AV receiver sucks with analog input...

michaelab

michaelab

desafinado
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
6,403
Reaction score
1
Location
Lisbon, Portugal
Was watching the MTV dance chart this morning and for decent stuff broadcast in stereo I usually pipe it through my AV receiver (Marantz SR4200). However, it just sounded so horrible. One dimensional, muffled bass, no image to speak of. It's a toss up whether it was any better than the TVs internal speakers.

So, as an experiment I tried connecting the output from my TV straight into my Arcam A22....WOW! So much better :eek:

Bear in mind I use my Arcam as a 'power' amp for the front speakers for my SR4200 already so it was really just the preamp/processing section of the SR4200 that was mudering the sound.

The only reason I had the TV connected via the SR4200 was so that I could watch the occasional programme in DPLII surround but even that isn't anything like as good as straight stereo through my Arcam.

Fortunately, the SR4200 seems to do a lot better with digital inputs and watching DD5.1 or DTS movies with it is pretty good :MILD:

Michael.
 
I have my TV and DVD conneted to my PM6010OSE and it sound really quite good, I have no sub woofer, but the bass on action films has a lot of attack and grunt (a sub woofer would help things but my £50 gale makes things ten times worse so its no longer in use).

I my mates got some crappy imported 5:1 system with crappy speakers, it may be surround sound but it sounds so compressed and closed in its awful, me admited that my stereo system sounded better than his even for movies.

I guess recievers are not designed for analogue inputs, although the way things are going they should work well with them. I mean the amount of people that will but a £150 dvd. £250 reciever and use it as there main stereo.

Although personaly if I ever got into home cinema I would keep my stereo system and souround system seperate.

Its interesting though as I though the SR4200 was supposed to be good on for stereo CD input music, buy then its only a £200 amp from Richers so I guess it cannot really sound anything like as good a similary priced stereo amp.

Well at least you have your arcam, I remember before I had a nicam TV, I feeded into my old Ariston AX910 and even that sounded better than some built in speakers on nicam tvs.

Sorry for the woffle.
 
The problem with AV amps like the Marantz SR4200 and others in that price range is that they are designed to appeal to the sort of person that puts the number of facilities higher up the desirability scale than sonic performance.

AV is still in the novelty stage and unfortunately the ability to decode hundreds of different formats and switch video signals is deemed as important as sonic performance and as much of the equipment is price sensitive, quality suffers.

Hopefully as the market matures, more attention will be paid to sound reproduction at the expense of unnecessary bells & whilstles and a budget AV receiver will become available that will also sound musical.

Or am I being too optimistic
 
Originally posted by Ian J
as the market matures, more attention will be paid to sound reproduction at the expense of unnecessary bells & whilstles and a budget AV receiver will become available that will also sound musical.

Or am I being too optimistic
Click to expand...
Yep, you're being waaaay toooo optomistic :D Entry level punters buy whistles and bells. The more a product has then the better it sells.

michaelab, get a grip man!!
You're comparing an AV amp that digitises it's analogue inputs and gives you:
5 x 70W power amps
a pre-amp with god knows how many inputs including 2 electrical and two optical, two tape loops,
video switching for composite and S-Video
DSP chips for decoding all the main surround sound formats
an FM/AM tuner with 30 presets
multibrand remote control -- all for for £400 list (discounted to less than £300 at end of life) against a £1000 dedicated 2 channel HiFi amp with what 4 (?) inputs and an optional MM/MC board, and you're surprised the Arcam sounds better??!! :rolleyes: Of course it sounds better - I'd be fecking livid if the Arcam didn't wipe the floor with any AV amp up to £2000 - it bloody well should!! :D :D
 
Of course the Arcam is better Hex, but I was surprised just how bad the SR4200 is at stereo with analog inputs. It's quite a while since I used it like that but I don't remember it being that bad.

Now, something I haven't really dared to do yet but I will tomorrow, is set my DVD player to PCM output and pipe it through my DAC (Tag DAC20, but Chord DAC64 arriving tomorrow :p ) and see just how good something like Lord of the Rings is in stereo alone - I'm not sure I'm prepared to deal with the results :cry:

Michael.
 
Originally posted by michaelab
Now, something I haven't really dared to do yet but I will tomorrow, is set my DVD player to PCM output and pipe it through my DAC (Tag DAC20, but Chord DAC64 arriving tomorrow :p ) and see just how good something like Lord of the Rings is in stereo alone - I'm not sure I'm prepared to deal with the results :cry:

Michael.
Click to expand...

Make sure you also set the DVD to output a downmixed signal. I tried sending a full 5.1 through my DAC and it wasn't pretty!

CLICK CLICK CLICK CLICK CLIck click click.............
 
Right - did the comparison: DVD player PCM into Tag DAC20 into the Arcam vs. DD5.1 surround with the SR4200 (front channels played via the Arcam using pre-outs as I've always done).

Two choice scenes from LOTR (Liv Tyler with Frodo, on horseback being chased by the Nazgul and the Balrog "You Shall not PASS" scene :) ).

Surround won hands down (phew!). First off, the SR4200 is a lot better with digital inputs and secondly, the things you notice as being cr@p when just listening to music are not nearly so apparent in movies and the advantages of surround in adding ambience space and, of course, the 5.1 effects far outweigh the loss in quality (which wasn't even that apparent in this test :eek: )

Panic over :cool:

Michael.
 
:D :D :D :D

...or how to replicate a Sony xx5 (especially 325 and 525) series DVD player - one of the worst pieces of crap I've ever had the misfortune to own - had one for 3 years and the thing nearly killed my enjoyment of watching films...

Roll on end of month when I can get a Pioneer 656A DVD :)
 
Originally posted by wadia-miester
Mike make sure when your using the Dac 64, to switch the time buffer off when using the dvd through it :D makes for intresting film watching :)
Click to expand...
I knew about that little gotcha Tone :D but I used the DAC20 for the test because I don't have any BNC/RCA adapters and my DVD player(s) only have RCA digi outputs.

Michael.
 
Originally posted by wadia-miester
Mike make sure when your using the Dac 64, to switch the time buffer off when using the dvd through it :D makes for intresting film watching :)
Click to expand...

Now we know how they generate the dialogue lag in martial arts films!

:D
 
Originally posted by michaelab
I knew about that little gotcha Tone :D but I used the DAC20 for the test because I don't have any BNC/RCA adapters and my DVD player(s) only have RCA digi outputs.

Michael.
Click to expand...

Mike when your over next I'll send you a couple, I have a few lying about mate. WM
PS I feel It's about time your told Z/G about your new toy Mr Boss sir :D I like the colour change BTW
 

Latest posts

Back
Top