New help with what to replace 10 yr old receiver with... Yamaha, Denon or Marantz? Receiver or Pre/Pro?

[VMPS-TIII]

Taco Bell ... yum.... even Wonder Woman likes Taco Bell.

 

[coxric]

Just no need generally to test external dacs let alone go out of my way to go listen to electronics generally, waste of time IME. Don't even own an external stand alone dac, no need for such. I could see different "sounds" on xlr vs rca due to level differences, but otherwise that's just bullshit unless something's broken. Some folk think good looking boxes sound better.....and some think Taco Bell is acceptable

For my in-ear monitors I purchased a Dragonfly Black USB DAC and was surprised at the difference in sound compared to the DACs in my iMac and phone. I didn't expect much, but I could definitely hear more character in certain instruments like the piano and cymbals or in layered, denser recordings where before I couldn't pick out subtleties. I loved it so much I upgraded to the Dragonfly Cobalt at x3 the price, and that's where I found myself against the law of diminishing returns. Definitely not enough improvement over my less expensive Dragonfly to justify the cost, even though all the professional reviews said it would be game-changing sound.

Then again maybe my ears are only silver and not golden. And anyway subjectivity is what makes it so great to debate this stuff.

 

[lovinthehd]

For my in-ear monitors I purchased a Dragonfly Black USB DAC and was surprised at the difference in sound compared to the DACs in my iMac and phone. I didn't expect much, but I could definitely hear more character in certain instruments like the piano and cymbals or in layered, denser recordings where before I couldn't pick out subtleties. I loved it so much I upgraded to the Dragonfly Cobalt at x3 the price, and that's where I found myself against the law of diminishing returns. Definitely not enough improvement over my less expensive Dragonfly to justify the cost, even though all the professional reviews said it would be game-changing sound.

Then again maybe my ears are only silver and not golden. And anyway subjectivity is what makes it so great to debate this stuff.

The Fraudioquest stuff is not interesting at all but those didn't measure all that well IIRC. We hear with our brains largely....silver or gold ears notwithstanding

 

[pcosmic]

Marketing is marketing, doesn't necessarily have anything to do with reality. Like saying an avr is "musical"....of course its musical when playing music, what a silly description whoever came up with that one. I'd say the D&M avrs have superior REQ in Audyssey over YPAO but inferior GEQ vs Yamaha's PEQ, but both have plenty of options for tuning for something specific to your preferences. As far as some sort of basic "warmth" by general brand, meh.

No. Audyssey does not do anything better, because it does not have a robust tool to do anything better. What you're referring to as REQ in Audyssey is just automated GEQ depending on how bright or stupid Audyssey's algorithms were for your specifc room. If Audyssey got stupid in your room, all you've got is GEQ to go and try to fix things manually.
If YPAO room correction algorithms got stupid in your room, you have a superior tool to work with manually to correct for its stupidity a.k.a PEQ (vs Marantz's neandertal GEQ).

Neither automation algorithm is bright enough to include other DSP parameters (i mentioned in my earlier comment) in its automated process. All it can do is fck around with inferior GEQ (Marantz) or a more robust PEQ (Yamaha). MCACC is even more obnoxious.

There is no substitute for educated physical room treatments and a discerning human sitting there listening making manual changes as necessary. Yamaha offers the better tool set for manual tuning (way more robust).

Hope this makes sense.

 

[lovinthehd]

No. Audyssey does not do anything better, because it does not have a robust tool to do anything better. What you're referring to as REQ in Audyssey is just automated GEQ depending on how bright or stupid Audyssey's algorithms were for your specifc room. If Audyssey got stupid in your room, all you've got is GEQ to go and try to fix things manually.
If YPAO room correction algorithms got stupid in your room, you have a superior tool to work with manually to correct for its stupidity a.k.a PEQ (vs Marantz's neandertal GEQ).

Neither automation algorithm is bright enough to include other DSP parameters (i mentioned in my earlier comment) in its automated process. All it can do is fck around with inferior GEQ (Marantz) or a more robust PEQ (Yamaha). MCACC is even more obnoxious.

There is no substitute for educated physical room treatments and a discerning human sitting there listening making manual changes as necessary. Yamaha offers the better tool set for manual tuning (way more robust).

Hope this makes sense.

You obviously do not understand Audyssey. It isn't geq. Nor do the avrs allow the audyssey to be adjusted by geq.

 

[PENG]

Then again maybe my ears are only silver and not golden. And anyway subjectivity is what makes it so great to debate this stuff.

Subjectivity aside, I am sure Dragon fly's dacs can really sound good, but since you into external dacs, I would strongly suggest you try some other low cost ones as well. Many have better specs, use higher end DAC chips and would likely measure much better (no it doesn't automatically means they will sound better) than the flies. More importantly, they can play higher resolution files than even the Cobalt can, except MQA I guess unless you get to the $400 range.

I am not saying DSD256/512, or > PCM 24/192 are better than DSD64/128, PCM24/96 etc. either, but it opens up more choices of digital files that are of very good recording/mastering quality, that, to me, is of utmost important for sound quality.

Anyone of ASR's measured top 20 will beat any of Drafly's in objective tests. Those in the top 10 may cost a little more than the Cobalt though.

Couple example of a $499 one:
Gustard X16 Balanced MQA DAC Review | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

and a $130 one:
Topping E30 DAC Review | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

One thing I like about external DAC is, easy to compare them. I have almost 10 one time, still have 7 of them, its fun to try different ones on different days.

 

[VMPS-TIII]

Couple example of a $499 one:
Gustard X16 Balanced MQA DAC Review | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

and a $130 one:
Topping E30 DAC Review | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

One thing I like about external DAC is, easy to compare them. I have almost 10 one time, still have 7 of them, its fun to try different ones on different days.

That Gustard DAC-X16 USB DAC seems to be vaporware. They advertised it and took orders 35 days ago and are now claiming it may not be available until Feb 9. Every week the release date is later.

 

[pcosmic]

You obviously do not understand Audyssey. It isn't geq. Nor do the avrs allow the audyssey to be adjusted by geq.

Why don't you and Peng (the 2 Marantz fanboys) ask that dodo Phil, the Marantz mouthpiece who's on Gene's youtube channel from time to time. He'll confirm it for ya in private, of course.

The two of ya flat earthers have a lot to learn about your Marantz indeed.

 

[lovinthehd]

Why don't you and Peng (the 2 Marantz fanboys) ask that dodo Phil, the Marantz mouthpiece who's on Gene's youtube channel from time to time. He'll confirm it for ya in private, of course.

The two of ya flat earthers have a lot to learn about your Marantz indeed.

Lol, don't have a Marantz. Phil a marketing guy?

 

[killdozzer]

Subjectivity aside, I am sure Dragon fly's dacs can really sound good, but since you into external dacs, I would strongly suggest you try some other low cost ones as well. Many have better specs, use higher end DAC chips and would likely measure much better (no it doesn't automatically means they will sound better) than the flies. More importantly, they can play higher resolution files than even the Cobalt can, except MQA I guess unless you get to the $400 range.

I am not saying DSD256/512, or > PCM 24/192 are better than DSD64/128, PCM24/96 etc. either, but it opens up more choices of digital files that are of very good recording/mastering quality, that, to me, is of utmost important for sound quality.

Anyone of ASR's measured top 20 will beat any of Drafly's in objective tests. Those in the top 10 may cost a little more than the Cobalt though.

Couple example of a $499 one:
Gustard X16 Balanced MQA DAC Review | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

and a $130 one:
Topping E30 DAC Review | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

One thing I like about external DAC is, easy to compare them. I have almost 10 one time, still have 7 of them, its fun to try different ones on different days.

Oh yes, check this. Inside it's the same as Hidizs S8

 

[Gmoney]

Why don't you and Peng (the 2 Marantz fanboys) ask that dodo Phil, the Marantz mouthpiece who's on Gene's youtube channel from time to time. He'll confirm it for ya in private, of course.

The two of ya flat earthers have a lot to learn about your Marantz indeed.

I'm rollin over here!! lmao!

 

[TechToys2]

Why don't you and Peng (the 2 Marantz fanboys) ask that dodo Phil, the Marantz mouthpiece who's on Gene's youtube channel from time to time. He'll confirm it for ya in private, of course.

The two of ya flat earthers have a lot to learn about your Marantz indeed.

Don't want to get in the middle of this, but I recently got a Marantz. There is a graphic qualizer, but to the best of my knowledge, the GEQ doesn't affect Audyssey. It can only be used if Audyssey is off. If I'm wrong on that I am happy to be shown that's not the case.

 

[pcosmic]

Don't want to get in the middle of this, but I recently got a Marantz. There is a graphic qualizer, but to the best of my knowledge, the GEQ doesn't affect Audyssey. It can only be used if Audyssey is off. If I'm wrong on that I am happy to be shown that's not the case. View attachment 42738

When you run a auto cal, after your receiver sets speaker/sub distances, levels, etc, etc, it does EQ based on what it measured in your room and attempts to correct for what it thinks are deficiencies in your room.
Audyssey MULTIEQ XT32 IS JUST EQ, that Audyssey decided to set for your room (room correction) after you ran your auto cal. THERE IS NO OTHER MAGIC IN YOUR MARANTZ!
There are 3 variants, Reference, L/R bypass (leaves your 2 fronts untouched), Flat (adjustments to get a flat response mas o menos) or you turn the damn thing OFF

The equivalents with YPAO in a Yamaha are:
YPAO Natural, YPAO Front (leaves the 2 damn fronts untouched), YPAO FLAT or, THROUGH (which is the equivalent of turning the YPAO EQ off)

If you are a advanced user who decided that whatever Audyssey EQ'd (whatever you guys are calling as REQ) on the auto cal is crap, you can turn MULTIEQ XT32 off and adjust it MANUALLY with manual GEQ (9 bands on the flagship), that's it.
If you are a advanced user on a Yamaha who decided that whatever YPAO EQ'd on the auto cal is crap, you can turn the damn thing off and adjust/make your corrections MANUALLY with its MUCH MORE ROBUST PARAMETRIC EQ (PEQ).

Neither of them can account for other parameters that are inherent to different DSP settings when they run a auto cal (Audyssey or YPAO). These are things that can only be adjusted MANUALLY. I am referring to things like sound field levels, delay between direct/presence effects, broadening effects for soundfields, loss, etc.

Both auto cal tools only deal with EQ. If the algorithms got too complex, you may end up sitting there way too long for an auto cal to complete.

In summary, no auto cal tool is perfect and they both can screw up a lot (if your room is screwed up to begin with). They are just not intelligent enough to achieve perfection in every room. However, the flagship Yamaha has a leg up on the flagship Marantz because of the robustness of its several bands of parametric EQ it offers in comparison to Marantz's gimped GEQ.
Yamaha has way more DSP specific parameters that a expert user can change manually to cater it best for his room.

For a basic user (with basic requirements for movies, etc), knock yourself out with either Audyssey or YPAO. They'll do something that may work ok. But, the Yamaha lets you go several notches deep and tailor your sound for your specific room. The Yamaha flagship sinks the Marantz flagship anyday for a advanced user.

The only con with the Yamaha 3080 is that it is NOT a beginner friendly receiver. It is a cluster fck of advanced functions. But, after ya get past the learning curve, great things can be achieved.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I bet PENG and the guys and get pretty advanced with Audyssey and the Audyssey App. YMMV. At the end of the day, it's just a matter of preferring a certain sound.

To me, I would never want to EQ any speakers period. Just PEQ only the subwoofers below 200Hz.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

When you run a auto cal, after your receiver sets speaker/sub distances, levels, etc, etc, it does EQ based on what it measured in your room and attempts to correct for what it thinks are deficiencies in your room.
Audyssey MULTIEQ XT32 IS JUST EQ, that Audyssey decided to set for your room (room correction) after you ran your auto cal. THERE IS NO OTHER MAGIC IN YOUR MARANTZ!
There are 3 variants, Reference, L/R bypass (leaves your 2 fronts untouched), Flat (adjustments to get a flat response mas o menos) or you turn the damn thing OFF

The equivalents with YPAO in a Yamaha are:
YPAO Natural, YPAO Front (leaves the 2 damn fronts untouched), YPAO FLAT or, THROUGH (which is the equivalent of turning the YPAO EQ off)

If you are a advanced user who decided that whatever Audyssey EQ'd (whatever you guys are calling as REQ) on the auto cal is crap, you can turn MULTIEQ XT32 off and adjust it MANUALLY with manual GEQ (9 bands on the flagship), that's it.
If you are a advanced user on a Yamaha who decided that whatever YPAO EQ'd on the auto cal is crap, you can turn the damn thing off and adjust/make your corrections MANUALLY with its MUCH MORE ROBUST PARAMETRIC EQ (PEQ).

Neither of them can account for other parameters that are inherent to different DSP settings when they run a auto cal (Audyssey or YPAO). These are things that can only be adjusted MANUALLY. I am referring to things like sound field levels, delay between direct/presence effects, broadening effects for soundfields, loss, etc.

Both auto cal tools only deal with EQ. If the algorithms got too complex, you may end up sitting there way too long for an auto cal to complete.

In summary, no auto cal tool is perfect and they both can screw up a lot (if your room is screwed up to begin with). They are just not intelligent enough to achieve perfection in every room. However, the flagship Yamaha has a leg up on the flagship Marantz because of the robustness of its several bands of parametric EQ it offers in comparison to Marantz's gimped GEQ.
Yamaha has way more DSP specific parameters that a expert user can change manually to cater it best for his room.

For a basic user (with basic requirements for movies, etc), knock yourself out with either Audyssey or YPAO. They'll do something that may work ok. But, the Yamaha lets you go several notches deep and tailor your sound for your specific room. The Yamaha flagship sinks the Marantz flagship anyday for a advanced user.

The only con with the Yamaha 3080 is that it is NOT a beginner friendly receiver. It is a cluster fck of advanced functions. But, after ya get past the learning curve, great things can be achieved.

I have to admit that that I probably don’t know about 90% of the features/functionality of my RX-A3080 and CX-A5100. I just pretend they are like analog preamps with no other features other than the speaker level balance, manual PEQ, Atmos, DTSX, DSU, NeuralX.

 

[pcosmic]

I have to admit that that I probably don’t know about 90% of the features/functionality of my RX-A3080 and CX-A5100. I just pretend they are like analog preamps with no other features other than the speaker level balance, manual PEQ, Atmos, DTSX, DSU, NeuralX.

It comes down to what your requirements are for music and how much room you have in your house really.
Personally, I have a eclectic taste/listen to all kinds of music man....from orchestra, metal, electronic, classic rock, indie rock, pop, rap, world, different fusion stuff, etc etc, anything from African Kora music to a Chinese Guzheng to a Indian Sarode to native South American harp to a Australian digeridoo to flutes from the Andes.... every kind of instrument out there....

I am also a "Music First" audiophile, which means i have many gloriously shtty recordings from many artists i like. I don't have 4 good recordings of Diana Krall on repeat all day long like some of the "gearheads" out there.

The question is......Can a single set of speakers paired up with some purist gear cut it for every kind of music out there (above mentioned)? Absolutely not. One might think so because he spent an arm and a leg on some high end speakers and purist gear. But, this is simply not the case.

As far as space goes, I have 2 dedicated rooms with multiple pairings of equipment i can use. If i overflow into another room in the house, the Mrs will set all my gear on fire and file for divorce. I could be tossed out of my home and be forced to live in my cabin by the lake. It is cold as fck these days.
So, what is the solution to save a 30 year marriage?

I present to thee, the YAMAHA RX-A3080

With all its features, i can create the sonic signatures of different types of rooms and audiogear (speakers/amps, etc), literally. As of today, i have about 8 finetuned/tailored preset files. I can get on my computer and load up a preset file on the Yam for the kind of music i am listening to and the experience i want to create on any particular day (on the same speaker and in the same room).....It is pretty funky eh? what modern engineering can do.

As i said before, submit thyself to the overlord/boss YAMAHA! Submit thyself to the big boss .

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

It comes down to what your requirements are for music and how much room you have in your house really.
Personally, I have a eclectic taste/listen to all kinds of music man....from orchestra, metal, electronic, classic rock, indie rock, pop, rap, world, different fusion stuff, etc etc, anything from African Kora music to a Chinese Guzheng to a Indian Sarode to native South American harp to a Australian digeridoo to flutes from the Andes.... every kind of instrument out there....

I am also a "Music First" audiophile, which means i have many gloriously shtty recordings from many artists i like. I don't have 4 good recordings of Diana Krall on repeat all day long like some of the "gearheads" out there.

The question is......Can a single set of speakers paired up with some purist gear cut it for every kind of music out there (above mentioned)? Absolutely not. One might think so because he spent an arm and a leg on some high end speakers and purist gear. But, this is simply not the case.

As far as space goes, I have 2 dedicated rooms with multiple pairings of equipment i can use. If i overflow into another room in the house, the Mrs will set all my gear on fire and file for divorce. I could be tossed out of my home and be forced to live in my cabin by the lake. It is cold as fck these days.
So, what is the solution to save a 30 year marriage?

I present to thee, the YAMAHA RX-A3080

With all its features, i can create the sonic signatures of different types of rooms and audiogear (speakers/amps, etc), literally. As of today, i have about 8 finetuned/tailored preset files. I can get on my computer and load up a preset file on the Yam for the kind of music i am listening to and the experience i want to create on any particular day (on the same speaker and in the same room).....It is pretty funky eh? what modern engineering can do.

As i said before, submit thyself to the overlord/boss YAMAHA! Submit thyself to the big boss .

That is definitely some wide range of music tastes.

Mine is significantly more narrow - either Classical (Ennio Morricone, Mozart, Beethoven, Vivaldi, Bach, etc.) or Pop/Rock (Eagles, Cars, etc.).

My Processor/Preamp requirement is also extremely simple - NO EQ for speakers, manual PEQ for Subs only.

So if they could make an extremely simple standalone processor that can just do the Sound decoding for ATMOS, DTSX, NeuralX, all I would need are simple good old fashion integrated amps.

But going back to what you were saying about Auto Room EQ, it's amazing that some audiophiles would spend $20K to get some Auto Room EQ.

 

[mazersteven]

 

[pcosmic]

That is definitely some wide range of music tastes.

Mine is significantly more narrow - either Classical (Ennio Morricone, Mozart, Beethoven, Vivaldi, Bach, etc.) or Pop/Rock (Eagles, Cars, etc.).

Life is short man. Ya gotta explore and give one listen once to everything out there. Sure, there is lots of stuff you won't like. However, you'll never know what you may enjoy if you never heard it (in the first place). I listen to a lot of stuff in languages i can't even understand a single word of.

My Processor/Preamp requirement is also extremely simple - NO EQ for speakers, manual PEQ for Subs only.
So if they could make an extremely simple standalone processor that can just do the Sound decoding for ATMOS, DTSX, NeuralX, all I would need are simple good old fashion integrated amps.

In the past, i have pestered Yamaha, Technics and Luxman to release a no compromise [ultra high fidelity+feature rich] AUDIO ONLY PROCESSOR with ATMOS, DTSX, etc. I want nothing to do with video on such a processor.
I didn't bother with some other companies because i have a feeling those dudes won't even attempt to accommodate such a request.

But going back to what you were saying about Auto Room EQ, it's amazing that some audiophiles would spend $20K to get some Auto Room EQ.

Write a book titled "Sht That Audiophools Do". If you get rich, give me 20% for giving you this wonderful idea.

 

[coxric]

Don't want to get in the middle of this, but I recently got a Marantz. There is a graphic qualizer, but to the best of my knowledge, the GEQ doesn't affect Audyssey. It can only be used if Audyssey is off. If I'm wrong on that I am happy to be shown that's not the case. View attachment 42738

Which Marantz? Do you like it so far? Did you replace a previous receiver?