Audyessy and mismatched speakers

[Briz vegas]

Bit the bullet and grabbed a runout Denon 4310 (will arrive next week) to replace my Marantz 730OSE.
Movies are very much a second priority for me but they can still be fun and I like good sound. The detail and atmospheric sounds I was getting before the Marantz died were very impressive. The Marantz based HT responded well to my efforts with power and room response. After reluctantly spending the cash I am hoping the Denon will be better still.

I know matched speakers are ideal (I once had 705/HTM7 across the front), but space and 2 channel priority does not allow any more than one audio setup (I have a spare room but its too small)

I have been happy enough with the HTM7 for movies with my 804s, although I was noticing the increasing gulf between the two as the 2 channel was tweaked.(see profile for system details)

Has anyone found that Audyessy helps to minimise the tonal differences between speakers or am I hoping for too much?

I know that the HTM7 will not match the detail etc of the 804s but minimising the differences in frequency response in theory would help them blend a little better.

[emig5m]

I think you'll be fine with B&W's of the same generation, different series. I used my (the infamous) HTM61 with my 804S and it surely wasn't unlistenable. I find the current 600 and the former S 800 series to be good matches tonally. My 685's seem to do an admirable job in the rears with the 804S/HTM3S up front. Did I notice a difference when I jumped to the HTM3S? Hell yea! Even more-so than the jump from the 683 to the 804S! The detail and airiness was night and day!

On the other hand, when I had my Cerwin Vega surround system I was using their top models for front mains, their middle ground center, but many years newer (seems like Cerwin Vega got worse as the years went on) and their bottom of the barrel rears (to their sub/satellite system) and nothing could make the sound seamless on that system. Everything sounded like a ping-pong game of sound bouncing from channel to channel everything sounded so un-matched.

So in my opinion if you're using similar generations of B&W it's perfectly fine to use mix and matched series because they all sound very similar tonally - auto room EQ will help even more (which I'm using Yamaha's YPAO - it definitely helps clean up my mid bass bloom). Even if you had the matching center, chances are you would still need auto room EQ to some degree anyway as we all know that moving speakers mere inches has an effect on their sound. So now considering the center is in a totally different location from walls compared to the front mains, chances are room correction will always be needed so some degree.

[stuofsci02]

I think you should be alright.. I am using and HTM4S because I still can't find a rosenut HTM3S..

I find the HTM4S is still a great match to the 804s... I am betting the HTM7 won't be too far behind.

[emig5m]

I think you should be alright.. I am using and HTM4S because I still can't find a rosenut HTM3S..

I find the HTM4S is still a great match to the 804s... I am betting the HTM7 won't be too far behind.

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?spkrmoni&1290305499&/B-W-htm3s-center-rosenut-brand

Took two minutes to find one! Brand new in the box too! :T

[stuofsci02]

Thanks emig5m,

I live in Canada so I am trying to find something more local (preferably that I can go look at). The way they tax stuff across the border, $2200 could easily end up being $3000 when all is said and done..

I ended up with the HTM4s that I got local and it is a very capable speaker.. It blows my old HTM61 out of the water (which isn't hard). I might just live with the HTM4s for a while longer. I think I would rather spend the money of some 805s rears before I change the center..

[Briz vegas]

Hi
Well the Denon is in and Audyessy-ed. Result - well its perfectly blended in fact - but it has done it by dropping the centre channel by 5db below the mains. I know that from my own measurements with the Marantz that the centre needs to go down by about 1 or 2 dB.

The auto correction has somehow decided that the centre should be ignored.

I am undecided about the end result. I need to give the amp a few more hours before I decide or start changing things. Problem is the 7300ose was sounding its best ever just before it died. By comparison the Denon is a bit dark sounding almost. Too early to come to any conclusions - at least it ain't bright and harsh - anything but. A bit more central focus would be good also - I might manually adjust it up a few notches and see how that goes.

[ShadowZA]

Congrats, Briz! :T

I agree that it might be too early to draw meaningful conclusions. Give the Denon a bit of time to settle in and then experiment a bit. Good luck & enjpy!

[Kal Rubinson]

Hi
Well the Denon is in and Audyessy-ed. Result - well its perfectly blended in fact - but it has done it by dropping the centre channel by 5db below the mains. I know that from my own measurements with the Marantz that the centre needs to go down by about 1 or 2 dB.

The auto correction has somehow decided that the centre should be ignored.

I doubt the latter as it probably depends on how you measure the output. However, there is nothing to stop you from bumping up the CC level if you wish and still retain the Audyssey corrections.

Kal

[emig5m]

Problem is the 7300ose was sounding its best ever just before it died. By comparison the Denon is a bit dark sounding almost. Too early to come to any conclusions - at least it ain't bright and harsh - anything but. A bit more central focus would be good also - I might manually adjust it up a few notches and see how that goes.

Interesting. I'm now looking into the Denon 3311ci to replace my Yamaha 663 but I wont lie, I normally like a brighter sound. Should I stick with Yamaha? I'm also looking into the new Yamaha A2000 but honestly after my run around with the Yamaha 3900 vs my 663 (the higher end unit didn't offer any better sound quality than the lower model - at least for 2-channel audio - it was basically the same) I kinda just want to steer away from Yamaha for a bit and try something else with a different type of auto room EQ.

[Briz vegas]

Can't really comment on 2 channel performance of the Denon as I use the Conrad Johnson only for that purpose. Given my preference I would currently prefer to have the old Marantz back. It had an open detailed esound that was just wow. In fact it was so good that it seemed to pull apart the sound and you could clearly hear where they edited in pre recorded music tracks for example- differences seemed quite stark.

Mind you alot of things have changed in my system since the Marantz went. I used to think my 15w valve guitar amp with 10 inch driver made my two channel stereo sound wimpy. Not any more. After getting the Naim DAC and a Qbase the 2 channel has alot more body, detail to burn and punch. My point of reference (2 channel sound 90% of the time) is so much better than it was.

Maybe what I am experiencing is merely the gap between good HT and high end two channel.

I should also put my DVD player on the constrained layer platform that I have to get better audio. I heard a big improvement throught the Naim when I tried the NAD dvd as a transport and sat it on the platform.

[emig5m]

Think I should check out Marantz instead? A couple of requirements I need is good room correction and a headphone jack. Some good high end 2 channel units don't have either. :W

[Briz vegas]

It is really hard to say whether the modern Marantz compares with its predecessors. I have read reviews (yeah I know) that have commented on the "new" 2010 marantz sound being quite different to the old.

Room treatment was essential to getting good sound in my room. Fancy correction software will never beat a well tuned room. Yes you can correct for some frequency related problems but room treatment also gives you more detail and a more natural sound. It will also make the job of HT eq easier and more effective.

Regarding amps more generally, I really liked the Marantz but the Conrad Johnson is in a different league.

[beden1]

I'm starting to do research on this new Integra DTR-80.2 9.2-Channel Receiver that looks pretty interesting. http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/r...r-80.2-70.2-fl

Anybody know anything good or bad about it?

[RebelMan]

Fancy correction software will never beat a well tuned room. Yes you can correct for some frequency related problems but room treatment also gives you more detail and a more natural sound. It will also make the job of HT eq easier and more effective.

Sound advice! (Get it, sound advice.) :rofl:

[Hammie]

I'm starting to do research on this new Integra DTR-80.2 9.2-Channel Receiver that looks pretty interesting. http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/r...r-80.2-70.2-fl

Anybody know anything good or bad about it?

I'm looking at the Onkyo Pro PR-SC5508 which is identical but a few hundred less. I will probably get it after the first of the year.

[Kal Rubinson]

I'm looking at the Onkyo Pro PR-SC5508 which is identical but a few hundred less. I will probably get it after the first of the year.

It ain't identical as it has a different warranty and lacks AudysseyPro compatibility.

[emig5m]

Well I picked up the Denon 3311ci today and initial impressions are surprisingly very favorable. First thing I did was update the firmware and then run audyssey. Only thing I changed from audyssey's auto settings is setting my fronts and center to small instead of large/full range and crossed over at 100Hz just like I had my Yamaha setup.

Overall sound is clearer and more open and much less fatiguing at high volume (none at all). Center channel dialog is a much noticed improvement - the Denon is just overall clearer and more open. I didn't expect getting more openness from electronics - I thought that was only with going from non-fst mids to FST mids, lol. :B I like openness, openness rocks! :rofl: Is this due to audyssey vs YPAO? I don't know, but my impressions of the 3311 compared to my 663 is much more favorable than the Yamaha 3900 (which was the same baseline sound of the 663).

Someone on AVS stated that coming off the 663 the 3311 made his rear channels come to life - I'm not experiencing this. The rear channels don't seem to get that much more of a workout than the 663 gave them. But overall, everything seems better sound-wise - even my main priority - 2 channel audio. I'm also really liking Dynamic EQ - really gets the tonal quality consistent between different volume ranges. This is actually one of the main features that made me take home the Denon instead of the Yamaha A2000.

As much as I liked the boost in sound quality that my Yamaha had over my previous Sonys (un-listenable garbage IMO, I think even a Walmart system can compete with Sony), I feel that I made a wise choice jumping ship over to Denon with Audyssey & dynamic EQ.

People say that Denon has a darker/duller sound than say a Yamaha which is supposedly a brighter sound. I was a little worried about this since I'm a detail freak that normally likes a brighter sound. I'm also not really experiencing this. The Denon has perfectly crystal clear top end and not something I would consider dark or dull AT ALL. It's very, very clear and open! Not to mention I'm hearing even more fine background detail than my Yamaha - just a little more smoother and without any kind of fatigue after blasting an action packed HD Bluray like say Batman or Transformers.

I gotta say uh... I was expecting to box it up and take it back the first day like I did with the Yamaha 3900, but, I think this one might be a keeper! So far I'm very happy with my first Denon! :T Would have the new Yamaha A2000 been an equal to the Denon? I was actually playing with the Yamaha A2000 today hooked up to B&W CM9s & CMC2 with a REL sub and it sounded good, but absolutely no where near as open as this Denon and my 800 series. The CMC2 on the Yamaha A2000 was very chesty sounding (but I have no idea if it was setup with YPAO or just running the default settings). I dunno, but either way, I just didn't want to get stuck with the same sound performance of my 663 again. I wanted something noticeable and I got it with the Denon! :T

[emig5m]

I doubt the latter as it probably depends on how you measure the output. However, there is nothing to stop you from bumping up the CC level if you wish and still retain the Audyssey corrections.

Kal

This is one thing that is impressing me with the Denon 3311... The dialog is so clear and right there even at low volume that there's absolutely no thought in my mind about needing to increase the volume of the center channel over what Audyssey set it to. Really impressed with the end result of the Denon + Audyssey here on my system. :T BTW, Audyssey only set my center 0.5dB lower than my mains....

[Briz vegas]

update. After 2 more movies with the 4310 I no longer feel that the Marantz was better. The Denon is possibly just more subtle in its approach. I find the more I use it the more it impresses.

Regarding detail, its easy to confuse a less full sound with a more detailed sound.

In regard to electronics not giving "air", I think you need to do more experimenting before saying things like that. I say this because I home demoed Sort Cone anti resonance feet under my DAC a few weeks back.

Before doing the demo I felt I was getting more detail and "air" from my 804s than I though possible thanks to my DAC and a host of other improvements. With the little sort cone feet in place under the DAC it opened up the sound more by removing a slightly congested chesty-ness, giving more sound of the recording space around the vocals and instruments. It removed a constraint on vocals so that in the loud parts it was not slightly shut in. It seemed a little crazy as my DAC is already on cone feet and a constrained layer platform. The sort cones seemed to shave away another thin layer between me and the recording. It really is amazing how small system refinements can keep providing dividends long after you think you are getting the best from your speakers.