“Let our rigorous testing and reviews be your guidelines to A/V equipment – not marketing slogans”
Facebook Youtube Twitter instagram pinterest

Yamaha CX-A5200 & MX-A5200 Measurements & Conclusion

By

All measurements were conducted using our Audio Precision APx585 8 Channel HDMI Audio Analyzer. 

For more information about how we measure power amplifiers, please see: Basic Amplifier Measurement Techniques

Be sure to check out our YouTube video on the bench test results for the 5200 series if you want further explanations not detailed in the report below.

Yamaha CX-A5200 & MX-A5200 Benchtest YouTube Discussion

CX-A5200 Preamplifier Measurements

The Yamaha CX-A5200 analog preamp section accommodates up to 4Vrms input with a max unclipped output of 7.8Vrms via the balanced XLR outputs. This is plenty of drive to work with any external amplification.

Using HDMI input, I plotted an FFT at 1Vrms via the XLR outputs and the resultant distortion was excellent with the 2nd order -105dB below the fundamental. At 4Vrms out, 3rd order rose substantially to -76dB (though still inaudible at 0.015%).

CX-A5200_FFT-HDMI.jpg\

Yamaha CX-A5200 FFT (-10dBFs HDMI in, 1Vrms out)

I wanted to take a closer look so I ran a distortion sweep vs output voltage for all channels. As you can see below, the distortion remained exceedingly low on all XLR outputs except the front channels. The higher distortion (0.05% THD+N for the front channels vs 0.002% THD+N for the remaining channels) did NOT present itself on the unbalanced outputs. This is one of those rare cases where the balanced outputs are at a noise and distortion disadvantage to the unbalanced. As you can see in the unbalanced distortion graph, the front channels had much lower distortion commensurate with the other channels, though maximum unclipped output voltage was about 1/2 at 4Vrms as expected.

CX-A5200-Psweep-THD.JPG

Yamaha CX-A5200 XLR Output Voltage vs Distortion ACD @ 1kHz

CX-A5200-Psweep-THD-unbal.JPG

Yamaha CX-A5200 Unbalanced Output Voltage vs Distortion ACD @ 1kHz

I wanted to verify if this problem plagued the CX-A5100 so I measured them side by side before swapping out my old CX-A5100 to review the CX-A5200.  I ran identical tests on the CX-A5100 and CX-A5200 to show illustrate the differences in distortion at 2.7Vrms output for XLR and Unbalanced. As a reference, 2.7Vrms is almost the full voltage required for the MX-A5200 to reach max rated power.

Yamaha CX-A5100 Main XLR vs UnBal THD +N.jpg Yamaha CX-A5200 Main XLR vs UnBal THD +N.jpg

Distortion vs Frequency Response Yamaha  CX-A5100  (left pic) ; CX-A5200 (right pic)

CX-A5100:
Brown: Unbal - 90dB @ 1kHz
Red: Bal -95dB @ 1kHz

CX-A5200:
Purple: Unbal -88dB @ 1kHz
Blue: Bal -72dB @ 1kHz

As you can see there's actually about a 23dB difference in distortion between the CX-A5100 and CX-A5200 at the same drive level and test conditions via the XLR outputs. The difference in distortion between the CX-A5100 and CX-A5200 unbalanced outputs was only 2dB in this comparison.

Yamaha confirmed my measurements and discovered the culprit to this increased distortion had something to do with how the volume control IC interacts with the XLR outputs. This is something they plan to resolve in future models but cannot make a hardware change to this current model.

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. However, if you want the very best performance from the CX-A5200, I recommend using the unbalanced outputs for the front channels. This is the first time I've ever said this sentence in a product review so it's a rare recommendation given the performance characteristics I've observed with this product.

CX-A5200_Freq-XLR-pure.JPG

Yamaha CX-A5200 Frequency Response of XLR Outputs (Pure Direct)

It’s no surprise that the frequency response was flat and linear for the entire bandwidth with a -3dB point just shy of 70kHz with ± 0.09dB deviation between channels which is excellent. In straight mode with the DSP engaged, the -3dB point was at 48kHz indicating a sampling rate of 96kHz which is great as many AV processors with room correction sample at 48kHz and thus limit the high frequency response to 24kHz when engaged.

CX-A5200_SNR-XLR-HDMI.jpg

Yamaha CX-A5200 SNR (XLR outputs at 1kHz, 1Vrms)
Note: CH3 is subwoofer channel and should be ignored.

The Yamaha CX-A5200 exhibited a very low noise floor for almost every mode of operation. In Pure Direct with an HDMI input signal of -10dBFs, the measured SNR was > 101dB (a-wt) at 1Vrms output which is excellent. The analog input driven with 200mVrms produced 95dB (a-wt) at 1Vrms output. With straight mode engaged, the SNR dropped to 81dB (a-wt) indicating that the ADC in the CX-A5200 was not state of the art in performance like the DACs that were used for digital to analog conversion. In other words, if you engage the DSP for analog sources, expect to take a penalty in noise performance.

CX-A5200-XTALK.JPG

Yamaha CX-A5200 CH-CH Crosstalk

With all channels driven but the test channel, the CX-A5200 exhibited very good crosstalk performance as seen in the graph above (-70dB @ 20kHz). Notice how the channel-channel isolation was consistent for each channel under test with the other channels driven.

MX-A5200 Power Measurements

Using our Audio Precision APx585 8-channel HDMI analyzer, we conducted a full barrage of multi-channel amplifier tests on Yamaha MX-A5200 per our Amplifier Measurement Protocol. We tested power using three methods all of which were taken at < 0.1% THD + N:

  • Continuous Full Power Bandwidth (CFP-BW) from 20Hz to 20kHz into 8 and 4-ohm loads (up to two channels)
  • 1kHz Power Sweep vs Distortion (1kHz PSweep) - popularized by the print magazines, this is an instantaneous power vs. distortion test at 1kHz. The problem with this test is it often masks slew-related and or frequency response problems some amplifiers exhibit at the frequency extremes, and thus inflates the measured power results. It does provide an instant gratification number for consumers to argue over on the forums, so we are now incorporating this test to please the masses.
  • Dynamic PWR - 1kHz CEA-2006 Burst Method testing. This is a dynamic power measurement adopted from the car industry similar to IHF method only a bit more difficult for an amplifier and more representative of real musical content.

Keep in mind most review publications don't do continuous power measurements and they usually publish power measurements into clipping at 1% THD + N. Our measurements are very conservative as we use a dedicated 20A line with no Variac to regulate line voltage.  We constantly monitor the line to ensure it never drops more than 2Vrms from nominal, which in our case was 120Vrms. 

For more info on amplifier measurements, see:  The All Channels Driven (ACD) Test

The frequency response measured  ±0.062dB from 20Hz to 20kHz on all channels of the MX-A5200. The voltage gain of this amp is similar to that of the MX-A5200:

Av = 23dB (via balanced) / 29dB unbalanced

Oddly, bridged mode doesn't boost the gain by 6dB as we see with most bridgeable amps. Instead, Yamaha purposely scaled it back to match levels with the unbridged channels.

MX-A5200-Cont-PWR-8ohm-bridged.JPG

Yamaha MX-A5200 Full Power Bandwidth Continuous Sweep (250wpc, 8 ohms, Bridged)

The MX-A5200 packs quite a punch when the front L/R channels are bridged. Here you can see it hitting 250 watts/channel with both channels driven into 8 ohms, full bandwidth at < 0.1% THD+N. This far exceeds the 200watts/channel rating Yamaha gives this amplifier in bridged mode.

MX-A5200-Cont-PWR-4ohm-bridged.JPG

Yamaha MX-A5200 Full Power Bandwidth Continuous Sweep (388wpc, 4 ohms, Bridged)

The MX-A5200 almost doubled in power into 4 ohms which is impressive considering the strain a bridged amplifier must undergo as each half of the amp section sees 1/2 the load impedance (2 ohms). This is a lot of power from an 11-channel amp in bridged mode and certainly will give your main speakers good dynamic headroom when needed.

MX-A5200-Psweep-2CH8ohm.JPG

Yamaha MX-A5200 Power Sweep vs Distortion Test - 2CH, 8 ohms

In normal mode, the MX-A5200 produced comparable power vs distortion numbers compared to the MX-A5000 previously reviewed. We see the amp exceeding its 150 watts/channel rating at 161 watts/channel, two channels driven < 0.1% THD+N and 171 watts/channel at 1% THD+N.

MX-A5200-Psweep-2CH8ohm-bridged.jpg

Yamaha MX-A5200 Power Sweep vs Distortion Test - 2CH, 8 ohms, Bridged

When bridged, the MX-A5200 went into beast mode, producing 250 watts/channel, two channels driven < 0.1% THD+N and 277 watts/channel at 1% THD+N. Into a 4 ohm load, the MX-A5200 produced 396 watts/channel, two channels driven < 0.1% THD+N and 444watts/channel at 1% THD+N.

MX-A5200-Psweep-2CH-bridge-vs-unbridged.jpg

Yamaha MX-A5200 Power Sweep vs Distortion Test - Bridged vs Unbridged Channels, 8 ohms

If you're thinking you can be clever and just bridge one channel while letting the other channel run in normal mode so you can turn this 11CH amp into a 10CH amp with one high power channel, think again. I was going to do this for my center channel until I realized that Yamaha feeds both channels from the lower voltage tap on the transformer even if you only bridge one of the channels. This cuts the unbridged channel by more than half as you can see in the blue trace where the unbridged channel only produced 65 watts at 0.1% THD+N and 72 watts at 1% THD+N.

Note: If you're going to use the bridged feature of this amplifier, use it for BOTH channels.

I did not test this amplifier with more than two channels driven since it has a similar sized power supply and design layout as its predecessor which I thoroughly tested in that review. I borrowed those test results to tabulate below for your convenience.

MX-A5200-dynamic-pwr-4ohm-bridged.JPG

Yamaha MX-A5200 (2CH) Dynamic Power Test - 4 ohms

The MX-A5200 produced 270 watts/channel, two channels driven, into 8 ohms, bridged during our CEA2006 dynamic burst testing and about 450 watts/channel into 4-ohm loads. It's a good amount of power but interesting to note the results aren't much different from our 1kHz power sweep testing indicating that the Yamaha must be hitting its limiter during these tests. By comparison, the MX-A5000 produced almost 400 watts/channel into 4 ohms for this test and that amp was not bridgeable.

# of CH Test Type Power Load THD + N
2B CFP-BW 250 watts 8 ohms 0.1%
2B CFP-BW 388 watts 4 ohms 0.1%
2 1kHz PSweep 161 watts 8 ohms 0.1%
2 1kHz PSweep 171 watts 8 ohms 1%
2* 1kHz PSweep 236 watts 4 ohms 0.1%
2* 1kHz PSweep 280 watts 4 ohms 1%
5* 1kHz PSweep 138 watts 8 ohms 0.1%
5* 1kHz PSweep 144 watts 8 ohms 1%
7** 1kHz PSweep 78 watts 8 ohms 0.1%
7** 1kHz PSweep 85 watts 8 ohms 1%
2B 1kHz PSweep 250 watts 8 ohms 0.1%
2B 1kHz PSweep 277 watts 8 ohms 1%
2B 1kHz PSweep 396 watts 4 ohms 0.1%
2B 1kHz PSweep 444 watts 4 ohms 1%
2B Dynamic PWR 270 watts 8 ohms 1%
2B Dynamic PWR 450 watts 4 ohms 1%

                  Yamaha MX-A5200 Power Measurement Table

B - bridged mode

* borrowed test data from MX-A5000

** current protection engaged

Caution:  No matter how tempted you may be to do so, DO NOT change the default "8 ohm min" impedance setting of the MX-A5200.  All this does is starve your speakers of power, simply so Yamaha could get 4-ohm certification (at a reduced power level) without making the amplifier get too hot during their power tests. We have tested this 'feature' on virtually every receiver or amplifier that offered it in the past and the results were always the same: the low impedance setting robs your speakers of power.  In our testing of this model's predecessor, the 4-ohm setting reduced the 150 watts/channel power to about 65 watts/channel with five channels driven.

For more information, see:  Setting the AV Receiver Impedance Switch

The MX-A5200 was a bit bipolar in how it measured during my FFT distortion tests. I literally got a different reading each time I took it sometimes varying by as much as 10dB for the 3rd order harmonics during the bridged mode tests. I believe this was possibly due to a current biasing monitoring circuit that drifted slightly with temperature or loading conditions.

MX-A5200 FFT-1watt-1-single-vs-bridged-3.jpg

Yamaha MX-A5200 FFT Distortion Analysis (1 watt, unbridged-blue vs bridged-red XLR)

There is a bit of excessive power supply hum at 120Hz on the MX-A5200 (a few dB worse than I measured on the MX-A5000). This wasn't too concerning as I never once heard an audible hum even with my ear close to the speaker.

In bridged mode, the 2nd order harmonic rose 5dB and the 3rd order almost 15dB in bridged mode compared to unbridged. This was surprising to see as running an amp in a BTL usually reduces distortion products. We did see residual harmonics cancel out in bridged mode, however.

MX-A5200 FFT @ 150 watt.jpg

Yamaha MX-A5200 FFT Distortion Analysis (150 watts, unbridged)

The MX-A5200 produced similar FFT results at full power, unbridged, that I measured from the MX-A5000 previously.

MX-A5200 FFT @ 200watt-bridged.jpg

Yamaha MX-A5200 FFT Distortion Analysis (200 watts, bridged)

In bridged mode, we again see the odd-order harmonics rise slightly, but 2nd order dropped almost 10dB. This is a very good result and demonstrates the amp’s good behavior when driven hard.

MX-A5200-THD-255watts-bridged.JPG

Yamaha MX-A5200 Distortion vs Frequency at 255 watts (2CH, 8 ohms, bridged)

To demonstrate how well behaved this amplifier is at high power, I swept two channels driven in bridged mode at 255 watts, 8 ohms and the distortion remained below 0.05% out to 20kHz. This is impressive considering this amplifier was only rated to deliver 200 watts/channel in bridged mode which this test exceeded comfortably by 55 watts/channel.

Downside

5200 heroThe 5200 series AVENTAGE separates are finely crafted components well worth their price of admission but there are some improvements to be had if Yamaha takes the time and effort to do so. For one, I'd like to see YPAO updated to an app driven solution that allows the end user to connect the microphone to a laptop instead of having to connect to the processor. This is particularly useful for installations where the preamp is not physically located in the same room as the home theater. I found it a bit of a nuisance that the CX-A5200 defaults with Surround:AI engaged for EVERY input out of the box and wonder how many enthusiasts setting this unit up for the first time were underwhelmed with two channel music as a result. Yamaha should look into either defeating Surround:AI for two channel sources going forward or taking it off Neo:6 Cinema in those cases and at least defaulting to the DSU with center spread on.

The distortion problem I discovered for the front main XLR outputs of the CX-A5200, although inaudible in my testing, is something Yamaha must fix in this model’s successor. I want to reiterate that this distortion problem didn't deter my enjoyment of the product or lower the overall subjective scoring I assigned it.

I'd like to see Yamaha differentiate their AV processor from their flagship AV receiver by offering at least two additional processing channels. This would put Yamaha on par with the likes of Marantz and Arcam at least in terms of the number of discrete channels for upscale installations.

MX-A5200 Inside

Yamaha MX-A5200 Inside View -beautiful layout of dual heatsinks and large central power supply

For the MX-A5200, I think Yamaha missed an opportunity to really step up their game with this amplifier or its predecessor. Since they are getting into bridgeable amplification, they should look into increasing the unit’s power supply capability to realize its full potential. I'd like to see the next generation model offer the ability to bridge all of the channels instead of just the main L/R channels. In addition, unbridged channels should stay on the high voltage rails to not sacrifice power like the MX-A5200 does IF you don't bridge both L/R channels. With Monoprice and Emotiva being the only affordable alternatives for 11-channel amplifiers, Yamaha has a real opportunity here to bring unique differentiating features to their product that adds to their appeal of high reliability.   

Conclusion

5200 Series StackYamaha's latest 5200 series separates are well constructed, offer near flawless operation and pack all the features to satisfy even the most sophisticated installs as long as they are limited to an 11-channel speaker configuration. Yamaha MusicCast is an excellent music management system if you're not running an independent control system that offers that functionality for your whole home. The video switching on the CX-A5200 seems a bit more speedy than the model it replaces which is a good thing and I never experienced HDMI handshaking issues or operational hiccups after I switched to mode 2 for 4K UHD signals in the advanced setup.

I thoroughly enjoyed the sonic results of every audio source I threw at this Yamaha separates combo and can safely say without a doubt you probably will as well if care is taken for proper setup and calibration. YPAO still needs refinement but the manual PEQ really helps to tune your system into sonic bliss. Surround:AI offers a subtle improvement in the immersive impact of multi-channel audio sources but should NOT be used for two-channel sources until Yamaha addresses the shortcomings I noted.

The bottom line is the Yamaha 5200 series of separates provide a well-built two-box solution that handles all of the latest in HD audio and video superbly with enough configuration flexibility to satiate the desires of even the most critical audiophile. I truly believe they are a worthy successor to the 5100 series they replace and look forward to seeing if Yamaha takes some of my suggestions under advisement when building this series’ successor.

Yamaha CX-A5200 & MX-A5200 Review
$2,699 & $2,899
For more information, visit: Yamaha YEC America

The Score Card

The scoring below is based on each piece of equipment doing the duty it is designed for. The numbers are weighed heavily with respect to the individual cost of each unit, thus giving a rating roughly equal to:

Performance × Price Factor/Value = Rating

Audioholics.com note: The ratings indicated below are based on subjective listening and objective testing of the product in question. The rating scale is based on performance/value ratio. If you notice better performing products in future reviews that have lower numbers in certain areas, be aware that the value factor is most likely the culprit. Other Audioholics reviewers may rate products solely based on performance, and each reviewer has his/her own system for ratings.

Audioholics Rating Scale

  • StarStarStarStarStar — Excellent
  • StarStarStarStar — Very Good
  • StarStarStar — Good
  • StarStar — Fair
  • Star — Poor
MetricRating
Frequency Response LinearityStarStarStarStarStar
Measured Power (8-ohms)StarStarStarStar
Measured Power (4-ohms)StarStarStarStar
Multi-channel Audio PerformanceStarStarStarStarStar
Two-channel Audio PerformanceStarStarStarStarStar
Build QualityStarStarStarStarStar
Fit and FinishStarStarStarStar
Ergonomics & UsabilityStarStarStarStar
FeaturesStarStarStarStarStar
Remote ControlStarStarStarStar
PerformanceStarStarStarStar
ValueStarStarStarStarhalf-star

Confused about what AV Gear to buy or how to set it up? Join our Exclusive Audioholics E-Book Membership Program!

About the author:

Gene manages this organization, establishes relations with manufacturers and keeps Audioholics a well oiled machine. His goal is to educate about home theater and develop more standards in the industry to eliminate consumer confusion clouded by industry snake oil.

View full profile

Recent Forum Posts:

Gmoney posts on June 26, 2020 04:51
AcuDefTechGuy, post: 1400817, member: 26997
The AVP-A1HDCI was a “life experience”. Just like B&W 802D2 or Salon2 or everything else is a “life experience”.

But going back in time, there's no way I would buy the AVP-A1HDCI. When I buy a $7500 Pre-pro, I expect it to last 20 years or more, not 8 years. Another member here also bought the AVP-A1HDCI and it also became paperweight after 8 years.

So no point buying these expensive electronics for me.

Back when I was all about Denon/Marantz, I probably would have gone with a Marantz pre-pro.

But knowing what I know now, I would have gotten the Yamaha pre-pro + amp combo, which is what I have now.

There is just no need for me to spend that kind of money on electronics.

CX-A5100 + MX-A5200 for no more than $3600 total or RX-A3080 for no more than $1500 is just awesome enough.

No need to waste any more money or waste any more time chasing some specs and ideas.

Bottom line, unless you absolutely want certain auto room corrections like Anthem's ARC, Audyssey XT32, Dirac, Trinnov, Lyngdorf, etc., there's no point chasing some specs for DACs and preamp sections.
I'm watching you, again! lol good post Andrew without all the, but this spec, surly shows why this unit is better. Yes in some cases it needs to be Addressed with hobbyists who need the know of.
All Valid points you made I get sick cause my 50 buck LG blu-ray is on its way out and its only 3 years. 8 years isn't no small time with gear, but than 7.500 isn't 50 bucks Either. I would have taken the Power supply out and strip the copper and sold, just so I feel a little better. Some would have taken a Sledgehammer to it and shipped it back to the Manufacture.
Kleinst posts on June 25, 2020 22:25
AcuDefTechGuy, post: 1400817, member: 26997
The AVP-A1HDCI was a “life experience”. Just like B&W 802D2 or Salon2 or everything else is a “life experience”.

But going back in time, there's no way I would buy the AVP-A1HDCI. When I buy a $7500 Pre-pro, I expect it to last 20 years or more, not 8 years. Another member here also bought the AVP-A1HDCI and it also became paperweight after 8 years.

So no point buying these expensive electronics for me.

Back when I was all about Denon/Marantz, I probably would have gone with a Marantz pre-pro.

But knowing what I know now, I would have gotten the Yamaha pre-pro + amp combo, which is what I have now.

There is just no need for me to spend that kind of money on electronics.

CX-A5100 + MX-A5200 for no more than $3600 total or RX-A3080 for no more than $1500 is just awesome enough.

No need to waste any more money or waste any more time chasing some specs and ideas.

Bottom line, unless you absolutely want certain auto room corrections like Anthem's ARC, Audyssey XT32, Dirac, Trinnov, Lyngdorf, etc., there's no point chasing some specs for DACs and preamp sections.


How much better is the 5100 vs the 3080 using the pre outs (if you do)? I'm curious if you feel like the extra money for the pre pro made a difference or if your 3080 would have put out the same sound with a power AMP. Since you have both you are uniquely qualified to give an educated opinion you probably have already said this in this thread so sorry for asking again

EDIT: Yeah I probably need to go back and read
AcuDefTechGuy posts on June 25, 2020 14:31
RickyT, post: 1400797, member: 91434
FYI: [email protected] (his user name on AVS) is the Anthem REP who answers questions in the Anthem Owners threads (AVM60, 1120/720/520, and other ones). So what he posts is not hearsay but the Anthem facts.

I agree with what you're saying. My point is within the same brand (usually, but not always), the prepro is essentially the top of the line receiver model minus power amps, with XLRs added. So when hooking up an HDMI device and RCA to a power amp (aka the digital preamp section), the prepro and receiver should both measure and sound the same: Anthem AVM60 & 1120 (yes, as confirmed by Nick), Yamaha 5200 & 3080 (I think so), Marantz 8805 and Denon 8500H (I think so, except the Marantz HDAMs can alter the sound).

Of course, this didn't apply to the incredible Denon AVP-A1HDCI prepro that you (and Gene) owned….that Denon has no equal! From time to time, I get tempted to buy one used…but it doesn't have atmos (for my mancave) and if I put it in my wife's 7.1 system, any quirks would get me in trouble!
The AVP-A1HDCI was a “life experience”. Just like B&W 802D2 or Salon2 or everything else is a “life experience”.

But going back in time, there's no way I would buy the AVP-A1HDCI. When I buy a $7500 Pre-pro, I expect it to last 20 years or more, not 8 years. Another member here also bought the AVP-A1HDCI and it also became paperweight after 8 years.

So no point buying these expensive electronics for me.

Back when I was all about Denon/Marantz, I probably would have gone with a Marantz pre-pro.

But knowing what I know now, I would have gotten the Yamaha pre-pro + amp combo, which is what I have now.

There is just no need for me to spend that kind of money on electronics.

CX-A5100 + MX-A5200 for no more than $3600 total or RX-A3080 for no more than $1500 is just awesome enough.

No need to waste any more money or waste any more time chasing some specs and ideas.

Bottom line, unless you absolutely want certain auto room corrections like Anthem's ARC, Audyssey XT32, Dirac, Trinnov, Lyngdorf, etc., there's no point chasing some specs for DACs and preamp sections.
RickyT posts on June 25, 2020 13:34
AcuDefTechGuy, post: 1400710, member: 26997
I wouldn’t get bogged down too much on hearsay and things like DAC and ADC and preamp sections. Look at the end results - SNR, THD, Crosstalk, FR, etc.

Pre-pros from Yamaha, Marantz, and Anthem all have state of the art measurements.

Instead, focus on price, reliability, apps, compatibility.

FYI: [email protected] (his user name on AVS) is the Anthem REP who answers questions in the Anthem Owners threads (AVM60, 1120/720/520, and other ones). So what he posts is not hearsay but the Anthem facts.

I agree with what you're saying. My point is within the same brand (usually, but not always), the prepro is essentially the top of the line receiver model minus power amps, with XLRs added. So when hooking up an HDMI device and RCA to a power amp (aka the digital preamp section), the prepro and receiver should both measure and sound the same: Anthem AVM60 & 1120 (yes, as confirmed by Nick), Yamaha 5200 & 3080 (I think so), Marantz 8805 and Denon 8500H (I think so, except the Marantz HDAMs can alter the sound).

Of course, this didn't apply to the incredible Denon AVP-A1HDCI prepro that you (and Gene) owned….that Denon has no equal! From time to time, I get tempted to buy one used…but it doesn't have atmos (for my mancave) and if I put it in my wife's 7.1 system, any quirks would get me in trouble!
AcuDefTechGuy posts on June 25, 2020 07:08
RickyT, post: 1400622, member: 91434
The other non-XT32 option I'm considering is the Anthem AVM60 prepro or the MRX1120 receiver, which has the same digital preamp (dacs, chips) as the AVM60.

If you connect both to the same power L&R power amp (or in my case, powered monitors) via RCA, I think both should measure and sound the same.

From [email protected] on AVS:

“only difference between the MRX1120 and the AVM60 is the AMPs, the AVM has better ADC and a dedicated headphone amp (since it can't borrow one of the main AMPs). The the only difference between the 720 and the 1120 is the four extra amp channels in the 1120 and the 1120 (and AVM60) has a toroidal transformer.”
I wouldn’t get bogged down too much on hearsay and things like DAC and ADC and preamp sections. Look at the end results - SNR, THD, Crosstalk, FR, etc.

Pre-pros from Yamaha, Marantz, and Anthem all have state of the art measurements.

Instead, focus on price, reliability, apps, compatibility.
Post Reply