AVS Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've narrowed it down to these three choices. Here is my system, room, and goals:


system

******


Directv HR21 via hdmi

soon to arrive JVC bluray via hdmi

soon to arrive server or computer

Toshiba Regza 40XF550U (1080p/120hz)

PSB Image B25/C40/eventual PSB ceiling speakers

Energy S10.3 sub


room

****


my den upstairs, which measures 14 x 17 with 10 ft ceilings. Plaster walls, minimal carpeting, wood plantation shutters opposite the front 3 speakers and display. The receiver will be in a built-in bookcase which limits depth and was/is a factor. The den will be used for 5.1 tv/movie watching with the back two channels assigned to zone 2 and driving ceiling speakers in the kitchen, dining/living room, and enclosed front porch for parties and the like.


But my overriding goal is 90% music, done via CD in stereo, with my tastes being centered on acoustic jazz.


***********


from my research, the differences that apply to ME include the following:


denon - has 5 (count 'em, FIVE) hdmi inputs, full Audessey array, better video processing, and better GUI.


Marantz - 3 hdmi, basic Audessey, more power (6003 benchtested at 130w in stereo and 97/7 channels driven), "more musical" rep.


Prices:


denon - 600-650 from authorized online dealers

5003 - 499 delivered for a refurb

6003 - 700-ish plus shipping.


Has anyone compared these? My local BB has the denon but it's pointless to try and listen there. And my local marantz dealer is out of stock, awaiting 5004/6004 arrivals.


Last note: I MIGHT consider the 5004, but the 6004 is too much dinero.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,035 Posts
I threw Audyssey in the creek. Dynamic volume is horrible...makes the volume 'pulse' in and out as it changes. MultEQ XT never did set things up better than I could myself. Personally, I wouldn't buy a receiver based on it having 'Audyssey'. I would buy it based on power and features you 'need', how it looks and sounds to you.


One thing you didn't mention is that Denon manuals are written in Klingon so find an interpreter. The remotes are awkward to say the least.


The GUI is something you use how many times? Well..once anyway so it's not really a consideration...put it this way, I wouldn't pay MORE money to have a 'nicer looking' GUI...but that's just my opinion.


I'm not sure about the video processing aspect for you. For me, there isn't any receiver that will make my picture look any better for under $1000 and even the units with Reon chips only make it look very 'marginally' better...not worth the money imo. Myself, like most others watch almost all HD feeds...whether it be TV or Movies so it's really a non-issue also.


I'd buy receivers for audio and TV's for video.


So basically...my opinion would be to get the Marantz over the Denon any day. I've owned Denon and while they are good....they can be frustrating. Not a great 'first time' buy for a receiver *not saying it's your first receiver*.


I would love to have that Marantz SR6003. I don't care if it only had 2 HDMI inputs...I can buy a switcher for $50 and turn it into 7 inputs! Buy the receiver that you think will give you better quality sound and power...that's what I think anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Interesting take, and I'm definitely in general agreement.


While this wont be my first AVR (I've had 3, dating back to the pro-logic days), it will be the best I've ever purchased (at least until I finish my downstairs HT room, which is still gutted from Katrina - a situation I vow to resolve by the kickoff of the 2010 NFL season, with a budget of at least 10K
). My current Onkyo 576 has Audessey and aside from setting levels for 3.1 movie watching (I'm waiting to install ceiling speakers until I paint the entire upstairs), I don't use it. I do most of my music listening in direct or 2.1, and it sounds decent.


For the life of me, I can't see EVER needing 5 hdmi inputs - I don't game, and the server will be the 3rd device... down the road.


So it all comes down to musicality and real world power.


Interestingly, while the Denon weighs ~4 lbs. less than the Marantz, it also 6 amps/720W vs. the marantz 650w (all per owners manuals). I'm sure there's more to it - can anyone else advise?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,122 Posts
I had narrowed it down to the 6003 vs the Denon 2310/890 and chose the Denon.


I love Audyssey, it has worked tremendously well for me. It took a couple of tries to get it right (I did it wrong the first few times and it was horrible). But after reading through some of the tip/tricks in the Audyssey thread, the results were terrific and I would never buy a receiver without it ever again. For TV and movie watching Dynamic EQ is the feature of the year...I love it. I don't care about Dynamic Volume as much but it's nice to have it for just casual late night watching. I've had receivers with Audyssey, YPAO and MCACC and I like Audyssey the best and it's the only one I really trust to do it right (providing you do the measurements correctly)

I've verified my Audyssey runs myself with RTA software and I think it does a terrific job. I'm not sure why some people don't find it works well, but it is very effective IMO. I don't even need my SMS-1 anymore, as Audyssey was good enough to target the main anomaly I had in the 40-60Hz range.


As far as power, you have enough IMO for your setup with either but the Marantz has preouts so you can add external amps if you ever need it.


The real value of the GUI on the Denon is volume overlay. I can't see my front receiver display and it's nice to be able to get the volume back to a known state after somebody turns it down.


EDIT:


I forgot the last reason I chose the Denon over the Marantz. The Denon allows per-speaker crossover setting and the Marantz DOESN'T! (correct me if I'm wrong here). My rear speakers are smaller than my front mains, and the Marantz would have forced me to use 80Hz all around whereas on the Denon, I can set the fronts to either 40 or 60Hz crossover. This sounds better when I run my receiver in 2.1 mode for music. I ended up with 40Hz. This is 2009, I'm not sure why receiver makers still don't have this kind of per-speaker adjustment on their mid range models. I was originally going to buy a Pioneer Elite Class-D model for their sound quality but I ruled them out for that reason alone.


Secondly, the Denon also allows per-input video adjustment. I have the brightness, DNR and contrast a bit higher for cable HD box (mostly well lit room watching), and I have my Blu-Ray settings optimized for low light viewing. The Denon remembers the setting for each source input. Pretty sure the Marantz doesn't have any of this
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,007 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by warpdrive /forum/post/17018266


I love Audyssey, it has worked tremendously well for me. It took a couple of tries to get it right (I did it wrong the first few times and it was horrible). But after reading through some of the tip/tricks in the Audyssey thread, the results were terrific and I would never buy a receiver without it ever again. For TV and movie watching Dynamic EQ is the feature of the year...I love it. I don't care about Dynamic Volume as much but it's nice to have it for just casual late night watching. I've had receivers with Audyssey, YPAO and MCACC and I like Audyssey the best and it's the only one I really trust to do it right (providing you do the measurements correctly)

Ditto. I used to hate room correction systems, but the Audyssey MultiEQ combined with the dynamic EQ has won me over. You do have to mess around a bit to get it just right, but it's worth it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rnatalli /forum/post/17018679


Ditto. I used to hate room correction systems, but the Audyssey MultiEQ combined with the dynamic EQ has won me over.

As an Audessey noob, I'll ask this... "just for the sake of arguement".



Is the Audessey suite in the 890 the same as that found in the new marantz 5004/6004?

http://us.marantz.com/Products/172.asp


my wife "wants me to be happy with my new toy" but she sure liked the idea of not having to constantly hit mute when commercials come on...


Don't say it - I know...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,122 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by drumsky /forum/post/17019028


As an Audessey noob, I'll ask this... "just for the sake of arguement".



Is the Audessey suite in the 890 the same as that found in the new marantz 5004/6004?

http://us.marantz.com/Products/172.asp


:

Not quite, because with the Marantz, it is not capable of doing Audyssey *AND* HD Audio decoding at the same time. This means if you watch Bluray and your player does not have decoding on board, you won't get any Audyssey. But for other audio streams, yes the Marantz has both Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume


Also looking at the manual, the 6004 Marantz still doesn't have per speaker crossover adjustment.


Personally The Marantz recievers are too crippled in their audio management. Denon does it better than any other maker except maybe Onkyo. I'd recommend the 990 if you are considering the 6004. It shuld be about the same price
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
259 Posts
I've got the Marantz 6003, couldn't be happier. I went from an Onkyo 705 to this and I there was a definite improvement (plus no lip sync issues!)


BUT the Dennon is a solid choice also.


I think it comes down to Audessey being important to you or not, I personally HATE they way Audessey calibrates my system, I've tried many times many different ways, never suited my tastes, not even closely.


That being said, it may suit your taste, so its a touch choice. If I were you, go with one you get a better deal on and never look back. Both solid units.


Also, i don't know if it matters to you but I LOVE the clean look of the 6003, Shouldn't really matter in theory, but hey I like to show off my stuff!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,122 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwc13ac /forum/post/17019149


I think it comes down to Audessey being important to you or not, I personally HATE they way Audessey calibrates my system, I've tried many times many different ways, never suited my tastes, not even closely

Time for this link
http://www.audyssey.com/blog/2009/05...-vs-preference
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
The 990 doesn't fit my wall unit - too deep a chassis. It's the only one of the 90 series with that issue.


Ah well...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
So, like everyone, i'm aware the Denon 890 has most, if not all the video/audio options one could want, and the Marantz 5003 lacks quite a bit. So, what it comes down to is features vs. audio quality...assuming audio quality is even a valid concern.


But in regards to the sonic quality, here's a wrinkle i want to throw in. I have a set of 6 of the original, full-size Mirage Omnisat satellite speakers (plus a Mirage sub). I currently own an HK 354 that i want to dump on ebay, due to several issues i have with it (none of which is the sonic quality, which is great).


That said, i've never used the Omnisats with anything other than my HK 354, and two previous HK's. So, i have no idea what they would sound like with a different receiver. They seem to sound pretty awesome, but i have no other-brand of receivers to reference them against.


So, i guess i want to know...is there a receiver suggestion that would match best to my Omnisats, as far as sound? I know different receivers have their own sonic qualities, but omnipolar speakers are a unique design, and so i don't know if a typical "musical" receiver (Marantz, HK) would actually BE more musical for the speakers i own. My apartment is 20x14, and mostly hard surfaces.


On the other hand, would any differences between the two receivers be negligible, and i won't even be aware of once i have one hooked up and am using it for a while?


I suppose on the Denon i can individually adjust audio setting for music, so as to tailor the sound to be warmer or cooler if i needed, right? Is there that kind of bass/treble control available for different inputs on the Denon?


Ok, that was a lot, i know. But any opinions would be greatly appreciated.


paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,085 Posts
The Omnisats seem to have a reasonably high 89 db sensitivity. Since your room seems to be of a medium size (although you didn't say how high the ceiling is) I'd guess that any good 100W/ch receiver would work for you if it has a power supply capable of 400W or more. That includes both the Denon and Marantz receivers that you're considering.


For more details, like how the two receivers' room equalization features work, I suggest asking in their respective threads on the Forum.


p.s. According to its manual, the Denon 890 includes both Audyssey and manual equalization circuits, so you can tune speaker/amp/room response to some extent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,281 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by warpdrive /forum/post/17018266


I had narrowed it down to the 6003 vs the Denon 2310/890 and chose the Denon.


I love Audyssey, it has worked tremendously well for me. It took a couple of tries to get it right (I did it wrong the first few times and it was horrible). But after reading through some of the tip/tricks in the Audyssey thread, the results were terrific and I would never buy a receiver without it ever again. For TV and movie watching Dynamic EQ is the feature of the year...I love it. I don't care about Dynamic Volume as much but it's nice to have it for just casual late night watching. I've had receivers with Audyssey, YPAO and MCACC and I like Audyssey the best and it's the only one I really trust to do it right (providing you do the measurements correctly)

I've verified my Audyssey runs myself with RTA software and I think it does a terrific job. I'm not sure why some people don't find it works well, but it is very effective IMO. I don't even need my SMS-1 anymore, as Audyssey was good enough to target the main anomaly I had in the 40-60Hz range.


As far as power, you have enough IMO for your setup with either but the Marantz has preouts so you can add external amps if you ever need it.


The real value of the GUI on the Denon is volume overlay. I can't see my front receiver display and it's nice to be able to get the volume back to a known state after somebody turns it down.


EDIT:


I forgot the last reason I chose the Denon over the Marantz. The Denon allows per-speaker crossover setting and the Marantz DOESN'T! (correct me if I'm wrong here). My rear speakers are smaller than my front mains, and the Marantz would have forced me to use 80Hz all around whereas on the Denon, I can set the fronts to either 40 or 60Hz crossover. This sounds better when I run my receiver in 2.1 mode for music. I ended up with 40Hz. This is 2009, I'm not sure why receiver makers still don't have this kind of per-speaker adjustment on their mid range models. I was originally going to buy a Pioneer Elite Class-D model for their sound quality but I ruled them out for that reason alone.


Secondly, the Denon also allows per-input video adjustment. I have the brightness, DNR and contrast a bit higher for cable HD box (mostly well lit room watching), and I have my Blu-Ray settings optimized for low light viewing. The Denon remembers the setting for each source input. Pretty sure the Marantz doesn't have any of this

these are all valid criticisms of the marantz models (I have a 6003). the room eq thing with bitstream is a non issue because almost every blu ray player will output pcm at the very least these days. If you really want video processing the marantz is NOT for you--passthrough is the way to go, I had a 2808 in one of my systems for testing purposes and it sounded like monkeybutt so I gave marantz a try for the upstairs system and the out of the box sound is significantly better imho, I am a very happy camper with the marantz sound wise but with respect to video and total features denon has more to offer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,281 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by comiconline /forum/post/18127553


So, like everyone, i'm aware the Denon 890 has most, if not all the video/audio options one could want, and the Marantz 5003 lacks quite a bit. So, what it comes down to is features vs. audio quality...assuming audio quality is even a valid concern.


But in regards to the sonic quality, here's a wrinkle i want to throw in. I have a set of 6 of the original, full-size Mirage Omnisat satellite speakers (plus a Mirage sub). I currently own an HK 354 that i want to dump on ebay, due to several issues i have with it (none of which is the sonic quality, which is great).


That said, i've never used the Omnisats with anything other than my HK 354, and two previous HK's. So, i have no idea what they would sound like with a different receiver. They seem to sound pretty awesome, but i have no other-brand of receivers to reference them against.


So, i guess i want to know...is there a receiver suggestion that would match best to my Omnisats, as far as sound? I know different receivers have their own sonic qualities, but omnipolar speakers are a unique design, and so i don't know if a typical "musical" receiver (Marantz, HK) would actually BE more musical for the speakers i own. My apartment is 20x14, and mostly hard surfaces.


On the other hand, would any differences between the two receivers be negligible, and i won't even be aware of once i have one hooked up and am using it for a while?


I suppose on the Denon i can individually adjust audio setting for music, so as to tailor the sound to be warmer or cooler if i needed, right? Is there that kind of bass/treble control available for different inputs on the Denon?


Ok, that was a lot, i know. But any opinions would be greatly appreciated.


paul

my marantz 6003 is pushing mirage omd-5's and the newer center channel (forget the model) and it does it with aplomb. i dont think youll be disappointed.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top