Marantz AV8801 Preamp/Processor Official Owner's thread - Page 50

It would be great if someone really close to how D&M does things could say if -

1) AL32 is intact in the Marantz 8801 but is not advertised to preserve brand differentiation or
2) it's there but turned off in FW code

I have a really hard time believing that the company builds 2 separate circuit designs & digital processing boards. that would make no sense for economies of scale in production costs. It makes a whole more sense that the company "comments out" the code that implements AL32 in the processor

it's too bad if AL32 really isn't there. because that would make the Marantz a clear winner. I'm still skeptical that the analog enhancements can compensate for lack of upsampling, I can't even find any reference of any kind anywhere on Marantz products about upsampling. Surely in this day, Marantz wouldn't deliberately leave it out which IMO puts them at a disadvantage to nearly all their competitors. Pioneer has had it for years, as has Denon. Why Marantz wouldn't strikes me as very short-sighted technologically. Having it PLUS the analog enhancements, PLUS the shielding would make it a clear winner. as it is, it's not clear at all, all the subjective opinions not withstanding. Sorry, but the objectivist in me wants to know what technology is used in the boxes & make them tick no different than how I look at gear from Pioneer or Denon.

subjective remarks about how it sounds are fine but more details of what's really in the 2 products & how they differ would also be very helpful IMO.

not just rely on subjective reviews about the sound somehow being "better". are there more people here who can comment on the hardware & implementation differences? Before I would consider trying one of these, this is the kind of information I would like to see. because I know a fair amount about what's in the Pioneers

We know the Audyssey vs Pioneer MCACC issues. What about AL32 vs no-AL32?

Sure sounds like Super Steve is being tempted by the Dark Side!!!

^^
it happens every year about this time

and no, I'm not - I just like staying on top of what's available. never hurts to know what's out there & how it compares. part of me, the part that says "spend the money", wouldn't mind having both just to see once & for all, what a full blown Audyssey M32XT Pro cal can do & switch between them depending on what features I wanted to use at that time. but as tempting as that is, the sane part says I don't need another receiver-processor in my collection, it's complicated enough as it is with 2

let's just say this product sounded interesting when it was announced, and I'd like to know more what's in it and how it compares with the 4520. I did the same thing with the AVP & came to the conclusion that it & upgrade & ext amp was way too much $$ to make the change worthwhile vs adding the new Pio to my collection of boxes

I'd love for an in-home trial. Only thing holding me back is how new my 80.3 is lol. And there really isn't anything I "dislike" about the Integra. Smoother and fuller are certainly sound characteristics I'd like more of. I agree, a blind comparison switching back and forth with no delay would be awesome. I'm thinking I should just wait until there is something worth upgrading for me like a new surround format.

Also, question on the Audyssey. The 80.3 has 2 curves to pick from after calibration, (Movie and Music). Does the Marantz have curves like this to choose from?

Did you try a BD movie yet? That's what I'm curious about. Also, you should spend a little more time dialing it in. The proper implementation of XT32 will be key.
Edited by adidino - 1/4/13 at 11:33pm

I agree the Denon AVP is still top of the food chain at D&M. The new AV8801 seems to be all that they are now offering in the top line. They removed Separtes from the Denon US site. Going from a $8,000 12 channel 9.3 AVP to a $3,500 11.2 AV.

The AV8801 price must be due to savings from eliminating s-video and THX certification. They've added a few network features and 32 bit DAC's. So we only gain! The losses mentioned are a good thing!

Yet both have Audysey32, XLR Direct for SACD, balanced all channels etc...

What I am asking, so I don't mistakenly sell the best product, is there any loss in buying the AV8801 vs selling the AVP-A1HDCI and then gaining via AV8801 the 11.2 capabilities and newer technologies for less $$$.

I want one AV or AVP for blu ray, DVD-A, SACD, use Audyssey32 for all except 2ch SACD. Have UD9004 with better video DAC's.
Edited by dahlgren - 1/4/13 at 5:37pm

New to separates and just bought 8801 with the 8077 amp. I want ability to expand to 9.2 using front height left and right. How is this typically done when pre/pro can output but amp input limits to 7? Do I just need to buy a second two or three channel amp and just run appropriate XLR to that added amp? Finally what are problems if any of having 2nd amp from different manufacturer with different specs say a Parasound A31 to drive front LCR?

Yes you need an extra 2ch amp. Ideally, the gain would be the same as the 8077 Marantz and I see the gain of the Parasound is adjustable so that will work.

I have been following this thread and keep hearing words like buttery smooth and detailed and the first thing that comes to my mind is mcintosh, seeing that d&m sold mcintosh I'm wondering if they used some of that technology from the Mac stuff and incorporated it into the 8801?

I came from an anthem d2 and moved to a Mac mx135 pre and love the smooth detailed sound. I'm thinking of grabbing an 8801 to do a little comparison.

Here's a pic of the back of the mcintosh mx 121

http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/Assets/Pages/ZoomImage.aspx?img=/Assets/Images/Products/MX121/XL_MX121_5.jpg

And the marantz 8801

http://us.marantz.com/us/Products/Pages/ZoomImage.aspx?img=/Assets/images/products/AV8801/XL_av8801_u_b_re.jpg

Maybe someone can put those pics side by side?

Anyone have any inside pics of the the two?
Edited by ultra 150 pilot - 1/4/13 at 6:39pm

Discodol,

Did you get your 8801 from Steve at Sound video? He mentioned someone in Florida had a 7005 (like me) and had buzz issues, but now with a 8801 the buzz is gone.

Here you go. Top image is the Marantz, bottom Mcintosh MX121

The 8801 is not fully balanced like the AVP. If you want more than 9.3 channels or you feel the 32bits vs 24bits signal path makes a change or you really need video parts at 4k keep the AVP. The 8801 sounds like a nice unit and i hope it will sell well but its made for a different market and state of the market right now.

Daniel.

You should hear one before making such comments on it being designed for the state of the market ! or just say be a good little Marantz 8801 and let the big boys play(LOL) its the current sota regardless of price, maybe not for long but for now it is and from what I'm hearing its indeed something special;)

It's like a Rolls Royce vs a BMW 750. Both use BMW technology and a new 750 will outperform the Phantom on some things, but the Rolls will be a classic while almost every 750 sold will be scrapped within 12 years or so.

Some 750 owners may beg to differ and the Denon isn't a Rolls by a long shot! I'm sure that can be reserved for the ultra high end. It all comes down to sound and in my 5.1 setup I see no need for 11.2 channels because of the 8801's ability to drop you in the middle of the sound field a pan by you, at you and around you like nobodies business the only thing I can compare it to is an Imax vs regular theater experennce (no joke) I primarily bought the 8801 for audio and its been more rewarding than expected I planed on far less performance than whats being delivered and can at this point say the Oppo 105 I purchased along with it is getting a run for its money as they both are still burning in at around 300hrs. I love Denon's products but the 8801 demands an audition its a game changer and no this isn't subjective talk my research was done and lead me to the purchases I made as I had some nice choices!

Nice work Tony! Thanks.

These units are very close to being the same size, with the Mac being a few inches deeper(maybe due to the knobs). And they both weigh in at about 30 pounds.

Not sure how the actual inside parts compare, and it does appear that the marantz offers more advanced features. There's no denying that over the past few years d&m m has used similar designs in some of the product line, only they know how much:)
Edited by ultra 150 pilot - 1/5/13 at 6:10am

Robert at Value Electronics.

let me ask, have you directly compared the 8801 with the 4520? in same room with same speakers, by chance?
was Joerod able to do that? I know he had both but what I don't remember from reading his reviews weeks ago is whether he had them both at the same time.

+1

watching the avengers the other night i was thinking there was a limit to the sound aka the dynamics of the sound track , so i went into the menu. i realized that audessey dynamic volume was on ( it adjusts the dynamic rang difference between loud an soft sounds).i switched it off . and what a difference, i also switched off audessey lfe. i can honestly say this pre pro has all the slam anyone could ever need it will have you grinning from ear to ear.

The 8801 is certainly a nice unit, but a "game changer"? What do you find to be unique in the 8801?

I got it from Richard Julian at Sound Advice in Ft Lauderdale on an upgrade trade from an Integra 80.3.

So if anyone is looking for an 80.3 I am sure Richard would make you a great deal!

The 8801 is being installed on Tuesday so I will let you all know how I think they compare.

+100
game changer = hyperbole & misleading

the only truly recent "game changing" room processing I ever honestly can say I heard in the same room with it on vs. off was a $15K Trinnov processor.

other than that, "subtle but noticeable difference" strikes me as more realistic description for 99.99% listeners

I hope this thread doesn't devolve too much because it's been interesting & I hope realistic posting so far. (note - I'm trying hard not to use the fan**y word)
Edited by ss9001 - 1/5/13 at 7:22am

I didn't make any claims about how they sound or what people prefer just about the parts being used. For example you make claims about steering of sound in surround. I just point out they (AVP/4520/8801) are running the same 3 chips mostly from the same board and my guess the same software made by the same people. If there is magic it aint in the digital parts.

Here is the layout of the chips for you :



Daniel.
Edited by danielo - 1/5/13 at 6:47am

^
that's the kind of objectivity this thread should have in having honest, objective comparisons between product A vs product B. and lacking so far. maybe when service manuals become available some of you can delve into the block diagrams, schematics and really learn what differences there are between the 4520 & 8801

some of us did it in the Pioneer Ice AVR threads, and we could speak with a degree of clarity as to hardware differences between some of the models. now, it's hard to do that, because 5 months after the SC-68/67 models were released, Pioneer still doesn't have service manuals for sale I'm at a loss on that one. For example, the SC-68 is very close to the same as the SC-57 hardware-wise but a few new features like the USB-DAC are an unknown. there are some questions in our SC-68 thread that I can't completely address because I don't have the schematics & block diagrams to support my answers.

IF some of you want to take this thread to the next level, one or 2 of you get the service manuals for the 2 products & then you'll know for sure.

or you can be 100% pied pipers
Edited by ss9001 - 1/5/13 at 7:07am

I was asking for a direct comparison of the AVP-A1HDCI and the AV-8801. Lets see how far this new product reaches. Can a $3,500 AV compete with the Denon AVP and McIntosh products? Maybe Marantz by cutting costs delivered a reference AVP at a bargain instead of charging a $8k - $12k. Maybe they could have charged what McIntosh does. Can we find out please how good this piece really is?

I'm talking sound quality, period.
The features speak for themselves.

^^
"Can we find out please how good this piece really is...I'm talking sound quality, period.?"

agreed

I have Paradigm Signature S8 speakers for my front L/R speakers. Audyssey configured them as Large speakers even though I have a sub (Paradigm Servo 15). I noticed other folks manually changed their config to set their front L/R speakers to small. I always thought that it was best to set almost all front L/R speakers as small if one has a sub. This is the first processor that I have with Audyssey correction (I had an Anthem D2 previously). Questions:

1. Why would one want to override audyssey's calculations that the front L/R should be large instead of small?
If there are good reasons they should be manually changed to small, then is this a miscalculation by Audyssey?

2. If the speakers are manually changed from large to small, would making the manual change invalidate the calculations that Audyssey made and therefore the Audyssey calculation/analysis have to be rerun? And if they are rerun, would Audyssey change the speakers back to Large?

Thanks.

Steve Herrala with Sound Video dot com. I have bought many pieces over the years and he is a true professional. I just bought a AV8801.
Edited by planetbrian777 - 1/6/13 at 10:21am

1.  As has been stated/posted many times, the decision to set a speaker as LARGE is not made by Audyssey but by the manufacturer of the AVR or prepro.  Audyssey's philosophy has been consistent in preferring bass management for all channels.  Many of us agree.

2a.  No invalidation.  If there is proper EQ down to, say, 20Hz or full range, setting and using 40Hz would also be properly EQ-ed.

2b.  On any re-run, the Audyssey setup ignores previous settings and the outcome should always be the same.  In the case you describe, it would always set the speakers back to LARGE.