AVS Forum banner

121 - 140 of 10404 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,986 Posts
I wonder how good it will sound 11 amps they have to be digital! The rating is going to be 50 Watts all channel driven :(
I'm running a Nuforce MCA-18 using 6 of its 8 channels @ 55w @ 8 ohms for TF,TR,Rear surrounds and it gets the job done even at reference volume. Had to digital due to space and not wanting that many amps sucking down more power than my A/C:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,276 Posts
I wonder how good it will sound 11 amps they have to be digital
only the back and height channels, which normally don't use as much power. The front and surround amps are the same as before.

Side note - class D amplification is named after the fourth letter in the alphabet, and isn't digital.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,172 Posts
Even 5k cut off for avm60??
Not a big deal. A good system won't require any correction above the transition region (200-500Hz, depending on room size) anyway.

Above that you're equalizing the speaker, not correcting the room. The beauty of ARC is not only that it does a pretty good job (better than the other room correction systems, IMO) in that range, but also that you can actually set it not to equalize any higher.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
I really hope the new receiver or at least the processor will have delay times in 10cm increments.
30cm/1foot not granular enough.
Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,276 Posts
I really hope the new receiver or at least the processor will have delay times in 10cm increments. 30cm/1foot not granular enough.
The acoustic center of a speaker varies with frequency, identical speakers are rarely used in all channels, ears are 10 cm apart, and soundtrack makers don't create with their heads in vises. These things and more turn smaller delay steps into a wash.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,098 Posts
For me, a Yamaha RX-Z11 was a high-end receiver, when I bought it. Time to upgrade and I was dithering between The Yamaha 3050 and the Denon X6200. I'm really not familiar with Anthem, but I'm open to spending more for more. Please, what is the more?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,049 Posts
For me, a Yamaha RX-Z11 was a high-end receiver, when I bought it. Time to upgrade and I was dithering between The Yamaha 3050 and the Denon X6200. I'm really not familiar with Anthem, but I'm open to spending more for more. Please, what is the more?
For many going with Anthem, ARC is the more (Anthem Room Correction). Many consider it better that Yamaha's YPAO or the Audyssey MultEQ XT32 found on the Denon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbojohngt

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
The acoustic center of a speaker varies with frequency, identical speakers are rarely used in all channels, ears are 10 cm apart, and soundtrack makers don't create with their heads in vises. These things and more turn smaller delay steps into a wash.
I am not entirely sure what are your trying to say, or the reply wasn't meant to answer my post?
However 30 cm delay increment it's way too large. All the other out there have them in 10 cm increment(denon, marantz, onkyo..) not to mention Arcam goes down to cm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,157 Posts
For me, a Yamaha RX-Z11 was a high-end receiver, when I bought it. Time to upgrade and I was dithering between The Yamaha 3050 and the Denon X6200. I'm really not familiar with Anthem, but I'm open to spending more for more. Please, what is the more?
This is an excerpt from Home Theater Review of the last gen MRX 710:

If, on the other hand, you're considering a move from another brand of receiver, the question is a little easier to answer. If you're looking to have all of your streaming audio services housed within one box, if AirPlay or Bluetooth connectivity is a must, if you want front height or front width channels, if you want a receiver that practically sets itself up, then perhaps you should keep looking. But if pure audio performance is what you're looking for, if you're itching for a surround sound receiver that performs shockingly well with five channels tied behind its back when you're listening to stereo sources, or if you're hunting for an AV receiver that would also make for an amazing (not to mention affordable) preamp when your budget allows, I can't encourage you enough to audition the MRX 710.

I don't know if the 720 will be the same, but for me I don't need all those extra gimmicky features that the Denon/Marantz/Yamaha brands have - my AVR's sole function will be for home theater. The powerful amps won't even be necessary for me since I'm going with separates, but it's good to know that they will be powerful enough for the average Joe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,276 Posts
I am not entirely sure what are your trying to say, or the reply wasn't meant to answer my post? However 30 cm delay increment it's way too large. All the other out there have them in 10 cm increment(denon, marantz, onkyo..) not to mention Arcam goes down to cm.
In the acoustic domain, things don't work neatly enough for smaller steps to make a usable difference and I gave the main reasons. If you have a reason besides menu comparison for maintaining that 30 cm distance increment, which is the same as 1 ms delay increment, is insufficient, what is it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
I don't know if the 720 will be the same, but for me I don't need all those extra gimmicky features that the Denon/Marantz/Yamaha brands have - my AVR's sole function will be for home theater. The powerful amps won't even be necessary for me since I'm going with separates, but it's good to know that they will be powerful enough for the average Joe.
Unfortunately the new receivers will be polluted with gimmicks....Air/Water/Earth Play, Bluetooth/wireless for iphone this, ipad that and so on. And yes the amp section it's now mixed like some channels are less important ?? as you said good enough for average Joe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,276 Posts
^ No Bluetooth, no Airplay, and if the internal amplification is not to liking, the AVM 60 is an option. Wireless network connection also works for ARC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: J.P

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
In the acoustic domain, things don't work neatly enough for smaller steps to make a usable difference and I gave the main reasons. If you have a reason besides menu comparison for maintaining that 30 cm distance increment, which is the same as 1 ms delay increment, is insufficient, what is it?
Yes, 15cm/0.5ms makes a difference(as an info.. I do have same high end speakers all round, Dyns Focus with exactly the same tweeters driven by a 5ch high end amp(parasound halo) exactly the same amp modules. mrx310 used as a pre/pro

And I can say it's not a menu comparison between the above models.. I owned them, and honestly I am waiting for the AVM60 before going back to Arcam.

I don't see any reason for "don't work neatly enough for smaller steps" as we all know the delay it's not a factor in ARC calculation, reason why those values can be change any time.
And finally yes... a processor must have that kind of granularity hence almost all the other vendors have that in receivers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,276 Posts
0.5ms makes a difference
In production, delays applied between channels for 3D effect begin at 10x that amount and are most often 20-60x. The purpose of distance compensation is to make correlated sounds in different channels arrive as intended and 1ms is plenty of tolerance.

www.digido.com/articles-and-demos12/13-bob-katz/20-depth-and-dimension.html

I don't see any reason for "don't work neatly enough for smaller steps"
Back up a few posts and even though you're using five identical speakers, with finer steps you're no longer adjusting for a single position but for a single ear when we use both. Each picks up sounds from all speakers not just the left half or right half of the system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,098 Posts
@bkeeler and @blastermaster
Thanks for your comments. I don't care about streaming or bluetooth connectivity. I do care about the new Dolby Atmos and DTS:X 3-D codecs. I have an 11.2 speaker setup now, planning on using the Yamaha FH and RH as the .4 speakers. I have a pair of AT 44DA Atmos-enabled speakers upfiring to 9' concrete ceiling available, if I feel the need for a pair of the .4 speakers to be an "overhead". I'm currently using Emotiva X-200 and x-100 amps for the mains and center, as preparation for a new receiver that will need outboard amps to get all 11 "channels". I went with the x-100 for the Center because it has provision for a second pair of output connectors for my 8 ohm identical top and bottom center speakers, without fussing about whether to parallel or series them. In the Anthem lineup, I would be looking at the MRX 1120 and I would have to add another amp, because there are only 7 on-board amps. I have some pauses for reflection:
1) My room (mancave) has the right side completely open to another room, so the side reflections will be very different, L to R. The Yamaha YPAO in the 3050 claims to have the ability to compensate for reflections. Denon advocates claim a similar capability for Audessy. I wonder if they really are effective and how ARC deals with this.
2) The Denon has a paid upgrade to Auro. In the Auro thread, and in the recent article in Sound & Vision, many people prefer the Auro upmix for music and some for it's upmix for movies, as well, compared to the Atmos upmix (I'm referring to the artificial upmix, here, not Native Atmos or Auro). In the Yamaha, some (including Scott Wilkinson) prefer the Yamaha DSP Sci-Fi up mix to the Atmos upmix. I think that upmix performance is very important given the back catalog of non-native Auro and DTS:X titles and streaming in 5.1 for the forseeable future. It appears that there is no path to add Auro to the Anthem, so one is left with the "stock" Auro and DTS:X upmixes. We have no idea how the DTS:X upmix will sound with 5.1 material so all of this rambling is just that: rambling about imponderables, at this time.

Would anyone care to comment on my ramblings. Many, if not all of you, are fully convinced of the superiority of Anthem, while I'm just trying to learn and contemplating my first foray into "higher-end".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,049 Posts
only the back and height channels, which normally don't use as much power. The front and surround amps are the same as before.
I won't disagree that the height channels don't need as much power. However, just out of curiosity, are all channels equally powered but just using different amplification topology, or are the heights not able to supply as much power? And the surround backs are included in this? So the 1120 uses 5 channels of amplification that are identical to the x10 series, and 6 channels of class D amplification? Mind you, I'm not worried or upset about the choices made, just curious about the implementation.

Does this also apply to the surround back channels of the 720 - ie, 5 channels of class A/B as before, and the two surround back channels are class D? Thanks.
 
121 - 140 of 10404 Posts
Top