NEWS: Marantz SR7012 AV Receiver & AV7704 pre-amp released

dante01

Distinguished Member
with nine channels of discrete amplification at 200W per channel.
Really? How did they arrive at this figure. Their own specifications for the SR7012 say it only has 110 watts available (8 ohm, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 0.08%) with just 2 channels driven?????
 

geogan

Well-known Member
Only 9 channels of amplification again? In 2017. Surely for a range topper, that supports Dolby Atmos, it should have the four powered height channels instead of only two overhead channels.

It wouldn't have cost much to add another two of the tiny amp modules that's inside these for the full 11 channels... or are they waiting for a future year (SR7015?) for this incremental improvement...

Manufacturers can add all the "bells and whistles" they like but until they get the basics of a range topping 2017 Atmos surround receiver correct they are all pointless IMO :thumbsdow
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Only 9 channels of amplification again? In 2017. Surely for a range topper, that supports Dolby Atmos, it should have the four powered height channels instead of only two overhead channels.

It wouldn't have cost much to add another two of the tiny amp modules that's inside these for the full 11 channels... or are they waiting for a future year (SR7015?) for this incremental improvement...

Manufacturers can add all the "bells and whistles" they like but until they get the basics of a 2017 Atmos surround receiver correct they are all pointless IMO :thumbsdow
Marantz have announced that they'll be launching a new 11 Chanel flagship AV receiver early next year (maybe December?). The new model will be the SR8012. It will be comparable to the Denon AVRX6400.

aking the SR7012 a step higher, the Marantz SR8012 is a high-speed output amplifier that is said to offer exceptional audio and video quality through its 11.2 channel, full 4K Ultra HD AV surround receiver with HEOS integration and the complete immersive audio formats including Dolby Atmos, DTS:X and Auro-3D. Importantly, the SR8012 features high grade, carefully selected audio components, including three codecs capable of driving height and overhead speakers and the receiver's 11 high quality amplifier stages with 140W of power per output. These power ratings enable the SR8012 to drive a full 7.1.4 home cinema setup without the need of additional external amplifiers. The whole internal circuit further enhances audio quality by delicately handling all signals via Marantz’s own HDAMs (Hyper Dynamic Amplifier Module) in Current Feedback topology before passing them on to the power stage to fire up the connected speakers.
Marantz Unveils SR7012, SR8012 AV Receivers and AV7704 Processor with Alexa Skill


It should also be noted that Marantz and Denon are for all intense purpose the one and the same concern. Denon will be introducing a 13 channel flagship model next year and already include the 11 channel AVRX6400 in their line up.


I guess you also have to ask yourself why anyone without the space to accommodate more speakers would waste their money buying a receiver that has more channels of internal amplification? Why should they be taxed in order to fulfil the requirements of what is basically a minority share of the market? Very few people have the space to accommodate a setup with more than 7 speakers let alone 11 or more.There's also the arguement that suggests that packing lots of smaller amps into a box results in poorer performance and less power.
 
Last edited:

Rockets

Active Member
Really? How did they arrive at this figure. Their own specifications for the SR7012 say it only has 110 watts available (8 ohm, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 0.08%) with just 2 channels driven?????
It's alchemy from 700w power consumption.

Another question why does the pre-amp/processor have to be sooooooooooooooooo ridiculously big. Now I have heard before from a guy in the industry that it's all down to saving money but really come on.

And just give up the am/fm inputs. Hands up for people who listen to FM on a receiver ot pre/amp processor. Was there someone at the back?
 

Rick84

Well-known Member
Marantz have announced that they'll be launching a new 11 chanel flagship AV receiver early next year (maybe December?). The new model will be the SR8012. It will be comparable to the Denon AVRX6400.



Marantz Unveils SR7012, SR8012 AV Receivers and AV7704 Processor with Alexa Skill


It should also be noted that Marantz and Denon are for all intense purpose the one and the same concern. Denon will be introducing a 13 channel flagship model next year and already include the 11 channel AVRX6400 in their line up.


I guess you also have to ask yourself why anyone without the space to accommodate more speakers would waste their money buying a receiver that has more channels of internal amplification? Why should they be taxed in order to fulfil the requirements of what is basically a minority share of the market? Very few people have the space to accommodate a setup with more than 7 speakers let alone 11 or more.There's also the arguement that suggests that packing lots of smaller amps into a box results in poorer performance and less power.
Apparently the new 8012 will be completely different from any Denon unit and will be a complete Marantz design.

I do wish all manufactures would be more transparent with there power ratings and not just quote 200watt per channel which is miss leading to some.

When really that figure would be for a single channels running solo.
 

geogan

Well-known Member
Marantz have announced that they'll be launching a new 11 Chanel flagship AV receiver early next year (maybe December?). The new model will be the SR8012. It will be comparable to the Denon AVRX6400.



Marantz Unveils SR7012, SR8012 AV Receivers and AV7704 Processor with Alexa Skill


It should also be noted that Marantz and Denon are for all intense purpose the one and the same concern. Denon will be introducing a 13 channel flagship model next year and already include the 11 channel AVRX6400 in their line up.


I guess you also have to ask yourself why anyone without the space to accommodate more speakers would waste their money buying a receiver that has more channels of internal amplification? Why should they be taxed in order to fulfil the requirements of what is basically a minority share of the market? Very few people have the space to accommodate a setup with more than 7 speakers let alone 11 or more.There's also the arguement that suggests that packing lots of smaller amps into a box results in poorer performance and less power.
Great. Well at least they will finally give the option of an 11 channel receiver at last instead of forcing people to buy expensive processors to get the option.

13 channels? What's the two extra channels for?

Nobody is forcing anyone to buy a receiver with more channels than they can accommodate - people can always buy one of the lower models if you only want less channels.

The argument about "lots of smaller amps into a box results in poorer performance" would be true if they actually increased the size and quality of the amp modules when they use less of them, but I don't think they do, they just have more empty space and use the same amp modules. Adding two extra doesn't mean they use smaller modules for previous nine channels. Obviously they would have to increase power supply though.

Check this video out... there is even space on those side heat-sinks to plug another two (green) amp modules onto to make 13 channels...

 

dante01

Distinguished Member
The SR7012 is in fact able to process 11 channels. You'd not need a standalone AV processor just 2 channels of external amplification if wanting an 11 channel 7.1.4 setup.

Nobody is forcing anyone to buy a receiver with more channels than they can accommodate - people can always buy one of the lower models if you only want less channels.]

So the lower tier models with fewer channels also include the same DACs and components incorporated into the higher tier models?

It isn't quite as simple as you make it out to be.
 
Last edited:

dante01

Distinguished Member
13 channels? What's the two extra channels for?
An Atmos 9.1.4 setup utilising width speakers.


The full potential for Atmos in the home is actually a total of 34 speakers plus an LFE channel. The only thing limiting this is the availability of receivers with enough channels of processing and amplification. The full potential is a 24.1.10 setup.
 
Last edited:

Rambles

Distinguished Member
Really? How did they arrive at this figure. Their own specifications for the SR7012 say it only has 110 watts available (8 ohm, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 0.08%) with just 2 channels driven?????
Crikey, 15 watts less than the SR7011.
 

geogan

Well-known Member
The SR7012 is in fact able to process 11 channels. You'd not need a standalone AV processor just 2 channels of external amplification if wanting an 11 channel 7.1.4 setup.




So the lower tier models with fewer channels also include the same DACs and components incorporated into the higher tier models?

It isn't quite as simple as you make it out to be.
I know it can process 11 channels - every amp from entry nearly always processes two more channels than they have built-in for some reason best known to manufacturers. I know the lower models might not be using the best-of-the-best components. But if someone wants their amp having best-of-the-best components and pays big premium for this then i don't think they would care about including two extra amps at relatively minimal cost that they may not use in their system. But this is irrelevant now when it is not the top model. All I said was you would think a top-of-the-range amp in 2017 would have 11 channels. Now I see it is not in fact top-of-the-range I am fine with it having 9 channels since the 11 channel 8012 is there soon.
 

geogan

Well-known Member
An Atmos 9.1.4 setup utilising width speakers.

The full potential for Atmos in the home is actually a total of 34 speakers plus an LFE channel. The only thing limiting this is the availability of receivers with enough channels of processing and amplification. The full potential is a 24.1.10 setup.
Oh right. Two extra speakers on sides so you can have two side surrounds on each side instead of just the one side surround on each side. Makes sense.

So looks like manufacturers now have a nice upgrade path every year - adding another 2 channels per year up to 24 in the end :laugh: (and I know the Trinnov and other can do it now)
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Oh right. Two extra speakers on sides so you can have two side surrounds on each side instead of just the one side surround on each side. Makes sense.

So looks like manufacturers now have a nice upgrade path every year - adding another 2 channels per year up to 24 in the end :laugh: (and I know the Trinnov and other can do it now)
They are not surrounds and are front width speakers.

9.1.4 Dolby Atmos Enabled Speaker Setup


I think the big issue with having them is that Dolby Surround upmixing doesn't currently cater for them so a setup with the width speakers would leave the two extra speakers dormant unless the audio (metadata) was actually Atmos in nature and includes objects that would need them. The mixing of the home varient of Atmos doesn't often engage the widths while the theatre mixes do.
 
Last edited:

geogan

Well-known Member
They are not surrounds and are front width speakers.

9.1.4 Dolby Atmos Enabled Speaker Setup


I think the big issue with having them is that Dolby Surround upmixing doesn't currently cater for them so a setup with the width speakers would leave the two extra speakers dormant unless the audio (metadata) was actually Atmos in nature and includes objects that would need them. The mixing of the home varient of Atmos doesn't often engage the widths while the theatre mixes do.
Oh that's just naming convention... they are exactly where I thought they were and can just as easily be called "side surround 2" as "front width" or as I said "Two extra speakers on sides so you can have two side surrounds on each side". They would certainly fill a big gap between the current side surrounds and front left/right during audio pans alright. I used to have the "front-height/wide" speakers up in top left and right corners of the room wider than the floor standing left/rights and it did expand out the sound even though it was simulated echo/reverb. Got rid of them and went back to surround-back though as the current amp hasn't got that many channels.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Oh that's just naming convention... they are exactly where I thought they were and can just as easily be called "side surround 2" as "front width" or as I said "Two extra speakers on sides so you can have two side surrounds on each side".
Yes you are correct, apart from the fact that they'll never be referred to as side surrounds 2 and calling them that is incorrect. :)

Why not rename the surround "not at the fronts 1" and the back speakers "not at the fronts 2" or maybe just use the terminology and naming conventions everyone recognises and the industry as a whole uses?
 

geogan

Well-known Member
Why not rename the surround "not at the fronts 1" and the back speakers "not at the fronts 2" or maybe just use the terminology and naming conventions everyone recognises and the industry as a whole uses?
Everyone recognises? OK. Everyone is supposed to know the correct name for the 2 extra speakers in a 13 speaker Atmos setup. I doubt even 5% of avforums members would have known that, never mind general public. You also ventured into "reductio ad absurdum" with the other speaker renaming. The standard 5.1 naming is well known for years. It's well known that cinemas use many side surround speakers - the one at the front of each side is just another side surround. So that's what I called it, given I never heard of Dolby's not very well known naming for it. Anyway I'm not going to argue any more about it.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Everyone recognises? OK. Everyone is supposed to know the correct name for the 2 extra speakers in a 13 speaker Atmos setup. I doubt even 5% of avforums members would have known that, never mind general public. You also ventured into "reductio ad absurdum" with the other speaker renaming. The standard 5.1 naming is well known for years. It's well known that cinemas use many side surround speakers - the one at the front of each side is just another side surround. So that's what I called it, given I never heard of Dolby's not very well known naming for it. Anyway I'm not going to argue any more about it.
I'll call you Bill from now on if that is Okay?


Go post a thread in the speakers forum asking what they are called. Just because you don't know the correct term isn't to say there isn't a correct term for them and that you can use any term you want for them while refuting the fact they are called width speakers. Once you know the correct term then you should use it or no one will ever know what you are refering to and will have to continually ask that you explain yourself.
 
Last edited:

geogan

Well-known Member
I'll call you Bill from now on if that is Okay?
Is that another snide remark / attack? Nobody on this forum allowed speak unless they get everything exactly right? Do you enjoy antagonizing people? I'd like to tell you where to go with yourself.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Is that another snide remark / attack? Nobody on this forum allowed speak unless they get everything exactly right? Do you enjoy antagonizing people? I'd like to tell you where to go with yourself.
I believe that you are the one being agressive and antagonistic. You can go away and call your speakers whatever you want.

Happy now.


It is still a fact however that no one will know what the hell you are on about if you refer to the width speakers using the term side surounds 2.
 
Last edited:

geogan

Well-known Member
Well
I believe that you are the one being agressive and antagonistic. You can go away and call your speakers whatever you want.

Happy now.


It is still a gact however that no one will know what the hell you are on about if you refer to the width speakers using the term suround sides 2.
Well done you. The forum big bully know-it-all. As usual once reported the posts will be removed and you will get away with your bullying again.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
As already suggested. Maybe post in the speakers forum and ask for clarification on the correct terminology.

You're the one who asked me what was meant by 9.1.2 and I gave you the correct terminology given to the speakers used. I cannot help it if you refuse to accept the correct answer.
 
Last edited:

geogan

Well-known Member
As already suggested. Maybe post in the speakers forum and ask for clarification on the correct terminology.

You're the one who asked me what was meant by 9.1.2 and I gave you the correct terminology given to the speakers used. I cannot help it if you refuse to accept the correct answer.
Why do I have to keep defending myself against you when it is you who do not seem to understand what I wrote in my previous posts?? Tell me exactly where I said I was going to continue to call them side surrounds after you told me the correct term for them? I was explaining to you why I called them that before you told me what they were called. I never said anywhere that I would continue to call them that. ***.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Tell me exactly where I said I was going to continue to call them side surrounds after you told me the correct term for them?

Oh that's just naming convention... they are exactly where I thought they were and can just as easily be called "side surround 2" as "front width" or as I said "Two extra speakers on sides so you can have two side surrounds on each side".
 

geogan

Well-known Member
I meant just as easily called that if you didn't know the correct term and why I called them that previously.
 

The latest video from AVForums

The Best Movies and TV Shows Coming to Netflix in November 2020: Tom's Thumbs.

Latest News

Tom's Thumbs: What is coming to Netflix in November 2020
  • By AVForums
  • Published
Melco anniversary edition N10 library announced
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
What's new on Disney+ UK for November 2020
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Denon, Marantz and Yamaha AV receivers hit by HDMI 2.1 bug
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
McIntosh launches MX100 AV processor and MI347 power amp
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom