Denon AVR-X4400H 9.2 Channel AV Receiver Review & Comments

Hi just a quick one about setting up the atmos speaker settings.
Do they allow you to set the fronts as atmos enabled and the rears as height
Many thanks.
 
Thanks for your replies gentlemen :) but I’m after Denon users feedback using the built in passive amping.

Quoting from the AVR-X4400H user manual:

You can use the bi-amp connection for front speakers. Bi-amp connection is a method to connect separate amplifiers to the tweeter terminal and woofer terminal of a speaker that supports bi-amplification. This connection enables back EMF (power returned without being output) from the woofer to flow into the tweeter without affecting the sound quality, producing a higher sound quality.
Sorry but I did give feedback from a Denon user using the built-in amp, I've had x4300, x4400, Marantz 7010, 7011 & a Denon x6400. In my experience with a few of the amps mentioned bi-amping an AVR using internal amps that share the same PSU is not worth it. The gain had when I did it on some R500's using an x4400 was negligible and definitely not worth the outlay and hassle of the extra cable runs. I only did it as an experiment but concluded what I'd read many times in that I'd be better putting the money towards a better separate power amp or buy a more powerful AVR or buy better cables, more films, music or beer.
I've been playing with HiFi and AV for over 30 years, well AV since the days of the Yamaha dsp-e800, and the theory came from HiFi long before people had AVRs. In the case of HiFi amps there generally was never any spare channels even though the amps probably had more headroom in the PSU, so adding separate power amps was generally the way to go or just bi-wire (for even less gains). In an AVR you can easily have spare channels, but it's more marketing B.S. really, as if the amp in the AVR does not have enough power to power your fronts, then adding a unused internal amp in a traditional bi-amp fashion will just rob the internal PSU even more, so what you gain in the extra amps, you lose on the existing amp as generally the pull on the PSU will be at the same time especially for tricky speakers or speakers that love power. In a multiple speaker surround setup, the rears and other effect channels do not always need full power all the time and at the same time, so an over shared/underspeced PSU can be got away with.
I'd say if you’re intent on doing it, then by all means try it, but I've never heard any gains myself and have read little to suggest anyone else has ever heard much gain. Anyone who fiercely says they have has been won over by the snake oil game or is probably just trying to justify their spend to themselves. If your speakers thrive on power, bi-amping with internal amps that share the PSU is not really giving them more power.
 
Hi just a quick one about setting up the atmos speaker settings.
Do they allow you to set the fronts as atmos enabled and the rears as height
Many thanks.
There is little point. To get the benefit out of Atmos there has to be separation between the Atmos layer and the remainder of the speakers. All of the surrounds, including surround backs should be placed just above seated head height. If you do have rear heights they can be configured as such but you may very well lose that Atmos image as the sound travels front to back.
 
Sorry what I should have said was I have 5 speakers at ear level and 4 for Atmos, 2 of which are Atmos enabled at the front and another 2 high up behind me
 
Sorry what I should have said was I have 5 speakers at ear level and 4 for Atmos, 2 of which are Atmos enabled at the front and another 2 high up behind me

Yes, you are given the option to state whether the Atmos speakers at the front and at the rear are heights, ceiling or upward firing and the front and rear settings are independent of one another. You are free to mix and match the type of Atmos speakers you employ at the front and to the rear of the room.
 
Sorry what I should have said was I have 5 speakers at ear level and 4 for Atmos, 2 of which are Atmos enabled at the front and another 2 high up behind me
Dante's covered it.:smashin:
 
Yes, you are given the option to state whether the Atmos speakers at the front and at the rear are heights, ceiling or upward firing and the front and rear settings are independent of one another. You are free to mix and match the type of Atmos speakers you employ at the front and to the rear of the room.
Thank you.
 
Very well explained there learnt something new every day on here well done @Thatsnotmynaim

I've bi-amped my Tannoys as I had some 4-core 2.5mm cable left over from another project so no real outlay other than the hour or so to wire up. My thoughts were yes, all the amps are sharing the PSU but I've now got twice as many amps driving the fronts so they're hogging a little more of the PSU than the surrounds or centre can when everything is running full tilt.

Ideally the speaker management would let you set up x-over frequencies for bi-amping.
 
I've bi-amped my Tannoys as I had some 4-core 2.5mm cable left over from another project so no real outlay other than the hour or so to wire up. My thoughts were yes, all the amps are sharing the PSU but I've now got twice as many amps driving the fronts so they're hogging a little more of the PSU than the surrounds or centre can when everything is running full tilt.

Ideally the speaker management would let you set up x-over frequencies for bi-amping.

You've two amps per speaker, but you've halved their output. You are basically delivering the same wattage via 2 as opposed to one amp per speaker.

If not using all the integral amplification modules then the amps that are in use have more power and dynamic headroom

You'd need an active arrangement to be able to set the frequencies for each amp while bi-amping. AV receivers only facilitate passive bi-amping.

Passive Bi-amping
Passive bi-amping utilizes the passive crossovers built into the speakers, with each amplifier channel reproducing a full range signal to drive separate high and low frequency networks. Relative to active bi-amping, the benefits of passive bi-amping are much less pronounced (you might hear the derogatory term of “fool’s bi-amping” applied). Nonetheless, splitting the high and low frequency networks does have some effect, as the amplifiers each now see a different load than one would under normal circumstances when individually driving the entire speaker. Generally speaking, the individual networks are designed such that “out of band” frequencies will have a very high impedance relative to the expected pass band of the driver(s), and consequently will demand significantly less actual power from the amplifier at those out of band frequencies.

Because of this split, there are a couple practical advantages. Potential output ability is increased as there is little power wasted reproducing those aforementioned “out of band” frequencies. As with active bi-amping, the possibility of tweeter burnout due to amplifier overload is also reduced. However, in terms of basic audible differences, there’s not much to write home about, and what improvements do exist could typically be gained by simply utilizing a single more powerful amplifier with similar or better performance metrics than the two smaller amplifiers.

Bi-amping vs Bi-wiring: What's the Difference and is it Audible?


You're not even using 2 independent amps if utilising the AV receivers's ability to reassign amps because both amps share the same PSU.


Your speakers haven't the ability to be used within a true active bi-amping arrangement. You'd need to be using very specialised high end audiophile speakers with no integral crossovers of their own. Many speakers that pertain to be bi-wirable/bi-ampable actually perform better while not bi-amped. The speaker manufactuers just stick an extra pair of terminals on many speakers because their customers expect them to be there. Some manufacturers have even come out and admitted this and suggest not biwiring or biamping their speakers.


You cannot use active bi-amping with your speakers because the speakers' own crossovers are still in effect. Your speakers aren't technically speaking bi-ampable (not in the truest "active" sense of the term).
 
Last edited:
You've two amps per speaker, but you've halved their output. You are basically delivering the same wattage via 2 as opposed to one amp per speaker.
.

Not quite...
Move from driving 5 amps to driving 7 so power available drops by 5/7 but available power to the fronts is double the rest.
Lets say the PSU can deliver a max 350W then, driving 5 speakers (L,R,SL,SR,C) there is 70W per channel. Driving 7 speakers that drops to 50W per channel but the fronts are getting 2x50W channels each, so a gain of 30W per speaker.

You cannot use active bi-amping with your speakers because the speakers' own crossovers are still in effect. Your speakers aren't technically speaking bi-ampable (not in the truest "active" sense of the term).

When in bi-amp mode the crossovers filter out rather than 'split' so, it you feed them a signal pre-filtered then more of the power will go through. My speakers are pretty old so, if I was actively bi-amping, I'd think about getting rid of the x-overs altogether though would probably end up blowing the tweeters!

Anyway, I've done it now and can't be bothered to revert! At the worst I've made no difference and at the best I've added around 30-40% extra available power to the fronts.
 
Let's be realistic. The PSU can deliver no more than 125 watts 2 channels driven (8 Ω/ohms, 20Hz – 20kHz with 0.05% THD.). Use another 2 channels and the power per channel decreases, not increases. It cannot even attain your 350 watts if driving just one channel in relation to a constant 1kHz signal with a THD of 0.1%. Denon's own ratings suggest this would only result in 235 watts driving one channel with an impedance of 6ohm.

Its 710 watt rated power consumption doesn't all go towards amplifing the audio. DEnon dn't make dynamic power rating available in relation to 4 channels driven so it is hard to determine what the actual benefits would be i relation to bi-amping with the AVRX4400. Note that you are reducing the power available to other channels by doing so though.

If you weren't going to otherwise utilise those two extra channels of amplification then that's fine, but I'd not suggest people purposefully sacrifice 2 channels of amplification that may have been used elsewhere. The benefits are marginal at best and you'd be diverting the harder to amplify lower frequencies to your sub anyway so this kind of negates what you'd gain via passive bi-amping.
 
Last edited:
Decided to watch The Equaliser 1and 2 back to back and thoroughly enjoyed them both. So I decided to listen to the original soundtrack on YouTube via Airplay. All I can say is wow. Especially the track “Alone”
it sounded sublime through the 4400. I could make out every string. It made my hairs stand on end. Anyone says this receiver cannot handle music is a liar.
 
Can we find any reviews that have some objective measurements done? A review should measure the power, distortion, pre-out voltage, etc. Seems like every review just lists the specs and provides subjective feedback of the reviewer. But I’d like to see if the hardware delivers based on the specs. Are we just supposed to trust the manufacturer or have some independent party test these things out?
 

The latest video from AVForums

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