Simaudio Moon CP-8 AV Processor: A Denon Receiver in Sim Clothing?

gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
The 8801 is superior to my AVP-A1HDCI. :D

But I would still keep my inferior AVP-A1HDCI. :D
Don't believe everything you hear on the forum. Marantz wouldn't be coming out with an AVP caliber product in the near future if that were true.
 
RichB

RichB

Audioholic Field Marshall
Don't believe everything you hear on the forum. Marantz wouldn't be coming out with an AVP caliber product in the near future if that were true.
Rest assured that when Marantz comes out with the AVP caliber product it will leave both products in the dust;
Hardly worth keeping :p

- Rich
 
Last edited:
Marshall_Guthrie

Marshall_Guthrie

Audioholics Videographer Extraordinaire
If you remember, I also bought an EQ's and adjusted the FR response a little in between the amp and the preamp (around 10KHZ) on the same brand of amps (hearing the shift real time as I adjusted the EQ slider) and I still failed. That's a whole topic in itself. So to be clear, when I intentionally put in a couple of db of non-linearity in one of the two comparisons, I still failed when ABX testing even though I could hear the shift real time. Now I knew it was my approach of testing in the blind.
This isn't surprising at all. Harman has done a lot of research on folks that have actually trained to listen vs. folks that just sit down and try it:

Audio Musings by Sean Olive: Part 2 - Differences in Performances of Trained Versus Untrained Listeners

Audio Musings by Sean Olive: Part 1- Do Untrained Listeners Prefer the Same Loudspeakers as Trained Listeners?

Though, the interesting thing from that last link is that preferences remained the same. The trained reviewers were just more critical.

For anyone that fancies themselves a golden-ear, you can try the Harman training program. Be prepared to have your ego crushed initially, but once you approach training your listening in a scientific manner, you may find that your ability to articulate the difference you hear in meaningful ways will improve.

Audio Musings by Sean Olive: Harman's "How to Listen" - A New Computer-based Listener Training Program

Get the program here: http://harmanhowtolisten.blogspot.com

I know that my own listening performance was pretty deplorable when I first tried it. I would love to sit down some professional reviewers that claim to hear the difference in products like Synergistic and other tweaks and pricey cables and see how they do with this program.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Rest assured that when Marantz comes out with the AVP caliber product it will leave both products in the dust;
Hardly worth keeping :p

- Rich
Not really. The only thing that can be added is some newer features which I really don't care about and some enhanced bass management modes that I really do need for my setup but 99.9% other users don't. They can't make the analog preamp section any better than it already is IMO.
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
This isn't surprising at all. Harman has done a lot of research on folks that have actually trained to listen vs. folks that just sit down and try it:

Audio Musings by Sean Olive: Part 2 - Differences in Performances of Trained Versus Untrained Listeners

Audio Musings by Sean Olive: Part 1- Do Untrained Listeners Prefer the Same Loudspeakers as Trained Listeners?

Though, the interesting thing from that last link is that preferences remained the same. The trained reviewers were just more critical.

For anyone that fancies themselves a golden-ear, you can try the Harman training program. Be prepared to have your ego crushed initially, but once you approach training your listening in a scientific manner, you may find that your ability to articulate the difference you hear in meaningful ways will improve.

Audio Musings by Sean Olive: Harman's "How to Listen" - A New Computer-based Listener Training Program

Get the program here: http://harmanhowtolisten.blogspot.com

I know that my own listening performance was pretty deplorable when I first tried it. I would love to sit down some professional reviewers that claim to hear the difference in products like Synergistic and other tweaks and pricey cables and see how they do with this program.

I've used this before. It's a good test but a bit limited. It mostly determines how well you can discern tonal differences. Still much better than nothing at all and worth trying out to anyone curious about more accurately comparing the sonic differences between speakers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

AV_Nut

Junior Audioholic
I would love to sit down some professional reviewers that claim to hear the difference in products like Synergistic and other tweaks and pricey cables and see how they do with this program.
Before you judge, simply walk into the Synergistic room at CES and plop your butt down for over an hour. I've done it 3 years in a row. When you do, I bet the farm that you will be singing a different tune. Can we agree that you have not had the opportunity to sit down and listen for yourself?

In one example, they flip on a switch that puts on a field to the powercord. Switch off=not as good, Switch on= DAMN. You can sit there and flip the switch yourself. Next, they will put in one of these resonator doohickeys in the front of the room, then they add in a couple on the side, then in back. Now they remove them, one by one. You can systematically hear the improvements and when taken away, the loss of improvements. Then they put on a field into a digital cord, switch on==nothing, switch off==nothing. So not everything they claim works to my ear.

I'm as skeptical as they come. I've been lied to by manufactures time and time again how incredible something sounds. So I actually had a hard bias against it working.
 
A

AV_Nut

Junior Audioholic
Don't believe everything you hear on the forum. Marantz wouldn't be coming out with an AVP caliber product in the near future if that were true.
Subjectively, how do you know that one will sound better than the other? Let's pick on Anthem. I prefer the AVM50 over the D2. The D2 does some things better (top end) but the AVM50 is more "musical" (more filtration or maybe lower bandwidth because it is warmer?). I prefer the Magico S1 over the S5. Yes, the S5's go deeper and have more soundstage, But the simpler design of the S1 is preferred to my ears. I like the Silver Monitor Audios (as an aggregate) over the Golds. Yet other can rate the importance of other factors as better in their personal importance. Certainly, the engineers thought that the more spendy product was better.

IMHO, the AVP positively has more "clarity" than the 8801, but the 8801 is more "holographic". Indeed the noise floor of the AVP is more impressive than the 8801. So in my mind, you don't always go forward in every category. If I rate holographics as more important than clarity (and I do), then the 8801 is better. Showing my measurements and pointing to a flagship piece won't change my mind.
 
Marshall_Guthrie

Marshall_Guthrie

Audioholics Videographer Extraordinaire
Before you judge, simply walk into the Synergistic room at CES and plop your butt down for over an hour. I've done it 3 years in a row. When you do, I bet the farm that you will be singing a different tune. Can we agree that you have not had the opportunity to sit down and listen for yourself?
Oh, I absolutely have NOT had the opportunity, but after I get some other projects done, I'm going to see if Gene would back me doing a test of the Synergistic products. However, I will not be doing them at CES or any other sales driven demo. I continue to have this experience, or some variation there of, over and over again at such places:

Audioquest Cable "BoomBox" Demo: Legit Science or Slick Marketing? | Audioholics

My most recent experience was only 3 weeks ago. It was, ironically, also Audioquest, but this time with Ethernet cables. Yes, we were told why wireless and basic ethernet cables were bad, then upgraded to increasingly expensive cables, and told we would hear a difference. We listened, and then the demo leader told us what she heard.

By the way, I was quite aware of my own psychological bias, that I believed I would not hear a difference, and so I worked very hard to hear and not hear differences at a few point. My take away...what a load of crap.

I wonder, did Denny or one of his demonstrators do the same for you? "I'm going to flip a switch and you're going to hear a difference."
 
RichB

RichB

Audioholic Field Marshall
Not really. The only thing that can be added is some newer features which I really don't care about and some enhanced bass management modes that I really do need for my setup but 99.9% other users don't. They can't make the analog preamp section any better than it already is IMO.
That makes sense.
I would like to see advancements in the digital signal processing.

I am making the simple observation that I have found on all the AVR/Preamps I have owned.

Pure Direct sounds difference than Direct which sounds different than Stereo mode with all processing set to flat, speakers set to large, RC off.
Ideally, these should be indistinguishable.
This seems to be an area with more room for improvement than the PD/analog volume control.

- Rich
 
Last edited:
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Don't believe everything you hear on the forum. Marantz wouldn't be coming out with an AVP caliber product in the near future if that were true.
I was only kidding. ;)

Can't improve TOO MUCH on near-perfection. :D
 
Last edited:
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
That makes sense.
I would like to see advancements in the digital signal processing.

I am making the simple observation that I have found on all the AVR/Preamps I have owned.

Pure Direct sounds difference than Direct which sounds different than Stereo mode with all processing set to flat, speakers set to large, RC off.
Ideally, these should be indistinguishable.
This seems to be an area with more room for improvement than the PD/analog volume control.

- Rich
On AV receivers that don't digitize the analog inputs, that shouldn't be the case. Denon Pure Direct, Direct Stereo are sonically indistinguishable (at least on the higher end models) b/c neither mode digitizes the analog inputs or limit bandwidth.
 
Last edited:
A

AV_Nut

Junior Audioholic
Oh, I absolutely have NOT had the opportunity, but after I get some other projects done, I'm going to see if Gene would back me doing a test of the Synergistic products. However, I will not be doing them at CES or any other sales driven demo.
You may need to buy their product because I predict they are not going to give it to you to review. Do you know why most reviewers always say great things about products? Not the advertising dollars because the reviewers don't care. They say great things about it or nothing because they know if they get a reputation that they will go after a product, they are officially unemployed as a paid reviewer. As in nothing to review==not a reviewer.

Let me give you an example. I was laying out a job in northern CA and wanted to say hi to the service department and sales. I was at the desk of the national sales manager of this leading subwoofer manufacture. He catches a call while I was there. I hear the one-way conversation. "Unfortunately we don't have any of those to review as they are all out, call us in 6 months." I asked him to explain why. He told me he would NEVER let that (in his words) lose cannon review their product. He had a reputation. So here you are posting on a public board saying that you highly doubt you are going to hear any differences in a Synergistic product. You are coming off an article talking about how Simaudio was unethical. Synergistic Research isn't going to give you their product Marshall. I know I would be very careful too who reviews a product I manufacture. You will have to have Gene buy it or talk to a dealer friend that carries it.


By the way, I was quite aware of my own psychological bias, that I believed I would not hear a difference, and so I worked very hard to hear and not hear differences at a few point. My take away...what a load of crap.

I wonder, did Denny or one of his demonstrators do the same for you? "I'm going to flip a switch and you're going to hear a difference."
So are you saying you didn't hear an Ethernet cable difference? If not, then their approach didn't work.

Years ago Richard Grey said that their product helped Plasma's color (10 years ago) to be more "vivid". They flipped a switch back and forth. 10 people were standing around it saying they saw a difference. I did not. They asked me 5 different times if I was sure. I kept saying "no". I don't see it. Reexplaining what I should see, I sated again and again, I do not see a thing. My guess is no one wanted to say they didn't see anything. Suggestions don't work well with me.

Nordost has a demo too. I'll PM you about my experience. We will leave it at that.

I don't know the name of who did the demo at Synergistic. They simply did whatever I told them. As in "Put that front one back up, now take it off again, back up." Or "Turn the field on, now off, now on." As I said, zero difference on the digital, a small but noticeable difference on the five inch power cord. So I have a little more faith in my ear. I know better that a resonator CANNOT work. But I am convinced that it factually does work. Putting it another way, I don't think anyone is walking out of that room thinking "those resonators don't work at all". There were lots of people expecting B.S. yet we heard what we heard. It wasn't all that subtle. This year I am going to re-listen and close my eyes.

I think there is a variation of how easily people fall for things. While I am not perfect, I have heard thousands of things and I come into the listening session without any expectations. Many times I hear nothing (Pure Direct comes to mind) even though it should sound different to me.

Allow me another example. A guy bought a expensive amp from me a year earlier. He was complaining that he lost "openness and clarity". There was absolutely no doubt in his mind. I got him an RA. This undisclosed brand checked it out and told me there is positively NOTHING wrong with it. They had it on the bench for days, took it home, etc. They said they are sending it back saying : NPF (No Problem Found). I said the HELL you are! Switch out a capacitor or something. Put a note on it: "Main power supply cap replaced". Then replace a cap that didn't need replacing.

My customer gets his amp back, calls to to tell me how INCREDIBLY it was. Sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much better than when it was brand new. It was all in his head. NPF would have resulted in him saying the problem was still alive and well. So I understand a subset of the Audiophle community are... well.... easy victims.
 
Last edited:
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Let me give you an example. I was laying out a job in northern CA and wanted to say hi to the service department and sales. I was at the desk of the national sales manager of this leading subwoofer manufacture. He catches a call while I was there. I hear the one-way conversation. "Unfortunately we don't have any of those to review as they are all out, call us in 6 months." I asked him to explain why. He told me he would NEVER let that (in his words) lose cannon review their product. He had a reputation. So here you are posting on a public board saying that you highly doubt you are going to hear any differences in a Synergistic product. You are coming off an article talking about how Simaudio was unethical. Synergistic Research isn't going to give you their product Marshall. I know I would be very careful too who reviews a product I manufacture. You will have to have Gene buy it or talk to a dealer friend that carries it.
Not sure if that comment was directed at me as I've been called a loose cannon by a few manufacturers back in the day ;) However, the companies that chose not to submit products to Audioholics do themselves a disservice b/c our SEO and reach online is second to no other AV website. We can always do a preview article about the product and still get near the top of the first page in Google if we like ;)

Kinda like this one:
Akiko Audio Tuning Stick Spectral Preview | Audioholics

Now go search it out on Google and tell me what you find ;)

Except the owner of this company was actually cool and still wants us to review this product.
 
Last edited:
A

AV_Nut

Junior Audioholic
Not sure if that comment was directed at me as I've been called a loose cannon by a few manufacturers back in the day ;) However, the companies that chose not to submit products to Audioholics do themselves a disservice b/c our SEO and reach online is second to no other AV website. We can still always do a preview article about the product and still get near the top of the first page in Google if we like ;)

Kinda like this one:
Akiko Audio Tuning Stick Spectral Preview | Audioholics

Now go search it out on Google and tell me what you find ;)

Except the owner of this company was actually cool and still wants us to review this product.
There are trade-offs. When you tell it like it is, you get more credibility (and more viewership). I've known about 4 personal examples of reviewers that disliked a product and their review was glowing. They have no credibility but brands love to give them product to review and they will be gainfully employed. The manufacture can then brag "So-and-so gave us a rave review".

I was simply stating that if Synergistic Research reads Marshall's words (and smart people would google who is going to review it), I not so sure they are going to give him the product. At a minimum, they want someone who is open minded. If I read Marshall's words correctly, he expects to hear nothing.

I put zero stock into nearly all reviews from the magazines. I canceled my subscription but they still send them to me for free (to boost readership). But I don't read it! There are some more ethics at work. With your site, they have MEASURED readership data. A much more logical approach. The days are numbered for print review magazines.

Oh... This (former) national sales manager didn't tell me who was on the phone.
 
Last edited:
fuzz092888

fuzz092888

Audioholic Warlord
Unless I'm mistaken the manufacturer's get final say over whether an article goes to print here (Gene, correct if I'm wrong). Which would be all the more reason to send them here for review. Worst case scenario would be that the review isn't favorable, they ask AH not to print it and everything remains the same. However, the upside seems too big not to risk it. IF, AH were to measure it, put it through the paces and find it to be a great product a review from them would carry a ton of weight.

If you know your product isn't going to hold up to the rigorous testing of AH and/or you don't have the confidence in it that the advertising would lead people to believe, then there is zero point in sending it to AH for review. As in politics, a no send (like a no vote) can speak louder than a review (vote).

There are trade-offs. When you tell it like it is, you get more credibility (and more viewership). I've known about 4 personal examples of reviewers that disliked a product and their review was glowing. They have no credibility but brands love to give them product to review and they will be gainfully employed. The manufacture can then brag "So-and-so gave us a rave review".

I was simply stating that if Synergistic Research reads Marshall's words 9and smart people would google who is going to review it), I not so sure they are going to give him the product. At a minimum, they want someone who is open minded. If I read Marshall's words correctly, he expects to hear nothing.

Putting it another way, I put zero stock into nearly all reviews from the magazines. I canceled my subscription but they still send them to me for free (to boost readership). But I don't read it! There are some more ethics at work. With your site, they have MEASURED data.
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Unless I'm mistaken the manufacturer's get final say over whether an article goes to print here (Gene, correct if I'm wrong). Which would be all the more reason to send them here for review. Worst case scenario would be that the review isn't favorable, they ask AH not to print it and everything remains the same. However, the upside seems too big not to risk it. IF, AH were to measure it, put it through the paces and find it to be a great product a review from them would carry a ton of weight.

If you know your product isn't going to hold up to the rigorous testing of AH and/or you don't have the confidence in it that the advertising would lead people to believe, then there is zero point in sending it to AH for review. As in politics, a no send (like a no vote) can speak louder than a review (vote).
Manufacturers NEVER get to call shots whether we publish content or not. However I send a complete copy of the review to ALL manufacturers that submit products to us for review so they can fact check it prior to publishing. In some cases we will take in a 2nd sample of the manufacturer claims the product wasn't performing correctly and retest if needed. Our content is always peer reviewed prior to publishing which is a rare courtesy we extend so I'm told by many manufacturers in the industry.
 
cpp

cpp

Audioholic Ninja
There are trade-offs. When you tell it like it is, you get more credibility (and more viewership). I've known about 4 personal examples of reviewers that disliked a product and their review was glowing. They have no credibility but brands love to give them product to review and they will be gainfully employed. The manufacture can then brag "So-and-so gave us a rave review".

I was simply stating that if Synergistic Research reads Marshall's words (and smart people would google who is going to review it), I not so sure they are going to give him the product. At a minimum, they want someone who is open minded. If I read Marshall's words correctly, he expects to hear nothing.

I put zero stock into nearly all reviews from the magazines
. I canceled my subscription but they still send them to me for free (to boost readership). But I don't read it! There are some more ethics at work. With your site, they have MEASURED readership data. A much more logical approach. The days are numbered for print review magazines.

Oh... This (former) national sales manager didn't tell me who was on the phone.
I agree 100%. No doubt there is a lot of bias for the high dollar advertisers in some of the mag's.
 
A

AV_Nut

Junior Audioholic
I agree 100%. No doubt there is a lot of bias for the high dollar advertisers in some of the mag's.
I view it a different way. As I said, reviewers don't want to be viewed as controversial. I have heard popular reviewers mention that they didn't like something and went to the manufacture asking if they wanted it published. I don't know how often that happens but I know that it has occurred.

Let's pick on Stereophile. Let's say I am the marketing director for So-and-So speakers. I call a reviewer at Stereophile to see if he would like to review by new product. The print reviewer doesn't give a rats-rear-end if I advertise or not. He explains to me that he has 8 items in the pipe-line and that it isn't happening for at least a year. But wait, I just wrote out a check for $10,000 an advertisement x 12 months. So I call the editor and ask for help. Pressure is applied to the reviewer and I butt in line. Now you see a review on page 20-25, and on page 26 you see an advertisement of that exact product.

The end result is the same: advertisers get great reviews. Not all reviewers are unethical. But I don't know which ones are which. Also, I think the better reviewers are careful as to which products they review. That way, they don't have to feel uncomfortable telling the supplier they don't like it.
 
RichB

RichB

Audioholic Field Marshall
That makes sense.
I would like to see advancements in the digital signal processing.

I am making the simple observation that I have found on all the AVR/Preamps I have owned.

Pure Direct sounds difference than Direct which sounds different than Stereo mode with all processing set to flat, speakers set to large, RC off.
Ideally, these should be indistinguishable.
This seems to be an area with more room for improvement than the PD/analog volume control.

- Rich
On AV receivers that don't digitize the analog inputs, that shouldn't be the case. Denon Pure Direct, Direct Stereo are sonically indistinguishable (at least on the higher end models) b/c neither mode digitizes the analog inputs or limit bandwidth.
Marantz Pure Direct, Direct, and Stereo modes are not indistinguishable.
If they were, that would make Pure Direct a marketing feature only.

- Rich
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top