Does Home Theater Mag know what they are talking about?

[AcuDefTechGuy]

HTM's latest special issue on AVR Guide states that the $5,000 Arcam AVR600 is "It's about the Best A/V we've heard, PERIOD..."

AVR600 measurements:
THD+N < 0.034% at 1 kHz when driving 2.83 volts into an 8-ohm load.

Crosstalk at 1 kHz driving 2.83 volts into an 8-ohm load was –74.68 dB left to right and –74.14 dB right to left.

Signal-to-noise ratio with 2.83 volts driving an 8-ohm load from 10 Hz to 24 kHz with “A” weighting was –95.20 dBrA.

http://www.hometheater.com/content/arcam-avr600-av-receiver-ht-labs-measures


Here is the $400 Sony STR-DN1000 measurements:

THD+N < 0.010% at 1 kilohertz when driving 2.83 volts into an 8-ohm.

Crosstalk at 1 kHz driving 2.83 volts into an 8-ohm load was –92.18 decibels left to right and –86.60 dB right to left.

Signal-to-noise ratio with 2.83 volts driving an 8-ohm load from 10 Hz to 24 kHz with “A” weighting was –107.74 dBrA.

http://www.hometheater.com/content/sony-str-dn1000-av-receiver-ht-labs-measures

As you can see, a cheap $400 Sony AVR beats the "Best Sounding Period" $5,000 Arcam AVR in not 1, not 2, but all 3 categories of THD, Crosstalk, & SNR!!!

So what kind of message is HTM trying to send?

"Screw the measurements because brand name means everything" ???

I know when it comes to speakers, their FR measurements are just one snapshot of the overall picture; we have to look at true off-axis, waterfall, etc. Plus the end test is the final audition.

Electronics (AVR in Direct Mode) aren't like speakers.

But is HTM trying to say that electronics are just like speakers?

Electronics measurements don't mean anything?

 

[Adam]

Well, they did say "about" the best that they'd heard.

My thinking is that those measured parameters tell only part of the story. For example, you might have low distortion at 1 kHZ, but not be so great at other frequencies. Also, you might have low distortion everywhere, but not have enough capacitance to accurately recreate transients.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Well, I wonder how they conduct their listening tests
And, did they in fact compare it with other receivers on the spot, or just speculating from their poor memory over time?

 

[PENG]

I do have my doubts about some of the things they say in those reviews. I pay more attention to their lab measurements though I agree their numbers don't always tell the whole story.

 

[Reorx]

I have lost faith in just about every printed A/V mag out there.
Everyone appear's biased based on whoever buy's the ad space, or pays for a positive review.
Even CE Pro

The best thing about a printed mag, is the pretty speaker pictures.

FYI, just this morning, I saw a Bose ad on Audioholics front page.
This has left me confused.

Reorx

 

[GoFastr]

I have lost faith in just about every printed A/V mag out there.
Everyone appear's biased based on whoever buy's the ad space, or pays for a positive review.
Even CE Pro

The best thing about a printed mag, is the pretty speaker pictures.

FYI, just this morning, I saw a Bose ad on Audioholics front page.
This has left me confused.

Reorx

+1 Agreed....they must have given the writer for that mag an Arcam AVR600!

 

[Alex2507]

FYI, just this morning, I saw a Bose ad on Audioholics front page.

If they paid me I would have Bose banners in my sig and on my car doors.

 

[Adam]

FYI, just this morning, I saw a Bose ad on Audioholics front page.

They have ads here?

If they paid me I would have Bose banners in my sig...

Watch out - you might upset someone doing a Google search.

 

[jliedeka]

It's really sad but there aren't enough good sources of information anymore. I subscribe to Home Theater but it's mostly just to keep up with the new toys coming out. I keep firmly in mind the fact that they come from the same publishing company as Stereophile (which I also read but believe even less).

Since the Audio Critic stopped publishing actively, Audioholics is probably one of the best paces to get good info. The Soundstage publications are useful, especially if they have measurements or if you understand they don't have the guts to call bullshit on some pieces of audiophoolery.

Jim

Edit: In all fairness, the distortion and crosstalk figures quoted in the original post are most probably inaudible. Specs are a good guide but few publications really explain what they mean.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

In all fairness, the distortion and crosstalk figures quoted in the original post are most probably inaudible. Specs are a good guide but few publications really explain what they mean.

Then why even bother measuring any amps, pre-amps, pre-pros?

I cannot recall ANY AVR with a crosstalk as bad as that $5K Arcam.

If the crosstalk is -74dB @ 1kHz, it's probably going to be -54dB @ 20kHz or worse.

I think the "Audioholic Standard" is -60dB @ 20Hz, which is around -80dB @ 1kHz.

So if all these specs are inaudible, why even bother with the measurements?

Shouldn't a $5K AVR be held to much higher standards, including measurements, than a $400 AVR?

 

[3db]

Then why even bother measuring any amps, pre-amps, pre-pros?

I cannot recall ANY AVR with a crosstalk as bad as that $5K Arcam.

If the crosstalk is -74dB @ 1kHz, it's probably going to be -54dB @ 20kHz or worse.

I think the "Audioholic Standard" is -60dB @ 20Hz, which is around -80dB @ 1kHz.

So if all these specs are inaudible, why even bother with the measurements?

Shouldn't a $5K AVR be held to much higher standards, including measurements, than a $400 AVR?

I've been harping on this at you for the last few years. Specs past the point of inaudbaility mean exactly sh?t. You keep getting hung up on them for some reason when it comes to amps, receivers, etc

The reality check:
I would love to hang a very low efficieny speaker or a high impedance speaker or both such as an electrostat on each receiver. In your mind, which receive would you think would sound better? The Sony or the Arcam? Crank them up walk away and let them play for a day or two non stop. When you come back and see the Sony in a smoulder heap of melted plastic and teh Arcam is still playing away, which receiver out of those two is the better built receiver? With the Sony you are limited to speaker choice from a load point of view where as the Arcam will give you much greater flexability.

Now the subjective part of being "the best receiver they've ever heard" is just thme trying to hook Arcam into paying them for bigger add spaces. That's all that is.

Specs are important but you have to look at the whole picture, not just the specs. The extra cost on the Arcam (I think they're over priced myself like most electronics out there) goes into a much more robust power supply and amplifier section. If one can't hear -70db, do you honestly think that having a spec of -80db on noise is going to make any difference in sound quality?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I've been harping on this at you for the last few years. Specs past the point of inaudbaility mean exactly sh?t. You keep getting hung up on them for some reason when it comes to amps, receivers, etc

The reality check:
I would love to hang a very low efficieny speaker or a high impedance speaker or both such as an electrostat on each receiver. In your mind, which receive would you think would sound better? The Sony or the Arcam? Crank them up walk away and let them play for a day or two non stop. When you come back and see the Sony in a smoulder heap of melted plastic and teh Arcam is still playing away, which receiver out of those two is the better built receiver? With the Sony you are limited to speaker choice from a load point of view where as the Arcam will give you much greater flexability.

Now the subjective part of being "the best receiver they've ever heard" is just thme trying to hook Arcam into paying them for bigger add spaces. That's all that is.

Specs are important but you have to look at the whole picture, not just the specs.

I'm not talking about the amp section. It's obvious the Arcam has a much better amp section than the cheap Sony. I'm only talking about the pre-amp section.

My thinking is, if the Arcam is much better built, why does it measure much worse than a cheap $400 AVR???

I thought "better built" translates into better measurement, no?

 

[3db]

I'm not talking about the amp section. It's obvious the Arcam has a much better amp section than the cheap Sony. I'm only talking about the pre-amp section.

My thinking is, if the Arcam is much better built, why does it measure much worse than a cheap $400 AVR???

I thought "better built" translates into better measurement, no?

It depends where in the AVR chain, the manufacturer is putting in the money. If I were a manufacturer and I had to choose between pre-amp section and an amp section knowing that if I made the pre-amp distortion levels un detectable from a hearing stand point of view, (-70db or lower..greater -ve value that is) I would go with the powersupply and amp section. This would give me the biggest bang for my buck.

 

[highfigh]

Then why even bother measuring any amps, pre-amps, pre-pros?

I cannot recall ANY AVR with a crosstalk as bad as that $5K Arcam.

If the crosstalk is -74dB @ 1kHz, it's probably going to be -54dB @ 20kHz or worse.

I think the "Audioholic Standard" is -60dB @ 20Hz, which is around -80dB @ 1kHz.

So if all these specs are inaudible, why even bother with the measurements?

Shouldn't a $5K AVR be held to much higher standards, including measurements, than a $400 AVR?

Imagine this next sentence in a bad Cockney accent- "But ours go up to eleven, see?"

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

It depends where in the AVR chain, the manufacturer is putting in the money. If I were a manufacturer and I had to choose between pre-amp section and an amp section knowing that if I made the pre-amp distortion levels un detectable from a hearing stand point of view, (-70db or lower..greater -ve value that is) I would go with the powersupply and amp section. This would give me the biggest bang for my buck.

I agree the amp section is the best bang for the buck. So let's compare the amp section of the $5K Arcam to the $1.4K Integra:

Arcam $5,000 AVR600:
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 82.0 watts
1% distortion at 95.5 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 81.0 watts
1% distortion at 93.9 watts

Integra $1,400 DTR-50.2:
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 110.8 watts
1% distortion at 134.1 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 107.5 watts
1% distortion at 127.7 watts

My point is, according to HTM, the $5K Arcam doesn't appear very special at all on the measurements pre-amp or amp section.

So either Arcam is underachieving on the measurements, or HTM is just completely inconsistent with their measurements, and the Arcam might actually measure a lot better if done by other labs?

 

[3db]

I agree the amp section is the best bang for the buck. So let's compare the amp section of the $5K Arcam to the $1.4K Integra:

Arcam $5,000 AVR600:
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 82.0 watts
1% distortion at 95.5 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 81.0 watts
1% distortion at 93.9 watts

Integra $1,400 DTR-50.2:
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 110.8 watts
1% distortion at 134.1 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 107.5 watts
1% distortion at 127.7 watts

My point is, according to HTM, the $5K Arcam doesn't appear very special at all on the measurements pre-amp or amp section.

So either Arcam is underachieving on the measurements, or HTM is just completely inconsistent with their measurements, and the Arcam might actually measure a lot better if done by other labs?

Isn't ARCAM British? That's a price premium right there.

ARCAM is just over priced is the conclusion I would draw from this example

 

[DD66000]

There is certainly more to pre-amps, power amps than specs. I stopped putting my total faith in the Specs, long ago. Its all what my ears tell me, in the end.

Most important is the circuitry design and the quality of components.
Two amps putting out the same flat FR really means nothing, for example.
It just means they both amplify each frequency to the level as the rest. It really does not tell you how it will sound.

Its in the design where it counts. Like a power amp having direct coupling in the output circuit, instead of having caps and inductors in the signal path, which cause distortion.

Personally, I think one can find better than Arcam, for the same or less money.

And the specs of the Arcam and Integra are much worse than my Parasound gear. And neither sound as good, imo.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

And the specs of the Arcam and Integra are much worse than my Parasound gear. And neither sound as good, imo.

I think Parasound commands a lot more respect because they walk the walk.

Their components consitently measure extremely well, and their prices reflect this high level of performance IMO.

Although Bryston components seem overpriced, at least they consistently measure and perform at a very high level.

I think the Anthem high-end separates also measure and perform at a very high level.

But then again, there is also the possibility that HTM just screwed up on the measurements of the Arcam to begin with.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Isn't ARCAM British? That's a price premium right there.

ARCAM is just over priced is the conclusion I would draw from this example

Shoot, they are probably made in China like everything else these days.

 

[DD66000]

I think Parasound commands a lot more respect because they walk the walk.

Their components consitently measure extremely well, and their prices reflect this high level of performance IMO.

Although Bryston components seem overpriced, at least they consistently measure and perform at a very high level.

I think the Anthem high-end separates also measure and perform at a very high level.

But then again, there is also the possibility that HTM just screwed up on the measurements of the Arcam to begin with.

I don't think Parasound pricing is high, compared to what you get. I can think of higher priced brands that either are no better quality, or their prices are soooo out of sight it makes little sense that I would want to pay more than I pay for Parasound.

I find that Anthem makes good gear, from what I've auditioned. I've never heard Bryston gear, that I can remember.

As for HTM, who knows anymore. But not excepting ads, like CR, does not mean accurate testing either. I saw many electronic testing and opinion I thought was way off, when I subscribed to them two decades ago.