Arcam avr350 vs. Marantz sr7005

[rushwj]

Currently I have an arcam avr350 and love the sound,
But have a less than ideal room set-up that I won't be able to treat (large family room, 19x22x9 feet, completely open on one side to a very open kitchen, windows behind seating-although curtains that can be drawn). What I'm wondering is if the audyssey on a marantz 7005 or the newer denon's would improve the sound quality? Thanks

 

[zumbo]

I am only giving an opinion, but I seriously doubt it. Very seriously.

 

[Buckster]

depends on what sort of experience you are looking for ? all out movie performance ?

I had an AVR350 - and I loved it to bits, Sound quality was superb - but for movies it always sounded a bit clinical to me, and didn't develop a soundfield as good as I've heard elsewhere - not sure if this was due to a lack of EQ - or its processing itself. Also it seemed to run out of puff at higher volumes with my 7.1 setup.

I "upgraded" to a Yamaha 3800, and couldn't live with the SQ drop vs the Arcam - so sold it on, then bought a Pioneer SC05 - and found the same again, although I had EQ and all the bells and whilstles, the SQ - in my system was not near that of the Arcam.

I sold that amp as well, and in the end have ended up with a compromise, I went for a Pioneer 59TXi (2nd hand) - which has about 85% of the pure SQ of the Arcam (its close but not quite there) - but for movies it sounds amazing - lots of grunt (more than the Arcam), and full EQ - does make a difference.

All I want now is something with equivalent to the 59TXi sound quality, but with HDMI - unfortunately my budget doesn't extend past 2k dollars, and I haven't found anything yet.

I have considered the SR Marantz, but without demoing I've no idea how it would compare - but your Arcam is up there with the best on SQ - so be careful how you upgrade ...

Arcam cost me a fortune, if I'd not heard how good the SQ of the 350 was I'd never have know otherwise and I'd probably be enjoying all the bells and whistles of an amp with HDMI on it ! lol

 

[PENG]

What I'm wondering is if the audyssey on a marantz 7005 or the newer denon's would improve the sound quality? Thanks

It would give you more choices. In pure direct mode the SQ between those AVRs should be similar as long they are operating within their power output capabilities. With EQ, Audyssey would give you more choices but how well each will sound to you is going to be a subjective matter.

Just a side note, once you get to AVRs in the $1500 and up range it is a waste of time to tell people which one sounds better. It probably does make some sense for those who enjoy classical music but for most other stuff such as jazz and rocks even if you go to live concerts you would end up listening to music played through the professional amps and speakers anyway, so it is a waste of time to talk about how those expensive amps produce more clarity, details etc. In terms of accuracy SQ only, you may in fact be better off with pro equipment.

 

[rushwj]

Thanks for the responses so far. As this is in the main family room, it is used about 60/40 tv(movies)/music. We listen to various styles including classical & jazz a great deal, but a good amount of pop/rock too.

 

[jostenmeat]

Well, you are like most folks, in that you just say Audyssey without any reference to any particular tech. The Marantz uses the MultEQ XT, among other techs. There are more than double digit techs that Audyssey makes.

The variations of MultEQ are the most value rich feature offered in affordable receivers, IMO. If you want comparable technologies from a different company, I dare you to price out an ARC1 capable unit, or even find one with Trinnov (and does it even work properly).

The above said, no one in their right mind would ever say that MultEQ (XT, Pro, etc), is ever any kind of substitute for good speakers, proper speaker positioning, proper listening positioning, proper treating of the acoustical space, proper room orientation, or even proper furniture placement.

Even the touted subwoofer company SVS chose MultEQ tech for their ASEQ1. Of course you then have Marantz, Denon, Onkyo, Integra, NAD, and more. Paul Barton of PSB created a unique target curve just for NAD's Audyssey implementation. Well, JBL now has the BassQ, but that's about double the price of the ASEQ1 or Audyssey SubEQ.

I think what throws most neophytes off besides unfamiliarity is the implementation by receiver companies. Neophytes mistake various implementations to be the fault of Audyssey, and it happens every single day it appears to me.

I think the number one reason that many might not like Audyssey, is because they have become used to overbloated bass. However, if you have any EQ devices, you can always piggyback on top of what Audyssey does for personal preference. There are also multiple target curves depending on the Audyssey capable unit. Many simply say, oh I don't like it, but I am positive that in many cases they don't even know if they are listening to the reference, audyssey/house, fronts, etc curves. They will all sound different. There are also misunderstandings on what delay measurements are, that the various levels set are relative and not absolute, and who knows how diligently they executed the mic measuring process to begin with, let alone even using all of the available measurement points to begin with. List goes on.

 

[rushwj]

The productt I'd be using would be marantz 7005 with audyssey multiEQ XT