# Onkyo Hits the Summer with High-End Gear (TX-NR3030, TX-NR1030, PR-SC5530)



## Todd Anderson

At this point Onkyo’s decision to remove Audyssey from its AV gear is old news; the initial shock has worn and the earth continues to spin. However, some enthusiasts and fans of the brand held hope that Onkyo had simply removed Audyssey from lower-end models, keeping the popular room correction suite secretly reserved for mid-summer high-end releases. Alas, this is not the case. The company recently released fine-print details for three new A/V heavy hitters, all devoid of Audyssey. It appears, for the time being, that Onkyo will push forward with its proprietary AccuEQ room calibration offering.

Of course, this may ultimately prove to be a moot point. Onkyo believes that AccuEQ produces a more natural sound through bypassing equalization of front and subwoofer channels. While there are certainly plenty of sub-EQ options available, it’s hard to ignore the popularity of Audyssey’s ability to offer sub-EQ out of the box (with MultEQ XT32). Nevertheless, this is what we have to work with and Onkyo’s AVR line-up for 2014 is incredibly competitive despite its Audyssey-less composition.










The new receivers (THX® Select2 Plus-certified 9.2-channel TX-NR1030 Network A/V Receiver and the 11.2-channel TX-NR3030 Network A/V Receiver) and preamplifier (THX® Ultra Plus-certified PR-SC5530 Network A/V Controller) arrive on the wave created by the announcement that Dolby Atmos is moving into the home environment. Not surprisingly, these new pieces of hardware are Atmos ready. Each features 32-bit DSP engines to decode, scale and calibrate signals for a full-on Atmos experience. They also support the latest HDMI specification and HDCP 2.2 copy protection, so you can be confident that they’ll be 4K/60Hz ready while being able to handle playback of future streamed and broadcast 4K material.

*TX-NR3030 and TX-NR1030 Network A/V Receivers*
The THX select2 certified TX-NR3030 sits at the top of Onkyo’s receiver offerings with 11.2 channels and 135 W of power output (8 Ohms, 2 channels driven). With the addition of Atmos capabilities, users will have the ability to augment 5.2, 7.2 and 9.2 configurations with the provided extra outputs for what will likely prove to be an audio cocooning experience. Wide Range Amplifier Technology (WRAT) comprised of a custom high-output transformer, caps, and low impendence copper bus-plates with separate processing and amplification blocks powers the heart of the NR3030. Audio processing is handled by seven two-channel 192 kHz/24-bit TI Burr-Brown DACs and two 32-bit DSP processors. It supports just about every hi-res and lossless audio format under the sun (from FLAC to WMA) while also supporting 5.6 MHz DSD and Dolby True HD formats, so the NR3030 has great sound covered. On the connectivity side, it features 8 HDMI inputs (one front panel with MHL), 3 HDMI outputs, a phono input, balanced 11.4 XLR pre-outs and 11.4 multichannel pre-outs, along with the other usual suspects, in addition to Wifi and Bluetooth support. On the output side, the NR3030 offers video upscaling (HD and UHD) on the back of Qdeo 4K upscaling technology.

The TX-NR3030 looks to be an extremely competitive high-end machine, worthy of its flagship badge, and is priced at $2399 (shipping in August 2014).

The NR1030 maybe slightly lower on the totem pole, but its spec sheet is delicious. It features 9.2 channels of output (135W, 8 Ohms, 2 channels driven) and otherwise reads very similar to the NR3030 (even possessing the same THX certification and excellent pre-out capabilities). The NR1030 carries a price tag of $1699.










*PR-SC5530 Network A/V Controller*
The THX Ultra2 Plus-certified PR-SC5530 Network A/V Controller replaces the PR-SC5509 as Onkyo’s preamplifier offering. Much like the above AVRs, it supports UHD material at 60 Hz with support for HDCP 2.2 and also offers Qdeo 4K video upscaling. It also features seven 32-bit TI Burr-Brown DACs, two 32-bit DSP processors, and a massive toroidal transformer with separate EI transformers. Users can opt for balanced or unbalanced 11.4 channel pre-outs. In many ways, the SC5530 mirrors the NR3030 and 1030 minus the inclusion of an onboard amplifier. Also shipping in August, the SC5530 has an MSRP of $2499.


_Image Credits: Onkyo_


----------



## tonyvdb

I for one dislike the fact that the "accuEQ" only touches the soround channels. I think there are very few gains by doing this as I would much prefer it if they EQed the front three channels and the sub and did nothing on the soround ch's. They already had a pure direct mode so this idea that it makes this a better solution is a bit strange. 
Sigh, I guess Onkyo is off the list for my next receiver upgrade as the new Dolby Atomos processing is enough to kick start my interest in upgrading my faithful Onkyo 805


----------



## Todd Anderson

tonyvdb said:


> I for one dislike the fact that the "accuEQ" only touches the soround channels. I think there are very few gains by doing this as I would much prefer it if they EQed the front three channels and the sub and did nothing on the soround ch's. They already had a pure direct mode so this idea that it makes this a better solution is a bit strange.
> Sigh, I guess Onkyo is off the list for my next receiver upgrade as the new Dolby Atomos processing is enough to kick start my interest in upgrading my faithful Onkyo 805


Tony, I know you are a huge fan of Onkyo...and have had great results with the on-board Audyssey. It's definitely a tough one to wrap arms around. With all of the changes in technologies (HDMI 2.0, support of UHD...and now the inclusion of Dolby Atmos) it makes it nearly impossible to suggest looking at last year's gear. Perhaps AccuEQ will see future iterations that hit-on what you're looking for. It's going to be at least another year, though...


----------



## tcarcio

I agree with Tony. With all the accolades that Audyssey, especially XT 32, has received in the last couple of years why remove it? I think it is more like Onkyo saving money than listening to it's customers. When they say they think it is smoother to just EQ the surrounds obviously they are not taking into account their customers opinion because if they were it would be obvious, to me anyway, that they wouldn't change to something that is unproven to their base. I will not be replacing my 809 with another Onkyo. I will be looking at Marantz again. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Tonto

I find myself feeling the same way. Looks like it will be a Denon for my next AVR.


----------



## sdurani

tcarcio said:


> With all the accolades that Audyssey, especially XT 32, has received in the last couple of years why remove it?


In order to run both Atmos and Audyssey, they would have to double the number of DSP chips from 2 to 4. Denon bit the bullet and did exactly that. Onkyo kept their receivers at 2 chips, Audyssey had to go. So it came down to money, though not the Audyssey licensing fee as some had suspected.


----------



## Todd Anderson

The first rounds of reviews on these receivers will be mighty interesting to read...


----------



## tonyvdb

Todd Anderson said:


> The first rounds of reviews on these receivers will be mighty interesting to read...


Agree, I'm going to be doing a lot of reading over the next few months.


----------



## JBrax

Like the majority opinion I to will be changing AVR brands when I upgrade. It's mind boggling to me why Onkyo would part with Audyssey? I would much rather see them save money by excluding THX certification and allocating those funds towards Audyssey retention or even including XT32 on lower level models as well as the upper end models. I personally think this will really hurt their bottom line and the recent troubles with HDMI boards doesn't help. Denon anyone?


----------



## willis7469

JBrax said:


> Like the majority opinion I to will be changing AVR brands when I upgrade. It's mind boggling to me why Onkyo would part with Audyssey? I would much rather see them save money by excluding THX certification and allocating those funds towards Audyssey retention or even including XT32 on lower level models as well as the upper end models. I personally think this will really hurt their bottom line and the recent troubles with HDMI boards doesn't help. Denon anyone?


I pretty much agree with all you guys too. Jbrax, I think skipping THX cert would be worthwhile if it meant keeping Audyssey, and maybe adding xt32 to lower tiered models(not sure how that would play with the new audyssey level system though). My 808 had a new board installed around Halloween. Despite my optimism, I'm still waiting for the other foot to drop. Since onkyo dumped audyssey, I've more seriously considered other brands, for when mine gives up the ghost. Denon? Looks great! Emotiva? ...always wanted separates! Maybe in a couple years, Ponkyoneer will have somethin. (Mcacc didn't work for me though)
Really interested to see this play out.


----------



## JBrax

I'll just continue to use and enjoy my 809 as long as it lasts. I've had zero problems with it so far and had Onkyo not dropped Audyssey I would have had no reservations about purchasing another AVR from them. As long as it's still available the next AVR I purchase will have XT32 so it does appear I'll be switching brands.


----------



## Todd Anderson

It's interesting that one of the more common knocks on Pioneer's excellent MCACC suite has been the lack of sub EQ. This year, for the first time, Pioneer introduced sub EQ (limited, yes...but they are working in the right direction)...Onkyo is currently working through a deal to acquire a majority holding of Pioneer...and Onkyo's 2014 class dumps support of sub EQ.

I don't think anyone saw this coming...

:dontknow:


----------



## Owen Bartley

Todd Anderson said:


> At this point Onkyo’s decision to remove Audyssey from its AV gear is old news;


What? Not to me it wasn't! 



tonyvdb said:


> I for one dislike the fact that the "accuEQ" only touches the soround channels. I think there are very few gains by doing this as I would much prefer it if they EQed the front three channels and the sub and did nothing on the soround ch's.


I totally agree, that seems like a strange place to focus. Changing only the surrounds seems to me more like an ambiance mode than actual room correction, since it leaves the main sources untouched. :scratch: I'm confused by this.


----------



## sdurani

tonyvdb said:


> I for one dislike the fact that the "accuEQ" only touches the soround channels.


According to the Onkyo website, they also EQ the centre channel. It is only the L/R channels and subwoofer output that are not EQ'd. 

The way it does the surrounds is unfortunate, using one EQ curve for all 4 surround channels (must be based on averaging the surrounds). That leads me to believe they are not really interested in correcting peaks & dips in each channel as much as conforming the surrounds and centre to the uncorrected L/R speakers. More like using EQ for tonal consistency (timbre matching) than traditional room correction.


----------



## tcarcio

sdurani said:


> In order to run both Atmos and Audyssey, they would have to double the number of DSP chips from 2 to 4. Denon bit the bullet and did exactly that. Onkyo kept their receivers at 2 chips, Audyssey had to go. So it came down to money, though not the Audyssey licensing fee as some had suspected.


I agree. In my first post I mentioned that for Onkyo it was the bottom line. I would rather they use more chips and charge more than to take away something that as far as I am concerned was one of their best options.


----------



## sdurani

tcarcio said:


> I would rather they use more chips and charge more than to take away something that as far as I am concerned was one of their best options.


Agreed, it's not an either/or situation. I wouldn't want object-based audio of that audio was full of peaks & dips. 

Still, after Audyssey being in the market for so many years, it feels strange to see them only have one major customer (D&M). How could they let this happen?


----------



## magic

sdurani said:


> Agreed, it's not an either/or situation. I wouldn't want object-based audio of that audio was full of peaks & dips.
> 
> Still, after Audyssey being in the market for so many years, it feels strange to see them only have one major customer (D&M). How could they let this happen?


Good point...!? 
Maybe they were charging to much for the use of their algorithms....

Either way maybe I'll try the anthem..... I've been curious for a while

Eq-ing the surrounds is a Sony option... and they at least gave you 3 different Eq choices not 1 
Onkyo must be using the money to buy Pioneer


----------



## gazoink

willis7469 said:


> I pretty much agree with all you guys too. Jbrax, I think skipping THX cert would be worthwhile if it meant keeping Audyssey, and maybe adding xt32 to lower tiered models(not sure how that would play with the new audyssey level system though).


THX gets you pretty much nothing anymore that you can't get another way. THX-specific processing is largely duplicated by other means. THX certification used to be some sort of quality assurance, but one of the highest quality product lines (Denon) hasn't had a THX product in years. 

The Onkyo decision is misguided, if guided at all. Apportioning DSP resources to Atmos over Audyssey? The facts are, very few will add Atmos speakers, or even know what it is. Audyssey benefits everyone, regardless of channel count. It's just dumb to take a giant step backwards and make room for something that's not even reality yet. 

I'v'e set up Yamaha, Sony, Pioneer and several flavors of Audyssey. None come close to the current X32 version of Audyssey, and some (Sony) are a total joke.


----------



## JBrax

Completely agree!


----------



## tonyvdb

gazoink said:


> THX gets you pretty much nothing anymore that you can't get another way. THX-specific processing is largely duplicated by other means. THX certification used to be some sort of quality assurance, but one of the highest quality product lines (Denon) hasn't had a THX product in years.


THX is still meaningful. Onkyo has always done much better in bench tests and particularly the Ultra 2 certification is not easy to achieve. Onkyo has had it's HDMI board issues but their amp section has always been the cream of the crop.


----------



## Dwight Angus

Scratching my head on this one. Been an devoted Onkyo customer for many years. I will hold on to my 5508 with XT32 for as long as possible. I'm not really interested in Atmos & will probably not add ATmos speakers. Onkyo dropped the ball on this one. XT32 is one of the main reasons I got the 5508. Agreed with Tony at least provide EQ support for the front 3 channels & forgo the surrounds. IMHO this is 3 steps backwards.


----------



## chashint

From a different side of the fence I see dropping the Audessey as no great loss.
Looking here (and other forums) there are a lot of people that turn off the room correction when listening to music. I never can get my head wrapped around that, either on or off should sound better all the time.
The second most popular HT forum has a dedicated Audessey thread that is hundreds of pages with some very smart and dedicated contributors that try to help/explain/troubleshoot issues....it's not nearly as plug-n-play as the public needs it to be (nor is any other EQ scheme).
While I have no direct experience with the top tier Audessey my brother has a Denon AVR and I do not find the Audessey in it to be any better or worse than the Pioneer MCACC.
Some of this is a preference thing, he really likes the dynamic volume and EQ, I decidedly do not, but I visit my brother regularly and get used to it after a short while.
The higher levels of MCACC have a front align calibration that does what the new Onk EQ is going to do.
I have been using that calibration for over two years with no additional adjustments.

The future of HT audio still looks bright to me.


----------



## chashint

I like THX certification too.


----------



## Peter Loeser

I have been a little surprised to see almost every response to Onkyo's decision being that a lack of Audyssey is a complete deal-breaker. I do definitely see merit in room correction and EQ for both music and HT applications, but not essential to me for my current setup. _Disclaimer: My HT is uniformly shaped with pretty ideal and completely symmetric speaker placement._ I have found that if I take the time to set the speaker distances and levels and play around with sub placement a bit, the additional improvements of basic room correction are pretty subtle (though measurable with REW). _Dislaimer: I have yet to use XT32 in my system._ Like chashint, I prefer to leave dynamic EQ disabled, and usually end up leaving room correction off completely.

Going beyond the enthusiast crowd, I would be willing to bet your average consumer does not even know room correction exists in AV receivers, much less what it does or how to set it up. Maybe I'm wrong. I gather for many of the commenters in the recent Onkyo threads that room correction is the #1 deciding factor in choosing an AV receiver. Is that true? If so, again I'm surprised. I wonder what percentage of Onkyo's customers consider Audyssey essential, and what percentage don't know or care about it. Some are suggesting this move will trigger a big drop in Onkyo's sales, but I'm skeptical. :dontknow:

Again, I'm not trying to say room correction is not valuable (especially in irregularly shaped rooms) or that Audyssey isn't the best. It just seems more like a very sophisticated band-aid than a replacement for a properly treated and set up room. :hide:


----------



## JBrax

Maybe I'm in the minority but I think THX certification is an unnecessary expense and as far as I'm concerned they can keep that logo. The listening modes are nice to have but I quit using THX Cinema long ago and much prefer straight decoding of my movies. Any AVR that doesn't include Audyssey is pretty much a deal breaker for me.


----------



## J&D

Impressive spec's until you see yet another poor attempt at proprietary room EQ. Massive cutting corner's decision. For those that do not see value in modern RCS like Audyssey there have always been other options (like simply turning it off) but for those that utilize it and appreciate it there is now one less option on the table.


----------



## willis7469

Peter Loeser said:


> I have been a little surprised to see almost every response to Onkyo's decision being that a lack of Audyssey is a complete deal-breaker. I do definitely see merit in room correction and EQ for both music and HT applications, but not essential to me for my current setup. Disclaimer: My HT is uniformly shaped with pretty ideal and completely symmetric speaker placement. I have found that if I take the time to set the speaker distances and levels and play around with sub placement a bit, the additional improvements of basic room correction are pretty subtle (though measurable with REW). Dislaimer: I have yet to use XT32 in my system. Like chashint, I prefer to leave dynamic EQ disabled, and usually end up leaving room correction off completely. Going beyond the enthusiast crowd, I would be willing to bet your average consumer does not even know room correction exists in AV receivers, much less what it does or how to set it up. Maybe I'm wrong. I gather for many of the commenters in the recent Onkyo threads that room correction is the #1 deciding factor in choosing an AV receiver. Is that true? If so, again I'm surprised. I wonder what percentage of Onkyo's customers consider Audyssey essential, and what percentage don't know or care about it. Some are suggesting this move will trigger a big drop in Onkyo's sales, but I'm skeptical. :dontknow: Again, I'm not trying to say room correction is not valuable (especially in irregularly shaped rooms) or that Audyssey isn't the best. It just seems more like a very sophisticated band-aid than a replacement for a properly treated and set up room. :hide:


Hello Peter! I have to agree with the band-aid thing, except I think you may be in the fortunate minority. Most(?) of us here I think are stuck with the rooms we've got. (For now at least). My living room supports a 7.3 ch setup now, and my WAF is at redline! Lol. I don't have a room/resources to do a proper space. That means I have to use some correction, and Audyssey Is great at treating my disgustingly inappropriate theater space. I think your also right about customer base, and the knowledge or caring to know what audyssey means. But many of those people are much less knowledgeable than even myself, and if I can give the nod to an audyssey equipped piece, it can help maximize their investment, and keep them interested on the hobby. Especially since the majority of ppl I know, have to contend with a less than optimal space. I too leave dynamicEQ off almost always, but it's nice once in awhile, and also try to work with placement as much as I can. As far as deal breaker, I can only speak for myself, but I might be ok to try a different eq suite, but the real problem is accuEQ. To my knowledge it hasn't been tested widely, and most of what we know sounds ridiculous, and ineffective. I am willing to be corrected however. Hard to say if it will effect the bottom line. I think that will be dictated by those who buy/install/recommend Onkyo products. IMO, the biggest violation isn't removing Audyssey, it's implementing accuEQ! 
...just my .02!


----------



## willis7469

JBrax said:


> Maybe I'm in the minority but I think THX certification is an unnecessary expense and as far as I'm concerned they can keep that logo. The listening modes are nice to have but I quit using THX Cinema long ago and much prefer straight decoding of my movies. Any AVR that doesn't include Audyssey is pretty much a deal breaker for me.


I think I'm finding this to be true now as well. When I bought my 808, THX cert was a big deal to me. This was mostly for the power capabilities however. Even though I knew from reading many tests that it was capable anyway. I don't like thx listening modes either. I like it straight up, with an Audyssey chaser! I would much rather they put the cert money into something else.


----------



## willis7469

gazoink said:


> THX gets you pretty much nothing anymore that you can't get another way. THX-specific processing is largely duplicated by other means. THX certification used to be some sort of quality assurance, but one of the highest quality product lines (Denon) hasn't had a THX product in years. The Onkyo decision is misguided, if guided at all. Apportioning DSP resources to Atmos over Audyssey? The facts are, very few will add Atmos speakers, or even know what it is. Audyssey benefits everyone, regardless of channel count. It's just dumb to take a giant step backwards and make room for something that's not even reality yet. I'v'e set up Yamaha, Sony, Pioneer and several flavors of Audyssey. None come close to the current X32 version of Audyssey, and some (Sony) are a total joke.


agreed. I'd say Onkyo is "UN" guided as well. If they are choosing to support Atmos over audyssey, this seems like "cart before the horse" move. I'm afraid a very small percent of normal/shared/multi purpose listening rooms will ever see atmos anything at work in it, and probably not many more dedicated spaces. At least for a long time. This is the ceiling in my LR. 12 cans, and 2 hvac outlets. Even in ceiling speakers would make this look like a bad Home Depot display! ...and my wife held my feet to the fire, and say more speakers. Aw...And also "atmos speakers" on the mains and surrounds? I don't think I could get them to fire properly to create the effect right, with my roof angle. I'm afraid I'm out. 
I agree xt32 is where it's at, although I've not used ypao, but didn't like mcacc. Sony has never offered anything but ps3 for me either.


----------



## Peter Loeser

willis7469 said:


> Hello Peter! I have to agree with the band-aid thing, except I think you may be in the fortunate minority. Most(?) of us here I think are stuck with the rooms we've got. (For now at least). My living room supports a 7.3 ch setup now, and my WAF is at redline! Lol. I don't have a room/resources to do a proper space. That means I have to use some correction, and Audyssey Is great at treating my disgustingly inappropriate theater space. I think your also right about customer base, and the knowledge or caring to know what audyssey means. But many of those people are much less knowledgeable than even myself, and if I can give the nod to an audyssey equipped piece, it can help maximize their investment, and keep them interested on the hobby. Especially since the majority of ppl I know, have to contend with a less than optimal space. I too leave dynamicEQ off almost always, but it's nice once in awhile, and also try to work with placement as much as I can. As far as deal breaker, I can only speak for myself, but I might be ok to try a different eq suite, but the real problem is accuEQ. To my knowledge it hasn't been tested widely, and most of what we know sounds ridiculous, and ineffective. I am willing to be corrected however. Hard to say if it will effect the bottom line. I think that will be dictated by those who buy/install/recommend Onkyo products. IMO, the biggest violation isn't removing Audyssey, it's implementing accuEQ!
> ...just my .02!


And that's where I see the value of Audyssey or any room correction/EQ. I think it's a shame to alter the sound of a speaker (carefully designed for accurate audio reproduction) to mask the imperfections of a room (not even remotely designed for good acoustics), but it's a whole lot easier (and more WAF friendly) to set up a mic, push a button, and let the AVR fix it. I do consider myself fortunate to have a pretty ideal space for HT. For that reason I am focusing more on acoustic treatments in the room, speaker placement, and seating arrangement. Now throw Atmos into the mix... :spend:


----------



## gazoink

tonyvdb said:


> THX is still meaningful. Onkyo has always done much better in bench tests and particularly the Ultra 2 certification is not easy to achieve. Onkyo has had it's HDMI board issues but their amp section has always been the cream of the crop.


Granted, Ultra2 is not easy/cheap to achieve. It's also about 3000cu/ft spaces and larger where the expensive and difficult aspects of U2 are all in the power amp section. 

From the THX site (--with my comments):

The Benefit Of THX Certified Receivers

• Crisp, clear sound fills your room: THX Ultra2 Plus, THX Select2 Plus and THX I/S Plus certification categories deliver amazing performances based on your room size.
--Select2 and below is easy many AVRs to hit. Just because they don't try doesn't mean they can't do it. Except for the somewhat questionable dynamic headroom spec, it's not hard to hit U2 power specs with higher end AVRS, and easy with separates. Much of the power specs were created decades ago with this was much more of an issue, and home cinema audio wasn't well understood. Unless you're in a 3000cu/ft space, it probably doesn't matter much.

• Powerful studio volume: Set your THX Certified receiver to “0” on the volume dial, and experience the exact Reference Level volume used in the movie theater.
--This happens anyway Audyssey cal and most other auto-cal systems.

• Effortless performance: THX performs more than 2,000 Bench Tests, to ensure that your receiver plays effortlessly with plenty of power and low distortion in your home theater.
--Again, U2 is hard to meet, but mostly unnecessary. Yes, entry-level and mid-level AVRs might not do as well. But unless you're at reference level a lot, and most listeners are 8-10dB below that all the time, it really doesn't matter much.

• Loudness Control: THX Loudness Plus lets you catch every detail of a surround sound mix when the volume is lowered.
--Duplicated, actually improved upon with Audyssey Dynamic Volume and Dynamic EQ, as well as Dolby Volume.

• Easily mix and match brands: With a single standardized bass configuration, you can easily and confidently use any THX Certified product together.
--Huh? I haven't found THX AVRs mix any better or worse with other products. THX used to make a bit of an issue about device control compatibility, now that's gone out the window too.

Otherwise, the THX specific features like re-EQ (a mostly confused and dead issue now), decorrelation (hasn't been necessary since DD 5.1), and the above mentioned volume adjusters are duplicated by others.

Funny thing, THX Ultra2 specs mean a LOT more for speakers, but are probably even more rare than in AVRs. Speaker design issues and applications that THX addresses have not changed in 20 years since Home THX was conceived, but they are mostly still ignored today. Of course, they pretty much nuked their own specs with Select...so...oh well.


----------



## Don Draper

Wow this is just crazy. Granted, I do spend hours playing with audessey before getting satisfactory results but when its dialed in its among the best. I did like dynamic EQ until I realized it was collapsing the sound stage and adding harshness, and since I added acoustic panels I'm just fine with the flat curve. Onkyo may have seen all the threads about the software pains and realized most happy people are using outboard processors. I bet the majority of these buyers (not us) never take the mic out of the box.


----------



## gazoink

Don Draper said:


> Wow this is just crazy. Granted, I do spend hours playing with audessey before getting satisfactory results but when its dialed in its among the best. I did like dynamic EQ until I realized it was collapsing the sound stage and adding harshness, and since I added acoustic panels I'm just fine with the flat curve. Onkyo may have seen all the threads about the software pains and realized most happy people are using outboard processors. I bet the majority of these buyers (not us) never take the mic out of the box.


If the majority of buyers never take the mic out of the box, then the number of people using outboard processing is miniscule, not enough to drive a product feature decision. 

If anyone actually reads the quick setup graphical instructions they'll run a basic audyssey cal. Far from everyone, but the purchase of a mid to high-end AVR usually indicates a geek, and he would run the cal. Low end, not so much.


----------



## Don Draper

gazoink said:


> If the majority of buyers never take the mic out of the box, then the number of people using outboard processing is miniscule, not enough to drive a product feature decision.
> 
> If anyone actually reads the quick setup graphical instructions they'll run a basic audyssey cal. Far from everyone, but the purchase of a mid to high-end AVR usually indicates a geek, and he would run the cal. Low end, not so much.


You would be surprised.. lots of folks will buy high end (brick and mortar) and are completely clueless. Just like people that buy high performance sports cars (and paid extra for the track package) that will never see track time. Onkyo is probably looking at what move in numbers though - most likely the lower end gear. So the mid level and especially the flagships don't make up for the lions share. Then of what's left, there is us and then those that couldn't care less if onkyo had ypao stamped on the faceplate. Then among us (a very small population mind you ) has moved to outboard or are ready to make the switch - those of us sticking it out have resorted to all sorts of witchcraft and rituals to run the 8 pint measurement. So onkyo is like: why license a product that will not get used by the people who actually care about when the majority of my money comes from the clueless? 

Obviously my jibber jabber is pure crazy talk but I cant wrap my head around why onkyo would try to pass off a surround channel eq on what it labels its flagship items. Crazy!!


----------



## willis7469

Don Draper said:


> ...those that couldn't care less if onkyo had ypao stamped on the faceplate. !!


Hilarious! 
I agree. Flagship+accuEQ= dingy!(boat)


----------



## JBrax

I'm of the opinion that most people shelling out $500 and up for a receiver are going to be pulling that mic out of the box and running the calibration. I'm also of the opinion that Denon and others that offer Audyssey are fist pumping the air with Onkyo's decision. Not to say that Audyssey is the end all be all but it's my preferred room correction software that I've personally used. YPAO and MCACC have a happy customer following as well as the camp that prefer EQ'ing themselves without the help of room correction software. I'm puzzled by this decision by Onkyo.


----------



## Don Draper

JBrax said:


> I'm of the opinion that most people shelling out $500 and up for a receiver are going to be pulling that mic out of the box and running the calibration. .


Maybe I was a little harsh there, but I think the folks spending $500 truly don't care what brand of room correction they are getting (even if they do use it). I haven't used ypao in a while but I didn't like what it did when I used it. Seems that it was averaging vs addressing critical room issues. What I did love was the graphical representation it showed of the work it did. I agree with the competition fist pumping. Until I am completely comfy with outboard I can't imagine jumping the audyssey ship after trying the rest. If the next iteration has graphs, my onkyo is in the trash. I imagine by then they will have seen the error of their ways though.


----------



## Don Draper

I found this..what gives:




_AccuEQ 
AccuEQ optimizes surround-sound and two-channel audio to suit your listening space. In particular, AccuEQ extracts the best possible performance from your front speakers to make stereo listening more dynamic and exciting. The system analyzes speaker setup and room acoustics from one listening position (which simplifies the calibration process) and optimizes frequency response and output levels for maximum clarity. _


----------



## Peter Loeser

I'm not here to defend or criticize Onkyo's decision, but I just don't think that many people outside the "enthusiast" circle care about room correction in their HT. Of all the people I know who own an AVR with room correction capability, none of them have actually set up the mic and done the calibration. This includes guys that are tech savvy and put time into researching their gear (and are aware that the calibration/room correction features are there). I have also generally observed that they will set their speakers and sub down where it's convenient and never move them again. Everyone's circle of friends is different I guess, but nobody I know outside the forum could care less about room correction.


----------



## tonyvdb

Peter, I agree with you there.

I have a cousin who never buys anything other than Sony receivers. He is on his third Sony after the other two failed and I tried to convince him to try something else but another Sony is in his rack. Im still on the same Onkyo receiver during the entire time hes been through the three.
Some people just dont care.


----------



## willis7469

You are right tony. And your onk is probably twice the rcvr any of his sonys were/are. Ppl don't care either. I was in a position to sell tv's for awhile. You wouldn't believe how many times I heard, "as long as it's LED, and at least 120hz" why is that sir? "My son in law told me"... Good thing I had a barf bag in my uniform. Some ppl do care, but just enough to ask someone else for a quick answer. For me, I think I want it to matter to others because it does matter to me.


----------



## JBrax

Peter Loeser said:


> I'm not here to defend or criticize Onkyo's decision, but I just don't think that many people outside the "enthusiast" circle care about room correction in their HT. Of all the people I know who own an AVR with room correction capability, none of them have actually set up the mic and done the calibration. This includes guys that are tech savvy and put time into researching their gear (and are aware that the calibration/room correction features are there). I have also generally observed that they will set their speakers and sub down where it's convenient and never move them again. Everyone's circle of friends is different I guess, but nobody I know outside the forum could care less about room correction.


 . This includes guys that are tech savvy and put time into researching their gear (and are aware that the calibration/room correction features are there).

Why would anyone who is tech savvy and spent time researching not fully utilize their purchased product?


----------



## magic

I'll do it later when the wife or the kids are not around.... ( it's gonna take 20-30 minutes )

......2 years later....... 

why didn't I do this earlier it sounds so good now. 


I'm just saying.... I'm just saying


----------



## willis7469

Good one magic. I don't think you're too far off!


----------



## Peter Loeser

JBrax said:


> Why would anyone who is tech savvy and spent time researching not fully utilize their purchased product?


A good question that probably applies to any type of electronics. How many people calibrate their TV rather than assuming default settings are best?


----------



## B- one

Peter Loeser said:


> A good question that probably applies to any type of electronics. How many people calibrate their TV rather than assuming default settings are best?


Sounds like we need a poll!!


----------



## willis7469

Peter Loeser said:


> A good question that probably applies to any type of electronics. How many people calibrate their TV rather than assuming default settings are best?


This is a good question. People not like us? Zero. Fwiw, I've used the spears and munsil cal disk on every persons display in my family, and what ever friends would let me. Lol. All were glad to have it done. I know it's not the same, but if I can make even one persons experience better, it's worth the time. The hard part is explaining why it's needs a calibration in the first place. This is my own analogy, but the arguments are similar to, buying a new car and having some 3rd party guy come and tune it up for a size-able fraction of the cost. I personally think it's stupid that tvs aren't correct when you get them home.


----------



## magic

B- one said:


> Sounds like we need a poll!!


Problem is the networks don't all look the same. So you could be adjusting for FOX but NBC now is washed out or vice versa

Hdmi stopped the individual channel tweaking for me. It won't let you.


----------



## B- one

willis7469 said:


> I personally think it's stupid that tvs aren't correct when you get them home.


That's why I bought mine from Robert at Value Electronics!


----------



## willis7469

B- one said:


> That's why I bought mine from Robert at Value Electronics!


Touché! The best we've got is BB. The boneheads in my store can't even spell ISF...:-(


----------



## B- one

willis7469 said:


> Touché! The best we've got is BB. The boneheads in my store can't even spell ISF...:-(


VE can calibrate and ship the set to you. It's a good service they make sure the display works properly and then calibrate and ship to those of us who need it!


----------



## willis7469

B- one said:


> VE can calibrate and ship the set to you. It's a good service they make sure the display works properly and then calibrate and ship to those of us who need it!


Thx for the tip! Robert seems great, and that is a good service. I will most definitely call them when the time comes.


----------



## JBrax

Peter Loeser said:


> A good question that probably applies to any type of electronics. How many people calibrate their TV rather than assuming default settings are best?


That's a bit different because it requires another monetary investment after you've just dropped a lot of money for the tv.


----------



## gazoink

As someone mentioned in an earlier post, I don't think the decision to drop Audyssey was related to licensing or the idea that "nobody uses it anyway". It do think that DSP resources may have driven it, as Atmos would take a bit of DSP, and to do both Audyssey and Atmos would require another set of DSP chips, and would run the price up. Every part's cost is reflected in the end price by a 5-10X factor, plus development costs. A pair $5 DSP chip could bump the price as much as $50-$100, and that takes the Onkyo product out of it's price niche. 

What I think was misguided is the over-emphasis on Atmos when it's not likely to be used at home even as much as Audyssey, though Dolby, and the film studios that release Atmos tracks certainly have more resources to promote (read: educate the buying public) as to the availability of Atmos and its benefits. I still don't see many shelling out for more speakers when the middle of the bell curve for home media systems is still less than 5 channels.


----------



## Peter Loeser

JBrax said:


> That's a bit different because it requires another monetary investment after you've just dropped a lot of money for the tv.


Agreed, plus it's not affected by the size or shape of the room. I think those that don't bother with calibration/correction of any sort simply don't think it's worth the investment (money or time) to find out what they're missing, and probably assume they won't hear or see a difference.


----------



## magic

http://www.onkyousa.com/Products/model.php?m=TX-NR3030&class=Receiver&source=indexBanner


FYI
They have the video up that explains the 
Eq they are using.( it's a short explanation)


----------



## gazoink

magic said:


> http://www.onkyousa.com/Products/model.php?m=TX-NR3030&class=Receiver&source=indexBanner
> 
> 
> FYI
> They have the video up that explains the
> Eq they are using.( it's a short explanation)


Well...the video...Wow! It's an amazing multi-layered amalgamation of complete and utter nonsense! I hardly know where to start...so I'm not going to.

Except to say, "...while letting the natural sound sound of your front speakers to shine through". And if you buy that, I've got a great deal for you on this bridge in Brooklyn... So...um...what if my front speakers ain't so natural...do they still shine through?

Hopeless. Somebody drank the koolaid.


----------



## willis7469

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/onkyo-tx-nr636-av-receiver

Didn't cover accuEQ as much as I was hoping for, but it's somethin. My take away was he seemed underwhelmed.


----------



## chashint

The vast majority of the employees where I work are electrical engineers, mechanical engineers, and chemical engineers.....educated, capable, and pretty well compensated geeks.
Believe me, the few that even bother to get surround sound are barely willing to connect all the speakers that come in the box (yes HTIB rules when they even bother at all).
They do buy expensive TVs and projectors with giant screens though.
IMO if the auto EQ system manages to set the speaker levels correctly that is more than good enough for the average consumer.


----------



## JBrax

This still doesn't make sense to me? The topic seems worthy of having its own thread. Why educated, well compensated, and tech savvy individuals would not place a premium on the audio aspect. This of course after spending a good deal of money on the video side of the experience.


----------



## Todd Anderson

I'd guess that 75% of electronics consumers don't take the time to calibrate...let alone optimize their systems (video or audio)...


----------



## JBrax

Todd Anderson said:


> I'd guess that 75% of electronics consumers don't take the time to calibrate...let alone optimize their systems (video or audio)...


I guess for some good enough is enough?


----------



## willis7469

JBrax said:


> I guess for some good enough is enough?


This is true. And unfortunate. Some of us have shared space issues, but do the absolute best we can. And on the other hand, I've been in homes where I've seen all five speakers on the tv stand in rooms that would accommodate nicely.


----------



## JBrax

I fully understand the shared space issue as I fall into that category. My point was and is people who go buy the AVR and speakers and then don't utilize the various room calibration programs installed in their receiver. As for the people who spend large amounts on a screen and projector and then slap a HTIB in place for audio to me that's like driving a Ferrari with a Dodge Caravan engine. As Chasint said these are educated and tech savvy people he knows doing this.


----------



## magic

I dont understand ....Just because you are tech savvy doesn't mean you are into audio.

I know plenty of people who could design and reverse engineer electronic components. They could tell you when the next new chip from Texas instruments was coming out but, they knew very little and didn't care much about audio. Other than...umm Bose sounds good to them. 


Your thread would be better to ask 
Why wouldn't an audio person calibrate their speakers using the onboard automatic Eq ? 
Just my opinion .


----------



## willis7469

JBrax said:


> I fully understand the shared space issue as I fall into that category. My point was and is people who go buy the AVR and speakers and then don't utilize the various room calibration programs installed in their receiver. As for the people who spend large amounts on a screen and projector and then slap a HTIB in place for audio to me that's like driving a Ferrari with a Dodge Caravan engine. As Chasint said these are educated and tech savvy people he knows doing this.


I think it makes them lazy and undeserving. Kind of like the granny buying a new vette when ya know she'll never use more than 1/2 throttle. And to the huge screen/htib thing? I couldn't agree more. Education doesn't equal common sense, and this kind of pairing seems a waste of a screen. Your analogy was spot on. How can you auditorily(I think I just made that up?) bolster a 120" screen with 2" drivers and a 10 inch sub?


----------



## JBrax

Umm…not my thread but that's irrelevant. Probably a good idea to steer the thread back on topic now.


----------



## gazoink

Todd Anderson said:


> I'd guess that 75% of electronics consumers don't take the time to calibrate...let alone optimize their systems (video or audio)...


Is this a guess or a reference of hard statistics? 

Probably not worth debating based on a guess...but if there are references for this, it would be helpful.


----------



## NBPk402

gazoink said:


> Is this a guess or a reference of hard statistics?
> 
> Probably not worth debating based on a guess...but if there are references for this, it would be helpful.


He said it was a guess. :T


----------



## gazoink

ellisr63 said:


> He said it was a guess. :T



Yes, I know. Then the discussion continued as if it were fact.


----------



## gazoink

It's unlikely we'll ever have the statistics as to how many new AVRs get run through auto-setup. Here are a couple of observations. 

Onkyo AVRs, at least until the current non-Audyssey version, run the user through the setup menu the first time the unit is turned on, just after language selection. Yes, you can skip it, but the tendency is to follow on-screen prompts.

Denon AVRs are a little different, but the initial setup on-screen menu routes the user through auto-cal, and the easy-setup instructions direct users to Audyssey immediately after speaker connection. The setup is started by plugging the measurement mic in. 

I don't recall what Yamaha does, but if I recall Pioneer routes new users through the auto-setup procedure on start-up.

It would take more willful effort to skip the process than to just follow the directions on screen. Not to say that the majority of AVR purchasers actually do a valid auto-cal, but it may be a more significant number than we synics expect. 

Regardless, we'll never know, there's no practical way to collect the statistics.

Except for Audyssey Pro calibrations...which can send results to Audyssey, so they do know that number. It's small considering the total market. A 2010 AES paper by Tomlinson Holman utilized a small part of the total data collected. At that time the paper was being prepared they had pre-equalization curves for more than 30,000 rooms, the paper distilled data down to 1000 rooms for practicality. The total data may easily comprise more than double that now.


----------



## AudiocRaver

I am terrible at being able to predict how much someone will value a feature or complain about its omission, so I can only add my own opinion to the discussion.

Being one who a) puts a high priority on good sound, b) likes to have options available (irreversible decisions are SO hard for me), c) have heard some pretty impressive results with Audyssey, d) have not heard the other competing AVR auto-eq offerings, but have no reason to doubt the consensus that Audyssey is the best of them, and do not follow the logic AT ALL in Onkyo's new approach, e) prefer other tuning methods for 2 channel, but would definitely use Audyssey on a dedicated home theater system (it is just SO convenient), and f) tend to be fairly brand loyal, but if they do not offer a feature that I want, will switch brands to get it...

All of these factors considered, if I was spending $1000 on a new AVR, it would definitely have Audyssey inside, and I would have to leave Onkyo behind as my favored AVR manufacturer for that reason. So based on my own little single data point poll, Onkyo's decision does not seem like a good move to me.


----------



## willis7469

Well said Wayne. +1.


----------



## chashint

If the AVRs now automatically direct new users/units into the auto cal routine on initial power up I think that is a fantastic step in the right direction.
My AVR initiates the setup when the mic is plugged in, but does not do anything to prompt that action on initial power up.

It is interesting to me that the rest of the forum members may be having different experiences in regards to their associates/friends/co-workers putting lots more money into the video half of their entertainment systems than the audio half.


----------



## JBrax

Agree with the above comments by Wayne. ^^+2


----------



## magic

chashint said:


> It is interesting to me that the rest of the forum members may be having different experiences in regards to their associates/friends/co-workers putting lots more money into the video half of their entertainment systems than the audio half.


Yes I guess so but if you look back it has been going on for a long time. 

1) WAF= large TV is OK but big speakers around the room isn't. I remember trying to get the old 32 inch CRT the ones that stuck out like 2.5 feet from the wall and we're are you going to put it comment came.

But now that you can mount it on the wall well its OK go and get the 60 inch one. So that's what a lot of men did and yea.. the picture was nicer too. 

2) Then their is the learning curve to using the remote control...too bad they can't all universally come out with something that works across all platforms( yes I have a logitech but still .....) 

Edit.. learning cure for TV and receiver and cable/sat box


Back to Onkyo I don't know what to say about their move to be honest.... I can only think that they are planning to use Pioneers Mcacc after they aquire it. So year after year they will add more features to their own


----------



## gazoink

chashint said:


> If the AVRs now automatically direct new users/units into the auto cal routine on initial power up I think that is a fantastic step in the right direction.
> My AVR initiates the setup when the mic is plugged in, but does not do anything to prompt that action on initial power up.


YOU would only see the initial setup menu the very first time the unit was powered up, or after a processor reset. Otherwise, most AVRs with Audyssey get the cal menu when the mic is connected.


----------



## willis7469

chashint said:


> It is interesting to me that the rest of the forum members may be having different experiences in regards to their associates/friends/co-workers putting lots more money into the video half of their entertainment systems than the audio half.


I think this is interesting too. I've seen all kinds The factors seem to be, priorities,ambition, and knowledge. Demographics seem to matter little. Some don't know/care how much audio contributes to the experience. Sometimes they find out too late, after installing their htib in a 5000 cuft theater, with 130" screen and not having enough money/time or WAF to redo it. Sometimes they live in "bliss", not knowing anything beyond BB or B**e even exist. Sometimes people are just lazy, letting their credit card do all the work.(and still not run Audyssey! Lol) My own unfortunate(?) reality is that my audio system is well above the impact level of my 58" plasma. (That will change though someday)
Having the user guided into auto setup is great. Maybe they should do an auto reminder thing every 5 minutes like antivirus ware, or adobe updates til the user goes through it. ...maybe I shouldn't care what other people do?


----------



## magic

willis7469 said:


> Maybe they should do an auto reminder thing every 5 minutes like antivirus ware, or adobe updates til the user goes through it. ...


 no...... !!!!!! I would loose it.
:0 don't give them ideas they wouldn't get it right. 

I can see it now I'm watching a movie and I've already done the setup months in and just then the pop up apears ... 
New update please run auto setup. 

Don't laugh you know I'm right !!!!!


----------



## JBrax

magic said:


> no...... !!!!!! I would loose it. :0 don't give them ideas they wouldn't get it right. I can see it now I'm watching a movie and I've already done the setup months in and just then the pop up apears ... New update please run auto setup. Don't laugh you know I'm right !!!!!


Totally agree!


----------



## willis7469

JBrax said:


> Totally agree!


sorry guys, I'm laughing so hard right now! I never thought of that. Back to the drawing board.


----------



## lvc10000

.


----------



## lvc10000

Gentlemen, 

Though I agree with you concerning the decision to change from Audyssey (even if I bypass to pure"st" modes for 2 channel listening), could I change the subject and ask you a question or opinion relating to these Onkyo AVRs? 

I am waiting for the latest releases to upgrade my SR7007 but am slightly concerned that only Onkyo seems to be the only one incorporating HDCP2.2 in this year's AVRs. Wouldn't that give you some possible issues when material becomes available in a coming year(s)? :dontknow:
(If my memory isn't failing me; I remember Joel Silver in January mentioning in my presence that HDCP 2.2 is clearly on the horizon and coming as the industry is gearing for it)
Wouldn't that possibly be a deal breaker also for the resale of these latest high-end HDMI 2.0 AVRs without HDCP2.2 capability a few years down the line?

Am I possibly wrong to look at such details? :nerd:
(Ok, I normally invest in the higher end AVRs and keep them a 4-5 years min :sweat


----------



## lvc10000

I've now actually started a new tread on the topic to have your feedback: http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...5818-do-i-need-invest-hdmi-2-0-right-now.html


----------



## Todd Anderson

gazoink said:


> Is this a guess or a reference of hard statistics?
> 
> Probably not worth debating based on a guess...but if there are references for this, it would be helpful.


Total guess...primarily based on experience with friends and family.


----------



## Don Draper

So I think it’s out there now that Onkyo chose Atmos over XT32 because its architecture cannot handle processing both. So my conspiracy theory is Onkyo may not be the immediate bad guy. But somewhere buried deep in a contract clause Onkyo is required to carry Atmos as a requirement of carrying any dolby product. I can imagine a receiver without out xt32 (barely) but no dolby processing? Onkyo would be in real trouble.

After doing some research on accu eq, and seeing that it is basically a joke, I’m willing to give Onkyo the benefit of the doubt and say they got caught with their pants down and accu eq is just a stop gap measure (just to have something in there). If accu eq sticks around it will be wearing mmacc cloths soon enough, but I expect onkyo is gambling on weathering the storm for a year, and that next year new architecture  will be present and so will xt 32.


----------



## gazoink

Don Draper said:


> So I think it’s out there now that Onkyo chose Atmos over XT32 because its architecture cannot handle processing both. So my conspiracy theory is Onkyo may not be the immediate bad guy. But somewhere buried deep in a contract clause Onkyo is required to carry Atmos as a requirement of carrying any dolby product.


Interesting idea, but probably not. No manufacturer would sign that contract because "any" Dolby product would mean PLII and up, and there are too many products without the hardware resources to do everything. I doubt Atmos was a requirement of any license other than Atmos. 



Don Draper said:


> I can imagine a receiver without out xt32 (barely) but no dolby processing? Onkyo would be in real trouble.


 Me either, yet there are more AVRs in the world without XT32 than with it by quite a ratio.


Don Draper said:


> After doing some research on accu eq, and seeing that it is basically a joke, I’m willing to give Onkyo the benefit of the doubt and say they got caught with their pants down and accu eq is just a stop gap measure (just to have something in there). If accu eq sticks around it will be wearing mmacc cloths soon enough, but I expect onkyo is gambling on weathering the storm for a year, and that next year new architecture will be present and so will xt 32.


I'm still guessing it was a marketing decision to go with Atmos because it already has a theatrical presence (Audyssey doesn't), it will soon have a presence in consumer media (N/A to Audyssey), and manufacturers can place it in consumer hardware. It's a 3-way cross-promotion, so it wins, and I think it was marketing jumping ahead of engineering which couldn't accommodate both in current hardware and maintain the price point.

Short-sighted, yes, but probably not forever. And, if you're watching, Denon's top end new units are not scheduled to land for a few months. Perhaps they are doing some engineering to handle Atmos and Audyssey? Hope so! 

Denon, you reading this??


----------



## sdurani

Don Draper said:


> But somewhere buried deep in a contract clause Onkyo is required to carry Atmos as a requirement of carrying any dolby product.


If that was true, then products like their new TX-NR535 receiver couldn't exist (has Dolby surround processing and format decoding, but no Atmos).


----------



## Don Draper

Well somebody definitely dropped the ball. But even marketing wise who are they trying to reach. Surely the folks that are die hard enough to even consider speakers over head (that are not mains) would revolt at the loss of xt 32 - I don't know which is worse, the loss or what they replaced it with. It just doesn't make sense.

Either way this is just further proof that enthusiast does not matter. Forget the fact that we early adopt and make the mainstream possible. We get no respect.


----------



## Don Draper

sdurani said:


> If that was true, then products like their new TX-NR535 receiver couldn't exist (has Dolby surround processing and format decoding, but no Atmos).


Oops.. This is true


----------



## magic

Don Draper said:


> So I think it&#146;s out there now that Onkyo chose Atmos over XT32 because its architecture cannot handle processing both. So my conspiracy theory is Onkyo may not be the immediate bad guy. But somewhere buried deep in a contract clause Onkyo is required to carry Atmos as a requirement of carrying any dolby product. I can imagine a receiver without out xt32 (barely) but no dolby processing? Onkyo would be in real trouble.




Denon can do it .... that's all I'm saying 
That's all I'm saying .....

http://www.denon.co.uk/Uk/News/Pages/newsdetails.aspx?newstype=news&newsid=188



Edit 
The top model is .... x5200w

http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/D...er-AVR-X5200W-with-Dolby-Atmos-for-1999.shtml


----------



## magic

gazoink said:


> Denon, you reading this??



Denon heard you 

I'm actually curious about this model now


----------



## sdurani

magic said:


> Denon heard you
> 
> I'm actually curious about this model now


UK product page (user manual can be downloaded). 

http://www.denon.co.uk/uk/product/p...theatre&subid=avreceivers&productid=avrx5200w


----------



## Owen Bartley

Maybe there were issues getting audyssey to work correctly with atmos? I can guess that adding an extra 4 channels to monitor would cause some complications. Would Onkyo have pushed products to market before audyssey was ready to work with atmos?


----------



## gazoink

Owen Bartley said:


> Maybe there were issues getting audyssey to work correctly with atmos? I can guess that adding an extra 4 channels to monitor would cause some complications. Would Onkyo have pushed products to market before audyssey was ready to work with atmos?


Doubtful. The Audyssey process isn't driven by channel count in what it does. Both Atmos and Audyssey require dsp resources, though. Its conjecture but possible the two couldn't be handled with current dsp resource overhead. Audyssey as taxed DSP resources in the past, which is why we couldn't have XT32, dynamic volume and dynamic EQ in a 2006 version...couldn't run all that on hardware of that vintage.


----------



## Owen Bartley

Lazy microchips.


----------



## willis7469

Owen Bartley said:


> Lazy microchips.


:rofl: !!!!!!!


----------



## Mars2k

Ok I have owned a couple of Onkyo pre/proccessors. They've been great to patch surround into my system, consisting of audiophile pre and power amp weighted in favor of 2 channel listening. Looking on the Denon site I'm not seeing a pre/processor just receivers. So the dilemma, for me, would be giving up my creamy much loved Bryston amps for the Denon receiver or slipping in the new Onkyo proc. Another option of course, would to be to wait, let the dust settle and see what happens. Maybe lack of Audessy would not be a deal killer after all. Would like to read a serious review before I make a move. Another thought, if the Denon's Audessy really does provide a substantive improvement over Onkyo's proprietary eq, then the receiver could function as a pre/proc and provide the power for the atmos channels.


----------



## Kal Rubinson

Mars2k said:


> Looking on the Denon site I'm not seeing a pre/processor just receivers.


Why not Marantz?


----------



## Mars2k

Yes I was looking at their pre/pro. It's a grand more than the Onkyo and would require some additional amps.


----------



## Kal Rubinson

Mars2k said:


> Yes I was looking at their pre/pro. It's a grand more than the Onkyo and would require some additional amps.


They have 2 currently and there are great deals on the most recently discontinued one (which I still use). All have Audyssey MultEQ XT32.


----------

