• QuadraphonicQuad welcomes you and encourages your participation! Treat all members with respect. Please keep all discussions civil, even when you have a strong opinion on a particular topic.

    Do not offer for free, offer for sale, offer for trade, or request copies or files of copyrighted material - no matter how rare or unavailable to the public they might be. We do not condone the illegal sharing of music. There are many places on the internet where you can participate in such transactions, but QuadraphonicQuad is not one of them. We are here to encourage and support new multichannel releases from those companies that still provide them and as such the distribution of illegal copies of recordings is counter-productive to that effort. Any posts of this sort will be deleted without notification.

    Please try to avoid discussions that pit one format against another. Hint for new users: make liberal use of the search facilities here at QuadraphonicQuad. Our message base is an incredibly rich resource of detailed information on virtually all topics pertaining to surround-sound. You will be surprised at what you can find with a little digging!

Denon releases new receiver line! 4 New 'X' receivers (June 2020)

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

J. PUPSTER

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
4,686
Location
CALIFORNIA (CENTRAL)
HDMI licensing is expensive:

1. A commitment to buy from QQers might help fund this device (edit: And/or Crowd Funded)
2. Once Involve Audio have an HDMI license HDMI could be added to the next Surround Master too (assuming it’s a company license, not a per product license).
Don't recall if Involve has HDMI on their new Y4 or not, but it sounded like the way @chucky3042 rails against it; it may be per product license (something like $10k per year) -Not sure though!
Since we can't find any on the market, I'd assume the costs are generally prohibitive, I mean there should be a need for this, you'd think?
Pretty sure Chucky's sussed this out already since it would impact how he could market and sell the SMv2; probably could have sold one to GOS 🤠
 

Scott65

701 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Nov 2, 2015
Messages
798
Location
Tasmania, Australia
I wouldn't be able to use this at all! It does have a phono input, but I want a multichannel analog input, too! How else could I hook up my Surround Master?
Having the multi channel input for the SM was one of the major factors that made me choose the receiver I bought last year.
 

humprof

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Jun 10, 2016
Messages
1,609
Location
NoCal
Maranta and Denon owned by same company. They have pretty much same gear.
I've read in a couple of places, however, that on the low end of their lines (which is where I live), Marantz doesn't skimp quite as much on components as Denon does. See, e.g., the first reply here. (The thread is already 6 years old, but I think the distinction still applies, more or less, even since Sound United acquired both brands--and Classe--a couple of years ago.)


On the upper end, though, I think it's a wash, and it really comes down to a question of which aesthetic you prefer.
 
Last edited:

minimumtumbleweed

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
97
Location
Canada
The big thing with these is they have HDMI 2.1 passthrough ports, so support for more bandwidth and variable refresh rates. Doesn't mean much for the music crowd, but pretty great if you're using your receiver for gaming as well. This means you can get 4K at higher than 60Hz, or 8K (of course, you would need a TV and computer to support these as well...).
 

IMachine

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 20, 2013
Messages
1,658
Location
Duesseldorf, Germany
I've read in a couple of places, however, that on the low end of their lines (which is where I live), Marantz doesn't skimp quite as much on components as Denon does. See, e.g., the first reply here. (The thread is already 6 years old, but I think the distinction still applies, more or less, even since Sound United acquired both brands--and Classe--a couple of years ago.)


On the upper end, though, I think it's a wash, and it really comes down to a question of which aesthetic you prefer.
I had a Marantz and now have a Denon!
Both sound good. No matter! The room is a much bigger factor!
 

HomerJAU

Moderator: MCH Media Players
Staff member
Joined
Jun 13, 2013
Messages
3,105
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Theres a Audio guy on the internet that reckons no one can pick an amp sound in a blind test when both are playing same content at same SPL. He offered a huge $$ ‘reward’ years ago and last time I looked the money’s not been claimed. Obviously some amps go much louder than others so they aren’t the same but interesting that a lower levels they are same. Not saying this guy is correct.

Personally when I recently changed my 5 main channels back to my old Arcam AVR (from my Denon X7200WA) I thought the sound was ‘better’. The Arcam is much heavier with 7 amps vs the Denon’s 9 amps. Placebo?
 

DuncanS

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
4,859
Location
UK
Theres a Audio guy on the internet that reckons no one can pick an amp sound in a blind test when both are playing same content at same SPL. He offered a huge $$ ‘reward’ years ago and last time I looked the money’s not been claimed. Obviously some amps go much louder than others so they aren’t the same but interesting that a lower levels they are same. Not saying this guy is correct.

Personally when I recently changed my 5 main channels back to my old Arcam AVR (from my Denon X7200WA) I thought the sound was ‘better’. The Arcam is much heavier with 7 amps vs the Denon’s 9 amps. Placebo?
Now to be controversial, not normally something I like to do!

By and large that is correct with the amps, strange as it may seem, humans aren't the mystical beings the pushers of expense audio tat like to make out we are! I am particularly scathing about the drivel put out by cable manufacturers and their ilk, there is no physics that lies behind what they claim. Audio homeopathy. If people want to buy it that is fair enough, it does no harm to anything but their bank balance.

We are good at discerning some transient distortion, clipping, but not very good at some harmonic distortion, and quite a lot of people can identify hard filtering, so 'brick wall' filtering. Which is why we use higher than Nyquist sampling rates, its not to give more high frequencies, its to ease the response of the low pass filter. Most people hear things which are actually down to frequency response differences (usually the amplifier (even pre-amp) hasn't enough drive) and poor contact in connectors. There are some super-listeners/hearers which can hear way more than the average person, but they are as rare as rocking horse sh*t, but they do exist. I can listen to mp3 in the car but not on my home system, it doesn't sound as good, but there is a measurable reason why.

As an electronic engineer if I can't measure it I can't improve or correct it. Peter Walker the founder of the Quad amplifier company was a very good engineer and realist, and designed some great and importantly, reliable amps. I often listen to a mix of Blu-rays, DVD (-A, DD, DTS), CD, and vinyl, the distortion 'differences' are quite large between the different sources but its actually a lot harder to distinguish between them than you'd think, and after a short while you're listening to the music (which is the purpose after all!) and don't notice the source.

Many moons ago: For quite a while until I could afford a 'better' amp I had an Amstrad amplifier (not great specs, which I bought in my 1st year at Uni) which cost £30, driving my AR93s which cost me £300 (a months post tax salary then!). A friend came round with his £400 Cambridge Audio amp and says you'll hear the difference, lower distortion, better all round - it improved the Bass response a lot as the Amstrad really couldn't drive the speakers that well, no discernible difference in distortion, my friend couldn't understand it!
 

HomerJAU

Moderator: MCH Media Players
Staff member
Joined
Jun 13, 2013
Messages
3,105
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Thanks Duncan. I think in my Denon vs Arcam switch the Arcam has slightly better bass output, since I’m driving 5 full range speakers that’s probably what I hear as the improvement. But this is a very small difference.

No doubt the human brain learns over a fairly short time. I often wonder if that’s the reason HiFi sales guys always say to ‘break in’ new equipment. Because over time we learn to love what we hear (The music), not that the sound actually changes due to the ‘break in’. It’s listener that got ‘broken in’.
 

J. PUPSTER

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
4,686
Location
CALIFORNIA (CENTRAL)
Now to be controversial, not normally something I like to do!

By and large that is correct with the amps, strange as it may seem, humans aren't the mystical beings the pushers of expense audio tat like to make out we are! I am particularly scathing about the drivel put out by cable manufacturers and their ilk, there is no physics that lies behind what they claim. Audio homeopathy. If people want to buy it that is fair enough, it does no harm to anything but their bank balance.

We are good at discerning some transient distortion, clipping, but not very good at some harmonic distortion, and quite a lot of people can identify hard filtering, so 'brick wall' filtering. Which is why we use higher than Nyquist sampling rates, its not to give more high frequencies, its to ease the response of the low pass filter. Most people hear things which are actually down to frequency response differences (usually the amplifier (even pre-amp) hasn't enough drive) and poor contact in connectors. There are some super-listeners/hearers which can hear way more than the average person, but they are as rare as rocking horse sh*t, but they do exist. I can listen to mp3 in the car but not on my home system, it doesn't sound as good, but there is a measurable reason why.

As an electronic engineer if I can't measure it I can't improve or correct it. Peter Walker the founder of the Quad amplifier company was a very good engineer and realist, and designed some great and importantly, reliable amps. I often listen to a mix of Blu-rays, DVD (-A, DD, DTS), CD, and vinyl, the distortion 'differences' are quite large between the different sources but its actually a lot harder to distinguish between them than you'd think, and after a short while you're listening to the music (which is the purpose after all!) and don't notice the source.

Many moons ago: For quite a while until I could afford a 'better' amp I had an Amstrad amplifier (not great specs, which I bought in my 1st year at Uni) which cost £30, driving my AR93s which cost me £300 (a months post tax salary then!). A friend came round with his £400 Cambridge Audio amp and says you'll hear the difference, lower distortion, better all round - it improved the Bass response a lot as the Amstrad really couldn't drive the speakers that well, no discernible difference in distortion, my friend couldn't understand it!
Then factor in variances in DACs and speaker setups and (finally cable weights etc. etc. ... you're gonna love my bud Ralphie!) :ROFLMAO:
 

anandchristi

Well-known Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2014
Messages
175
Location
Calgary, AB, Canada
6700 is their first AVR with DTS:X Pro. Not sure why DTS are flogging a ‘Pro’ version. There has not been many DTS:X movie releases and no music except for demos. The Atmos horse has bolted.
DTS X Pro can run upto 32 speakers. Not sure why, but definitely not close to how ATMOS runs!
 

HomerJAU

Moderator: MCH Media Players
Staff member
Joined
Jun 13, 2013
Messages
3,105
Location
Melbourne, Australia
I can’t see any home users wanting more than 16 speakers. Atmos mixes on BD support 16 although DTS:X is less (12 I think). DTS probably wanted to match Atmos and decided to go to 32 while they were at it.
 

DuncanS

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
4,859
Location
UK
Then factor in variances in DACs and speaker setups and (finally cable weights etc. etc. ... you're gonna love my bud Ralphie!) :ROFLMAO:
The biggest source of distortion in a system are the speakers, so people should spend the maximum they can afford .................. and no more! The room acoustics also have a large effect on the frequency response (the joys of Eigen-vectors if I remember correctly back 40+ years to my Uni course on Acoustics) - a lot of money is spent in studios to get the acoustics right.
 

DuncanS

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
4,859
Location
UK
Thanks Duncan. I think in my Denon vs Arcam switch the Arcam has slightly better bass output, since I’m driving 5 full range speakers that’s probably what I hear as the improvement. But this is a very small difference.

No doubt the human brain learns over a fairly short time. I often wonder if that’s the reason HiFi sales guys always say to ‘break in’ new equipment. Because over time we learn to love what we hear (The music), not that the sound actually changes due to the ‘break in’. It’s listener that got ‘broken in’.
I suspect that the Break-in/Burn-in is another oddity with little basis these days, maybe valid in speakers to get rid of stiffness in materials used in the edge ring surrounds of the cones. Years ago electronic equipment of all kinds was often given a burn-in period to shake out early failures (the bath tub reliability curve) and to allow components to get through initial aging. Modern components are remarkably good and apart from crystal oscillators tend to be stable from day one. Unless the manufacturer uses cheap carbon resistors and cr*p capacitors. Even the almost invisible 0201 size components are not that bad these days, and the reliability of semiconductors is very high (unless the design pushes them close to their limits).

What surprised me is that its happening in cars as well, with my new A5 I didn't have to run it in at all, where as 5 years before I had to follow the run-in 'rules' for my A4 or invalidate the warranty.
 
Last edited:

Imbobman

Well-known Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
121
Location
New Berlin, WI
Ugh, no analogs Ins (one way to reduce cost!); what do you think, can I do without the analogs???

View attachment 52142
No, I think there should be some analog inputs. I don't like that trend. What's it called?.. 'Analog Sunset', I believe.
I have a Yamaha RX-A2010 with quite a few analog inputs but still not enough!
 
Last edited:

JonUrban

Forum Curmudgeon
Staff member
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
15,975
Location
Connecticut
No, I think there should be some analog inputs. I don't like that trend. What's it called?.. 'Analog Sunset', I believe.
I have a Yamaha RX-A2010 with quite a few analog inputs but still not enough!
As an old guy, I agree 100%. You have to have at least on set of 5.1 analog in's. As noted above, where does the SM2 go? Or the Q8 player for that matter! :eek:
 

vinylguy4

600 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
656
Location
San Diego area
I'm going to put in a good word for my NAD T758. It has analog inputs, and you can use tone controls on the analog signals.
The Surround Master works well, you get the subwoofer with the SM and tone controls with the 5.1 or 4.1.
The T758 can do dolby atmos also, 4k,stream internet radio,dirac,....
 
Last edited:

ssully

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Jul 2, 2003
Messages
2,705
Location
in your face
Theres a Audio guy on the internet that reckons no one can pick an amp sound in a blind test when both are playing same content at same SPL. He offered a huge $$ ‘reward’ years ago and last time I looked the money’s not been claimed. Obviously some amps go much louder than others so they aren’t the same but interesting that a lower levels they are same. Not saying this guy is correct.

Personally when I recently changed my 5 main channels back to my old Arcam AVR (from my Denon X7200WA) I thought the sound was ‘better’. The Arcam is much heavier with 7 amps vs the Denon’s 9 amps. Placebo?
The audio guy is Richard Clark and AFAIK his $10K amplifier challenge still stands, though the original page with the test rules is gone. https://www.reddit.com/r/audiophile/comments/2htd0d

The wayback machine still has it, though

 
Top