Denon 4311ci vs Athem Mx 700

[markkirk1]

I am looking for a new avr and was wondering which receiver would be the best to drive Paradigm studio 100s cc690 studio 20s studio 10s and a Paradigm sub12 they both cost the same What I need know which would have better sound quality thanks

 

[brianedm]

I am looking for a new avr and was wondering which receiver would be the best to drive Paradigm studio 100s cc690 studio 20s studio 10s and a Paradigm sub12 they both cost the same What I need know which would have better sound quality thanks

If there's any chance at all you'll one day upgrade to dual subs I'd recommend the 4311. I have one and think the SQ is excellent, but have no experience with the Anthem.

 

[PENG]

I am looking for a new avr and was wondering which receiver would be the best to drive Paradigm studio 100s cc690 studio 20s studio 10s and a Paradigm sub12 they both cost the same What I need know which would have better sound quality thanks

I have not listened to those specific models but I do have experience with a few Denon AVRs including the 3805, 4308 and an Anthem amp. To me the Denon AVRs sound just as good with or without pairing with my Anthem amp for 2 channel music listening. My guess is that in pure direct either will sound great with your speakers. With room EQ on then it would be harder to predict, the MRX has Anthem's own room eq system while the 4311 comes with Audyssey XT32. The 4311 should have more power for the big Studio 100s, so that may help a little but won't be too significant.

 

[mjcmt]

The Anthems have my interest too. They are well respected amp manufactures, so the trickled down design on their top AVR should be pretty darn good. Remember you will need a PC laptop to run their software for the advanced room correction, which get rave reviews.
Here is another thread from elsewhere
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1289610/anthem-mrx700-vs-denon-4311-vs-pioneer-sc-37

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

From Home Theater Magazine.

Anthem MRX700:
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 86.3 watts
1% distortion at 93.7 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 43.9 watts
1% distortion at 52.6 watts

The MRX 700’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 128.6 watts and 1 percent distortion at 160.2 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 164.8 watts and 1 percent distortion at 221.0 watts.





Denon 3312:
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 82.9 watts
1% distortion at 103.0 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 79.5 watts
1% distortion at 96.8 watts

The AVR-3312CI’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 122.9 watts and 1 percent distortion at 143.3 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 202.0 watts and 1 percent distortion at 225.5 watts.



I would just get a Denon 3312 open box from Amazon & get 3 yr warranty. Today it's $567. Some days it's $493, some days it's $800.

 

[jcl]

I would just get a Denon 3312 open box from Amazon & get 3 yr warranty. Today it's $567. Some days it's $493, some days it's $800.

However the 3312 is 7.2 vs. 9.2 for the 4311, and only has the Audyssey MultEQ XT, not the MultEQ XT32 and Sub EQ HT that the 4311 has. While a good AVR in it's own right, and a great value, it's not a 4311 with less power.

 

[billy p]

>Well I just took a leap of faith and bought the mrx300 with some of the recent boxing day sales and compared it to my rxv1800 which has a very robust amp section(better or on par than the 3312....IMO) and the 300 held its own and why I evenually sold my yammy...but the real reason was ARC REQ which IMO is on par with xt32> over that of YPAO.

Food for thought...YMMV...Bill

BTW...if I could afford the 700... I woulda bought it!!!

 

[Hostility]

There is a lot of debat over ARV and XT32. I looked into it before buying my mrx 300. But for the price of the 700, i was able to buy the 300 plus an external amp with more power. I think the only thing lacking in ARC is eq for dual subs like xt32 has.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Choosing an AVR is based on what you think you need, based on your personal experience.

In my case, I have no use for Audyssey, which never improved my SQ.

I've talked to another person with the Denon 4311. He also said XT32 did nothing for him on 2 different sets of speakers.

So not everyone likes Audyssey (XT32 or other version).

If you like what Audyssey does, then you would want XT32. Otherwise, the 3312 is just as good. And if don't care for more than 5.1, then 9.1 does nothing for you. And the power difference is insignificant with 125wpc vs 140wpc.

If you care for HDMI1.4 for 3D video, then the 3312 has that.

So it all depends on what you think you need.

 

[billy p]

Than why do we spend all this added cash on receivers with this EQ technology capability ...just buy a top notch integrated amp and be done with it for muisc?

 

[Grador]

Than why do we spend all this added cash on receivers with this EQ technology capability ...just buy a top notch integrated amp and be done with it for muisc?

Because an integrated amp doesn't have 5.1...

As he's saying, it's all about what you want/need.

 

[PENG]

Than why do we spend all this added cash on receivers with this EQ technology capability ...just buy a top notch integrated amp and be done with it for muisc?

Of the popular REQ systems, I tend to have a little more faith in Audyssey because of the resources/depth they have and the fact that reputable manufacturers such as NAD, Denon, Onkyo, Marantz use their products. Any of them could have the resource to develope their own if they choose to. Having said that, aside from managing my subwoofers, Audyssey does not alter much else in my HT room but I think if the room does not need EQ to begin with then a good REQ system should leave it alone anyway. Other systems such as Anthem's, may be just as good or better but unless and until I see some full technical reviews supported with all necessary measurements/data, any so called rave reviews are mostly subjective and speculative. I do have faith in all of them in terms of bass management though as that does not require rocket scientists to figure out. Of course, I am also just expressing my own subjective opinion.

Guys like ADTG may find Audyssey useless because they have rooms that don't need EQ to begin with, and they have subs that have auto EQ built-in, or have enough controls for them to be dial in for the 15 to 80 Hz range.

 

[3db]

>Well I just took a leap of faith and bought the mrx300 with some of the recent boxing day sales and compared it to my rxv1800 which has a very robust amp section(better or on par than the 3312....IMO) and the 300 held its own and why I evenually sold my yammy...but the real reason was ARC REQ which IMO is on par with xt32> over that of YPAO.

Food for thought...YMMV...Bill


BTW...if I could afford the 700... I woulda bought it!!!

Congrats on your purchase. I'll be sticking with my Yammy for a while longer seeing other upgrades in the plans first. Its nice to see the venerable Yammy still holding its own as far as power delivery go against the newer receivers out there.

 

[3db]

Of the popular REQ systems, I tend to have a little more faith in Audyssey because of the resources/depth they have and the fact that reputable manufacturers such as NAD, Denon, Onkyo, Marantz use their products. Any of them could have the resource to develope their own if they choose to. Having said that, aside from managing my subwoofers, Audyssey does not alter much else in my HT room but I think if the room does not need EQ to begin with then a good REQ system should leave it alone anyway. Other systems such as Anthem's, may be just as good or better but unless and until I see some full technical reviews supported with all necessary measurements/data, any so called rave reviews are mostly subjective and speculative. I do have faith in all of them in terms of bass management though as that does not require rocket scientists to figure out. Of course, I am also just expressing my own subjective opinion.

Guys like ADTG may find Audyssey useless because they have rooms that don't need EQ to begin with, and they have subs that have auto EQ built-in, or have enough controls for them to be dial in for the 15 to 80 Hz range.

NAD also uses a modified version of Audyssey..can't remember what they call it but it does equalize different from the standard Auddyssey.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Than why do we spend all this added cash on receivers with this EQ technology capability ...just buy a top notch integrated amp and be done with it for muisc?

I may not want RC/EQ/DSP, but I do want HDMI, DTS HDMA, TrueHD, AirPlay, Network, etc.

Some people may want HDMI-1.4 for 3D video. I believe the 4311 has HDMI 1.3?

So for me and some others, we have no desire for Audyssey, ARC, or other RC/EQ/DSP, but others may want all those features.

The only RC system I would consider is the ultra high-end RC from the JBL Everest speaker system.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Of the popular REQ systems, I tend to have a little more faith in Audyssey because of the resources/depth they have and the fact that reputable manufacturers such as NAD, Denon, Onkyo, Marantz use their products. Any of them could have the resource to develope their own if they choose to. Having said that, aside from managing my subwoofers, Audyssey does not alter much else in my HT room but I think if the room does not need EQ to begin with then a good REQ system should leave it alone anyway. Other systems such as Anthem's, may be just as good or better but unless and until I see some full technical reviews supported with all necessary measurements/data, any so called rave reviews are mostly subjective and speculative. I do have faith in all of them in terms of bass management though as that does not require rocket scientists to figure out. Of course, I am also just expressing my own subjective opinion.

Guys like ADTG may find Audyssey useless because they have rooms that don't need EQ to begin with, and they have subs that have auto EQ built-in, or have enough controls for them to be dial in for the 15 to 80 Hz range.

After I ran Audyssey twice on my Denon AVP-A1HDCI & Salon2, it gave me 3 grahs: Audyssey Off, Audyssey On, & Audyssey Flat. They did not look identical, but they looked very similar overall (I recall around +/-3dB, no big dips or anything), with only minor differences.

 

[cpp]

I may not want RC/EQ/DSP, but I do want HDMI, DTS HDMA, TrueHD, AirPlay, Network, etc.

Some people may want HDMI-1.4 for 3D video. I believe the 4311 has HDMI 1.3?

So for me and some others, we have no desire for Audyssey, ARC, or other RC/EQ/DSP, but others may want all those features.

NOPE my 4311 is HDMI version 1.4a

I'm lucky enough to have my HT room and 2 chl room treated with Real Traps. Audyssey when on, just seems to mess up the sound, of course it could be my age and hearing

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

NOPE my 4311 is HDMI version 1.4a

I'm lucky enough to have my HT room and 2 chl room treated with Real Traps. Audyssey when on, just seems to mess up the sound, of course it could be my age and hearing

Darn, I hate it when I'm wrong.

Of course, who wouldn't want a 4311 over a 3312? Nobody. Of course not.

But the 4311 costs twice as much also. And for those who don't need all the features and capability of the 4311, which is one of the best AVR, why get it, unless....well...

 

[cpp]

Darn, I hate it when I'm wrong.

Of course, who wouldn't want a 4311 over a 3312? Nobody. Of course not.

But the 4311 costs twice as much also. And for those who don't need all the features and capability of the 4311, which is one of the best AVR, why get it, unless....well...

True if you don't need all the features, there is always great alternatives from Yamaha, Marantz, Pioneer, Anthem, Rotel, NAD etc.. and not necessarily Denon.

 

[jostenmeat]

>Well I just took a leap of faith and bought the mrx300 with some of the recent boxing day sales and compared it to my rxv1800 which has a very robust amp section(better or on par than the 3312....IMO) and the 300 held its own and why I evenually sold my yammy...but the real reason was ARC REQ which IMO is on par with xt32> over that of YPAO.

Food for thought...YMMV...Bill

BTW...if I could afford the 700... I woulda bought it!!!

Congrats Billy! Last night I was replying very first to this thread, but the forum froze up on me, I was a little too disappointed to repeat everything I typed (you know how verbose I get), and so haven't returned until now. As maybe AH's first Audyssey fanboi, I would be quite happy to try ARC in my system. As I recall it had a bit more flexibility when I was trying to compare them nearly 5 years ago. Also at that time, as I recall anyway, it was simply cost prohibitive to even think of ARC for me, so that's cool you can get it at the pricing you find, and frankly, it's nice to have some techs mixed up for the forum's sake, it's healthy.

In agreement with the post above, if I didn't care for EQ, I'd probably try a Yamaha for the supposed reliability. That said, Onkyo doesn't share that rep, but my 5 yo refurbed unit is still going strong, and it's still relevant with the XT version.

As for NAD's version, they use the same Audyssey code that everyone else does. Unless something has changed during the last year or so. The unique thing they offered with certain Audyssey enabled units was a proprietary target curve designed by Paul S Barton.