THX Launches Website to Compare AV Products

RichB

RichB

Audioholic Field Marshall
Denon and Yamaha used to get THX certified. I actually advised Yamaha to drop the THX after 2 generations bc they already easily met all the specs anyways. The THX name lost relevancy in consumer audio over the years especially since consumers weren't demanding it in their product purchasing decisions as a major factor.
In Yamaha's case, they may have dropped some of the performance as well.

- Rich
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
In Yamaha's case, they may have dropped some of the performance as well.

- Rich
I hope they don't do that (dropping performance) to the 2000 and 3000 series. Those have good specs on paper, but it is high time Gene do some bench tests on them, along with the Marantz SR8012 and Denon AVR-X8500H. I do understand he may not be able to get samples from the manufacturers even if he does it for free.
 
RichB

RichB

Audioholic Field Marshall
805 runs hot. From the anecdotical/forums members experience, it seems like placing it in air constrained spaces and high failure rate has a direct correlation.
My 805 so far (knocking on wood) had only 1 issue and it was a known bug with display resistors fail. It was very cheap to fix.
I have an Onkyo 605 used as a preamp in a vacation home. It also runs hot but I put power sensing fans on it and have no problems. Pioneer/Onkyo is moving into class-D again. It would be nice to have the option to turn off the amps that are not in use.

- Rich
 
RichB

RichB

Audioholic Field Marshall
The THX site is also "unconventional":

  • There is no consideration given to uncelebrated and calibrated. This is big deal in that OLEDs with Auto calibration are now capable of coming close to the reference display.
  • Practical Black Level seems to be getting at real-world performance which is fine, but measurements to 5 decimal placed seems to be overkill and not sensible given meter accuracy.
  • HDR Tone-mapping again could be practical but is applicable only to HDR10 (not DV or the upcoming HDR+). Even then, LG displays have different tone-mapping used the titles static metadata. There are different tone-mapping curves for 1000 nits, 4000 nits, and 10000 nit mastered titles. The tone-mapping measurement does not specify the mastering nits.
  • HDR and SDR color tracking is 1 dimensional. Color tracking at different luminance is important. This is the video equivalent to measuring audio with only 1kHz signals. Anyone at home with a copy of Calman (or equivalent) can produce better measurements.

If you are interested in video performance. Look to https://www.hdtvtest.co.uk or https://www.rtings.com/.
The THX site is new so they deserve some slack and it remains to be seen if they are going to be more like a measurement based review site or measurement lite consumer reports site without the commentary.

- Rich
 
M Code

M Code

Audioholic General
Denon and Yamaha used to get THX certified. I actually advised Yamaha to drop the THX after 2 generations bc they already easily met all the specs anyways. The THX name lost relevancy in consumer audio over the years especially since consumers weren't demanding it in their product purchasing decisions as a major factor.
Gene..
A primary reason for the subject brands to drop THX was simply its $ royalty cost. What many outsiders and consumers fail to realize is the escalating royalties paid per AVR. Royalties were under control until the HD codecs and more processing channels became the norm. The average AVR royalties paid today have increased >120% compared to those of just a few years ago. There are royalties for Dolby, DTS, HDMI, Apple, video processors.. And for Room EQ schemes thats the reason Audyssey was dropped by Onkyo/Integra...

Just my $0.02... ;)
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
In Yamaha's case, they may have dropped some of the performance as well.

- Rich
Only recently on lower models. Their post THX
In Yamaha's case, they may have dropped some of the performance as well.

- Rich
Some of the flagships Yamaha produced post THX have been very good. The reason why receiver quality has declined is an industry problem more than relating to dropping THX. The demand for the super receiver has dwindled and most folks would rather buy separates at those asking prices then to sink it all into a single box that may obsolete in 2-3 years. The licensing fees for all the streaming apps, Atmos, HDMI, etc have caused receiver companies to shrink the power supplies in order to keep their price points the same.

see: https://www.audioholics.com/audio-amplifier/trading
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Gene..
A primary reason for the subject brands to drop THX was simply its $ royalty cost. What many outsiders and consumers fail to realize is the escalating royalties paid per AVR. Royalties were under control until the HD codecs and more processing channels became the norm. The average AVR royalties paid today have increased >120% compared to those of just a few years ago. There are royalties for Dolby, DTS, HDMI, Apple, video processors.. And for Room EQ schemes thats the reason Audyssey was dropped by Onkyo/Integra...

Just my $0.02... ;)
Very true indeed. Also, once a manfacturer knows the THX spec and has already designed a product to meet it, it's easy enough for them to make successor products that meet those specs without having to pay a royalty. THX never updated their Cinema EQ feature or stance on dipole speakers so in many aspects their post processing has become obsolete.
 
E

<eargiant

Senior Audioholic
Very true indeed. Also, once a manfacturer knows the THX spec and has already designed a product to meet it, it's easy enough for them to make successor products that meet those specs without having to pay a royalty. THX never updated their Cinema EQ feature or stance on dipole speakers so in many aspects their post processing has become obsolete.
The question I would ask is do most actually do it?

With rising royalties paid and the dropping costs of AVRs is there any money left for manufacturers to include things like beefy filter caps, proper heatsinks, output transistors and other internal build items needed to actually meet or exceed the requirements of a demanding test?
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
That's informative, but then why do you think those THX Ultra 2 certified Onkyo such as the TX-SR805 through 906 didn't seem to be all that reliable?

...
Reliability not tested for? That takes time. :D
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
i've received some nice emails from manufacturers that have read this article and also had similar concerns.

The folks at NAD gave me permission to repost their response:

It is difficult to comment on the tests conducted by THX in this amplifier comparison as THX doesn’t provide a proper explanation of the actual test or specific test conditions.

We do not see any rationale for the low rating THX provides when the M22 delivers high dynamic power to meet real world music needs and excellent low impedance drive capability to drive virtually any loudspeaker at lifelike listening levels. And it does this while achieving industry leading specs in other critical areas of amplifier design.

Lastly there is no correlation between THX ratings and the critical acclaim for the M22 from leading audio journalists such as Stereophile’s John Atkinson who measured the M22 and concluded by saying “NAD's Masters Series M22 amplifier measures extraordinarily well. It is the very model of a modern class-D amplifier!”


Greg Stidsen

Director, Technology and Product Planning
Lenbrook International
NAD Electronics
 
Matthew J Poes

Matthew J Poes

Audioholic Chief
Staff member
NAD confirmed to me that the THX Frequency response graphs aren't correct and they also were puzzled by the power burst test results. This is getting interesting.
I also talked to NAD about this.

They indicated that the dynamic power performance isn't a good test in their view (I'm paraphrasing) and that NAD has long intentionally designed their amplifiers to provide similar power into both 8 and 4 ohm loads as a means to provide similar low distortion into both loads. (I will share more once I get permission).

I won't share anything specific to NAD yet, but...I will say this. The modules they license and supplies they use CAN be designed intentionally in a way that will make it so that their power won't change much with load. This would be an intentional and desirable trait. An overly simplistic way of describing this is that the supplies are far more regulated than they once were and it is possible to lower the rail voltage (on purpose) to ensure it can be better regulated into lower impedance loads. THX would ding an amp that behaves this way, but this is exactly how I would design a modern amplifier. I did something similar with my own last amplifier, the switching supply operates at a different mean rail voltage as the impedance drops. It can range anywhere from 60 volts up to 72 volts. With a solid flat 8ohm or higher load, it will operate at the 72-volt rail. If the impedance is more typical of 8ohm speakers or is, in fact, a 4-ohm speaker, the rail drops down, typically to around 65-68 volts and remains at that voltage under a very wide range of loads. Much like unregulated linear supplies, the power supply stops strictly regulating its rail voltage at peak current draw and allows the voltage to drop as low as 60 volts. At that point, it hits a hard current limit and actually shuts down momentarily to protect itself. I didn't design the supply just specified its operating parameters.

I also mentioned to James that I thought there speaker measurements had some issues. He noted the focus on power response, which I agree is a strange focus. I think it makes sense to look at the smoothness of the response as you move around the speaker, looking for little major variation. However very different speaker designs will have very different power responses, and neither is necessarily wrong. It seems surprising they didn't include directivity index instead, and I would simply have made the smoothness of the DI the focus, rather than a particular level or even tilt. Some designers like a tilt in the DI. Some want it at 0 and some want it at 20db's (Speakers with lasers on their head). It's all a design decision. The peak SPL test is one I'm heartened to see included. James and I disagreed on the merit of such a test, but...I have to say, I wish they would describe in more detail what they are doing in that test. Those values seem much higher than I would have expected as possible from the speakers under test.
The last point, I think a lot of their tests are of questionable merit. I would much prefer them to ensure that the tests either a) have a strong association with perceived sound quality, or b) have a reasonable engineering purpose. The THD tests aren't ideal, you could have an amp with fairly low THD that still has audible distortion. While not a well studied topics, certainly enough papers exist dismissing the THD spec. My mentor, Earl Geddes did a nice start toward this, noting that certain combinations of harmonics can lead to a low absolute value and audible distortion. The dynamic power test seems silly, increasing power into lower loads doesn't benefit sound nor is it a sign of good engineering (in the modern era).
 
Matthew J Poes

Matthew J Poes

Audioholic Chief
Staff member
Only recently on lower models. Their post THX

Some of the flagships Yamaha produced post THX have been very good. The reason why receiver quality has declined is an industry problem more than relating to dropping THX. The demand for the super receiver has dwindled and most folks would rather buy separates at those asking prices then to sink it all into a single box that may obsolete in 2-3 years. The licensing fees for all the streaming apps, Atmos, HDMI, etc have caused receiver companies to shrink the power supplies in order to keep their price points the same.

see: https://www.audioholics.com/audio-amplifier/trading
In a conversation I had with Peter Tribeman concerning the designing and building of modern audio equipment, he noted that one major problem they run into is a lack of analog parts. Resistors, transistors, caps, etc. He said that factories producing these parts are going out of business in droves and the rise in cheap consumer electronics is causing shortages. They might design a product only to have Apple swoop in and buy all of the resistors they specified in the design. His opinion was that this has hurt the product quality as you may not be specifying the parts you really want to use, instead of the ones you happen to be able to buy up.

I also imagine increases in copper prices may have caused an increase in the cost of large power transformers making it difficult to include sufficiently large power supplies. There are no problems in the amplifier department. While I'll contend that companies like TI are producing really bad measuring and sounding digital amplifiers, these aren't being used in receivers. Even the monolithic chip amplifiers they are using are quite a bit better than amps of the past. I imagine as more companies move to switching supplies and it becomes cost efficient to make them sufficiently large, we might see amp specs improve again.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
I also talked to NAD about this.

They indicated that the dynamic power performance isn't a good test in their view (I'm paraphrasing) and that NAD has long intentionally designed their amplifiers to provide similar power into both 8 and 4 ohm loads as a means to provide similar low distortion into both loads. (I will share more once I get permission).

I won't share anything specific to NAD yet, but...I will say this. The modules they license and supplies they use CAN be designed intentionally in a way that will make it so that their power won't change much with load. This would be an intentional and desirable trait. An overly simplistic way of describing this is that the supplies are far more regulated than they once were and it is possible to lower the rail voltage (on purpose) to ensure it can be better regulated into lower impedance loads. THX would ding an amp that behaves this way, but this is exactly how I would design a modern amplifier. I did something similar with my own last amplifier, the switching supply operates at a different mean rail voltage as the impedance drops. It can range anywhere from 60 volts up to 72 volts. With a solid flat 8ohm or higher load, it will operate at the 72-volt rail. If the impedance is more typical of 8ohm speakers or is, in fact, a 4-ohm speaker, the rail drops down, typically to around 65-68 volts and remains at that voltage under a very wide range of loads. Much like unregulated linear supplies, the power supply stops strictly regulating its rail voltage at peak current draw and allows the voltage to drop as low as 60 volts. At that point, it hits a hard current limit and actually shuts down momentarily to protect itself. I didn't design the supply just specified its operating parameters.

I also mentioned to James that I thought there speaker measurements had some issues. He noted the focus on power response, which I agree is a strange focus. I think it makes sense to look at the smoothness of the response as you move around the speaker, looking for little major variation. However very different speaker designs will have very different power responses, and neither is necessarily wrong. It seems surprising they didn't include directivity index instead, and I would simply have made the smoothness of the DI the focus, rather than a particular level or even tilt. Some designers like a tilt in the DI. Some want it at 0 and some want it at 20db's (Speakers with lasers on their head). It's all a design decision. The peak SPL test is one I'm heartened to see included. James and I disagreed on the merit of such a test, but...I have to say, I wish they would describe in more detail what they are doing in that test. Those values seem much higher than I would have expected as possible from the speakers under test.
The last point, I think a lot of their tests are of questionable merit. I would much prefer them to ensure that the tests either a) have a strong association with perceived sound quality, or b) have a reasonable engineering purpose. The THD tests aren't ideal, you could have an amp with fairly low THD that still has audible distortion. While not a well studied topics, certainly enough papers exist dismissing the THD spec. My mentor, Earl Geddes did a nice start toward this, noting that certain combinations of harmonics can lead to a low absolute value and audible distortion. The dynamic power test seems silly, increasing power into lower loads doesn't benefit sound nor is it a sign of good engineering (in the modern era).
Sounds similar to McIntosh's philosophy. I don't think it is a good idea to keep the output regulated. I prefer to keep it simple, let the current flow according to Ohm's law but yes keep distortions low too as much as possible. No need to complicate things when there is no need but I guess NAD and Mc perceive such a need.
 
Last edited:
M Code

M Code

Audioholic General
In a conversation I had with Peter Tribeman concerning the designing and building of modern audio equipment, he noted that one major problem they run into is a lack of analog parts. Resistors, transistors, caps, etc. He said that factories producing these parts are going out of business in droves and the rise in cheap consumer electronics is causing shortages. They might design a product only to have Apple swoop in and buy all of the resistors they specified in the design. His opinion was that this has hurt the product quality as you may not be specifying the parts you really want to use, instead of the ones you happen to be able to buy up.

I also imagine increases in copper prices may have caused an increase in the cost of large power transformers making it difficult to include sufficiently large power supplies. There are no problems in the amplifier department. While I'll contend that companies like TI are producing really bad measuring and sounding digital amplifiers, these aren't being used in receivers. Even the monolithic chip amplifiers they are using are quite a bit better than amps of the past. I imagine as more companies move to switching supplies and it becomes cost efficient to make them sufficiently large, we might see amp specs improve again.
A couple of points...
1. Shortage of analog parts suppliers
This is true, simply because there are fewer component products processing only analog are rapidly decreasing so market demand is simply less...
2. EL Traditional Power Transformers, Linear Power Supplies
CE is now a global market, so a product's power supply needs to be multi-voltage compatible for 100V, 120V, 220V, 240V. The most economical solution is a switching PWM power supply like those used in computers, HD displays. Therefore the audio AVRs brands are now going to a single, global PWM design compatible with all the world-wide markets, made possible by cheaper controller ICs. Also as the cost of copper continues to increase in price on the world market. Recognizing this trend back 8 years ago, for 1 major audio AVR brand we actually recommended/designed a switching PWM power supply. @ first the brand thought it was goofy idea :eek: but in 2013 they went that design way...

Just my $0.02... ;)
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
THX has been emailing me. They acknowledged some of the errors on their new website I pointed out in my article. They have since then updated the Monoprice amp measurements and told me the scorecard was unaffected since it's calculated off the results they measure on the Audio Precision. We'll see how this progresses going forward I presume....
 
Brent Butterworth

Brent Butterworth

Audiophyte
Great article, Gene! It's refreshing to see informed, in-depth audio journalism instead of the usual mystical/magical nonsense.
 
W

William Sommerwerck

Enthusiast
I don't see much about the electrical compatibility (eg, can an amplifier properly drive a standardized "bad" speaker load?), or how THX requirements relate to the subjective home-theater experience?

How were such correlations determined (if they were determined at all)? My gut feeling is that THX came up with a bunch of specs that looked nice on paper, and that was that.

grumble, grumble, grumble
 

Latest posts

newsletter

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