Anthem MRX 310 / 510 / 710 - Pre Release Discussion

I know but I'm not sure BUCKSTER and MATTKHAN are fully understanding the difference based on their posts above. Apologies if I am mistaken guys:)

Thoroughly confused :thumbsup:

You appear to be saying that processors don't have the ability to downmix 7.1 to 5.1 but certain players do.

In particular I understand you to be saying the oppo DTS decoder can basically transcode a dts hd ma 7.1 track to a 5.1 dts HD ma track and then send that over bitstream when told to do so. However this feature is not one that exists in a 5.1 receiver so it falls back to the core stream only.

If this is true, it seems completely bizarre behaviour (but then HD audio processing is not an area where common sense regularly applies) given that the DTS codec appears capable of doing that mix as a standard feature and downmixing (in player or processor) is also a standard feature. Therefore I have no idea why this is an issue for the 310, why don't they just take the 7.1 stream in decode it and down mix it? This is surely what the 510 (or other 7.1 processor) will do when it has only 5 channels connected won't it?
 
Thoroughly confused :thumbsup:

You appear to be saying that processors don't have the ability to downmix 7.1 to 5.1 but certain players do.

In particular I understand you to be saying the oppo DTS decoder can basically transcode a dts hd ma 7.1 track to a 5.1 dts HD ma track and then send that over bitstream when told to do so. However this feature is not one that exists in a 5.1 receiver so it falls back to the core stream only.

If this is true, it seems completely bizarre behaviour (but then HD audio processing is not an area where common sense regularly applies) given that the DTS codec appears capable of doing that mix as a standard feature and downmixing (in player or processor) is also a standard feature. Therefore I have no idea why this is an issue for the 310, why don't they just take the 7.1 stream in decode it and down mix it? This is surely what the 510 (or other 7.1 processor) will do when it has only 5 channels connected won't it?

Pretty much so - if you look at this manual :-
http://download.oppodigital.com/BDP103/BDP-103_User_Manual_English_v1.2.pdf

Page 64 - 66 are the relevant pages. The Oppo can output decoded DTS Master over LPCM via HDMI and also has the ability to mix 7.1 to 5.1.

From what I understand the AV Receiver world does not do it this way - someone more knowledgeable in this may be able to explain why.
 
Andrew, have you tried LPCM over HDMI vs Bitstream and core with native 7.1 into 5.1 surround?

Did you hear a difference?
 
Don't get me wrong, I'd love a compelling reason to upgrade but, for me, I'm not sure there is one.

I don't need extra connections, I don't mind that much how long it takes to run ARC, I don't mind that much using serial. There are no significant amp improvements and the new ARC should only really benefit if your current ARC has trouble matching target and calculated curves.

No compelling reasons *for me* :)

Hey ajg68,
yes I do agree if you are happy with your current model. I don't mind serial connection or the time it takes to run ARC either. I don't care about ios control.
For me it will be the more filters in ARC as my room is tricky and although ARC does a sterling job I am hoping to see further improvements. Proof will be in the pudding though.
 
It's not that it's better on paper, it'll sound better even if ARC has done a good job on your room already.

Correcting a room always has a trade off somewhere, room correction was terrible until ARC on AVR units now there's XT32 as well. It's been reshaped completely and will sound even more natural than you current version as I understand it due to all the number crunching.

Otherwise why buy an AVM50??

And then you have all your custom modes and distances too and not just more HDMI sockets, but better video switching and for those who don't use 'through mode' (and there's loads of you who don't) you can be sure there's a better upscaler / processor in it this time round.

And the power saving if you care about [-]the planet[/-] your pocket.
 
Pretty much so - if you look at this manual :-
http://download.oppodigital.com/BDP103/BDP-103_User_Manual_English_v1.2.pdf

Page 64 - 66 are the relevant pages. The Oppo can output decoded DTS Master over LPCM via HDMI and also has the ability to mix 7.1 to 5.1.

From what I understand the AV Receiver world does not do it this way - someone more knowledgeable in this may be able to explain why.
OK thanks. I don't see that in the doc though, it just references down mix for mc analogue connections and re-encoding secondary audio streams. The question (for one considering the 310 vs 510) remains of why/if this is different to a 7.1 processor with only 5 speakers connected.
 
The question (for one considering the 310 vs 510) remains of why/if this is different to a 7.1 processor with only 5 speakers connected.

20 watts more power, front HDMI, bi-amped fronts. Not sure if the PSU is different.

Last time 300 vs 500 was power and USB audio playback.
 
Guys,
I have ordered my 510 and I will give you a full breakdown of the end user experience.
I'm hoping for subtle improvements to an all ready great sounding receiver that is used as apre/pro. I have a very neutral and detailed sounding system that just reproduces what it's fed, so any improvements should be obvious in my room.
 
Anyone else notice that the MRX310 lost 5.6 lbs in comparison to the MRX300? Typically such a loss does NOT equate to improved amplification and sound quality but I guess the proof will be in actually listening tests.
 
Pretty much so - if you look at this manual :-
http://download.oppodigital.com/BDP103/BDP-103_User_Manual_English_v1.2.pdf

Page 64 - 66 are the relevant pages. The Oppo can output decoded DTS Master over LPCM via HDMI and also has the ability to mix 7.1 to 5.1.

From what I understand the AV Receiver world does not do it this way - someone more knowledgeable in this may be able to explain why.

It is unusual if the Oppo is indeed mixing raw DTS, but most if not all receivers have no issue mixing down 7.1 to 5.1 prior to their DACs because the DAC will only accept LPCM (DSD as well in some instances). The fact of the matter is that the incoming 7.1 DTS-HD audio is decoded and then converted to PCM prior to having the back channels mixed down into the rears and prior to being passed through the DACs. There's actually no need for AV receivers to be able to mixdown raw HD formats because they can do the mixdown at the stage after the decoding and prior to the DAC. ;)

There's no reason why the LPCM stream prior to the DAC should be any lesser than if you had a 7.1 speaker configuration.
 
Last edited:
Anyone else notice that the MRX310 lost 5.6 lbs in comparison to the MRX300? Typically such a loss does NOT equate to improved amplification and sound quality but I guess the proof will be in actually listening tests.

Smaller boards need less and better designed heatsinks = less weight. Linn are using sm psu lots more which makes them lighter with no loss in quality.
 
thats true

about 1/4 the weight of my amp (overall 35kg) seems to be copper - not convinced if it helps - but it sure looks shiney when you take it apart :)
 
I believe that Linn uses a form of switching amplification which requires less heat sinking etc. Anthem do NOT use switching amplification and rely on A/B so question the weight difference.
 
Anyone else notice that the MRX310 lost 5.6 lbs in comparison to the MRX300? Typically such a loss does NOT equate to improved amplification and sound quality but I guess the proof will be in actually listening tests.

I noticed this and it did surprise me.
 
I believe that Linn uses a form of switching amplification which requires less heat sinking etc. Anthem do NOT use switching amplification and rely on A/B so question the weight difference.

The new anthems have the same albeit tweaked amp stage and almost the same everything else. But less and smaller boards hence the weight difference.

The linn example was just another example of lighter having no bearing on quality.
 
Anyone else notice that the MRX310 lost 5.6 lbs in comparison to the MRX300? Typically such a loss does NOT equate to improved amplification and sound quality but I guess the proof will be in actually listening tests.

Two less channels of amplification need less heatsinking and a smaller mains transformer.
 
Posts on avs from anthem say the 310 is still playing DTS HD MA, you just can't use the logo if you are not 7.1. Storm in a teacup over then. This suggests the 310 is still a good option as a processor if you don't care about 7.1 (or zone 2 I suppose).
 
Posts on avs from anthem say the 310 is still playing DTS HD MA, you just can't use the logo if you are not 7.1. Storm in a teacup over then. This suggests the 310 is still a good option as a processor if you don't care about 7.1 (or zone 2 I suppose).

We know this from matts post several pages ago. It's moved on to a different topic entirely now.
 
Convince me I need this....

It'll sound better.

Your amp still has some trade in / resale value right now, in 3 months it will half that.

Heights are for losers.:thumbsup:
 
Why the heck not! Convince me....;-)

I can't I know as much about them as you do, until I hear one on the 12th at which point I'll be posting from the Movie Rooms in Edinburgh.

What speakers are you running? How big is your room, what do you usually watch movies at on the volume scale?
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom