I think many don't need the 11.1.4 and for the money would do well consider the Arcam or NAD 758 version 3 which both have Dirac.I was looking at this model but if I end up purchasing a replacement for my "Denon AVC-A11XV" sometime next year I will consider either the AVC-X8500H or the Marantz SR8012. Given that my system is in the lounge.... and i'm married, realistically I don't need more than a 7.1.4 setup and I already have a 7.1 system. Marantz's straight hi-fi stereo performance seems to, generally, garner better reviews which is important to me and therefore may sway to me that model apart from costing considerably less than the "Denon". Also the price of these two amps will probably drop next year and will have any (well most) updates available out of the box. Having said all that thanks for the review Steve.
After a few near misses I started using locking banana plugs on the back of the Amp and bare wire on the speakers as you say not much room.Good review Steve. I'm not going to miss the tuner, something I never use. Because of it's size, depth wise, which is actually a little less than my X6200, it's always going to be a consideration because of my lack of depth in my cabinet.
The main question, for me at least, is has the audio performance improved over the already excellent 6200, or would the use of the Audyssey app further improve that delivery over the fixed Audyssey of the 6200. It's film performance being the most important as the front stereos will still be driven by a Rega Elicit for music.
My main beef with the 6200 was the binding posts, they are so crammed together it was almost impossible for my aged fingers to tighten them enough for bare wire connection. The obvious use of banana plugs have solved the problem yet I always think bare wire is best.
Power numbers are always rather misleading, and some manufacturers are more honest than others. A lot of these measurements are based on driving one speaker and are taken just before it blows up. All I can say is that in actual usage, the Arcam seemed to have more power than the Denon.Great review Steve. You mention the AVR390 as an alternative which I have been looking at recently. You mention that the AVR390 has more power in it's amplifiers than the AVC-X6500H however looking at on Arcam's website the specs seem to show it as being less powerful than the Denon.
Arcam
====
Continuous power output, per channel, 8Ω (AVR390)
2 channels driven, 20Hz - 20kHz, <0.02% THD - 80W
2 channels driven, 1kHz, 0.2% THD - 86W
7 channels driven, 1kHz, 0.2% THD - 60W
Denon
====
Power Output (8 ohm, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 0.05% 2ch Drive)140 W
Power Output (6 ohm, 1 kHz, 0.7% 2ch Drive)175 W
Power Output (6 ohm, 1 kHz, 1% 1ch Drive)205 W
I realise the Denon's rating is at a higher THD but it definitely seems to be more powerful at the same ohmage (top rating on both spec sheets).
Am I missing something here?
It's hard to say because I reviewed the X6200 over two and a half years ago, but probably not.Good review Steve. I'm not going to miss the tuner, something I never use. Because of it's size, depth wise, which is actually a little less than my X6200, it's always going to be a consideration because of my lack of depth in my cabinet.
The main question, for me at least, is has the audio performance improved over the already excellent 6200, or would the use of the Audyssey app further improve that delivery over the fixed Audyssey of the 6200. It's film performance being the most important as the front stereos will still be driven by a Rega Elicit for music.
My main beef with the 6200 was the binding posts, they are so crammed together it was almost impossible for my aged fingers to tighten them enough for bare wire connection. The obvious use of banana plugs have solved the problem yet I always think bare wire is best.
I use banana plus as well, but then I do have a lot of AV receivers going through the home cinema.After a few near misses I started using locking banana plugs on the back of the Amp and bare wire on the speakers as you say not much room.
We'll see what we can do.Great read there Steve. Do you plan on reviewing this amps smaller brother by any chance? I am hoping to take the plunge in the next few weeks!
Here's a good question? Does anyone really use these receivers to there full potential?
Your going to have a specific room to set these up or have a very, very understanding partner.
7.4.2 channels must sound amazing. Must be like setting yourself down inside a speaker.
Awesome.
Here's a good question? Does anyone really use these receivers to there full potential?
Your going to have a specific room to set these up or have a very, very understanding partner.
7.4.2 channels must sound amazing. Must be like setting yourself down inside a speaker.
Awesome.
Great review Steve. You mention the AVR390 as an alternative which I have been looking at recently. You mention that the AVR390 has more power in it's amplifiers than the AVC-X6500H however looking at on Arcam's website the specs seem to show it as being less powerful than the Denon.
Arcam
====
Continuous power output, per channel, 8Ω (AVR390)
2 channels driven, 20Hz - 20kHz, <0.02% THD - 80W
2 channels driven, 1kHz, 0.2% THD - 86W
7 channels driven, 1kHz, 0.2% THD - 60W
Denon
====
Power Output (8 ohm, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 0.05% 2ch Drive)140 W
Power Output (6 ohm, 1 kHz, 0.7% 2ch Drive)175 W
Power Output (6 ohm, 1 kHz, 1% 1ch Drive)205 W
I realise the Denon's rating is at a higher THD but it definitely seems to be more powerful at the same ohmage (top rating on both spec sheets).
Am I missing something here?
That's very true, and I mainly used the X6500 with the B&W 700 Series I was testing at the time, which are rated at 8Ohms. However it was also able to drive my reference MK S150 speakers, which are 4Ohms.As Steve says, power ratings can be misleading. Arcam's specs say "Continuous Power Output", meaning it can deliver that power constantly, Denon's website just says "Power Output" so it may mean peak power delivered for just a fraction of a second. Continuous power might be half (or less) of peak power, so the Denon might be more in the 60-70W range if measured on the same basis. I have owned both Arcam and Denon amps, the Denon's were more reliable and had better features, the Arcam's had better amplification, comparable to proper stereo amps.
The real test will be the type of speakers you want to connect - if you've got a set of fairly benign 8Ohm speakers then the Denon will be fine. If you have some hard to drive speakers (dipping down to 4 or even 2Ohm under load) then the Arcam would be better. But that said, if you have lots of hard to drive speakers then you might be better with a support amplifier anyway (each amp has pre-outs, letting you add another amplifier to take the strain, at more expense!).
Here's a good question? Does anyone really use these receivers to there full potential?
Your going to have a specific room to set these up or have a very, very understanding partner.
7.4.2 channels must sound amazing. Must be like setting yourself down inside a speaker.
Awesome.
Leave it at 8ohm to get the maximum output from the AVR unless you run into problems but that is unlikely.
I’m running a Denon AVR with 4 ohm Arendals and it’s been fine but does run out of steam at higher volumes and the sound thins a little.