Based on the reviews that you are doing I purchased the Yamaha Aventage RX-A6A to replace my Marantz 7706 (that is replace one Processor and 2 amplifiers with one receiver). There is a difference in how these products sound. The Yamaha has a much more lively and fuller sound which I prefer. The one big difference is in the menus. The Marantz is much easier to navigate. When adjusting the db one the Marantz there is a white noise so that you know what the sound level is while making an adjustment. With the Yamaha you have make the adjustment then go to separate menu to hear the sound of each speker then get out of that menu and go to the adjustment menu then back to noise menu to hear the adjustment. I play my music from a USB drive. One of the biggest differences is the play order. Every time the Marantz is turned on it goes to the top of the play list. The Yamaha starts where it left off (just like a car audio player does). I appreciate the work that you are doing. This is something that no one else if doing. They just review each product on their own and don't reply make or explain where on the "what does it sound like" chart does it fit.
I am powering both speakers (Spatial Audio Lab X-5's) are dual powered. That is the tweeter and mid speakers are powered by the receiver and the woofers have onboard power amp. These are very good speakers that play a full range of music even at low volume. However, I can't recommend the new speakers because they have thinner baffles that vibrate and any base sound is really bad.@@usmankhalid990
@@ripewave You are welcome! I think that company is also sourcing parts from the same Chinese company associated with Emotiva and Tonewinner, but in the UK. I kind of like their industrial design and logo. Another reviewer thought that IOTA seemed to process even better than Emotiva, but who knows if they did an A/B comparison like you do. I would prefer to buy from Emotiva, but I think they need a new industrial designer. Obviously, I would purchase Emotiva components regardless, if the sound quality was top notch. I do see now that the less expensive 7-channel amplifier is not available.
@@ripewave So, I pulled the trigger on the Yamaha A8A! I was strongly considering the Sony ES line, the Yamaha Aventage, or the BasX MC1 processor and their BasX A11 amplifier, but there were some additional features on the Yamaha that were hard to pass up. The fact that you rated it with the best sound helped me to shift my focus back to Yamaha. And if I feel I need more power in the future, I can always add some Emotiva amps to the system. Thank you for all your advice!
Upgraded 1 year ago to the yamaha aventage rx-a8a from a new Denon AVRX4700H which was returned 2 times because Audyssey stopped working Proper along with other issues. yamaha aventage rx-a8a firmware upgrades are available with all the promised upgrades and I tried all they are 100% working flawlessly!
Hi Jon, I have had the Marantz Cinema 40, Yamaha A8A, Denon X-4800H, AZ5000ES and I agreed with you that both Marantz and Denon sound thin. When I first started testing them with 2 channel audio music and I couldn't believe how much bass was lacking ( tried 4 different pairs). The treble is detailed ,but the mid to low end is lacking. I spent hours to adjust the settings on the AVRs and I just couldn't get them sound right when it comes to music listening. For movies, they are great, but that's about it. When it comes to the Yamaha, music sounds really good and all I have to do is either put it on Direct or Stereo mode. Unfortunately , the surround performance is behind the others. When it comes to the Sony, I am actually surprised by how good it sounds. In my opinion, the A8A has better mid range while the Sony has better high, but both have good bass. The Sony has the best sound for movies and I had a hard time to believe how good it is compares to using Dirac Live on the 4800H. I returned the Denon and Marantz and keeping the Sony and Yamaha, but I definitely will upgrade the Yamaha as soon as their new Aventage models are out.
Excellent report. Thanks for sharing, it is not common to find someone who has experienced all four brands in their home at the same time. I just received the Sony an hour ago so I am very curious is we align on that model as well. I like that you have compared both music and movie listening and have run the calibration software - very thorough. It is unfortunate that the same model doesn’t win in both music and movie categories. I am struggling to find a clear winner - there is always a compromise with each product I review. Some get close enough and we accept its limitations. -Jon
I have the 5000es, 4800h, Pioneer 505. I don't think the 4800 sounds thin at all. Out of the box it sounds amazing. The bass is amazing also. I don't know why it sounds that way for you. The Sony is decent, but I'm keeping the Pioneer. Has the best of both worlds, plus the app is the best. Pioneer sounds amazing out of the box also. I'm trying to learn how to dial in Dirac on it. I thought about getting the Yamaha a6a, but I don't like the looks, and not a big fan of ypao. I am curious how it sounds tho.
Great job reviewing the A8A John. I enjoy using the very flexible 'scene' feature that can even incorporate the speaker patterns. Please advise if Onkyo RZ70 or the latest Denon/Maranz AVRs come with the equivalent of scene. Many thanks.
I did not find an equivalent 'scene' feature on the Onkyo or Denon/Marantz. However, the Denon/Marantz comes closer with the ability to have 2 speaker presets. -Jon
There are 3 fans in it, as you said there is 1 small fan for the circuit/processor and there are 2 big once underneath the power supply (you can only see from blow) and they do work but it’s almost impossible to hear them, I had to shuv my phone under the receiver while recording Video with flash on to see them work!
Thanks so much for that correction. I didn't hear anything, so whether they are present or not, I guess it doesn't matter. It would to know how often they come on. However, you may not know if they are inaudible. -Jon
I guess the RZ 70 is too new to enter this comparison, wonder if it would sound any better than the RZ 50 . great review, I love the confined/ spacious, thin/rich axis you used, very useful and intuitive. great review as usual.
I believe I will have the Onkyo TX-RZ70 in within the next two months. Yes - it would be a good comparison to see what spending the extra money delivers over the TX-RZ50. Glad you find the chart is helpful. -Jon
Love the series of videos regarding the Yamaha, quick question is how was the sound signature and sound effect separation in comparison to Denon and marantz?
I felt the Yamaha RX-A8A was slightly clearer with more separation then the Denon AVR-X4800H and Marantz Cinema 40. It was noticeably better in that regard than the lower tier Marantz Cinema 50 and Denon AVR-X3800H. -Jon
No - I only tried Dirac with the Cinema 50. Marantz ties the license to the unit, so I am only willing to pay for the upgrade if I am keeping the unit. -Jon
@@ripewave Makes sense. I am waiting for dirac live bass control. Even then only if it works with directional bass since this is why I bought this AVR.
Just finished watching all 5 parts for the Yamaha! Unbelievable detail, great job! I know you may not have experience with IOTA, but I am having trouble deciding between the Yamaha A6A and the IOTA AVX17 and IOTA AVXP1 7-channel amplifier. I’ve heard they might offer a 9-channel amplifier at some point. Such a difficult decision once you are up around $2500-$2700+ dollars.
That is impressive. Yes - these become tough choices. The combo of the IOTA AVX 17 ($1,700) + Amplifiers ($1,700+) is going to be more then the Yamaha RX-A8A at $3000. I would go with the Yamaha for several reasons - better support/warranty, Auro-3D, top-tier sound (known vs. unknown), room calibration (known YPAO vs. unknown EQFlex), HDMI 2.1, balanced input. What IOTA AVX 17 has in its favor is 17 channels (vs. 13.2) and full set of balanced outputs (vs front L/R only). -Jon
@@ripewave Thanks for the advice! That makes a lot of sense. Yeah, I realize the separates approach would be more costly and take up more room. And I can always add amplification to the Yamaha once I install the 4 height speakers for Atmos. Your reviews have definitely helped me seriously consider the Yamaha! It will be running Monitor Audio Bronze 200 for the sides, the Bronze center channel, Bronze bi-polar surrounds for the sides, their Bronze Atmos up-firing speakers for the rear (I am going to flip them to be direct facing), and Emotiva ceiling speakers for the 4 heights. I actually have 8" Klipsch in-ceiling speakers (5), but I don’t use them anymore since I prefer the main front and surround speakers to be at ear level. The ceiling is just over 11’. Because of those speakers in the ceiling, I was considering the Sony at one point to try and utilize them in some way. My head is going to explode, LOL!!
Yes - it ear level speakers at ear level is best vs mounted high, especially with 11 foot ceilings, it at least Sony has a solution to compensate if you can’t. Are you using the Klipsch for real heights now or are they abandoned in place? I would think there could be a way to leverage them so you could have 2 or 3 rows of heights. -Jon
@@ripewave I purchased 4 of Emotiva’s ceiling speakers when they went on sale for $199 a pair. I plan to install those overhead in closer proximity to the main viewing position.
Btw, if you don’t want to scroll thru all the inputs, you could disable the inputs you don’t use so you only need to scroll to the ones that are active.
Excelent! Measuring output amplification per channel in future will be great. Audhiolics make a excelent job with A6A. At the time I was not aware of that it was a Big surprise. So I will add a power amp. to ear the diference. Im just in navigation very smoothly.
Let me know what you are able perceive when comparing internal vs. external amplifiers. I suspect the you will need to give the unit some dynamic source material to really expose a difference. -Jon
@@ripewave I will tell you about what I perceive after receiving the multichannel power amp AT4007. By the way, you were partial responsable for this choise. I view your excelents videos about power amps. Tanks for the advice.
@@ranakirti Here are the results: With AT4007: 1- The sound change fot better, more beautiful, refined, more real, delicious for my ears. 2 - At a high volume, no britghness, the is all there, amazing detail, a fantastic experience, but for only few minutes because Im not crazy, 3 - Amplifier very silent. 4 - Today may be I go to AT6007. 5 - If AT6007 or AT4000 is on your budget dont look back! Go for it!
Thanks for the shout out regarding Auro-3D. I’m happy about your review as I evaluated most of the others in your product positing map - I have been a Yamaha dealer for decades before I switched to be a professor
So fortunate to have a former Yamaha dealer view this content. Glad I am touching some points that someone with your experience feels are important. Let me know if there are any statements I have made that don't align with your knowledge. I am sure there are details that you have which I was not able to discover with my one month analysis. Hope you can continue to weigh in on these videos. -Jon
what level of integrated/stereo amplifier in the yamaha lineup would be needed to sound better than the a6a/a8a for 2 channel music performance? thanks
No one puts out content aa valuable as you. Thank you. Also I wish this unit had a balanced output for subwoofer at least. Is there another unit comparable price wise that does offer that?
I agree - it should have balance subwoofer outputs. However, this level of sound quality is hard to find at this price. The Marantz Cinema 40 ($3,500) I feel is a tier below and more money, but still no balanced subwoofer outputs. The Anthem AVM 70 is in the same tier for more money ($4,000) and finally you have balance subwoofer outputs. I haven't tested the Pioneer VSX-LX805 ($2,999) yet, but that may be your best option - likely in the same tier and has balance subwoofer outputs. -Jon
I can save you some time and money. Don't bother. Its not that balancing isn't good or useful. It is, but the way that the industry advertises and explained it turned it into the most misunderstood concept in audio (pro and consumer). To start with, there are different ways an audio component can be balanced, and each way has more than one option as to how it can be wired. So, you can have 2 different balanced components, and they can be implemented in a completely different way. This is a pretty big topic, and I can't possibly cover everything in a single post, so I'll try to give you some info you may find useful in context to what you are asking for here. Balanced connections on a HT receiver. There are 2 main ways a component can be balanced. Connection to connection balancing and fully balanced, or fully differential balancing. There's a huge difference between them. Connection to connection balancing is when they take a regular single ended audio component and add balanced connections just at the inputs and outputs. That means the signal traveling between the 2 components will be balanced, but not inside the components themselves. Almost all pro gear is balanced this way, as is less expensive home gear. This is the type of balancing that will be on the receivers this video covers. If you're lucky. Quite often they will just put xlr connectors on the back of a component and label it balanced. Its electrically identical to using an rca connector. Then you have fully balanced, or fully differential balancing. This is when they actually make the component itself balanced. This way costs a lot more because every component in the signal path has to be doubled up. To visualize, a standard single ended, or rca cable, has 2 conductors (+ and -). A balanced connection requires a 3 conductor cable. Typically, xlr is used, but any 3 conductor cable/connector is fine (TRS, din, etc..). Balanced has 2 signal conductors (+) and a ground (-). A fully differential component adds all those extra parts so the extra signal conductor can have its own path through the component. The problems arise when you have a mix of balanced and SE components. The 2 modes of operation are not compatible. In order to make the connection work, something has to be done. You either make it so both components are SE, or they're both balanced. Most people aren't aware of this, and when they think they have a balanced connection, 90%+ of the time, it isn't. In reality, only 2 of the 3 conductors are utilized, and that makes it electrically identical to using a pair of rca cables. So, unless both components are balanced, and they're connected with a balanced cable, you won't be balanced. The signal defaults to single ended. This is how I know all of these receivers are not balanced and just have xlr jacks, or are balanced, but just at the inputs and outputs. All the other channels and component inputs has to be balanced as well. So, your best case scenario will be the receiver accepts a balanced signal, but immediately converts it to SE. Worst case, is the signal was never balanced to begin with. What does this mean for you? There's nothing to worry about. The only benefit of point to point balancing is to reduce noise and signal degradation over long runs of cables. That's why its so common in pro gear. The average home HT system doesn't have long enough runs of cable to worry about it. Its possible, but not the norm. If you have a fully balanced system, there's a potential for better sound quality. However, the differences are not that big. In order to hear any improvement from fully balanced components, you need high end components that are capable of presenting a lot of details. Even high end HT receivers don't have that kind of resolution. Also, the fact that you are asking about a bass only connection, you'll never hear any meaningful improvement in any case. The audible effects of balancing are in the mids and highs. If you want to see what type of connection your gear has, get the owners manual and look at the specs. Any time you balance a signal, the end result is you end up with about 4-6 db more output. You should see 2 sets of specs. One set is for balanced and the other is unbalanced. If you don't see both, 99% its not balanced. This may look like a long post, but I'm just scratching the surface. There's a lot more technical information that I just can't get to in a post like this.
I missed your reply here until today. What you present is valuable information. Yes, it is hard to know when I/o which has a physical XLR connection is really balanced. Your guidance is helpful in determining. I believe that the IO on the RmC-1, in this video, is fully balanced Fully differential as they advertise. I have purchased their matching amplifiers which are advertised as the same. I am running some long distances - over 20 feet to the other side of the room for some amps and powered subwoofers as well as a phono pre-amp across the room to its balanced input. I don’t have any audible noise, but are these balanced as you understand? -Jon
Jon, thanks for the high quality, in depth reviews. I have watched all 5 videos twice now. Once while selecting an AVR and once after purchasing an A6A when it went on sale. Your expertise was key to my decision. Could you please tell me which amplifiers you are using in your testing in place of the internal ones? Thanks in advance!
Glad the content helped. I am using all Emotiva Differential Reference amplifiers for the ear level channels. For heights I have a vintage Sony TA-N9000ES amplifier. -Jon
hi , great video. I'm looking at the a6a. where in the graph would you place it performance/sound wise....? at almost twice the cost vs 3800 would it be much better at 2 channel stereo performance or would it be better to get a 3800 and add a 2 channel amp for the front left/right...? thanks.
I perform all my sound comparisons using 100% externally amplifiers and the same amps and speakers connected with each. Therefore, the Denon AVR-X3800H remains in the third tier (down and to the left) of AV Receivers I have tested. The Yamaha Aventage RX-A8A is in the top tier (up and to the right). This remains true if you are to do the same and add an external 2 channel amp to the front left/right. -Jon
Just finished the series, most in depth review I have seen on this line. Curious about your findings on the subs sometimes running one and sometimes running two. Did you set them up as left/right or front/back. If you tagged them in setup as front/back, your results make sense.
Based on all the positive Reviews about the A8A her and in other places, I decided to buy it as a replacement for my Denon X6700 that had a few issues with HDMi signal, humming noise/vibration from some component (had it in for repair twice, but they never manged to fix it fully). To get right to the point...I sent the Yamaha back very quickly. While HDMI worked better and the placement of sound in the Surround and Overhead channels was clearly superior, the YPAO system just didn't work in my Home Theatre. While Audyssey (especially with Multeq-X) gave me perfectly controlled nd smooth bass and also did a goos job over the whole frequency range, YPAO essentially looked at my two subs, shrugged, and did nothing. That's just not acceptable for a 3000+€ AVR these days. Sure, I could have spent a few hours and manually corrected the Subs with REW or invested in an Antimode, but at the price Yamaha is asking for their AVRs, I expect them to do at least a passable job in terms of room correction.
This is very helpful feedback. While I had better results with YPAO, your experience cannot be ignored. Perhaps my sub placement and room characteristic were different enough to result in better calibration. There are a lot of variables. If that is the case, then it speaks to focusing on a more rounded calibration tool that can handle a wider range of conditions. I hope you are able to find a receiver that will achieve your goals. -Jon
@@ripewave The interesting thing to me is, that YPAO did the exact same corrections (almost none) on my Subs on the RX-A3080 back in 2018. It's consistent, useless, but consistent...😉 Seeing the difference in Subwoofer frequency response between the A8A and my X6700H was honestly shocking. Without REW I would have noticed that something is off, but would not have known what.
Did you make a decision? I just got the A2a and I'm really pleased. I replaced a ten year old Onkyo with it and though I went down a notch on the hierarchy, I think it sounds just a bit better.
- Some less plastic and better external build quality. - Bigger display with more information. - Better on-screen display menu. Yamaha should seriously rethink about this if they want to have a real flagship receiver.
I am very surprised that Yamaha has not followed up with a flagship AV Processor separate. That could be their opportunity to delivery a statement piece. -Jon
Most high end units like this are going to be in a closet so the on screen display is not even needed. Everything should be on the app like Sonos. Would be so much easier for programming.
I really don’t get why they don’t just make a tempered glass front with large displays or VU meters and charge a little bit more. It’s not like this additional stuff is that expensive, but it would make it look so much more high end.
I have been waiting for Marantz to release a successor to the SR8015. It will be interesting to see what they announce in September - they typically announce new models around that time. -Jon
I’d love to see the A8A vs the Yamaha 3080. I don’t see much difference after performing the latest firmware upgrade on the 3080. I’m betting they have the same amps and DAC
@@ThunderJarvisthe replacement of the 3080 is the A6A. I had the 3080 and upgraded to the A8A. There are several elements that are noticeable (the A8A is a more premium and rock solid unit). In terms of sound, it uses 2x DACs compared to 1x DAC the 3080 uses. Power supply section has been also improved significantly. 5 years warranty is also a plus.
@@ripewave I have a 5.1 setup with all separates currently and I am planing to buy the A8A and use it with 4 separate Amps (front, center, Surround back, surround) and using the A8A for 4 height channels. I have 4 older Yamaha amps from early 80's that are awesome (MX800, M70, M60, M50). I kept waiting for an upgrade to CX-A5200 per-amp and finally gave up and settling for A8A. I actually think I am better off with the A8a because I can use the amps section for my height channels and do not have to buy more amps for those. My two from speakers are Yamaha NS1000 and to get best sound out of these you must pare them with a good amp (MX800). These speakers sound so crystal clear and awesome with the MX800. Yamaha has a new line of apms that replace my older Yamaha apms (Yamaha A-S3200 and A-S2200 Natural Sound Integrated Amplifier), but they are out of my budget ($5000 to $7000 range each). I think this setup would be awesome, what you all think?
Hi, first of all i want to thank you very much for letting us (the viewers) to get know all the gadget better. I just want to know which of those amp in this series of your video has a sound kinda... "OUT OFF SPEAKER TO GRAB YOU" sound quality ?
@@ripewave Wow, look like i got to direct my way to that rx-a8a expensive top model of the yamaha. Im not a fan of yamaha after i had owned a scondhand of yamaha mid range(rx-v657) and few experience(through online video) of yamaha amps.....i think their new generation audio product produce laidback sound and tamed treble. I prefer as my first comment👆🏻 a sound that out infont speaker("out of speaker to grab you") sound. Anyway thank thank you so much for your reply and your review videos, its really a great help.
Thanks Jon, Yet again an amazing indepth video. Now I am stumped. I was going to get the c40 next month due to your other videos and other research. Now I feel conflicted with the a8a. If it is a tier up, seems like the better bet as I am music first then movies. Is ypal good enough for room correction in your opinion? I guess I will have to do a demo with both and make up my mind. Good stuff and thanks for bringing in an honest view! Nick
Nick, I feel I could recommend either model. It does come down to what you value most. If you are seeking a better Auro-3D experience and more control over sound decoding, then the Marantz may be better. As for room calibration... The Marantz Dirac option is going to add at least $259 for the limited version ($349 for full range) but neither provide the Dirac bass control feature. YPAO is simpler to use then Dirac, is included with the AVR and is almost as good as Dirac if you don't like to tinker. I haven't got good results from Marantz's standard Audyssey tool as it sounds dull to me and lacks bass. They also charge $19.99 for the Audyssey MultEQ Editor app, which give you control over the results, whereas the standard on-screen user interface provides no control - so that is a most have in my mind, if you use Audyssey. Then they have the Audyssey MultEQ-X PC application, which makes Audyssey more like Dirac with ability to save results, input target curves and export filters. MultEQ-X is targeted for the pro installers and sells for $200 (undercutting the cost of Dirac). I need more time with MultEQ-X, but my initial feeling is it helps to deliver Dirac-level results from Audyssey for the first time. If you like to get in a fine-tune, then I would choose Marantz with Dirac or MultEQ-X options over Yamaha with YPAO. If you want good results within the effort or added cost, go with Yamaha. YAMAHA summary - one option (from AVR) YPAO = included - good results, easy MARANTZ summary - several options (from AVR - easiest - no control over results) - Audyssey = included - results not good (from mobile device - still easy, but effort to load app - more control over results) - Audyssey MultiEQ Editor app - $20 - similar disappointing results as on-screen version (from Windows computer - medium to large effort - most control over results) - Audyssey MultEQ-X = $199 - good results, full range - Dirac Limited = $259 - good results, limited range - Dirac Full = $349 - good results, full range Jon
@ripewave Hey Jon, Thankyou for such a detailed response!!! Just it seems a lot of reviewers were slamming ypao. Makes me nervous. Another thing is I will go in store and see if I like the Yamaha's sound compared to marantz. I am a denon guy and have been for 20 years. Loving your detailed look at everything, which gives me more trust in your breakdown. Thanks again, Nick
Since 1995 I've only owned Yamaha AV. 2023 i purchased the Marantz sr8015 and I feel its definitely over rated in terms of audio quality. Will be selling to purchase Yamaha once again.
While I haven’t heard the SR8015, I did have the newer Cinema 40 in-house to review. I felt that the Cinema 40, didn’t sound as good as the Yamaha RX-A8A I reviewed - Jon
@ripewave Well I've calibrated the Marantz in every way. Then bi amped onto another power amp. Even used different high quality speakers. Sounds nice. But not impressive. I have a Yamaha 2020 and a Yamaha 3060. Marantz didn't sound any better than those running True HD. The SR 8015 sound quality does improve noticeably when completely switched over to the preamp mode but then whats the point of buying a reciever? Again, even in pure preamp mode the sound quality isn't better than Yamaha's older models.
I found YPAO easier to use, less options, but the results compared well against the competition with Dirac. In fact this is the first model which I felt sound better (slightly) then my Emotiva RMC-1. How much of that is the quality of the electronics and how much is due to the room correction software- hard to say. So it could be that Dirac is better, but if the unit itself is better designed, then the end result is best. -Jon
I have not heard when the next models will be introduced for Yamaha. What I did hear is that the platform Yamaha introduced with the RX-A8A and RX-A6A is intended to serve Yamaha for the next decade. Yes, there will be am evolution with both hardware and software improvements/ new features, but there won’t be a full redesign. -Jon
Hey Jon, I've watched this video like 4 times. I think the results all depends on the room. Everyone's area is different. I'm guessing the RZ50/Pioneer 505/Integra 5.4 would all pretty much sound the same? They should be in the same category at the 4800/40 right? The 4800 and 505 sound really good in my room. I looked them more than the Sony 5000es. You can't really tweak the Sony much. I think the Pioneer is the most user friendly. I'm not a fan of Heos either.
I could see utilizing top audio to listen to The Moody Blues, Nights In White Satin, but George what’shisface? “Y’all needs ta listen to mah tun-ages on the fahnest of equipmentses. Well, there weren’t a lot of DVDs in the beginning, I guess. Everyone else was clinging to their VHS tapes.
Hey Any Ideals For Speakers Great Far Home Theater 🎥 Set Up (Klipsch Kef Arendal Svs Ect.Ect!) For Movie 🎬, Music And Gaming??? What Speakers, U Say To Use????
I have yet to dig deep into speakers brands. So I don't have direct experience to provide specific guidance. As you have included "music" within you selection I would aim for a speaker which you feel are great for music first. If you like them for music, they will be good for games and movies as well. Having a musical subwoofer as well will be key for your movie and gaming experience. I have only a couple of brands. The small Klipsch "The Fives" I have are terrible for music, but great for movies and tv sound. The Polk lsi and lsim flagship speakers I have are used with Rythmik F18 subwoofers and produced great reproduction for all types of sources - music to games. -Jon
Hier, thanks again for tout work. In m'y opinion , Onkyo, Sony, Yamaha have a Fuller sound, Denon ,marantz thiner, less bass. Onkyo, Sony more impact, more spacious. Thé différenciés in home cinéma amplifier are small but theirs prices are bigger. How much does Yamaha a8 sound better than Onkyo rz50 which costs 2000€ less‽ I had auro 3d, imax enhanced and so on, I found they are very very similar. I would bet that a Onkyo a 9130 for 220€ sounds better in stereo than any of these home cinéma amplifiers. So Onkyo rz50+ Onkyo a9130 connected in bypass( main in, poweramp) for less than 1300€ with a. 11 channel system. So why would I pay 3200€ ‽ It would be really interesting to compare an Onkyo a9130 in stereo to the other home cinema amplifiers. One can have Dirac, 360 reality or auro 3d but if does sound no good‽ So....
Great thought here - got me thinking. First, your analysis of current Sony, Denon, Marantz and Yamaha is on track with my opinions. It is a great debate about whether the new models can live up to the performance of the old. Many say the prior generation of Denon is better. Not sure about all the others. And all those sound formats are useless if the unit doesn’t perform well. Thanks for sharing - a lot to agree with. -Jon
All AVR for multi channel protocol ( dts , dolby, auro 3D) don't implement microsoft multichannel driver asio wme to be able to listen audio from cubase or flstudio when sound use hdmi connect to denon yamaha . At this time pc support only multi channel in read mode from dvd, game, music but never from audio daw in realtime . Why ? there was dts live and dolby live in the past. The connector say nothing about protocol so we have the choice between xlr or aes ebu protocol on 3 pins connector ? Yamaha is wellknow for pro music gear....
Are all these channels really worth it? From what I see, I'm not so sure. Before I say anything, I'm not an expert on HT. For 2 channel music, I am, but for movies, I like a nice HT system, but I don't have the technical knowledge some others have with HT specific gear. That said, here's what I've noticed. I have an older HT system consisting of 5 speakers. What sets this system apart, is the quality. The 5 speakers and electronics are all very high quality compared to what you would normally see in a typical receiver based, or even many preamp/amp separates. Also, none of the speakers are HT specific. What I mean by that is I don't have a center channel speaker. I have a 3rd speaker that is the same as my 2 main front speakers. For surrounds I have 2 full size regular speakers like in the front, just one model down. They're a little smaller. But they're meant to be used at main speakers, not surround specific. All my friends have one of these modern systems with all the speakers, and every last one of them comes over to watch movies on my old HT system. What I'm thinking, is there has to be some kind of cutoff point where newer technology can't overcome pure build and sound quality. I was actually thinking about upgrading, but I hesitate. I've heard some of my friends systems and I can see why they always come over to use mine. I'm definitely going to upgrade my screen. They all have better video quality than me, so when I do that upgrade, I was thinking about updating my processor to handle more channels. Before I forget, I know someone is going to recommend I get subs. I have no plans on getting them because with the speakers I have, you just don't need them. I have all the bass I could ever want.
Thanks for sharing details about your system and experience to date vs friend who have more modern setups yet are still falling short of your 5.1 system. I was running 5.0 until I started this channel a few years ago. I then moved to 7.0 to 7.2 to 7.2.4 and noticed the upgrade each time I enhanced. However, I feel that I always expanded with quality components. I will note that I was content with my 5.0 system but moved to larger speaker layouts out of curiosity. Therefore, your current position I can relate to. What I believe you have going for you is the consistency of speakers. Having the same or similar speakers for each location is ideal - including the center speaker. Sounds like you may have behind a transparent screen - nice! Clarity and timbre matching make a big difference from my experience. Again, if you have that - perfect! Having lived without a subwoofer for almost 20 years, your choice not to purchase one is also something I understand. However, the dual 18” sealed subwoofers I added made a huge impact for all types of content. So if you have the space, I recommend considering. You may be surprised. Taking the time to properly position and integrate with the room and align with you other speakers is the key to success. The speakers that have made the least impact have been my rear surrounds. They only seem to fill in lightly to the experience. If I isolate the back channels and listen by themselves, the levels are still low. The height channels on the other hand are speakers I really appreciate. They help to create a more enveloping sound. I took care to purchase top of the line timbre matching ceiling speakers. Albeit, they are powered by the one amplifier I have which is of lower performance. So I think replacing that amp could improve clarity. I wouldn’t just throw anything up on the height speakers given how active they can be with the right source or upmixing. I wish I had a projector and screen - someday. I am focused on sound quality first as display technologies have been moving at a faster pace. With my recommendations above don’t feel those are necessary. I feel it is better to have an older super high quality 5.0 system then a new basic 9.4.6 system. -Jon
@@ripewave"Having lived without a subwoofer for almost 20 years, your choice not to purchase one is also something I understand. However, the dual 18” sealed subwoofers I added made a huge impact for all types of content. So if you have the space, I recommend considering. You may be surprised. Taking the time to properly position and integrate with the room and align with you other speakers is the key to success. " I should have included more information about my system. Everything I have is made by a company called Meridian. Its a smaller company that most people probably never heard of so I didn't bother to mention it. I have 3 8000's in the front and 2 7000's in the rear. My electronics are the matching 800 series. Every component in the system is upgradable to whatever new standards evolve. With regards to bass, these are not your typical speakers. All Meridian speakers have built in amps for each driver, along with a DAC and digital preamp. My processor really just routes the signal to the DAC in the speakers. But when it comes to bass, these are true full range speakers. I simply don't want anymore. I use subs in my main 2 channel system, and if I thought the HT system needed subs, I would just get them. For the other channels I don't have, I can just buy cards to install in my processor, then add speakers. The only drawback is Meridian doesn't do anything cheap. If I update the system, it will be a substantial investment. I just have to decide if its worth the expense. If I cared as much about watching movies as I do listening to music on my 2 channel system, I would have already made the upgrade.
I do have subwoofer, but I only added two years ago. They are two Rhymik F16s, 16 inch sealed active servo subwoofers. They added a lot to my experience. I completely agree. Meridian - yes that is a special system. I mention Meridian in my processor overview videos. However, I don’t have a lot of details. Which immersive format are they supporting? I can seem to find that detail. I like the ideal of having active speakers. You know the amps and crossovers are perfectly matched if delivered by a strong company. -Jon
When the display of my bloody Beko washing machine looks 10 times better than the display of this Yamaha flagship AVR, it is a great red flag for any potential customer regarding what's inside of that AVR and its audiophile and videophile performance... They really went very wrong with the actual design. Better without any display, than with this one... I wonder when will they come out with an AV processor to match the level of the build quality of the 15-year-old Denon AVP A1HD. When will we receive fully differential balanced XLR outputs, top-of-the-line OP-amps, top-of-the-line DAC from ESS Sabre or from AKM, and dedicated ultra-low noise power supplies? With a serious phono preamp for both MM and MC cartridges included... Also with HDCD decoder, SACD stereo, and multichannel playback - because audiophiles don't abandon their disc collection... Streaming capability capable of reproducing highest quality audio files from Tidal (Master)... And regarding video processing power - when will we get a trully performant video section, one capable of upsampling DVD video to 4 or even 8K resolution? Personally, I want a 'monster' capable of playing every audio and video file to a maximum level of quality with the help of nowadays top-of-the-line technology. I want an AV processor that will be the best out of the box, one that you will not need to send to other companies specialized in audio that do tuning. Also, to my opinion, It is completely useless to add more channels just for some questionable sound effects if the audio quality is not getting significantly better!
I guess this really depends on person and if you plan to use display for anything. I own Cinema 50, and it has tiny display, but I love it. And I have it closed in rack anyway, out of my sight. But I get your point if display and information on display is important to you.
A receiver is old fashion. 4k.8k ect. Only what count is your tv. Only use 1 hdmi too receiver for sound from tv too receiver too het get 7.1 or more. Don't let receiver do the upscaling.. A tv Is doing that. Only use receiver for the sound! Receiver for picture is stupid. The tv these days is doing the job. So it's only commerciële a expense receiver. Don't let you fooled! When all hdmi on tv it automatisch choose the entrance, on receiver you must pusch buttons. I use lgc4 and a denon ax1200 and works great. Earc too arc. The weight and cooling systems are only because off the amount off speakers,not the sound! Use one cable! Nothing more.
Sounds like an Iggy Pop song. I leave the final judgement to the audience. I just present the features and sound quality assessment and let you decide which is right for you. -Jon
![ILLSLICK - KILLSHOT REMIX [FULL VERSION]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RIK8RrqIAzE/mqdefault.jpg)
Based on the reviews that you are doing I purchased the Yamaha Aventage RX-A6A to replace my Marantz 7706 (that is replace one Processor and 2 amplifiers with one receiver). There is a difference in how these products sound. The Yamaha has a much more lively and fuller sound which I prefer. The one big difference is in the menus. The Marantz is much easier to navigate. When adjusting the db one the Marantz there is a white noise so that you know what the sound level is while making an adjustment. With the Yamaha you have make the adjustment then go to separate menu to hear the sound of each speker then get out of that menu and go to the adjustment menu then back to noise menu to hear the adjustment.
I play my music from a USB drive. One of the biggest differences is the play order. Every time the Marantz is turned on it goes to the top of the play list. The Yamaha starts where it left off (just like a car audio player does).
I appreciate the work that you are doing. This is something that no one else if doing. They just review each product on their own and don't reply make or explain where on the "what does it sound like" chart does it fit.
Are you powering all your channels with just the receiver? Or did you use the amplifiers in addition to the receiver to power the speakers?
I am powering both speakers (Spatial Audio Lab X-5's) are dual powered. That is the tweeter and mid speakers are powered by the receiver and the woofers have onboard power amp. These are very good speakers that play a full range of music even at low volume. However, I can't recommend the new speakers because they have thinner baffles that vibrate and any base sound is really bad.@@usmankhalid990
You have to turn on the Test Tone. You can then go back into the Levels menu and adjust the db level of each speaker.
Thanks for all the hard work putting these in-depth reviews together!
I really appreciate the donation - thank you! I am glad you are finding value in this content. I will have to look into getting an IOTA AVX17 in. -Jon
@@ripewave You are welcome! I think that company is also sourcing parts from the same Chinese company associated with Emotiva and Tonewinner, but in the UK. I kind of like their industrial design and logo. Another reviewer thought that IOTA seemed to process even better than Emotiva, but who knows if they did an A/B comparison like you do. I would prefer to buy from Emotiva, but I think they need a new industrial designer. Obviously, I would purchase Emotiva components regardless, if the sound quality was top notch. I do see now that the less expensive 7-channel amplifier is not available.
All valid points. I don’t mind the Emotiva design, but I realize it is more industrial and not for everyone.-Jon
@@ripewave So, I pulled the trigger on the Yamaha A8A! I was strongly considering the Sony ES line, the Yamaha Aventage, or the BasX MC1 processor and their BasX A11 amplifier, but there were some additional features on the Yamaha that were hard to pass up. The fact that you rated it with the best sound helped me to shift my focus back to Yamaha. And if I feel I need more power in the future, I can always add some Emotiva amps to the system. Thank you for all your advice!
I gave Emotiva some love too. To help relieve the Yamaha from powering all 11 channels, I decided to use the BasX A3 for the front 3 channels.
Upgraded 1 year ago to the yamaha aventage rx-a8a from a new Denon AVRX4700H which was returned 2 times because Audyssey stopped working Proper along with other issues. yamaha aventage rx-a8a firmware upgrades are available with all the promised upgrades and I tried all they are 100% working flawlessly!
Great coverage as always Jon!
Can't wait for your Sony AZ7000es review, especially regarding the virtual speaker alignment and septial sound mapping!
Very excited about reviewing the Sony STR-AZ7000ES in the near future. -Jon
Great stuff as always mate, objective and fair assessment of the Yamaha.
I appreciate your kind feedback. Glad you enjoyed the content. -Jon
Hi Jon, I have had the Marantz Cinema 40, Yamaha A8A, Denon X-4800H, AZ5000ES and I agreed with you that both Marantz and Denon sound thin. When I first started testing them with 2 channel audio music and I couldn't believe how much bass was lacking ( tried 4 different pairs). The treble is detailed ,but the mid to low end is lacking. I spent hours to adjust the settings on the AVRs and I just couldn't get them sound right when it comes to music listening. For movies, they are great, but that's about it. When it comes to the Yamaha, music sounds really good and all I have to do is either put it on Direct or Stereo mode. Unfortunately , the surround performance is behind the others. When it comes to the Sony, I am actually surprised by how good it sounds. In my opinion, the A8A has better mid range while the Sony has better high, but both have good bass. The Sony has the best sound for movies and I had a hard time to believe how good it is compares to using Dirac Live on the 4800H. I returned the Denon and Marantz and keeping the Sony and Yamaha, but I definitely will upgrade the Yamaha as soon as their new Aventage models are out.
Excellent report. Thanks for sharing, it is not common to find someone who has experienced all four brands in their home at the same time. I just received the Sony an hour ago so I am very curious is we align on that model as well. I like that you have compared both music and movie listening and have run the calibration software - very thorough. It is unfortunate that the same model doesn’t win in both music and movie categories. I am struggling to find a clear winner - there is always a compromise with each product I review. Some get close enough and we accept its limitations. -Jon
I have the 5000es, 4800h, Pioneer 505. I don't think the 4800 sounds thin at all. Out of the box it sounds amazing. The bass is amazing also. I don't know why it sounds that way for you. The Sony is decent, but I'm keeping the Pioneer. Has the best of both worlds, plus the app is the best. Pioneer sounds amazing out of the box also. I'm trying to learn how to dial in Dirac on it. I thought about getting the Yamaha a6a, but I don't like the looks, and not a big fan of ypao. I am curious how it sounds tho.
I really like the Sound quality Quad chart Jon! Interesting results even if it was subjective and really not too surprising. Love the comparisons.
Glad you found the chart helpful. I am about to add the Monoprice HTP-1 and Arcam AV41 processors to that chart. -Jon
@@ripewave I'm curious how the Sony STR-AZ5000ES will fit in this chart. I think this will be my next AVR.
I should be reviewing Sony next month
@@ripewavehey John, I didn’t see you use this chart for the 6800H review, are you no longer using it?
Great job reviewing the A8A John. I enjoy using the very flexible 'scene' feature that can even incorporate the speaker patterns. Please advise if Onkyo RZ70 or the latest Denon/Maranz AVRs come with the equivalent of scene. Many thanks.
I did not find an equivalent 'scene' feature on the Onkyo or Denon/Marantz. However, the Denon/Marantz comes closer with the ability to have 2 speaker presets. -Jon
Final bought the Yamaha A8A after going back and forth with other receiver’s. I bought it based on your review just hope it all works out well thanks.
How is the A8A working out? I am getting caught up on replies this week - sorry about the delayed response. -Jon
@@ripewave So far I'm enjoying it and looking forward to getting in-depth calibration done soon.
Awesome video, appreciate the detail as always!
Thanks for that kind response. -Jon
There are 3 fans in it, as you said there is 1 small fan for the circuit/processor and there are 2 big once underneath the power supply (you can only see from blow) and they do work but it’s almost impossible to hear them, I had to shuv my phone under the receiver while recording Video with flash on to see them work!
Thanks so much for that correction. I didn't hear anything, so whether they are present or not, I guess it doesn't matter. It would to know how often they come on. However, you may not know if they are inaudible. -Jon
I guess the RZ 70 is too new to enter this comparison, wonder if it would sound any better than the RZ 50 . great review, I love the confined/ spacious, thin/rich axis you used, very useful and intuitive. great review as usual.
I believe I will have the Onkyo TX-RZ70 in within the next two months. Yes - it would be a good comparison to see what spending the extra money delivers over the TX-RZ50. Glad you find the chart is helpful. -Jon
Love the series of videos regarding the Yamaha, quick question is how was the sound signature and sound effect separation in comparison to Denon and marantz?
I felt the Yamaha RX-A8A was slightly clearer with more separation then the Denon AVR-X4800H and Marantz Cinema 40. It was noticeably better in that regard than the lower tier Marantz Cinema 50 and Denon AVR-X3800H. -Jon
@@ripewave thanks for the response!
@@ripewave Did you ever in the end use Dirac Live with the Cinema 40?
No - I only tried Dirac with the Cinema 50. Marantz ties the license to the unit, so I am only willing to pay for the upgrade if I am keeping the unit. -Jon
@@ripewave Makes sense. I am waiting for dirac live bass control. Even then only if it works with directional bass since this is why I bought this AVR.
Just finished watching all 5 parts for the Yamaha! Unbelievable detail, great job! I know you may not have experience with IOTA, but I am having trouble deciding between the Yamaha A6A and the IOTA AVX17 and IOTA AVXP1 7-channel amplifier. I’ve heard they might offer a 9-channel amplifier at some point. Such a difficult decision once you are up around $2500-$2700+ dollars.
That is impressive. Yes - these become tough choices. The combo of the IOTA AVX 17 ($1,700) + Amplifiers ($1,700+) is going to be more then the Yamaha RX-A8A at $3000. I would go with the Yamaha for several reasons - better support/warranty, Auro-3D, top-tier sound (known vs. unknown), room calibration (known YPAO vs. unknown EQFlex), HDMI 2.1, balanced input. What IOTA AVX 17 has in its favor is 17 channels (vs. 13.2) and full set of balanced outputs (vs front L/R only). -Jon
@@ripewave Thanks for the advice! That makes a lot of sense. Yeah, I realize the separates approach would be more costly and take up more room. And I can always add amplification to the Yamaha once I install the 4 height speakers for Atmos. Your reviews have definitely helped me seriously consider the Yamaha! It will be running Monitor Audio Bronze 200 for the sides, the Bronze center channel, Bronze bi-polar surrounds for the sides, their Bronze Atmos up-firing speakers for the rear (I am going to flip them to be direct facing), and Emotiva ceiling speakers for the 4 heights. I actually have 8" Klipsch in-ceiling speakers (5), but I don’t use them anymore since I prefer the main front and surround speakers to be at ear level. The ceiling is just over 11’. Because of those speakers in the ceiling, I was considering the Sony at one point to try and utilize them in some way. My head is going to explode, LOL!!
@@ripewave To clarify, I was looking at their 7-channel amp that is $1,099. Either way, still more expensive than the A6A.
Yes - it ear level speakers at ear level is best vs mounted high, especially with 11 foot ceilings, it at least Sony has a solution to compensate if you can’t. Are you using the Klipsch for real heights now or are they abandoned in place? I would think there could be a way to leverage them so you could have 2 or 3 rows of heights. -Jon
@@ripewave I purchased 4 of Emotiva’s ceiling speakers when they went on sale for $199 a pair. I plan to install those overhead in closer proximity to the main viewing position.
Btw, if you don’t want to scroll thru all the inputs, you could disable the inputs you don’t use so you only need to scroll to the ones that are active.
Nice tip! Thanks - Jon
Excelent!
Measuring output amplification per channel in future will be great.
Audhiolics make a excelent job with A6A. At the time I was not aware of that it was a Big surprise. So I will add a power amp. to ear the diference. Im just in navigation very smoothly.
Let me know what you are able perceive when comparing internal vs. external amplifiers. I suspect the you will need to give the unit some dynamic source material to really expose a difference. -Jon
@@ripewave I will tell you about what I perceive after receiving the multichannel power amp AT4007. By the way, you were partial responsable for this choise. I view your excelents videos about power amps. Tanks for the advice.
I think you made a great choice. Would like one myself. -Jon
@@RAMIRO61FERNANDESwaiting for results. thanks
@@ranakirti Here are the results:
With AT4007:
1- The sound change fot better, more beautiful, refined, more real, delicious for my ears.
2 - At a high volume, no britghness, the is all there, amazing detail, a fantastic experience, but for only few minutes because Im not crazy,
3 - Amplifier very silent.
4 - Today may be I go to AT6007.
5 - If AT6007 or AT4000 is on your budget dont look back! Go for it!
Thanks for the shout out regarding Auro-3D. I’m happy about your review as I evaluated most of the others in your product positing map - I have been a Yamaha dealer for decades before I switched to be a professor
So fortunate to have a former Yamaha dealer view this content. Glad I am touching some points that someone with your experience feels are important. Let me know if there are any statements I have made that don't align with your knowledge. I am sure there are details that you have which I was not able to discover with my one month analysis. Hope you can continue to weigh in on these videos. -Jon
what level of integrated/stereo amplifier in the yamaha lineup would be needed to sound better than the a6a/a8a for 2 channel music performance?
thanks
No one puts out content aa valuable as you. Thank you.
Also I wish this unit had a balanced output for subwoofer at least. Is there another unit comparable price wise that does offer that?
I agree - it should have balance subwoofer outputs. However, this level of sound quality is hard to find at this price. The Marantz Cinema 40 ($3,500) I feel is a tier below and more money, but still no balanced subwoofer outputs. The Anthem AVM 70 is in the same tier for more money ($4,000) and finally you have balance subwoofer outputs. I haven't tested the Pioneer VSX-LX805 ($2,999) yet, but that may be your best option - likely in the same tier and has balance subwoofer outputs. -Jon
@@ripewave Interesting. Thank you
I can save you some time and money. Don't bother. Its not that balancing isn't good or useful. It is, but the way that the industry advertises and explained it turned it into the most misunderstood concept in audio (pro and consumer). To start with, there are different ways an audio component can be balanced, and each way has more than one option as to how it can be wired. So, you can have 2 different balanced components, and they can be implemented in a completely different way. This is a pretty big topic, and I can't possibly cover everything in a single post, so I'll try to give you some info you may find useful in context to what you are asking for here. Balanced connections on a HT receiver.
There are 2 main ways a component can be balanced. Connection to connection balancing and fully balanced, or fully differential balancing. There's a huge difference between them. Connection to connection balancing is when they take a regular single ended audio component and add balanced connections just at the inputs and outputs. That means the signal traveling between the 2 components will be balanced, but not inside the components themselves. Almost all pro gear is balanced this way, as is less expensive home gear. This is the type of balancing that will be on the receivers this video covers. If you're lucky. Quite often they will just put xlr connectors on the back of a component and label it balanced. Its electrically identical to using an rca connector.
Then you have fully balanced, or fully differential balancing. This is when they actually make the component itself balanced. This way costs a lot more because every component in the signal path has to be doubled up. To visualize, a standard single ended, or rca cable, has 2 conductors (+ and -). A balanced connection requires a 3 conductor cable. Typically, xlr is used, but any 3 conductor cable/connector is fine (TRS, din, etc..). Balanced has 2 signal conductors (+) and a ground (-). A fully differential component adds all those extra parts so the extra signal conductor can have its own path through the component.
The problems arise when you have a mix of balanced and SE components. The 2 modes of operation are not compatible. In order to make the connection work, something has to be done. You either make it so both components are SE, or they're both balanced. Most people aren't aware of this, and when they think they have a balanced connection, 90%+ of the time, it isn't. In reality, only 2 of the 3 conductors are utilized, and that makes it electrically identical to using a pair of rca cables. So, unless both components are balanced, and they're connected with a balanced cable, you won't be balanced. The signal defaults to single ended.
This is how I know all of these receivers are not balanced and just have xlr jacks, or are balanced, but just at the inputs and outputs. All the other channels and component inputs has to be balanced as well. So, your best case scenario will be the receiver accepts a balanced signal, but immediately converts it to SE. Worst case, is the signal was never balanced to begin with.
What does this mean for you? There's nothing to worry about. The only benefit of point to point balancing is to reduce noise and signal degradation over long runs of cables. That's why its so common in pro gear. The average home HT system doesn't have long enough runs of cable to worry about it. Its possible, but not the norm. If you have a fully balanced system, there's a potential for better sound quality. However, the differences are not that big. In order to hear any improvement from fully balanced components, you need high end components that are capable of presenting a lot of details. Even high end HT receivers don't have that kind of resolution. Also, the fact that you are asking about a bass only connection, you'll never hear any meaningful improvement in any case. The audible effects of balancing are in the mids and highs.
If you want to see what type of connection your gear has, get the owners manual and look at the specs. Any time you balance a signal, the end result is you end up with about 4-6 db more output. You should see 2 sets of specs. One set is for balanced and the other is unbalanced. If you don't see both, 99% its not balanced.
This may look like a long post, but I'm just scratching the surface. There's a lot more technical information that I just can't get to in a post like this.
I missed your reply here until today. What you present is valuable information. Yes, it is hard to know when I/o which has a physical XLR connection is really balanced. Your guidance is helpful in determining.
I believe that the IO on the RmC-1, in this video, is fully balanced Fully differential as they advertise. I have purchased their matching amplifiers which are advertised as the same. I am running some long distances - over 20 feet to the other side of the room for some amps and powered subwoofers as well as a phono pre-amp across the room to its balanced input. I don’t have any audible noise, but are these balanced as you understand? -Jon
If I dont need the 11 channels of the A8A, would A6A be much of a downgrade? From my research all the processing and hardware are on par.
My guess is that the A6A would be the same less the channels. -Jon
@@ripewave Two (2) - DAC ES9026PRO ... is a great difference.
Jon, thanks for the high quality, in depth reviews. I have watched all 5 videos twice now. Once while selecting an AVR and once after purchasing an A6A when it went on sale. Your expertise was key to my decision.
Could you please tell me which amplifiers you are using in your testing in place of the internal ones? Thanks in advance!
Glad the content helped. I am using all Emotiva Differential Reference amplifiers for the ear level channels. For heights I have a vintage Sony TA-N9000ES amplifier. -Jon
@@ripewave Nice setup, thanks for taking the time !
Hi can you compare an ARCAM AVR30 or AVR31 please?
Maybe the AV41 as it is less expensive but should have similar sound characteristics - just without the amps. -Jon
hi , great video.
I'm looking at the a6a. where in the graph would you place it performance/sound wise....?
at almost twice the cost vs 3800 would it be much better at 2 channel stereo performance or would it be better to get a 3800 and add a 2 channel amp for the front left/right...?
thanks.
I perform all my sound comparisons using 100% externally amplifiers and the same amps and speakers connected with each. Therefore, the Denon AVR-X3800H remains in the third tier (down and to the left) of AV Receivers I have tested. The Yamaha Aventage RX-A8A is in the top tier (up and to the right). This remains true if you are to do the same and add an external 2 channel amp to the front left/right. -Jon
HEllo: Relative to min 22:45, the PEQ. Is there any AV receiver out there which can load REW filter files ?
Yes. Emotiva, Denon, Marantz.
Just finished the series, most in depth review I have seen on this line. Curious about your findings on the subs sometimes running one and sometimes running two. Did you set them up as left/right or front/back. If you tagged them in setup as front/back, your results make sense.
Based on all the positive Reviews about the A8A her and in other places, I decided to buy it as a replacement for my Denon X6700 that had a few issues with HDMi signal, humming noise/vibration from some component (had it in for repair twice, but they never manged to fix it fully).
To get right to the point...I sent the Yamaha back very quickly.
While HDMI worked better and the placement of sound in the Surround and Overhead channels was clearly superior, the YPAO system just didn't work in my Home Theatre. While Audyssey (especially with Multeq-X) gave me perfectly controlled nd smooth bass and also did a goos job over the whole frequency range, YPAO essentially looked at my two subs, shrugged, and did nothing. That's just not acceptable for a 3000+€ AVR these days. Sure, I could have spent a few hours and manually corrected the Subs with REW or invested in an Antimode, but at the price Yamaha is asking for their AVRs, I expect them to do at least a passable job in terms of room correction.
This is very helpful feedback. While I had better results with YPAO, your experience cannot be ignored. Perhaps my sub placement and room characteristic were different enough to result in better calibration. There are a lot of variables. If that is the case, then it speaks to focusing on a more rounded calibration tool that can handle a wider range of conditions. I hope you are able to find a receiver that will achieve your goals. -Jon
@@ripewave
The interesting thing to me is, that YPAO did the exact same corrections (almost none) on my Subs on the RX-A3080 back in 2018. It's consistent, useless, but consistent...😉
Seeing the difference in Subwoofer frequency response between the A8A and my X6700H was honestly shocking. Without REW I would have noticed that something is off, but would not have known what.
Hi Jon, im on a budget for a small room did you recomend the yamaha advantage a2a over a Denon 2800 onkyo 6100, thanks for your work
Did you make a decision? I just got the A2a and I'm really pleased. I replaced a ten year old Onkyo with it and though I went down a notch on the hierarchy, I think it sounds just a bit better.
- Some less plastic and better external build quality.
- Bigger display with more information.
- Better on-screen display menu.
Yamaha should seriously rethink about this if they want to have a real flagship receiver.
I am very surprised that Yamaha has not followed up with a flagship AV Processor separate. That could be their opportunity to delivery a statement piece. -Jon
I...know.... I'm waiting.... Yamaha... !
Good amp but too many design flaws!
Most high end units like this are going to be in a closet so the on screen display is not even needed. Everything should be on the app like Sonos. Would be so much easier for programming.
I really don’t get why they don’t just make a tempered glass front with large displays or VU meters and charge a little bit more. It’s not like this additional stuff is that expensive, but it would make it look so much more high end.
What about comparing A8A with Marantz 8015
I have been waiting for Marantz to release a successor to the SR8015. It will be interesting to see what they announce in September - they typically announce new models around that time. -Jon
I’d love to see the A8A vs the Yamaha 3080. I don’t see much difference after performing the latest firmware upgrade on the 3080. I’m betting they have the same amps and DAC
@@ThunderJarvisthe replacement of the 3080 is the A6A. I had the 3080 and upgraded to the A8A. There are several elements that are noticeable (the A8A is a more premium and rock solid unit). In terms of sound, it uses 2x DACs compared to 1x DAC the 3080 uses. Power supply section has been also improved significantly. 5 years warranty is also a plus.
@@panoulix oh man you’re going to make me push that buy button. 👍😂
I wonder when the next line is released. I would imagine at CES.
@@ripewave I have a 5.1 setup with all separates currently and I am planing to buy the A8A and use it with 4 separate Amps (front, center, Surround back, surround) and using the A8A for 4 height channels. I have 4 older Yamaha amps from early 80's that are awesome (MX800, M70, M60, M50). I kept waiting for an upgrade to CX-A5200 per-amp and finally gave up and settling for A8A. I actually think I am better off with the A8a because I can use the amps section for my height channels and do not have to buy more amps for those. My two from speakers are Yamaha NS1000 and to get best sound out of these you must pare them with a good amp (MX800). These speakers sound so crystal clear and awesome with the MX800. Yamaha has a new line of apms that replace my older Yamaha apms (Yamaha A-S3200 and A-S2200 Natural Sound Integrated Amplifier), but they are out of my budget ($5000 to $7000 range each).
I think this setup would be awesome, what you all think?
Hi, first of all i want to thank you very much for letting us (the viewers) to get know all the gadget better.
I just want to know which of those amp in this series of your video has a sound kinda... "OUT OFF SPEAKER TO GRAB YOU" sound quality ?
I missed this one earlier. I haven’t done a lot of testing with the internal amps. However, the Yamaha seems to be the best. -Jon
@@ripewave thank you so much.
Until now the yamaha rx-a8a still the best ?
Correct
@@ripewave Wow, look like i got to direct my way to that rx-a8a expensive top model of the yamaha. Im not a fan of yamaha after i had owned a scondhand of yamaha mid range(rx-v657) and few experience(through online video) of yamaha amps.....i think their new generation audio product produce laidback sound and tamed treble. I prefer as my first comment👆🏻 a sound that out infont speaker("out of speaker to grab you") sound.
Anyway thank thank you so much for your reply and your review videos, its really a great help.
Thanks Jon,
Yet again an amazing indepth video.
Now I am stumped. I was going to get the c40 next month due to your other videos and other research.
Now I feel conflicted with the a8a.
If it is a tier up, seems like the better bet as I am music first then movies.
Is ypal good enough for room correction in your opinion?
I guess I will have to do a demo with both and make up my mind.
Good stuff and thanks for bringing in an honest view!
Nick
Nick, I feel I could recommend either model. It does come down to what you value most. If you are seeking a better Auro-3D experience and more control over sound decoding, then the Marantz may be better.
As for room calibration... The Marantz Dirac option is going to add at least $259 for the limited version ($349 for full range) but neither provide the Dirac bass control feature. YPAO is simpler to use then Dirac, is included with the AVR and is almost as good as Dirac if you don't like to tinker. I haven't got good results from Marantz's standard Audyssey tool as it sounds dull to me and lacks bass. They also charge $19.99 for the Audyssey MultEQ Editor app, which give you control over the results, whereas the standard on-screen user interface provides no control - so that is a most have in my mind, if you use Audyssey. Then they have the Audyssey MultEQ-X PC application, which makes Audyssey more like Dirac with ability to save results, input target curves and export filters. MultEQ-X is targeted for the pro installers and sells for $200 (undercutting the cost of Dirac). I need more time with MultEQ-X, but my initial feeling is it helps to deliver Dirac-level results from Audyssey for the first time. If you like to get in a fine-tune, then I would choose Marantz with Dirac or MultEQ-X options over Yamaha with YPAO. If you want good results within the effort or added cost, go with Yamaha.
YAMAHA summary - one option (from AVR)
YPAO = included - good results, easy
MARANTZ summary - several options
(from AVR - easiest - no control over results)
- Audyssey = included - results not good
(from mobile device - still easy, but effort to load app - more control over results)
- Audyssey MultiEQ Editor app - $20 - similar disappointing results as on-screen version
(from Windows computer - medium to large effort - most control over results)
- Audyssey MultEQ-X = $199 - good results, full range
- Dirac Limited = $259 - good results, limited range
- Dirac Full = $349 - good results, full range
Jon
@ripewave Hey Jon,
Thankyou for such a detailed response!!!
Just it seems a lot of reviewers were slamming ypao.
Makes me nervous.
Another thing is I will go in store and see if I like the Yamaha's sound compared to marantz. I am a denon guy and have been for 20 years.
Loving your detailed look at everything, which gives me more trust in your breakdown.
Thanks again,
Nick
Since 1995 I've only owned Yamaha AV. 2023 i purchased the Marantz sr8015 and I feel its definitely over rated in terms of audio quality. Will be selling to purchase Yamaha once again.
While I haven’t heard the SR8015, I did have the newer Cinema 40 in-house to review. I felt that the Cinema 40, didn’t sound as good as the Yamaha RX-A8A I reviewed - Jon
@ripewave Well I've calibrated the Marantz in every way. Then bi amped onto another power amp. Even used different high quality speakers. Sounds nice. But not impressive. I have a Yamaha 2020 and a Yamaha 3060. Marantz didn't sound any better than those running True HD. The SR 8015 sound quality does improve noticeably when completely switched over to the preamp mode but then whats the point of buying a reciever? Again, even in pure preamp mode the sound quality isn't better than Yamaha's older models.
I think the Marantz Cinema 40 I tested can come closer with the Dirac Love calibration I performed. Your points make sense
You have the Yamaha AV controller APP to turn things on and off
Thanks - that is helpful to know. -Jon
If you hold down a preset button fore about 3 sec you store whats on for the moment on the settings and income source
Sir, how u feel abt latest ypao compare to dirac live? thanks.
I found YPAO easier to use, less options, but the results compared well against the competition with Dirac. In fact this is the first model which I felt sound better (slightly) then my Emotiva RMC-1. How much of that is the quality of the electronics and how much is due to the room correction software- hard to say. So it could be that Dirac is better, but if the unit itself is better designed, then the end result is best. -Jon
Great content 😊 & very informative as well 😊 Both Denon & Yamaha build good units what about Pioneer & Pioneer Elite? & Sony ES line ?
Just finished an 8 part review of Sony. Sounds great, a few misses. Pioneer, Onkyo, Integra review series starts this week. -Jon
Hi sir jon, any news for new Yamaha aventage receiver when they release this year or next year? I mean the new version of rx-a8a & a6a.
I have not heard when the next models will be introduced for Yamaha. What I did hear is that the platform Yamaha introduced with the RX-A8A and RX-A6A is intended to serve Yamaha for the next decade. Yes, there will be am evolution with both hardware and software improvements/ new features, but there won’t be a full redesign. -Jon
@@ripewavethanks for the response sir jon.
Hey Jon, I've watched this video like 4 times. I think the results all depends on the room. Everyone's area is different. I'm guessing the RZ50/Pioneer 505/Integra 5.4 would all pretty much sound the same? They should be in the same category at the 4800/40 right? The 4800 and 505 sound really good in my room. I looked them more than the Sony 5000es. You can't really tweak the Sony much. I think the Pioneer is the most user friendly. I'm not a fan of Heos either.
Perfect great job
Thank you! Glad you liked the content. -Jon
Thanks!
Thanks so much - very helpful. -Jon
I could see utilizing top audio to listen to The Moody Blues, Nights In White Satin, but George what’shisface? “Y’all needs ta listen to mah tun-ages on the fahnest of equipmentses. Well, there weren’t a lot of DVDs in the beginning, I guess. Everyone else was clinging to their VHS tapes.
I listen to it all. To test some formats, I take what is available. -Jon
Hey Any Ideals For Speakers Great Far Home Theater 🎥 Set Up (Klipsch Kef Arendal Svs Ect.Ect!) For Movie 🎬, Music And Gaming??? What Speakers, U Say To Use????
I have yet to dig deep into speakers brands. So I don't have direct experience to provide specific guidance. As you have included "music" within you selection I would aim for a speaker which you feel are great for music first. If you like them for music, they will be good for games and movies as well. Having a musical subwoofer as well will be key for your movie and gaming experience.
I have only a couple of brands. The small Klipsch "The Fives" I have are terrible for music, but great for movies and tv sound. The Polk lsi and lsim flagship speakers I have are used with Rythmik F18 subwoofers and produced great reproduction for all types of sources - music to games. -Jon
Just got a pair of arendals 1723 monitor s and they are pretty good. For films and music.
Hier, thanks again for tout work. In m'y opinion , Onkyo, Sony, Yamaha have a Fuller sound, Denon ,marantz thiner, less bass. Onkyo, Sony more impact, more spacious. Thé différenciés in home cinéma amplifier are small but theirs prices are bigger. How much does Yamaha a8 sound better than Onkyo rz50 which costs 2000€ less‽ I had auro 3d, imax enhanced and so on, I found they are very very similar. I would bet that a Onkyo a 9130 for 220€ sounds better in stereo than any of these home cinéma amplifiers. So Onkyo rz50+ Onkyo a9130 connected in bypass( main in, poweramp) for less than 1300€ with a. 11 channel system. So why would I pay 3200€ ‽ It would be really interesting to compare an Onkyo a9130 in stereo to the other home cinema amplifiers. One can have Dirac, 360 reality or auro 3d but if does sound no good‽ So....
Great thought here - got me thinking. First, your analysis of current Sony, Denon, Marantz and Yamaha is on track with my opinions. It is a great debate about whether the new models can live up to the performance of the old. Many say the prior generation of Denon is better. Not sure about all the others. And all those sound formats are useless if the unit doesn’t perform well. Thanks for sharing - a lot to agree with. -Jon
All AVR for multi channel protocol ( dts , dolby, auro 3D) don't implement microsoft multichannel driver asio wme to be able to listen audio from cubase or flstudio when sound use hdmi connect to denon yamaha . At this time pc support only multi channel in read mode from dvd, game, music but never from audio daw in realtime . Why ? there was dts live and dolby live in the past.
The connector say nothing about protocol so we have the choice between xlr or aes ebu protocol on 3 pins connector ? Yamaha is wellknow for pro music gear....
Great point - why doesn’t more home theater components support pro audio functions and formats? I agree - doesn’t make sense. -Jon
I still think the denon 6700 is a beast..
Waiting to see what the X6800 delivers when released. -Jon
Are all these channels really worth it? From what I see, I'm not so sure. Before I say anything, I'm not an expert on HT. For 2 channel music, I am, but for movies, I like a nice HT system, but I don't have the technical knowledge some others have with HT specific gear.
That said, here's what I've noticed. I have an older HT system consisting of 5 speakers. What sets this system apart, is the quality. The 5 speakers and electronics are all very high quality compared to what you would normally see in a typical receiver based, or even many preamp/amp separates. Also, none of the speakers are HT specific. What I mean by that is I don't have a center channel speaker. I have a 3rd speaker that is the same as my 2 main front speakers. For surrounds I have 2 full size regular speakers like in the front, just one model down. They're a little smaller. But they're meant to be used at main speakers, not surround specific.
All my friends have one of these modern systems with all the speakers, and every last one of them comes over to watch movies on my old HT system. What I'm thinking, is there has to be some kind of cutoff point where newer technology can't overcome pure build and sound quality. I was actually thinking about upgrading, but I hesitate. I've heard some of my friends systems and I can see why they always come over to use mine. I'm definitely going to upgrade my screen. They all have better video quality than me, so when I do that upgrade, I was thinking about updating my processor to handle more channels. Before I forget, I know someone is going to recommend I get subs. I have no plans on getting them because with the speakers I have, you just don't need them. I have all the bass I could ever want.
Thanks for sharing details about your system and experience to date vs friend who have more modern setups yet are still falling short of your 5.1 system.
I was running 5.0 until I started this channel a few years ago. I then moved to 7.0 to 7.2 to 7.2.4 and noticed the upgrade each time I enhanced. However, I feel that I always expanded with quality components. I will note that I was content with my 5.0 system but moved to larger speaker layouts out of curiosity. Therefore, your current position I can relate to.
What I believe you have going for you is the consistency of speakers. Having the same or similar speakers for each location is ideal - including the center speaker. Sounds like you may have behind a transparent screen - nice!
Clarity and timbre matching make a big difference from my experience. Again, if you have that - perfect!
Having lived without a subwoofer for almost 20 years, your choice not to purchase one is also something I understand. However, the dual 18” sealed subwoofers I added made a huge impact for all types of content. So if you have the space, I recommend considering. You may be surprised. Taking the time to properly position and integrate with the room and align with you other speakers is the key to success.
The speakers that have made the least impact have been my rear surrounds. They only seem to fill in lightly to the experience. If I isolate the back channels and listen by themselves, the levels are still low. The height channels on the other hand are speakers I really appreciate. They help to create a more enveloping sound. I took care to purchase top of the line timbre matching ceiling speakers. Albeit, they are powered by the one amplifier I have which is of lower performance. So I think replacing that amp could improve clarity. I wouldn’t just throw anything up on the height speakers given how active they can be with the right source or upmixing.
I wish I had a projector and screen - someday. I am focused on sound quality first as display technologies have been moving at a faster pace.
With my recommendations above don’t feel those are necessary. I feel it is better to have an older super high quality 5.0 system then a new basic 9.4.6 system. -Jon
@@ripewave"Having lived without a subwoofer for almost 20 years, your choice not to purchase one is also something I understand. However, the dual 18” sealed subwoofers I added made a huge impact for all types of content. So if you have the space, I recommend considering. You may be surprised. Taking the time to properly position and integrate with the room and align with you other speakers is the key to success. "
I should have included more information about my system. Everything I have is made by a company called Meridian. Its a smaller company that most people probably never heard of so I didn't bother to mention it. I have 3 8000's in the front and 2 7000's in the rear. My electronics are the matching 800 series. Every component in the system is upgradable to whatever new standards evolve. With regards to bass, these are not your typical speakers. All Meridian speakers have built in amps for each driver, along with a DAC and digital preamp. My processor really just routes the signal to the DAC in the speakers. But when it comes to bass, these are true full range speakers. I simply don't want anymore. I use subs in my main 2 channel system, and if I thought the HT system needed subs, I would just get them. For the other channels I don't have, I can just buy cards to install in my processor, then add speakers. The only drawback is Meridian doesn't do anything cheap. If I update the system, it will be a substantial investment. I just have to decide if its worth the expense. If I cared as much about watching movies as I do listening to music on my 2 channel system, I would have already made the upgrade.
I do have subwoofer, but I only added two years ago. They are two Rhymik F16s, 16 inch sealed active servo subwoofers. They added a lot to my experience. I completely agree.
Meridian - yes that is a special system. I mention Meridian in my processor overview videos. However, I don’t have a lot of details. Which immersive format are they supporting? I can seem to find that detail. I like the ideal of having active speakers. You know the amps and crossovers are perfectly matched if delivered by a strong company. -Jon
Yamaha u onkyo?
If price is not a factor - Yamaha. However, Onkyo TX-RZ50 is great for its price. -Jon
When the display of my bloody Beko washing machine looks 10 times better than the display of this Yamaha flagship AVR, it is a great red flag for any potential customer regarding what's inside of that AVR and its audiophile and videophile performance... They really went very wrong with the actual design. Better without any display, than with this one... I wonder when will they come out with an AV processor to match the level of the build quality of the 15-year-old Denon AVP A1HD. When will we receive fully differential balanced XLR outputs, top-of-the-line OP-amps, top-of-the-line DAC from ESS Sabre or from AKM, and dedicated ultra-low noise power supplies? With a serious phono preamp for both MM and MC cartridges included... Also with HDCD decoder, SACD stereo, and multichannel playback - because audiophiles don't abandon their disc collection... Streaming capability capable of reproducing highest quality audio files from Tidal (Master)... And regarding video processing power - when will we get a trully performant video section, one capable of upsampling DVD video to 4 or even 8K resolution? Personally, I want a 'monster' capable of playing every audio and video file to a maximum level of quality with the help of nowadays top-of-the-line technology. I want an AV processor that will be the best out of the box, one that you will not need to send to other companies specialized in audio that do tuning. Also, to my opinion, It is completely useless to add more channels just for some questionable sound effects if the audio quality is not getting significantly better!
The display in the device for $4,326 is simply shameful.
While I appreciate that Yamaha focuses on sound quality, the display seems to be an easy enhancement to address. -Jon
To be fair, I nearly never look at it.
Valid point for many. -Jon
I guess this really depends on person and if you plan to use display for anything.
I own Cinema 50, and it has tiny display, but I love it. And I have it closed in rack anyway, out of my sight.
But I get your point if display and information on display is important to you.
I will say the Cinema 59 is cosmetically appealing
A receiver is old fashion. 4k.8k ect.
Only what count is your tv. Only use 1 hdmi too receiver for sound from tv too receiver too het get 7.1 or more. Don't let receiver do the upscaling.. A tv Is doing that. Only use receiver for the sound!
Receiver for picture is stupid. The tv these days is doing the job.
So it's only commerciële a expense receiver. Don't let you fooled!
When all hdmi on tv it automatisch choose the entrance, on receiver you must pusch buttons.
I use lgc4 and a denon ax1200 and works great. Earc too arc.
The weight and cooling systems are only because off the amount off speakers,not the sound!
Use one cable! Nothing more.
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, which is best, damnit!
Sounds like an Iggy Pop song. I leave the final judgement to the audience. I just present the features and sound quality assessment and let you decide which is right for you. -Jon
Thanks!
Thanks so much - this donation really helps the channel. -Jon