1/29/13 at 7:49am
Furniture sliders under the feet help...

I have to move my console out to do some rewiring and it is a pain with an AVR, two power amps, BD player, center speaker, and 55" LCD TV on it. Too much work to remove all that stuff, but it results in grunting and heaving an inch at a time.
Reply
Reply
post #2516 of 4868
1/29/13 at 10:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theresa View Post

What about connecting them to the R/L pre-output?

I thought that would result in only getting analog sources and the network through. I hope I am wrong but I had read in a search of this forum that this would result in none of my HDMI sources being sent to headphones.
Reply
Reply
post #2517 of 4868
1/29/13 at 10:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sourbeef View Post

One thing I have noticed which I was concerned about but doesn't seem to be an issue is heat output. It does not seem to get as hot as my Onkyo 705 did when watching movies at relatively loud (-10) volume setting. I never notice the fans going on either, like I did on the Onkyo.

I have frequently read that Onkyos get hot; one reviewer of the 5009 was jovial and said the heat level could proably fry an egg.
Reply
Reply
post #2518 of 4868
1/29/13 at 10:53am
I cook pork roasts on my Onkyo.tongue.gif
Reply
Reply
post #2519 of 4868
1/29/13 at 10:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by EVT View Post

Wow, what's with all the doom and gloom about power? It's one test that nobody can read that is inconsistent with U.S. publications such as Home Theater which for example tested the step down Marantz 7007 (Denon 3313 clone) and still got over 70 wpc with 7 channels driven. BTW, the 4520 has 10 lbs on the 7007/3313. Also, Home Theater tested the 4310 a couple of years ago which is a couple of pounds lighter than the 4520 and recorded 114 wpc with 5 channels driven and 105 wpc with 7 channels driven into 8 ohms so I don't see what all the concern is about with reduced weight - obviously these results show that weight is not always tied to output. Furthermore, the review referenced points to some very low numbers for the Onkyo 5010 which certainly isn't short on power (it's THX Ultra2 certified) and Home Theater's test of the step down 3010 shows over 110 wpc with 7 channels driven.

I think we need some perspective, assuming a worst case scenario - that the 4520 has no more power than the 3313 and produces just 70wpc instead of for example 110wpc with 7 channels driven what would that really mean - a 1.5 db difference? I think we can all agree that in real world terms that doesn't amount to much.

While the 1.5db volume difference means little in the scheme of things, where the 70wpc vs 110wpc debate will be huge will depend on how efficient (or inefficient) your speakers are.

That said, I do miss the days when the wpc figure was taken seriously by manufacturers. I remember the beefy 5803 tested out at 167wpc x 7 at 4 ohms, where it was rated at 170. Denon certainly put its money where its mouth is, even if the results were 2% off. The 4520 is supposedly rated at 150wpc x 9 channels. I will be very curious to read results of the actual output.
Reply
Reply
post #2520 of 4868
1/29/13 at 11:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by avatar9 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theresa View Post

What about connecting them to the R/L pre-output?

I thought that would result in only getting analog sources and the network through. I hope I am wrong but I had read in a search of this forum that this would result in none of my HDMI sources being sent to headphones.

That would annoy anyone using an external amp... I assume the adapter has a high-impedance input? If so using the R/L pre outputs should be fine. If it loads the outputs, the preamp outputs are not designed to drive headphones directly. Another issue is that using the preamp outputs probably does not disable the amplifiers so you will have to turn off the speakers, which might disable the preamp outputs (I donot know, depends on the switching in the AVR). It would probably be simplest to just use the adapter; you can get one that is just a small plastic or metal body with two RCAs on one side and a 1/4" TRS plug on the other.
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-4520CI thread