# getting ready to pull trigger on Denon x4000



## eurovw89 (Feb 25, 2010)

I currently own the Pioneer 1019 and have not been impressed with it since I bought it. I am looking to upgrade my avr to something I can have and not worry about upgrading a few years down the road. I have read nothing but good reviews about the Denon x4000, so I went to Magnolia and listened to it and liked it and listened to it next to the Marantz 7008 and I could not really hear a difference.....well in my opinion.

I was wondering if anyone could recommend another receiver to go listen to.

I am currently running 7.1 with Yamaha NS series fronts, surrounds, backs, and PA120 as my sub. I am looking for a receiver that will last for years and be ready for a speaker upgrade when the time comes. Basically the best sounding receiver within a budget of $1,500 or less and using the Audyssey MultEQ XT32.

Thanks in advance,
Jeff


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

The X4000 gets nothing but rave reviews. We upgraded from a Marantz SR5007 to a Denon AVR-4520CI and did so for the amplifier section and the XT32 w/SubEQ HT. I can't say the 4520 sounds any better than any other unit.

If you're happy with how the X4000 sounds, you'll be happy with it once you get home and run XT32. As to how long the technology will stay current, that's up to the manufactures.


----------



## eurovw89 (Feb 25, 2010)

BeeMan458 said:


> The X4000 gets nothing but rave reviews. We upgraded from a Marantz SR5007 to a Denon AVR-4520CI and did so for the amplifier section and the XT32 w/SubEQ HT. I can't say the 4520 sounds any better than any other unit.
> 
> If you're happy with how the X4000 sounds, you'll be happy with it once you get home and run XT32. As to how long the technology will stay current, that's up to the manufactures.


so you couldnt hear a difference between the 5007 and the 4520?


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

Pioneer SC-72 would be comparable to the AVR X-4000.
Sorry just realized you wanted Audessey.
The X-4000 should be a great AVR.


----------



## 86eldel68-deactivated (Nov 30, 2010)

eurovw89 said:


> ... I am looking for ... the best sounding receiver within a budget of $1,500 or less and using the Audyssey MultEQ XT32.


That has Denon AVR-X4000 written all over it.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

eurovw89 said:


> so you couldnt hear a difference between the 5007 and the 4520?


Nope. But I have to acknowledge that I wasn't looking to hear a difference. I was looking for the better amplifier section and XT32/SubEQ HT. And what I was looking for in room correction software and amplification, I was rewarded with. I'm a very happy camper and I thank God pretty much every day for the improvement.

Once all amplifiers are equalized, and working within specifications, double-blind tests have shown that the most experienced user listeners, using familiar recorded material, can't choose above random chance between their amplifier and a cheepie. We run two separate subwoofers, hence the need for SubEQ HT and it has been shown time and again that XT32 is superior to XT and personal testing has show me that XT32 w/SubEQ HT is superior to XT plus Anti-Mode 8033S II.

If you check out our photo album you'll see before and after graphs that empirically back up my above.


----------



## Reefdvr27 (Aug 1, 2012)

eurovw89 said:


> I currently own the Pioneer 1019 and have not been impressed with it since I bought it. I am looking to upgrade my avr to something I can have and not worry about upgrading a few years down the road. I have read nothing but good reviews about the Denon x4000, so I went to Magnolia and listened to it and liked it and listened to it next to the Marantz 7008 and I could not really hear a difference.....well in my opinion. I was wondering if anyone could recommend another receiver to go listen to. I am currently running 7.1 with Yamaha NS series fronts, surrounds, backs, and PA120 as my sub. I am looking for a receiver that will last for years and be ready for a speaker upgrade when the time comes. Basically the best sounding receiver within a budget of $1,500 or less and using the Audyssey MultEQ XT32. Thanks in advance, Jeff


 I believe I have heard others say that the Marantz 7008 is almost identical to the 4520 or X4000, so chances are you would not hear a difference. I also talked to a guy that had the 8801 and 4520 and told me I would gain nothing sound wise over my 4520 moving to the 8801. I am looking for a new pre pro myself. I have a few in mind.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

When we were hunting for an upgrade for the SR5007, I was told the Pre-Pro in the 4520CI is a scaled down version of the 8801.


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

BeeMan458 said:


> When we were hunting for an upgrade for the SR5007, I was told the Pre-Pro in the 4520CI is a scaled down version of the 8801.


I believe it's scaled down from the AVP-A1HDCI, which is their top end pre-pro. The basic technologies are there in both, but outside of the AVP-A1HDCI being only a pre-pro, its also fully balanced internally, where the 4529CI is not. Otherwise they are quite similar in nearly every way except cost.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

gazoink said:


> Otherwise they are quite similar in nearly every way except cost.


AV8801 or AVP-A1HDCI, considering the price of either of these units, which ever the 4520 is a scaled down version of, agreeing with you, this makes the 4520 a screaming good package, for a screaming good price.


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

BeeMan458 said:


> AV8801 or AVP-A1HDCI, considering the price of either of these units, which ever the 4520 is a scaled down version of, agreeing with you, this makes the 4520 a screaming good package, for a screaming good price.


My thoughts exactly. And if you go the next step, the X4000 (which also has pre-outs) has all the important stuff the 4520 has for even less.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

gazoink said:


> My thoughts exactly. And if you go the next step, the X4000 (which also has pre-outs) has all the important stuff the 4520 has for even less.


The exception, the amplifier section isn't as robust as the 4520 which is good to 4ohm as opposed to 6ohm for the X4000. From what I've read, even nominal 8ohm speakers can be dragged down to <4ohm so for my needs, this is an important feature. If one doesn't need this feature, then in my opinion, agreeing with you, the X4000 is a screaming good deal.


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

BeeMan458 said:


> The exception, the amplifier section isn't as robust as the 4520 which is good to 4ohm as opposed to 6ohm for the X4000. From what I've read, even nominal 8ohm speakers can be dragged down to <4ohm so for my needs, this is an important feature. If one doesn't need this feature, then in my opinion, agreeing with you, the X4000 is a screaming good deal.


Agreed, but don't put too much emphasis on it. Yes, the impedance curve of any 8 ohm speaker can dip below 4 ohms, but that doesn't mean an amp spec'ed at 6 ohms can't drive it. The impedance dips mean that statistically there will be program dependent momentary loads below 4 ohms, but the exact demand on the amp depends on how much power is demanded into that load and for how long. If a short program peak happens to land in the 4 ohm area of the curve, it will be driven just fine. It's a question of how low the curve dips, the Q of the dip, and as a result how much program material lands in that area statistically. The higher the Q of the dip, the less chance of peaking out the amp in normal use because the chances of a maximum output peak landing in that region are very low, and the chances of a sustained maximum signal there approach zero.

That's why we deal with impedance averages, not small curve-area dips. If, on average, a speaker load is 4 ohms, then an amp rated at 6 stands a fair chance of having some trouble delivering peak power to it. That doesn't mean it can't drive the load at all though, nor does it mean the amp will shut down during normal operation. It just means the maximum happens earlier.

It's always educational to look at the impedance curve of your speakers. Just remember, its the average of the curve, not the peak deviation from average.

But of course if you have the cash, and you aren't hooked on separates, the 4520 is the clear choice for that and other reasons.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

gazoink said:


> But of course if you have the cash, and you aren't hooked on separates, the 4520 is the clear choice for that and other reasons.


We upgraded to the 4520 from a Marantz SR5007 because the 5007's amplifier couldn't handle the load. I didn't have the cash but instead, had the credit so I hit the hip marked plastic and purchased a 4520. At the time, Denon had a deal going where delivered, they threw a DBT-3313UDCI universal Blu-ray player into the deal with full authorized dealer warranty for $2,200.00 USD. That kind of Godfather deal, I couldn't refuse. 

The point, through first hand experience, I learned about the need for the amplifier in the AVR to be able to handle the load or you're going hear the speakers fade to the background as the demands of the sound track are ramped up.

(i'm just a layperson so I only have what I've read and personal experience to guide me on issues of this kind)

I can't find an impedance curve for our speakers.


----------



## Architect7 (Apr 9, 2012)

I am going to be the odd one out here...I had an X4000 for two months and while it was "good" there was always something off about it coming from a big high end DIY 2-channel system. I switched to an Anthem MRX-500 and the change has been very satisfying. I like ARC better than XT32 and the sound seems to have better incrementals...the Denon sounded like it was either on or off...hard to describe I know but I feel like the Anthem has more going on between the peaks and valleys. I have been extremely happy with it and I plan to upgrade to another Anthem when the time comes.

You should be able to score an MRX-510 for around $1500 from a local dealer, tax included.


----------



## Andre (Feb 15, 2010)

I have had the X4000 for about 6 months and I am happy with it


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

I was looking at target graphs for ARC 2 and if I'm reading the graphs correctly, ARC 2 crushes bass.

MRX-710 review










ARC 2 requires hand entry of distances vs the automatic measure-and-set provided be XT32/SubEQ HT. From the above graph, it shows ARC 2 crushing bass output. The point, based on the above, bolstered by personal experience with XT32/SubEQ HT and lesser room correction systems, I would stick with the X4000.


----------



## Architect7 (Apr 9, 2012)

Not sure I follow as those are targeting a cutoff of 40-50hz and allowing overlap with the sub as expected. Can you elaborate?

Manually entering distance will almost always be more accurate than auto calibration. My X4000 wanted to say my left was 1ft further than my right even though they were the same.


----------



## eurovw89 (Feb 25, 2010)

Thanks guy...I think ill be picking up the x4000 this weekwnd. BB said only 30 left in maryland. Thanks for all the input


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

The 710 may meet many people's needs, but as far as I can tell the USB port is for firmware updates only and the Ethernet is for ARC only.
At this price point that's a pretty big hole.

I use a hard drive and an iPod on the USB multiple times a week.
When I bought my gear Ethernet was not common, I would like to have it and I would want it to have full functionality.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

Architect7 said:


> Not sure I follow as those are targeting a cutoff of 40-50hz and allowing overlap with the sub as expected. Can you elaborate?
> 
> Manually entering distance will almost always be more accurate than auto calibration. My X4000 wanted to say my left was 1ft further than my right even though they were the same.


At 6dB down, the owner is losing performance at approximately 80Hz. As to calibration, it depends on reflections and delays the AVR introduces into the audio stream. As to the roll off, if the calibration leaves the subs out of the equation, you might as well throw half the subs performance out the window because due to their length, bass waves interact with each other, much more differently than higher frequency waves do and not EQ'g the lower frequencies, is a sure fire way to reduce the performance of a bass reproduction system.

In my opinion, Eq'g the bass waves flat, is everything in a Home Theater sound reproduction system. The short version, from my perspective, that's a terrible graph which says we just killed your subwoofers for you.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

Architect7 said:


> Not sure I follow as those are targeting a cutoff of 40-50hz and allowing overlap with the sub as expected. Can you elaborate?
> 
> Manually entering distance will almost always be more accurate than auto calibration. My X4000 wanted to say my left was 1ft further than my right even though they were the same.


Actually the auto cal distances are often more accurate, especially for the sub. Because the low pass filter on all subs adds delay, a distance slightly longer than actual is better time aligned. But there may also be phasing problems with the mains that the auto cal got wrong, but using the physical distance is not correct either.


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

Architect7 said:


> Manually entering distance will almost always be more accurate than auto calibration. My X4000 wanted to say my left was 1ft further than my right even though they were the same.


 1ft at 40Hz is a complete non-issue. 40Hz has a wavelenth of 27ft, so 1ft less than a 4% error. This will have no effect on anything unless you're sitting in a perfect null (in which case you have other issues). People freak out that Audyssey can't hit the sub distance to within a 1/4", but it simply doesn't matter, it's close enough.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

primetimeguy said:


> But there may also be phasing problems with the mains that the auto cal got wrong, but using the physical distance is not correct either.


That's the beauty of SubEQ HT, it takes care of phase issues. 



 The less I have to think, the happier I am. That's where REW comes into the equation.



gazoink said:


> This will have no effect on anything unless you're sitting in a perfect null (in which case you have other issues).


Murphy's Law states that no matter how hard the audio enthusiast tries, they will always sit in the deepest null in the room. It's da law.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

BeeMan458 said:


> That's the beauty of SubEQ HT, it takes care of phase issues. Video Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM25-lz1Yms The less I have to think, the happier I am. That's where REW comes into the equation.
> 
> Murphy's Law states that no matter how hard the audio enthusiast tries, they will always sit in the deepest null in the room. It's da law.


Actually it doesn't, it can't without doing post eq measurments of both the main channels and sub. There are many people with measurement gear who tweak the sub distance a few feet post Audyssey and get much better integration.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

primetimeguy said:


> Actually it doesn't, it can't without doing post eq measurments of both the main channels and sub. There are many people with measurement gear who tweak the sub distance a few feet post Audyssey and get much better integration.


Are you working with XT32 or XT32 w/SubEQ HT? No room correction software is perfect and all room correction software needs to be tweaked but no matter how one tries to spin things, XT32 w/SubEQ HT does an excellent job with phase issues and with REW, one can verify this point.

As to post EQ measurements, SubEQ measures and sets two subwoofers independently and does so at the same time it's measuring the output of all the other speakers.

Do you have an AVR that has independent subwoofer outs as opposed to internally split? AVRs equipped with SubEQ HT have two independent subwoofer outs. Very nice. The X4000 has independent subwoofer outs.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

BeeMan458 said:


> Are you working with XT32 or XT32 w/SubEQ HT?
> 
> No room correction software is perfect and all room correction software needs to be tweaked but no matter how one tries to spin things, XT32 w/SubEQ HT does an excellent job with phase issues and with REW, one can verify this point.


I only have xt32, SubEQ wouldn't provide any benefit as I have dual subs symmetrically placed from listening position. Agree tools like REW are the only way to know what is going on, but there are instructions over on AVS on how to do the post Audyssey sub distance tweak (pretty simple really with something like REW) with many happy customers, me included. I gained 3-4db of output through most of the sub range by tweaking sub distance post Audyssey. 

So trust Audyssey but always verify.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

primetimeguy said:


> ....but there are instructions over on AVS on how to do the post Audyssey sub distance tweak (pretty simple really with something like REW) with many happy customers, me included. I gained 3-4db of output through most of the sub range by tweaking sub distance post Audyssey.


...:scratch:

So you're bagging on XT32 w/SubEQ HT? Agreed, two subs co-joined by a mono room correction algorithm is going have issues. This, even if one uses the phase control on the back of the subwoofer. But to be fair, that's a user problem, not a problem with XT32. Yes, if you get those conflicting bass waves out of each others way, you're going get a corresponding bump in output. Symmetrical placement is no guarantee. It's best to place one on opposite walls and one nearfield to get a 10dB bump in tactile feel.

We went from XT w/Anti-Mode 8033S II to XT32 w/SubEQ HT because of the issues you post about. Much better but we still had issues due to reinforcement which needed to be dealt with that was solved using the PEQ built into both subwoofers. 



> So trust Audyssey but always verify.


Sniff, sniff.....the last great American president.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

BeeMan458 said:


> ...:scratch:
> 
> So you're bagging on XT32 w/SubEQ HT? Agreed, two subs co-joined by a mono room correction algorithm is going have issues. This, even if one uses the phase control on the back of the subwoofer. But to be fair, that's a user problem, not a problem with XT32. Yes, if you get those conflicting bass waves out of each others way, you're going get a corresponding bump in output. Symmetrical placement is no guarantee. It's best to place one on opposite walls and one nearfield to get a 10dB bump in tactile feel.
> 
> ...


SubEQ HT does not EQ the subs independently. It will set level and distance for each, then ping together to create one set of EQ filters. I have very good sub only response and very good main channel response post audyssey. Run them together and the combined response is much worse.

I'm not bagging on XT32, I think it is great. But like any ARC it is not perfect. Until someone develops a system than runs your sub and main channel post EQ with a crossover in place and tweaks to get the best response it cannot get the phase perfect as most subs and speakers go through a phase changes.


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

primetimeguy said:


> There are many people with measurement gear who tweak the sub distance a few feet post Audyssey and get much better integration.


They're probably fooling themselves. Assuming a 12dB/octave crossover (which is fairly typical), that puts the critical splice zone at under 1/3 octave wide, assuming perfect level match (which it never is). The change in "integration" caused by a +/- 26 degree (that's +/- 1 foot at 80Hz) distance slip won't even change the vector sum at the splice zone 1dB, assuming basically in phase at the splice.

No, a foot or so error won't matter, just another feel-good thing. Certainly doesn't qualify for "much better integration".


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

gazoink said:


> They're probably fooling themselves. Assuming a 12dB/octave crossover (which is fairly typical), that puts the critical splice zone at under 1/3 octave wide, assuming perfect level match (which it never is). The change in "integration" caused by a +/- 26 degree (that's +/- 1 foot at 80Hz) distance slip won't even change the vector sum at the splice zone 1dB, assuming basically in phase at the splice.
> 
> No, a foot or so error won't matter, just another feel-good thing. Certainly doesn't qualify for "much better integration".


Not intuitive how to attach an image or I'd show you. Most people adjusted 3-5ft, mine was 7ft (15 to 22). Or I could link to my posts and others on AVS, but not sure if that is frowned upon or not.

Edit: Guess the attachment worked. This was the first comparison measurement I found and is not a "more current" one that has much less of a phase induced null.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

Here is one from my center channel showing a larger setting change as well as 1ft increments.

These are 1/6 octave smoothed just to make them easier to view.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

primetimeguy said:


> SubEQ HT does not EQ the subs independently. It will set level and distance for each, then ping together to create one set of EQ filters. I have very good sub only response and very good main channel response post audyssey. Run them together and the combined response is much worse.
> 
> I'm not bagging on XT32, I think it is great. But like any ARC it is not perfect. Until someone develops a system than runs your sub and main channel post EQ with a crossover in place and tweaks to get the best response it cannot get the phase perfect as most subs and speakers go through a phase changes.


Actually it does. As you stated, the first thing, it has the user set the gain and verifies the levels for each subwoofer; "Level Matching." And during EQ'g process, pings each subwoofer independent of the other.

Forgive me, just saying, ARC stands for "Anthem Room Correction."

I'm not quite sure where your argument is going but at no time do I believe that any room correction is perfect nor do I think that user tweaking is not going be needed and I've said as much in my above comments. As far as sub response vs combined response, that the fault of the acoustics in the room (reflections, reinforcement) as room correction software can only do so much as one can pull peaks down but one is limited as to how much they can raise a valley. It's understood the user has to step in.

On this point, I'll step out of the conversation.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

BeeMan458 said:


> Actually it does. First thing, it has the user set the gain and verifies the levels for each subwoofer; "Level Matching." And during EQ'g process, pings each subwoofer independent of the other.
> 
> Just saying, ARC stands for "Anthem Room Correction." I'm not quite sure where your argument is going but at no time do I believe that any room correction is perfect nor do I think that user tweaking is not going be needed and I've said as much in my above comments.
> 
> As far as sub response vs combined response, that the fault of the acoustics in the room as room correction software can only do so much and then the user has to step in.


I'll let you read it right from Audyssey..."The idea is to first measure each sub separately, then apply delay and level settings so that the two subs are now time and level aligned. Then we ping them once more as "one" sub to derive the room correction filter." - https://audyssey.zendesk.com/entries/20953442-SubEQ-HT-vs-MultEQ-XT32

ARC is often used as Automated Room Correction as well.

I guess where I'm going with this is showing you the SubEQ HT isn't doing as much as you think it is, and that there are cases where the Audyssey set distance is not the best. Just trying to share information and continue to learn along with everyone else here.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

primetimeguy said:


> I let you read it right from Audyssey..."The idea is to first measure each sub separately, then apply delay and level settings so that the two subs are now time and level aligned. Then we ping them once more as "one" sub to derive the room correction filter." - https://audyssey.zendesk.com/entries/20953442-SubEQ-HT-vs-MultEQ-XT32
> 
> ARC is often used as Automated Room Correction as well.


Never seen ARC referred in that fashion other than as an Anthem trademark.

As to pinging, Audyssey XT32/SubEQ HT, pings each subwoofer independently during the EQ'g process so it can adjust for the acoustics in the room. XT32 by itself, doesn't have this ability hence the need for an AVR like the X4000 that has two independent subwoofer Pre-Outs, so each subwoofer signal is presented and EQ'd separately in the same fashion L/R speakers are pinged and EQ'd separately.

(okay, I'm out as you had another post in before I bowed out)


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

BeeMan458 said:


> Never seen ARC referred in that fashion other than as an Anthem trademark.
> 
> As to pinging, Audyssey XT32/SubEQ HT, pings each subwoofer independently during the EQ'g process so it can adjust for the acoustics in the room. XT32 by itself, doesn't have this ability hence the need for an AVR like the X4000 that has two independent subwoofer Pre-Outs, so each subwoofer signal is presented and EQ'd separately in the same fashion L/R speakers are pinged and EQ'd separately.
> 
> (okay, I'm out as you had another post in before I bowed out)


Hate to rain on your parade but SubEQ HT does not EQ each sub independently. Not sure how you read that from the quote. Here is another quote from the same page...."Yes, the SubEQ HT function in the 80.3 will measure each sub individually first to determine any level and distance (phase) differences between them. It will apply these corrections and then measure them together as "one" sub to apply the room correction filter."

And another quote from the Audyssey FAQ on AVS..."There is an additional issue with regard to XT32 systems which incorporate SubEQ HT (most of them). XT32 SubEQ HT-equipped systems have the ability to set levels and distances for two subwoofers independently, and then go on to EQ both subs as one, taking account of their interaction with the room and with each other. For these systems, on the first measurement at the MLP, Audyssey will ping one sub, then ping the other sub, then ping both subs together. In other words, for the first measurement in a dual sub system with XT32+Sub EQ HT, you will hear three separate lots of sub chirps. But for every subsequent measurement you make, you will only hear one sub chirp, which is both subs being pinged at the same time. "

That is why for me, with identical subs in symmetrical arrangement there is absolutely zero benefit. But for many with dual subs that is not the case and so SubEQ HT has benefit...but only if you trust its sub distances.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

> SubEQ HT function in the 80.3


This is why I like to bow out. That's an Integra, not a Denon and it was a comment made two years ago. Audyssey isn't a static room correction software. Each manufacture gets together and agrees on how they will set their AVRs, based upon the information Audyssey measures. Audyssey doesn't set anything and Audyssey isn't a one size fits all utility. It's the receiver that does the setting of the values.

In the case of the Denon 4520, each sub is independently pinged and measured. The subs are measured independently but like the rest of the speakers, the final reproduction is the sum total of the whole sound reproduction system. I sat and watched the flat screen while Audyssey was run and the GUI clearly shows each subwoofer being pinged independently.

(i have a thing about responding to those who post to me, but please do not take this as an indication of my wanting to continue. i do so out of politeness, not out of a need to continue after saying i wish to bow out)


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

primetimeguy said:


> Not intuitive how to attach an image or I'd show you. Most people adjusted 3-5ft, mine was 7ft (15 to 22). Or I could link to my posts and others on AVS, but not sure if that is frowned upon or not.
> 
> Edit: Guess the attachment worked. This was the first comparison measurement I found and is not a "more current" one that has much less of a phase induced null.


That's evidence of a phase flip. 7' at 80Hz is about 180 degrees. That's not the same as +/-1ft. And yes, any auto EQ can get sub phase wrong, but it's not subtle (as you have shown) and equally the fault of the mains as the subs in confusing the measurements.


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

BeeMan458 said:


> This is why I like to bow out. That's an Integra, not a Denon and it was a comment made two years ago. Audyssey isn't a static room correction software. Each manufacture gets together and agrees on how they will set their AVRs, based upon the information Audyssey measures. Audyssey doesn't set anything and Audyssey isn't a one size fits all utility. It's the receiver that does the setting of the values.


 It would be nice to have a reference as to why can this be said. At least using the Pro kit and software, the target curves are fixed in the software, not up to the whim of any specific piece of hardware. The variables in non-pro calibration would be the mic itself, though most of those are minor and averaged out in QC.


BeeMan458 said:


> In the case of the Denon 4520, each sub is independently pinged and measured. The subs are measured independently but like the rest of the speakers, the final reproduction is the sum total of the whole sound reproduction system. I sat and watched the flat screen while Audyssey was run and the GUI clearly shows each subwoofer being pinged independently.


 The X4000 does the same thing under Pro Cal.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

gazoink said:


> It would be nice to have a reference as to why can this be said.


The comment comes from many conversations on another forum.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

BeeMan458 said:


> This is why I like to bow out. That's an Integra, not a Denon and it was a comment made two years ago. Audyssey isn't a static room correction software. Each manufacture gets together and agrees on how they will set their AVRs, based upon the information Audyssey measures. Audyssey doesn't set anything and Audyssey isn't a one size fits all utility. It's the receiver that does the setting of the values.
> 
> In the case of the Denon 4520, each sub is independently pinged and measured. The subs are measured independently but like the rest of the speakers, the final reproduction is the sum total of the whole sound reproduction system. I sat and watched the flat screen while Audyssey was run and the GUI clearly shows each subwoofer being pinged independently.
> 
> (i have a thing about responding to those who post to me, but please do not take this as an indication of my wanting to continue. i do so out of politeness, not out of a need to continue after saying i wish to bow out)


Do you have link or evidence of this? I'm interested to learn because if it behaves as you say I have not seen it before and would truly be interested in a receiver that indeed does this.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

gazoink said:


> That's evidence of a phase flip. 7' at 80Hz is about 180 degrees. That's not the same as +/-1ft. And yes, any auto EQ can get sub phase wrong, but it's not subtle (as you have shown) and equally the fault of the mains as the subs in confusing the measurements.


Agree and is why I said it wasn't the best example. My center channel is much better.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

primetimeguy said:


> Do you have link or evidence of this? I'm interested to learn because if it behaves as you say I have not seen it before and would truly be interested in a receiver that indeed does this.


The truth be told, I went through the Audyssey wars on another forum. I'm not interested in going through it again. I almost got banned because to me, Audyssey and the manufacture are one and the same but the Mods came down hard on me as to those guys, there was a big difference between settings and recommendations.

Here's a guide to Audyssey.

Watching Twins/Giants.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

BeeMan458 said:


> The truth be told, I went through the Audyssey wars on another forum. I'm not interested in going through it again. I almost got banned because to me, Audyssey and the manufacture are one and the same but the Mods came down hard on me as to those guys, there was a big difference between settings and recommendations.
> 
> Here's a guide to Audyssey.
> 
> Watching Twins/Giants.


I guess I don't follow. I'm simply asking for evidence of the behavior as you describe.

I just can't get into the Twins this year. Watching 12 Years a Slave instead.


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

BeeMan458 said:


> The comment comes from many conversations on another forum.


Link?


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

gazoink said:


> Link?


There is no link but anybody who wants to can go over to "The Other Forum" and rattle a few cages if they're feeling froggy.

These were conversations held almost two years ago regarding Audyssey and how Audyssey interacts with different manufacture's AVRs.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

primetimeguy said:


> I guess I don't follow. I'm simply asking for evidence of the behavior as you describe.


And I posted, this is from conversations I held on another forum. I don't have at my finger tips the evidence you're asking for so I guess that makes you right and me wrong. Please, this is my last response and regarding this issue, I'll ignore anymore posting in my direction.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

BeeMan458 said:


> And I posted, this is from conversations I held on another forum. I don't have at my finger tips the evidence you're asking for so I guess that makes you right and me wrong. Please, this is my last response and regarding this issue, I'll ignore anymore posting in my direction.


You said you quit a long time ago. 

If your receiver behaves differently I'd really like to know because it would be interesting to tinker with.

Here is another reference to the Denon X4000 stating how I have always believed SuqEQ HT worked..." It independently set delay and level for each sub, then applied a single correction curve to the summed response of both subs" - http://www.audioholics.com/av-receiver-reviews/denon-avr-x4000-review/setup.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

It was bugging me Bee, so I went straight to the horses mouth on Facebook.


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

primetimeguy said:


> It was bugging me Bee, so I went straight to the horses mouth on Facebook.


Thanks for that. Frankly, it's the only thing that would make any sense. Individualizing what Audyssey does would be like very manufacturer having it's own EQ curve rather than having flat response. Those guys did their homework, and there no sense not to lock things down to a standard. It is, after all, a question of licensing a technology, not giving an artist a set of paints.


----------



## Architect7 (Apr 9, 2012)

BeeMan458 said:


> At 6dB down, the owner is losing performance at approximately 80Hz. As to calibration, it depends on reflections and delays the AVR introduces into the audio stream. As to the roll off, if the calibration leaves the subs out of the equation, you might as well throw half the subs performance out the window because due to their length, bass waves interact with each other, much more differently than higher frequency waves do and not EQ'g the lower frequencies, is a sure fire way to reduce the performance of a bass reproduction system.
> 
> In my opinion, Eq'g the bass waves flat, is everything in a Home Theater sound reproduction system. The short version, from my perspective, that's a terrible graph which says we just killed your subwoofers for you.


I really do not know what you are talking about, where on those graphs do you see 6db down at 80hz? And the sub correction/response is always shown on a separate graph in ARC, what do you mean the Anthem leaves the sub out of the equation?



gazoink said:


> 1ft at 40Hz is a complete non-issue. 40Hz has a wavelenth of 27ft, so 1ft less than a 4% error. This will have no effect on anything unless you're sitting in a perfect null (in which case you have other issues). People freak out that Audyssey can't hit the sub distance to within a 1/4", but it simply doesn't matter, it's close enough.


The issue was not sub distance, it was the left speaker. 1ft inaccuracy at 10ft distance is ~10%, the result made a very big difference because it affected everything from 40hz-20khz.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

Architect 7, 

Changing the distance setting of a speaker will only impact the response in the area it overlaps the subwoofer so not sure how you saw a benefit up to 20khz. You could run sweeps all day for just the front speaker changing the speaker distance from 0 to 100ft and the response would not change.


----------



## Architect7 (Apr 9, 2012)

primetimeguy said:


> Architect 7,
> 
> Changing the distance setting of a speaker will only impact the response in the area it overlaps the subwoofer so not sure how you saw a benefit up to 20khz. You could run sweeps all day for just the front speaker changing the speaker distance from 0 to 100ft and the response would not change.


Distance dictates time alignment (delay) and level as well. That is why it sounded so much different and imaged poorly without manual intervention.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

Architect7 said:


> I really do not know what you are talking about, where on those graphs do you see 6db down at 80hz? And the sub correction/response is always shown on a separate graph in ARC, what do you mean the Anthem leaves the sub out of the equation?


The best way to mess up your bass graph, is trying to measure the subs only. As to -6dB down at 80Hz, it's right in front of everybody who sees the graph I commented on....:scratch: Many of my conclusions are based on years of personal effort and learning to discount mantra as bogus. Once coming to these conclusions, bass became much easier to deal with.

(to be fair, i'm not going argue the above. why? there's no point)


----------



## Architect7 (Apr 9, 2012)

BeeMan458 said:


> The best way to mess up your bass graph, is trying to measure the subs only. As to -6dB down at 80Hz, it's right in front of everybody who sees the graph I commented on....:scratch: Many of my conclusions are based on years of personal effort and learning to discount mantra as bogus. Once coming to these conclusions, bass became much easier to deal with.
> 
> (to be fair, i'm not going argue the above. why? there's no point)


You are mistaken, that graph does not show -6 db at 80hz. The green line is the final response.

The Anthem does not correct the sub by itself. You make a lot of assumptions and came to a conclusion that was not discussed in the article you quoted. Have you used an Anthem device before?


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

Architect7 said:


> The issue was not sub distance, it was the left speaker. 1ft inaccuracy at 10ft distance is ~10%, the result made a very big difference because it affected everything from 40hz-20khz.


Yes, 1ft is 10% of 10', but that's not what's important. Response in the splice is a function of the vector sum of the sub and mains. Vector sum, simply put, is the result when summing two signals considering their relative amplitudes and phase angles. Assuming identical amplitudes within .1dB (a huge assumption, actually), the result is based on the relative phase angles in the splice. Assuming basic in-phase condition of the mains and subs, at 80Hz, 1' is 26.2 degrees, and that creates a vector sum result of -0.5dB re perfectly in phase. If the splice were at 40Hz, the difference would be even less, as the phase difference for 1ft would be 13.1 degrees. If the distance between the sub and mains were more like 3.5' (that's 90 degrees at 80Hz), the vector sum would be about -3dB, again assuming perfect level match.

If there was any significant response dip in the splice, and the sub(s) differ in listening distance from the mains by 7' or so, you'd want to flip sub phase first. Some of the distance errors on the order of a foot or three can be due to crossover phase shift. Sometimes things like Audyssey seem to get it wrong, but they could be compensating for crossover phase errors by adjusting delay to match up phase in the splice.


----------



## Architect7 (Apr 9, 2012)

gazoink said:


> Yes, 1ft is 10% of 10', but that's not what's important. Response in the splice is a function of the vector sum of the sub and mains. Vector sum, simply put, is the result when summing two signals considering their relative amplitudes and phase angles. Assuming identical amplitudes within .1dB (a huge assumption, actually), the result is based on the relative phase angles in the splice. Assuming basic in-phase condition of the mains and subs, at 80Hz, 1' is 26.2 degrees, and that creates a vector sum result of -0.5dB re perfectly in phase. If the splice were at 40Hz, the difference would be even less, as the phase difference for 1ft would be 13.1 degrees. If the distance between the sub and mains were more like 3.5' (that's 90 degrees at 80Hz), the vector sum would be about -3dB, again assuming perfect level match.
> 
> If there was any significant response dip in the splice, and the sub(s) differ in listening distance from the mains by 7' or so, you'd want to flip sub phase first. Some of the distance errors on the order of a foot or three can be due to crossover phase shift. Sometimes things like Audyssey seem to get it wrong, but they could be compensating for crossover phase errors by adjusting delay to match up phase in the splice.


You missed my point completely. I am not talking about the receiver correcting between the sub and mains. I am talking about the difference caused between mains themselves. If the mains are both the same distance from you but one is delayed because the receiver thinks it is closer, it will sound wrong. Simple as that.


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

Architect7 said:


> You missed my point completely. I am not talking about the receiver correcting between the sub and mains. I am talking about the difference caused between mains themselves. If the mains are both the same distance from you but one is delayed because the receiver thinks it is closer, it will sound wrong. Simple as that.


Yes, quite so, I agree, even a small amount of delay error would not be good in the mains. I've also never seen Audyssey do that in dozens of cals, though I did see it get pretty confused once with a set of omnidirectional speakers in a brick-walled room. It had no idea on phase, not on any speaker, and distances were all over the place because the reflected field was so big and messy. Mostly the LCR distances come in dead-on, I do often see errors in where it things subs are. 

However, to be fair, you can obsess about critically timing for the mains, but it's really critical only for 2-channel stereo which only works in one seat with your head in a clamp anyway, so I don't think I see much point, at least for 5.1 and up where there's a hard center rather than a phantom center. If you're worried about 2 channel stereo, then yes, you need to get it right, but as I said, stereo imaging only works in a dead-center single position anyway. Just lean over on a chair arm, and the palpable center image will vanish.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

On my part, there are no assumptions being made although in my view, assumptions are a good thing. I'm going off of what's being posted in this thread, personal experience, the reams of material, which on my part, that have been read, not to mention the many discussions I've been involved in.



Architect7 said:


> You are mistaken, that graph does not show -6 db at 80hz. The green line is the final response.


Which is the line I commented on and I checked several times before making comment. :scratch:

The Anthem does not correct the sub by itself. You make a lot of assumptions and came to a conclusion that was not discussed in the article you quoted. Have you used an Anthem device before?[/QUOTE]

I responded to your comment when you posted:

"And the sub correction/response is always shown on a separate graph in ARC"

And that was all that I responded to regarding the graph. No, I have not used an 
Anthem device before but graphs is graphs.

...:scratch:

At this point, my opinion, everything is getting fragmented and contextual continuity is being fractured


----------



## Architect7 (Apr 9, 2012)

You are misreading the graph. It is not 6db down at 80hz. ARC2 would be a joke if it was and no on would buy it. Please look at the graph again.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

gazoink said:


> Vector sum, simply put, is the result when summing two signals considering their relative amplitudes and phase angles. Assuming identical amplitudes within .1dB (a huge assumption, actually), the result is based on the relative phase angles in the splice. Assuming basic in-phase condition of the mains and subs, at 80Hz, 1' is 26.2 degrees, and that creates a vector sum result of -0.5dB re perfectly in phase. If the splice were at 40Hz, the difference would be even less, as the phase difference for 1ft would be 13.1 degrees. If the distance between the sub and mains were more like 3.5' (that's 90 degrees at 80Hz), the vector sum would be about -3dB, again assuming perfect level match.


Which is a high tech way of saying...bass waves don't play and get along well with each other.

...


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

Architect7 said:


> You are misreading the graph. It is not 6db down at 80hz. ARC2 would be a joke if it was and no on would buy it. Please look at the graph again.


Before I posted, I did take the time to look at the graph again.










I'll give you 50Hz. Maybe you can point out where I'm going wrong as what I was seeing makes no sense unless there's graphs not being shown but I only have the graph in front of me to go by.


----------



## Architect7 (Apr 9, 2012)

I drew a line at the approximate center between 50hz and 100hz, ~75hz. If anything, the response is UP at that point, likely ARC 2 doing something for the transition to the subwoofer. Again, the -6db at 80hz is not present.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

I don't have the graph so I can measure the top vs -6dB down so I'm approximating.

I'm responding to the hump and from the top to -6dB down is where the +/-3dB mark is which is what speakers and subwoofer manufactures consider an acceptable performance standard.

I don't like showing graphs as it smacks of if I show you mine, will you show me yours; ego. We have the same subs so I'll post our in room graphs for our subwoofer system, using XT32/SubEQ HT, all speakers playing. My concern with the graph you're posting is the left side that rolls off sharply which tells me the owner of the graph is loosing much of what they are paying for and not getting full benefit of the subwoofer's capability. What am I not understanding?


----------



## Architect7 (Apr 9, 2012)

Please note that those graphs are for Front Right and Surround Right. There is no subwoofer shown on those graphs.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

Architect7 said:


> Please note that those graphs are for Front Right and Surround Right. There is no subwoofer shown on those graphs.


Thanks! That helps as I didn't see anything on the graph indicating it was restricted to the above two speakers.

If you set your crossovers to 80Hz, the graph makes perfect sense.


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

BeeMan458 said:


> I don't have the graph so I can measure the top vs -6dB down so I'm approximating.
> I'm responding to the hump and from the top to -6dB down is where the +/-3dB mark is which is what speakers and subwoofer manufactures consider an acceptable performance standard.
> I don't like showing graphs as it smacks of if I show you mine, will you show me yours; ego. We have the same subs so I'll post our in room graphs for our subwoofer system, using XT32/SubEQ HT, all speakers playing. My concern with the graph you're posting is the left side that rolls off sharply which tells me the owner of the graph is loosing much of what they are paying for and not getting full benefit of the subwoofer's capability. What am I not understanding?


This is a good looking graph but there is a lot of EQ being applied below the sub's tuning to achieve it.
You have a couple of great subwoofers but they are >20dB down at 10Hz.
http://www.rythmikaudio.com/FV15HP_specs.html 
Looking at the XT graphs you have in your gallery your room does not add low end gain.
So all of this below 20Hz is being achieved by the electronics feeding the sub, actually I am surprised >20dB below the sub's tuning can be added.
If any meaningful SPL level of content below 20Hz comes through it could easily bottom out the subs because they are not actually capable of producing it.


----------



## BeeMan458 (Nov 25, 2012)

Just saying, based on conversations, the sub's tuning is 12Hz. This is an absolutely "amazing" subwoofer.



chashint said:


> You have a couple of great subwoofers but they are >20dB down at 10Hz.


Because of the ported design, they're literally engineered to fall like a stone below 12Hz. I knew this going in as I spoke with Rythmik on this point, before making the purchase.



> Looking at the XT graphs you have in your gallery your room does not add low end gain.


That's because of the filters on the Anti-Mode 8033S II. Anti-Mode is the limit switch, not the subwoofers or lack of room gain. I didn't know this point until getting a receiver with XT32 w/SubEQ HT. The problem was the Anti-Mode appliance, not the lack of room gain as the FV15HPs were chosen for their unique ability. When I got Anti-Mode out of the way, room gain was allowed to show itself.

(kudos to basshead81 for his recommendation as we had many conversations on this point)



> If any meaningful SPL level of content below 20Hz comes through it could easily bottom out the subs because they are not actually capable of producing it.


Based on your above, I can see you're not familiar with the capabilities of the FV15HPs.... There's absolutely zero chance of us bottoming out the subwoofer system. With one port closed, there's the singular off chance of chuffing but zero worry about bottoming out at reference level play. You have no idea how good these subwoofers are. These subwoofers recline in the world of better than ideal.

At this price point, there ain't nothing better than the FV15HP. To get better, at almost twice the price, one has to go to a pair of JTR S2s and unless one wants to literally blow their roof off or dig deeper than humanity can hear, there's no need to purchase a pair of S2s. And besides, we can't afford twice the price or we'd have a pair of S2s.

(disclosure: we don't use the full capability/use out of our pair of FV15HPs, so we surely wouldn't get the best out of a pair of S2s)


----------



## eurovw89 (Feb 25, 2010)

ok...now back onto the topic. I pulled the trigger and purchased the X4000 hopefully I will get it wednesday


----------



## nova (Apr 30, 2006)

I thought all of the upper end Denon's were 3.2 ohm stable? My Denon drove my 4 ohm speakers just fine, as others have said, do not put to much stock in that spec.


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

eurovw89 said:


> ok...now back onto the topic. I pulled the trigger and purchased the X4000 hopefully I will get it wednesday


Nice.


----------



## Mikeythai (Aug 23, 2010)

I also just bought the X-4000. My first 'real' AVR! I had to get a 220V model from 220-electronics.com.

I originally had decided on the X-3000, but they were backordered. I was then offered a X-4000 for $1025 shipping included. I jumped on it.

Had buyers remorse for a few days, because the AVR, new sub, and pair of bookshelfs were all bought on the same day. Really puts a dent in the wallet. But I think having a 9.1 with XT32 will pay off.


----------



## eurovw89 (Feb 25, 2010)

Well received the receiver on last Wednesday (7/9/14) from Accessories4less. Installed it...set it up and WoW.......sounds AMAZING, :TI had a smile ear to ear!!!! But have come into an issue. The center channel has static coming out of it constantly and quietly "pops" a few times every 15mins or so.:huh: Just got off the phone with Denon and going to send it back for a replacement. So far so good on the customer service.....I just hope this doesn't become a long, drawn out crazy process


----------



## Architect7 (Apr 9, 2012)

eurovw89 said:


> Well received the receiver on last Wednesday (7/9/14) from Accessories4less. Installed it...set it up and WoW.......sounds AMAZING, :TI had a smile ear to ear!!!! But have come into an issue. The center channel has static coming out of it constantly and quietly "pops" a few times every 15mins or so.:huh: Just got off the phone with Denon and going to send it back for a replacement. So far so good on the customer service.....I just hope this doesn't become a long, drawn out crazy process


Good luck. My X4000 had the same issue with the rear right surround speaker. When I sent it to Denon they could not reproduce the issue and demanded to send the same unit back to me or charge me for an exchange. I told them to kick rocks and escalated to the reseller, Amazon, for a full refund. I will never own Denon again after that situation. I hope your situation turns out much better and that they have identified the cause of the static for a permanent fix.


----------



## eurovw89 (Feb 25, 2010)

Architect7 said:


> Good luck. My X4000 had the same issue with the rear right surround speaker. When I sent it to Denon they could not reproduce the issue and demanded to send the same unit back to me or charge me for an exchange. I told them to kick rocks and escalated to the reseller, Amazon, for a full refund. I will never own Denon again after that situation. I hope your situation turns out much better and that they have identified the cause of the static for a permanent fix.


jesus:gulp::unbelievable::crying:

how recent?


----------



## Architect7 (Apr 9, 2012)

eurovw89 said:


> jesus:gulp::unbelievable::crying:
> 
> how recent?


I sent it back in December, not long after it was released. So hopefully they have figured it out by now. Didn't mean to bash your hopes, I'm sure my situation was one in a million. But it was definitely a strange experience.


----------



## eurovw89 (Feb 25, 2010)

Architect7 said:


> I sent it back in December, not long after it was released. So hopefully they have figured it out by now. Didn't mean to bash your hopes, I'm sure my situation was one in a million. But it was definitely a strange experience.


I hope so, cuz I love the sound of the x4000. the "pop" isnt all the time and is really random, but can definitely hear the static (when you get close to it), I even swapped speakers on the center channel just to see and sure enough it was still there. I even walked around to all my speakers and none of them had the static. My fingers are crossed!!!


----------



## Mikeythai (Aug 23, 2010)

I am also listening closely to every speaker for popping...so far so good. :T

I hooked up my X-4000 yesterday morning. I love the sound, and having the front wide speakers is really something that I'm glad I went for. Hopefully I can get the full 9.2 together someday...


----------



## TheHammer (Dec 16, 2012)

eurovw89 said:


> Well received the receiver on last Wednesday (7/9/14) from Accessories4less. Installed it...set it up and WoW.......sounds AMAZING, :TI had a smile ear to ear!!!! But have come into an issue. The center channel has static coming out of it constantly and quietly "pops" a few times every 15mins or so.:huh: Just got off the phone with Denon and going to send it back for a replacement. So far so good on the customer service.....I just hope this doesn't become a long, drawn out crazy process


I received mine from the same seller - refurb. I have not had any performance issues with it and am reasonably happy with the amp. I hope you have your problem resolved soon.

Did you get the noise with all different inputs? Any noisy electronics nearby (like a WiFi router)? When you turn off the center channel, does the noise shift to another output?

I am fighting with the XT32 as I do not like its results - and I feel the adjustments are somewhat irrational (cut the Sub 10 db, then boost the low freq output 10 db), but that is an other issue that I will document and post on a separate topic someday soon - so I do not hijack this one. 

I do love being able to sit out on my deck, and turn it on zone 2, adjust the volume and select inputs using apps or via browser. And using a VNC app, I can select music on my computer to play through the Denon. I just wish the Denon had more than four pre-selects for internet radio. And the free Denon app is pretty crummy.


----------



## Owen Bartley (Oct 18, 2006)

Congrats on the upgrade, Mikeythai. I just did a smaller step up myself, and picked up a Denon AVR-E400 to replace my 12+ year old 2802 in the living room. Can't wait to finally try out Audyssey.


----------



## Skrill (Feb 4, 2014)

I just picked up an X4000 (upgrading from an Onkyo TX-SR805). I plan to use it only as a pre-pro (as I have a Sherbourn PA-7-350 power amp) -- at least until I add front height speakers -- then I may use the onboard ampt to drive those.

So far I have been really impressed with the unit. Lots of great features and very nice network music abilities.

I picked mine up open box from Electronics Expo (an authorized Denon e-retailer). Before I got it -- I got written confirmation from Denon USA that the 3 year Denon Warranty would apply to the E. Expo's open box units. So for the price ($100 more than the refurbs) you get the full warranty. My unit arrived looking pristine. It looks like someone cut the original tape, looked in the box, and then sealed it back up. Everything -- including the main unit and all accessories -- were still wrapped in their factory packaging.

Anyway its a great unit --and Electronic's Expo has a great deal on the open box units. 

Good luck!


----------



## budjo01 (Apr 22, 2014)

You may want to consider the Denon AVRX3100W. I have one of the first units to hit the market and I have to say it is a really good sounding receiver. I am very pleased with it so far. I preordered it directly from Denon.


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

The AVR-X3100W has Audyssey XT only, the X4000 has XT32 and SubEQXT with two sub cal. Both are capable of Pro calibration. The X4000 has slightly higher power output capability, though that's an inaudible difference. XT32 and SubEQ would be the deal breakers in that comparison, and would be audibly better.


----------



## oclakerfan (Aug 1, 2014)

New to the forum, Hi to everyone. I'm debating between the x4000 and 4520. Anyone compared/demoed the two and can give their opinion? What features of the x4000 would I be missing if I picked the 4520? I'm creating a home theater room that's 15ftx30feet and I need to power 7.1 system including martin logan (non electrostat) speakers and velodyne sub. For the size of my room and running 4ohm speakers should I pick the 4520 so I don't have to buy separate power amps? Also, any known issues with the x4000? Thanks


----------



## gazoink (Apr 17, 2013)

oclakerfan said:


> New to the forum, Hi to everyone.


Welcome!


oclakerfan said:


> I'm debating between the x4000 and 4320. Anyone compared/demoed the two and can give their opinion?


Assuming you mean the AVR X4000 and the AVR-4520ci? 



oclakerfan said:


> What features of the x4000 would I be missing if I picked the 4320?


None, the AVR-4520CI is their current flagship AVR. More loaded than the X4000.


oclakerfan said:


> I'm creating a home theater room that's 15ftx30feet and I need to power 7.1 system including martin logan (non electrostat) speakers and velodyne sub. For the size of my room and running 4ohm speakers should I pick the 4320 so I don't have to buy separate power amps?


 If you're trying to calculate the maximum peak volume you'll end up with, the figures you need is the speaker efficiency/sensitivity (ex: 90dB/1W/1m), the distance from your listening position to the speakers, and the amplifier maximum output power. Room size is not all that important. 

Short story, either will be fine.


oclakerfan said:


> Also, any known issues with the x4000? Thanks


Yeah, it's being discontinued. Great AVR, bargains to be had now. The replacement has not hit the market yet. The replacement will be the X4100, will add built-in Wifi and blue-tooth, possibly Dolby Atmos, though I don't think that's been confirmed. None of that is really a big deal, though. The X4000 would be an excellent choice, higher power and more speaker outputs will be on the 4520ci.

You can download manuals for both at the Denon website, compare features and specs that way for more detail.


----------



## oclakerfan (Aug 1, 2014)

gazoink said:


> Welcome!
> 
> Assuming you mean the AVR X4000 and the AVR-4520ci?
> 
> ...


thanks for correcting me, yes I did mean 4520ci. both the 4520 and x4000 have gotten great reviews and the x4000 has everything I need. I was only concerned if x4000 would struggle/shut off running seven 4ohm speakers. I'm not using a sound proof room so I can't imaging having the volume extremely high and disturbing my neighbor.


----------

