AVR as pre/pro vs pre/pro, XLR vs single ended, and compatibility with high current amplifier(s)

[PENG]

I found a Yamaha CX-A5100 11.2-CH MusicCast Preamplifier for $2,299.00... ready to pull the trigger and call it good... as opposed to denon avr-x3700h? pretty sure peng's supply of patience has been taxed to its limit lol... Peng? Anyone?

The 5100 does not have that xlr anomaly.
For the same price or a little more, I would get the 5200. I thought both are in short supply. Is the one you found brand new with full warranty?

 

[HSWJR]

Absolutely he should.

 

[HSWJR]

new with warranty. But it is the old one- not the 5200 with the weird XLR issue.

 

[PENG]

new with warranty. But it is the old one- not the 5200 with the weird XLR issue.

It is the new one, 5200 that has the issue. I used to prefer the 5100 for that reason but I changed my mind now because the 5100 is now a 6 year old model. Now if you can get the 5100 new with full warranty for under 2K then go for it.

 

[PENG]

The 5200 is 3 year newer.

 

[HSWJR]

I vote for the CX-A5200 or CX-A5100.

I agree with you based on what I have read since I went down this rabbit hole...'Next year Manufact A will finally get it right etc' lol our endless obsession/quest for nirvana - god forbid anyone ever find it... might have to start being athletic again if I do ha ha... always room for improvement. Funny thing I started out thinking the 7705 would be a good fit until I dove deeper, especially thanks to PENG (THANK YOU PENG). The CX-A5200 or CX-A5100 look great if a little more complex than I am used to, either seems to fit my needs from a hardware standpoint. I like the idea of better chips and processing and dual antennas with 5200 (whichever pre/pro I get I want to run it 100% in VIA XLRs... except for a wireless Klipsch sub which is sorta moot I think)... otherwise I'd get the X3700H or maybe the 4700 (assuming "Amir" was wrong or biased in his assessment of the 4700. So, if single ended use was not your (my), goal, would the quirk, per Gene's review of the 5200, of the 5200's XLRs move you toward the 5100 or will it be an inaudible thing that is outweighed by the improved chipset over the 5100? And finally, at $2300 for the 5100 vs $2700 for the 5200, given that I plan on using it for movie sound processing 70%) and music (30%), that I run Krell Amps on 5 ch and marantz on remaining, use two subs and Dunlavys for fronts (R/L/C) (all about 91db sensitivity) plus a mish mosh of sides, heights, rears.... which would you go with? There is so much to digest with so many freaking variables it makes me want to dig an old Sony ES 5 channel out of my stepdaughter's closet (she'd rather listen to spotify on her iphone or Alexa than be bothered with all those buttons etc- I'm almost envious of her nonchalance regarding audio lol but once I got into high end I refuse to go into a 12 step lol..

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I agree with you based on what I have read since I went down this rabbit hole...'Next year Manufact A will finally get it right etc' lol our endless obsession/quest for nirvana - god forbid anyone ever find it... might have to start being athletic again if I do ha ha... always room for improvement. Funny thing I started out thinking the 7705 would be a good fit until I dove deeper, especially thanks to PENG (THANK YOU PENG). The CX-A5200 or CX-A5100 look great if a little more complex than I am used to, either seems to fit my needs from a hardware standpoint. I like the idea of better chips and processing and dual antennas with 5200 (whichever pre/pro I get I want to run it 100% in VIA XLRs... except for a wireless Klipsch sub which is sorta moot I think)... otherwise I'd get the X3700H or maybe the 4700 (assuming "Amir" was wrong or biased in his assessment of the 4700. So, if single ended use was not your (my), goal, would the quirk, per Gene's review of the 5200, of the 5200's XLRs move you toward the 5100 or will it be an inaudible thing that is outweighed by the improved chipset over the 5100? And finally, at $2300 for the 5100 vs $2700 for the 5200, given that I plan on using it for movie sound processing 70%) and music (30%), that I run Krell Amps on 5 ch and marantz on remaining, use two subs and Dunlavys for fronts (R/L/C) (all about 91db sensitivity) plus a mish mosh of sides, heights, rears.... which would you go with? There is so much to digest with so many freaking variables it makes me want to dig an old Sony ES 5 channel out of my stepdaughter's closet (she'd rather listen to spotify on her iphone or Alexa than be bothered with all those buttons etc- I'm almost envious of her nonchalance regarding audio lol but once I got into high end I refuse to go into a 12 step lol..

Those measurements and most measurements only confirm one main thing- that AVR should sound as good as separates.

Other than that, those numbers don't mean much else in terms of Sound Quality, Reliability, Compatibility, and Functionality.

If you've always fancied separates, get separates. It's not about SQ.

Whether you get the Marantz AVP or Yamaha AVP or Denon AVR, the SQ can be equally excellent.

I changed to Yamaha because Yamaha operates at a cooler temperature and is more functional and compatible for me. Yamaha might be more reliable. I also think the built quality of the CX-A5200/CX-A5100 and RX-A3080 are better than the Marantz counterparts. And based on what I've seen, Yamaha customer service is better. And Panurgy is going to be the death of DM.

 

[HSWJR]

I probably should know what "Panurgy" means... the Marantz 7705 seems really easy to use compared to the Yamahas, but the measurements seem better on the 5100 with the XLRs compared to either the 5200 or the 7705. My take from what you wrote is that even with the separates I have there will be little to no sonic benefit to using the 5100 over the 7705 or 5200, and that the features of the 5200 outweigh any sonic differences between the 5100 and 5200 even using the balanced connections. Seems pretty obvious that Marantz is riding on its laurels from many years ago as we sit here today...

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I probably should know what "Panurgy" means... the Marantz 7705 seems really easy to use compared to the Yamahas, but the measurements seem better on the 5100 with the XLRs compared to either the 5200 or the 7705. My take from what you wrote is that even with the separates I have there will be little to no sonic benefit to using the 5100 over the 7705 or 5200, and that the features of the 5200 outweigh any sonic differences between the 5100 and 5200 even using the balanced connections. Seems pretty obvious that Marantz is riding on its laurels from many years ago as we sit here today...

Those measurements are completely inaudible and purely academic. Audiophiles have always talked about those numbers. But those numbers mean absolutely nothing in terms of sound quality in the real world.

You are not going to hear a difference in SQ among the AVR and AVP (Yamaha or Denon or Marantz or Anthem or anything else) in direct mode, unless you use some kind of EQ or DSP to CHANGE the sound.

Focus your attention on the much more important things than those inaudible numbers.

 

[HSWJR]

It brings me full circle to the 7705 at $1800... seem like a better match for me than the 5100 at 2300 (I am a bit daunted by the setup required) or the 5200 at 2700 (for the same reasons)... and makes the Marantz that much more appealing on that basis alone. Everything else seems to favor the yamahachi siblings.... Is the setup really that much harder for the yamahas? the DM reputation is that they are much easier to set up...

 

[lovinthehd]

Depends what you mean by setup....running Audyssey vs YPAO is more than just setup related, its also eq related. I'd say probably easier to run YPAO from what I've read, it's not as involved (p.s. or as capable..).

 

[HSWJR]

Cool. I'm going to review the feature sets of both and just get the one that makes the most sense. Seems like the 5100 is the clear winner here (over the 7705) even if 5 years old due to build quality.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Cool. I'm going to review the feature sets of both and just get the one that makes the most sense. Seems like the 5100 is the clear winner here (over the 7705) even if 5 years old due to build quality.

Obviously I favor Yamaha personally/subjectively. But that’s because I hate all Room EQ. I don’t like Audyssey, YPAO, Dirac, ARC. So I don’t use any room EQ.

Objectively, if Room EQ is extremely important to you, I think Audyssey is better than YPAO.

I have used both Audyssey and YPAO. Unless you plan on getting more complex setup (using Audyssey app), both are the same level of difficulty. You hook up the microphone, run Audyssey or YPAO, and simply follow the on-screen instructions. Very simple.

 

[HSWJR]

I think you already said that you'd go with the 5200 over the 5100, even if it is $400 more, because it is maybe 2-3 years newer, has better DAC, heavier chassis, cheaper remote, weird XLR quirk... even though I will use XLRs not RCAs... all things considered...

 

[PENG]

I probably should know what "Panurgy" means... the Marantz 7705 seems really easy to use compared to the Yamahas, but the measurements seem better on the 5100 with the XLRs compared to either the 5200 or the 7705. My take from what you wrote is that even with the separates I have there will be little to no sonic benefit to using the 5100 over the 7705 or 5200, and that the features of the 5200 outweigh any sonic differences between the 5100 and 5200 even using the balanced connections. Seems pretty obvious that Marantz is riding on its laurels from many years ago as we sit here today...

The 5100/5200 measured about as good as the AV8805, better than the AV7705 but not as good as the SR8015. As ADTG said, the difference would mean little for real world use, so other factors such as reliability and support may be more important. To me, the only reason I stayed with Denon so far is Audyssey, that works very well (as good as Dirac Live if you use the App+Ratbuddyssey in my opinion) for the 20-200 Hz range.

 

[HSWJR]

The heavyweights running cooler (reliability) plus no HDAM makes the Yamaha better for me... would you go with the 5100 over the 5200 to save the $400 difference between them or just get the 5200 in spite of Gene's discovery of the XLR goblin in the 5200? Rzn I ask is you use them both interchangeably, and you said you liked the 5200 more due to release date/etc... I assume the features too? The Ms get too $$$ for me at that range....

 

[snakeeyes]

The heavyweights running cooler (reliability) plus no HDAM makes the Yamaha better for me... would you go with the 5100 over the 5200 to save the $400 difference between them or just get the 5200 in spite of Gene's discovery of the XLR goblin in the 5200? Rzn I ask is you use them both interchangeably, and you said you liked the 5200 more due to release date/etc... I assume the features too? The Ms get too $$$ for me at that range....

Not sure 5100 has eARC or Airplay2.

Otherwise pretty similar.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Krell KAV-250a/3...they also exhibit a +6B more gain when using XLR as opposed to single ended (RCA) connections.

Oh, well that’s different. I think most amps have 3dB to 6dB Less Gain for the XLR compared to RCA.

For example, my ATI AT2005 amp has 28dB Gain for XLR, but 34dB Gain for RCA.

But your Krell is the opposite (probably 28dB RCA vs 34dB XLR).

No wonder your Krell amp sounds better using XLR - like 6dB better.

Joking aside, I always use XLR when I can because I love that LOCKING mechanism. I wish HDMI has that locking mechanism.

I even use XLR on my Yamaha RX-A3080 AVR.

 

[HSWJR]

the 8805 just dropped to $3349. The 5200 is $2700... decisions.

https://www.hdvisionworks.com/Marantz-Receiver-p/av8805

 

[PENG]

the 8805 just dropped to $3349. The 5200 is $2700... decisions.

https://www.hdvisionworks.com/Marantz-Receiver-p/av8805

In that case, I would take the Marantz. It's the best measured Marantz gear on the ASR bench so far, and is 13 channel processing capable. No XLR THD+N anomalies.

Below shows its bench measurements relative to other units tested:

Note: I can't guarantee there are no errors/typos, for accuracy please read the source ASR reviews

Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum