Does more money buy you better performance with home audio gear?

[Seth=L]

The only difference between the 5010 vs the 6010 is a little bit more power

The power difference is probably negligible. Those two are extremely similar in design.

2-zone audio and video output(5010 only has 2-zone audio output) and the 6010 has a phono input. Is that worth $400... The 5010 has pre-amp outputs.

I don't think so. If you really need to connect a turntable to this receiver you could buy an outboard phono preamplifier for less than $400 that would outperform what's found inside the SR6010.

 

[highfigh]

I've heard that several times too. Even asked about it once here. If D&M tells their reps to say it, I suppose it is true. But I have yet to see any trusted member here say they could actually hear the difference, and the recommendations still seem to say Denon is the better value.

It makes me wonder if the difference in sound is subtle on paper, and indistinguishable by ear.

I haven't signed up to sell Marantz, but it's interesting to me because I'd really like to do more with two channel than systems with video and Denon doesn't offer as much two channel equipment. One of these days, I'll ask the rep to bring a Marantz integrated amp so I can compare it with my Denon AVR. They do say that Marantz is their line for people who want to emphasize sound quality but aren't looking for all of the features and bells & whistles as the Denon models.

 

[herbu]

They do say that Marantz is their line for people who want to emphasize sound quality but aren't looking for all of the features and bells & whistles as the Denon models.

That's real interesting. I plan to take a serious look at Marantz whenever my Denon X4000 "needs" to be replaced. I'm curious if the extra bells & whistles on Denon are things I don't use anyway. Will be an interesting comparison. "Better" audio at the expense of features I don't use anyway seems a good trade.

 

[PENG]

That's real interesting. I plan to take a serious look at Marantz whenever my Denon X4000 "needs" to be replaced. I'm curious if the extra bells & whistles on Denon are things I don't use anyway. Will be an interesting comparison. "Better" audio at the expense of features I don't use anyway seems a good trade.

Those talks by the rep as reported in post#42 are BS IMHO. I don't know why people believe Marantz and Denon will each design their amp to sound different, one for movies and one for music, how the heck do they do it and yet still claimed (and verified by many bench tests including those by AH right here) flat freq response, less than 0.1% THD+N, less than 0.05% IMD, more than 100 dB S/N etc etc? Surely they claimed there are things specs and measurements don't/can't show. Well then again, how do engineers design anything if they couldn't even measure the outcome? If they do it by ears and hand tweaking pots, transistors etc., then how to they satisfy different people with different taste and hearing. Sorry about ranting..,I just find such talks ridiculous. and I happen to have faith in today's science and engineering that makes design and build consumer audio gear not as critical as audiophile think. How can we ever land on the moon, let alone Mars, if engineers have to do it by trial and error? Answer: IMHO, all about marketing and profit margin, most of us seem to have accepted $5,000 interconnect cables are snake oil, so in time, well design amps working within their designed limits will be accepted too, but obviously there is a long way to go. I do think it is a good idea to trade gadgets you don't use with better audio quality though.

 

[herbu]

Those talks by the rep as reported in post#42 are BS IMHO.

I'm wondering if their claims are related to component attributes like tolerance and shielding. Maybe Marantz uses more expensive components that on paper are better, but make no actual difference to the ear because the "cheaper" components in Denon are quite good enough for the task?

 

[Seth=L]

IMHO, all about marketing and profit margin, most of us seem to have accepted $5,000 interconnect cables are snake oil, so in time, well design amps working within their designed limits will be accepted too, but obviously there is a long way to go. I do think it is a good idea to trade gadgets you don't use with better audio quality though.

We can agree that a lot less goes into make cables than does into amplifiers. We can also agree that measuring how an amplifier performs with music isn't feasible. So it's entirely possible that these amps are biased slightly differently to have there own signature.

 

[slipperybidness]

I've heard that several times too. Even asked about it once here. If D&M tells their reps to say it, I suppose it is true. But I have yet to see any trusted member here say they could actually hear the difference, and the recommendations still seem to say Denon is the better value.

It makes me wonder if the difference in sound is subtle on paper, and indistinguishable by ear.

Well, they must do some kind of hand waving to appease the people

 

[PENG]

We can agree that a lot less goes into make cables than does into amplifiers. We can also agree that measuring how an amplifier performs with music isn't feasible. So it's entirely possible that these amps are biased slightly differently to have there own signature.

i can agree with your last sentence but definitely not the first two and only in the sense that anything is possible. Also it is definitely doable if they wanted to, but how slightly? Besides, if you ask Marantz, surely they will tell you their goal is neutrality and accuracy. I doubt they will admit they "biased their amps to have a signature such that it would sound better with music yet not movies. Again, if they did, they should tell people what frequencies did they boost or attenuate, and what if any harmonics they intentionally introduced to "sweeten" the sound "signature". In other words, what's their goal exactly.

I think even the real die hard audiophile will not like the idea of sound with a "biased signature". They too typically prefer the theoretical high fidelity sound, that is neutral and accurate, true to the quality of sound signature of the recording. Let me emphasize that my point is not about all amp sounds the same, I do not believe they do. I just don't think people should perpetuate the false claim of some mass produced consumer audio manufacturers would bother to create their own sound signature yet still claim high fidelity.

 

[PENG]

Well, they must do some kind of hand waving to appease the people

It is believable that their reps woul

I'm wondering if their claims are related to component attributes like tolerance and shielding. Maybe Marantz uses more expensive components that on paper are better, but make no actual difference to the ear because the "cheaper" components in Denon are quite good enough for the task?

My AV8801 supposed has better shielding compared to the AV7005 and AVR-4308 that it replaced. I can tell you aside from the more effective XT32/SubEQHT, in pure direct they don't sound much difference to me. I did do do any honest A/B volume match listening test but if they have different so called sound signature I would have noticed it. Another strange thing, if you dig into the S&V archive you will find that more often than not Denon AVRs has better S/N and cross talk figures than their Marantz counterpart, in some cases even better than the Marantz AVP. They are all good though, so the differences are academic.

I emailed D&M once about the potential sound quality difference between the 4520 and the AV8801 and was told most likely I wouldn't hear a difference because they were both high end. Another time I emailed D&M about difference between the 7200 and the AV8802 and was told the AV8802 has a much stronger transformer so it would sound better. Yes, he said transformer, go figure. I think the customer supports don't get very deep in answer questions and that's fair, no complain from me, but those who told their dealer rep to spread the sound signature thing must be people from the marketing department. Their mandate are to sell more and at the highest margin.

 

[lsiberian]

I'd be pissed if they biased their amps intentionally and I owned the products. That's what DSPs are for not amps. An amp is supposed to add gain to my signal and send it to the speakers. I suppose it's possible they use different calibrations in their receivers. I could see value in having a line with the house curve and one without.

 

[Seth=L]

i can agree with your last sentence but definitely not the first two and only in the sense that anything is possible.

It was my understanding it's not possible at this time (possibly ever) to measure an amplifier's performance on anything other than test tones, pulses, impulses, etc. I'm not sure why you disagree with less being involved in cable design as apposed to amplifier design.

Also it is definitely doable if they wanted to, but how slightly?

Wait, which part?

Besides, if you ask Marantz, surely they will tell you their goal is neutrality and accuracy. I doubt they will admit they "biased their amps to have a signature such that it would sound better with music yet not movies. Again, if they did, they should tell people what frequencies did they boost or attenuate, and what if any harmonics they intentionally introduced to "sweeten" the sound "signature". In other words, what's their goal exactly.

I'm not implying that they would mess with the linearity of the amplifier. I guess I may not understand bias, so maybe I should not use that word. Based on measurements done with test tones it's not going to tell us how that amplifier reacts when loaded with a real speaker with music or soundtracks. Perhaps they have people that make final touches to the design using a particular type of speaker to ensure that it doesn't distort audibly. Since we won't assume that Denon and Marantz will perform such calibrations under the exact same conditions it's possible the fine tuning will end with a different result.

I think even the real die hard audiophile will not like the idea of sound with a "biased signature".

True.

They too typically prefer the theoretical high fidelity sound, that is neutral and accurate, true to the quality of sound signature of the recording. Let me emphasize that my point is not about all amp sounds the same, I do not believe they do. I just don't think people should perpetuate the false claim of some mass produced consumer audio manufacturers would bother to create their own sound signature yet still claim high fidelity.

Not intentionally.

 

[PENG]

It was my understanding it's not possible at this time (possibly ever) to measure an amplifier's performance on anything other than test tones, pulses, impulses, etc. I'm not sure why you disagree with less being involved in cable design as apposed to amplifier design.




Wait, which part?

Sorry, I agree with the cable part as well, my bad.

I'm not implying that they would mess with the linearity of the amplifier. I guess I may not understand bias, so maybe I should not use that word. Based on measurements done with test tones it's not going to tell us how that amplifier reacts when loaded with a real speaker with music or soundtracks. Perhaps they have people that make final touches to the design using a particular type of speaker to ensure that it doesn't distort audibly. Since we won't assume that Denon and Marantz will perform such calibrations under the exact same conditions it's possible the fine tuning will end with a different result.

That's sort of my point, that is, if you try to "bias", (or the varieties of that word), you are going down a slippery path and never know if where you will end up, could be the ditch. If you aim for accuracy then you have all kinds of instrumentation and knowledge to help you verify whether you meet the goal or not.
Don't get fixated on the amp reacting with music thing. Actually I don't even listen to amplified music much, but for those who mainly listen to pops and even jazz, they invariably will be listening to all sorts of electronic sound processing in the path from source material to loudspeakers. How about electronic keyboards, organs etc., don't they all get molested by electronic gear including amplifiers? If people have no way to know how an amplifier interact with music, you wouldn't even have electronic musical instrument. Don't forget the multiple mics used in studio and live recordings too. So before you need to worry about your own amplifier, you have to worry about those used in the creation of the music and the recording of music.

You an easily imagine why it is a lost course to try and create a brand name sound signature as there will be so many variables to deal with making it practically non sensible, the worst variable is probably human, we all have different hearing perception and preference, there is nothing black and white, wrong and right. Some are also more easily and severely affected by their mood, and Placebo effect.

The right thing for the amp to do is to simply output exactly what is input to it, just make the signal larger and nothing else. Amplifiers (solid state) are designed to have very high input impedance and very low output impedance so they can handle speakers with different characteristics. If not, then you got another problem, that is, even if it is true that Marantz is biased differently as Denon, then due to their different interaction properties with different music and speakers, the Denon can sound like Marantz with speaker A and Marantz can sound like Denon with speaker B. Well I think we both know that is not the case. What those people are spreading are simply not true and if you try to make sense of it, you will be met with massive confusion and contradictions, hence back to the accuracy/neutrality=high fidelity being the best design goals. Leave it to the consumer to "bias" the sound and create the sound signature they preferred by engaging DSP, graphic EQs etc.

Not intentionally.

I know, not you, but the "rep" and other marketing people. I just hope you are not, and won't ever be the victim.

 

[highfigh]

Those talks by the rep as reported in post#42 are BS IMHO. I don't know why people believe Marantz and Denon will each design their amp to sound different, one for movies and one for music, how the heck do they do it and yet still claimed (and verified by many bench tests including those by AH right here) flat freq response, less than 0.1% THD+N, less than 0.05% IMD, more than 100 dB S/N etc etc? Surely they claimed there are things specs and measurements don't/can't show. Well then again, how do engineers design anything if they couldn't even measure the outcome? If they do it by ears and hand tweaking pots, transistors etc., then how to they satisfy different people with different taste and hearing. Sorry about ranting..,I just find such talks ridiculous. and I happen to have faith in today's science and engineering that makes design and build consumer audio gear not as critical as audiophile think. How can we ever land on the moon, let alone Mars, if engineers have to do it by trial and error? Answer: IMHO, all about marketing and profit margin, most of us seem to have accepted $5,000 interconnect cables are snake oil, so in time, well design amps working within their designed limits will be accepted too, but obviously there is a long way to go. I do think it is a good idea to trade gadgets you don't use with better audio quality though.

Denon is one company, Marantz is another. They're part of the same corporation but their design teams aren't necessarily the same and each is looked at as a separate project. Have you looked at the Marantz site, to see the inside of their equipment? It looks nothing like the inside of a Denon. Before you say it's BS, look into it. They use different circuit topologies, devices, chassis and shielding. They are far from being the same.

BTW- it wasn't a rep- rep is short for 'reptile', IMO and I have met few who actually know as much about the equipment they sell as they should. This was Denon/Marantz CI training for Custom Integrators, not counter sales people or for big box store people and it's presented by the VP of training.

 

[mtrycrafts]

People often think "you get what you pay" for is an absolute.

In consumer audio there is often more fluff than substance in terms of marketing claims. ...

I think there are other consumer areas where this applies. Audio is not alone in this market.

 

[PENG]

Denon is one company, Marantz is another. They're part of the same corporation but their design teams aren't necessarily the same and each is looked at as a separate project. Have you looked at the Marantz site, to see the inside of their equipment? It looks nothing like the inside of a Denon. Before you say it's BS, look into it. They use different circuit topologies, devices, chassis and shielding. They are far from being the same.

BTW- it wasn't a rep- rep is short for 'reptile', IMO and I have met few who actually know as much about the equipment they sell as they should. This was Denon/Marantz CI training for Custom Integrators, not counter sales people or for big box store people and it's presented by the VP of training.

Whatever you meant by rep, I simply borrowed that term from you. My post was made mainly in response to herbu's post#43 but regardless, when you used the word "rep", I never thought you meant counter sales people either, but I assume it would be some marketing staff. My point has nothing to do with the internal components or layout but all about design goals/philosophy. I did try to make that point clear in my lengthy post that I know was not well written.

If you want to talk about different components being the reason why one will be for music and the other is for something else, well then we are all going to be shooting in the dark shopping for amps. Even if we are fine with going by our ears instead of relying too much on specs and test data, it isn't really practical for most people to take a few amps home for comparison listening. If not, then it will be very difficult to compare apple to apple. By the way, when I say amps I refer to AVR in two channel pure direct mode. With DSP engaged, yes AVR can sound quite different, and in some cases, by design.

I read every words of your post before I responded, so I really would appreciate it you do the same. Then again, as I said before, I do realize my post was lengthy and not particularly well written, so that's okay if you don't want to be bothered. In that case we should just agree to disagree. I believe in science and engineering much more than our ears, though I have owned several (still do) Denon and Marantz AVR/AVP preamp and amps. I know their specs, some measurements, and how they sound to me and I know what BS is. I certainly don't need you to tell me Marantz is one company and Denon is another company. Thanks for reminding me though.

 

[PENG]

Some nice looking 60 and 66 lbs integrated amps that double down into 4 ohms:

http://www.denon.jp/jp/product/hificomponents/amplifiers/pmasx11
http://www.denon.jp/jp/img/PMA-SX1_pressrelease.pdf
https://www.google.ca/search?q=denon+pma-sx1&biw=1120&bih=599&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjl2bOhxqrJAhWH7R4KHUBFCBkQsAQIHg&dpr=1.5#imgrc=uRRS5yF_bgylgM:

I hope they will market a lower cost version of the AVP-A1HD & POA-A1HD combo and still keep them truly differential balanced from input to output.

 

[highfigh]

Some nice looking 60 and 66 lbs integrated amps that double down into 4 ohms:

http://www.denon.jp/jp/product/hificomponents/amplifiers/pmasx11
http://www.denon.jp/jp/img/PMA-SX1_pressrelease.pdf
https://www.google.ca/search?q=denon+pma-sx1&biw=1120&bih=599&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjl2bOhxqrJAhWH7R4KHUBFCBkQsAQIHg&dpr=1.5#imgrc=uRRS5yF_bgylgM:

I hope they will market a lower cost version of the AVP-A1HD & POA-A1HD combo and still keep them truly differential balanced from input to output.

It would be nice if those were available in the US.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The speakers/subs are unequivocally 1st. Processors would be 2nd.

But they both reach points of diminishing returns.

For the speakers, I think different designs make the most impact (line array vs direct radiating, active vs passive, etc).

Speakers of the same designs (passive direct vs passive direct) are more similar than not.

For AVR/pre-pro, it's all about the EQs (room EQ, bass EQ, etc).

In Direct modes, AVR/pre-pros are are similar than not.

 

[PENG]

It would be nice if those were available in the US.

Agree, I would love to have one of those, or the Marantz reference series in my 2 channel system. By the way, I just remember something, have you read this article, thanks to RichB (IIRC) who told me about it:

http://hometheaterhifi.com/reviews/receiver-processor/processors/marantz-av8801-11-2-surround-sound-processor-ssp/

http://hometheaterhifi.com/technical/technical-reviews/options-by-supplier-and-price/

I am not in biased position, as I am a happy owner of the AV8801 that use the same cheap LSI chip found in the entry level RX-V367.

I wouldn't assume Dr. Rich's was saying low-cost stereo integrated amp would sound better as such. He said they would offer better performance. To me, better does not equal audibly better. The interesting thing is, until he called Marantz out on this, I am quite sure most reviewers would not have said bad thing about the $3,599 (list price at launch) AV8801's sound quality.

 

[herbu]

Denon is one company, Marantz is another. They're part of the same corporation but their design teams aren't necessarily the same and each is looked at as a separate project.

I have some experience with that situation. My company sold its entire PC Division, (and people), to another company. So the "new" company had the products of both companies. Each had its own design and manufacturing teams.

But elements of the products quickly began to merge, including specs and mfg processes. So in many cases we had 2 design teams and 2 mfg facilities working to the same specs and requirements. While each team initially thought their way was best, we soon learned there is more than one way to skin a cat. (Sorry, my wife hates that analogy.) And when egos softened, we started evaluating the different approaches and settling on the best practices of each.

So while Denon and Marantz are different, I'd bet the farm the specs and requirements for each come from a common corporate source. The teams are learning from each other and adopting the best practices into corporate requirements. Exactly how each design team accomplishes the specs may be different, but I suspect the result is the same. And eventually, (to save money), the design teams will integrate.

I can absolutely see where one design team would say their so-and-so is "better", and maybe that's what the Marketing Dept is using. I can also see where the statement could be debated among designers. But at the end of the day, I suspect PENG is dead on that the difference is transparent to the user.