Denon AVC-A1H, special request for Gene to review and bench test this new beast!

Would you like to see the new Denon flaghsip AVR reviewed and measured by Gene, Audioholics?


  • Total voters
    46
panteragstk

panteragstk

Audioholic Warlord
I know- I have sold audio equipment since early 1978 and video since 1983- when the first cable companies came to Milwaukee, parts of it used two cables (Viacom) and people would call to ask how they could watch one channel and record another. They could barely set the clock on their VCR, but they wanted to make connections with a video switch, cable box and VCR. We provided simple, clear diagrams and they wanted us to explain it over the phone. That was before 'Adults can't do it, ask one of the children' became popular.
Reminds me of a time a customer called all frustrated with how they connected their video sources and that it wasn't working. I tried my best over the phone, but they just weren't getting it. I told them to come to the store and show me the diagram they were trying to follow.

They get to the store and pull out the manual, and the connection diagram Denon included with the manual. They showed me where it "said to hook everything up" and pointed to the diagram. This particular diagram showed all the possible options for video connections. I told them this and watched their face go from frustrated, to realizing they didn't read it properly. They were nice after that and asked how they were supposed to hook things up. I just basically told them that HDMI was the preferred connection and component after that. If they had s-video or composite, those were last place in preference.

They thanked me for the help and left. I'd wager they got it right after that.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Reminds me of a time a customer called all frustrated with how they connected their video sources and that it wasn't working. I tried my best over the phone, but they just weren't getting it. I told them to come to the store and show me the diagram they were trying to follow.

They get to the store and pull out the manual, and the connection diagram Denon included with the manual. They showed me where it "said to hook everything up" and pointed to the diagram. This particular diagram showed all the possible options for video connections. I told them this and watched their face go from frustrated, to realizing they didn't read it properly. They were nice after that and asked how they were supposed to hook things up. I just basically told them that HDMI was the preferred connection and component after that. If they had s-video or composite, those were last place in preference.

They thanked me for the help and left. I'd wager they got it right after that.
I took a phone call the day after a weekend Sony sale. The guy was furious, started yelling that he bought a cassette deck and it was the biggest POS he had ever seen. When he paused, I asked what it was doing and he yelled "Nothing! It's not doing anything!". I asked if the lights illuminated and he said they didn't, so I asked what it was plugged into.........click.
 
M

MrBoat

Audioholic Ninja
15.4 channels. I wonder what the cutoff point for amount of surround channels are. I mean, if a sense of realism can't be met with 5, 7, 9, 11 or 13. . .

Me personally, I think I will hold off until at least 30.8 separate channel model is out.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
15.4 channels. I wonder what the cutoff point for amount of surround channels are. I mean, if a sense of realism can't be met with 5, 7, 9, 11 or 13. . .

Me personally, I think I will hold off until at least 30.8 separate channel model is out.
Depends on how big your room is and how many rows of seats.

If only 1 row, probably 7.1.4 is about it.
 
D

dlaloum

Full Audioholic
I personally think that in many home situations, a 7 speaker base layer is difficult - and a 5 speaker setup is more than adequate.

If you go for 7 - there is greater gain to be had from using the additional pair as Wides rather than rears in any case. And in my experience, wides are easier to accomodate than rears.

Often there is more room/space available for heights - and a lot could be said for 5.2.6, or even better 7.2.6 (using wides)
 
Baff

Baff

Enthusiast
15.4 channels. I wonder what the cutoff point for amount of surround channels are. I mean, if a sense of realism can't be met with 5, 7, 9, 11 or 13. . .

Me personally, I think I will hold off until at least 30.8 separate channel model is out.
Sure 7.x.4 is enough to give reasonable surround sound, but for an actual max cutoff point (for a single person), I would say about 26 speakers: 12.x.7.7

Start with the standard 9.x.6 and add:
Rear Wides
Rear Center
Bottom Fronts/Sides/Rears
Voice of God
Voice of Satan (?)
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
Sure 7.x.4 is enough to give reasonable surround sound, but for an actual max cutoff point (for a single person), I would say about 26 speakers: 12.x.7.7

Start with the standard 9.x.6 and add:
Rear Wides
Rear Center
Bottom Fronts/Sides/Rears
Voice of God
Voice of Satan (?)
Nonsense. For a domestic room, that is far too many speakers. It is not good to get speakers too close together. For most domestic rooms, even even those on the larger size, 7.2.4 is optimal. That is what I use and it works very well indeed. It is built to Dolby specs.

Lastly always remember fewer good speakers ALWAYS best more inferior ones.
 
-Jim-

-Jim-

Audioholic General
IMHO the constant move to more and more surround speakers is driving younger folks away from this hobby. Pretty soon (tomorrow?) only the rich will be buying these systems and the hobby will die on itself. Very few folks I know have even a single 5.1 system, whereas in my youth every buddy I had had a "stereo" system and bragged about it. They were cool!
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
IMHO the constant move to more and more surround speakers is driving younger folks away from this hobby. Pretty soon (tomorrow?) only the rich will be buying these systems and the hobby will die on itself. Very few folks I know have even a single 5.1 system, whereas in my youth every buddy I had had a "stereo" system and bragged about it. They were cool!
You are absolutely correct. As I have said most domestic rooms are unsuitable for more than two or three speakers and a sub or two. Two really good speakers actually give you 90% plus of what is required for a good home HT experience.
 
Baff

Baff

Enthusiast
Nonsense. For a domestic room, that is far too many speakers. It is not good to get speakers too close together. For most domestic rooms, even even those on the larger size, 7.2.4 is optimal. That is what I use and it works very well indeed. It is built to Dolby specs.

Lastly always remember fewer good speakers ALWAYS best more inferior ones.
And yet you don't have a single bottom speaker...

You are talking about your personal preference. I am talking about max number of discernible speakers.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Sure 7.x.4 is enough to give reasonable surround sound, but for an actual max cutoff point (for a single person), I would say about 26 speakers: 12.x.7.7

Start with the standard 9.x.6 and add:
Rear Wides
Rear Center
Bottom Fronts/Sides/Rears
Voice of God
Voice of Satan (?)
Oh yeah I am sure dealers would love to sell you all 26 speakers for your room. :eek: :D

And how big is this room?
 
Baff

Baff

Enthusiast
Oh yeah I am sure dealers would love to sell you all 26 speakers for your room. :eek: :D

And how big is this room?
With seating for 1, the size of the room will be dictated by the size of your tv. I am picturing something reasonably realistic, like 20'x20'x10'.

If you were to do a 100 foot sphere with a bare minimum seat in the center, you could probably manage a lot more discernible speakers, but that isn't very realistic as a home theater.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
And yet you don't have a single bottom speaker...

You are talking about your personal preference. I am talking about max number of discernible speakers.
What do you mean I don't have a bottom speaker? I have four 10" inch long excursion drivers with an Fs of 20 Hz, that is the same as two 15" drivers. They are also high powered drivers. They are mounted in aperiodic TLs. That gives a low Q bass that shakes the floor, without a trace of boom. In addition those drivers have a nice response to be able to assist the mids in the power band.

Then the rear backs have two KEF B 139s a side in transmission lines, and they play to nearly 20 Hz.

This is a highly engineered system powered by 18 amp channels with a power of over 3000 watts. So yes, I have plenty on the bottom!

But Jim's point is correct, this obsession with channels over quality and domestic practicality is important. He is right, as it put people off and on whole is a negative, unless you are a lunatic like me, with a very understanding wife.
 
Baff

Baff

Enthusiast
What do you mean I don't have a bottom speaker? I have four 10" inch long excursion drivers with an Fs of 20 Hz, that is the same as two 15" drivers. They are also high powered drivers. They are mounted in aperiodic TLs. That gives a low Q bass that shakes the floor, without a trace of boom. In addition those drivers have a nice response to be able to assist the mids in the power band.

Then the rear backs have two KEF B 139s a side in transmission lines, and they play to nearly 20 Hz.

This is a highly engineered system powered by 18 amp channels with a power of over 3000 watts. So yes, I have plenty on the bottom!
I don't mean that kind of bottom. I mean speakers supplying sound from below. Yes, I understand that is pointless with the 2.5 dimensional sound that exists now. My post is about theoretical, rather than practical though. I don't ever expect to have or need 26 speakers. Outside of an amusement park or a lab, I would be surprised if any such thing ever exists.

But Jim's point is correct, this obsession with channels over quality and domestic practicality is important. He is right, as it put people off and on whole is a negative, unless you are a lunatic like me, with a very understanding wife.
I don't disagree with that. "Lucky" for me too that my wife is also understanding. With a little less luck, I would have a lot more money in the bank.
 
Last edited:
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
I don't mean that kind of bottom. I mean speakers supplying sound from below. Yes, I understand that is pointless with the 2.5 dimensional sound that exists now. My post is about theoretical, rather than practical though. I don't ever expect to have or need 26 speakers. Outside of an amusement park or a lab, I would be surprised if any such thing ever exists.


I don't disagree with that. "Lucky" for me too that my wife is also understanding. With a little less luck, I would have a lot more money in the bank.
It is interesting you bring that up. There is no general acceptance of floor speakers. However in listening studies at the university of Sheffield UK, they found that front floor speakers were more important than height or ceiling speakers in creating a realistic sound field. The proviso was that the mic arrangement had to allow for that. In their studies they were using a modified Decca tree arrangement and it had to include modification to pick up floor reflections at the front of the sound field.

Jim's point remains relevant however. Whist all this is very interesting, does it really advance good audio in the home? Jim is probably right, that it has the reverse effect. I think percentage wise, there are now less homes with good audio, than there were back in the sixties, seventies and eighties. Part of that is competition for funds, from Internet and computer requirements. You can't escape the fact that 15 speakers and their powering is much more costly than two that was the norm in previous generations.

I belong to the mono era and remember the introduction of stereo. The pundits thought that social resistance going from one speaker to two would be enormous. They were wrong. Stereo spread like wild fire in homes. The audio in the home, quickly become known as the "stereo". Acceptance of any multichannel audio, except sound bars has been at a snails pace compared to going from mono to stereo.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

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