or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Marantz AV8801 Preamp/Processor Official Owner's thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Marantz AV8801 Preamp/Processor Official Owner's thread - Page 22

post #631 of 11327
Thread Starter 
Interesting. On my AV7005 I always had Dynamic Volume on (not that I need it for any particular reason), and I just turned it off. So, does it really sounds better or is it placebo? smile.gif In general, do you guys recommend this on or off?
Edited by exm - 12/2/12 at 9:24am
post #632 of 11327
OFF, unless you need it for late night listening and don't want to disturb others. Note however, that on the flipside it will also boost low dialogue as well.
post #633 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post

OFF, unless you need it for late night listening and don't want to disturb others. Note however, that on the flipside it will also boost low dialogue as well.
interesting. I have been confused on whether Dynamic Volume would enhance, or boost, low dialog or not? I've have Dynamic Volume = OFF on my Denon AVR-2112CI. I think I will switch to ON now.
post #634 of 11327
Right ... the whole point is to adjust the volume to your desired level ... lowering the explosions and boosting the weak dialogue to meet that level depending on whether set to (light, medium, heavy).
post #635 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post


With Denon (XX11 and newer) and Marantz AVRs and pre/pros (X005 and newer) with Audyssey of any flavor, at the end of the AUTO SETUP procedure, give you the option of turning Dyn Volume OFF, otherwise it will default to ON (medium) as noted below.

The 8801 does not.  It turns on Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume by default and one has to return to the setup menu to defeat and/or modify them.  Of course, I had to do that anyway since, as usual, the prepro set all my speakers to LARGE.

post #636 of 11327
Really? I took that snippet directly from the Owner's manual. You sure about that Kal? Sciacca implied he saw that GUI page.
post #637 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucka View Post

I would also like to see a review of the Marantz AV8801 as compared to the Denon AVR-4520 and if is worth the difference in cost...
Chucka

So far I am failing to see what advantage the Marantz has over the Denon 4520, if any.

As I see it the the Denon has everthing the Marantz does plus the following:

Robust 9 channel amplifier
Denon Link HD
$500 less


The only thing I can find is copper shielding rolleyes.gif

I'd rather have the "free" amp and Denon link. The Marantaz does not seem to have any way to deal with the pronounced jitter found in HDMI singals.

What am I missing?

-Brian
post #638 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post

Really? I took that snippet directly from the Owner's manual. You sure about that Kal? Sciacca implied he saw that GUI page.

I see that in the manual but I do not recall being offered that option when I did the Audyssey calibration.  I do recall that both DEQ and Dvol were activated and I did go into the Audyssey menu to defeat both.  I will probably get to doing another EQ in the future and pay more attention to this particular frame.

post #639 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bghead8che View Post

So far I am failing to see what advantage the Marantz has over the Denon 4520, if any.
As I see it the the Denon has everthing the Marantz does plus the following:
Robust 9 channel amplifier
Denon Link HD
$500 less
The only thing I can find is copper shielding rolleyes.gif
I'd rather have the "free" amp and Denon link. The Marantaz does not seem to have any way to deal with the pronounced jitter found in HDMI singals.
What am I missing?
-Brian

You are paying for Marantz name
post #640 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

The 8801 does not.  It turns on Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume by default and one has to return to the setup menu to defeat and/or modify them.  Of course, I had to do that anyway since, as usual, the prepro set all my speakers to LARGE.

I know you have three 800Diamond in the front what amplification do you use? Also how far apart are the L/R channels, finally since you have tried both how does the 8801 compares to the SSP-800.

I would love Classe to have DTS NeoX but more importantly Audyssey MultiEQ32X
Edited by wse - 12/2/12 at 5:12pm
post #641 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

I see that in the manual but I do not recall being offered that option when I did the Audyssey calibration.  I do recall that both DEQ and Dvol were activated and I did go into the Audyssey menu to defeat both.  I will probably get to doing another EQ in the future and pay more attention to this particular frame.

Great. Thanks. Otherwise, if the next new owner can check as well?. smile.gif
post #642 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bghead8che View Post

So far I am failing to see what advantage the Marantz has over the Denon 4520, if any.
As I see it the the Denon has everthing the Marantz does plus the following:
Robust 9 channel amplifier
Denon Link HD
$500 less
The only thing I can find is copper shielding rolleyes.gif
I'd rather have the "free" amp and Denon link. The Marantaz does not seem to have any way to deal with the pronounced jitter found in HDMI singals.
What am I missing?
-Brian

XLR outputs.

This is the same when comparing an Integra DHC-80.3 to an Onkyo TX-NR5009.
post #643 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manchild View Post


XLR outputs.
This is the same when comparing an Integra DHC-80.3 to an Onkyo TX-NR5009.

Another issue is weight.  I hefted the TX-NR5010 and my DHC-80.2 yesterday.  I am much happier manipulating the latter to install it onto an upper shelf of the rack and having the power amps hidden away as well as closer to their particular speakers.

post #644 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Another issue is weight.  I hefted the TX-NR5010 and my DHC-80.2 yesterday.  I am much happier manipulating the latter to install it onto an upper shelf of the rack and having the power amps hidden away as well as closer to their particular speakers.

Agreed.
post #645 of 11327
I'm curious how long it takes for the Marantz to switch input resolution. For example, I have a TiVo and would like to configure it to output the native format of the program being watched. However, channel surfing is a pain if you're switching to channels that have different output resolutions. My old Anthem D2 takes some time to process changes to input resolutions so I wound up configuring my TiVo to output a fixed resolution. Obviously, I would prefer to have the preamp processor do the upconversion but only if it can respond to resolution changes quickly.
post #646 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manchild View Post

XLR outputs.
This is the same when comparing an Integra DHC-80.3 to an Onkyo TX-NR5009.

OK. And what else....?
post #647 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bghead8che View Post

So far I am failing to see what advantage the Marantz has over the Denon 4520, if any.
As I see it the the Denon has everthing the Marantz does plus the following:
Robust 9 channel amplifier
Denon Link HD
$500 less
The only thing I can find is copper shielding rolleyes.gif
I'd rather have the "free" amp and Denon link. The Marantaz does not seem to have any way to deal with the pronounced jitter found in HDMI singals.
What am I missing?
-Brian

The 4520 uses op amps where the 8801 uses HDAM circuits.

Here's a read on the HDAM circuits http://www.dutchaudioclassics.nl/?strBrand=Various&strType=Highfidelity&strPage=Info

In theory, the 8801 should sound better. We'll have to see if it actually does.
post #648 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bghead8che View Post

The only thing I can find is copper shielding
does'nt the AV7701 feature copper shielding as well? And also torriodial power-supply (not the EI type found in AV7005)?
post #649 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bghead8che View Post

So far I am failing to see what advantage the Marantz has over the Denon 4520, if any.
As I see it the the Denon has everthing the Marantz does plus the following:
Robust 9 channel amplifier
Denon Link HD
$500 less
The only thing I can find is copper shielding rolleyes.gif
I'd rather have the "free" amp and Denon link. The Marantaz does not seem to have any way to deal with the pronounced jitter found in HDMI singals.
What am I missing?
-Brian

One's a receiver and one's a pre/amp processor, not that hard to understand:)
post #650 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiofan1 View Post

One's a receiver and one's a pre/amp processor, not that hard to understand:)

But that is moot as the Denon has pre-outs so it is the equivalent of both a pre-pro and a receiver.
post #651 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bghead8che View Post

So far I am failing to see what advantage the Marantz has over the Denon 4520, if any.
As I see it the the Denon has everthing the Marantz does plus the following:
Robust 9 channel amplifier
Denon Link HD
$500 less
The only thing I can find is copper shielding rolleyes.gif
I'd rather have the "free" amp and Denon link. The Marantaz does not seem to have any way to deal with the pronounced jitter found in HDMI singals.
What am I missing?
-Brian

This was covered a page or 2 earlier. There are quite a few reasons including the DAC's. bigger power supply, HDAM, XLR's, etc. The Denon is the downscaled 8801.
post #652 of 11327
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr_Mark View Post

This was covered a page or 2 earlier. There are quite a few reasons including the DAC's. bigger power supply, HDAM, XLR's, etc. The Denon is the downscaled 8801.

Exactly. The Marantz is build using better internal components and has the benefit of not having to share amplification with its power supply. If all of that results in better SQ is unclear yet.
post #653 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by exm View Post

Exactly. The Marantz is build using better internal components and has the benefit of not having to share amplification with its power supply. If all of that results in better SQ is unclear yet.

For a lot of people "good enough" is just that. If you would probably not hear the differance or care to pay for the upgrades, no reason to waste your money.
post #654 of 11327
In general, the reasons for getting a pre/pro instead of a receiver have little or nothing to do with the quality of the sound. Unless something's broken, noise and distortion are far below audibility at this level of home audio equipment. There are plenty of other reasons, though, not least of which are the emotional ones. Each potential customer has to decide if they justify the expense. For some people they do, for others they do not.
post #655 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post

In general, the reasons for getting a pre/pro instead of a receiver have little or nothing to do with the quality of the sound. Unless something's broken, noise and distortion are far below audibility at this level of home audio equipment. There are plenty of other reasons, though, not least of which are the emotional ones. Each potential customer has to decide if they justify the expense. For some people they do, for others they do not.

SB,

I agree 100% with your thoughts smile.gif. I used to think that a dedicated prepro was the better choice over using an AVR as a prepro. But after owning several prepros then going to the 4311 I notice no loss in SQ. I'm sitting here listening to JT's Hourglass MCH SACD and it sounds excellent (all subjective thoughts of course) smile.gif.

Bill
post #656 of 11327
Yes, I too have an emotional attachment to having separates but given the performance and price of the 4311 I am ignoring that emotional attachment. I won't be using any of its amps until I live someplace conducive to 7.1.
post #657 of 11327
You seem to be saying that even though a receiver may have a full set of pre-outs and has the same sound quality as a pre-pro you prefer a pre-pro. That's o.k., given a choice between a pre-pro and a receiver of the same price and quality I would choose the pre-pro too. But if I must pay a $1,000 more for a pre-pro with the same sound quality as a receiver I must choose the latter. I just ignore the presence of internal amplification.
post #658 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCoastD View Post

Personally I believe a dedicated pre-pro is the better choice ultimately. Although many current-generation AVR's (such as the Denon AVR-4311CI) yield pretty much equal enjoyment in regards to sound-quality and cool features (ie. streaming content, Audyssey Multi EQ XT32, etc.,...), are practical and save space.
However I prefer dedicated separate amplification, as opposed to an integrated pre-amp/processor/amp package. Separate, or dedicated, amplification provides a more "modular" configuration- the user has the ability to upgrade the pre-pro as necessary, while not having to physically change amplification. One could even swap their pre-pro out for a current-generation AVR, such as the Denon AVR-4311CI (which has pre-out's), and still use the same amplification (since many of the latest "cool" features are found in the latest AVR's). Also I can experiment with just about any type of speakers.
In my experiences, employing a high-quality separate amp yield's better performance. Currently I'm using a Denon AVR-2112CI receiver (90wpc) in my living room system (including Energy RC-Series speakers), very impressive performance from this unit considering it's amp specifications. However my theater room features an AV7005/Parasound A51 amplifier (250wpc) configuration, including Monitor Audio GS-Series speakers. Playing the same BluRay source ("Mr. Brooks"- Kevin Costner) on both systems, the dynamics were noticeably better from the dedicated configuration. Both systems employ Audyssey Multi EQ XT. Music listening experience is noticeably nicer as well (I listen to SACD's and DVD-A's, FLAC, etc.,...). Obviously I'm comparing different amp spec's and speakers, etc.,.....but still.

And different rooms. Kind of hard to draw any kind of conclusion given all of the variables involved.
post #659 of 11327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theresa View Post

But that is moot as the Denon has pre-outs so it is the equivalent of both a pre-pro and a receiver.

Not moot at all! it has amps on board disabled or not, additional circuitry is additional circuitry . Why yes of course it can preform the task of driving an outboard amp and the question for many is how well? is it the same? A great debate for sure but the 8801 and other preamp/processors like it are not marketed at the receiver (all in one crowd) but at those who consider it an upgrade over the all in one solution. I would imagine the the additional money is hopefully spent on more attention to detail and better part selection and overall construction but that is debatable as well in regards to sonic merits (YMMV) . Those of you wanting this to be a Denon with out amps is an apples to oranges comparison, no matter how similar they may seem. This is a Marantz 8801 smile.gif
post #660 of 11327
Looks like a Denon 4520 with upgraded parts minus the amps. I do like the copper plating, always did like in Pioneer Elites. Not being in Marantz world, what benefit is HDAM?

This looks like a perfect fit for an excellent quality separates solution < the $7500 AVP! Looks like D&M finally got the latest version of Audyssey in there. It was about time wink.gif

I'm still married to Pioneer but I downloaded the manual & all support info...never hurts to keep up with what's out there.
Edited by ss9001 - 12/3/12 at 12:38pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Marantz AV8801 Preamp/Processor Official Owner's thread