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 216

post #6451 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdlynch View Post

Kal- is there any pre/pro that you would rate between the 8801 and the Bryston SP3? The step-up in price between these two is significant.
I am seriously interested in this also. The SP3 does not do heights (which is helpful in my room for movies) and I don't believe it does DSD. Thus, the 8801 seems like the prepro of choice unless I go HT bypass prepro for 2 channel.
post #6452 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post

Please ..... all Sub EQ HT does is level match and set the delay for 2 subs (so it doesn't even come into play when only using 1 sub), a feature set that doesn't even come close to what XT32 offers, not to mention if the subs are able to be placed equidistant from the MLP and with the use of a SPL meter, not much more (if anything) is gained using Sub EQ HT.

Wabo has 2 subs. So he wants sub eq. I agree with Wabo you pay the money you want it all. Why its bothering you it's beyond me.
Spl meter hey...
post #6453 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post

Please ..... all Sub EQ HT does is level match and set the delay for 2 subs (so it doesn't even come into play when only using 1 sub), a feature set that doesn't even come close to what XT32 offers, not to mention if the subs are able to be placed equidistant from the MLP and with the use of a SPL meter, not much more (if anything) is gained using Sub EQ HT.

Why the need to belittle Sub EQ HT?

From Chris -
Quote:
SPL meters are not really suitable for subwoofer level calibration. MultEQ
uses a different method to find the level. I would suggest changing it by the
same amount that you change the other speakers that are out of range for the AVR.

Since the exclusion of Sub EQ HT in a $1k upgrade seems to be no biggie to you, wanna buy an AVP? Send funds to my Paypal. I'll ship it out in the morning.
post #6454 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post

Why the need to belittle Sub EQ HT?

From Chris -
Since the exclusion of Sub EQ HT in a $1k upgrade seems to be no biggie to you, wanna buy an AVP? Send funds to my Paypal. I'll ship it out in the morning.

biggrin.gif
post #6455 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post

From Chris -
Since the exclusion of Sub EQ HT in a $1k upgrade seems to be no biggie to you, wanna buy an AVP? Send funds to my Paypal. I'll ship it out in the morning.

Wabo Chris told me the same thing do not use a SPL meter to calibrate subs. So why mr audyssey over here is recommending it who knows??
post #6456 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

Wabo has 2 subs. So he wants sub eq. I agree with Wabo you pay the money you want it all. Why its bothering you it's beyond me.
Spl meter hey...

Silly us for thinking a $1,000 upgrade will include it all. At least we got 3D passthrough.rolleyes.gifbiggrin.gif
post #6457 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post

At least we got 3D passthrough.rolleyes.gifbiggrin.gif

It will be good if you used it too lol
post #6458 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

Wabo Chris told me the same thing do not use a SPL meter to calibrate subs. So why mr audyssey over here is recommending it who knows??

Your guess is as good as mine, Franin. He seems to be anti Sub EQ HT and pro SPL meter.biggrin.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

It will be good if you used it too lol

Well worth the price.
post #6459 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post

Your guess is as good as mine, Franin. He seems to be anti Sub EQ HT and pro SPL meter.biggrin.gif

My HAA calibrator told me the same thing. Don't use it for subs. He used more advance equipment, which was more accurate equipment than a SPL. Mind you Wabo it was done awhile ago and I was told to go separate eq which became way too expensive. Audyssey would have to suffice.
Edited by Franin - 6/24/13 at 10:19pm
post #6460 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post

Why the need to belittle Sub EQ HT?

From Chris -
Since the exclusion of Sub EQ HT in a $1k upgrade seems to be no biggie to you, wanna buy an AVP? Send funds to my Paypal. I'll ship it out in the morning.

+1 to the biggrin.gif
good comeback
post #6461 of 11289
No need to bust jd's chops, all he did was give his opinion. If anyone ever needs help with something he's always right there for them. I know because I asked for it. Him and a handful of the regulars on this thread go out of their way to help us novices informed. Just sayin smile.gif
Edited by comfynumb - 6/25/13 at 4:02pm
post #6462 of 11289
Just got my dedicated mic boom for Audyssey and looking forward to running it this weekend. The first time I ran it my fronts were biamped and Audyssey crossed them at 250Hz and told me they were out of phase. I'm over the biamping thing and my setup sounds much better the single amp way. Is everyone running Audyssey with all the mic positions? I've heard some say they only run it with the 3 positions on the seating area.
post #6463 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdlynch View Post

Kal- is there any pre/pro that you would rate between the 8801 and the Bryston SP3? The step-up in price between these two is significant.

Not for me.  There might be options for those with different emphases than I have.

post #6464 of 11289
^^^^

look here for higher end processors: I suggested they add the 8801 to the list but I think it is priced too low wink.gif

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1459947/best-surround-processor-currently-available
post #6465 of 11289
I'm sure they are all good processors but the prices are insane. I don't even think one of those does 11.2 let alone half the features of the 8801. Here's what I did for $6,600 bought the 8801, got a close out deal on the Revel F52's (the new Performa3's were coming out) and a JBL PC600 center. That's approx 3 grand less than one of those ultra high end pieces alone.
Edited by comfynumb - 6/25/13 at 3:02pm
post #6466 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post

The LFE signal ranges from roughly 20Hz - 120Hz, and with the LPF for LFE defaulting to 120Hz on the 8801, this allows all of the LFE to pass to the sub. Reducing this setting to 100Hz or 80Hz would simply limit the LFE signal passing to the sub to that level (ie. max 100Hz, 80Hz, etc.) also realizing there is a roll off and not a brick wall being applied.

i.guess the only question left is why would one change the setting?

Bill
post #6467 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by jam88 View Post

Please be a little more careful when quoting someone so that folks can more easily follow the conversation and who says what.

Don't shoot the messenger, I was merely trying to offer a plausible explanation to audiofan1's question and a possible usage scenario. For the record, I would personally not use my main speakers in this manner. However, you have to keep in mind that as avman09 and jdsmoothie indicate, this feature has been in many of Denon and Marant's AVRs for a few years, most of those AVRs being much less capable and expensive than the 8801 and it therefore follows that folks using those lower-end AVRs will have speakers that are typically much less capable.

Then again, there is at least one manufacturer, Lyngdorf Audio of Denmark, that designs and sells their own patented and very well regarded digital room correction technology (RoomPerfect) that runs inside their digital stereo amplifiers with 2.2 speaker configurations and also on Steinway Lyngdorf gear (a joint venture with the piano maker) and where Lyngdorf recommends a 300 Hz crossover for the mains with what they call the BassDirect technology or Boundary Woofers as they refer to them on the Steinway Lyngdorf website. The speakers made by both brands are more than capable and anything but low-priced, all the way to obscenely expensive.

I agree with you that it's a matter of preference though.

My darn IE won't multiquote anymore for some reason so I have been having trouble when quoting more than one person at a time. Otherwise I am pretty diligent about doing it the right way.


Also, this spl meter thing is a crock. I have an good ole RS spl meter and always use it to level match my subs. It is pretty close to spot on. I honestly don't believe a word Chris from Audyssey says, he is more often than not incorrect in a lot of his claims.

If you want me to run sweeps to prove that an RS meter is accurate I would be more than happy to. With either of my two professionally calibrated mics. I hate misinformation...
post #6468 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by baranowski View Post

i.guess the only question left is why would one change the setting?

Bill

Some think it takes a little of the overbearingness out of the midbass if you knock it down to say 100 or 90hz. It makes the LFE track just not quite as boomy
post #6469 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

My darn IE won't multiquote anymore for some reason so I have been having trouble when quoting more than one person at a time. Otherwise I am pretty diligent about doing it the right way.


Also, this spl meter thing is a crock. I have an good ole RS spl meter and always use it to level match my subs. It is pretty close to spot on. I honestly don't believe a word Chris from Audyssey says, he is more often than not incorrect in a lot of his claims.

If you want me to run sweeps to prove that an RS meter is accurate I would be more than happy to. With either of my two professionally calibrated mics. I hate misinformation...



If you have IE 10 maybe AVS isn't updated for it, idk I'm always on with my istuff not my laptop. But I do know other sites are not fully functional with IE 10, I was having a problem on a different site. Just a thought smile.gif
post #6470 of 11289
My understanding is that the Radio Shack microphone is quite good at lower frequencies (it's often used with REW), but the built-in sound level meter circuitry is what has the low-frequency problems.

FWIW, I'm using Firefox, which has no problems doing multi-quotes, although I didn't bother this time.
post #6471 of 11289
Thanks guys, my personal laptop is doing fine with it, it is my work PC that is having the issues and I can't access didly squat to fix it. Just have to live with it for now.
post #6472 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by baranowski View Post

i.guess the only question left is why would one change the setting?

Bill

Exactly. For most, leaving it at the default of 120Hz works just fine.
post #6473 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

Just got my dedicated mic boom for Audyssey and looking forward to running it this weekend. The first time I ran it my fronts were biamped and Audyssey crossed them at 250Hz and told me they were out of phase. I'm over the biamping thing and my setup sounds much better the single amp way. Is everyone running Audyssey with all the mic positions? I've heard some say they only run it with the 3 positions on the seating area.

Audyssey generally works best with more data points which is why it's suggested to use the full 8 mic positions. Note that to benefit the main listening position (mic #1), the 7 additional mic positions should all be within a 2'-3' radius of the #1 mic position as noted on the Audyssey pic below.

post #6474 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post

Audyssey generally works best with more data points which is why it's suggested to use the full 8 mic positions. Note that to benefit the main listening position (mic #1), the 7 additional mic positions should all be within a 2'-3' radius of the #1 mic position as noted on the Audyssey pic below.



The first time I ran it I didn't have the correct mic stand. It should be easier this time as long as all the mic positions are in the Marantz book. I was intimidated but I feel confident now that I know what to expect and realizing Audyssey has a positive effect on sound quality. Thanks jd smile.gif
post #6475 of 11289
Keep in mind .... there are no "exact" mic positions you must follow (although the pic I listed above is a good guideline from the Audyssey website) ... rather simply select your main listening position (#1) at ear height level and place the remaining 7 positions within a 2'-3' radius around it at roughly ear height level. Review the Audyssey 101/FAQ Guide linked in my sig for more information to include what to do with high back chairs/sofas as well as if the sofa is against the back wall.
post #6476 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post

Keep in mind .... there are no "exact" mic positions you must follow (although the pic I listed above is a good guideline from the Audyssey website) ... rather simply select your main listening position (#1) at ear height level and place the remaining 7 positions within a 2'-3' radius around it at roughly ear height level. Review the Audyssey 101/FAQ Guide linked in my sig for more information to include what to do with high back chairs/sofas as well as if the sofa is against the back wall.



Great, I'm going to check out the F&Q and thanks again.
post #6477 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by jam88 View Post

It depends on who you believe. Perhaps a slight improvement in transient response but if the two sampling rates have a 24-bit word length then they'll share the same dynamic range and noise floor, which is increased over conventional CD.

However, at least two studies cast doubt the supposed superiority of higher resolution audio.

One is titled: "Audibility of a CD-Standard A/D/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback" conducted by two members from the Boston Audio Society.

Another, titled: "Perceptual Discrimination between Musical Sounds with and without Very High Frequency Components" was done in Japan by NHK Laboratories.



Very interesting studies. The first test did conclude that most SACD/DVD-A sounded better than most red book
CD's. The second study concludes that you cannot hear any difference between high res and a red book CD. Of course the listeners were listening to the stereo layer of the high res recording or it would have been a dead giveaway. I still consider my SACD's and DVD-A's some of my best sounding media. But I do have "some" red book CD's that are in the same league. It all comes down to the recording and all the important mastering, that's why some of the music from 40 plus years ago can still sound so good today.
post #6478 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

Look again and I think you will see that it is +18 not -18, so -78.5 to 18. In this case 0 on the master volume control will be for all practical purposes be called reference level. This is assuming you have calibrated the system.

You sir are a genius!!!!

It indeed goes to 18 (or +18)

Running this way now. From what I can my typical listening volume is -10 (which was 70 on the scale of 0-99)

So this must translate into roughly 70 being 70db and 80 would have been close to reference. When I crank the tunes there is no way in hell I can go to 0, never mind +3, I think my ears may bleed. That and the foundation would crack from the bass smile.gif
post #6479 of 11289
^^
As noted by the Volume Limit setting (p. 123 OM), after running Audyssey, "reference" volume (min 85db with speaker peaks to 105db) on the "absolute" scale is 80 while on the "relative" scale is 0db.

post #6480 of 11289
Quote:
Originally Posted by cofn42 View Post

You sir are a genius!!!!

It indeed goes to 18 (or +18)

Running this way now. From what I can my typical listening volume is -10 (which was 70 on the scale of 0-99)

So this must translate into roughly 70 being 70db and 80 would have been close to reference. When I crank the tunes there is no way in hell I can go to 0, never mind +3, I think my ears may bleed. That and the foundation would crack from the bass smile.gif

-10 is still puttin' the coal to it for most folks. I get to -0 on music sometimes, but never movies.

Screw all this foundation talk, try cracking tile in the bathroom two floors up biggrin.gif
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