Marantz AV 20 13.4CH Pre/Pro & AMP 20 12CH Amplifier Official Thread

[Madhuski]

Many along the way.

When I moved from Trinnov to AV10, I had an Alcons setup.

I later sold the Alcons and put in a KEF blade and reference meta setup - still had the av10 at that point. I then sold the KEF's and put in a B&W 700 signature setup. At that point I sold the AV10/amp10 and went A10h

I scratched the (for me) high end itch and decided to downsize to something that cost wise made sense for what I use it for

 

[ryanosaur]

Hi there, how are you finding the AV20 since the initial Audyssey setup?

Have you found easily discernable sound quality improvements over your previous processor?

I'm in the market for the AV20 (upgrading from a Denon 4700, which I use as a pre-pro with a separate power amp), so looking to glean as much information as possible on the kind of upgrade I can expect.

The other thing that's in the back of my mind is that Marantz said the AV10 uses higher quality capacitors and therefore is still the go to for those after the best sound quality above all else. I'm running a 5.2.2 system for now (with eventual upgrade to 5.4.2), so I would prefer to go for the AV20 due to my channel count, but wondering if there are actual real world sound quality differences between the AV20 and AV10. (My power amp is the Emotiva XPA Gen 3)

Simply to answer your questions...

The AV20 has been solid. Initial Audyssey setup and curve editing worked per usual App experience and overall quality of my experience on the AV20, post room correction, has been very good.

I cannot and will not make claims of night and day differences between my older SR6012 purchased new in Summer of 2018 when it was on closeout for the newer models. However, the processing power in the AV20 is significantly improved over what was in a mid-tier AVR designed and manufactured 8 years ago.

What I am willing to say is that the Movie and Gaming experience has been more impactful. Audyssey on this machine measured differently than it ever did on my 6012. Is it the XLRs or the machine itself? No other equipment was changed.

As to Music only, I have had precious little time to sit and enjoy anything in an active listening session. What I have listened to is solid. Nothing notably off in any way. Keep in mind I refuse to make claims about being able to hear the possible drop in noise floor or improved SINAD/Distortion numbers. But what I have listened to in a more passive manner has been great.

Lastly, I am not one to assign magical properties to capacitors. I know some love to discuss Caps and their "qualities," but I am more firmly in the camp of Caps and other wiring not really affecting SQ.

With that in mind, I don't think we have seen any 3rd party bench test of the AV20 yet, however Masimo/SU/D&M know that somebody will likely put this on an AP and run it through its paces, so my money is on this thing testing as advertised. Or at least close enough. If that is the case, it should test higher than the AV10. *shrugs We'll see.

Is the AV10 worth the new higher price? Possibly for those who can afford it and want the true flagship model.

If you don't need the 2 extra channels, I don't think the AV20 will disappoint.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I will not make claims of night and day differences…

Now how are you gonna get 300 replies like TLS Guy with that kind of response?

 

[Trebdp83]

Yeah, what the f#%k am I supposed to do with that s#%t?

 

[franknorris12]

Simply to answer your questions...

The AV20 has been solid. Initial Audyssey setup and curve editing worked per usual App experience and overall quality of my experience on the AV20, post room correction, has been very good.

I cannot and will not make claims of night and day differences between my older SR6012 purchased new in Summer of 2018 when it was on closeout for the newer models. However, the processing power in the AV20 is significantly improved over what was in a mid-tier AVR designed and manufactured 8 years ago.

What I am willing to say is that the Movie and Gaming experience has been more impactful. Audyssey on this machine measured differently than it ever did on my 6012. Is it the XLRs or the machine itself? No other equipment was changed.

As to Music only, I have had precious little time to sit and enjoy anything in an active listening session. What I have listened to is solid. Nothing notably off in any way. Keep in mind I refuse to make claims about being able to hear the possible drop in noise floor or improved SINAD/Distortion numbers. But what I have listened to in a more passive manner has been great.

Lastly, I am not one to assign magical properties to capacitors. I know some love to discuss Caps and their "qualities," but I am more firmly in the camp of Caps and other wiring not really affecting SQ.

With that in mind, I don't think we have seen any 3rd party bench test of the AV20 yet, however Masimo/SU/D&M know that somebody will likely put this on an AP and run it through its paces, so my money is on this thing testing as advertised. Or at least close enough. If that is the case, it should test higher than the AV10. *shrugs We'll see.

Is the AV10 worth the new higher price? Possibly for those who can afford it and want the true flagship model.

If you don't need the 2 extra channels, I don't think the AV20 will disappoint.

Many thanks for taking the time to provide your feedback thus far, much appreciated

 

[ryanosaur]

Yeah, what the f#%k am I supposed to do with that s#%t?

#halo-smiley, b!tch


In some simple way, I want to think that the Marantz AV 10 and 20 might exist because @gene leaned on the right folk at SU/D&M. That, and they know somebody is gonna bench it and reveal if the AV20 isn’t what it is supposed to be.

Considering the AV10 already benched so impressively well, all the AV20 has to do is match it. I don’t need the extra +3 SINAD score to make me happy. Hell, just going into Setup through the remote is so much of an improvement that it’s easily worth 1k of the retail price.

Anyway, iirc, Anthem may have been first to market with this pattern of the 15.4 processor, and while I haven’t used one, all I can say is that I think Marantz got this right.

Put that in your bong and do a few rips!

 

[TLS Guy]

#halo-smiley, b!tch


In some simple way, I want to think that the Marantz AV 10 and 20 might exist because @gene leaned on the right folk at SU/D&M. That, and they know somebody is gonna bench it and reveal if the AV20 isn’t what it is supposed to be.

Considering the AV10 already benched so impressively well, all the AV20 has to do is match it. I don’t need the extra +3 SINAD score to make me happy. Hell, just going into Setup through the remote is so much of an improvement that it’s easily worth 1k of the retail price.

Anyway, iirc, Anthem may have been first to market with this pattern of the 15.4 processor, and while I haven’t used one, all I can say is that I think Marantz got this right.

Put that in your bong and do a few rips!

It is highly unlikely that the AV 20 will test or sound worse in anyway than the AV 10. I would expect there to be a lot of commonality. I got the A 10 because it was available and has been out long enough to have a track record of reliability. I assume, but don't know, that there is a lot of commonality between the AV 10 and AV 20. So I expect you will get the same stellar performance I am getting from the AV 10.

I think the better 2 channel performance is likely related to the much improved SNR and this is important.

I think the biggest difference from previous AVPs is the implementation of Dolby Atmos and the Dolby surround upmixer. With the 7705 and 7706, Atmos streams were an improvement but nothing like the improvement in processing of the AV 10. The AV 10 can give a very lifelike representation of the venue where the program was recorded, whereas with the others there was only a hint, but a fairly solid hint. Now from the BPO Atmos streams you really feel acoustic of the philharmonie in Berlin, and feel you are in the audience. Why this is so improved is beyond my pay grade to explain, but it is definitely identifiable.

 

[PENG]

Many along the way.

When I moved from Trinnov to AV10, I had an Alcons setup.

I later sold the Alcons and put in a KEF blade and reference meta setup - still had the av10 at that point. I then sold the KEF's and put in a B&W 700 signature setup. At that point I sold the AV10/amp10 and went A10h

I scratched the (for me) high end itch and decided to downsize to something that cost wise made sense for what I use it for

Wow, I hope you didn't lose too much money in such a short time frame. But I understand when feel itchy, it is hard not to scratch even if it costs..

 

[PENG]

It is highly unlikely that the AV 20 will test or sound worse in anyway than the AV 10. I would expect there to be a lot of commonality. I got the A 10 because it was available and has been out long enough to have a track record of reliability. I assume, but don't know, that there is a lot of commonality between the AV 10 and AV 20. So I expect you will get the same stellar performance I am getting from the AV 10.

I think the better 2 channel performance is likely related to the much improved SNR and this is important.

I think the biggest difference from previous AVPs is the implementation of Dolby Atmos and the Dolby surround upmixer. With the 7705 and 7706, Atmos streams were an improvement but nothing like the improvement in processing of the AV 10. The AV 10 can give a very lifelike representation of the venue where the program was recorded, whereas with the others there was only a hint, but a fairly solid hint. Now from the BPO Atmos streams you really feel acoustic of the philharmonie in Berlin, and feel you are in the audience. Why this is so improved is beyond my pay grade to explain, but it is definitely identifiable.

Thank you for such a short but informative summary!

 

[PENG]

#halo-smiley, b!tch


In some simple way, I want to think that the Marantz AV 10 and 20 might exist because @gene leaned on the right folk at SU/D&M. That, and they know somebody is gonna bench it and reveal if the AV20 isn’t what it is supposed to be.

Considering the AV10 already benched so impressively well, all the AV20 has to do is match it. I don’t need the extra +3 SINAD score to make me happy. Hell, just going into Setup through the remote is so much of an improvement that it’s easily worth 1k of the retail price.

Anyway, iirc, Anthem may have been first to market with this pattern of the 15.4 processor, and while I haven’t used one, all I can say is that I think Marantz got this right.

Put that in your bong and do a few rips!

Anthem deserves the credit for leading the pack in using reference class ESS Sabre DAC ICs in the AVM line. They did not do better on the bench though, likely because of the other parts (mainly ICs) in the audio chain such as the volume IC, switches and opamps. I know many don't care about the DAC IC, but many do, as those fitted with better ICs tended to measure better, except for perhaps a few that failed to use better ICs up and downstream of the DAC (such as some of the older D+M and Y models, e.g. before 2016/17).

The so called upgraded audio cct., tighter tolerances resistors, capacitors wouldn't contribute much (surely they wouldn't hurt though lol..), based on may bench test results I have read on Audioholics and ASR. Regardless, whether the AV20 would do 107 dB SINAD, reportedly, or even just 100 dB SINAD, it is mainly bragging right, anything >95 dB likely would put the device in the transparency territory, even if the 95 dB is dominated by noise.

 

[Trell]

Now how are you gonna get 300 replies like TLS Guy with that kind of response?

On some other sites that reply by @ryanosaur would generate far more than 300 replies where members can hear night and day differences of cables.

With DSP and it's many menu choices there are also a great opportunity for misconfiguration and thus mistake preference for transparency. Another poster alluded to that in "the other thread" but I'm not sure he actually followed up on that, given the OP status. I'm all for preferences, just to be clear.

Both me and TLS Guy own recording devices (he calls them DACs) from the German company RME Audio that is (in Europe at least) heavily used in broadcast, live events and for recording classical music. For recording devices RME uses a input filter that is low latency with minimal deviation in FR in the audible band, which, of course, makes sense for recording. Similar filter is used for the output from the DACs in them. With any choice of filters there are tradeoffs. Just to give you all a little background about my snarky comment about replacing my RME devices.

Another class of RME devices is what RME call "converters" (like the excellent RME ADI-2 DAC fs, which I also own) and on those you can choose from a number of reconstructive filters, and that can be done easily in less than a second using the remote, so at least one can do some testing, but I can't hear any difference being a middle aged man with the filters starts rolling off high. That, of course, does mean that others can't.

On the RME forum there are some that claims they can hear difference between the filters on some content but once the sample rate goes to 88 kHz or above they can't any more. They say they control their listening testings, and I'm inclined to believe them given their posts. They also say the differences are subtle, and certainly not day and night. I believe that too!

Then there is DSP, which, of course, is the main reason I bought the RME ADI-2 DAC fs for desktop duty. Features like a very configurable dynamic volume, treble/bass controls (also configurable), EQ (great for knocking down the Beyer Dynamics treble peak in their headphones) and so forth.

So let me shortly recap a poster (one of several, actually) on RME forum that complained about the lack of soundstage on so forth on his RME ADI-2 DAC. Turned out he had enabled mono.

Edit: typos and so forth

 

[Trell]

Anthem deserves the credit for leading the pack in using reference class ESS Sabre DAC ICs in the AVM line. They did not do better on the bench though, likely because of the other parts (mainly ICs) in the audio chain such as the volume IC, switches and opamps. I know many don't care about the DAC IC, but many do, as those fitted with better ICs tended to measure better, except for perhaps a few that failed to use better ICs up and downstream of the DAC (such as some of the older D+M and Y models, e.g. before 2016/17).

The so called upgraded audio cct., tighter tolerances resistors, capacitors wouldn't contribute much (surely they wouldn't hurt though lol..), based on may bench test results I have read on Audioholics and ASR. Regardless, whether the AV20 would do 107 dB SINAD, reportedly, or even just 100 dB SINAD, it is mainly bragging right, anything >95 dB likely would put the device in the transparency territory, even if the 95 dB is dominated by noise.

Choice of DAC IC in a product? I recall another thread about Denon using a much lower performance DAC IC in one of their receivers compared to the previous generation. At least one poster in this thread, not you of course, was very focused on non-audibility of distortion and not noise at all, as I recall. But here we are with the AV10, and presumably AV20 as well, with much higher measured performance and now it can be audible.

 

[ryanosaur]

On some other sites that reply will by @ryanosaur generate far more than 300 replies where members can hear nigh and day differences.

There’s a reason I don’t play in those sandboxes!

 

[ryanosaur]

Anthem deserves the credit for leading the pack

When I saw those being released was the first time I found myself plotting to spend more than a reasonable amount of money on a Processor!

Even the AV20 is arguably too expensive, though it really does come down to having the right relationship. I certainly could not have done this at MSRP.

Regardless, for all the 16-ch designs that came out, Anthem was the company that seemingly saw the flaw in those limits and did the smartest thing in channel count.

Now I really have no reason to not kick my but and finish my Subwoofer project and Atmos projects!

 

[Trell]

When I saw those being released was the first time I found myself plotting to spend more than a reasonable amount of money on a Processor!

Even the AV20 is arguably too expensive, though it really does come down to having the right relationship. I certainly could not have done this at MSRP.

Regardless, for all the 16-ch designs that came out, Anthem was the company that seemingly saw the flaw in those limits and did the smartest thing in channel count.

Now I really have no reason to not kick my but and finish my Subwoofer project and Atmos projects!

Good luck trying to time tariffs to Trumps daily mood and you buying this now overly expensive device. With some luck you can get some a pre-Trump device in stock with the old tariffs.

 

[ryanosaur]

On a scale of 1-10, with the Monolith HTP-1 being a 1 on that scale, and the Emo RMC-1+ a 3... I would say you shouldn't have to pay more than a 2 for the AV20.
Of course that scale breaks down... isn't truly linear... especially by the time you include the Trinnov 32. ...unless you just stretch the scale and say that's a 15 on the 1-10.

I saw some folk for years saying you should never have to pay full MSRP for these machines. I wish I knew this when I bought my SR6012 as I perhaps could have made an even smarter purchase than buying that on close-out sale.

Anyway. Tariffs are stupid.