Beyond 9.2 - Is it time for affordable Pre - Pro to handle Dolby Atmos / Dts X ?

[elangoas]

Hi All,

With the advent of object based audio, which demands more speakers to have a great home theater experience, is it time for AVR manufacturer's to consider an affordable Pre-power combination?.

Anything more than 9.2 Capable AVR, i think it is better they separate Pre & power.. Something like 13.2 capable Pre-amplifier and 2 x 7 channel amplifier's.. This way, one can always settle with just 7.2 if there is a limitation and go full 13.2 if there are no limitations..

Share your thoughts on the same..

 

[rpmahale]

Emotiva BasX series Pre Amp MC700 and Power Amp A700 is may be currently the cheapest option for 7.2 mode of configuration but MC700 doesn't support Dolby Atmos and DTS X. Few AV receiver manufacturer offere 7 channels onboard amplification with 2 to 4 channels pre out for additional surround/Atmos speakers. It is difficult for manufacturer to pack all the technology in one box with affordable price tag. So manufacturer provide solutions for all individuals from 2.1 to 11.2 .

Sent from my Le X507 using Tapatalk

 

[elangoas]

It is difficult for manufacturer to pack all the technology in one box with affordable price tag.

Exactly.. Not sure how much separating Pre-Pro would cost additionally..

But keeping in mind that most AVR require only 50W/ channel all channels driven, I mean a simple pre-amplifier with 13.2 or more RCA Pre-outs and a power amplifier that can do 50w/channel all channels driven should be fine..

Kind of a budget Pre-pro..

 

[rpmahale]

Most of the budget and mid priced AVR design to give 50w/all channel in reality but manufacturer jackup them to the power figure to 100 to 160 W. So the issue of 50W/Channels doesn't arise. The manufacturing cost for two sets ( Pre-Power) , patented technology used, I/O interface included etc will definitely definately increase the cost of final product which may be out of budget of average user, who are the driving force behind the market. I have audition Anthem AVR MRX 520 costing MRP 120k. This AVR is as good as Pre-Power set which may cost you about 100k after discount. This is a good price for Anthem premium sound signature. Again you compromises to 5.2 set only. So within the moderate budget you will get either good quality with limited quantity or good quantity with limited quality.

Sent from my Le X507 using Tapatalk

 

[elangoas]

Most of the budget and mid priced AVR design to give 50w/all channel in reality but manufacturer jackup them to the power figure to 100 to 160 W. So the issue of 50W/Channels doesn't arise.

Think even flagships do the same.. They offer slightly little more power than the mid priced ones..

The manufacturing cost for two sets ( Pre-Power) , patented technology used, I/O interface included etc will definitely definately increase the cost of final product which may be out of budget of average user, who are the driving force behind the market.

Only the manufacturing cost might increase, but will offer lot of flexibility to the users..I think, rest all remains the same for AVR (or) Pre-Pro..

I have audition Anthem AVR MRX 520 costing MRP 120k. This AVR is as good as Pre-Power set which may cost you about 100k after discount. This is a good price for Anthem premium sound signature. Again you compromises to 5.2 set only. So within the moderate budget you will get either good quality with limited quantity or good quantity with limited quality.

I have never auditioned Anthem, but read good things abt it.. Letz take the case of US...Anthem MRX 520, a 5.2 AVR is offered for $1,400 and Denon X 4300, a 11.2 capable AVR for the same price.. So defenetly, more is always possible..

I think manufacturers should consider producing only 2 model's.

- A 7.2 AVR as entry model.. Leave it to the user to decide if he wants to go 7.2 (or) stop it with 5.1 (or) 2.0 (or) 2.1..
- A pre-pro with 13.2 with budget power amplifiers.. (Am not greedy)hyeah:

 

[rpmahale]

Is there need of onboard Dolby and DTS decoder today where LPCM sounds much better than about mentioned format. Instead of this, Blu-ray disk encoded with 7.1 channels LPCM track while AVR with high quality DAC and directly amplifying LPCM track. This will definitely bypass today's expensive patented technology which overall reduce the product cost. Manufacturer will be able to deliver quality product at justified cost. New thought, may be work.

Sent from my Le X507 using Tapatalk

 

[drkrack]

Probably adding more channels won't benefit much after this I believe. Instead concentrating on proper signal processor, better DAC for each channel and improving amplification + overall SQ should be the objective.

I checked a Anthem Mrx 720 and Marantz SR 7010 as a possible upgrade for my denon x2200w. Anthem was much superior in performance over Marantz but it was out of my budget as well. I dropped the idea of getting Marantz as it wasn't a remarkable upgrade at a additional cost of 1L, save for one more year and buy Anthem is what I finally decided. My Denon isn't markedly outdated anyway.

Another good option is Emotiva XMC1 (it's a 7.2 BTW) processor with DIRAC Live, where Dirac is inbuilt so you can alter everything to the best of your listening preferences. Add a power amp like Emotiva XPA GEN3 and you're done with the amp part of the story, future modules can be added according to Emotiva policy. But it'll cost close to 3L in India, but worthwhile considering the advantages of Dirac on board.

Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk

 

[elangoas]

Probably adding more channels won't benefit much after this I believe.

How many channels do you consider is good enough to enjoy Atmos / Dts X?

Instead concentrating on proper signal processor, better DAC for each channel and improving amplification + overall SQ should be the objective.

I think this has improved with year on year models, marginally in almost all AVR's..

I checked a Anthem Mrx 720 and Marantz SR 7010 as a possible upgrade for my denon x2200w. Anthem was much superior in performance over Marantz but it was out of my budget as well. I dropped the idea of getting Marantz as it wasn't a remarkable upgrade at a additional cost of 1L, save for one more year and buy Anthem is what I finally decided. My Denon isn't markedly outdated anyway.

Were both of them fully calibrated?

Another good option is Emotiva XMC1 (it's a 7.2 BTW) processor with DIRAC Live, where Dirac is inbuilt so you can alter everything to the best of your listening preferences. Add a power amp like Emotiva XPA GEN3 and you're done with the amp part of the story, future modules can be added according to Emotiva policy. But it'll cost close to 3L in India, but worthwhile considering the advantages of Dirac on board

Even though, it has Dirac Live, it is limited only to 7.2 channels and cost a bomb (IMO) in India..

I recollect reading that Dirac Live is limited to 7.1 channel only..

With Denon & Marantz you have the flexibility of calibrating upto 11.2 channels..

 

[drkrack]

How many channels do you consider is good enough to enjoy Atmos / Dts X?

9.2 is already a decent number, adding more drivers to the same listening area will not be as incremental as we think, unfortunately in my experience I felt its more distracting experience than immersive one. BTW I enjoy movies in 2.1 config as well. Probably psychoacoustics to blame here.

[/QUOTE]
I think this has improved with year on year models, marginally in almost all AVR's..
[/QUOTE]


Yes I do agree, but still inferior to quality stereo amp and and a dedicated DAC setup in SQ for music. They're (Manfacturers) concentrating more on adding user friendly features like WiFi, BT, Airplay, Different Codec support etc but skimping on sound quality per se. Even the Wattage/THd figures are inflated and cannot be relied upon. Build quality, decent PSU & Quality of components isn't great in midrange receivers also. They're prone to failure much often than their stereo counterparts. The way they're putting the resources, they may come up with upgradable Android OS on AVR anytime soon ; the focus is on adding more and more features instead of SQ.


[/QUOTE]
Were both of them fully calibrated?
[/QUOTE]


Yes they were, its a well reputed demo room.



[/QUOTE]
Even though, it has Dirac Live, it is limited only to 7.2 channels and cost a bomb (IMO) in India..

I recollect reading that Dirac Live is limited to 7.1 channel only..

With Denon & Marantz you have the flexibility of calibrating upto 11.2 channels..[/QUOTE]



What's the availability of content above 7.1 currently, Even atmos for that matter? The content availability is scanty at the moment. Downloaded content suffers from encoding issues, Netflix is limited to 5.1, 4K blu-rays are pretty costly.

Audessey though, calibrates 11.2 its issues are a plenty, its more erratic in terms of final output. Dirac is more customizable in that sense and you can switch profiles easily.

 

[elangoas]

9.2 is already a decent number, adding more drivers to the same listening area will not be as incremental as we think, unfortunately in my experience I felt its more distracting experience than immersive one. BTW I enjoy movies in 2.1 config as well. Probably psychoacoustics to blame here.

:sad: if one has 200 Sqft of lengthy room, 7.2.6 would be great..

What's the availability of content above 7.1 currently, Even atmos for that matter? The content availability is scanty at the moment. Downloaded content suffers from encoding issues, Netflix is limited to 5.1, 4K blu-rays are pretty costly.

Have been able to source about 16 BR Rips in Atmos & still counting..I think it will only increase over time..

Audessey though, calibrates 11.2 its issues are a plenty, its more erratic in terms of final output. Dirac is more customizable in that sense and you can switch profiles easily.

I have had only good experience with Audyssey.. Yet to catch Dirac..

 

[RajithKumar]

I believe for rooms more than 200 sqft should have channels more than 13.2 ,for example take Trinov Altitude 32 ,it can process 32 channels (I don't have personal experience of Trinnov ,but I'm telling from my understanding) but cost of such processor will be Nuclear bomb here.
What I heard that one of the user of Trinnov is that some Atmos contents have many bed layers ,that an array of speakers in the bed channel will be bring the potential of Atmos codec.
However such setups will be only a dream for many HT peoples.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

 

[elangoas]

I believe for rooms more than 200 sqft should have channels more than 13.2 ,for example take Trinov Altitude 32 ,it can process 32 channels (I don't have personal experience of Trinnov ,but I'm telling from my understanding) but cost of such processor will be Nuclear bomb here.

Even if you have a room less than 200 sqft, you can squeeze a 9.2.6 layout, with small satellites..

I think it is more to placement of speaker in the suggested angle/location than the room layout..

A 7.2.4 capable AVR is out of reach here for many..So a processor will only be a dream..

 

[drkrack]

Even if you have a room less than 200 sqft, you can squeeze a 9.2.6 layout, with small satellites..

I think it is more to placement of speaker in the suggested angle/location than the room layout..

A 7.2.4 capable AVR is out of reach here for many..So a processor will only be a dream..

Hopefully I'm not OT, I'm considering a 7.2.4 setup with my Marantz SR 7010. Other than fronts and center I'm planning to go with Polk OWM3 for most of the other locations. The mounting and angulating OWM3 seems less problematic, the matching between Polk and Marantz seems to be decent enough & they're easy to drive as well.
The pre pro setup for AVR would be pretty costly affair as of now.

I will need some inputs & suggestions on this plan from @elangoas & others using Polk OWM3 in their setup.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elangoas]

Hopefully I'm not OT, I'm considering a 7.2.4 setup with my Marantz SR 7010.

Ok..Your AVR supports flexible configuration.. 9.2.2 using front wides & a standard 7.2.4 layout..Hope you thought abt 9.2.2..

Other than fronts and center I'm planning to go with Polk OWM3 for most of the other locations.

Great.. May be all 11 identical speaker..

The mounting and angulating OWM3 seems less problematic, the matching between Polk and Marantz seems to be decent enough & they're easy to drive as well.

ok..I thought you were considering options of in-ceiling speakers..

The pre pro setup for AVR would be pretty costly affair as of now.

True

I will need some inputs & suggestions on this plan from @elangoas & others using Polk OWM3 in their setup.

Sure.. I had collected critical inputs from FM sdurani & manoj.p on speaker placement and their importance.. I will also pitch in with inputs..

 

[kmathan88]

@elangoas good read on 7.1.4 and beyond.

https://www.highdefdigest.com/blog/dolby-atmos-beyond-7-1-4-part-1/

Read all 4 parts of his post. For now I will keep dreaming. Hopefully 11 channel or more AVR will be affordsble in future.

 

[newlash09]

In my limited experience, the biggest problem with any HT is clarity and dynamic head room. Both of which can be improved by adding decent power amps to pre-outs of a decent mid price amp. The advantage of a pre-pro will certainly be with the addition of better and plentiful DACs. And purer signal processing with less interference from the Poweramp section.

I already use a 2 channel amp for my front L&R. Next plan is to add a amp for the centre channel. Once I have all main speakers being driven by seperate Amp, I will keep changing my AVR's as and when they break down with mid prices AVR's that just give me the required channels 5.1.4. So I will probably never spend a lot on a single AVR.

I think it would be safer to invest on external amplification in the long run, than invest in one high end AVR.

 

[elangoas]

@elangoas good read on 7.1.4 and beyond.

https://www.highdefdigest.com/blog/dolby-atmos-beyond-7-1-4-part-1/

Read all 4 parts of his post. For now I will keep dreaming. Hopefully 11 channel or more AVR will be affordsble in future.

Thank You.. Yes.. saw this.. 3 AVR's is just awesome.. Has been done very thoughtfully..

 

[elangoas]

3 yrs since the time this thread was created, and AVR seems to have become more capable in the form of 13.2 or 15.2 pre-outs..

If adding XLR pre-outs will make it flagship offering and expensive, wondering why not any manufacturer provide 13.2 (or) 15.2 RCA pre-outs capable processor to keep the costs down ?..

13.2 (or) 15.2 RCA pre-outs only as budget offering and with RCA & XLR Pre-outs as premium offering ?..