Anthem MRX 710 used as a prepro?

[BWguy]

Any thoughts on using an Anthem MRX 710 AVR as a pre-pro? Any users? My dealer is telling me this sounds better than any other AVR on the market and will perform better than a Rotel pre-pro. I am using a Rotel RMB 1095 amp with B&W 804d speakers. I am currently using a Pioneer SC 65 AVR as my pre-pro.

 

[tmurnin]

I have a 710, and while I love it, I think it would be an expensive pre-pro unless you are just dying for ARC. You can get the Denon X4000 with Audysset XT32 for about 1/2 the price of the Anthem. If you really want ARC, I would look at the 310 (5 ch per outs) or the 510 (7 ch preouts). The only difference between the 510 and 710 is the amp power which you aren't going to use anyway.

 

[rnatalli]

Getting the 510 as a pre/pro is worth considering.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If you have tried Audyssey XT32, ARC, and other room correction, sub EQ, and Audyssey Dynamic EQ, and conclude that you prefer ARC over all others, then for you Anthem AVR or pre-pro is the best.

Otherwise, ARC/Anthem is no better than Audyssey XT32 and other variations, and possibly even worse.

The same could be said of Audyssey or any other systems.

So it depends on your subjective preference upon trying all the variations.

 

[JonnyFive23517]

I'm considering the Anthem 310 or 510 as a pre-pro, coming from a Marantz SR6006...as a much cheaper alternative to the AV8801. Couple questions.

1) ADTG and I both love dynamic EQ. I know Anthem has a Dolby Level function which is supposed to have a similar effect to DEQ. Can anyone who's heard both technologies chime in?

2) Anthem mentions aboutARC: "The connected PC’s 64-bit floating point processor calculates the correction curves to the n’th degree of accuracy." I just want to confirm they are talking about double precision arithmetic, not the need for a 64-bit processor? That is, this sentence should read "The connected PC's processor uses 64-bit floating point operations to calculate..." Otherwise if they expect a 64-bit processor, does this reduce filter quality if using a 32-bit processor like in my current laptop?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I'm considering the Anthem 310 or 510 as a pre-pro, coming from a Marantz SR6006...as a much cheaper alternative to the AV8801. Couple questions.

1) ADTG and I both love dynamic EQ. I know Anthem has a Dolby Level function which is supposed to have a similar effect to DEQ. Can anyone who's heard both technologies chime in?

Yeah, see, from what I've read, Dolby Volume is more like Audyssey Dynamic Volume or Dynamic Volume + DEQ combined, not Dynamic EQ by itself:

"Dolby Volume eliminates a major complaint of home viewers: the need to constantly adjust the volume as they change channels, content, and program sources. It also takes care of a more subtle problem: the loss of richness and details, such as surround effects, at normal home playback levels compared to the high levels used in studios where content is created."

And I hate Audyssey Dynamic Volume, but I love DEQ.

So it seems like Dolby Volume uses a form of dynamic COMPRESSION to me, limiting the peak level of the music. It doesn't look like ARC have an equivalent to Audyssey DEQ by itself.

 

[JonnyFive23517]

I thought I had read something about Dolby Volume versus Dolby Level. But it appears in the Anthem that there is only Dolby Volume. So it would be question of if you can turn the compressor in DV to off, or nearly off, while keeping the level aspect of it on. It doesn't appear that this is an option though.

 

[rnatalli]

Audyssey has Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume. Dolby Volume has the same with the Modeler and Leveler. On many receivers (like Anthem), you can enable the Modeler without enabling the Leveler which is basically the same thing as Audyssey with Dynamic EQ enabled (but no Dynamic Volume). The Anthem receiver lets you keep the Leveler entirely off or allows you to set it anywhere from 1 to 10 which offers more control than the usual Low, Medium, High type settings for Dynamic Volume. In other words, the Modeler does not apply compression whereas the Leveler does. Having heard both, I feel Dolby Volume does a better job of maintaining the right balance with low volumes by keeping the dialogue clean and not over-emphasizing the bass. That said, both are excellent overall and definitely a life saver late at night.

To chime in with regards to the Marantz 6006 and Anthem 310, I would easily take the Anthem unless you need 7.1 or any of the other features the Marantz offers. Anthem's ARC + Dolby Volume has Audyssey beat IMO until you reach XT32. I actually reviewed the 310 recently here:

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/write-your-own-review/89261-anthem-mrx-310-receiver-review.html

Just an additional note, the Anthem allows you apply which configuration including EQ curve and Dolby Volume settings by input which is nice.

 

[tmurnin]

I don't believe you need a 64 bit processor to run ARC.

 

[rnatalli]

I don't believe you need a 64 bit processor to run ARC.

This is true. ARC installed into my x86 folder which is 32-bit stuff.

 

[JonnyFive23517]

Thanks for all the input guys.

Regarding 64-bit processor...I don't doubt you can run it on 32-bit. But I was asking if it's possible that ARC can only produce the best filters under 64-bit processing? I.e., do those of us 32-bit processors lose some of the fidelity without even seeing a warning pop up?

Great information about the Dolby Leveler and Volume, rnatalli. I like the very high levels of bass at lower volumes that DEQ provides, although I suppose it is over the top. Could I live without that? Probably! I'm wondering of the Leveler does something similar...increasing the volume of bass at lower listening levels?

IMO, I'm ready to chuck Audyssey XT out the window. The 32x resolution filters do a fine job on the sub, but I'm not pleased with the results on my other speakers... confirmed by my ears and measurements. At this point it's either XT32 (i.e., the expensive AV8801) or an Anthem 310/510 with ARC.

 

[rnatalli]

Thanks for all the input guys.

Regarding 64-bit processor...I don't doubt you can run it on 32-bit. But I was asking if it's possible that ARC can only produce the best filters under 64-bit processing? I.e., do those of us 32-bit processors lose some of the fidelity without even seeing a warning pop up?

Great information about the Dolby Leveler and Volume, rnatalli. I like the very high levels of bass at lower volumes that DEQ provides, although I suppose it is over the top. Could I live without that? Probably! I'm wondering of the Leveler does something similar...increasing the volume of bass at lower listening levels?

IMO, I'm ready to chuck Audyssey XT out the window. The 32x resolution filters do a fine job on the sub, but I'm not pleased with the results on my other speakers... confirmed by my ears and measurements. At this point it's either XT32 (i.e., the expensive AV8801) or an Anthem 310/510 with ARC.

It doesn't matter whether you run it on 32-bit or 64-bit, it'll do the job in full either way. As for the Leveler, it's job is to reduce dramatic swings in volume by adding compression. The Modeler definitely increases the bass you hear at lower volumes and adjust levels on the fly, but the bass isn't as exaggerated as Audyssey Dynamic EQ IMO. Only way to know for sure what you prefer is to try it out.

 

[PENG]

although I suppose it is over the top. Could I live without that? Probably! I'm wondering of the Leveler does something similar...increasing the volume of bass at lower listening levels?

I typically engaged DEQ when the volume is at around -20 to -30. If you crank it up to -15 or louder, I get pretty much the same sort of bass and surround effects with DEQ off or on. So in my case I find DEQ quite accurate, that is not over the top as such. Maybe XT is different, but I didn't play with DEQ enough when I had the AV7005, that has the XT version.

IMO, I'm ready to chuck Audyssey XT out the window. The 32x resolution filters do a fine job on the sub, but I'm not pleased with the results on my other speakers... confirmed by my ears and measurements. At this point it's either XT32 (i.e., the expensive AV8801) or an Anthem 310/510 with ARC.

Before you do that, you may want to re-run Audyssey but make sure you follow their instructions exactly, and you may be pleasantly surprised. I hate to admit this, for quite a long time I didn't even know the mike was supposed to be pointing straight up instead of pointing to the speakers. I was embarassed for the way I had been doing it when I finally read the instructions.

 

[JonnyFive23517]

Before you do that, you may want to re-run Audyssey but make sure you follow their instructions exactly, and you may be pleasantly surprised. I hate to admit this, for quite a long time I didn't even know the mike was supposed to be pointing straight up instead of pointing to the speakers. I was embarassed for the way I had been doing it when I finally read the instructions.

Peng, thank you for the input! I'd like to think I know what I'm doing with Audyssey. I've read in detail about it, followed the instructions using all 8 positions, pointing the mic up, keeping it away from the reflections off the back off the couch, etc. Basically it makes my speakers too bright and brittle sounding. It could be my 3 year old mic has had some high end roll off occur, so Audyssey XT is compensating. I don't know.

Here's the thing...if Audyssey would incorporate a cutoff frequency to STOP applying correction above a certain frequency, I'd be fine. Anthem does this, but Audyssey does not. Audyssey versions XT and below attempt to correct the minor variations "hair" in the high frequencies...which does more harm than good. XT32 does not operate in the same fashion as the other versions on the high frequencies. Which is why I want to chuck XT out the window on anything but the sub. I think XT32 could be an option, or a correction software with a cutoff frequency, i.e. Anthem's ARC.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Thanks for all the input guys.

Regarding 64-bit processor...I don't doubt you can run it on 32-bit. But I was asking if it's possible that ARC can only produce the best filters under 64-bit processing? I.e., do those of us 32-bit processors lose some of the fidelity without even seeing a warning pop up?

Great information about the Dolby Leveler and Volume, rnatalli. I like the very high levels of bass at lower volumes that DEQ provides, although I suppose it is over the top. Could I live without that? Probably! I'm wondering of the Leveler does something similar...increasing the volume of bass at lower listening levels?

IMO, I'm ready to chuck Audyssey XT out the window. The 32x resolution filters do a fine job on the sub, but I'm not pleased with the results on my other speakers... confirmed by my ears and measurements. At this point it's either XT32 (i.e., the expensive AV8801) or an Anthem 310/510 with ARC.

Just make sure you can easily return the Anthem if you find out ARC is no better than Audyssey XT32. Not everyone thinks ARC is better (or worse) after they have heard both.

Sean Olive/Harman did a study. Don't know what to make of it. They said people preferred NO Room Correction over Audyssey, but that people did NOT think ARC was any better than no room correction at all. I feel the same way. I prefer bypass over both Audyssey and ARC (at the dealer, never in my house). I never compared Dolby Modeler vs. DEQ.

 

[JonnyFive23517]

Just make sure you can easily return the Anthem if you find out ARC is no better than Audyssey XT32. Not everyone thinks ARC is better (or worse) after they have heard both.

Sean Olive/Harman did a study. Don't know what to make of it. They said people preferred NO Room Correction over Audyssey, but that people did NOT think ARC was any better than no room correction at all. I feel the same way. I prefer bypass over both Audyssey and ARC (at the dealer, never in my house). I never compared Dolby Modeler vs. DEQ.

ADTG, I definitely agree that a return policy is vital. I would prefer no correction on my satellites, but it honestly does a good job on my subwoofer. Pis is attached, 1/12 smoothing before/after Audyssey on the sub. I'm pretty happy with those results for an automated software.

 

[pg_rider]

...Audyssey makes my speakers too bright and brittle sounding....if Audyssey would incorporate a cutoff frequency to STOP applying correction above a certain frequency, I'd be fine.

Maybe try Audyssey's "Bypass L/R" curve? I think that prevents Audyssey from touching the front speakers, but still gives the benefit of Audyssey correction to the other speakers (as well as the sub, I assume).

EDIT: According to Audyssey, "The Bypass L/R setting uses the MultEQ XT filters that were calculated for the entire listening area, but it does not apply any filtering to the front left and right speakers. The average measured response from the front left and right speakers is used as the target curve for the remaining speakers in the system. The subwoofer in this case is equalized to flat as is the case for the other curves."

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Maybe try Audyssey's "Bypass L/R" curve? I think that prevents Audyssey from touching the front speakers, but still gives the benefit of Audyssey correction to the other speakers (as well as the sub, I assume).

That's what I do. Let Audyssey work on the Subwoofers, Center, Surrounds, but bypass the Front Left and Right.

To recap, I can't tell a significant difference between Audyssey Flat vs. Bypass. Thus, I choose Bypass L/R since I can't tell a difference.

I do prefer Flat & Bypass over the standard Audyssey curve.

I hate what Audyssey Dynamic Volume does at any level.

And I love what Audyssey Dynamic EQ does.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

ADTG, I definitely agree that a return policy is vital. I would prefer no correction on my satellites, but it honestly does a good job on my subwoofer. Pis is attached, 1/12 smoothing before/after Audyssey on the sub. I'm pretty happy with those results for an automated software. View attachment 13086

Yes, Audyssey does a good job with the Subs. As already mentioned above, I let Audyssey EQ the sub, but Bypass the Main Front Left + Right. The Center + Surrounds are set to Flat, which sounds great to me. The biggest improvement is in the subs.

 

[JonnyFive23517]

What I want is to have the bass of my mains managed, but not in the subwoofer. I want to run them full range and have Audyssey apply bass corrections. I don't want Audyssey to touch anything 500hz or so and up. This is not possible with Audyssey. "Audyssey" setting is bright and brittle, Audyssey "flat" is even worse with more high end. You think a cutoff frequency would be common sense to incorporate, but alas, no.