warm, bright, very bright AVR?? - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 49Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 51 Old 06-25-2019, 07:20 PM
Advanced Member
 
spacecowboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 529
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by KSpan View Post
While my experiences are but my own, I've been doing audio for almost 30 years including playing music professionally with a wide range of basses/rigs and recording/mixing at some very nice studios on some very expensive equipment. I'm no authority but I do like to think my ears are pretty well tuned in to the nuances of sound and this was the experience I had with level-matched amplifier sections (direct, no processing/EQ) and lossless material through quality speakers in a quiet listening room. Would have been interesting for someone else to be there with me and try as well but that wasn't the case. If there was a difference that I just didn't pick up on it sure wasn't striking enough to justify a 400% price premium.
Interesting. I appreciate your experience, and hope I didn't come across as condescending.

"Excuse me...What does God need with a Starship?" (Captain Kirk - Star Trek V: The Final Frontier)
spacecowboy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 51 Old 06-25-2019, 08:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tenthplanet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North of Mexico, South of Oregon, West of desert
Posts: 6,166
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2144 Post(s)
Liked: 3236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molon_Labe View Post
Agree with the exception of the speakers. I would buy speakers that measure flat, have good directivty, and excellent off-axis response, and then buy the receiver that has the features and channels you need . Season it all with EQ to taste as the proverbial cherry on top
Work some room treatments in there too and I agree, beware speakers that measure flat but don't sound like it.

"Espresso is like tequila, when in doubt apply more shots."
tenthplanet is offline  
post #33 of 51 Old 06-26-2019, 05:21 AM
Member
 
ugotvijay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Dubai, UAE
Posts: 172
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkaizer View Post
i tested KEF LS50 today and i find them a little bit bright, so i thought a warm and high watt AVreceiver would balance them and be able to drive.

but is warm/bright true or a myth??

i heard marantz receivers are warm, Denon in the middle or bright and onkyo/yamaha are very bright

the AVR budget would be around 2000 USD
Is this for a 2 channel set-up? Music only? Or do you plan to set-up a surround sound set-up with LS50?

The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten

Panny UB900| Apple TV 4K| Zidoo Z9S| WD TV Live| RPi3| Yamaha RX-A3050|ATI 1805, 1802| Sony HW40ES - 120"| LG UH850V - 65"| B&W CT8 LR, CT8 CC, CT8.4 LCRS x 4, Jamo I/O2 (Atmos), AELite| Linkwitz LXMini| Linkwitz Pluto 2.1
ugotvijay is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 51 Old 06-26-2019, 05:35 AM
Member
 
ugotvijay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Dubai, UAE
Posts: 172
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkaizer View Post
inflated? guess best thing to do is to read reviews that include tests and benchmarks.

UPDATE!

found a bench test for yamaha 2070. it even provide more watt than official 140-155 watt claimed. 167 watt 8 ohm 2ch driven

to my surprise, 2ch high watt doesnt necessary mean a high 7ch compare with other brands with lower 2ch.

why?

quick comparison

Yamaha 2070 = 2ch 167 5ch 104 7ch 40 watt

Denon X3400 = 2ch 123 5ch 97 7ch 72

NAD t758v3 = 2ch 100 5ch 86 7ch 66

seems Denon is strongest for HT

all 8ohm 0.01THD

https://www.soundandvision.com/conte...iew-test-bench
Wattage at 8 ohms is half the story. Power at 4/2 ohms and cross-over distortion greatly affects sound quality. I don't think any review gives such info. You will not even find how many output devices per channel used, which is a basic quality indicator of amp section.

Having said that, all these above AVRs have decent amp sections. From personal experience, I recommend Yamaha over Denon/ Marantz.

The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten

Panny UB900| Apple TV 4K| Zidoo Z9S| WD TV Live| RPi3| Yamaha RX-A3050|ATI 1805, 1802| Sony HW40ES - 120"| LG UH850V - 65"| B&W CT8 LR, CT8 CC, CT8.4 LCRS x 4, Jamo I/O2 (Atmos), AELite| Linkwitz LXMini| Linkwitz Pluto 2.1
ugotvijay is offline  
post #35 of 51 Old 06-26-2019, 06:59 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 683
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 351 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by spacecowboy View Post
Interesting. I appreciate your experience, and hope I didn't come across as condescending.
No worries - no offense taken. My anecdote is even perhaps a bit off-topic since I was really only evaluating the amp sections in direct mode, but part of the 'Marantz mystique' seems to be the HDAM modules and power section being superior and in my specific experience it didn't really matter. It's fair to say that the overall tonal signature of an AVR can absolutely be manipulated once processing comes into play and I suspect that if the sound-only components are eliminated as contributing to any differences, then one could potentially get AVRs to sound more alike than different through EQ and such; that's been my experience in the music world and I'm of the same general opinion for consumer-level AVRs. No question that something like DIRAC can have a huge impact on tonality but that's expanding on the discussions about the AVR units themselves.
dfa973 likes this.
KSpan is offline  
post #36 of 51 Old 06-26-2019, 04:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bear123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: PA
Posts: 6,444
Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2655 Post(s)
Liked: 4150
Modern day reasonably well designed amps and AVR's, if not using eq and room correction, don't have a "sound". Their responses are flatter than the human ear can detect across the entire audible spectrum. Mistakenly perceived difference in sound are just that, mistakenly perceived. Non level matched listening impression in Best Buy....lol no wonder people hear or think they hear a difference.

The facts are, in a controlled listening test that removes bias, under accurate conditions(level matched, no eq, no clipping, operated within capability), there is no difference in sound. Measurements might be able to point to a -.1 dB response at 20 KHz, but that is not something any human can hear or detect.

You will hear a boat load of "nuh-uh, I was at Best Buy and heard a difference"....do a little research, look at actual factual measurements of most any decent modern amp or AVR....a flat frequency response from 20-20KHz sounds the same regardless what name brand is on the box.

If you don't have enough power, or have a very difficult load to drive(which would mean that you are no longer operating said amp within its clean output capabilities), then a better quality or higher powered amp or AVR may make a difference. If you are clipping and distorting, a more powerful amp will improve sound quality. But 20 watts from Denon, Marantz, Yamaha, Krell, Macintosh....there is no difference. There are a few audiophile type amps that intentionally distort and color the sound. They will obviously sound different.
dfa973 likes this.

Last edited by bear123; 06-26-2019 at 05:02 PM.
bear123 is offline  
post #37 of 51 Old 06-27-2019, 11:54 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rocky1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: miami
Posts: 2,309
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 454 Post(s)
Liked: 125
To my ears I went from Marantz said speakers = warm. Same speakers changed to a rotel = neutral. Changed speakers with rotel = neutral then back to Marantz =warm. Had a Yamaha in another setup and thought it was too bright for my tastes.

Sony XBR65A1E,(Pioneer 500m relocated), AppleTv 4K,Marantz sr7012, System Audio Loudspeakers( sa1750 mains), ML Grotto.
Eastern Electric Minimax cd, Oppo UDP-203, Toshiba HD, Pro Ject 1expression Carbon TT.
rocky1 is offline  
post #38 of 51 Old 06-27-2019, 12:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 956 Post(s)
Liked: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenthplanet View Post
Work some room treatments in there too and I agree, beware speakers that measure flat but don't sound like it.
What? Why would a speaker measure flat but not sound like it? Unless you mean by measuring, just a few frequency response curve and not the full set of measurements at different angles to the speaker.

Please elaborate.

This is a good book to read to get a good understanding of Audio Science and Speaker Design.

Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms (Audio Engineering Society Presents) https://www.amazon.com/dp/113892136X..._uprfDbV8B97PZ
SouthernCA is offline  
post #39 of 51 Old 06-27-2019, 12:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 956 Post(s)
Liked: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123 View Post
Modern day reasonably well designed amps and AVR's, if not using eq and room correction, don't have a "sound". Their responses are flatter than the human ear can detect across the entire audible spectrum. Mistakenly perceived difference in sound are just that, mistakenly perceived. Non level matched listening impression in Best Buy....lol no wonder people hear or think they hear a difference.



The facts are, in a controlled listening test that removes bias, under accurate conditions(level matched, no eq, no clipping, operated within capability), there is no difference in sound. Measurements might be able to point to a -.1 dB response at 20 KHz, but that is not something any human can hear or detect.



You will hear a boat load of "nuh-uh, I was at Best Buy and heard a difference"....do a little research, look at actual factual measurements of most any decent modern amp or AVR....a flat frequency response from 20-20KHz sounds the same regardless what name brand is on the box.



If you don't have enough power, or have a very difficult load to drive(which would mean that you are no longer operating said amp within its clean output capabilities), then a better quality or higher powered amp or AVR may make a difference. If you are clipping and distorting, a more powerful amp will improve sound quality. But 20 watts from Denon, Marantz, Yamaha, Krell, Macintosh....there is no difference. There are a few audiophile type amps that intentionally distort and color the sound. They will obviously sound different.
Agree completely.

Here is a good source for all this and other information about the science behind all this.

Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms (Audio Engineering Society Presents) https://www.amazon.com/dp/113892136X..._uprfDbV8B97PZ
SouthernCA is offline  
post #40 of 51 Old 06-27-2019, 01:08 PM
Advanced Member
 
DavidinGA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: GA
Posts: 665
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkaizer View Post
i tested KEF LS50 today and i find them a little bit bright, so i thought a warm and high watt AVreceiver would balance them and be able to drive.

but is warm/bright true or a myth??

i heard marantz receivers are warm, Denon in the middle or bright and onkyo/yamaha are very bright

the AVR budget would be around 2000 USD

I'm in the Myth camp myself.

I think changing equipment for the sake of an avr's supposed "sound signature" is just completely baseless. Now, if your changing for something tangible, say db performace or something else that can be measured, then sure go for it.

Spend your money on something that makes a real measurable difference like speakers or room treatment, not a different name badge on pretty much the same avr equipment...

--------------------------------------------------
Source: HTPC w/madVR, Video: Epson 5040, 150" 16:9, Audio: Onkyo RZ 830 avr, 5.1.4 Atmos setup. 5 speaker Energy C Series: L/R C300's, C C-C100, SR/SL C50's, 4 in-ceiling Micca R-8c. Subwoofer: MiniMarty um18 w/NX3000D.
DavidinGA is offline  
post #41 of 51 Old 06-27-2019, 01:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bigguyca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: East Turkestan
Posts: 1,767
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1100 Post(s)
Liked: 928
Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123 View Post
Modern day reasonably well designed amps and AVR's, if not using eq and room correction, don't have a "sound". Their responses are flatter than the human ear can detect across the entire audible spectrum. Mistakenly perceived difference in sound are just that, mistakenly perceived. Non level matched listening impression in Best Buy....lol no wonder people hear or think they hear a difference.

The facts are, in a controlled listening test that removes bias, under accurate conditions(level matched, no eq, no clipping, operated within capability), there is no difference in sound. Measurements might be able to point to a -.1 dB response at 20 KHz, but that is not something any human can hear or detect.

You will hear a boat load of "nuh-uh, I was at Best Buy and heard a difference"....do a little research, look at actual factual measurements of most any decent modern amp or AVR....a flat frequency response from 20-20KHz sounds the same regardless what name brand is on the box.

If you don't have enough power, or have a very difficult load to drive(which would mean that you are no longer operating said amp within its clean output capabilities), then a better quality or higher powered amp or AVR may make a difference. If you are clipping and distorting, a more powerful amp will improve sound quality. But 20 watts from Denon, Marantz, Yamaha, Krell, Macintosh....there is no difference. There are a few audiophile type amps that intentionally distort and color the sound. They will obviously sound different.

Do you actually claim that Apple computers sound the same a Denon AVR. That seems to be carrying the idea that everything sounds the same a bit too far.

This Mac says it is, "Freaking Powerful," still it's amazing it will produce 20 watts.

https://www.apple.com/imac/

Last edited by bigguyca; 06-27-2019 at 01:53 PM.
bigguyca is offline  
post #42 of 51 Old 06-27-2019, 02:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 956 Post(s)
Liked: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigguyca View Post
Do you actually claim that Apple computers sound the same a Denon AVR. That seems to be carrying the idea that everything sounds the same a bit too far.

This Mac says it is, "Freaking Powerful," still it's amazing it will produce 20 watts.

https://www.apple.com/imac/
If you listen at very low volumes and the amplifier section in the apple computer is designed to operate within your speakers frequency band (and it is) and impedence ( need to check as I don't know your speaker), then YES.
SouthernCA is offline  
post #43 of 51 Old 06-27-2019, 05:09 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bigguyca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: East Turkestan
Posts: 1,767
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1100 Post(s)
Liked: 928
Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123 View Post
Modern day reasonably well designed amps and AVR's, if not using eq and room correction, don't have a "sound". Their responses are flatter than the human ear can detect across the entire audible spectrum. Mistakenly perceived difference in sound are just that, mistakenly perceived. Non level matched listening impression in Best Buy....lol no wonder people hear or think they hear a difference.

The facts are, in a controlled listening test that removes bias, under accurate conditions(level matched, no eq, no clipping, operated within capability), there is no difference in sound. Measurements might be able to point to a -.1 dB response at 20 KHz, but that is not something any human can hear or detect.

You will hear a boat load of "nuh-uh, I was at Best Buy and heard a difference"....do a little research, look at actual factual measurements of most any decent modern amp or AVR....a flat frequency response from 20-20KHz sounds the same regardless what name brand is on the box.

If you don't have enough power, or have a very difficult load to drive(which would mean that you are no longer operating said amp within its clean output capabilities), then a better quality or higher powered amp or AVR may make a difference. If you are clipping and distorting, a more powerful amp will improve sound quality. But 20 watts from Denon, Marantz, Yamaha, Krell, Macintosh....there is no difference. There are a few audiophile type amps that intentionally distort and color the sound. They will obviously sound different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigguyca View Post
Do you actually claim that Apple computers sound the same a Denon AVR. That seems to be carrying the idea that everything sounds the same a bit too far.

This Mac says it is, "Freaking Powerful," still it's amazing it will produce 20 watts.

https://www.apple.com/imac/
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernCA View Post
If you listen at very low volumes and the amplifier section in the apple computer is designed to operate within your speakers frequency band (and it is) and impedence ( need to check as I don't know your speaker), then YES.
Likely you are kidding about the above (hopefully), but perhaps to put too fine a point on this subject, the given was 20 watts, and there was no limitation on the specific speakers used.

We all make mistakes, I'm amazed that people don't find more of mine. That said, a second point concerning the overall post, is that likely many people read your post and didn't find an error (assume you meant McIntosh). Even if a 1,000 people read the post and didn't see the error, the error never-the-less exists. The same can be said for listening trials. Just because listeners don't hear differences, doesn't mean they don't exist and in fact are audible to some listeners.

Another thought on this subject concerns a thought experiment concerning the conductor of a symphony orchestra. Evidently the conductor hears and sees all sort of details concerning the playing by the members of the orchestra. Let's say we talk to one of the members of the orchestra in advance, and have that player do something subtly, but audibly noticeable (to the conductor) and wrong during the performance (let's say practice to avoid issues!) and the conductor notices the issue.

Then lets take a set of people with my knowledge and experience of listening to an orchestras (50 to 100 musicians) and the music they are playing, at the conductor's location. My level of knowledge and experience in this case is zero. Have the orchestra play a short segment of the performance several times. At random, some performances will have the error and some not. It seems unlikely that I, or my 100 clones, or huge number of other similarly (un)qualified people, will hear the issue, or in fact, a difference. Does that mean that the issue doesn't exist, or that the issue isn't audible, clearly no. This lack of recognition of the differences in the performance stems from some combination of lack of experience, knowledge or physical capabilities.

Some people have extensive experience and skills in listening to recorded music. It seems possible that these people, using selections with which they are familiar, and in a familiar system, with one change, say an AVR, can hear differences that the masses don't. It also may be possible that some individuals have the ability to key on certain characteristics of music and hear changes to the music even in less structured settings.

Human's hearing processes are still not fully understood. (If someone is an expert here please contribute.) Based on limited reading about a year ago, valid analytical models of what output the various parts of the ear will produce based on specific stimuli, or even models that can predict the output ignoring the underlying physical ear, are not available. Again based on some very basic reading, it does appear that parts of the sensing system (some of the hair cells) can adapt (be moved to change response) as the overall hearing system learns. It appears that an equivalent of 5 to 6 bits of entropy are available in each of the many channels from the basic hearing system to higher levels and that efficient use is made of this entropy. If we could simulate the hearing process like a digital or analog circuit, we'd have better answers concerning what we can hear and not hear, but that level of knowledge isn't available.
bigguyca is offline  
post #44 of 51 Old 06-27-2019, 07:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tenthplanet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North of Mexico, South of Oregon, West of desert
Posts: 6,166
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2144 Post(s)
Liked: 3236
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernCA View Post
What? Why would a speaker measure flat but not sound like it? Unless you mean by measuring, just a few frequency response curve and not the full set of measurements at different angles to the speaker.

Please elaborate.

This is a good book to read to get a good understanding of Audio Science and Speaker Design.

Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms (Audio Engineering Society Presents) https://www.amazon.com/dp/113892136X..._uprfDbV8B97PZ
People hear things that don't measure, listening is a learned ability. A speaker can measure well and still sound wrong, a good speaker designer voices with numbers and listening. This is a decades old debate that will never be resolved.
pink soda and Scotth3886 like this.

"Espresso is like tequila, when in doubt apply more shots."
tenthplanet is offline  
post #45 of 51 Old 07-02-2019, 12:13 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Alkaizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It seems that my old 2007 Onkyo tx-sr805 has 5ch driven power of 162 watt at 0.1% and 7ch driven at 120 watt at 0.1%. (course: sound&vision)

Wow....how come old/cheap AVR have such power compared with new AVRs in the market?!

These will definitely drive KEF LS50 very easily, right?
Alkaizer is offline  
post #46 of 51 Old 07-02-2019, 03:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: United States
Posts: 2,590
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1297 Post(s)
Liked: 2096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkaizer View Post
It seems that my old 2007 Onkyo tx-sr805 has 5ch driven power of 162 watt at 0.1% and 7ch driven at 120 watt at 0.1%. (course: sound&vision)

Wow....how come old/cheap AVR have such power compared with new AVRs in the market?!

These will definitely drive KEF LS50 very easily, right?
It is quite simple--you don't NEED all 7 channels driven at once when using multi-channel surround.

Think about it realistically, say a 64 channel Dolby Digital theater and for fun, ignore the 4 to 8 channels for sub bass. What would happen if you blasted ALL the channels to maximum volume at the same time? Darkness! Kiss those breakers goodbye not to mention as you add more amplifier channels and speakers together in the same space, the SPL will skyrocket and smoke the audience. The sources are mixed according to Dolby specifications as the days of some guy just twisting pots by ear is long, long gone (thankfully) AI is a great application for that so things will get better moving forward.

An amplifier is a man made device using man made components that are manufacturered to certain tolernances. Amps don't grow on trees or are found in space. A black hole is a naturally occuring thing in space and science will be the first to tell you they don't know what is inside. Amps don't have that problem, they make small man made electrical signals larger and since they are made by humans, they are measured, tested and verified to fit within specific specifications. Give "science" a break, they have been screwing around with electrical signals far longer than you have been alive.

Then there are the audiologists that spend their lives with human hearing. They are aware of the limits of human hearing and combined with surgeons can make deaf people hear--they might know a thing or two. How accurate is human hearing? Well, it depends on the persons AGE and is indicated with hearing test results. You can't "teach" your ears to hear better to improve your hearing test results--but age will gradually make your hearing worse.

Back to amps, measure the things full bandwidth and get distortion readings from 0.0001 watts to whatever watts you chose to rate it and whatever impedance it was designed to operate within specifications. I can take an amp and rate it for 0.005% or rate it for 10%...same amplifier and it is up to the marketing and engineering department to specify the power level. You can get a chip amp from Texas Instruments that produces 0.005% distortion at 5 watts of output, it can punch around 50 watts at 0.01% and 130 watts at 10% distortion--same amp and it costs $5. The game of my amp does magical things because the maximum output at a certain level is meaningless because amplifiers don't operate that way. Their distortion is not linear so if you have a Denon AVR that produces 0.009% distortion at 10 watts and you use it at 10 watts---why would some audiophile amp the size of an AC unit sound different?

Look at speaker distortion next, amps create no sound without a speaker so.... what distortion do you get from speakers? Well, they measure that also! Voice coil (google it) they measure drivers at 105dB at one meter and the distortion even very finve, high power and very expensive drivers produce is at the 1% range. Subwoofer distortion is measured when it reaches 10 percent distortion. I don't know about you but worrying about fractional distortion levels when the speakers mask the amplifier distortion with much higher numbers is a waste of time. Sure, you can "claim" that your learned ears have the ability to ignore the speaker distortion and somehow pick out amplifier distortion but those medical people will negate that belief. Yes, masking of disotortion from louder sounds has been studied and verified.

I did some blind ABX testing with amps, CD players and so on back in the day--learned a lot. Much easier to do now, if you want to know at what levels of distortion your can detect with your own ears--the Audio Engineering Society has music you can download that has the error programmed in.... you can find at what levels things become noticeable and things that do not. So if you really want to know, they can hook you up! The other thing to do is learn how amplifiers work, what the measurements mean, what matters and what does not and then look at full measurements of amplifiers--the graphs not a single number. Just because an amp can do 2 ohms does not make it "better" than one that is limited to 4 ohms if you are using 8 ohm speakers. If it did, all the auddiophiles would be using Crown iTech and PowerSoft professional amplifiers because they are stable into 1 ohm loads.

Do amps "sound" warm? Sure, if they have a boost in the midrange power levels over the bass and treble. This is EASY to spot on a scope or output chart. Personally,. I would refuse to purchase any amplifier that has a warm, bright or whatever sound as a feature--I want my amplifiers accurate as I can make they sound any way I want to parametric EQ and processing. The amplifiers I use are accurate, they operate speakers that are generally 6 to 16 ohms, I don't clip them and they stay in their linear operating level. If you clip an amp, all bets are off but I learned many years ago that when the clip light hits--I screwed up!

Why do people hear things? That is a question for the medical people, they sure spent enough money trying to eliminate that (bias) For that reason, they double blind ABX testing was done so no outside things will skew the results. If you have ever done one, it is a learning experience not only to figure out what distortion levels effect you but damning proof you are a human with our natural biases at work. When I purchase amplifers and gear, I know what specifications I shoot for or better. Yes, I have an AVR and a chip amp--and a studio amp along with an arc welding PA amp with enough DSP to keep me amused for years. I go from "dumb brick" (studio amp) to spaceman spiff (PA amp and corrective AVR processing) Once any processors, EQ and so on is engaged, now the sound changes because of the processing--the amp has nothing to do with it. If you think AVR A sounds warmer than AVR B and they both have their corrective processing applied, the results you are hearing IS the corrective processing!

If you are a human, you have bias built in and be thankful that you do. Those weird biases kept your family tree alive and you can't turn them off. The McGurk effect explains why you hear with your eyes, they are higher prioority to the brain and if the ears disagree with the eyes, the eyes win automatically. You can take that test on Youtube--it is a lot of fun! How come we hear things in 7.1 channel surround that if flying over our heads but the speakers are to the side of you? Your eyes tell your brain where the sounds should be.... so if you think you have supernatural hearing, it is kicked to the curb by your eyes and brain.

Does it matter? Well, that is up to you! Say Amp A and Amp B sound the same but you like the features, looks, size, weight and so on of Amp B although it costs twice as much--go with Amp B. Not because of some "sound" it has but all the other factors you use when purchasing amplifiers. When I purchased my AVR, I went with features--there were specific things I wanted it to perform. My HT speakers are very efficient so never need more than 40 watts so power was not a factor. I prefer my amplifiers to run cool, be very reliable and tend towards a subtle look--not the gee-gaw million knobs and having a light show. I could of spent less on my AVR, a heck of a lot less for my other amps also if it was just "what it sounds like". There is plenty of audio equipment I would not use even if it was free--I am human and if it looks rediculoous, fadish gee-gaw fashion or if they speakers are finished highly reflective (I can't stand light reflecting off a speaker in the dark!) you can keep it no matter how good it is.

For decades I had my hearing, eyes, blood and everything else tested for my job. My hearing slowly got worse over the years, no matter how hard I tried it slowly trailed off. I would love to know how to "train your ears" to hear better, I want my 20 KHz back! Sure, you can learn how to listen for specific distortions and Harmon International will provide the video how to do just that. However, your hearing can't be more "accurate" .... I wish it could! The concept that people can hear something that is created by an electrical signal generator that is created by humans--and our creation creates unknown things that are not measureable is really stretching it--don't ya think? Considering the limits of human hearing are known, it would not seem to be unreasonable that humans would be smart enough to know how to match human hearing to what electrical signals can do. If those stupid science people can create a detector that can measure movement to one tenth of a proton to read gravitational waves (LIGO) they might, just might be able to measure a sound or electrical wave.

In summation, it would be much less confusing if the manufacturers just put out all the measurement charts which would prevent needless single point numbers. Back to my previous ponderings..."hair" on the surface of a black hole event horizon? ?????
18Hurts is offline  
post #47 of 51 Old 07-02-2019, 08:09 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bigguyca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: East Turkestan
Posts: 1,767
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1100 Post(s)
Liked: 928
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernCA View Post
Agree completely.

Here is a good source for all this and other information about the science behind all this.

Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms (Audio Engineering Society Presents) https://www.amazon.com/dp/113892136X..._uprfDbV8B97PZ
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenthplanet View Post
People hear things that don't measure, listening is a learned ability. A speaker can measure well and still sound wrong, a good speaker designer voices with numbers and listening. This is a decades old debate that will never be resolved.
Just for emphasis, here is a link to the same book that is in SouthernCA's post.

https://www.amazon.com/Sound-Reprodu...gateway&sr=8-2

From your statement it can be assumed that you haven't read Floyd Toole's excellent book. (in the link)

Dr. Toole's book covers the extensive research that has been done in Canada and at Harman/Revel in California, to define the relationships between measurements of loudspeakers and user preferences. The book is a mandatory read if you are to understand the best work in the field.
SouthernCA likes this.
bigguyca is offline  
post #48 of 51 Old 07-02-2019, 08:37 PM
Member
 
pink soda's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: VA
Posts: 70
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123 View Post
Modern day reasonably well designed amps and AVR's, if not using eq and room correction, don't have a "sound". Their responses are flatter than the human ear can detect across the entire audible spectrum. Mistakenly perceived difference in sound are just that, mistakenly perceived. Non level matched listening impression in Best Buy....lol no wonder people hear or think they hear a difference.

The facts are, in a controlled listening test that removes bias, under accurate conditions(level matched, no eq, no clipping, operated within capability), there is no difference in sound. Measurements might be able to point to a -.1 dB response at 20 KHz, but that is not something any human can hear or detect.

You will hear a boat load of "nuh-uh, I was at Best Buy and heard a difference"....do a little research, look at actual factual measurements of most any decent modern amp or AVR....a flat frequency response from 20-20KHz sounds the same regardless what name brand is on the box.

If you don't have enough power, or have a very difficult load to drive(which would mean that you are no longer operating said amp within its clean output capabilities), then a better quality or higher powered amp or AVR may make a difference. If you are clipping and distorting, a more powerful amp will improve sound quality. But 20 watts from Denon, Marantz, Yamaha, Krell, Macintosh....there is no difference. There are a few audiophile type amps that intentionally distort and color the sound. They will obviously sound different.

I used to believe this was true because it's commonly stated here on AVS, but unfortunately it was not my experience at all. I had a Denon X4100W receiver that I was using with an external Outlaw Audio 7140 amplifier and external Dirac Live room correction, so I was only using the Denon as a preamp in direct mode, no sound modes, tone control adjustments, or room correction, testing stereo music. This post (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-re...l#post55712868) got me interested in swapping out the Denon with an Anthem MRX 720 and the difference was immediate and obvious (so obvious that I'm constantly listening to music on my setup after getting the Anthem now, even songs I don't particularly like are addicting to listen to just to hear how they sound). That post describes the difference much better than I can. I had several people that I didn't tell about the receiver swap hear and comment on the differences as well. And there are no issues with level matching because the Anthem sounds better at all volumes. It's easy to forget but there is much, much more to good sound than frequency response measurements.
MUDCAT45 likes this.

Speakers: Ascend Acoustics Sierra RAAL Towers & Horizon w/ Mapleshade 4" Maple Platforms & Brass Heavyfeet ・ Ascend Sierra Luna satellitesRythmik FV18 aluminum cone subwoofer x2 ・ JBL GX-1200 subwoofer x5 direct mounted to seats
Components: Anthem MRX 720 ・ miniDSP DDRC-88BM with Dirac Live ・ Anthem Statement P5 ・ JVC DLA-RS540

Last edited by pink soda; 07-02-2019 at 09:03 PM.
pink soda is offline  
post #49 of 51 Old 07-02-2019, 09:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bigguyca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: East Turkestan
Posts: 1,767
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1100 Post(s)
Liked: 928
Quote:
Originally Posted by pink soda View Post
I used to believe this was true because it's commonly stated here on AVS, but unfortunately it was not my experience at all. I had a Denon X4100W receiver that I was using with an external Outlaw Audio 7140 amplifier and external Dirac Live room correction, so I was only using the Denon as a preamp in direct mode, no sound modes or tone control adjustments, testing stereo music. This post (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-re...l#post55712868) got me interested in swapping out the Denon with an Anthem MRX 720 and the difference was immediate and obvious. That post describes the difference much better than I can. I had several people that I didn't tell about the receiver swap hear and comment on the differences as well. And there are no issues with level matching because the Anthem sounds better at all volumes. It's easy to forget but there is much, much more to good sound than frequency response measurements.

In the post you reference, analog stereo, such as CD, inputs were likely used. I've asked the creator of the post you reference which inputs were used, but have received no response.

Signals into the Denon/Marantz AVR/AVP's analog stereo inputs, not the external multi-channel inputs found on some models, all go through an analog-to-digital-to-analog conversion process. This is true even if direct or pure direct are engaged. This subject has been addressed on several/many occasions in D/M threads.

Specifically the signal flow is: -8.5 dB attenuation using circuitry with average at best opamps using very low supply voltages. This attenuation is to reduce the signal to less than 1 V, which the voltage limit of the AKM ADC used for analog-to-digital conversion. The ADC has less good specifications than the DAC IC's in these units. If digital processing is engaged then the digital stream goes through the DSP and other chips. The digital signal is then converted to analog again via the DAC IC and associated circuitry. Any required adjustments to the analog signal level are made via the active IC volume control that can have +/-gain.

Because of the way stereo analog inputs are handled in these D/M units it is very possible that differences could be heard vs. other AVR's.
pink soda likes this.
bigguyca is offline  
post #50 of 51 Old 07-03-2019, 07:18 AM
Member
 
pink soda's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: VA
Posts: 70
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigguyca View Post
In the post you reference, analog stereo, such as CD, inputs were likely used. I've asked the creator of the post you reference which inputs were used, but have received no response.

Signals into the Denon/Marantz AVR/AVP's analog stereo inputs, not the external multi-channel inputs found on some models, all go through an analog-to-digital-to-analog conversion process. This is true even if direct or pure direct are engaged. This subject has been addressed on several/many occasions in D/M threads.

Specifically the signal flow is: -8.5 dB attenuation using circuitry with average at best opamps using very low supply voltages. This attenuation is to reduce the signal to less than 1 V, which the voltage limit of the AKM ADC used for analog-to-digital conversion. The ADC has less good specifications than the DAC IC's in these units. If digital processing is engaged then the digital stream goes through the DSP and other chips. The digital signal is then converted to analog again via the DAC IC and associated circuitry. Any required adjustments to the analog signal level are made via the active IC volume control that can have +/-gain.

Because of the way stereo analog inputs are handled in these D/M units it is very possible that differences could be heard vs. other AVR's.

The post I referenced tested both analog ("Test as a Pre-Amp") and digital (optical) inputs ("Testing the Anthem's DAC"). In my own testing my most common audio source was digital, over HDMI. I agree that the DAC and ADC conversions must be playing a major factor in the difference, thank you for the detailed explanation. I know some people believe all modern, well-designed DACs should sound the same as well, but again, this wasn't my experience. I'm still shocked and annoyed that the Denon degraded my sound so much.

Speakers: Ascend Acoustics Sierra RAAL Towers & Horizon w/ Mapleshade 4" Maple Platforms & Brass Heavyfeet ・ Ascend Sierra Luna satellitesRythmik FV18 aluminum cone subwoofer x2 ・ JBL GX-1200 subwoofer x5 direct mounted to seats
Components: Anthem MRX 720 ・ miniDSP DDRC-88BM with Dirac Live ・ Anthem Statement P5 ・ JVC DLA-RS540

Last edited by pink soda; 07-03-2019 at 07:23 AM.
pink soda is offline  
post #51 of 51 Old 07-04-2019, 08:57 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scotth3886's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: New Albany, OH
Posts: 8,229
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3997 Post(s)
Liked: 2464
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigguyca View Post
Likely you are kidding about the above (hopefully), but perhaps to put too fine a point on this subject, the given was 20 watts, and there was no limitation on the specific speakers used.

We all make mistakes, I'm amazed that people don't find more of mine. That said, a second point concerning the overall post, is that likely many people read your post and didn't find an error (assume you meant McIntosh). Even if a 1,000 people read the post and didn't see the error, the error never-the-less exists. The same can be said for listening trials. Just because listeners don't hear differences, doesn't mean they don't exist and in fact are audible to some listeners.

Another thought on this subject concerns a thought experiment concerning the conductor of a symphony orchestra. Evidently the conductor hears and sees all sort of details concerning the playing by the members of the orchestra. Let's say we talk to one of the members of the orchestra in advance, and have that player do something subtly, but audibly noticeable (to the conductor) and wrong during the performance (let's say practice to avoid issues!) and the conductor notices the issue.

Then lets take a set of people with my knowledge and experience of listening to an orchestras (50 to 100 musicians) and the music they are playing, at the conductor's location. My level of knowledge and experience in this case is zero. Have the orchestra play a short segment of the performance several times. At random, some performances will have the error and some not. It seems unlikely that I, or my 100 clones, or huge number of other similarly (un)qualified people, will hear the issue, or in fact, a difference. Does that mean that the issue doesn't exist, or that the issue isn't audible, clearly no. This lack of recognition of the differences in the performance stems from some combination of lack of experience, knowledge or physical capabilities.

Some people have extensive experience and skills in listening to recorded music. It seems possible that these people, using selections with which they are familiar, and in a familiar system, with one change, say an AVR, can hear differences that the masses don't. It also may be possible that some individuals have the ability to key on certain characteristics of music and hear changes to the music even in less structured settings.

Human's hearing processes are still not fully understood. (If someone is an expert here please contribute.) Based on limited reading about a year ago, valid analytical models of what output the various parts of the ear will produce based on specific stimuli, or even models that can predict the output ignoring the underlying physical ear, are not available. Again based on some very basic reading, it does appear that parts of the sensing system (some of the hair cells) can adapt (be moved to change response) as the overall hearing system learns. It appears that an equivalent of 5 to 6 bits of entropy are available in each of the many channels from the basic hearing system to higher levels and that efficient use is made of this entropy. If we could simulate the hearing process like a digital or analog circuit, we'd have better answers concerning what we can hear and not hear, but that level of knowledge isn't available.
Sorry, old post, but I'll still respond.

That's exactly what I do. Only one change at a time so everything else stays precisely the same. Plus, late at night in my listening room downstairs, and with everything off, including the icemaker in the fridge upstairs, I have a in-room noise floor of 15db so I can have almost 100db of real-life dynamic range and using speakers with THD approaching that of my amp, you bet I'll hear things. Additionally, I'll use recordings that I'm hugely familiar with, mostly piano, which is a bitch to record. It's much much harder, if not impossible, if I'm somewhere else with everything unfamiliar to me.
Scotth3886 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off