HDAM,HDAM!,HD...... is hype or hope ?????????

[KAKA]

Hello Audioholics,

I am having almost 7 years old Yamaha Aventage RX - A1050 still doing great. I have an 5.1 setup with KEF Q300/Q150 for front and surrounds, KEF Q600c for Center and SVS SB 2000 as sub. Other day I was just checking out new receivers thinking whether I can sell my current gear and checkout new one and came across a video by SoundUnited training videos who owns D+M. In one of the video I heard them comparing marantz and denon and vouching for marantz HDAM as something magical which makes sound warm and all. I haven';t been able to compare my receiver with any of the marantz or denon. I know audyssesy is key but other than that what sound difference will I hear in marantz or denon compared to what I have. I want some audio gurus here to help me out understand what is HDAM and if it so special why can't other companies copy it rather than use OP-AMPS as sound&united are touting.

 

[j_garcia]

I would not call it hype exactly, but I never found HDAM to make anything sound warmer. I would say the amp quality was very good on those units and that is more important - stable and able to drive difficult loads and sound good. I had 2 different integrated amps that had it.

IMO, choose speakers that sound the way you want rather than trying to "improve" things with the "sound" of an amp.

 

[Verdinut]

Hello Audioholics,

I am having almost 7 years old Yamaha Aventage RX - A1050 still doing great. I have an 5.1 setup with KEF Q300/Q150 for front and surrounds, KEF Q600c for Center and SVS SB 2000 as sub. Other day I was just checking out new receivers thinking whether I can sell my current gear and checkout new one and came across a video by SoundUnited training videos who owns D+M. In one of the video I heard them comparing marantz and denon and vouching for marantz HDAM as something magical which makes sound warm and all. I haven';t been able to compare my receiver with any of the marantz or denon. I know audyssesy is key but other than that what sound difference will I hear in marantz or denon compared to what I have. I want some audio gurus here to help me out understand what is HDAM and if it so special why can't other companies copy it rather than use OP-AMPS as sound&united are touting.

The HDAM module found on with Marantz amplifiers is not a desirable feature. As a matter of fact, it gives poorer performance than that of Denon amps which don't have that module. See Post#994:

Denon/Marantz vs Yamaha vs Anthem Thread

The current V6A doesn't have analog as far as I know. I think they got rid of the input selector too [emoji15] What if your remote stops working suddenly & and you need to change the input to something else? Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk Of course it has analog, It has a selector knob...

forums.audioholics.com

See Post#46:

Denon Vs Yamaha AVR

When you get your AVR spend a little money on fans to draw out the heat. I’m not saying every new Denon runs hot as hell, but that’s the rumor... :) This pair is cheap and quiet and available on Amazon: AC Infinity MULTIFAN S7, Quiet Dual 120mm USB Fan

forums.audioholics.com

 

[lovinthehd]

I'd say more hype.

 

[Verdinut]

I'd say more hype.

Yeah! Typical marketing bullshit!

 

[PENG]

I standby what I stated in the post Verdinut linked, unless and until someone prove my logic wrong, with facts, not hearsay/opinions. The fact is, those HDAMs are simply discrete (as opposed to ICs) op amps with unity gain. Unity gain means the amplification ratio is 1, that is, it doesn't amplify the signal, and it acts as a "buffer". Based on the positioning of the HDAM, that is, right at the end of the preamp/DAC signal chain, that is right before the power amp input, I would say it is 99.9% hype. It is simple logic, it is a buffer only so it won't change the sound characteristics except it would add a little more distortions and noise. It may offer higher slew rate by itself, but in that case the slew rate would be bottlenecked by the op amps and volume control ICs upstream, so that particular claim is pure BS. HDAMs in the Marantz integrated amps are more legit (in terms of their advertised benefits) because of the way they are applied, not not in the AVRs/AVPs. Case in point, the slim line series (probably also the NR series but have to double check first..) don't have HDAMs.

The 0.1% potential benefit would, or could be, in theory, improve the AVRs ability to drive power amps that have relatively low input impedance, but then based on bench test results it did not seem to even do that.

 

[KAKA]

Thanks @PENG for explaining. so going from RX-A1050 to any higher end receiver like Denon x6700 or Marantz SR 7015 OR 8015 I shouldn't see a perceivable sound difference compared to changing speakers right ?. I don't have plan to go beyond 5.1.2 in future. So do you think even upgrading is worth in my case ?. Also how much difference does a audyssesy make compared to YPAO in my case.

 

[Pogre]

so going from RX-A1050 to any higher end receiver like Denon x6700 or Marantz SR 7015 OR 8015 I shouldn't see a perceivable sound difference compared to changing speakers right ?

Pretty much yes. Any perceivable differences are going to lie in the differences between Audyssey and YPAO. If you do use YPAO, you might prefer Audyssey. As far as that goes the best version of Audyssey can be had in the 3700 for much less than the same version found in 8500.

I think Audyssey does a better job, but it's been a while since I've had a Yamaha and I've never actually done a direct comparison. I don't know if Audyssey is that much better that I'd upgrade just based on that alone. Outdated connections is a more compelling reason to me. I'd think about putting that money toward some new speakers or good subwoofage.

Do you have dual subs? Heck, would you consider going with ported subs? Now there's somewhere your money can go to give you a nice "wow" upgrade. Don't buy into sealed being better for music. That's a myth. Their only advantage is smaller size. Everything else is a compromise. SVS make great subs, but their PB models blow their SB models away. Not just more bang and boom, but more smooth, clean, extended deeper bass.

 

[PENG]

Thanks @PENG for explaining. so going from RX-A1050 to any higher end receiver like Denon x6700 or Marantz SR 7015 OR 8015 I shouldn't see a perceivable sound difference compared to changing speakers right ?. I don't have plan to go beyond 5.1.2 in future. So do you think even upgrading is worth in my case ?. Also how much difference does a audyssesy make compared to YPAO in my case.

I am not familiar with the RX-A1050's YPAO version, but it probably has the PEQ feature that allows you to use on on top of YPAO. If that is the case then it can do a reasonable job cleaning up the 20-200 Hz (assuming you have subwoofers) but then the question is, what would it do to the mid/high frequencies.

@AcuDefTechGuy is very experienced with YPAO and hopefully he will help you out on this.

I can tell you the X6700H or SR7015 you mentioned, have Audyssey XT32 and SubEQHT, and are compatible with the $20 App. So either one will let you clean up the 20-200 Hz range quickly, and you can choose the frequency range for room correction. According to forum talks, many users don't like the sound with Audyssey on, it would seem that in many cases, they thought Audyssey made the sound "thin", "bright" etc. To me, that's likely because Audyssey removed their room gain that exaggerated the lower mid bass, so they got used to, and preferred such room gain effects. They could have easy fixed such issues and enjoyed the much better sound with Audyssey do its RC thing in the 20-200 or even 500 Hz range and put a tilt in the low bass response using the App, instead of jumping to conclusion and the bandwagon, all based on such internet/forum hearsay.

If you are considering those two D+M AVRs, be aware that the Denon 3700, 4700, 6700, Marantz 6015, 7015, AV7705, AV7706 all have virtually the same preamp/DAC parts and circuitry, while the power amp sections are virtually identical. Marantz has the HDAMs that is an extra buffer stage but the way it is implemented would most likely not improve sound quality while adding THD+N. The difference in THD+N are of course totally measurable, but will likely not be audible. You will pay more for Marantz because of the extra parts (HDAMs and legacy I/Os that you may never use), and the fact that they don't sell as many as Denon, so Denon can afford more aggressive pricing.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I am not familiar with the RX-A1050's YPAO version, but it probably has the PEQ feature that allows you to use on on top of YPAO. If that is the case then it can do a reasonable job cleaning up the 20-200 Hz (assuming you have subwoofers) but then the question is, what would it do to the mid/high frequencies.

@AcuDefTechGuy is very experienced with YPAO and hopefully he will help you out on this.

You can do YPAO first. Then copy one of the YPAO curves (FLAT, NATURAL) to the Manual Parametric EQ. Then use PEQ to further change the YPAO.

I think when Gene had the CX-A5100, you copied the Natural YPAO curve to Manual PEQ and then tweaked it.

As for me, I don't use YPAO at all. I only use manual PEQ for the subwoofers, not the speakers.

 

[KAKA]

@AcuDefTechGuy can you guide on how to tweak peq for subwoofer . What is the baseline or how do I know what I need to tweak.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

@AcuDefTechGuy can you guide on how to tweak peq for subwoofer . What is the baseline or how do I know what I need to tweak.

If you want the long and labor-intensive comprehensive solution, you would need to buy a UMIK-1 mic and use the REW software to measure your subs.

If you want the quick and dirty solution, then you can try this.

Using PEQ, with Q=0.5, boost these Sub frequencies by 1dB, 2dB or 3dB (try 3dB, if too much try 2dB, etc.):
19.7Hz, 39.4Hz, 62.5Hz, 78.7Hz.

Or boost these: 39.4Hz, 62.5Hz, 78.7Hz and 99.2Hz.

Some people may not be able to hear much below 30Hz, so boosting from 40Hz-100Hz might give you more "punch" than boosting at 19.7Hz.

 

[fmw]

Hello Audioholics,

I am having almost 7 years old Yamaha Aventage RX - A1050 still doing great. I have an 5.1 setup with KEF Q300/Q150 for front and surrounds, KEF Q600c for Center and SVS SB 2000 as sub. Other day I was just checking out new receivers thinking whether I can sell my current gear and checkout new one and came across a video by SoundUnited training videos who owns D+M. In one of the video I heard them comparing marantz and denon and vouching for marantz HDAM as something magical which makes sound warm and all. I haven';t been able to compare my receiver with any of the marantz or denon. I know audyssesy is key but other than that what sound difference will I hear in marantz or denon compared to what I have. I want some audio gurus here to help me out understand what is HDAM and if it so special why can't other companies copy it rather than use OP-AMPS as sound&united are touting.

If the receiver has the ability to adjust the tone of the output, then you aren't comparing apples to apples. If all the adjustments are defeated and both units measure to an acceptably flat frequency response, then any different in the sound is most likely affected by personal bias. If the unit has a flat frequency response, then why does it matter that is uses op amps or HDAM or anything else? If it isn't capable of producing an acceptably flat frequency response in this day and age then it is either badly designed or broken. Unless you want to design electronic circuits, the internals of the unit are immaterial.

If you like the sound colored, then color it. There is nothing wrong with that. The desired result is or should be entertainment. You can get all the warmth you want by cutting the treble.

I have never owned a Denon or Marantz receiver so I can't comment on the equipment. But I suspect both are competently designed and competent performers. Buy whatever appeals to you. In your shoes I would use what you use currently that you say is going great. Save your money for something important.