Anthem AVM 90 15.4CH Processor Review

[TheoN]

Audible for movies, or even for music, using the ABX Little Bear switch? For music, did you guys also compared in direct mode with no dsp in used, just curious...

Yes listening was direct only using the processor’s internal DACs with no room correction. Stereo listening is the preferred metric and what we used. As we all know, the more speakers you add, the more difficult it can become to discern differences. The AVM 90’s ARC Genesis also has an advantage over the AVM 60 so we wanted to eliminate that variable and look solely the processor’s raw audio performance. AKA do the audio sections have measurable and audible differences. It should be noted we did listening tests prior to any test results to avoid bias.

 

[TheoN]

That's just 2ch, tho How does it do with its full capabilities?

Thanks for the extra details. Maybe I'll break down and watch the video to see just what these comments/preferences were particularly. I had just not expected a review to incorporate a listening comparison like this,

Since a group of users are certainly likely to be looking to step up from the AVM 60 and since
I had one in my setup it lent itself to take advantage of that opportunity and compare directly vs. anecdotal or memory.

The ARC Genesis implementation on the AVM 90 is superior to the 60 just from automated phase alignment and multisub. It’s not a fair fight.

 

[lovinthehd]

Since a group of users are certainly likely to be looking to step up from the AVM 60 and since
I had one in my setup it lent itself to take advantage of that opportunity and compare directly vs. anecdotal or memory.

The ARC Genesis implementation on the AVM 90 is superior to the 60 just from automated phase alignment and multisub. It’s not a fair fight.

I mostly wasn't prepared for a listening comparison in a review here. Particularly for electronics. ARC wasn't part of the comparison, tho, was it?

 

[Nondemo01]

I'm not liking the tone of this thread, especially from regular contributors here. It's a dangerous game when someone tries to define sound quality by a single metric like SINAD or SNR. There are a lot of variables that contribute to high fidelity and the AVM 90 has all the hallmarks of quality processing and componentry. Theo's love for the AVM 90 may in part be due to how well the latest version of Anthem ARC Genesis does for his system compared to what he had with the AVM 60. The AVM 90 also has numerous upgrades over the AVM 60 as he stated. That said, I doubt most people, including Theo and myself would be able to discern audible differences between two top teir processors like the Marantz AV 10 and Anthem AVM 90 if they are both set up similarly. This won't be possible once room correction is factored in, however. We will be doing a comparison of these 2 awesome products via a livestream very soon. It won't be a direct audio comparison but a feature set and use casis comparison of the products. I wish Theo lived closer so we could set up a proper controlled listening test between the 2 units but that's not happening in the immediate future. IN any event, I ask everyone to get along better here, drop any intentional or non-intentional accusations towards Theo and let's all enjoy the passion for the hobby we have in common. thanks.

Sorry Gene and totally agree. I find it tiring when people don't take the time to read the entire review or watch the accompanying video yet attempt to discredit the efforts of the reviewer. I don't buy everything after double blind tests, Klipple and Audio Precision measurements. Sometimes the word of the reviewer is sufficient. Did we need to know the science behind heat transfer and thermal conductivity when mom said; "don't touch, hot" as toddlers?

 

[TheoN]

I mostly wasn't prepared for a listening comparison in a review here. Particularly for electronics. ARC wasn't part of the comparison, tho, was it?

Correct, direct, switched testing was without any room correction engaged. ARC was not used in the direct XLR switching between the AVM 90 and AVM 60

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Well obviously measurements matter…

If a newbie is trying to understand why the AVM90 would sound better than the AVM60 in Direct Mode by asking which measurements (THD, SNR, Crosstalk, FR, etc.) matter and at what points are they audible, what would you say?

IOW, do measurements matter more than the upgraded parts (DAC, other components) ?

Are subjective opinions from 3 people (in a test where the test-giver knew exactly which one was playing) significant enough to say that it’s audible?

As a side note regarding double-blind studies, in case any newbie is wondering , in drug studies, the number of test subjects (people being tested on) must be statistically significant, which means a lot more than 3 people. IOW, if I tested a drug that lowers BP (blood pressure) in 3 people, I am not going to publish that this drug works to lower BP in a “group of people”. And the test giver must not know which drug is which to eliminate bias. Thus, the test giver is not counted as being a test subject.

But, of course, audio testing isn’t as serious as FDA medical drug studies. So I suppose 3 people is better than nothing. But I just want to point out that 3 people isn’t definitive in any test. So YMMV as they say.

Also, this is just a hobby. We all have the rights to buy whatever AVP that makes us happy.

Anyway, I’ll stop annoying some people here and move on. I swear I didn’t have this problem when I was much younger.

 

[PENG]

Sorry Gene and totally agree. I find it tiring when people don't take the time to read the entire review or watch the accompanying video yet attempt to discredit the efforts of the reviewer. I don't buy everything after double blind tests, Klipple and Audio Precision measurements. Sometimes the word of the reviewer is sufficient. Did we need to know the science behind heat transfer and thermal conductivity when mom said; "don't touch, hot" as toddlers?

Hah that's funny, but seriously, it is good to know the 2nd law of thermodynamics too if you want to talk about entropy. Same idea as the need to understand Fourier and Laplace transforms if one wants to understand harmonic distortions and room correction filters applicable to audio devices.

Just because someone says the dut sounded audibly warm, transparent, clinical etc., is the same as your example, that is, don't touch it because mom said it's hot. That's just too easy, no fun at all. Many of us like Gene's reviews because he typically would include many measurements, not like S&V's single point THD+N and FR.

 

[everettT]

If a newbie is trying to understand why the AVM90 would sound better than the AVM60 in Direct Mode by asking which measurements (THD, SNR, Crosstalk, FR, etc.) matter and at what points are they audible, what would you say?

IOW, do measurements matter more than the upgraded parts (DAC, other components) ?

Are subjective opinions from 3 people (in a test where the test-giver knew exactly which one was playing) significant enough to say that it’s audible?

As a side note regarding double-blind studies, in case any newbie is wondering , in drug studies, the number of test subjects (people being tested on) must be statistically significant, which means a lot more than 3 people. IOW, if I tested a drug that lowers BP (blood pressure) in 3 people, I am not going to publish that this drug works to lower BP in a “group of people”. And the test giver must not know which drug is which to eliminate bias. Thus, the test giver is not counted as being a test subject.

But, of course, audio testing isn’t as serious as FDA medical drug studies. So I suppose 3 people is better than nothing. But I just want to point out that 3 people isn’t definitive in any test. So YMMV as they say.

Also, this is just a hobby. We all have the rights to buy whatever AVP that makes us happy.

Anyway, I’ll stop annoying some people here and move on. I swear I didn’t have this problem when I was much younger.

If a newbie understands what direct mode is, let alone SINAD, they're not newbs anymore, lol. I'm in the group that believes DACs shouldn't be an audible issue in AVPs/AVRs unless implemented very poorly but it happens). With AVPs and at their price points, a lot of consumers expect more for their money, not the same thing that's in a product for $2k less. McIntosh learned this trying to charge Mac prices for a Denon/Marantz guts, good guts included.

 

[Nondemo01]

This hobby has gotten so toxic. Reviewers get subjected to so much garbage when all they seek to do is inform, educate, and provide THEIR subjective opinions. Some use measurements to communicate OBJECTIVE findings, some don't and that is OKAY. We need to welcome the "Marantz sound warm" crowd along with the "DUT should have XX.XXXX.XXXXX SINAD in direct mode at X.XV". There is room for each. I guarantee you that D&M sell WAY MORE to the "sounds warm" crowd vice the "needs higher SINAD" crowd. I suspect all manufacturers do but that's me conjecturing.

We should all THANK OUR LUCKY STARS that Gene and Audioholics can get D&M, Yamaha, and others to eek out better technical performance for things that the majority of us "geek squad" (self-proclaimed so don't get triggered) agree isn't audible but win bragging rights.

BACK to the AVM-90, just watched Matt on his YT channel discussing low frequency sources. Is Anthem considering adding the option in ARC to send LFE information to the mains in the future considering Dirac ART is available soon on more platforms?

 

[PENG]

Anthem ARC is a lot easier to use for the layman with much less to screw up if you just follow the initial set up, limit correction to 5kHz or less and adjust bass levels to taste.

I agreed with everything you said except this one. In my experience:

- Audyssey and Dirac are easy to do as well if one is okay giving up the improvements that could be achieved by spending time making manual tweaks, post auto calibration.

- ARC Genesis is easy to use for sure but if you check with REW after calibration, even just for the mmp (I have done so for other mic positions as well), you would likely find the results not as good as Audyssey's and Diracs. I have tons of graphs to show the differences, and others who cared to check with REW experienced the same/similar results, but very few ARC G users post their graphs as their users tend to trust Anthem on their RC, a lot more than those who would trust Audyssey and Dirac.

- With manual tweaks, ARC G can do a good job for sure, except I hope they would improve on their phase optimization via future FW updates, as it is now, it is not that effective at all, DLBC's a little better consistently for me. Audyssey, amazingly, also integrate my speakers and subs quite well, simply with time alignment, but that obviously depends a lot of one's room acoustic characteristics.

- I don't have the 90 (so that could behave differently), only the lower end brother 70, and as far as I can tell, the sucked out bass Theo mentioned on some beta ARC G version is not true for the 70 and I think other models such as the MRX 740 as well, it happened with the regular non beta FW version(s) as well, at least the one before the latest update. So those who have not updated yet, unless they had done their own manual tweaks, they would have their deep bass range messed up, it may or may not be too noticeable as it always is a room dependent thing. Audyssey and Dirac (especially Audyssey) don't seem to have such FW related issues.

Overall, I think Anthem ARC's HMI (man machine interface), while more restrictive than Audy and Dirac's but it is very user friendly, simple to tweak manually and because it is restrictive, it is easier for users not to mess things up. So, overall I would give it higher marks than the other two for users who are not too curious and just want to get the job done and then sit back and enjoy. For those who are too curious, or perfectionist type, they would likely find ARC G less effective than the other two. That's just based on my own findings, and reading a few others who posted their finding with REW graphs. Theo's findings could well be completely different as he obviously think ARC G is better than Audyssey, or Dirac, based on what I read...

 

[PENG]

This hobby has gotten so toxic. Reviewers get subjected to so much garbage when all they seek to do is inform, educate, and provide THEIR subjective opinions. Some use measurements to communicate OBJECTIVE findings, some don't and that is OKAY. We need to welcome the "Marantz sound warm" crowd along with the "DUT should have XX.XXXX.XXXXX SINAD in direct mode at X.XV". There is room for each. I guarantee you that D&M sell WAY MORE to the "sounds warm" crowd vice the "needs higher SINAD" crowd. I suspect all manufacturers do but that's me conjecturing.

That seems to be true to a point, but I think we should all try not to be too sensitive. Most of the time people might get overly passionate (that's far from being toxic, is my point) when the right buttons got pushed at the right moment, mood, caffeine deficiency... etc. For example, I have known adtg for a million years electronically, and don't recall the last time he got so....... reacting to this very nice review by Theo. I did feel the "toxicity" may be once or twice after years of participation, so I think that's rare on this forum.

We should all THANK OUR LUCKY STARS that Gene and Audioholics can get D&M, Yamaha, and others to eek out better technical performance for things that the majority of us "geek squad" (self-proclaimed so don't get triggered) agree isn't audible but win bragging rights.

Agreed, imo, Gene and Theo are among the best doing what they are doing. Gene is also the best in terms of being objective 99% of the time. I wanted to say 100% but just would go with 99% just in case lol....

BACK to the AVM-90, just watched Matt on his YT channel discussing low frequency sources. Is Anthem considering adding the option in ARC to send LFE information to the mains in the future considering Dirac ART is available soon on more platforms?

I hope not, they don't seem to have the resource D+M/Masimo has, so better focus on just getting bass optimization done well, as it is not, I feel there's a lot of room for improvements. They do seem to support their RC for a long time via updates, and they make up for their tendency to have a little more bugs in the beginning.

 

[TheoN]

If a newbie is trying to understand why the AVM90 would sound better than the AVM60 in Direct Mode by asking which measurements (THD, SNR, Crosstalk, FR, etc.) matter and at what points are they audible, what would you say?

IOW, do measurements matter more than the upgraded parts (DAC, other components) ?

Are subjective opinions from 3 people (in a test where the test-giver knew exactly which one was playing) significant enough to say that it’s audible?

As a side note regarding double-blind studies, in case any newbie is wondering , in drug studies, the number of test subjects (people being tested on) must be statistically significant, which means a lot more than 3 people. IOW, if I tested a drug that lowers BP (blood pressure) in 3 people, I am not going to publish that this drug works to lower BP in a “group of people”. And the test giver must not know which drug is which to eliminate bias. Thus, the test giver is not counted as being a test subject.

But, of course, audio testing isn’t as serious as FDA medical drug studies. So I suppose 3 people is better than nothing. But I just want to point out that 3 people isn’t definitive in any test. So YMMV as they say.

Also, this is just a hobby. We all have the rights to buy whatever AVP that makes us happy.

Anyway, I’ll stop annoying some people here and move on. I swear I didn’t have this problem when I was much younger.

The only opinion that ultimately matters is the buyer’s. Do the buyer like it or not.

I agreed with everything you said except this one. In my experience:

- Audyssey and Dirac are easy to do as well if one is okay giving up the improvements that could be achieved by spending time making manual tweaks, post auto calibration.

- ARC Genesis is easy to use for sure but if you check with REW after calibration, even just for the mmp (I have done so for other mic positions as well), you would likely find the results not as good as Audyssey's and Diracs. I have tons of graphs to show the differences, and others who cared to check with REW experienced the same/similar results, but very few ARC G users post their graphs as their users tend to trust Anthem on their RC, a lot more than those who would trust Audyssey and Dirac.

- With manual tweaks, ARC G can do a good job for sure, except I hope they would improve on their phase optimization via future FW updates, as it is now, it is not that effective at all, DLBC's a little better consistently for me. Audyssey, amazingly, also integrate my speakers and subs quite well, simply with time alignment, but that obviously depends a lot of one's room acoustic characteristics.

- I don't have the 90 (so that could behave differently), only the lower end brother 70, and as far as I can tell, the sucked out bass Theo mentioned on some beta ARC G version is not true for the 70 and I think other models such as the MRX 740 as well, it happened with the regular non beta FW version(s) as well, at least the one before the latest update. So those who have not updated yet, unless they had done their own manual tweaks, the would have their deep bass range messed up, it may or may not be too noticeable as it always is a room dependent thing. Audyssey and Dirac (especially Audyssey) don't seem to have such FW related issues.

Overall, I think Anthem ARC's HMI (man machine interface), while more restrictive than Audy and Dirac's but it is very user friendly, simple to tweak manually and because it is restrictive, it is easier for users not to mess things up. So, overall I would give it higher marks than the other two for users who are not too curious and just want to get the job done and then sit back and enjoy. For those who are to curious, or perfectionist type, they would likely find ARC G less effective than the other too. That's just based on my own findings, and reading a few others who posted their finding with REW graphs. Theo's who findings could well be completely different as he obviously think ARC G is better than Audyssey, or Dirac, based on what I read...

Good points. On the topic of Room Correction, I like all three. I have the most experience with ARC going back to ARC-1. I really like what Audyssey has done with MultEQ-X especially fixing the dynamic range and sub volume issue. Dirac likewise is great and have enjoyed it too. I think that what you said is key—some software provides more flexibility post calibration. For example the Focal Astral 16 processor paired with Dirac has nearly limitless possibilities. We’re in a great age of audio advancement s

 

[MrBoat]

I, for one, appreciate it when thread participants question methods and pick apart reviews regardless of how it comes across. Many of us have heard these claims of audible improvements for decades, not forgetting how audibly perfect things supposedly were even a few decades back, with each so-called audible milestone being so minutely detectable that you pretty much have to talk yourself into it for each and every thing. It's not the audience's fault that so many of these improvement claims live so high up into the realm of diminishing returns and what amounts to a perpetual state of obsolescence, especially at the prices they command now.

If I had dropped a wad on a previous model a couple years ago, only to find that it is upstaged significantly audibly again, I'd be hesitant to buy until I could be assured that it was pointless to try to hear a difference. Fortunately for me, I only listen to music, and the threshold for that ends up being recording quality, which the equipment for, has been more capable than. . . for decades.

It's the marketers who have made these topics so contentious with their endless claims of superiority while perpetuating the now constant state of upgraditus, and how they play the market with their often, meaningless numbers, not the end users with their well placed skepticisms because of it.

 

[mns3dhm]

Seems like a niche product aimed at the stupid rich that think $7500 for an AV processor is a good idea. You could literally go see 500 movies at the theater for the same amount of money. That is one movie a week for 10 years.

 

[Chickenwing]

Seems like a niche product aimed at the stupid rich that think $7500 for an AV processor is a good idea. You could literally go see 500 movies at the theater for the same amount of money. That is one movie a week for 10 years.

I like it to buying a car versus taking the bus. The cost of my truck, which is certainly not fancy, would pay for a lifetime of bus rides, but I prefer the convenience and not having to sit with strangers!

 

[Nondemo01]

That seems to be true to a point, but I think we should all try not to be too sensitive. Most of the time people might get overly passionate (that's far from being toxic, is my point) when the right buttons got pushed at the right moment, mood, caffeine deficiency... etc. For example, I have known adtg for a million years electronically, and don't recall the last time he got so....... reacting to this very nice review by Theo. I did feel the "toxicity" may be once or twice after years of participation, so I think that's rare on this forum.



Agreed, imo, Gene and Theo are among the best doing what they are doing. Gene is also the best in terms of being objective 99% of the time. I wanted to say 100% but just would go with 99% just in case lol....



I hope not, they don't seem to have the resource D+M/Masimo has, so better focus on just getting bass optimization done well, as it is not, I feel there's a lot of room for improvements. They do seem to support their RC for a long time via updates, and they make up for their tendency to have a little more bugs in the beginning.

It's just tiring. 23 years in the military didn't make me "feely". But I learned if everyone walked around all day saying whatever is on their mind, there would be a WHOLE LOT FEWER of us walking around. One's freedom to say whatever doesn't make it okay to insult people on purpose or accident. After years of deploying to third world countries, "might makes right" doesn't end well or look like what you might think. Passion is reading, commenting, fighting for your position not attacking reviewers over personal beliefs.

Anyway...

 

[cardsdoc]

I’m currently running a 9.2.4 system using an SR8015 plus a hypex amp for LCR calibrated with multeq-x and using a custom target curve. Speakers are Revel Concerta2 and subs are dual PSA TV1813. Subs are also time aligned using REW/miniDSP HD. My LCR are behind an AT screen so do need full range correction. I have no complaints but always contemplating my next upgrade. Dirac with DLBC and recent ARC iterations with sub-main phase optimization seem to both get rave reviews but I have never heard systems with them. While I don’t think I would ever spend AVM-90 money I would consider the AVM-70. I also don’t listen to much music. Would this be a noticeable upgrade or fairly minor? Has anyone compared the most recent ARC versions to Dirac with DLBC? I would also think about a Denon x6800h or Marantz Cinema 30 with Dirac DLBC. Thanks for any input.

 

[Nondemo01]

I’m currently running a 9.2.4 system using an SR8015 plus a hypex amp for LCR calibrated with multeq-x and using a custom target curve. Speakers are Revel Concerta2 and subs are dual PSA TV1813. Subs are also time aligned using REW/miniDSP HD. My LCR are behind an AT screen so do need full range correction. I have no complaints but always contemplating my next upgrade. Dirac with DLBC and recent ARC iterations with sub-main phase optimization seem to both get rave reviews but I have never heard systems with them. While I don’t think I would ever spend AVM-90 money I would consider the AVM-70. I also don’t listen to much music. Would this be a noticeable upgrade or fairly minor? Has anyone compared the most recent ARC versions to Dirac with DLBC? I would also think about a Denon x6800h or Marantz Cinema 30 with Dirac DLBC. Thanks for any input.

I would add MultiEQ-X Pro to your list of "listens".

Gene and Matt did a great video on the subject:

 

[cardsdoc]

I would add MultiEQ-X Pro to your list of "listens".

Gene and Matt did a great video on the subject:

Thanks. Multeq-x Pro is the same product as Multeq-X just with business/installer friendly licensing. I think I saw that video but will review again. I know some folks have had good results with importing REW/usb mic generated biquad filters into multeq-x. I think Matt did that too but can’t recall. I’m not sure I want to put that much time/work into it but certainly something to think about. If I can get better results with ARC or maybe Dirac/DLBC that’s appealing as it’s much less time on my end.

 

[TLS Guy]

Thanks. Multeq-x Pro is the same product as Multeq-X just with business/installer friendly licensing. I think I saw that video but will review again. I know some folks have had good results with importing REW/usb mic generated biquad filters into multeq-x. I think Matt did that too but can’t recall. I’m not sure I want to put that much time/work into it but certainly something to think about. If I can get better results with ARC or maybe Dirac/DLBC that’s appealing as it’s much less time on my end.

I just can't believe that there are so many bad rooms and or speakers, that all that complexity is required and even makes a difference. I have three systems here and NONE of them need that nonsense. All Eqs of any variety are all disabled.