AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/)
-   Receivers, Amps, and Processors (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/)
-   -   The Official Anthem AVM 60 thread (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/2004562-official-anthem-avm-60-thread.html)

Reefdvr27 05-18-2015 03:22 PM

The Official Anthem AVM 60 thread
 
148 Attachment(s)

fatbottom 05-18-2015 03:31 PM

No dual subwoofer out...major deal breaker. If you're spending thousands on a AV pre most likely you'll have or want dual subs

Reefdvr27 05-18-2015 03:33 PM

148 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by fatbottom (Post 34319178)
No dual subwoofer out...major deal breaker. If you're spending thousands on a AV pre most likely you'll have or want dual subs

It appears to have dual balanced sub outs? That was one of the problems I had with the MRX line.

fatbottom 05-18-2015 03:39 PM

Read no dual sub EQ or something

DS-21 05-18-2015 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatbottom (Post 34319178)
No dual subwoofer out...major deal breaker. If you're spending thousands on a AV pre most likely you'll have or want dual subs

The lack of so-called dual sub EQ is a feature, not an omission.

In fact, the real problem with pretty much all the room correction systems is that they don't sweep mains and subs together as a unit. That's why most of them (even ARC, though it is probably the best of them) offer relatively poor integration without manual tweaking.

ALL of the automated "dual sub" EQ systems out there are risible failures: Audyssey SubEQ HT, Dirac in XMC-1, etc. Harman Sound Field Management (JBL Synthesis) seems to get it right, but that's the only one I know of. Even the super-expensive Dirac and Trinnov boxes work optimally when they only "see" a subwoofer system instead of individual subs.

In every case (except for Harman SFM) one will get the best results by using a mono sub out into a dedicated controller (e.g. miniDSP) and setting levels, delays, and EQ manually.

And if you're willing to spend thousands on a pre-pro, then you should be willing to spend an extra few hundred on equipment to properly run multiple subwoofers, and an extra $500 or so for professional calibration if you don't want to do it yourself for whatever reason.

Nick @ Anthem 05-19-2015 01:26 AM

When .1 came home people started saying:

- "I want the subs to play in stereo."

Response: It can be arranged but to hear them in stereo, your system will have to be moved outside and ten feet off the ground. In a room, bass is non-directional even with one sub, and since multiple subs affect frequency response interactively, group eq as final eq is a necessity.

More recently, a couple more reasons surfaced:

- "I would like to set delay separately per sub as a means of taming resonances."

Response: ARC flattens them. This is what equalization is for.

- "My more capable sub plays to 20 Hz and the other two only go to 30 Hz."

Response: Subs are normally designed to block frequencies too low / levels too high for their own good. Warnings that say, "Connect only to a sub-out that doesn't play lower than 30 Hz" are unheard of.

Multiple sub channels so far: A solution in search of a hypothetical problem.

Nick @ Anthem 05-19-2015 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DS-21 (Post 34323618)
That's why most of them (even ARC, though it is probably the best of them) offer relatively poor integration without manual tweaking.

www.stereophile.com/content/music-round-52

"However, the real payoff was [ARC's] overall integration of the sound, both harmonically and spatially."

www.hometheaterhifi.com/audio-calibration/audio-calibration-reviews/anthem-room-correction-arc-including-a-subwoofer/page-4-conclusions.html

"only the Anthem ARC has the ability to create the correct filter shapes ... Before the Anthem ARC, I had never heard a system with a subwoofer that had not been degraded in the crossover area."

DS-21 05-19-2015 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem (Post 34328754)
www.stereophile.com/content/music-round-52

"However, the real payoff was [ARC's] overall integration of the sound, both harmonically and spatially."

www.hometheaterhifi.com/audio-calibration/audio-calibration-reviews/anthem-room-correction-arc-including-a-subwoofer/page-4-conclusions.html

"only the Anthem ARC has the ability to create the correct filter shapes ... Before the Anthem ARC, I had never heard a system with a subwoofer that had not been degraded in the crossover area."

Well...if you're going to quote Dr. Rich, you might want to also look what he wrote about AVR LSI's, starting here. ;)

That aside, those quotes hardly disprove my point, which is that all current room correction systems (except Harman SFM) are all bad at integrating subs, though ARC is perhaps relatively less bad than the others. All of them, including ARC, require manual tweaking for really good results.

I'm not writing from ignorance here: I've have personal experience with Trinnov, Audyssey, and ARC in multichannel, and Dirac in 2-channel. And now I've used ARC in three rooms. It is my favorite of all of the systems I've tried, but that doesn't mean it's perfect.

Speaking of ARC, perhaps your AVM60 version can steal a trick from Dirac, assuming Dirac hasn't patented it. They run an extra sweep at the end to account for time variance in USB sound cards. I don't know if it's as good as a true loopback correction, but Dirac seems to think it's good enough to set speaker distances.

Nick @ Anthem 05-20-2015 01:00 PM

^ Start two pages earlier, where MRX gen 1 is mentioned. Key take-away:

www.hometheaterhifi.com/technical-articles-and-editorials/technical-articles-and-editorials/audio-video-receiver-build-quality-part-ii-design-of-high-performance-avrs-and-pre-pros/page-2-electronic-volume-controls-that-enhance-performance.html

"The difference between the THD of the best IC-based volume control ICs (Integrated Circuits) and typical AVR LSIs (Large Scale Integrated Circuits) is 2.5 bits using measurements sourced from data sheets with the control set to unity gain."

...and not much to do with AVM 60 since it doesn't use the cited parts.

Reefdvr27 05-20-2015 05:27 PM

148 Attachment(s)
@Nick @ Anthem Any info when we can see this unit on the market? I am highly interested in this unit or an updated MRX with DTSX and Atmos. I was so close to buying the MRX710, but no Atmos was the reason why I did not get it. I was actually going to get the 510 and boost the front stage up with another amp. Hope to see something soon.

Nick @ Anthem 05-21-2015 05:56 AM

Production date isn't set - best to wait until CEDIA for an accurate timeline.

rwheelwright 05-23-2015 03:43 PM

So, that rep that told me anthem was coming out with a new pre was correct even though anthem told me it wasn't true. Interesting...

DS-21 05-23-2015 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem (Post 34369690)
[quoting Dr. David Rich]
"The difference between the THD of the best IC-based volume control ICs (Integrated Circuits) and typical AVR LSIs (Large Scale Integrated Circuits) is 2.5 bits using measurements sourced from data sheets with the control set to unity gain."

...and not much to do with AVM 60 since it doesn't use the cited parts.

2.5 bits is a 15dB difference in signal/noise ratio, right? That's certainly not nothing!

Now, if you want to say that either way we're above the threshold of audibility, I agree that is more likely than not the case. Here, the coverup is far worse than the "crime" (building an pre-pro off of an AVR LSI). But you seem oddly threatened by things that don't 100% toe the company line from someone basically on Team Anthem and it's a little puzzling.

fish5225 05-24-2015 07:49 AM

Will it be fully integrated with an app for iOS control?

Nick @ Anthem 05-25-2015 09:53 AM


Nick @ Anthem 05-25-2015 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DS-21 (Post 34454258)
Now, if you want to say that either way we're above the threshold of audibility, I agree that is more likely than not the case. Here, the coverup is far worse than the "crime" (building an pre-pro off of an AVR LSI).

I wouldn't know how to give a relevant answer before a production-spec AVM 60 becomes available. The data sheet for the LSI in the AVM 60 says it's made for multichannel audio systems - nothing about being exclusive to AVRs or that it shouldn't be used in a prepro. I've often said that all that matters is what comes out the output jacks and that blanket statements only cloud the discussion, and have no idea why LSIs even became part of this one.

Nick @ Anthem 05-25-2015 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwheelwright (Post 34448714)
So, that rep that told me anthem was coming out with a new pre was correct even though anthem told me it wasn't true. Interesting...

Statement D3 no, AVM 60 yes (as of relatively short while ago)

DS-21 05-25-2015 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem (Post 34486450)
I wouldn't know how to give a relevant answer before a production-spec AVM 60 becomes available. The data sheet for the LSI in the AVM 60***

[emph. added]

You just did give a relevant answer, in the text I bolded. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem (Post 34486450)
nothing about being exclusive to AVRs or that it shouldn't be used in a prepro.

As you know or should know, I'm using the term "AVR LSI" as defined in Dr. Rich's hometheaterhifi AVR build quality article cited above. Here's how he defined his term "AVR LSI," at the top of this page.:

"a single chip that subsumes almost all of the unit's analog electronics. This single chip serves a variety of functions:

a. Eight[*] channels of electronic volume controls to control the level at the preamp or power amp output.
b. Eight channels of analog buffering for direct connection to the preamp output jacks or internal power amp inputs.
c. A switch at each electronic volume control input to select the DAC output or the 7.1 analog inputs.
d. A selector switch for the two-channel analog inputs (8 – 14) to be sent to the ADC, or in direct mode, sent to the electronic volume controls at the preamps output.
e. The FL and FR volume control inputs have an additional position on the switch to the volume controls. This is for the direct (DSP bypass mode) mode of operation for two channel inputs. All other volume controls are grounded when stereo direct is selected.
f. Two channels of electronic volume controls for the ADC input to adjust levels to prevent overload of the ADC, followed by a pair of opamp buffers.
g. An independent selector switch for the two-channel analog inputs to be sent to the record output. An opamp buffer is placed between the selector switch and the chips output to isolate the selector switch from the load. In addition, switches are in series with the output that open to prevent a tape recorder self-loop fault condition. Some AVRs have no tape output and in that case this selector is for zone 2.
h. Another independent selector switch for the two-channel analog inputs to be sent to an alternate record output. This output can also be used for zone 2 or 3 outputs. The selector switch is again buffered by a pair of opamps."

*Pre-Atmos/Auro/DTS:X, obviously.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem (Post 34486450)
nothing about being exclusive to AVRs or that it shouldn't be used in a prepro.

That's marketer prevarication. As you know, the market does draw (rightly or wrongly) a distinction between "true" pre-pros (such as the current AVM/D, the Bryston and Classe units, the new Emotiva XMC-1, etc.) which have SSI (Rich's term again) analog sections, and "AVR's with deleted amps," which use AVR LSI analog sections. (Today, I believe all of the mainstream Japanese brand prepros are in the latter category. I'm not sure about Onkyo/Integra, as their current lineup isn't interesting enough for me to investigate in any detail.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem (Post 34486450)
I've often said that all that matters is what comes out the output jacks***

I agree with that statement, but only to an extent. Parts quality and expense matters in an expensive product, even if performance is the same, because of value perception.

Let me draw an analogy to Paradigm. Say Paradigm announces a new upmarket sub with all the trimmings: hi-rez ARC/PBK, force cancellation, beautiful cabinetry, etc. Someone asks if the drive units' frames are stamped or cast. They get a wishy-washy non-answer (which will cause any intelligent person to infer the answer is "stamped"). Now, a stamped frame can do the job of a drive unit frame just as well as a cast one can, at least to any real audibility limits. But at a certain price, the market simply expects cast frame drivers. At a lower price, under-the-skin cost-cutting measures such as using stamped rather than cast drive-unit frames make sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem (Post 34486450)
and have no idea why LSIs even became part of this one.

Because the question was asked and you prevaricated instead of giving the straight answer you gave above ["the LSI in the AVM60"]. It's as simple as that. The coverup prompted all further discussion. Hopefully someone found it useful to read.

Nick @ Anthem 05-25-2015 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DS-21 (Post 34491098)
Hopefully someone found it useful to read.


Agreed.

Rod#S 05-26-2015 06:16 AM

Will a Statement product follow soon after the AVM goes to market and are you looking to go beyond the typical run of the mill receiver limited Atmos/dts:X channel count? In other words will you be implementing a minimum of 16 channels i.e. DataSat RS20i and possibly going out to 24 i.e. Theta Casablanca V when it arrives and possibly more i.e. Trinnov Altitude32?

I just feel that the SSP's should be separating themselves from the receivers by offering more channels than the receivers and at a very minimum dual sub outs. Just my opinion.

Scott B 05-26-2015 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem (Post 34486482)
Statement D3 no, AVM 60 yes (as of relatively short while ago)


I have a AVM50 which I will be looking to change for a unit that can handle the new surround sound formats. Is Anthem considering a processor that allows 4K video switching without any video processing circuitry? Video processing circuitry must add significant cost to the Anthem processors and is a feature that I neither use nor desire.

Nick @ Anthem 05-26-2015 09:34 AM

^ These days, keeping it is a win-win because using an existing HDMI+VP circuit board means lower cost and time to market while providing OSD and less handshake time when source resolution changes e.g. transitions between channels, inputs, splash screen, menu, main title and bonus material.

As well, all our current models have passthrough option in setup, as will the AVM 60.

Nick @ Anthem 05-26-2015 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rod#S (Post 34503714)
Will a Statement product follow soon after the AVM goes to market and are you looking to go beyond the typical run of the mill receiver limited Atmos/dts:X channel count? ... and at a very minimum dual sub outs.

A Statement prepro is not in sight and I'm wondering whether another player is needed in 16+ channel, $20K+.

DIYers also mention three subs and custom installations often use four so on one hand, why stop at two preamp channels but on the other, in-room peaks and valleys become flatter on their own as more subs are added. It comes back to which problem needs fixing and under what circumstances.

If anyone has an .arc2 file from a setup with two or more subs and the sub channel result is non-flat after running ARC per directions, please send it to tech support. I've never seen such a file and if there's an ARC-related case where individual delay would be the only solution, I'd probably recommend an external delay unit. It's cheaper in the grand scheme and there's no limit to channel count.

Rod#S 05-26-2015 10:11 AM

I don't necessairly see why 16+ channels has to equate to $20K+ SSP's. Part of why Trinnov and Datasat are so expensive is the inclusion of the highly coveted EQ in those platforms. The Theta Casablanca was already very expnesive before Atmos, etc. so nothing really changes there, they were already in a different market than Anthem.

Anthem has their own proprietary much less expensive EQ so I don't see the huge price jump here from what <$10k to over $20k by expanding the channel count and the logical additonal cost of the extra hardware, additional CPU and firmware updates.

J.P 05-26-2015 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem (Post 34509034)
A Statement prepro is not in sight and I'm wondering whether another player is needed in 16+ channel, $20K+.

Probably not, but have Anthem considered 9.4.1(13 channels+sub) for AVM60 ?

Nick @ Anthem 05-26-2015 03:05 PM

^ Front wides were considered but we'd like to see some dust settle before committing to configurations beyond 7.1.4.

Nick @ Anthem 05-26-2015 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rod#S (Post 34509778)
I don't see the huge price jump here from what <$10k to over $20k by expanding the channel count

MSRP for our current prepros would be significantly higher if not for their platform having been developed incrementally starting with the AVM 20. A 16-channel platform coming out now would need circuit design and an operating system starting from scratch, paying their own way.

The cure for early adoption prices: Mainstream adoption, a matter of 9.1.6 becoming standard.

Rod#S 05-26-2015 04:50 PM

So you think to expand out to 16, 24 or 32 channels would take your products out beyond $20k then?


One additional advantage of the higher channel count which many overlook as we tend to fixate on discrete channels is that the channels don't need to be used for physically more speakers but are great for speakers that can be bi-amped or tri-amped so a 7.1.6 array for example becomes 27 channels in a bi-amped system and that of course doesn't even allow for multiple subs, just the one. I admit those looking to go to 16 discrete channels and beyond are few and far between as would those who would want to take advantage of the extra channels to bi/tri amp but having more options to do that and cheaper options then Trinnov, Datasat and Theta would indeed be welcomed by many.


The Datasat LS10 is aimed to bridge the gap I suppose by allowing for 13.1 but does so without the Dirac EQ found in the RS20i. I suspect your AVM60 will be priced similarly, perhaps a bit lower and obviously offer EQ but with 2 fewer channels. So on the positive there are going to be more than one SSP and I'm sure more will follow suite.

Ellebob 05-26-2015 08:22 PM

I would imagine any company has to ask a few questions to build a product like this.


1. Is there going to me any material for more than 11 channels? Although, HDMI 2 can have more audio channels whether they are going to be used in material has yet to be seen.


2. How much of a market is there for more than 11 channels? You can have more channels for bi-amping, multiple surrounds or re-mapping like Trinnov is there going to be a big desire for these products.


3. If there is enough desire can it be developed the unit so it can be prices competitively?


4. Will there be enough sales of these to be profitable?


Whether it is Anthem or any other company they have to factor these basic questions. There is a reason these specialty processors cost so much. If Datasat or other specialty company had hundreds of thousands of units like Onkyo receivers than the cost could be much less. In the lower price range of products the majority of consumers will only do 5.1, fewer do 7.1 and even fewer will do Atmos/ DTS-X. In fact receiver sales are down as more consumers are using sound bars instead of surround sound:eek: As an enthusiast, I want it all! But, I understand a company waiting to see what products are going to be in demand before manufacturing new products that might not sell. I doubt D2s have been flying off the shelf.

J.P 05-26-2015 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem (Post 34518985)
^ Front wides were considered but we'd like to see some dust settle before committing to configurations beyond 7.1.4.

I can see that. Personally i was really hoping for 9.1.4.

Generally i think we will see 9.1.4 in a year or two.Maybe (9.1.6), not necessary because everyone needs all the channels, but because of the option/flexibility. But i also belive products with support for channels beyond (9.1.6) is going to be very few, and probably "niche" products.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.