Denon AVC-A1H, special request for Gene to review and bench test this new beast!

[lovinthehd]

I see that. looks like 1.13 feet per millisecond but 1100 ft/per second still works. If my speaker distance is set to 25 feet that should mean Dirac (which uses milliseconds) will be roughly be 23ms.

Good luck....this is why I am not an early adopter

 

[multisport4me]

Good luck....this is why I am not an early adopter

Meh. I turned off my fourth sub with Speaker Preset 2 and Dirac is fine now. Max distance is 16ms on one of the speakers so it seems to me that fourth sub is right up against the 20ms threshold. Hopefully this is a quick fix if they've already done it for Onkyo (which is now 50ms). I also have Audyssey as well for Speaker Preset 1 if I really need the fourth rear sub (which I really don't).

 

[lovinthehd]

Meh. I turned off my fourth sub with Speaker Preset 2 and Dirac is fine now. Max distance is 16ms on one of the speakers so it seems to me that fourth sub is right up against the 20ms threshold. Hopefully this is a quick fix if they've already done it for Onkyo (which is now 50ms). I also have Audyssey as well for Speaker Preset 1 if I really need the fourth rear sub (which I really don't).

I wouldn't read too much into the translation into feet display, it's more about the general relation of delay to the set.

 

[PENG]

My educated guess is that those kind of "bugs" are likely not much of an issue forum folks tend to worry too much and read into things too much too early...

On AVF and AVSF, there have been tons of posts with many "experts" (backed by their number of posts and seniority), claimed and told people why they need to manually enter the distance to correct the D+M error due to using 300m/s instead of 343 m/s and then those who followed report back how their "sound", like imaging and whatever..got magically fixed..., I am not exaggerating, just read some foo those posts in you have nothing better to do and want a good laugh.

Audyssey, presumably they know better than us forum members, has stated repeatedly that (just one example below):

Audyssey LabsNovember 18, 2011 12:06
Yes, the distance measurement is actually a delay setting. The idea is to get the signal from all speakers and subs arriving at the same time for the main listening position (where you place the mic for the first measurement). This is how they have the system set up in the studio during the mix.

I have yet to see on single post from those on AVSF and AVF about why they thought the speed of sound use have to be so exact, if the goal is just to have the sound signal from all speakers and subs arriving at the same time, and many of them do seem, or claim to know Audyssey, D+M actually measure the delays, not distance.

I did try to convince one such poster, and he started trying to explain things in circulator logic, with no quoted contents from those in the know such as D+M, and Audyssey themselves.

In the early days, one poster actually quoted Denon support, stating that this speed error thing is just that, but not a bug.

UPDATED. Audyssey Time Alignment Correction in Denon and Marantz AVR's and AVP's. Plus info about Loudness Management Settings. | Page 3 | AVForums

That poster appeared to have been ignored since (not to him but to the quoted Denon response), in fact you get an "established member" follow up post like this:

"That response from Sound United is disgraceful if it came from an actual engineer.
I get the feeling their hardware can only do basic calculations in the area it calculates the channel delays, so they use a rough approximation of distance to time. "

Pretty sure this established member himself, is not an engineer, not that it matters though.

I rarely post there, and I know why.

The audio world is full of misconception by hobbyists, audiophiles, and the forum "experts".

 

[highfigh]

That’s what we’ve been trying to tell him over and over again.

He expects the 90% of the population (who don’t have the budget) to get rid of all their AVRs and spend $3K+ on AVP + another $3K+ on amps.

If the manufacturers can sell AVRs that do all of the preamp/processor things well AND have the amplifier channels for two-three grand, they should be able to delete the amplifiers and sell it for less. The reason they don't is that they don't want to.

 

[lovinthehd]

If the manufacturers can sell AVRs that do all of the preamp/processor things well AND have the amplifier channels for two-three grand, they should be able to delete the amplifiers and sell it for less. The reason they don't is that they don't want to.

I've seen many times the economies of scale are also a big part....but I can see the "exclusive" marketing/wanting to appeal to the "higher end" crowd, especially with the Marantz branding.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If the manufacturers can sell AVRs that do all of the preamp/processor things well AND have the amplifier channels for two-three grand, they should be able to delete the amplifiers and sell it for less. The reason they don't is that they don't want to.

What they WANT is to KEEP their jobs.

2 things are for certain:

1. Most consumers want to spend LESS money
2. Manufacturers want to make the MOST amount of money

 

[ryanosaur]

1. Most consumers want to spend LESS money
2. Manufacturers want to make the MOST amount of money

And somewhere in the middle is where the two should meet.

 

[highfigh]

What they WANT is to KEEP their jobs.

2 things are for certain:

1. Most consumers want to spend LESS money
2. Manufacturers want to make the MOST amount of money

And consumers want to save money, but honestly, we aren't here to pay their wages- that's a byproduct of us buying from them and if they do their job well, some of us will be loyal to the brand. Many won't because they don't give a rat's butt about the company or the brand, they want products at low prices.

If they want to make money, they have to satisfy their customers- if they want to find out what people want, they need to ask. I haven't heard them ask as a consumer or as a dealer.

 

[highfigh]

I've seen many times the economies of scale are also a big part....but I can see the "exclusive" marketing/wanting to appeal to the "higher end" crowd, especially with the Marantz branding.

And at training, they did present Marantz as the upper scale brand- they have done that for about as long as both companies have been under the same umbrella.

 

[-Jim-]

Gents, you are mixing two realms => Economics (Supply & Demand & Economies of Scale) and Marketing (Branding), both things I was into in a past life. The former is the balancing of selling price with desire of the Consumer and his ability to pay, whereas the latter is going to try to distort his desire, and influence him to pay more while the OEM costs remain virtually the same. (I sometimes call this putting lipstick on a Pig. It's still a Pig, just with a little more gloss on the outside.)

I remember back when GM had many different "brands" of cars, but the reality was numerous models were basically very similar with little touches to differentiate between a Pontiac, Oldsmobile, or a Chev. The public bought into the marketing hierarchy of these brands for decades while improving GMs bottom line. For example people bought an Olds instead of a Chev for the perceived status (or satisfaction) it gave them. To a large extent, for some models, Marantz is the Olds to Denon's Chev.

One of the methods to separate equipment is for repeatable data driven testing. (Think Six Sigma.) That way you get away from the Marketing Hype, and can make good decisions.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If they want to make money, they have to satisfy their customers

That’s what they have been doing - selling AVR to the 90% population who want AVR and don’t want to spend a lot more money on AVP + Amps.

Isn’t that how they satisfy their 90% population?

If not, then how would they satisfy their 90% population?

 

[ryanosaur]

That’s what they have been doing - selling AVR to the 90% population who want AVR and don’t want to spend a lot more money on AVP + Amps.

Isn’t that how they satisfy their 90% population?

If not, then how would they satisfy their 90% population?

Free AVRs!
“You get an AVR! You get an AVR!…”

 

[multisport4me]

Differentiating and segmenting products to address different demographics is hardly a new concept. There will always be personas that can buy that new Corvette every other year that they can't drive 10 months out of the year and those that can only afford a very practical, Chevy Trax. I'm not sure where this thread is going? I've owned many D&M products including many of their most reverred AVRs. I'm into separates lately and like XLRs so I bought an AV10. I also prefer Dirac having used it with the HTP-1. Sue me. lol

Back to reality - when the hell is Gene doing the review of the AP10/AMP10 and when is the AVR-A1H bench tests going to be posted? C'mon boys....get them APs fired up already!

 

[dlaloum]

If they want to make money, they have to satisfy their customers- if they want to find out what people want, they need to ask. I haven't heard them ask as a consumer or as a dealer.

In this day and age of social media, all they have to do is read the forums... the feedback is pretty clear.

You get to hear the fanboys of each brand.... you get to hear the more critical buyers.
A smart marketing person, could easily identify groups to target.

 

[dlaloum]

Gents, you are mixing two realms => Economics (Supply & Demand & Economies of Scale) and Marketing (Branding), both things I was into in a past life. The former is the balancing of selling price with desire of the Consumer and his ability to pay, whereas the latter is going to try to distort his desire, and influence him to pay more while the OEM costs remain virtually the same. (I sometimes call this putting lipstick on a Pig. It's still a Pig, just with a little more gloss on the outside.)

I remember back when GM had many different "brands" of cars, but the reality was numerous models were basically very similar with little touches to differentiate between a Pontiac, Oldsmobile, or a Chev. The public bought into the marketing hierarchy of these brands for decades while improving GMs bottom line. For example people bought an Olds instead of a Chev for the perceived status (or satisfaction) it gave them. To a large extent, for some models, Marantz is the Olds to Denon's Chev.

One of the methods to separate equipment is for repeatable data driven testing. (Think Six Sigma.) That way you get away from the Marketing Hype, and can make good decisions.

Yes - for you and I .... audio nerds/geeks... the rest of my family will never look at a technical review... and their idea of perfection would be B&O at corner store prices...

 

[PENG]

Differentiating and segmenting products to address different demographics is hardly a new concept. There will always be personas that can buy that new Corvette every other year that they can't drive 10 months out of the year and those that can only afford a very practical, Chevy Trax. I'm not sure where this thread is going? I've owned many D&M products including many of their most reverred AVRs. I'm into separates lately and like XLRs so I bought an AV10. I also prefer Dirac having used it with the HTP-1. Sue me. lol

Back to reality - when the hell is Gene doing the review of the AP10/AMP10 and when is the AVR-A1H bench tests going to be posted? C'mon boys....get them APs fired up already!

If you guys would get together and fund me for an AP and send me test samples by whatever means, I will do it for free (or for Gene). But I am in Canada so shipping costs would likely deter any such efforts in reality. As a retired EE, I could probably test at least one per month, won't compete with Amir, he's been doing like one a week. Gene, even with Matthew's help seem too busy to do more than a few in a year.

 

[highfigh]

In this day and age of social media, all they have to do is read the forums... the feedback is pretty clear.

You get to hear the fanboys of each brand.... you get to hear the more critical buyers.
A smart marketing person, could easily identify groups to target.

The #1 thing they'll see is that people don't read the manuals because it's easier to ask questions. The second is that many people don't understand what the equipment is trying to do, they're trying to make it do what it can't and that many don't wait for a resolution to bash a manufacturer.

Who will teach the marketing department to decipher what people are writing about AV when they just write about it, hire people who know? That's a real 'needle in a haystack' quest.

Social media is far from an accurate information base.

 

[panteragstk]

The #1 thing they'll see is that people don't read the manuals because it's easier to ask questions.

RTFM is an acronym for a reason.

I remember a customer asking me how I could answer their questions. I told them I read the manual.

 

[highfigh]

RTFM is an acronym for a reason.

I remember a customer asking me how I could answer their questions. I told them I read the manual.

I know- I have sold audio equipment since early 1978 and video since 1983- when the first cable companies came to Milwaukee, parts of it used two cables (Viacom) and people would call to ask how they could watch one channel and record another. They could barely set the clock on their VCR, but they wanted to make connections with a video switch, cable box and VCR. We provided simple, clear diagrams and they wanted us to explain it over the phone. That was before 'Adults can't do it, ask one of the children' became popular.