Yamaha CX-A5200 11.2 AV Processor Review & Comments

UMAR 3:16

Moderator
Thanks Phil. So this or the Marantz 7705/8805?
 

Phil Hinton

Editor
Staff member
Thanks Phil. So this or the Marantz 7705/8805?
At a similar price point, yes that would appear to be your choices at the moment. I haven't heard the 8805 so can't give you a direct comparison, but they will be similar with performance and some features.
 

drillo

Active Member
Owned top tier D&M /Yamaha products for decades. But Audessey in its latest incarnation is what 8/9 yrs old (excl the app)? YPAO likewise scarcely different over the yrs AFAIK. Without Dirac or Maybe ARC, I read Yamaha and D&M reviews out of interest only.....wish they would up their game on room correction so I could consider them again but for me - Arcam, NAD...maybe anthem and the like are the only game in town / wish it wasn’t so.
 

SonOfSJ

Well-known Member
@Phil Hinton I am puzzled by the multichannel analogue inputs. Normally they are 7.1, but here they are only 5.1, with the inputs for the front left and right inputs (which as a layman I would regard as the most important) being missing?? I'm not sure of which model it was, but Yamaha did the same thing on a recent receiver, I think it was the RX-A3080 maybe? But in this case, which analogue inputs on the rear of the unit can be used for the missing Front Left and Right channels please?
 

Krobar

Well-known Member
So this or the Marantz 7705/8805?
The CX-A5200 has a hardware problem which means effectively the L/R XLR outputs are faulty:

If you are using RCAs then it is an OK choice. Comparatively the AV7705s only issue is the XLR top out at 1.5V which is not a big issue for 95% of power amps so it is a better choice IMHO.

Are AVForums going to start adding some actual audio measurements soon? All this subjective WhatHifi style reviewing is not that helpful. The video reviews are much more objective and useful.
 

golden phoenix

Distinguished Member
For the box tickers still no hdmi 2.1 or Imax enhanced, and most people would like to future proof..i don't think were going to see these features on receivers until next year...as this year is a pretty much right off
 

ian34g

Active Member
For the box tickers still no hdmi 2.1 or Imax enhanced, and most people would like to future proof..i don't think were going to see these features on receivers until next year...as this year is a pretty much right off
It won't have those features because it has been around for awhile now. Whilst a new review on here this model came out over a year ago.
 

drillo

Active Member
Are AVForums going to start adding some actual audio measurements soon? All this subjective WhatHifi style reviewing is not that helpful. The video reviews are much more objective and useful.
[/QUOTE]

This!!! I used to pour over the data in HCC when they included benchtests years ago....until they dropped it (and in turn I ended my subscription). WHF is rightly regarded as a comic methinks - it’s risible tosh. However, I don’t want to lose the personal insight Phil et al provide and IMHO , he is miles from their fast and lose and valueless nonsense but bench data would be a very welcome addition to his subjective thoughts (which I would see retained).
 

Phil Hinton

Editor
Staff member
Are AVForums going to start adding some actual audio measurements soon? All this subjective WhatHifi style reviewing is not that helpful. The video reviews are much more objective and useful.
This!!! I used to pour over the data in HCC when they included benchtests years ago....until they dropped it (and in turn I ended my subscription). WHF is rightly regarded as a comic methinks - it’s risible tosh. However, I don’t want to lose the personal insight Phil et al provide and IMHO , he is miles from their fast and lose and valueless nonsense but bench data would be a very welcome addition to his subjective thoughts (which I would see retained).
I'm aware of this and the issues are of resources, adding objective testing that is useful and will assist the reviews and being able to do that in the time frames we have available for reviews.
Audio reviews are far more subjective than video (which is easy to test and assess against actual industry standards), where audio is much more subjective in that respect.
We will work towards adding more objectivity to the audio reviews in areas where we think it will add genuine value, and we have the resources to do that. I admire the work Gene does at Audioholics, but it is incredibly time-consuming and we just couldn't justify that and continue to produce the TV and AV reviews in the numbers we do at present.
I do hope that our current audio reviews do add some value to readers, (as I hope they can trust the authors here and know we are genuine in our assessment and thoughts). We aim to help readers with their demo lists of what kit they should audition for themselves where possible.
Thanks for the feedback, we are listening and trying to adapt and add new features where we can.
 

steviedr

Distinguished Member
For the box tickers still no hdmi 2.1 or Imax enhanced, and most people would like to future proof..i don't think were going to see these features on receivers until next year...as this year is a pretty much right off
I was still hoping for the release of the new RX-A range (RX-A8 being the flag), leaked from Ces this year but nothing announced and with current COVID situation may well drift into next year. It will have all the Hdmi2.1 features for those who need them (mainly gamers) and changed design from the current RX range which as Phil states has been the same for some time. Hoping YPAO is also looked at for sub correction or replaced altogether.

It does mean this will become a bargain for those interested. Always fancied the MX addition too.

Thanks for both reviews Phil.
 

Ste7en

Distinguished Member
The CX-A5200 has a hardware problem which means effectively the L/R XLR outputs are faulty:
Seriously? Well, that is one to scratch off the shopping list then :(
 

rccarguy

Active Member
Seriously? Well, that is one to scratch off the shopping list then :(
Yup I was going to buy this av pre until found about this flawed issue with XLR. Think gonna die of old age before replacing my lexicon lol
 

Dunners

Active Member
The XLR 'issue' is one that can be pointed to in measurements only, not actually discerned audibly.

From the Audioholics review:
"While 23dB sounds like a really big number, it's important to note that the overall distortion level is still quite low for the CX-A5200 model and below the threshold of audibility in my testing. While I'm not happy about this result, as it certainly is NOT State-of-the-Art (SOTA), it never diminished my enjoyment of this product even during my critical listening sessions."

Every product will have an issue, in this case, the reviewer has found a ghost that cannot be heard.
If you want to improve things you can't hear, then I have a jar of magical pebbles that will make your system shine like a diamond in a goats ass!!
 

Krobar

Well-known Member
72dB THD+N is a terrible result, arguments over what is audible usually sit in the 85 to 105dB range. If you wish to compare to ASR number you are looking at a SINAD well below 70dB.
 

SonOfSJ

Well-known Member
72dB THD+N is a terrible result, arguments over what is audible usually sit in the 85 to 105dB range. If you wish to compare to ASR number you are looking at a SINAD well below 70dB.
From studying electronics decades ago I think THD + N is Total Harmonic Distortion plus Noise, but I'm not sure what the other two acronyms are?
 

SonOfSJ

Well-known Member
@Krobar Ah, thank you. However, for me (others may of course disagree) that's getting to a level of detail that I would be unlikely to follow closely. And referring to Mr Hinton's post #10 above about resources (namely people), I wonder how many people ASR has to do measurements? AVForums has only two people to do AV testing, Messrs Hinton and Withers, or perhaps three if we include Mr Selley on the audio side. I suspect (but of course I don't know) that ASR has (many) more people to take measurement than AVForums does.
 

pragmatic

Distinguished Member
Audio reviews are far more subjective than video (which is easy to test and assess against actual industry standards), where audio is much more subjective in that respect.
If they are truly subjective then what is the point, as each person would consider how good the product is differently, making reviewing audio product akin to reviewing impressionist paintings ...

I suspect what people are asking is: for signal in, signal out, how high is its fidelity?

While the room has a much greater effect on audio than it does video, and you have to add speakers to the equation, this is a processor taking primarily a digital signal and poping out an analogue one.

If the fidelity of the product is poor than even with the 'best room in the world' and perfectly flat speaker output, it would still not be performing as good as another product with higher fidelity (GIGO).
Like testing a display in a batcave to determine its optimal performance, once you get the product in your own environment it may perform differently but objectively you've bought the best for your budget.

While it is no doubt true that some people will like a particular lack a fidelity (i.e. a pronounced bass or rolled off tops), that is the subjective part, and people should be made aware of that to decide if that is to their preference.

People paying for a high end product should rightly have extremely high expectations, someone paying a hundred or so quid for a soundbar should expect compromises, and it's fair that reviews are in tune with that. For the latter "it sounds pretty good to me" type reviews are much more forgivable.

As we've paid exactly £0 for these reviews we can't be too hard though.
 

Jonny Ware

Standard Member
I have read quite a lot of the review on here, as well as audioscience. The equipment required to take these readings i believe costs in the region of $35,000. Whilst it would be nice to see some measurements, in reality I am very happy with the reviews as they are.
 

RichardG

Active Member
Are AVForums going to start adding some actual audio measurements soon? All this subjective WhatHifi style reviewing is not that helpful. The video reviews are much more objective and useful.
Been done to death...never gonna happen, even if the A in AV Forums stands for Audio.

For some reason, there's no appetite to take the vast majority of manufacturers to task over their wildly optimistic output ratings...
 

SonOfSJ

Well-known Member
@RichardG How much would you personally be prepared to pay every month to get measured audio reviews? That would entail paying the salary of another staff member at AVForums, as well as buying the equipment that @Jonny Ware mentioned in post #23. We get what we currently get at the cost of zero bucks to us.
 

RichardG

Active Member
Most hifi mags I buy are £5-8 a month, so that sounds reasonable.

There are approx 2,500 visiting this site atm, so £5 a month subscription has potential to generate significant income (let alone the corporate sponsors and adverts that we all experience anyway).

Yes, it costs zero bucks to visit here, but you get what you pay for.

Why would it involve an extra salary? This was a long term (3 months?) review, plenty of time to measure and report objectively. With upskilling one reviewer can certainly look at both audio and video objectively.

I'm not ragging on about how good or bad the Yamaha is (not heard it, but I do own a ageing RX-1073 in the snug for fun), I'm more concerned that the excellent level of objective testing for the video aspects is in no way matched by the audio aspects. I think it does a disservice to 50% of the enjoyment of this hobby.

To Phil's credit, his post in this thread is much more conciliatory than this site's previous stance on this topic. When it has popped up in the past it's been dismissed as not important, or suggesting no-one cares, which is clearly untrue and dismissive of those people's contributions.

Hopefully in time, the audio testing will catch up with the video tests.
 

HeadBanger

Well-known Member
The CX-A5200 has a hardware problem which means effectively the L/R XLR outputs are faulty:

If you are using RCAs then it is an OK choice. Comparatively the AV7705s only issue is the XLR top out at 1.5V which is not a big issue for 95% of power amps so it is a better choice IMHO.

Are AVForums going to start adding some actual audio measurements soon? All this subjective WhatHifi style reviewing is not that helpful. The video reviews are much more objective and useful.
I've been looking at the AV processors in the £2-£3.5K mark and if you care about measurements then the overall measurents (i.e. all measurements considered) for both of the Marantz processors are worse than the Yamaha CX-A5200 over on Audio Science:

Marantz AV7705

Marantz AV8805

Unless you are driving more than 2V from the CX-A5200 then the front XLRs still have low THD (0.005% !!) and above 2V the THD rises to 0.015%. If you want even lower THD but don't need more than 4V output feeding your power amp (it will output up to ~8V on XLR) then Gene over at Audioholics recommends connecting the RCAs for the front L & R as the RCAs don't exhibit the same issue above 2V (but max output is limited to 4V).

I'm still leaning towards the 5200. Whilst I know that I will likely never push it past 2V output, the OCD in me will mean that I will undoubtedly connect the L & R using RCA!

HB
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Samsung HW-Q950T Soundbar Review, Filmmaker Mode, Disney+ $30 for Mulan, AV news and more

Trending threads

Latest News

Xiaomi OLED is world’s first mass produced transparent TV
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Tron 3 lands star and director for Disney
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Kef announces KW1 Wireless Subwoofer Adapter
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 9th August 2020
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Linn announces Majik DSM digital streamer upgrade
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom