Arcam 600 vs Denon 4310 the numbers don't make sense.

[Superfly]

Ok I need help to figure this out.

The Arcam 600 numbers in HT magazine vs The Denon 4310 indicate the
Denon should be better than the Arcam. But it doesn't sound that way.

So can some one tell me What is it that I am not seeing.
And I would like to add what is it that I am missing.

My theory is that maybe the Arcam is higher current but the math seems off.
and if this is what is making the Arcam sound this good why is the current not measured in the magazine?

http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/arcam_avr600_av_receiver/index3.html arcam

http://www.hometheatermag.com/receivers/denon_avr-4310ci_av_receiver/index4.html Denon



Gurus can you pass on your wisdom

 

[j_garcia]

The amp section is only one part of the influence on the sound, and not a huge one at that. Just because the Denon puts out more power in testing doesn't mean the circuitry or the components are similar and as a result, they won't quite sound the same. I find Arcam to have a nice, clean, neutral sound, while Denons have been sort of "flat" or "clinical" in their presentation. Both are fine, and the sound of each is a personal preference. Speakers will still make a much bigger difference than anything else.

 

[Superfly]

Thanks j_garcia

It makes sense. What other receivers or going pre pro would give the same sound as the Arcam?
Marantz 8002/7002 ? Rotel? I have B&W 685 683 speakers. but I loved the Arcam sound. I would also agree with your description of the Denon

 

[j_garcia]

I've found that Marantz has a closer sound to Arcam than Denon, but I wouldn't kick a higher model Denon to the curb either. I haven't heard the 8002, but the 8003 pre/pro is excellent. Rotel would be an obvious choice with B&Ws as well. The Emotiva UMC-1 would be a great deal also, providing you can get one, though I haven't had a chance to hear this one yet.

 

[PENG]

So can some one tell me What is it that I am not seeing.

May be "seeing" is the problem. There are enough heresay out there, aside from the higher price, to influence once perception.

And I would like to add what is it that I am missing.

A properly conducted comparison, i.e., A/B, in the same acoustic environment, level matched, same source, use pure direct mode only, listening only without seeing/knowing which one is in use, etc.

My theory is that maybe the Arcam is higher current but the math seems off.
and if this is what is making the Arcam sound this good why is the current not measured in the magazine?

Your are correct, I subscribe to HTM and have read both reviews. The math/numbers did not support the higher current theory. Besides, you have to understand that current cannot just go "high". Current=Voltage/Impedance, so if your source (e.g. CD, DVD) and the SPL you play do not call for the high voltage, and the load (speakers) do not dip low in impedance and/or large phase angle, then you can have a 10,000W welding machine class amp you still won't see any high current. People tend to say Denon sounds flat, Rotel sounds cool, Arcam, HK, Marantz, NAD sounds warm/sweet, Sony sounds thin etc. To me those are hearsays that started from long ago and got repeated enough times to finally become almost facts despite the fact that technological advance has long levelled the playing fields.

Two more points from my own experience:

1. I love the Arcam sound when I first auditioned the AVR300 driving a pair of Veritas. Luckily I ended up buying the Veritas and they play equally sweet in my home driven by my then own Denon AVR3805.

2. You cannot always pass judgment base on HTM lab measurements. I strongly suspect they do not always conduct their tests the same way. I have seen data in their tests that simply defies logic. If you wish, I could PM (not till weekend) you links to specific reviews so you can read them and draw your own conclusion.

My suggestion is, before you spend more on the Arcam make sure you are really sure you can hear the difference and that the Arcam in fact sounds better under controlled conditions.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Unlike speakers, electronics don't lie IMO.

The Denon: THD 0.005%, Crosstalk -87dB, SNR -112dB, FR +/- 0.1dB, Power 131 Watts x 5 Ch @1%THD

The Arcam: THD 0.034%, Crosstalk -74dB, SNR -95dB, FR +/- 0.0dB, Power 95 Watts x 5 Ch @1%THD

I would pick the Denon over the Arcam without a doubt.

In a "real" controlled study, you won't hear the difference; but I would pick the Denon just because it has much better numbers.

I can't stand so-called "high-end" that can't even beat a $400 Onkyo receiver's measured specs. But that's just me.

 

[Superfly]

Thanks for the help can you send me the links Peng
I would greatly apreaciate it

question is it the preamplifier portion of the avr that could contribute to the sound that everyone seems to say is warm thin etc.. ? Assuming your not using direct mode in the processing

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

...is it the preamplifier portion of the avr that could contribute to the sound that everyone seems to say is warm thin etc.. ? Assuming your not using direct mode in the processing...

That is correct.

When not using a Direct Mode, the Processor may change (EQ/DSP) the sound. Some do more harm than others.

 

[Warpdrv]

Interesting - this post comes to mind about a comparison of the 600 and the 4310, as well as the 5308

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=18591927#post18591927

 

[PENG]

Thanks for the help can you send me the links Peng
I would greatly apreaciate it

question is it the preamplifier portion of the avr that could contribute to the sound that everyone seems to say is warm thin etc.. ? Assuming your not using direct mode in the processing

I will send you a couple of links to the HTM, HCC, or possible S&V lab measurements so you can see the apparent inconsistencies/logic defying sort of test data.

Without truly pure direct mode, what you refer to as preamp portion is in fact the preamp+sound processing portion so of course it has major impact on the final sound quality. For a pure preamp, I believe it has less impact on the final outcome than the power amp as it deals with much lower level of amplification. Noise may be more of an issue than power amps but that's about it. For line level inputs, such as signals from CD, tuner and BD players, the preamp can even be passive. There are audiophiles who actually prefer to use passive preamp (misnomer as it really does not amplify, but rather attenuate the signal) if they can keep the interconnects very short.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

...There are audiophiles who actually prefer to use passive preamp...

It's been a while since I looked at preamps & passive-preamps. Back in my "analog" days, I was looking into the passive-preamps too. But I recall at least one article (I think The Audio Critic) that said the passive-preamps tend to be "noisier" & have lower SNR than the active-preamps.

I don't know if we can actually hear the difference though.

But for some reasons, it stuck in my mind that passive-preamps tend to have SNR of < 60dB. I could be wrong though.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

You cannot always pass judgment base on HTM lab measurements. I strongly suspect they do not always conduct their tests the same way. I have seen data in their tests that simply defies logic.

I agree 100%.

For example, in their actual magazine, HTM showed lab results of the Denon AVP-A1HDCI being worse than the AVR-5308 in every single category (THD, Crosstalk, SNR, FR). Of course, it wasn't by heads & shoulders, but still...

For example, the crosstalk of the 5308 was -92dB, but the crosstalk of the AVP-A1 was like -87dB. No audible difference, but still...

I mean logically, how is that possible?

Audioholics did measurements of both the AVP-A1 & AVR-5308 and the AVP-A1 was way better on the numbers as I recall.

Now on their website, HTM actually showed the lab results of the Denon POA-A1 amplifier, NOT the AVP-A1 pre-pro! Another screw up, I guess.

I sent them an email regarding this (AVP-A1 numbers look worse than AVR-5308), but they haven't responded. They probably never will.

HTM also screwed up on their lab measurements on the Revel Salon2 as well, if you recall.

Revel actually got them for that and HTM had to post a "CORRECTION" segment in their HTM editorial/letters.

I guess Denon didn't look at the HTM AVP-A1 review as closely?

If I were Denon, I would be angry if HTM said that the Pioneer, Yamaha, & Denon flagship RECEIVERS and all the Integra flagship pre-pros (at a fraction of the AVP-A1's price) had better numbers than their "gold standard" AVP-A1 pre-pro.

 

[PENG]

I agree 100%.

I would like you to agree 200% so please have a look of the labs measures of the $400 (list) non ES Sony:

http://www.hometheatermag.com/receivers/

That little 19 lbs sorry looking thing is only 0.69 dB< output than the NAD T747 in ACD continuously driven and is 2.8 dB> the 43 lbs Denon AVR-4810.

I wonder when is Mr. Fleischmann going to explain how he did his tests and how he expect potential buyers to use his test data to help them make their selections?