As an audio enthusiast. I’m a big fan of SACD’s, Turntable playing at times, OSD’s and backlit remotes. We also stream sources at times above 48khz using spatial audio. This unit is a flop in all those areas. The touchscreen haptics alone sum this unit up IMHO. The remote having separated the categories is a nice idea. Thanks for the review Jon. Enjoy the music powerfully, accurately, and of course loudly. 😊
This is exactly what these videos are aimed to achieve. My goal is to present the capabilities, features and performance of each AV Processor and AV Receiver I review as clearly as possible so you can make informed decisions. The lack of DSD support, on-screen display (OSD), poor touchscreen sensitivity and ability to handle sources over 48kHz are limitations that don't have a work-around. I feel that it is better to use an external phono pre-amp (budget permitting) as those built into most AV Receivers/Processors don't support Moving Coil (MC) cartridges - only Moving Magnet (MM) and likely don't perform at the same level regardless. I like the Parasound phono pre-amp I have as it has balanced outputs so I can have my turntable on the other side of the room away from rumble caused by front speakers. Some may say that they use a universal remote, but I still like using the individual remotes that came with each component - so yes, the backlight would still be helpful from my perspective. Jon
Although spatial audio uses high BIT RATES spatial audio doesn't use use high SAMPLING RATES. So, Dirac and the upmixers work great on spatial audio. High bit rates are a totally different thing. The HTP-1 supports 96khz through HDMI inputs - just not USB. Dirac and upmixers are limited to 48khz, and those actually improve sound quality FAR more than 96khz or 192khz. The included remote is indeed crappy. The web UI works great from your phone, so you'd either use that or a universal remote, like a Harmony. I actually like how there's no OSD to interrupt movies every time I adjust the volume, but if an OSD is important to you, you'll need to look elsewhere.
@@robcohen thx for the reply rc. To clarify your spatial audio comment, Auro 3D currently up-mixes spatial audio at a high sampling rate of 96khz (it will be even higher in the very near future according to it’s founder, Wilfred Van Baelen). For immersive listening, we use Auromatic 3D to upmix our three main high resolution sources which have at least this rate….SACD’s, DVD Audio, and BluRay pure audio. 1. The SACD sampling rate is 2822.4 kHz and the resolution is one bit. 2. DVD Audio supports 16, 20 and 24-bit samples at sampling rates of 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4 and 192 kHz, 3. Pure Audio Blu-ray supports a sampling rate of up to 192 kHz and a sampling depth of 24 bit.
@@jb.2986 okay, so it sounds like you really meant high sampling rates. I used to use Dirac Live for PC, which supports all sampling rates. I found that the before & after improvement with Dirac dramatically overshadowed the subtle difference with sampling rates. Purists may balk, but once properly set up, IMO, Dirac sounds MORE pure, not less. If you have a PC source and a calibrated mic, you can use that version to try Dirac for free. The HTP-1 downsamples DSD to 48khz PCM. Same story. If you use an analog DSD source, it will do ADC at 96/24 unless Dirac or upmixers are engaged (which I'd strongly recommend.) If you want native DSD support, look elsewhere. If you only care about the end result, the end result is great. Internal processing is 32-bit floating point, downsampled to 24-bits at the DAC with a 2-stage volume resulting in exceptional SNR. If you do encounter audible noise (yuck), you can trust that it's your source or amp. There are a handful of $20k+ processors that can do high-end room correction at 96khz, but the PC-based room correction is a cost effective way to do that. You end up sacrificing spatial audio and compatibility with different sources. Not even close to worth it, IMO.
You must have been working around the clock. Nice work! There is so much to like about this product. Your work is so important to those of us who cannot directly compare these processors. I don’t know if it’s just my open floor plan type room or if I’m just missing something but my experience (2.1 only) this far that DIRAC does a good job of blending the speakers and sun but the overall sound is not as good as I get with REW/PEQ. I really like that you can save so many DIRAC calibrations. I can extend my TV out 30” so I’ve saved narrow and wide calibrations with the TV pulled out and pushed back. I use one just for balancing my left and right speakers to get the best center image I can if the levels are off when using PEQ but I can also use a shelf filter in the PEQ to balance them as well. The best DIRAC sound I’ve gotten so far was just performing one measurement in the sweet spot and skipping all the other measurements. It would be nice if you could save multiple PEQ calibrations in the future. It would be nice to A/B test multiple PEQ sets with different crossovers and room curves. If there is a way to do that I haven’t found it yet. I had read somewhere that the easiest way to get your phase right on your subwoofer was to play a steady frequency at the crossover point, and the microphone at your listening position, and then just watch a decibel meter. Turn your phase on the sub until you reach the loudest spot. The idea is that if the sub and mains are in phase then they should be adding to each others volume. That must work pretty well because DIRAC only added 0.1 ms to the delay. When I went through the process of matching the voltage, I found that 1.6 volts was the result while my amps accept 1.7 volts. So I went with the 1.6 volts. I guess the idea is that the processor should clip just before your amps clip so a slightly lower voltage seemed to make sense, but certainly no expert here. I agree that PEQ and DIRAC should not be run at the same time. I think your just adding too much boosting and cutting and the end result may be smoother but with a loss of quality, almost like it’s adding distortion. Anyway, thanks again. Can’t wait for the sound comparison.
Again super thank you for your Super Thanks donation - wow! I have noticed the same about Dirac. Dirac certainly improved the sound quality but I too have been able to achieve more by setting filters manually with PEQ and the aid of other tools. However, for those that don’t want to attempt a more involved process, Dirac is a good option. I like your sub phase method - makes sense. I used REW to set the phase on my two subwoofers. Double filters can get confusing and cause conflicts real fast unless you are an expert. -Jon
"The best DIRAC sound I’ve gotten so far was just performing one measurement in the sweet spot and skipping all the other measurements." Can you eloborate on that please? I am one that always moves speakers around, toe-in, location, height, etc. So, I kind of get tired of having to re-run dirac. I was honestly even considering switching to a simpler room correction system for my ever changing setups. What do you think contributed to having the best results, with only 1 measurement point? What dirac version do you have, was it done with the umik 1? Thanks. This would be a huge time saver for me
@@sammy10001 Yeah, I was trying everything to do with speaker and sub placement and it got tiresome running 9 or more sweeps to see what you think. I’m using the Umik-2 but don’t know if that would matter. I should be on the latest DIRAC software for Windows since my first time installing it was two weeks ago. So the process is simple. Just go through the first few steps of the calibration, choosing your processor, mic, and the narrow seating position. The first measurement is all ways in the center head area. So choose to measure and let it do the sweep. The next position will then be highlighted but down at the bottom you can just click on continue to calibration filter (or something to that effect; I can’t see the screen until tomorrow). At that point Dirac just has one sweep of each speaker and will calculate an EQ. I think it sounds best because it’s not averaging, it’s just one measurement. I only have 2.1 speakers currently so I can’t comment on the surround processing or multi-sub calibration so your mileage may vary. Seems like every speaker I order is on back order.
@@sammy10001After another all nighter, I did start getting better sound than my single mic measurement. I did the 9 position measurements but only moved the mic six inches left, right, forward,and backwards. I also limited the range at the top end to 9000 hz and experimented with Harmon room curves that I stumbled across trying to find out if you should boost the bass in the room curve. I had noticed that in REW the default room curve looks different than the room curve in DIRAC. Well, Harmon headroom curves you could download and load them into DIRAC at the filter design stage. This may be common knowledge but I’m just learning. So then I experimented with several crossover frequencies and room curves and saved them to different slots in the HTP-1 and while saving them I used the description field to note which room curve and crossover I used. Then, after I was all done I did another PEQ calibration inn REW using Jon’s advice about using DIRAC Bypass to retain the delays and trims. After all that I realized I don’t see a way to see the description I entered for each DIRAC slot. So, right now, I’m think my #4 slot sounds better than my PEQ but I don’t know what crossover or curve I used for that. Perhaps reconnecting with the DIRAC application will allow me to see that but that will have to wait. I also realized I did something wrong on that last PEQ so I’ll have to redo that again to be fully certain that DIRAC is sounding better than PEQ now. Entering all those PEQ numbers manually is a job. Anyway, I’m getting really good sound quality now but noticed that the trims on the left and right channels are really high (meaning they are set to lower negative numbers than normal). I must have had the subwoofer volume set too high. That means my volume now has to be a higher number than before, by a lot. So, I guess I need to redo it again. But listened to a lot of music and two movies now and am happy with what it sounds like using DIRAC.
@@williamhicks2763 there are a number of tricks to getting the best results from Dirac. It does better with more measurement positions. Otherwise, you can end up with "over correction" where it corrects things that shouldn't be corrected. I've had the best results with the "focused" measurement pattern. Another thing that I found really helps imaging is to use REW's "system delay" to perfectly center the mic between L&R speakers before the first center Dirac measurement position. Some more Dirac tips: Start by smoothly following your speakers' natural response and iterate the target curve from there to see what sounds best. Disable PEQ prior to Dirac. Using both usually isn't necessary. In general, Dirac should improve clarity & imaging and make it easy for you to fine tune your desired target curve.
Needs analogue bypass. If I'm using snappy source (tape etc) I'd want to keep it analogue. Or if my source DAC is better. Plus could do with two more channels want to stick with 9.3.4 plus two spare for extra height or maybe fourth sub
I’d like to see that and it would be nice if a digital pass through could be added but I haven’t seen anyone do that. Well, the RMC-1 has a digital output but I could find out anything about that and what it can be used for, even asking Emotiva. It seems I keep trying to avoid it but I may be forced to have two systems, one system for 2 channel and another for home theater and I guess a switch box or manually switching speaker cables on the mains.
Analog bypass is not a common thing with AV Processors. The market is treading more towards 100% digital only (no legacy) models like the McIntosh MX100. I remember when Sony had to create an analog companion piece around 1998 to compliment their AV Processor. What you may look into is the Parasound JC 2 BP pre-amplifier which is designed to work after any AV processor. It lets you switch your mains from the sources connected to the JC 2 BP to the mains output of your AV Processor. It has two balanced inputs and one balanced output plus six unbalance inputs. I feel that 17 or 19 channels are a better count. Anthem got that right. Lets you setup 9.2.6 (17) and 9.4.6 (19) which I consider to be a full immersive audio configuration without getting into expended replicated side channels etc. -Jon
I ordered the Umik-2 from MiniDSP and I think the shipping was $15 and it took a week or maybe longer to get it. If I did it again I would have rather had it fast than the small amount I saved.
Yes - when you add in shipping the numbers get closer. I thought about that at just before I said the direct mini DSP was the lowest price. And yes, their shipping isn’t that fast. -Jon
Sony is next on my list. I was actually planning to get on in this month, but I could no longer purchase from Amazon as planned. I then noticed that the Monoprice HTP-1 was available after a long period and felt I needed to grab one while they were still in stock. The Arcam AV41 is very similar to the HTP-1 and I felt that was a great pairing. Once those are complete I will pursue the Sony again. -Jon
Jon, it sounds like you are saying that if you are using PEQ then you should still set the delays under the calibration tab and then use Dirac Bypass rather than Dirac Off. is that right?
I believe that when you want to use 100% PEQ, the also set the trims and delays via HTP-1 calibration page with Dirac = OFF. If Dirac is set to bypass, then the HTP-1 will use the values set by Dirac but bypasses the Dirac filter only. -Jon
@@ripewave It seems that DIRAC is limited to 48 kHz and the only way I’m getting higher sample rates is to use the Direct mode and DIRAC Bypass. Even Native and Stereo are limiting the Encoder Sample Rate. That means the only way to get the most out of 96 kHz files is to use Direct and DIRAC bypass which means a good PEQ is needed and must be switched on for music streaming. Just an extra step but one that requires the browser interface as far as I know. It would be nice if it could automatically engage the PEQ when placed on DIRAC Bypass. So DIRAC is not a replacement for PEQ in this case.
Many Dirac implementations are limited to 48kHz - Monoprice is not alone with this feature gap. It would be good to know which model go beyond 48kHz with Dirac enabled. -Jon
If you are running Dirac on a 2.1 system, you may be better to look at using a MiniDSP which supports 96kHz or the PC version of Dirac Live which supports up to 192kHz.
I gave the Marantz AV7706 credit for 11.2 (13 channels) as the manual states independent control of both subwoofers. From page 11: The unit has two subwoofer output capability and can adjust the level and delay for each subwoofer individually. Jon
I wonder if using the BEQ Designer would allow for direct export of the PEQ numbers to the HTP-1. Entering all those numbers manually takes so long and that’s the only way I know how to do it so far. It would be nice if there was an option in REW to do that like there is in DIRAC.
I guess BEQ is for bass and not a REW alternative so I guess that wouldn’t solve the problem of manually entering numbers. Sorry, I misunderstood that.
I am in the same place as you. I would rather have the PEQ filters import without the need for manual entry. However, I won’t know for sure if their is a method supported by the HTP-1 until I try. My guess is no. I was surprised when I discovered that Dirac was not able to set the crossovers in the HTP-1 automatically and had to manually enter. I feel that while the HTP-1 has some unique features that sets it apart, it is lacking functionality I expect from an AV Processor. It is these elements which keeps the HTP-1 from being a leading solution. -Jon
@@ripewave Agreed. It’s so close to being truly great that it is disappointing they indicated it doesn’t need an upgrade. And while we’re at it, would it kill these companies to let us save multiple PEQs so we could A/B test the changes? It was nice to see so many DIRAC slots.
BEQDesigner does have support for the HTP-1, but the most convenient way to load BEQ filters is to skip BEQDesigner and load BEQ filters directly from the HTP-1's custom UI.
As an audio enthusiast. I’m a big fan of SACD’s, Turntable playing at times, OSD’s and backlit remotes. We also stream sources at times above 48khz using spatial audio. This unit is a flop in all those areas. The touchscreen haptics alone sum this unit up IMHO. The remote having separated the categories is a nice idea. Thanks for the review Jon. Enjoy the music powerfully, accurately, and of course loudly. 😊
This is exactly what these videos are aimed to achieve. My goal is to present the capabilities, features and performance of each AV Processor and AV Receiver I review as clearly as possible so you can make informed decisions. The lack of DSD support, on-screen display (OSD), poor touchscreen sensitivity and ability to handle sources over 48kHz are limitations that don't have a work-around.
I feel that it is better to use an external phono pre-amp (budget permitting) as those built into most AV Receivers/Processors don't support Moving Coil (MC) cartridges - only Moving Magnet (MM) and likely don't perform at the same level regardless. I like the Parasound phono pre-amp I have as it has balanced outputs so I can have my turntable on the other side of the room away from rumble caused by front speakers.
Some may say that they use a universal remote, but I still like using the individual remotes that came with each component - so yes, the backlight would still be helpful from my perspective.
Jon
Although spatial audio uses high BIT RATES spatial audio doesn't use use high SAMPLING RATES. So, Dirac and the upmixers work great on spatial audio. High bit rates are a totally different thing. The HTP-1 supports 96khz through HDMI inputs - just not USB. Dirac and upmixers are limited to 48khz, and those actually improve sound quality FAR more than 96khz or 192khz.
The included remote is indeed crappy. The web UI works great from your phone, so you'd either use that or a universal remote, like a Harmony.
I actually like how there's no OSD to interrupt movies every time I adjust the volume, but if an OSD is important to you, you'll need to look elsewhere.
@@robcohen thx for the reply rc. To clarify your spatial audio comment, Auro 3D currently up-mixes spatial audio at a high sampling rate of 96khz (it will be even higher in the very near future according to it’s founder, Wilfred Van Baelen).
For immersive listening, we use Auromatic 3D to upmix our three main high resolution sources which have at least this rate….SACD’s, DVD Audio, and BluRay pure audio.
1. The SACD sampling rate is 2822.4 kHz and the resolution is one bit.
2. DVD Audio supports 16, 20 and 24-bit samples at sampling rates of 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4 and 192 kHz,
3. Pure Audio Blu-ray supports a sampling rate of up to 192 kHz and a sampling depth of 24 bit.
@@jb.2986 okay, so it sounds like you really meant high sampling rates. I used to use Dirac Live for PC, which supports all sampling rates. I found that the before & after improvement with Dirac dramatically overshadowed the subtle difference with sampling rates. Purists may balk, but once properly set up, IMO, Dirac sounds MORE pure, not less. If you have a PC source and a calibrated mic, you can use that version to try Dirac for free.
The HTP-1 downsamples DSD to 48khz PCM. Same story. If you use an analog DSD source, it will do ADC at 96/24 unless Dirac or upmixers are engaged (which I'd strongly recommend.) If you want native DSD support, look elsewhere. If you only care about the end result, the end result is great.
Internal processing is 32-bit floating point, downsampled to 24-bits at the DAC with a 2-stage volume resulting in exceptional SNR. If you do encounter audible noise (yuck), you can trust that it's your source or amp.
There are a handful of $20k+ processors that can do high-end room correction at 96khz, but the PC-based room correction is a cost effective way to do that. You end up sacrificing spatial audio and compatibility with different sources. Not even close to worth it, IMO.
Lots of great information provided - thanks. I was give all these extra though. -Jon
You must have been working around the clock. Nice work! There is so much to like about this product. Your work is so important to those of us who cannot directly compare these processors. I don’t know if it’s just my open floor plan type room or if I’m just missing something but my experience (2.1 only) this far that DIRAC does a good job of blending the speakers and sun but the overall sound is not as good as I get with REW/PEQ. I really like that you can save so many DIRAC calibrations. I can extend my TV out 30” so I’ve saved narrow and wide calibrations with the TV pulled out and pushed back. I use one just for balancing my left and right speakers to get the best center image I can if the levels are off when using PEQ but I can also use a shelf filter in the PEQ to balance them as well. The best DIRAC sound I’ve gotten so far was just performing one measurement in the sweet spot and skipping all the other measurements. It would be nice if you could save multiple PEQ calibrations in the future. It would be nice to A/B test multiple PEQ sets with different crossovers and room curves. If there is a way to do that I haven’t found it yet.
I had read somewhere that the easiest way to get your phase right on your subwoofer was to play a steady frequency at the crossover point, and the microphone at your listening position, and then just watch a decibel meter. Turn your phase on the sub until you reach the loudest spot. The idea is that if the sub and mains are in phase then they should be adding to each others volume. That must work pretty well because DIRAC only added 0.1 ms to the delay.
When I went through the process of matching the voltage, I found that 1.6 volts was the result while my amps accept 1.7 volts. So I went with the 1.6 volts. I guess the idea is that the processor should clip just before your amps clip so a slightly lower voltage seemed to make sense, but certainly no expert here.
I agree that PEQ and DIRAC should not be run at the same time. I think your just adding too much boosting and cutting and the end result may be smoother but with a loss of quality, almost like it’s adding distortion.
Anyway, thanks again. Can’t wait for the sound comparison.
Again super thank you for your Super Thanks donation - wow!
I have noticed the same about Dirac. Dirac certainly improved the sound quality but I too have been able to achieve more by setting filters manually with PEQ and the aid of other tools. However, for those that don’t want to attempt a more involved process, Dirac is a good option.
I like your sub phase method - makes sense. I used REW to set the phase on my two subwoofers.
Double filters can get confusing and cause conflicts real fast unless you are an expert. -Jon
"The best DIRAC sound I’ve gotten so far was just performing one measurement in the sweet spot and skipping all the other measurements."
Can you eloborate on that please? I am one that always moves speakers around, toe-in, location, height, etc. So, I kind of get tired of having to re-run dirac. I was honestly even considering switching to a simpler room correction system for my ever changing setups.
What do you think contributed to having the best results, with only 1 measurement point? What dirac version do you have, was it done with the umik 1?
Thanks. This would be a huge time saver for me
@@sammy10001 Yeah, I was trying everything to do with speaker and sub placement and it got tiresome running 9 or more sweeps to see what you think. I’m using the Umik-2 but don’t know if that would matter. I should be on the latest DIRAC software for Windows since my first time installing it was two weeks ago.
So the process is simple. Just go through the first few steps of the calibration, choosing your processor, mic, and the narrow seating position. The first measurement is all ways in the center head area. So choose to measure and let it do the sweep. The next position will then be highlighted but down at the bottom you can just click on continue to calibration filter (or something to that effect; I can’t see the screen until tomorrow). At that point Dirac just has one sweep of each speaker and will calculate an EQ. I think it sounds best because it’s not averaging, it’s just one measurement. I only have 2.1 speakers currently so I can’t comment on the surround processing or multi-sub calibration so your mileage may vary. Seems like every speaker I order is on back order.
@@sammy10001After another all nighter, I did start getting better sound than my single mic measurement. I did the 9 position measurements but only moved the mic six inches left, right, forward,and backwards. I also limited the range at the top end to 9000 hz and experimented with Harmon room curves that I stumbled across trying to find out if you should boost the bass in the room curve. I had noticed that in REW the default room curve looks different than the room curve in DIRAC. Well, Harmon headroom curves you could download and load them into DIRAC at the filter design stage.
This may be common knowledge but I’m just learning. So then I experimented with several crossover frequencies and room curves and saved them to different slots in the HTP-1 and while saving them I used the description field to note which room curve and crossover I used. Then, after I was all done I did another PEQ calibration inn REW using Jon’s advice about using DIRAC Bypass to retain the delays and trims.
After all that I realized I don’t see a way to see the description I entered for each DIRAC slot. So, right now, I’m think my #4 slot sounds better than my PEQ but I don’t know what crossover or curve I used for that. Perhaps reconnecting with the DIRAC application will allow me to see that but that will have to wait. I also realized I did something wrong on that last PEQ so I’ll have to redo that again to be fully certain that DIRAC is sounding better than PEQ now. Entering all those PEQ numbers manually is a job.
Anyway, I’m getting really good sound quality now but noticed that the trims on the left and right channels are really high (meaning they are set to lower negative numbers than normal). I must have had the subwoofer volume set too high. That means my volume now has to be a higher number than before, by a lot. So, I guess I need to redo it again.
But listened to a lot of music and two movies now and am happy with what it sounds like using DIRAC.
@@williamhicks2763 there are a number of tricks to getting the best results from Dirac. It does better with more measurement positions. Otherwise, you can end up with "over correction" where it corrects things that shouldn't be corrected. I've had the best results with the "focused" measurement pattern. Another thing that I found really helps imaging is to use REW's "system delay" to perfectly center the mic between L&R speakers before the first center Dirac measurement position. Some more Dirac tips: Start by smoothly following your speakers' natural response and iterate the target curve from there to see what sounds best. Disable PEQ prior to Dirac. Using both usually isn't necessary. In general, Dirac should improve clarity & imaging and make it easy for you to fine tune your desired target curve.
Can't wait to know you though on how it sounds, detail, clarity, bass. I love it so far and it's not even calibrated.
Coming soon - should have the sound quality video out as a comparison between the HTP-1, Arcam AV1 and Emotiva RMC-1 within the next week. -Jon
Would love to see you do a tutorial on the HTP One setup using the spatial audio toolkit disk I see there on your counter top
Good eyes!
That is possible - thanks for that great suggestion. -Jon
Needs analogue bypass. If I'm using snappy source (tape etc) I'd want to keep it analogue. Or if my source DAC is better. Plus could do with two more channels want to stick with 9.3.4 plus two spare for extra height or maybe fourth sub
I’d like to see that and it would be nice if a digital pass through could be added but I haven’t seen anyone do that. Well, the RMC-1 has a digital output but I could find out anything about that and what it can be used for, even asking Emotiva. It seems I keep trying to avoid it but I may be forced to have two systems, one system for 2 channel and another for home theater and I guess a switch box or manually switching speaker cables on the mains.
@@williamhicks2763 that's what I've done, two systems
Analog bypass is not a common thing with AV Processors. The market is treading more towards 100% digital only (no legacy) models like the McIntosh MX100. I remember when Sony had to create an analog companion piece around 1998 to compliment their AV Processor.
What you may look into is the Parasound JC 2 BP pre-amplifier which is designed to work after any AV processor. It lets you switch your mains from the sources connected to the JC 2 BP to the mains output of your AV Processor. It has two balanced inputs and one balanced output plus six unbalance inputs.
I feel that 17 or 19 channels are a better count. Anthem got that right. Lets you setup 9.2.6 (17) and 9.4.6 (19) which I consider to be a full immersive audio configuration without getting into expended replicated side channels etc. -Jon
Some of the JBL Synthesis AV Processors support Dante digital out for wiring to active speakers or external DACs. -Jon
I ordered the Umik-2 from MiniDSP and I think the shipping was $15 and it took a week or maybe longer to get it. If I did it again I would have rather had it fast than the small amount I saved.
Yes - when you add in shipping the numbers get closer. I thought about that at just before I said the direct mini DSP was the lowest price. And yes, their shipping isn’t that fast. -Jon
I just made my system with the Sony az5000es. Do you plan on making a review on these units? If so, when?
Sony is next on my list. I was actually planning to get on in this month, but I could no longer purchase from Amazon as planned. I then noticed that the Monoprice HTP-1 was available after a long period and felt I needed to grab one while they were still in stock. The Arcam AV41 is very similar to the HTP-1 and I felt that was a great pairing. Once those are complete I will pursue the Sony again. -Jon
The lack of Osd for just basic things like input status, volume etc rules this one out for me. Maybe they will surprise with the HTP-2??
It is a shame as they implemented several features very well. -Jon
Jon, it sounds like you are saying that if you are using PEQ then you should still set the delays under the calibration tab and then use Dirac Bypass rather than Dirac Off. is that right?
I believe that when you want to use 100% PEQ, the also set the trims and delays via HTP-1 calibration page with Dirac = OFF. If Dirac is set to bypass, then the HTP-1 will use the values set by Dirac but bypasses the Dirac filter only. -Jon
@@ripewave It seems that DIRAC is limited to 48 kHz and the only way I’m getting higher sample rates is to use the Direct mode and DIRAC Bypass. Even Native and Stereo are limiting the Encoder Sample Rate. That means the only way to get the most out of 96 kHz files is to use Direct and DIRAC bypass which means a good PEQ is needed and must be switched on for music streaming. Just an extra step but one that requires the browser interface as far as I know. It would be nice if it could automatically engage the PEQ when placed on DIRAC Bypass. So DIRAC is not a replacement for PEQ in this case.
Many Dirac implementations are limited to 48kHz - Monoprice is not alone with this feature gap. It would be good to know which model go beyond 48kHz with Dirac enabled. -Jon
I believe the Arcam also uses 48kHz for Dirac - they downsample just like Monoprice. - Jon
If you are running Dirac on a 2.1 system, you may be better to look at using a MiniDSP which supports 96kHz or the PC version of Dirac Live which supports up to 192kHz.
The Marantz 7706 only has 11.1 channels of processing.
I gave the Marantz AV7706 credit for 11.2 (13 channels) as the manual states independent control of both subwoofers. From page 11: The unit has two subwoofer output capability and can adjust the level
and delay for each subwoofer individually.
Jon
@@ripewave Oh I see. They're cheating but I get where you're coming from.
I wonder if using the BEQ Designer would allow for direct export of the PEQ numbers to the HTP-1. Entering all those numbers manually takes so long and that’s the only way I know how to do it so far. It would be nice if there was an option in REW to do that like there is in DIRAC.
I guess BEQ is for bass and not a REW alternative so I guess that wouldn’t solve the problem of manually entering numbers. Sorry, I misunderstood that.
I am in the same place as you. I would rather have the PEQ filters import without the need for manual entry. However, I won’t know for sure if their is a method supported by the HTP-1 until I try. My guess is no. I was surprised when I discovered that Dirac was not able to set the crossovers in the HTP-1 automatically and had to manually enter. I feel that while the HTP-1 has some unique features that sets it apart, it is lacking functionality I expect from an AV Processor. It is these elements which keeps the HTP-1 from being a leading solution. -Jon
@@ripewave Agreed. It’s so close to being truly great that it is disappointing they indicated it doesn’t need an upgrade. And while we’re at it, would it kill these companies to let us save multiple PEQs so we could A/B test the changes? It was nice to see so many DIRAC slots.
Memory isn’t a problem - should be easy to support any number of filters and PEQ settings. Very odd that they limit unnecessary
BEQDesigner does have support for the HTP-1, but the most convenient way to load BEQ filters is to skip BEQDesigner and load BEQ filters directly from the HTP-1's custom UI.