Denon/Marantz vs Yamaha vs Anthem Thread

[PENG]

Got all the screen shots done, have to figure out how to post them. I seem to remember AH allows larger files to be attached but not sure..

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Only US$75 from miniDSP but delivery may be a little longer.
https://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/umik-1

I think you have to pay for shipping there too. So by the time you add shipping, it's probably the same as the price on Amazon.

 

[PENG]

I think you have to pay for shipping there too. So by the time you add shipping, it's probably the same as the price on Amazon.

I forgot Amazon includes shipping.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

@AcuDefTechGuy Did you ever hear back from Yamaha on sample rate conversion when using YPAO?

Just got word back from Yamaha.

For all Avantage AVR models, YPAO will not down-sample the 192kHz frequency at which digital audio signals are decoded.

So it looks like Gene is 100% correct on his statement, which is usually the case.

 

[sakete]

Just got word back from Yamaha.

For all Avantage AVR models, YPAO will not down-sample the 192kHz frequency at which digital audio signals are decoded.

So it looks like Gene is 100% correct on his statement, which is usually the case.

That is awesome!! Glad I ordered the A2070 then from A4L. Should have it Wednesday. And my speakers by Friday! Can't wait to blast it at... very low volume as I have a sleeping baby at home haha

I guess the salesperson I was talking to was just genuinely misinformed, or just trying to up sell me to Anthem (which is limited to 96khz anyway when using ARC, not that it makes a huge difference at those sample rates).

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

That is awesome!! Glad I ordered the A2070 then from A4L. Should have it Wednesday. And my speakers by Friday! Can't wait to blast it at... very low volume as I have a sleeping baby at home haha

I guess the salesperson I was talking to was just genuinely misinformed, or just trying to up sell me to Anthem (which is limited to 96khz anyway when using ARC, not that it makes a huge difference at those sample rates).

Like you said, it's not like the down-sampling to 96kHz or 48kHz is actually audible.

But still, it's seems funny that even a $500 Yamaha RX-A680 AVR doesn't have to down-sample from 192kHz, yet a much more expensive Anthem has to down-sample.

I guess nothing is perfect.

 

[Verdinut]

Got all the screen shots done, have to figure out how to post them. I seem to remember AH allows larger files to be attached but not sure..

Based on my experience with attaching files, the last time I posted the size of a file could not exceed 1 Mb.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Got all the screen shots done, have to figure out how to post them. I seem to remember AH allows larger files to be attached but not sure..

I upload all my pictures to imgur.

Then copy and paste the BBCode directly on the forum.

https://imgur.com/

 

[sakete]

Like you said, it's not like the down-sampling to 96kHz or 48kHz is actually audible.

But still, it's seems funny that even a $500 Yamaha RX-A680 AVR doesn't have to down-sample from 192kHz, yet a much more expensive Anthem has to down-sample.

I guess nothing is perfect.

Yeah. Different priorities I guess, but with processing power being quite cheap nowadays it makes me scratch my head why a brand like Anthem needs to downsample anything given the prices they charge for their equipment.

 

[PENG]

Let's see if I can just copy and paste them here:

Screen 1 - Click "Yes"

You will then get to Screen 2 below, again select "Yes", and then select the location where you stored the mic's calibration txt file.

Screen 3 - select the calibration file by clicking on it to highlight it, then click "Open" at the bottom of the pop up screen/menu below:

Screen 4

Screen 5 -

Screen 6 - Select the detected device, in your case CX-A5100, or whatever shows up in the selection when you click on the button to scroll

Screen 7 - Select the sweep frequency range, then click "start measuring.

Screen 8 and 9 below are just the screens when it is measuring, during which time you will hear the sweep tone.

 

[PENG]

Below are the LS50 Vs R900, measured from 2 meters, and my DIY measured from 1.25 meters, in the back yard.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

First time speaker measurements in my life.

REW - I just used the default settings for quick measurements. UMIK-1 at listening position about18FT away from speaker.

Will go back later to change settings.

Green: No EQ, Listening Window Response +/- 2.9dB
Purple: PEQ Response +/-2.0dB

Red: No EQ (2nd Best FR)
Blue: PEQ (Best FR)
Green: YPAO Flat (Worst)
Yellow: YPAO Natural (3rd Best)

I was able to get the best response from manual PEQ. But I think the Response was already good enough without any EQ. I don’t think I was able to hear a significant difference.

 

[KEW]

First time speaker measurements in my life.

KEW, I just used the default settings for quick measurements. UMIK-1 at listening position about18FT away from speaker.

Will go back later to change settings.

Green: No EQ, Listening Window Response +/- 2.9dB
Purple: PEQ Response +/-2.0dB

Red: No EQ (2nd Best FR)
Blue: PEQ (Best FR)
Green: YPAO Flat (Worst)
Yellow: YPAO Natural (3rd Best)

I was able to get the best response from manual PEQ. But I think the Response was already good enough without any EQ. I don’t think I was able to hear a significant difference.

Well, it looks an easy call not to use YPAO if that is what it does! The 7 dB upswing from 220 to 300Hz makes no sense at all!
The plots I have seen of Audyssey are usually making changes that flatten the FR and the argument against it involves phase issues (whether valid or not, I'm not sure - I'm thinking it depends on the room and the characteristics of the speakers).

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Well, it looks an easy call not to use YPAO if that is what it does! The 7 dB upswing from 220 to 300Hz makes no sense at all!
The plots I have seen of Audyssey are usually making changes that flatten the FR and the argument against it involves phase issues (whether valid or not, I'm not sure - I'm thinking it depends on the room and the characteristics of the speakers).

Well, I need to re-run YPAO again to be fair since it was about a year ago.

And most likely need to play around with REW and UMIK1.

PENG and others weren’t kidding when they said only a SLIGHT change in the mic position can change the FR graph.

Last night was just a quick intro to see how things work.

I didn’t realize how almost “plug and play” REW+UMIK1 is.

The takeaway message from last night was that Manual PEQ can be effective.

Just by quickly messing with PEQ, I was able to get a response of +/-1.7dB from 280Hz-12kHz (1/6 REW smoothing).

Take initial measurement. See where the peaks (+) and troughs (-) are. Then increase the troughs and decrease the peaks using PEQ. Repeat REW.

One thing I also realized last night. If I use smoothing of 1/12, the PK and TR are bigger (like +/-3dB). If I use smoothing of 1/6, the PK and TR are smaller (like +/-2dB).

Using smoothing of 1/3 makes the PK and TR even smaller (like +/-1dB).

What did Stereophile, S&V, and Soundstage/NRC use for smoothing when determining the FR +/- ?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

BTW, I wrote "KEW", but I meant "REW".

 

[PENG]

Well, I need to re-run YPAO again to be fair since it was about a year ago.

And most likely need to play around with REW and UMIK1.

PENG and others weren’t kidding when they said only a SLIGHT change in the mic position can change the FR graph.

Last night was just a quick intro to see how things work.

I didn’t realize how almost “plug and play” REW+UMIK1 is.

The takeaway message from last night was that Manual PEQ can be effective.

Just by quickly messing with PEQ, I was able to get a response of +/-1.7dB from 280Hz-12kHz (1/6 REW smoothing).

Take initial measurement. See where the peaks (+) and troughs (-) are. Then increase the troughs and decrease the peaks using PEQ. Repeat REW.

One thing I also realized last night. If I use smoothing of 1/12, the PK and TR are bigger (like +/-3dB). If I use smoothing of 1/6, the PK and TR are smaller (like +/-2dB).

Using smoothing of 1/3 makes the PK and TR even smaller (like +/-1dB).

What did Stereophile, S&V, and Soundstage/NRC use for smoothing when determining the FR +/- ?

Good job, whether you can hear a difference or not!

Now, do you dare looking at the 15-250 Hz range? That's where Audyssey does well flattening it, and no phase issue, those are just bs, hearsay, or misconceptions. I have too many graphs plotted (in my room anyway), saw them, heard them, to know the "messing up the sound due to phase issues" weren't true. Can you honestly hear much difference between with and without PEQ applied anyway? And if you do, can you really say which one sounds better if you don't know which one is which?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Good job, whether you can hear a difference or not!

Now, do you dare looking at the 15-250 Hz range? That's where Audyssey does well flattening it, and no phase issue, those are just bs, hearsay, or misconceptions. I have too many graphs plotted (in my room anyway), saw them, heard them, to know the "messing up the sound due to phase issues" weren't true. Can you honestly hear much difference between with and without PEQ applied anyway? And if you do, can you really say which one sounds better if you don't know which one is which?

Yeah, next step is going all the way 20Hz-20kHz.

As for hearing a difference, I don't think I heard a difference between No-EQ vs PEQ. But I can hear the difference when YPAO Natural and Flat are used, which is not to my liking.

I think doing REW 20Hz-20kHz and re-doing YPAO will shed some more light.

 

[PENG]

What did Stereophile, S&V, and Soundstage/NRC use for smoothing when determining the FR +/- ?

Just guessing:
Soundstage: likely used no smoothing because they measured speakers in their anechoic chamber.
S&V: definitely used smoothing, just look at them, it is very obvious. My guess is that they used 1/6.
Stereophile: No idea, but you would think that JA wouldn't do it with 1/3, 1/6 to hide things, so probably 1/12 or 1/24.

Thanks to Gene, AH has an excellent one on this very topic:

https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/audio-measurements

If I were to do manual EQ, I would use 1/48, or at least 1/24 but that's just me. To analyze the range between 10-300 Hz, you don't need to do much smoothing, so even 1/24, 1/48, or at least 1/12 should do. For the higher range, without smoothing it would look like a mess, due to all sorts of reflections, so I normally use 1/12. Dennis Murphy told me he didn't use any smoothing, but he shorten the sampling window to get some sort of quasi anechioc response. If you shorten it to a few microseconds, you would loose a lot of resolution in the lower frequency range. I believe that's why Shady presented his FR graphs for the BMRs in the 300-20 kHz range iirc.

 

[PENG]

Yeah, next step is going all the way 20Hz-20kHz.

As for hearing a difference, I don't think I heard a difference between No-EQ vs PEQ. But I can hear the difference when YPAO Natural and Flat are used, which is not to my liking.

I think doing REW 20Hz-20kHz and re-doing YPAO will shed some more light.

I am just curious to know what YPAO can achieve from 15-200 Hz in your set up, and I am quite sure you are not the type who want it flat in that range. Me neither, but I do prefer to know what the baseline is, and tweak from there with the Editor App.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Just guessing:
Soundstage: likely used no smoothing because they measured speakers in their anechoic chamber.
S&V: definitely used smoothing, just look at them, it is very obvious. My guess is that they used 1/6.

Stereophile: No idea, but you would think that JA wouldn't do it with 1/3, 1/6 to hide things, so probably 1/12 or 1/24.

Stereophile:

S&V:

AH is 1/12:

The Stereophile FR looks a lot smoother than Audioholics. So if AH is 1/12, I'm thinking Stereophile has to be more like 1/6?

So I will use 1/12 like Audioholics.