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 27

post #781 of 11314
Cerwin Vega loving AC/DC listeners? What!? I listen to my AC/DC (some of it on vinyl) through 5 class A monoblocks and B&W 802Ds at all corners thank you very much. And I've been using an Aragon Soundstage for over a decade. Many thanks to Theresa, CELee, BobP, and others for their input. I've been waiting on the fence because there were some reports about the 80.3 that gave me pause. This is a fantastic forum made that way by outstanding people. My purchases of the BDP-83NE and later the 95 were directly influenced by people here. Thanks to all of you. Please don't hesitate to post non-ABX, controlled, blah blah blah findings. For the record, I did blind switch (level matched with test tone discs and an oscilloscope) the Marantz UD9004 and found exactly what many of the non ABX posters on this forum described. Four of my friends agreed but many struggled for words beyond "the Oppo just sounds more alive." Stuck with the 83NE until the 95 came out and garnered praises right here. So please, Joerod, bring it and tune out anyone seeking to debate your SQ opinion. Thank you, Need4, for doing just that. Count me among the those who are making a buying decision based on opinions presented here. And SeattleHTguy, congratulations on your new found "recreational" freedoms up there. Bet that improves the sound even more than XT32... Ugh, I'm jealous.
post #782 of 11314
I will be working on a Review/Comparison soon enough. smile.gif
post #783 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boozehound21 View Post

Cerwin Vega loving AC/DC listeners? What!? I listen to my AC/DC (some of it on vinyl) through 5 class A monoblocks and B&W 802Ds at all corners thank you very much. And I've been using an Aragon Soundstage for over a decade. Many thanks to Theresa, CELee, BobP, and others for their input. I've been waiting on the fence because there were some reports about the 80.3 that gave me pause. This is a fantastic forum made that way by outstanding people. My purchases of the BDP-83NE and later the 95 were directly influenced by people here. Thanks to all of you. Please don't hesitate to post non-ABX, controlled, blah blah blah findings. For the record, I did blind switch (level matched with test tone discs and an oscilloscope) the Marantz UD9004 and found exactly what many of the non ABX posters on this forum described. Four of my friends agreed but many struggled for words beyond "the Oppo just sounds more alive." Stuck with the 83NE until the 95 came out and garnered praises right here. So please, Joerod, bring it and tune out anyone seeking to debate your SQ opinion. Thank you, Need4, for doing just that. Count me among the those who are making a buying decision based on opinions presented here. And SeattleHTguy, congratulations on your new found "recreational" freedoms up there. Bet that improves the sound even more than XT32... Ugh, I'm jealous.

Hah, very clever. I just remember that exact experience in my buddies basement in Junior High. AC/DC on vinyl played through big ugly Cerwin Vegas while purveying in not so legal activities. Today you can stream lossless AC/DC from your device via I-Tunes. AC/DC being the last hold out and right to those B&Ws. I am confident it sounds better than my friends garage.

So for our state, yes times they are a changing. Someone told me today there is a verse in the bible stating, "if any two men lie down together they will be stoned". Yep, come to Washington today and that may well be the case. Just having fun.... No real opinion on either referendum.
post #784 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boozehound21 View Post

For the record, I did blind switch (level matched with test tone discs and an oscilloscope) the Marantz UD9004 and found exactly what many of the non ABX posters on this forum described. Four of my friends agreed but many struggled for words beyond "the Oppo just sounds more alive."

What exactly was what many of the non ABX posters on this forum described?
I am genuinely interested in regards to the Marantz UD9004 (a $10,000 unit) as i own its little brother the UD8004 ( a $5000 unit) and am seriously considering purchasing the new Oppo 105.

cheers
post #785 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by jam88 View Post

Yes Erwin, I know you've been most interested on the XMC-1; I read many of your posts on the Emotiva forums. smile.gif
Indeed as I also mentioned, the PDF doesn't indicate "fully balanced" in any form. I thought I had read that it would be fully balanced. When looking at so many products, over time, one's memory sometimes plays tricks. Thank you for setting the record straight about the XMC-1 not being fully balanced either. I think you've just made some folks here, that are contemplating buying the 8801, a little more comfortable.
If it's fully balanced they are after, without wanting all the bells and whistles the AV8801 has on offer, they might want to take a look at the Cary Cinema 12 for a relatively modest amount of extra cash... This way, those folks you mentioned are, once again, a little less comfortable in picking the right one. Although the Cary has issues.

Or do we even need a pre-pro? Taking a look at all the things the Oppo BDP-105 can do makes me wonder sometimes. In a properly treated room (hence room correction being less needed) and good speakers with only digital sources and not caring for DSX etc, why not?
Edited by erwinfrombelgium - 12/9/12 at 7:56am
post #786 of 11314
^^^

you realize how thick of "treatment" you would need to control the modal zone? wink.gif

"room treatment" is thrown around without thinking too much about the ramifications... it is very easy to control reflections in the radiant energy zone with absorbtion/diffraction... it is virtually impossible in a "home environment" to control the modal zone, especially for the very low frequencies...

and that leaves aside other issues, auch as pvg gain and so on...

there are very good reasons why eq (regardless of flavor) is "important" in a home environment...
post #787 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

^^^
you realize how thick of "treatment" you would need to control the modal zone? wink.gif
"room treatment" is thrown around without thinking too much about the ramifications... it is very easy to control reflections in the radiant energy zone with absorbtion/diffraction... it is virtually impossible in a "home environment" to control the modal zone, especially for the very low frequencies...
and that leaves aside other issues, auch as pvg gain and so on...
there are very good reasons why eq (regardless of flavor) is "important" in a home environment...

No argument from my side, but still.. Knowledgeable people such as Kal Rubinson and Lars Mette (German Area DVD) not always put room correction on top of their most wanted list. Lars Mette owns two Denon AVP himself and he doesn't use Audyssey XT/XT32 with it. He feels it takes the sparkle away of his (7) costly Arabba speakers... And I don't think his room is perfectly treated either, though better than average.
post #788 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by erwinfrombelgium View Post

Or do we even need a pre-pro? Taking a look at all the things the Oppo BDP-105 can do makes me wonder sometimes. In a properly treated room (hence room correction being less needed) and good speakers with only digital sources and not caring for DSX etc, why not?

Yeah, that thought has gone through my mind many times. If it wasn't for room EQ that my small living room definitely needs as I explained in an earlier post, I would simply buy a BDP-105 and get a good a multichannel preamp like a Parasound Halo P7 and be done with it.
post #789 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by erwinfrombelgium View Post

No argument from my side, but still.. Knowledgeable people such as Kal Rubinson and Lars Mette (German Area DVD) not always put room correction on top of their most wanted list. Lars Mette owns two Denon AVP himself and he doesn't use Audyssey XT/XT32 with it. He feels it takes the sparkle away of his (7) costly Arabba speakers... And I don't think his room is perfectly treated either, though better than average.

In Kal's review of the Bryston pre/pro he remarked how surprised he was at how good it sounded at first with no room eq. I still feel my old Cary Cinema11 with no room eq was better sounding than my av7005, and in direct comparison felt the av7005 to be better sounding than the 4311ci with XT32. I'd love to get a Cinema12 but am hoping the 8801 will sound as good with better reliability.
post #790 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krobar View Post

The two trigger limitation could be a problem unless you intend to use 3rd party tiggering
thanks. I have two amp's, should fit my needs in that area. But still may consider 3rd party device.
post #791 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by erwinfrombelgium View Post


 Knowledgeable people such as Kal Rubinson and Lars Mette (German Area DVD) not always put room correction on top of their most wanted list.

I know it is hard to encapsulate a complex position in a few words.  I could say that room correction is not essential but only if the room has reasonable dimensions and all necessary acoustical treatment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jond0 View Post


In Kal's review of the Bryston pre/pro he remarked how surprised he was at how good it sounded at first with no room eq. 

I was but that is not an indication that I would not prefer if it had room eq.  In fact, I used it with a sub-woofer eq (AntiMode 8033 in NYC ) and a sub with built-in EQ (Paradigm Sub15 in CT).  

post #792 of 11314
The simple fact is that even in custom built rooms and studios, except for very near field monitoring, room correction is in use...

I just find it amusing that a lot of "purists" are more interested in the purity of the signal chain rather than trying to accurately reporduce what was intended by the artists and engineers.

We need correction, in both the time and frequency domain for out dub stages which were custom built to the tune of millions of dollars...

Most music studios are the same, but for some reason a handful of "purists" seem to think they are above the need for any kind of electronic correction.

While it is indeed possible to build a fantastic room that might be relatively flat, I've yet to hear one that wouldn't benefit from some kind of correction..

I just don't get it.. just my.02 of course. smile.gif

That being said, one of my issues with Audyssey is that its take it or leave it, even with the Pro kit. There is no tweaking of anything but the target curve.... currently I'm using a Pioneer SC-67 which not only gives you choice of target curves, but all of the resultant eq and delays.

I wish Audyssey would start to think about the same.
post #793 of 11314
FilmMixer,

It's been a long time but I've read lots of your postings in the past. Thank you for your contributions. Seems like you have a major sub system if my memory isn't failing. One of the reasons I'm considering a new processor is for the XT32. My subs are 2 custom towers, each with 3 sealed chambers containing a 12" driven and a 12" passive. I'm using two 3-channel Aragon 8008BBs such that each driven unit has its own amp channel. In this way I can operate the subs in stereo but generally drive them mono but with two balanced lines out to the amps which in turn have a 1 in, 3 out box I made to make all this work. Obviously with XT32 I'd want to use two separate signals so that the system could apply different correction to each channel as needed. But there are six driven units and only two sub outs from the processor. Do I need to forget XT32 and go for something that produces a separate signal for each channel or would you expect a large improvement just from XT32? Sometimes I let my Soundstage produce the sub signal, sometimes it comes directly from the source, and sometimes I use a Richter Scale to produce it for things like generating a sub signal from a quad mix or vinyl. The two sub channels have their own preamp to facilitate all of this switching and provide gain when needed. A little old school...

Also, does anyone know it the heights/wides or both can be driven in a "party" type configuration with the 8801. I know, why would anyone want to do so? Answer, so the music is loud but still clean in the back yard too! Only when the neighbors join in, of course.

Cheers,
BH21
post #794 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by erwinfrombelgium View Post

No argument from my side, but still.. Knowledgeable people such as Kal Rubinson and Lars Mette (German Area DVD) not always put room correction on top of their most wanted list. Lars Mette owns two Denon AVP himself and he doesn't use Audyssey XT/XT32 with it. He feels it takes the sparkle away of his (7) costly Arabba speakers... And I don't think his room is perfectly treated either, though better than average.

Not in the habbit to correcting you Erwin but Lars in his review he is much more vague, he states that if you have a 'perfect' room (which he feels he has) the need for a eq is less and that in that case the tradeoff between using a EQ or not becomes more tricky. In the review that is his starting point before testing XT32 (as far as i can tell) and within that logic of having a 'perfect' room something he and others know almost nobody has esp. these 'purists' 99% of the time.

review in question : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s36ih7nYe_A

Daniel.
post #795 of 11314
Those who have many years of listening to many different systems and components and say that the Room EQ is desirable have my respect. It's still important how a processor sounds sans REQ. I want to know how people think the 8801 SQ compares to their analog preamps without the REQ engaged. One of the things that made me wonder about the 80.3 was when people didn't like its sound before engaging REQ. That made me wonder if REQ was being used a bandaid to correct not just room problems but also poor analog output design. If the 8801 is worthy as an analog preamp then to me, things can only get better with XT32. I share FilmMixer's concern about not being able to individually tweak the curve. Seems like a no-brainer since the processing power is already there. Like some others here, I also have a Zektor 6 channel switcher and would hate to wind up running the single ended outputs of my new proc through that switch and then through the Soundstage. I just haven't found a processor that matches the Soundstage analog sound quality. But I'm hopeful... Thanks to all for sharing their experiences.

BH21
post #796 of 11314
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boozehound21 View Post

Also, does anyone know it the heights/wides or both can be driven in a "party" type configuration with the 8801. I know, why would anyone want to do so? Answer, so the music is loud but still clean in the back yard too! Only when the neighbors join in, of course.
Cheers,
BH21

Interesting question. I know the AV7005 has 'Multi Channel Stereo', and this is what I'm reading in the AV8801 manual:
"MULTI CH STEREO - This mode is for enjoying stereo sound from all speakers.
The same sound as that from the front speakers (L/R) is played back at the
same level from the surround speakers (L/R) and surround back speakers (L/R)."

It looks like this mode is limited to 7.2 - can any AV8801 owner confirm?
Edited by exm - 12/10/12 at 9:03am
post #797 of 11314
nah, it's not to correct "poor analog output design"...

man, people are really reaching here...

fwiw, target curves can be tweaked to your heart's content using pro... wink.gif

anecdotal sq observations, while sometimes amusing to read, really tell you nothing... which is why so many of us are interested in controlled testing... otherwise, all you get is an observation that is clouded by bias, both conscious and unconscious... you may not like that, but it'a the way the human brain "works"...
post #798 of 11314
OK - I have a question, applies to both but I'll ask it here smile.gif

does this & the Denon 4520 downsample SACD or DVD-A in any way shape or form, both when applying audyssey/surround or in Pure Direct/ Pure DSD mode? if yes, what sample rates are used?

at one time, wasn't that an issue or am I thinking of the Denon or Oppo players?
post #799 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

OK - I have a question, applies to both but I'll ask it here smile.gif
does this & the Denon 4520 downsample SACD or DVD-A in any way shape or form, both when applying audyssey/surround or in Pure Direct/ Pure DSD mode? if yes, what sample rates are used?
at one time, wasn't that an issue or am I thinking of the Denon or Oppo players?

Are you thinking of replacing your Susano? Have an AV7701 but I suspect 8801 will just behave the same or better. Audyssey can occur at all the way up to 24/192 so DVD-A will remain untouched. DSD is converted to PCM but I have not seen any documentation as to what rate; I'd assume 24/176 but that is just an assumption.
post #800 of 11314
Ccotenj,

Thanks for your suggestion using Pro. This is another reason I held off on the 80.3. There was a lengthy period of "It's an Auddyssey problem, no it's an Onkyo problem" before Pro actually became functional if it ever did. I'm not sure because at some point Integra lost my attention.

As for controlled tests, count me in. I've seen their value. I've also found value in anecdotal tests. For example, there are some sales reps from whom I've been able to buy equipment simply on their recommendation. Sure, they're listening to lots of different equipment. But rarely in an ABX environment. Having said that, out of all the people I've worked with, only two have demonstrated that when they say something sounds good, it surely does. A more personal example is the UD9004 vs BDP-83NE test that I performed. I went into that test with bias and prejudice fully expecting the Marantz to destroy the Oppo. But no amount of bias could undo what I heard. So I borrowed friend's copies of the same titles, level matched, and set up the ABX for several friends. Everyone chose the Oppo. I even tried setting up the test giving the 9004 a bit higher level. Nope, no change. Why not invite everyone to share what they hear? I'm not going to rip anyone up for saying "I think model X sounds better than model Y." Especially if they cite specific things they're hearing. Some will get caught up in "if it's more expensive, it must be better." Others won't. Several five figure preamps didn't survive in my system because they simply "got in the way" of the Aragon Soundstage. Not saying they sounded bad. Just that they didn't live up to the promise of their price. I'm happy to pay, but the goods must be delivered. So the question here is: Does the 8801 deliver? I hope no one will stay silent just because their observations aren't ABX.

Ccotenj, do you have any theories on why some people found a certain processor to sound thin and not quite there without the XT32 engaged when their previous processor/preamp without XT32 and in the same system didn't sound that way? The only theory I have is that there was some other deficiency that the EQ covered up or masked. When playing a source using analog inputs and not performing a conversion to digital and back that pretty much leaves the analog section as the culprit. One part of a processor that every source shares is the analog output section. I can't remember if anyone reported digitally inputted sources as sounding unsatisfactory without XT32.

Best regards,
BH21
post #801 of 11314
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boozehound21 View Post

Ccotenj,
Thanks for your suggestion using Pro. This is another reason I held off on the 80.3. There was a lengthy period of "It's an Auddyssey problem, no it's an Onkyo problem" before Pro actually became functional if it ever did. I'm not sure because at some point Integra lost my attention.
As for controlled tests, count me in. I've seen their value. I've also found value in anecdotal tests. For example, there are some sales reps from whom I've been able to buy equipment simply on their recommendation. Sure, they're listening to lots of different equipment. But rarely in an ABX environment. Having said that, out of all the people I've worked with, only two have demonstrated that when they say something sounds good, it surely does. A more personal example is the UD9004 vs BDP-83NE test that I performed. I went into that test with bias and prejudice fully expecting the Marantz to destroy the Oppo. But no amount of bias could undo what I heard. So I borrowed friend's copies of the same titles, level matched, and set up the ABX for several friends. Everyone chose the Oppo. I even tried setting up the test giving the 9004 a bit higher level. Nope, no change. Why not invite everyone to share what they hear? I'm not going to rip anyone up for saying "I think model X sounds better than model Y." Especially if they cite specific things they're hearing. Some will get caught up in "if it's more expensive, it must be better." Others won't. Several five figure preamps didn't survive in my system because they simply "got in the way" of the Aragon Soundstage. Not saying they sounded bad. Just that they didn't live up to the promise of their price. I'm happy to pay, but the goods must be delivered. So the question here is: Does the 8801 deliver? I hope no one will stay silent just because their observations aren't ABX.
Ccotenj, do you have any theories on why some people found a certain processor to sound thin and not quite there without the XT32 engaged when their previous processor/preamp without XT32 and in the same system didn't sound that way? The only theory I have is that there was some other deficiency that the EQ covered up or masked. When playing a source using analog inputs and not performing a conversion to digital and back that pretty much leaves the analog section as the culprit. One part of a processor that every source shares is the analog output section. I can't remember if anyone reported digitally inputted sources as sounding unsatisfactory without XT32.
Best regards,
BH21

You contradict ccotenj's main argument, which is "everything sounds the same, except when you introduce room correction". You basically stated that the Oppo sounds better than the Marantz, but according to cc there should be no difference. Similar to the processors...

ccotenj.... Correct me if I'm wrong (and do enjoy reading your comments, as long as everyone respects each others opinion smile.gif)
post #802 of 11314
Uh oh. I hope I didn't just step into a storm... I reread the post and didn't see where Chris said "everything sounds the same, except when you introduce room correction." I mainly lurk around here but have a love of the art that is this hobby. I'm pretty sure most others around here share that or they wouldn't take the time. Look at the system on his link. Surely Chris shares our love of music and gear. Can't think of any other reason he'd invest that kind of money in it. Of course, that is an anecdotal conclusion...
post #803 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielo View Post

Not in the habbit to correcting you Erwin but Lars in his review he is much more vague, he states that if you have a 'perfect' room (which he feels he has) the need for a eq is less and that in that case the tradeoff between using a EQ or not becomes more tricky. In the review that is his starting point before testing XT32 (as far as i can tell) and within that logic of having a 'perfect' room something he and others know almost nobody has esp. these 'purists' 99% of the time.
review in question : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s36ih7nYe_A
Daniel.

I recall that his extremely costly Arabba speakers (€18,000 a piece I believe with diamond tweeters), together with his room treatments are his reasoning for not using XT32 with the AVP. I have read more than one of his reviews.
http://www.isophon.com/pages/isophon.pages.php?id=en_805
BTW, I e-mailed Mr Mette asking for more explanation, but maybe I wasn't friendly enough because he didn't answer.

However great these speakers might be, I have to see the graphs from the room measurements before I believe his room is "perfect" enough. IMO, here's how you do a perfect room:
http://www.soundscapes.nu/d_nagalm.htm
Measure first, take actions accordingly. I am hiring the acoustician behind it (Toine Dingemans). His service doesn't even cost that much compared to all the hardware we buy. Our room will be a compromise as it is multipurpose, complete with a lot of glasing. I do believe in digital room correction. But more as a cherry on top of an already nice (but not perfect) room.
post #804 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boozehound21 View Post

Uh oh. I hope I didn't just step into a storm... I reread the post and didn't see where Chris said "everything sounds the same, except when you introduce room correction." I mainly lurk around here but have a love of the art that is this hobby. I'm pretty sure most others around here share that or they wouldn't take the time. Look at the system on his link. Surely Chris shares our love of music and gear. Can't think of any other reason he'd invest that kind of money in it. Of course, that is an anecdotal conclusion...

This is core to most of the arguments in this thread. The 8801 has the same processing as the 4520 but with quite different OPAmps and analogue output stage; if you follow Chris's argument these offer none to very little difference in SQ.
post #805 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boozehound21 View Post

Uh oh. I hope I didn't just step into a storm... I reread the post and didn't see where Chris said "everything sounds the same, except when you introduce room correction." I mainly lurk around here but have a love of the art that is this hobby. I'm pretty sure most others around here share that or they wouldn't take the time. Look at the system on his link. Surely Chris shares our love of music and gear. Can't think of any other reason he'd invest that kind of money in it. Of course, that is an anecdotal conclusion...

There are two primary audiophile camps: Objectivists and Subjectivists.

Objectivists have the point of view that if equipment has measurable noise and distortion effects which are well below levels at which they can be audible, then different equipment designs which meet those criteria cannot be distinguished from one another just by listening to them. Their sonic differences are so subtle that the differences people hear are primarily due to "expectation bias". I.e. if you know which piece of equipment you're listening to, the things you know about it will distort what you hear. However, if you use what's called a "Double Blind Test", in which you cannot know which device you're listening to at a given time, you will not be able to distinguish among them. (Properly setting up a DBT is very difficult, so it's seldom done.)

In contrast, Subjectivists have the point of view that the subtle differences people hear among the various models of high quality equipment are significant. Small differences in the electronics do cause differences that people can hear. Those audible differences might or might not be due to the differences measured by bench tests. You don't have to go so far as running a DBT in order to hear differences in the various equipment designs.

As best I can tell, ccotenj is an Objectivist.

I lean toward the Objectivist camp, myself. Hopefully I haven't distorted the Subjectivist stand too badly.
post #806 of 11314
Thread Starter 
^^ Selden Ball... Perfect summary and as a "Subjectivist" I can relate to your summary.

I gotta tell you my "test" factor which is also called the "wife" factor. If she can't hear or see the difference, then it's probably placebo on my side smile.gif A few hits or misses with the 'wife factor'

No difference:
- Upgrading Projector from 720p to 1080p
- Swapping out any digital or video cable
- Going from a my Marantz AV7005 to the AV8003
- Adding a second subwoofer without calibration
- Upgrading my Amp to the Parasound A51 (from the Marantz MA500s)
- Any sound chance to any optic device (CD, LD, DVD, HD DVD, BR)

Difference:
- Going from the Lexicon MC-12 to the Onkyo 885 ("what happened to my warm sound?"), and going from the Onkyo 885 to the Marantz AV8003 ("that's what I'm used to!")
- Adding a second subwoofer after calibration
- Upgrading my speaker cables
- Upgrading my speakers (any)

I don't expect any positive improvements when I upgrade my AV7005 to the AV8801... Who knows!
post #807 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

OK - I have a question, applies to both but I'll ask it here smile.gif
does this & the Denon 4520 downsample SACD or DVD-A in any way shape or form, both when applying audyssey/surround or in Pure Direct/ Pure DSD mode? if yes, what sample rates are used?
at one time, wasn't that an issue or am I thinking of the Denon or Oppo players?

I might be wrong but my guess would be that the 4520 brings all to 192khz/32bits using AL32 and thats not easy to defeat in the settings (on the avp is possible but again not easy you have to stay 100% analog). They do this to keep the rest of the digital chain easy imho. My guess is the 8801 does the same but they just don't call/tell you AL32 or something similar method is used since its such a core element of the digital engine that the two units share.

Daniel.
post #808 of 11314
@selden...

yup, that's a fair description of me... paraphrasing the great rasheed wallace, graph don't lie... wink.gif

however, i would add that i definitely like a good long drink from the cup of placebo every now and then... biggrin.gif i am not completely heartless.. tongue.gif i DO like shiny new toys, and my preference* is for aesthetically pleasing ones... smile.gif and i also realize that the placebo of "aesthetically pleasing" will enhance my "enjoyment" of the end result... i had an onkyo pre-pro that was so darned ugly, i sold it at a ridiculous price just to get it out of my house... redface.gif i obsessed for days (weeks) over veneer choices for my speakers... etc.

@booze... yes, i have spent (not really "invested", as a/v equipment is a depreciating asset) a significant amount of money and spent an even more significant amount of time to turn my room into a rather nice listening and viewing environment (imo, anyway)... but i try (note: "try") to spend that money and time wisely, and base my "opinions" (or nonsensical rantings, depending on your pov tongue.gif ) on well grounded science... you will very rarely see me express a "subjective" opinion without "objective" rationale to back it up... and when i do, i make it clear that it subjective, and entirely probable that it's placebo until "proven" that its "real"...

bottom line... there is much "proven" science out there (it's not like audio reproduction isn't a well studied field) and that proven science is at odds with many "anecdotal observations"... you can choose the path that you'd like to follow...

it should also be noted that while "money is definitely an object", as i do not have an unlimited budget, it would be safe to say that the av8801 is well within reach for me, and have posted more than once that if "objectively proven" to be "better" than the 4520 that is sitting here now, someone is going to get themselves a 4520... wink.gif

* actually, my preference is to not have to look at the equipment at all... tongue.gif
post #809 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielo View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

OK - I have a question, applies to both but I'll ask it here smile.gif
does this & the Denon 4520 downsample SACD or DVD-A in any way shape or form, both when applying audyssey/surround or in Pure Direct/ Pure DSD mode? if yes, what sample rates are used?
at one time, wasn't that an issue or am I thinking of the Denon or Oppo players?

I might be wrong but my guess would be that the 4520 brings all to 192khz/32bits using AL32 and thats not easy to defeat in the settings (on the avp is possible but again not easy you have to stay 100% analog). They do this to keep the rest of the digital chain easy imho. My guess is the 8801 does the same but they just don't call/tell you AL32 or something similar method is used since its such a core element of the digital engine that the two units share.

Daniel.

yes, that is my understanding as well... best i can tell, it'll decimate dsd to 192...

steve, you may be thinking of the oppo, which decimates dsd to 96...

dsd direct is "different", obviously... smile.gif
post #810 of 11314
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielo View Post

I might be wrong but my guess would be that the 4520 brings all to 192khz/32bits using AL32 and thats not easy to defeat in the settings (on the avp is possible but again not easy you have to stay 100% analog). They do this to keep the rest of the digital chain easy imho. My guess is the 8801 does the same but they just don't call/tell you AL32 or something similar method is used since its such a core element of the digital engine that the two units share.
Daniel.

Is there external volume control or are the additional 8 bits of the 32bit resolution being used as a neat way to control volume.
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