Denon/Marantz vs Yamaha vs Anthem Thread

[hifihillbilly]

My suggestion is, keep the SR6013, but if you believe in auto REQ, purchase the Editor App for $20. The Marantz has the same DAC as the MRX, but the preamp/vol control has been upgraded so now they may be better than the MRX720's, though Anthem might have done similar upgrades too. Either way, those are theoretical, based on specs and measurements, in practice I believe in pure direct, you won't be able to tell them apart audibly speaking.

If you run Audyssey with the App, follow Audyssey's auto setup guide to the letter, sd all 8 positions in a quite room. After that, try different crossovers, add a few dB to the subwoofer level, you will end up have the bass response as smooth and accurate as Anthem ARC, if not better. If you don't use REW to guide you, then from my experience, crossovers should be 80 Hz or higher even for big tower speakers. Obviously with your satellite speakers you don't need to worry about this, just leave the XO to whatever Audyssey set it to, in this case it was 180 Hz right? By the way, that is clearly your bottleneck, any plan to replace the sats with some real speaker for the front row? What's the point of the XPA-5 otherwise?

Anthem ARC's based on IIR filters that are inherently not as good as Audyssey and Dirac's FIR, though that's in theory/principles only. Anthem's got better reviews reviews from "experts" who like the fact that they offer the option to EQ below the room transition frequency as well as limiting the upper end to 5 kHz for the MRX leaving the 20 kHz limit option available to their AVPs only. Anthem also apparently don't EQ the bass response flat, but include what they considered "room gain". I don't buy that because I prefer flat as a starting point and then I have the option to do the tweak myelf using the App. It is obvious though, based on forum posts, that the main reason why many people thought Audyssey would take the live out of their speakers, some claimed they find simply adding a few dB to the subwoofer level fixed it for them.

Thanks for the input. I believe I will keep the Marantz. At this point I don't see or hear a $1500 difference. I will more than likely use this to upgrade the front speakers (L/C/R). I would like to stay with a good bookshelf style speaker with stand but could possibly fit a smaller tower style into the space. Any suggestions?

 

[PENG]

Thanks for the input. I believe I will keep the Marantz. At this point I don't see or hear a $1500 difference. I will more than likely use this to upgrade the front speakers (L/C/R). I would like to stay with a good bookshelf style speaker with stand but could possibly fit a smaller tower style into the space. Any suggestions?

$1500 can buy you a pair of the BMRs that are probably the best sounding bookshelf speakers $3000 can buy.

 

[ryanosaur]

$1500 can buy you a pair of the BMRs that are probably the best sounding bookshelf speakers $3000 can buy.

Sadly not anymore, but they are still among the best, including towers, even at Salks price point. http://www.salksound.com/model.php?model=BMR+Monitors

 

[PENG]

Sadly not anymore, but they are still among the best, including towers, even at Salks price point. http://www.salksound.com/model.php?model=BMR+Monitors

What sounded better to you in the below $3k range?

 

[ryanosaur]

What sounded better to you in the below $3k range?

Ha. I think I misread your post slightly. I'm still recovering from a brutal Saturday night at the restaurant only just now getting up and moving around after sort of hitting my almost-8 hours in bed. *facepalm
I haven't heard better from anything even at Salks pricepoint.

 

[PENG]

Ha. I think I misread your post slightly. I'm still recovering from a brutal Saturday night at the restaurant only just now getting up and moving around after sort of hitting my almost-8 hours in bed. *facepalm
I haven't heard better from anything even at Salks pricepoint.

I was going by Philharmonic's prices, didn't click the link you provided until now. Also, I might have over exaggerated a little.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

At this point I don't see or hear a $1500 difference.

If you keep the Anthem, I think you will find a way to see and hear the $1500 difference!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I would like to stay with a good bookshelf style speaker with stand but could possibly fit a smaller tower style into the space. Any suggestions?

If you post this on the speaker section you will get about a 100 different recommendations.

There are a lot of great sounding speakers.

 

[PENG]

Oh, I'm sure if you posted this on the speaker section you will get about a 100 different recommendations.

There are a lot of great sounding speakers.

That's a good reason to not go by hearsay and even one'w own ears, but to verifiable specs.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

That's a good reason to not go by hearsay and even one'w own ears, but to verifiable specs.

Measurements and specs are great starting points. I think many of us wouldn't even consider speakers that don't have good anechoic on-axis and off-axis FR.

Once you get the good on/off-axis FR out of the way, then you have to start looking at the specs that are more important to you - like sensitivity, distortion, driver size, etc. Some people desire certain driver types - Be, Diamond, soft vs metal domes, ribbons, etc.

 

[PENG]

Measurements and specs are great starting points. I think many of us wouldn't even consider speakers that don't have good anechoic on-axis and off-axis FR.

Once you get the good on/off-axis FR out of the way, then you have to start looking at the specs that are more important to you - like sensitivity, distortion, driver size, etc. Some people desire certain driver types - Be, Diamond, soft vs metal domes, ribbons, etc.

By the way, did you notice what I have been noticing that it seems recently most posters who asked about what amps to match to, add to their avr, or just upgrade to, own klipsch speakers (not the audiophile models but mostly models typically found in BB etc.)? I would love to see their anechoic on/off axis FR as well as THD, impedance/phase angle etc. @shadyJ seems to think they are good so may be he has seen graphs.

 

[shadyJ]

By the way, did you notice what I have been noticing that it seems recently most posters who asked about what amps to match to, add to their avr, or just upgrade to, own klipsch speakers (not the audiophile models but mostly models typically found in BB etc.)? I would love to see their anechoic on/off axis FR as well as THD, impedance/phase angle etc. @shadyJ seems to think they are good so may be he has seen graphs.

Klipsch RP-8000F review

 

[PENG]

Klipsch RP-8000F review

When you say gated at 5 ms, do you mean the IR Windows, and setting the right windows, or both right and left windows to 5 ms? Assuming you are using REW. Thanks

 

[shadyJ]

When you say gated at 5 ms, do you mean the IR Windows, and setting the right windows, or both right and left windows to 5 ms? Assuming you are using REW. Thanks

Yes, using REW. I gate at the right window in the IR window. 5 ms is possibly the time it takes for the sound to bounce off the ground and reflect into the microphone thereby interfering with the test signal coming directly from the speaker, so the gating filters that out. To be honest, I might have gated it at a longer window than 5 ms, that might be incorrect. It may be 6 or 7 ms. I used to gate at 5 ms for tower speakers just to be super conservative, but the ground reflections usually take longer than that to hit the mic, it could take as long as 8 ms. On bookshelf speakers I get a higher elevations and can use longer gate times.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

By the way, did you notice what I have been noticing that it seems recently most posters who asked about what amps to match to, add to their avr, or just upgrade to, own klipsch speakers (not the audiophile models but mostly models typically found in BB etc.)? I would love to see their anechoic on/off axis FR as well as THD, impedance/phase angle etc. @shadyJ seems to think they are good so may be he has seen graphs.

Klipsch might have taken the hint from many bashers and tamed the treble on their speakers.

That's why Shady's measurements of the new Klipsch look good.

But that won't stop many bashers from bashing - at least not until we see more Klipsch measurements that look like Shady's.

What about all the other Klipsch speakers?

But anyway, all these Klipsch speakers have higher sensitivities than most speakers, so I bet none of these people need external amps.

I think what's happening is that when people use Auto Room EQ, it sets all the speaker levels so low for these Klipsch because of the higher sensitivity. So they have to crank the volume up and it makes people think, "Why do I need to crank up the volume when my speakers have high sensitivity? My speakers must need more power."

 

[M Code]

The major challenge of every brand's auto Room EQ software is the end transfer function response curve can/will vary between brands...
So toss in the unique room's acoustics and indivdual loudspeaker capability, the final results will vary greatly. So the only criteria is the listener's conclusions which sounds better..

Totally up to the listener and his preferences, 1 may say it sounds incredible another may say it sucks....

Just my $0.02...

 

[snakeeyes]

Klipsch might have taken the hint from many bashers and tamed the treble on their speakers.

That's why Shady's measurements of the new Klipsch look good.

But that won't stop many bashers from bashing - at least not until we see more Klipsch measurements that look like Shady's.

What about all the other Klipsch speakers?

But anyway, all these Klipsch speakers have higher sensitivities than most speakers, so I bet none of these people need external amps.

I think what's happening is that when people use Auto Room EQ, it sets all the speaker levels so low for these Klipsch because of the higher sensitivity. So they have to crank the volume up and it makes people think, "Why do I need to crank up the volume when my speakers have high sensitivity? My speakers must need more power."

Many if not most brands successful at making cheap speakers will have comprises to hit those price points. Weaknesses in low end products that lead to upgrades are often associated by those owners to that brand. They may not give the brand another chance.

Suggesting people demo lots of speaker brands to broaden their horizon rather than replacing other working components that have little influence on the sound is not bashing.

Let’s face it, the cheap 5.1 or 7.1 sets from Best Buy or Frys are often Polk or Klipsch. They aren’t the top end products from those brands.

 

[Ken32]

Klipsch might have taken the hint from many bashers and tamed the treble on their speakers.

That's why Shady's measurements of the new Klipsch look good.

But that won't stop many bashers from bashing - at least not until we see more Klipsch measurements that look like Shady's.

What about all the other Klipsch speakers?

But anyway, all these Klipsch speakers have higher sensitivities than most speakers, so I bet none of these people need external amps.

I think what's happening is that when people use Auto Room EQ, it sets all the speaker levels so low for these Klipsch because of the higher sensitivity. So they have to crank the volume up and it makes people think, "Why do I need to crank up the volume when my speakers have high sensitivity? My speakers must need more power."

It’s about time. Their older RF line was insanely brutal to my ears. And to me definitely not worth the thousands a pair they’ve asked for them.

I have heard the Reference Premier line (280f)
To me, it was more for movies than music type speaker.

They were ok to me. IMHO still can’t touch B&W for a full bodied sound.

Next set of towers I’m going to try are the ascend acoustics.

 

[ryanosaur]

Next set of towers I’m going to try are the ascend acoustics.

Rumor has it he's working on a new design! Along with that there is the upgraded Sierra 2, and very soon, the Luna Duo. If only I had an additional 5K in disposable funds!

 

[PENG]

The major challenge of every brand's auto Room EQ software is the end transfer function response curve can/will vary between brands...
So toss in the unique room's acoustics and indivdual loudspeaker capability, the final results will vary greatly. So the only criteria is the listener's conclusions which sounds better..

Totally up to the listener and his preferences, 1 may say it sounds incredible another may say it sucks....

Just my $0.02...

Agreed, but not to me as I use REW to tell me things that my ears otherwise may lie to me.