A/B Comparing Receivers DOs and DON'Ts? Spent $2,600 to compare Marantz SR7005 vs Yamaha

[bizmord]

So .... just purchased these 2 receivers to play around with,.
\

Marantz SR7005
vs
Yamaha RX-A2020

Since I don't feel like spending hours learning a unit I won't keep .... what are some basics and just how you would go about comparing these two? What setting and what procedure would you employ if you were comparing Receivers in your home?

any input is appreciated.
thanks

 

[cschang]

The main thing, use an SPL meter and make sure you are listening at the same levels when using the different receivers.

To make things easier, set the speakers to large, and don't use the subwoofer.

Make sure you are comparing EQ'd to EQ'd and direct to direct. When EQ'd to EQ'd, make sure you run the calibration routines under the same conditions.

I'm sure there are other things I am leaving out.

 

[Speedskater]

The biggest difference between receivers of about the same horsepower is the DSP functions. The list of functions gets longer and longer, but not all DSP programs have the same quality or ease of use.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Compare Pure Direct 2.1 mode (Set Large, LFE+Main) on the Marantz vs the Stereo or Straight 2.1 (Large, LFE+Main) on the Yamaha.

Compare the RC of Marantz vs RC of Yamaha.

 

[cschang]

Compare Pure Direct 2.1 mode (Set Large, LFE+Main) on the Marantz vs the Stereo or Straight 2.1 (Large, LFE+Main) on the Yamaha..

Why would you want to compare in that config?

 

[Grador]

Why would you want to compare in that config?

It compares the least amount of signal processing that allows 2.1 operation on both units. The yamaha does not use the subwoofer in pure direct mode.

 

[cschang]

It compares the least amount of signal processing that allows 2.1 operation on both units. The yamaha does not use the subwoofer in pure direct mode.

Ahh...got it. Thanks. I didn't realize pure direct vs pure direct wouldn't be an apples to apples comparison.

I would just take the subwoofer out of it. Run the mains fullrange, no sub. Then do the mains small with sub.

 

[bizmord]

The main thing, use an SPL meter and make sure you are listening at the same levels when using the different receivers.

To make things easier, set the speakers to large, and don't use the subwoofer.

Make sure you are comparing EQ'd to EQ'd and direct to direct. When EQ'd to EQ'd, make sure you run the calibration routines under the same conditions.

I'm sure there are other things I am leaving out.

But why would I want to hear my speakers as "Large" if I never use them that way,. These are bookshelves and not full range speakers. Yesterday I changed my crossover from 60 to 90 and felt like bass and overall sound became tighter and much more defined. Does that make sense? I for some reason always thought that crossing at 60 is the best .... until yesterday.

Compare Pure Direct 2.1 mode (Set Large, LFE+Main) on the Marantz vs the Stereo or Straight 2.1 (Large, LFE+Main) on the Yamaha.

Compare the RC of Marantz vs RC of Yamaha.

What's RC?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Ahh...got it. Thanks. I didn't realize pure direct vs pure direct wouldn't be an apples to apples comparison.

I would just take the subwoofer out of it. Run the mains fullrange, no sub. Then do the mains small with sub.

Well, some of us want Pure Direct + Subs too, not just PD 2.0.

I never listen to 2.0, so why would I want to compare in 2.0?

Some people want to use PD + Sub, but they can't! So they just use Stereo + Sub.

Check out the PD vs Stereo thread: http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/amps-pre-pros-receivers/84899-pure-direct-vs-stereo.html

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

But why would I want to hear my speakers as "Large" if I never use them that way,. These are bookshelves and not full range speakers. Yesterday I changed my crossover from 60 to 90 and felt like bass and overall sound became tighter and much more defined. Does that make sense? I for some reason always thought that crossing at 60 is the best .... until yesterday.

What's RC?

Makes sense to me.

I always use my subs regardless. I don't care for 2.0. I care for PD 2.2.

Of course, I always turn off RC (Room Rorrection like Audyssey). But some people like RC.

 

[cschang]

Well, some of us want Pure Direct + Subs too, not just PD 2.0.

I never listen to 2.0, so why would I want to compare in 2.0?

Some people want to use PD + Sub, but they can't! So they just use Stereo + Sub.

Check out the PD vs Stereo thread: http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/amps-pre-pros-receivers/84899-pure-direct-vs-stereo.html

My point is not wanting double bass. I don't want the speakers run large without a crossover to the sub. Small, with crossover to sub, would be what I want to do in that instance.

 

[cschang]

But why would I want to hear my speakers as "Large" if I never use them that way,. These are bookshelves and not full range speakers. Yesterday I changed my crossover from 60 to 90 and felt like bass and overall sound became tighter and much more defined. Does that make sense? I for some reason always thought that crossing at 60 is the best .... until yesterday.

If that's the way you want to listen to the setup, then that is what you should do.

For me, if I were to compare receivers, I want to hear it in 2.0 first. The processing for 2.1 is pretty standard.

 

[Pyrrho]

... Yesterday I changed my crossover from 60 to 90 and felt like bass and overall sound became tighter and much more defined. Does that make sense? I for some reason always thought that crossing at 60 is the best .... until yesterday.
...

You should always select a frequency above the -3dB point of the speakers. Thus, if the speakers are rated 60-20,000Hz +/-3dB, you should select a frequency above 60Hz, because it is already on the downward slope of its frequency response curve at that point, and is not as capable at that frequency as it is above it. I have bookshelf speakers rated 50-40,000Hz +/-3dB, and I use 80Hz for the crossover point.

Exactly how much above the -3dB point will depend on the particular speakers, and also on how hard you plan on driving them. Basically, the louder you want it, the higher the frequency should be, to keep the woofer from bottoming out. This is assuming that the subwoofer can handle things, of course.

If one frequency were always the best choice, there would be no point in having that aspect of the performance adjustable.

 

[bizmord]

You should always select a frequency above the -3dB point of the speakers. Thus, if the speakers are rated 60-20,000Hz +/-3dB, you should select a frequency above 60Hz, because it is already on the downward slope of its frequency response curve at that point, and is not as capable at that frequency as it is above it. I have bookshelf speakers rated 50-40,000Hz +/-3dB, and I use 80Hz for the crossover point.

Exactly how much above the -3dB point will depend on the particular speakers, and also on how hard you plan on driving them. Basically, the louder you want it, the higher the frequency should be, to keep the woofer from bottoming out. This is assuming that the subwoofer can handle things, of course.

If one frequency were always the best choice, there would be no point in having that aspect of the performance adjustable.

Makes sense.

My Speakers are Sierra-1 Bamboo Loudspeaker
subwoofer is Rythmik F12 Direct Servo Subwoofer

i found that XO at 90 for music was the best.

 

[cschang]

I cross mine at 80hz to my Rythmik F15HP. Above that, I start hearing differences.

I used to have a different sub, and with that one I had to cross at 60hz.

 

[Grador]

If that's the way you want to listen to the setup, then that is what you should do.

For me, if I were to compare receivers, I want to hear it in 2.0 first. The processing for 2.1 is pretty standard.

This is not true in the least. In the thread ADTG linked you to we discussed this a bit, but to sum it up: many denons [and marantz] receivers have a separate analog crossover for subwoofers in pure direct mode. No yamahas do this. ADTG and a few others believe that pure direct sounds better than not pure direct even with all additional processing off.

 

[mtrycrafts]

But why would I want to hear my speakers as "Large" if I never use them that way,. These are bookshelves and not full range speakers. Yesterday I changed my crossover from 60 to 90 and felt like bass and overall sound became tighter and much more defined. Does that make sense? I for some reason always thought that crossing at 60 is the best .... until yesterday.

What's RC?

I think the RC is Remote control.
Your bookshelf speakers are just too small to cross over at 60 Hz, that is why the improvements you are hearing when crossed higher. May even want to try 120 just as a test and see. It is a free test.

 

[bizmord]

So ........... sound update ....

Yesterday, changed music to play through all speakers with subwoofer instead of just 2ch stereo without sub.
Also ... changed Crossover from 60 to 90.
On receiver did a -1 on Treble

Result .... sound is great. I am getting delivery of Marantz 7005 and Yamaha rx-a2020 today. Don't even know if I should unpack them. Do you ever upgrade even when you are satisfied with the sound?

Still can't get the upgrade bug out of me.


Compared WAV vs FLAC vs 320Kbps MP3 vs 128Kbps MP3.

128 is out ..... 320 is perfect middle (easy to get, sounds close to FLAC)

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Do you ever upgrade even when you are satisfied with the sound?

Never ever in a million years!

You're utterly insane!

 

[bizmord]

Never ever in a million years!

You're utterly insane!

I guess we all are ;-)