Denon AVR-E400 Receiver Review

Adam

Adam

Audioholic Jedi
I recently had the fortune to audition this receiver and wanted to share my thoughts with you all. It's at the top of Denon's lower line of network receivers, and is very similar to (but slightly less feature-rich than) their AVR-X2000 model.

(The following is from a review that I'm writing for Amazon, hence my wording and "star" ratings below.)

This is a nice receiver that does a lot of things well. By itself, while having a few shortcomings for my needs, it's overall a solid unit with some really neat features. At its price point, though, it has some strong competition from other major brands that have put out less expensive receivers with similar power ratings but with more connections and features. The review is a bit lengthy, but I think that $500-$600 is a lot of money, and I hope that you find it helpful in your search for a new receiver.

I read about and discuss receivers on an audio/video forum (Audioholics) a lot, and the things that I recommend that you look at when shopping are: connections (does it have everything that you want/need), auto calibration (a huge plus, IMO), features (can it do everything that you want), power (can it play as loud as you want and still sound good), ease of use, and the remote control. Price, of course, also weighs into it - I never want to spend more than I have to in order to get what I want, but I don't want to spend less and then be unhappy for years because I bought something that doesn't do what I want. This Denon doesn't do everything that I want, but it might be perfect for you depending on your needs.

The video provides an overview of the receiver, including a look under the hood. The main review is below.


SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
I'm going to compare this against similarly priced network receivers from Onkyo, Pioneer, and Denon because I have recent experience with those brands. I can only go off of specs on the other brands, and those are readily available online to check out (and I recommend that you do check out the specs from the manufacturers to make sure that a receiver can do what you want).

This Denon has all of the connections that I need, has plenty of power for me, and does really well in the initial setup and overall ease of use. Where it falls short for me (but maybe not you) are (a) the Audyssey auto calibration can't store multiple configurations, such as for different locations in a room, (b) it can't decode DSD from SACDs, and (c) the remote control can't operate any other equipment like a blu-ray player or TV even though it has all of the needed buttons.

My overall recommendations are:
(*) If you are open to other brands and aren't set on getting Audyssey, then I highly recommend that you check out the Pioneer VSX-1123. While it has a higher MSRP, I've seen it for $430 at Newegg in the past week. It has more connections, can store up to six different configurations for its auto calibration system, can decode DSD from SACDs, has equivalent power ratings, and has a more capable remote control. I didn't notice any features on the Denon that are lacking on the Pioneer, but there are probably some.
(*) If you are open to other brands but are set on getting Audyssey, then I recommend that you check out the Onkyo TX-NR626. It is less expensive while providing more connections, the exact same Audyssey capabilities, can decode DSD from SACDs, has Wi-Fi and bluetooth, has equivalent power ratings, and has a more capable remote control. Plus, you can access the menu from the front panel. Having used both receivers, I do think that the Denon menu system is overall nicer and easier to use, and I also like that the Denon doesn't have a fan. They both have their pros and cons, but I think it's worth comparing the two for yourself.
(*) If you are set on getting a Denon and this receiver has what you want, then I'd say compare this against the Denon AVR-X2000 or (while supplies last) the AVR-2313CI. The X2000 is very similar, has a few more features, has Audyssey Multeq XT (one step up), and currently costs about $50 more. The 2313 currently costs the same and has some more features.


DETAILS
First, a quick description of my setup and experience to set the stage. I have a 7.2 speaker setup using surround back channels and two powered subs. I have six matching bookshelf speakers for fronts and surrounds and the matching center channel. My current receiver is a Pioneer Elite VSX-23 bought in 2009, before that it was a Pioneer VSX-1015 from 2005, and before that a Yamaha RX-V992 from 1997. For over five years, and up until a month ago, I was also running two external power amps (200W for front speakers, 150W for all others). The first auto calibration system that I'd ever used was on the VSX-1015, and ever since, I've been a HUGE fan of that capability. It made a big difference in the quality of sound in my setup, both accounting for room interactions as well as tonal differences between the bookshelf and center channel speakers. I've lusted after a Denon receiver for well over a decade, and I also wanted to check out Audyssey after reading about how it (in theory) is superior to Pioneer's MCACC system. Below are my opinions on various aspects of this receiver.

Connections: 4 Stars
While I initially thought it was lacking because the back panel looks pretty barren compared to my previous receivers, it actually has everything that I need these days. With the exception of the optical audio output from my TV, all of my other gear uses HDMI. Of course, you've got to make sure that it has what YOU need, because that is probably different than what I need. I did take a star away because one of the push-in speaker connectors is very poorly placed for people who use banana plugs (shown in detail in the video). I happen to have some plugs small enough to slip into that one connector, but my regular plugs are too large to fit. Also note that you can't connect an external amplifier, and it only have one HDMI output.

Auto Calibration: 3 Stars (might be 5 stars for you, though)
Auto calibration is a wonderful thing, and if you've never used it, I think that you'll love it. Audyssey seems to work pretty well and sounds good in the location where I set up the mic and ran the calibration. My biggest complaint, and why I won't be using this receiver, is that it cannot store multiple configurations. In my room, I have two main seating locations - one is centrally located relative to the speakers, while the other is off to the side. The relative distances between the speakers and those two locations (and hence the optimal timing and volume levels for each speaker) are significantly different. MCACC (at least the version on my Pioneer and the VSX-1123) can store up to six configurations, so I can have one for the central location and another one for the side location. Audyssey, at least on this receiver, can't do that. I can place the mic in both locations during setup, but it still sets the timing based on the first mic location. If you have a seating arrangement in your room where everyone sits pretty close, then this might not matter to you, and you very well might consider Audyssey to be a five star system. A lot of people love it. I just didn't realize that it couldn't do multiple configurations until I started using it, so I wanted to point it out. That was a big disappointment to me. One other note - while it will ask you during Audyssey setup if you want to turn on Dynamic Volume (which applies dynamic range compression), it automatically turns on without asking Dynamic EQ (which is a more advanced version of the old Loudness controls). If you don't like Dynamic EQ, you need to disable it individually for every input.

Features: 4 Stars
It has pretty much everything that I want except it won't decode DSD from SACDs. This is a downer for me, but probably won't matter to most of you. I love the ability to rename the inputs (e.g. "PS3") and select which inputs get cycled through when you use the selector buttons on the front panel (my Pioneer also has this). For example, if you only have four components connected, you can set in the menu that you only want to cycle through those four instead of having to cycle through all of the inputs (including several that you never use) just to get to the ones that you want. VERY nice. HDMI pass through in standby mode is also very nice. The networking features (like internet radio and DLNA) are also cool, but not something that I'll use often. I might use the DLNA a lot if it could handle video files, but based on the manual and my own checking, it will only stream audio files. As far as I saw, you can't access the menu system from the receiver itself, so you need the remote to do that - I like that the Onkyo TX-NR626 can access the menus from the receiver itself.

Power: 5 Stars
This has plenty of power for me. I don't tend to listen very loudly, so I don't need a lot of power. However, I checked out its capabilities at pretty loud volumes (0 dB, or reference level, on the volume control). One of my test cases to check out power is Fleetwood Mac's "The Dance" DVD. I know, I know…"How old is this guy?" :D I use it because it's 5.1 and therefore uses five of the amp channels to some extent, and because it has short dynamic power requirements for things like guitar string plucks. The reason that I added a power amp to my first Pioneer, besides the real reason of just wanting to try one out :), is that I could tell that the music wasn't as crisp and clear at high volumes. For lack of a better word, it sounded muffled. The dynamics just weren't there, and it's because that Pioneer didn't have enough juice for the peaks (like guitar string plucks and cymbals) at higher volumes (at my normal listening volumes, though, that Pioneer was fine). So, I tried that exact same disc with this receiver - and it did great. Even at a setting of 0 dB on the volume level (so, reference level, and MUCH louder than I'd ever normally listen), the dynamics were still there. No need for any external amplification in my case, which is nice because this amp doesn't support that capability.

Ease of Use: 4 Stars
Honestly, I have no trouble using receivers that some other people consider complicated, so I'm probably not the best judge. This receiver, though, does seem very easy to use. I love that the OSD (including the setup menus) will overlay on top of what you're watching and let you keep watching. The OSD is also graphically nice and laid out well. I took away a star because, even though it's intended to be very easy to setup and use with Denon's onscreen assistant, there are a couple of hitches. First, the onscreen assistant steps you through connections that you really should have made before you ever get to the point that you could see the assistant, at least if you have this in an entertainment center. Obviously, you need to have the HDMI output connected to the TV before you could see the assistant. Also, it steps through how to connect your speakers, but besides those being on the back side which you might have already blocked in an entertainment center, you shouldn't connect speakers with the receiver on (although, I don't remember if the Denon had the power to those terminals shut off during the setup, so maybe it was okay). One other thing is that there are commonly used features that you wouldn't realize how to use without reading the manual (or getting lucky), such as needing to hold down the sound mode buttons for a couple of seconds in order to see a menu of available modes. However, outside of that, the setup assistant was really nice. The Audyssey setup is also a breeze.

Remote: 3 Stars
Okay, I hate that this thing isn't a universal remote. The remote's simplicity is both a blessing and a curse. The blessing is that the buttons are large and easy to find/push, and the remote isn't bulky so it's easy to handle. The curse is that it's pretty limited. It operates the receiver well, although some things like changing the sound modes are more difficult than I think they should be. The killer for me is that it can't operate any other equipment. My past three A/V receivers, stretching back to 1997, have all had remotes that could operate other gear to some extent (two had learning remotes, and the latest has a preprogrammed universal remote). Given how inexpensive it is to include that ability, I'm surprised that Denon didn't. The remote even has the buttons that you'd need for common equipment - you just can't use them. It's annoying to me to have to reach for another remote just to change channels on my TV when the Denon remote has buttons for changing channels, and another remote for my blu-ray player when the Denon has all of the buttons already there. I figure that if the receiver is marketed as the audio/video hub for all of your gear, then it should have a remote that can operate the most common features of common equipment like TVs, disc players, and cable boxes.

Build Quality: 4 Stars
Overall, a nice solid unit. I docked it a star because the center front plastic panel on mine creaks when I put light pressure on it, which detracts from the overall pride of ownership for me. I noticed the creak when I went to lightly brush off some dust, so I wasn't putting much pressure on it at all. That aside, everything else seems really sturdy. The connectors on the back are all solid, and the push connectors for the speakers don't jiggle at all.

Packing: 5 Stars
Okay, I know that you won't be packing and unpacking this often, but I want to give Denon credit for a top notch job of packing this thing. It stood out to me as being nicely thought out. Give this as a gift or get it for yourself, the box is graphically nice and will probably inspire a little excitement. Inside, everything is logically placed and secured. I LOVE that they went with foam end caps around the receiver that have top/bottom pieces so that you can lift out the top two end pieces, exposing the receiver that you can then lift out and off the bottom end pieces without any end caps still on it. So, you can sit the receiver down without having to pull the foam end caps off in mid-air as you juggle and balance it. Some receivers, like the Onkyo 626, have one-piece end caps that are more difficult to remove when unpacking.

Overall: 3.5 Stars
I can live without (but miss) DSD decoding, and I can put up with (but dislike) the remote. However, the inability to store multiple configurations for Audyssey in my living room is too big of a drawback for me and why I gravitate to Pioneer's MCACC system. This is a good receiver with some nice features and plenty of power, but one that doesn't particularly stand out from its competition at this price except for maybe the excellent GUI.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
brianedm

brianedm

Audioholic General
Good job, bud! I'm always impressed by how in depth you go with you reviews :)
 
Adam

Adam

Audioholic Jedi
Thanks, Brian! Cliff gets the credit for inspiring me to take that photo of the caps. :) I wish that I knew more about electronics so that I could say if the stuff on the inside is any good...I just know how to take stuff apart. :D
 
anamorphic96

anamorphic96

Audioholic General
Great job. Really loved the balanced perspective and capacitor shots. :D I own the AVR-1911 which seems to be the comparable model price and amp wise. It seems the capacitors are smaller in this newer model. I wonder if they have cut corners in the amp section to add features elsewhere. I love the fact MultEQ XT is showing up on cheaper models.

Looking forward to your future reviews. Did I here something about an Onkyo in an older post somewhere ?
 
Adam

Adam

Audioholic Jedi
Thanks! I appreciate it.

Btw, MultEQ XT isn't on this model, but it is on the ~$650 X-2000.

And, yes, I'll be doing a similar review for the Onkyo TX-NR626. It doesn't have two of the issues that I had with this Denon (namely, it decodes DSD and has a universal remote), but it still has the same Audyssey issue. It's menu system isn't as polished as that on the Denon, but it has some nice added connections like a PHONO input and a second HDMI output. Oddly, the volume control can't be set to show things relative to a reference level (i.e. -X dB) on the Onkyo. I'm hoping that gets changed in a firmware update. Also, as much as I don't like how the Onkyo looks out by itself, it actually looks pretty nice in my entertainment center.
 
anamorphic96

anamorphic96

Audioholic General
My bad I must have misread the Audyssey portion in the review. MultEQ is not bad and is the same as XT for the subwoofer. The satellites get more filters with XT. Presets would definitely be nice with Audyssey. Especially in your scenario. But it's the only company to EQ the sub aside from the system in Anthem receivers. Rather frustrating IMO as I would love to try MCACC or YPAO. But only if they EQ'd the sub. Nice to see MutEQ in the 626 as it seemed like the would never put this version in a 6 series receiver.

Thanks and I look forward to the Onkyo review. :)
 
A

avengineer

Banned
The comments re: Audyssey...perhaps a bit of explanation. Even though the displayed timing adjustments are based on the first position, the system does take into account all seats. In this implementation of Audyssey, you are allowed, I think, 6 positions. For best results, you'd want to use them all. It is possible to "weight" measurements to favor an area by doing more measurements, for example, 3 or 4 in the "money" seats, but including other positions actually helps the results too. The review sounded a bit like you measured only one seat, but I'm not even sure that's possible to do. In any case, you probably did measure more positions, as a single point measurement is wrong for Audyssey. Even if you had 2 seats, you'd want go ahead and burn up all 6 measurements, just clustered around those seats. It's very important to use a tripod, and place the mic at ear level away from any reflecting surface.

You'd probably benefit from trying some of those techniques, measuring all seats even if spaced radically differently from the main position, and give it a listen anyway.

It's my understanding that the limit in preset positions with Audyssey relates to the complexity of the calculations and resulting filters. Having the potential for six times as much data impacts the cost of the hardware. The calculations and data set used for other systems like MCACC are far more simple, and take less memory and DSP. I could be wrong about that, things change, but the logic seem reasonable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Adam

Adam

Audioholic Jedi
Thanks for the info. I appreciate it and you taking the time to try and help me out. I think that I already did those things, though.

I used a tripod and placed the mic at ear level in each position. I used all six mic positions sometimes, three positions other times, and one position once.

I initially tried spreading the six positions across my two primary listening positions without agreeable results. In my very first attempt, I placed the mic midway between the seating locations for the "primary" location, then used the other five mic positions across the seating arrangements. Not very good. I tried several times with various positions for the mic, including running more than one measurement at the same locations for some attempts to weight those more heavily. It was never to my liking. Because that wasn't working out for me, I decided to try running all six measurements clustered around a single listening position per the diagrams in the manual to give Audyssey it's best shot at sounding good. I did that a few different ways. It worked okay for that one listening position, but I didn't think it was any better (and perhaps worse) than MCACC, IMO. It sounded worse when I moved to the other seating location, of course, because the speaker timings were all intended to center the sound at the other location. I think the best result was when I used a single position for the mic and ran the tones once, and then sat at that one location. I'll admit that I didn't give it days and days of tweaking because it was pretty clear almost immediately to me that it wouldn't work for my two seating locations.
 
A

avengineer

Banned
Sounds like to did it right and that your two seating locations are pretty different. You probably hit the compromise. Thanks for clarifying.

So, do you hear Audyssey chirps in your dreams now?
 
Adam

Adam

Audioholic Jedi
So, do you hear Audyssey chirps in your dreams now?
Ha! :D I probably should. I have to say, I was surprised at how quickly it went through the tones for each mic location. MCACC goes through a longer series of different tones. Maybe MCACC is less efficient, or perhaps it does some things a bit better. I don't know. I do know that I like the results, though.
 
A

avengineer

Banned
I've used both MCACC and Audyssey. I haven't done any measurements to compare, but my impression is that MCACC uses more generalized, lower precision filtering, and therefore it can sometimes present a more dramatic change, if perhaps less accurate. Audyssey's strong points are very high precision at low frequencies because of their "fuzzy clustering" method. Clearly, we have to measure at more than one location. Rather than just average measurements, which lowers the precision because all data, valid or not, is averaged in, Audyssey uses fuzzy logic to evaluate the validity of measurement data before combining measurements, rejecting wild single point excursions, and thus improving precision. This is slightly tangential, but worth noting that Audyssey is limited to 9dB of gain at any frequency, which is there to avoid power amp overload issues.
 
Alex2507

Alex2507

Audioholic Slumlord
I've used both MCACC and Audyssey. I haven't done any measurements to compare, but my impression is that MCACC uses more generalized, lower precision filtering, and therefore it can sometimes present a more dramatic change, if perhaps less accurate. Audyssey's strong points are very high precision at low frequencies because of their "fuzzy clustering" method. Clearly, we have to measure at more than one location. Rather than just average measurements, which lowers the precision because all data, valid or not, is averaged in, Audyssey uses fuzzy logic to evaluate the validity of measurement data before combining measurements, rejecting wild single point excursions, and thus improving precision. This is slightly tangential, but worth noting that Audyssey is limited to 9dB of gain at any frequency, which is there to avoid power amp overload issues.
... not to mention that he keeps mispronouncing Denon. :rolleyes:

Hope that helps. :D
 
Adam

Adam

Audioholic Jedi
De-nun or De-none.
Let's talk more after you pahk the cah. :D

-------------
I really wish this receiver had a universal remote. After using it and the Onkyo, and then putting my Pioneer back in the system last night, I find myself missing the Onkyo more. Thing is, that's almost exclusively due to the Onkyo remote. I like most (but not all) things about the Denon more than the Onkyo, except that darn remote. The Denon menu is more refined, and I like how the front panel display shows the sound mode and the input in large lettering. The key to me is that it shows the sound mode in an obvious fashion - the Onkyo doesn't. It displays the input source in large letters, but the sound mode is shown in really tiny symbols. I like to know what audio is coming from the source, and what I'm playing. The Onkyo will display that onscreen (as will the Denon), but my preference is to have it on the front panel. I also like that the Denon allows the volume to be shown as a relative number (e.g. "-40dB"), whereas the Onkyo only allows absolute (e.g. "20"). Onkyo might update that in firmware, though, as well as fix some HDMI glitches that have happened.
 
brianedm

brianedm

Audioholic General
Let's talk more after you pahk the cah. :D

-------------
I really wish this receiver had a universal remote. After using it and the Onkyo, and then putting my Pioneer back in the system last night, I find myself missing the Onkyo more. Thing is, that's almost exclusively due to the Onkyo remote. I like most (but not all) things about the Denon more than the Onkyo, except that darn remote. The Denon menu is more refined, and I like how the front panel display shows the sound mode and the input in large lettering. The key to me is that it shows the sound mode in an obvious fashion - the Onkyo doesn't. It displays the input source in large letters, but the sound mode is shown in really tiny symbols. I like to know what audio is coming from the source, and what I'm playing. The Onkyo will display that onscreen (as will the Denon), but my preference is to have it on the front panel. I also like that the Denon allows the volume to be shown as a relative number (e.g. "-40dB"), whereas the Onkyo only allows absolute (e.g. "20"). Onkyo might update that in firmware, though, as well as fix some HDMI glitches that have happened.
Harmony! Harmony! Harmony!
 
Adam

Adam

Audioholic Jedi
Harmony! Harmony! Harmony!
I hear ya. However, here's my thinking - the Denon (at current street prices) already costs $100 more than the Onkyo without any big advantages except for the menu system and the front panel display (which probably doesn't matter to most people). Having to go out and spend $100+ on a remote to get it closer to the Onkyo just hurts its value proposition even more.
 
brianedm

brianedm

Audioholic General
I hear ya. However, here's my thinking - the Denon (at current street prices) already costs $100 more than the Onkyo without any big advantages except for the menu system and the front panel display (which probably doesn't matter to most people). Having to go out and spend $100+ on a remote to get it closer to the Onkyo just hurts its value proposition even more.
Just get amazon to send you one for review :p
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top