Arcam AVR11 x NAD T778 x Marantz Cinema 50

Which to buy

  • Aracam AVR11

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • NAD T778

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Marantz Cinema 50

    Votes: 1 33.3%
  • Other

    Votes: 2 66.7%

  • Total voters
    3
S

sergix

Audiophyte
Hello, I would like to buy an AVR that also plays well in stereo (usage: movies:music 60:40). I originally wanted to connect the AVR with an integrated stereo amplifier with my own DAC, but the people here on the forum talked me out of it.
I would therefore like to have a quality device on which it will be a pleasure to listen to music and watch movies. I currently have Canton Chrono DC speakers (the front speakers have 160W, SPL (1 W / 1 m): 88.3 dB), the room is about 50 m2. I may be buying new speakers in the future.

I am currently choosing between these 3 AVRs.

Arcam AVR11
advantages: 2.1 HDMI, color LCD, Dirac Live
disadvantages: more expensive: lower power, worse service in the EU

NAD T778
advantages: color LCD, dirac live, high power
disadvantages: hdmi 2.0b, higher price, worse service in the EU

Marantz Cinema 50
advantages: hdmi 2.1, low price
disadvantages: no dirac yet, the lcd is useless

Which one do you think I should buy?
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
In direct mode, all three (and other AVR) will sound the same.

So the difference will be Room EQ. Once the Marantz & Denon AVRs get Dirac, then all will be about the same.

Power output differences will be pretty much insignificant.

In terms of measurements like THD+N/SINAD, etc., the differences will also be inaudible.

So eventually after Dirac, the big question will be customer service, warranty, reliability.
 
Last edited:
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Marantz Cinema 50
advantages: hdmi 2.1, low price
disadvantages: no dirac yet, the lcd is useless
Can't comment on the advantages you listed for the other two, but for the Cinema 50, hdmi 2.1 and low price may be true for comparison with the NAD and Arcam (price only), but not Denon.

So if you consider price as a factor then you should probably wait for the Denon AVR-X4800H. Or the AVR-X3800H that is available now, and it is actually more comparable with the Cinema 50 except the power supply is a touch smaller. 110 W vs 105 W is hardly a factor though. Why pay for the gold plated connectors and HDAMs when there is no evidence it would do anything other than their phycological impacts, that tend to precondition the owners to think they heard better sound quality, when measurements likely would show the opposite based on the measured performance of the SR6014, SR7015 vs the AVR-X3700H.

I wasn't going to suggest the above, but you did include the option "other" so I assume the door is ajar.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
I wasn't going to suggest the above, but you did include the option "other" so I assume the door is ajar.
I was gonna mention Yamaha, but too bad Yamaha is too obstinate to change to or add Dirac. Guess nobody's perfect. :D
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
I've not had an avr that didn't do well with music, that's one of my primary uses after all....buy the avr on the feature set/amp section you find most appropriate....and would consider Denon simply due pricing here in US over the Marantz or the boutique brands.
 
evert

evert

Audiophyte
Hello, I would like to buy an AVR that also plays well in stereo (usage: movies:music 60:40). I originally wanted to connect the AVR with an integrated stereo amplifier with my own DAC, but the people here on the forum talked me out of it.
I would therefore like to have a quality device on which it will be a pleasure to listen to music and watch movies. I currently have Canton Chrono DC speakers (the front speakers have 160W, SPL (1 W / 1 m): 88.3 dB), the room is about 50 m2. I may be buying new speakers in the future.

I am currently choosing between these 3 AVRs.

Arcam AVR11
advantages: 2.1 HDMI, color LCD, Dirac Live
disadvantages: more expensive: lower power, worse service in the EU

NAD T778
advantages: color LCD, dirac live, high power
disadvantages: hdmi 2.0b, higher price, worse service in the EU

Marantz Cinema 50
advantages: hdmi 2.1, low price
disadvantages: no dirac yet, the lcd is useless

Which one do you think I should buy?
I'm very interested in hearing why the solution for best 2ch sound wouldn't be pre-out to an integrated stereo amplifier? I'm planning to do this in the near future with X-4800H/Cinema 40.
Am I stuck in old thinking?
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
I'm very interested in hearing why the solution for best 2ch sound wouldn't be pre-out to an integrated stereo amplifier? I'm planning to do this in the near future with X-4800H/Cinema 40.
Am I stuck in old thinking?
Why use an avr with an integrated amp at all? Especially using an integrated amp as power amp?
 
evert

evert

Audiophyte
So what is the best solution for good multichannel + 2-ch?
Don't you get better quality 2ch sound if you bypass the amp-section in the AVR?
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Don't you get better quality 2ch sound if you bypass the amp-section in the AVR?
No you do not.

1st, if you believe in measurements like THD+N, SINAD, SNR, etc., you will see that AVR, Amp, Preamp all have great measurements- all inaudible differences.

2nd, there have been double-blind studies to show that amps, preamps, DAC don’t have a sound signature of their own in DIRECT MODE (no EQ or DSP). But when you use any EQ or DSP, the sound will change.

I know this makes things seem “boring”, but that means that an AVR or AVP will sound just as good as an analog 2CH preamp. Yes, boring. It’s more fun and exciting if all amps, preamps, DAC’s sound differently and if 2CH analog preamps sound better. :D

But I feel like after saying this, I have to also say that some people will disagree and that’s cool by me. We can disagree and still have peace. :D
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
So what is the best solution for good multichannel + 2-ch?
Don't you get better quality 2ch sound if you bypass the amp-section in the AVR?
Amps by themselves don't magically make music better. An external power amp can be useful in a few ways if they are of higher capability than the avr's amp section, tho. Maybe you could have more power, better handling of low impedance loads, higher spl or more overhead, etc
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
I'm very interested in hearing why the solution for best 2ch sound wouldn't be pre-out to an integrated stereo amplifier? I'm planning to do this in the near future with X-4800H/Cinema 40.
Am I stuck in old thinking?
It all depends on the speakers, the power you need and how loud you are going to play it. I personally am not a fan of AVRs, but even less of combining an integrated amp with an AVR. Now as far as the front end preamp sections and the processor, there is nothing wrong with an AVR.

My problem with AVRs is that I like concert level sound for symphonic music, organ etc. The fact is that the power amp sections of AVRs are limited, as now there are often nine of them in one box driven off a power supply that is too small. In addition they heat up the more fragile components like the processor because they are in the same box. Sure you can use an AVR with preouts to external amps, but the box is still crowded. In addition these AVR amps dislike low impedance difficult loads more than they used to. The fact is, most speakers are nearer four ohms than eight, no matter what the manufacturer says. In any event you probably don't want an eight ohm speaker as it is unlikely to be properly BSC compensated. All of this leads into the reliability issue, which I think is significant downside of AVRs.

So I have always used AVPs and external power amps. In fact even before AV and multichannel receivers, I never used receivers but a separate pre-amp/amp combo.

So what is the downside of this approach? It is cost and nothing else. Everything else is on the upside.

I have used AVPs since the advent of AV. My first AVP was pre HDMI and so that was the reason that was sold on. The next Marantz is still going but stored. The next two that I bought in 2008 and 2010, are still in use without an issue, one in a 2.1 system the other in a 3.1 system. The last AVR is my 7705 which went into service in 2019. I can't really speak to room correction as I don't need it, it can only make things worse. Technically there are reasons Dirac should be superior. My experience with Audyssey is that it is a massive quality spoiler, and the only thing good I have to say about it, is that it sets levels and distances correctly.

Lastly, the Dolby upmixer DD SUR, is now superb, and so good that I seldom listen to two channel without it engaged in my AV room. It realistically creates a sense of space, ambience and perspective from all 11 speakers. In ambient material significant demands are placed on all 11 channels and I'm sure I would have blown up multiple AVRs by now.

So the high road answer to your question is AVP and external amps. I am convinced that in the long run, that is also the cheapest solution. I am particularly trouble adverse. Therefore I design robust systems for the long haul. That way you get maximum pleasure and enjoyment from your major investment.
Members think I spend huge sums, as I have a system with a lot of fine equipment. However there is a equipment here still providing fine service over sixty years.
Purchasing junk, is the most expensive route, and I always encourage going for quality, then you are not replacing equipment all the time.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
I'm very interested in hearing why the solution for best 2ch sound wouldn't be pre-out to an integrated stereo amplifier? I'm planning to do this in the near future with X-4800H/Cinema 40.
Am I stuck in old thinking?
One undesirable thing about the solution is, unless one uses the so call home theater bypass feature, one ends up with having the signal go through two volume control parts and circuitry that will degrade the signal, aside from the need to use fixed volume on the integrated amp.

Since you are talking about "best 2ch sound", then all else being equal, you don't really want to route the signal through the AVR's preamp/dac and then again through an integrated amp's volume control parts and circuitry that would definitely degrade the signal.

As you know, some integrated amp's do let you bypass the preamp/dac section, in that case, sound quality (on paper) may improve, but it may not, depending on the performance of the AVR's preamp vs that of the integrated amp's. Specs and measurements showed, in many bench tests that AVR's pre out performance often did better than those of integrated amps. In the distant pass, integrated amps in general would do better than receivers but this is not the case any more, at least not if you compare products at the similar price point, say between $1,500 to $8,000 (just a random example).
 
S

sergix

Audiophyte
Why use an avr with an integrated amp at all? Especially using an integrated amp as power amp?
Well, it is also a surprise to me that most people here think that there is no point in combining a stereo amplifier with an AVR..
My original thought was to use an INT Stereo AMP + dac + streamer for music; then use AVR+ST for movies. AMP (in HT passthrough)..
But I ran into a problem that if I were to use PM8006 and Cinema 50 at the same time, the controller would always turn both devices on and off at the same time, which I don't want
 
S

sergix

Audiophyte
Why use an avr with an integrated amp at all? Especially using an integrated amp as power amp?
Well, because when I want to play music, I will listen to integrated stereo amplifier + an external dac + streamer player. That is The AVR will be off, while I think both the preamp and amp have PM8006 better than the AVR ones. I also have a better DAC than the ones in the AVR.
If I want to play a movie, I turn on both devices and put the front channels through the pre-out outputs, into the HT passthrough input of the integrated stereo amplifier - it will bypass the preamplifier.
I don't expect this combination to improve the sound for movies, but it should provide good sound for stereo listening
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Well, because when I want to play music, I will listen to integrated stereo amplifier + an external dac + streamer player. That is The AVR will be off, while I think both the preamp and amp have PM8006 better than the AVR ones. I also have a better DAC than the ones in the AVR.
If I want to play a movie, I turn on both devices and put the front channels through the pre-out outputs, into the HT passthrough input of the integrated stereo amplifier - it will bypass the preamplifier.
I don't expect this combination to improve the sound for movies, but it should provide good sound for stereo listening
Seems a lot of extra gear for what should be audibly the same....
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Well, it is also a surprise to me that most people here think that there is no point in combining a stereo amplifier with an AVR.
Seems a lot of extra gear for what should be audibly the same....
I think it always comes back to the “all amp/preamp/DAC have a sound signature of their own” vs. “no they don’t” argument. :D

 
S

sergix

Audiophyte
So you think all AVRs sound de facto the same? I'm not talking purely about the theory and measurement of the inaudible (ASR forum), but when I play stereo music on my Onkyo AVR, it sounds different than when I play music on the Marantz PM8006. Therefore, I assumed that it would make a difference if I played music on the Marantz SR8015 or the Denon X3700. Or won't it?
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
So you think all AVRs sound de facto the same? I'm not talking purely about the theory and measurement of the inaudible (ASR forum), but when I play stereo music on my Onkyo AVR, it sounds different than when I play music on the Marantz PM8006. Therefore, I assumed that it would make a difference if I played music on the Marantz SR8015 or the Denon X3700. Or won't it?
I have four avrs in use, I couldn't tell you which one was particularly playing music or movies if set up similarly. I have two ch separates, too, but can't say the avrs sound any different particularly either (without particular eq/dsp employed). Might be something to how you conducted your comparison, it's not particularly easy to do well....it often simply boils down to slight level differences (a slightly higher level has been shown many times to be the "difference" in casual comparisons), or trying to rely on sonic memory....
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
So you think all AVRs sound de facto the same? I'm not talking purely about the theory and measurement of the inaudible (ASR forum), but when I play stereo music on my Onkyo AVR, it sounds different than when I play music on the Marantz PM8006. Therefore, I assumed that it would make a difference if I played music on the Marantz SR8015 or the Denon X3700. Or won't it?
Let’s say SUBJECTIVELY, we think all AVR sound differently in DIRECT mode volume matched.

If we ask 1 million people, we get a million different opinions. It comes down to “they say vs. we say”.

Is there any point to asking what anyone thinks since we all think differently? :D

Some people would say they used to own an Anthem and now they own an Onkyo because the Onkyo sounds better.

Some people would say they used to own an Onkyo and now they own an Anthem because the Anthem sounds better. Around and around it goes. :D
 

Latest posts

newsletter

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