Denon/Marantz flexible preamp mode FW upgrade? - Do you think D+M should offer a free or paid upgrade?

[PENG]

Of course Verdinut is correct. Receivers are ill thought out ghastly contraptions. It is not rocket science to design for the ability to switch off unused power amps. engineering that in is ridiculously simple. It is a reliability issue also, as the unused amps will still be seeing high voltage swings in the output stage, putting them at increase risk of failure for no purpose at all. It also wastes energy and is not a "green friendly solution at all.

No disagreement there, my point is simply that they wouldn't do it because many users would want to use some of the internal amps. Now if each amp has its own power rail, then they could turn off internal amps that are not used, and that's what I thought would be a tall order. It has nothing to do with simple or complex engineering, it has to do with cost.

Disconnecting the connections between preamp out put (pre-out) and the individual power amp inputs don't need additional hardware for the 2020 models that already come with the all channel preamp mode, because the required switches, in this case the NJU72750AV should already be there and obviously wired. So I think it is a safe assumption that the flexibility to disconnect (again, not power off) only unused (or all) internal amps could be a free or paid feature upgrade via FW.

https://www.njr.com/electronic_device/PDF/NJU72750A_E.pdf

If you are interested in seeing how they implement the already existing amp assign and preamp mode, just purchase some service manuals (or download if you could find them available for public) and see it for yourself.

I have engineered my system to easily switch off amps I'm not using. It is just simplicity itself.

Now, please feel free to vote yes, but I am not counting on it at all, knowing your feeling about AVRs.

 

[DJ7675]

Offering a full preamp mode is great for those wanting a very good performing preamp (if they are ok with no xlr). But the amps in these Denon's are actually quite good and more than adequate for the surrounds/atmos. It is just a shame the preamp mode seems to be all or nothing. Thanks @PENG for this poll. Hopefully making it is possible to make it more flexible.

 

[lovinthehd]

Interesting results of archimago's distortion test https://archimago.blogspot.com/2020/06/blind-test-results-part-ii-is-high.html#more

 

[ryanosaur]

Interesting results of archimago's distortion test https://archimago.blogspot.com/2020/06/blind-test-results-part-ii-is-high.html#more

Very cool link.

Warning: Sidebar Possible

This was supremely fascinating to me:

While I would readily expect that systems at the far ends of the spectrum would be outliers and not readily represented...
I am very surprised at the lack of representation in the middle category of $5-10K.
IMO, this is a bracket of mid-high quality, and I would expect to see a bit more balance perhaps as the curve increases toward the $10-20K bracket (which, again my opinion, becomes high end). I suppose, arguably, there is a split that might occur at $12.5K (say) that perhaps should create the brackets as $5-12.5K, $12.5-25K, then $25-50K.
Yes I know I am splitting some hairs here, but as we look at equipment costs and the performance expected at certain dollar values, I think that there is something awry here.
My suspicion is that if you changed those values as I did, you might see a conformity to the curve where the proposed $12.5K split balances (or averages out) in the downward curve from Mid-High, High and Lux quality syatems.
(And yes, I believe that at $25K+ you are definitely in the Lux quality of expenditure.)

If interested, let's please discuss...

Or brush this into the dustpan of obscurity. Your choice.

 

[KEW]

Very cool link.

Warning: Sidebar Possible

This was supremely fascinating to me:
View attachment 36948

While I would readily expect that systems at the far ends of the spectrum would be outliers and not readily represented...
I am very surprised at the lack of representation in the middle category of $5-10K.
IMO, this is a bracket of mid-high quality, and I would expect to see a bit more balance perhaps as the curve increases toward the $10-20K bracket (which, again my opinion, becomes high end). I suppose, arguably, there is a split that might occur at $12.5K (say) that perhaps should create the brackets as $5-12.5K, $12.5-25K, then $25-50K.
Yes I know I am splitting some hairs here, but as we look at equipment costs and the performance expected at certain dollar values, I think that there is something awry here.
My suspicion is that if you changed those values as I did, you might see a conformity to the curve where the proposed $12.5K split balances (or averages out) in the downward curve from Mid-High, High and Lux quality syatems.
(And yes, I believe that at $25K+ you are definitely in the Lux quality of expenditure.)

If interested, let's please discuss...

Or brush this into the dustpan of obscurity. Your choice.

5 observations:
1) It is important to consider that there are only 67 respondents involved, so certainly not enough to make solid conclusions on.
2) I don't know if there is much information on who these people are...perhaps people who visit his forum/website? Not necessarily a representative sample of all owners of audio systems!
3) The people are from all different continents (except Antartica), so they probably represent a wide division of incomes which is likely to defy a normal bell curve distribution!
4) The x-axis values are not consistent - starting with a $200 range then a $300 range then a $500 range, etc. If you were to divide it into $2000 range for each bar of the bar chart, the first bracket from $0 to $2000 would have 40% with it tapering off as the cost increases.
5) (building on #3) Nonetheless, the 6% in the $5,000 to $10,000 range followed by the 18% in the $10,000 to $20,000 range exhibits a trend which (if it is reinforced by a larger and more random population) could be explained as a bi-modal curve! In the USA we talk about the gap between the rich and the poor growing. It could be that among the global population such a gap exists in such a way as to explain the low value for the $5,000 to 10,000 range.

 

[lovinthehd]

5 observations:
1) It is important to consider that there are only 67 respondents involved, so certainly not enough to make solid conclusions on.
2) I don't know if there is much information on who these people are...perhaps people who visit his forum/website? Not necessarily a representative sample of all owners of audio systems!
3) The people are from all different continents (except Antartica), so they probably represent a wide division of incomes which is likely to defy a normal bell curve distribution!
4) The x-axis values are not consistent - starting with a $200 range then a $300 range then a $500 range, etc. If you were to divide it into $2000 range for each bar of the bar chart, the first bracket from $0 to $2000 would have 40% with it tapering off as the cost increases.
5) (building on #3) Nonetheless, the 6% in the $5,000 to $10,000 range followed by the 18% in the $10,000 to $20,000 range exhibits a trend which (if it is reinforced by a larger and more random population) could be explained as a bi-modal curve! In the USA we talk about the gap between the rich and the poor growing. It could be that among the global population such a gap exists in such a way as to explain the low value for the $5,000 to 10,000 range.

Part 1 has more info about setup and where he posted about it to gather respondents, should he include AH next time? https://archimago.blogspot.com/2020/05/blind-test-results-part-i-is-high.html