Marantz Cinema 50 AVR Review

[techsamurai]

Hard to say. The X8500H had a silver model in the US and the PM-10/SA-10 had a gold model in the US, both as limited production runs.

Unfortunately, my guess is that they sold poorly because the X8500HA and A1H are black only and the gold PM-10/SA-10 appear to be discontinued in the US.

It would seem like the only difference is firmware and transformer, so it would be nice to allow dealers to order colors of the customer’s choice.

I agree it should be up to the customer and even if 10% have more discerning tastes and prefer the silver or gold, it should be an option. As for the reason, I have to wonder if AVRs are mostly the domain of dedicated home theaters or people have given up on their decor

 

[Carycinema]

Are you talking about these specs? Looks like it's HDAM vs DDSC+AL32. My X4100W had DDSC + ALC 24 and HDAM implementation of C50 doesn't seem significantly better.

Cinema 50
View attachment 256994

X4800H
View attachment 256995

X3800H
View attachment 256996


I know exactly what you mean I have a feeling that if I return C50 and get a X4800H I might be even more disappointed that all the returns/setup were for nothing so likely we'll just keep it... I got another 10 days or so to decide. Denon does have a better display to compensate for the ancient appearance.

No if you download the pdf manuals for Cinema 50 and Denon 4800H you will see the following under appendix specs. They are exactly the same, so probably same Dac used.

Marantz:
D/A output:
Rated output — 2 V (at 0 dB playback)
Total harmonic distortion — 0.008 % (1 kHz, at 0 dB)
S/N ratio — 102 dB
Dynamic range — 100 dB

Denon:
D/A output:
Rated output — 2 V (at 0 dB playback)
Total harmonic distortion — 0.008 % (1 kHz, at 0 dB)
S/N ratio — 102 dB
Dynamic range — 100 dB

 

[rexian]

No if you download the pdf manuals for Cinema 50 and Denon 4800H you will see the following under appendix specs. They are exactly the same, so probably same Dac used.

Marantz:
D/A output:
Rated output — 2 V (at 0 dB playback)
Total harmonic distortion — 0.008 % (1 kHz, at 0 dB)
S/N ratio — 102 dB
Dynamic range — 100 dB

Denon:
D/A output:
Rated output — 2 V (at 0 dB playback)
Total harmonic distortion — 0.008 % (1 kHz, at 0 dB)
S/N ratio — 102 dB
Dynamic range — 100 dB

Got it. Here is what I found from the X3800H PDF manual -

And from near top of the line Marantz SR8015 -

Finally for my 8-yr old X4100W -

Don't know if this is a copy/paste error going for years but we probably can't be sure on the DAC used (or audio quality) from these specs as there is no difference between higher/lower end models as well as old/new ones. Even X2700H has the same specs and it costs ~1/5th of SR8015.

 

[Carycinema]

Got it. Here is what I found from the X3800H PDF manual -

View attachment 257374

And from near top of the line Marantz SR8015 -
View attachment 257376

Finally for my 8-yr old X4100W -
View attachment 257377

Don't know if this is a copy/paste error going for years but we probably can't be sure on the DAC used (or audio quality) from these specs as there is no difference between higher/lower end models as well as old/new ones. Even X2700H has the same specs and it costs ~1/5th of SR8015.

Looks like your right! based on them being all the same. It's so top secret to tell the consumer what dacs they used? I posted a question asking Marantz and they deleted and did not post it. That makes me think thay are hiding something and the info should be disclosed in the specs. Going to the next better model I expect better components and especially the next level Dac with better performance. We deserve that for the money. Why should we go for the better models if they all have the same dacs?

 

[-pekr-]

Looks like your right! based on them being all the same. It's so top secret to tell the consumer what dacs they used? I posted a question asking Marantz and they deleted and did not post it. That makes me think thay are hiding something and the info should be disclosed in the specs. Going to the next better model I expect better components and especially the next level Dac with better performance. We deserve that for the money. Why should we go for the better models if they all have the same dacs?

This is exactly my gripe with the Sound United (Denon, Marantz), but most probably not just them. When I acquired x3500h 4 years ago, AKM DAC was proudly communicated. After the AKM factory destruction by fire, and overal supply shortage, they have changed to TI (Texas Instrumens). I have watched a webinar with SU, where they replied to the DAC question by stating, that online community is exagerrating, because DAC is not only aspect, which makes sound good, or bad. The truth is, though, that x3800h measures MUCH worse than x3700h (AKM version).

I also don't understand the comparison between the Cinema 50 and x4800h - those are not the same machines. Cinema 50 pairs to the x3800h, whereas x4800h pairs to Cinema 40. I really expect at least those, use something like ESS Sabre. Well, I expected ESS Sabre even for Cinema 50 :-(

 

[techsamurai]

This is exactly my gripe with the Sound United (Denon, Marantz), but most probably not just them. When I acquired x3500h 4 years ago, AKM DAC was proudly communicated. After the AKM factory destruction by fire, and overal supply shortage, they have changed to TI (Texas Instrumens). I have watched a webinar with SU, where they replied to the DAC question by stating, that online community is exagerrating, because DAC is not only aspect, which makes sound good, or bad. The truth is, though, that x3800h measures MUCH worse than x3700h (AKM version).

I also don't understand the comparison between the Cinema 50 and x4800h - those are not the same machines. Cinema 50 pairs to the x3800h, whereas x4800h pairs to Cinema 40. I really expect at least those, use something like ESS Sabre. Well, I expected ESS Sabre even for Cinema 50 :-(

I think you're right - all those AVRs should have high-end DACs. The Cinema 60 is more expensive than the 6000 series (aka Cinema 50) from a few years ago.

Do they all have the same DAC?

 

[peng]

No if you download the pdf manuals for Cinema 50 and Denon 4800H you will see the following under appendix specs. They are exactly the same, so probably same Dac used.

Marantz:
D/A output:
Rated output — 2 V (at 0 dB playback)
Total harmonic distortion — 0.008 % (1 kHz, at 0 dB)
S/N ratio — 102 dB
Dynamic range — 100 dB

Denon:
D/A output:
Rated output — 2 V (at 0 dB playback)
Total harmonic distortion — 0.008 % (1 kHz, at 0 dB)
S/N ratio — 102 dB
Dynamic range — 100 dB

They haven't changed that part of the specifications for well over 10 years and we know for sure they have had changed the DAC IC, among other ICs used, every few years.

 

[techsamurai]

They haven't changed that part of the specifications for well over 10 years and we know for sure they have had changed the DAC IC, among other ICs used, every few years.

Aren't they supposed to update it (as in required by law)? If not, then these measurements could be false. They haven't updated their max power consumption either.

Is it possible that the max power consumption may no longer be 680 watts? I just assume they use the same power amps for the past 15 years based on that. Am I wrong?

 

[rexian]

This is exactly my gripe with the Sound United (Denon, Marantz), but most probably not just them. When I acquired x3500h 4 years ago, AKM DAC was proudly communicated. After the AKM factory destruction by fire, and overal supply shortage, they have changed to TI (Texas Instrumens). I have watched a webinar with SU, where they replied to the DAC question by stating, that online community is exagerrating, because DAC is not only aspect, which makes sound good, or bad. The truth is, though, that x3800h measures MUCH worse than x3700h (AKM version).

They do have a point - can we (humans with decent hearing) tell the difference between pre-amp SINAD 87 (X3800H) and 97 (X3700H) when not using quality headphones? When using the built-in amps the SINAD at 5W is very comparable (85 vs 88 for X3700H). This evasive behavior does tell clearly that the company used an inferior part for some reason (fire at AKM factory) but I am not sure that matters outside of measurements.

I also don't understand the comparison between the Cinema 50 and x4800h - those are not the same machines. Cinema 50 pairs to the x3800h, whereas x4800h pairs to Cinema 40.

In my opinion, the comparison between Cinema 50 (many in the forum have it) and X4800H (preorders starting to show up) is fair because they are priced similarly and have some audio enhancements in the specs that Cinema 60 or X3800H doesn't (Cinema 60 is definitely the weakest of them all). In terms of specs, I don't see X4800 standing out over Cinema 50 in quality, just has slightly higher output / extra HDMI / zone.

Also from OP's review, Cinema 50 seems to be better than X3800H with SINAD at 5W (89dB for RCA) being slightly higher than X3700H though I'd wait for Amir's review before arriving at a conclusion just to make sure it's the same bench used for measurements and also, the HDMI input matters more to me than optical / RCA.

I really expect at least those, use something like ESS Sabre. Well, I expected ESS Sabre even for Cinema 50 :-(

If it doesn't void the warranty, I could take the lid off of my Cinema 50 and take a picture. Assuming the DAC isn't hidden, of course.

 

[peng]

Aren't they supposed to update it (as in required by law)? If not, then these measurements could be false. They haven't updated their max power consumption either.

Is it possible that the max power consumption may no longer be 680 watts? I just assume they use the same power amps for the past 15 years based on that. Am I wrong?

Denon has never said anthing about maximum power consumption. Manufacturers rarely (if ever) told us how they came up with such numbers. Yamaha does a little better, they typically provide 2 numbers, power consumption and maximum power consumption. Regardless, those numbers, without stating how they are derived, don't mean a whole lot.

 

[peng]

They do have a point - can we (humans with decent hearing) tell the difference between pre-amp SINAD 87 (X3800H) and 97 (X3700H) when not using quality headphones? When using the built-in amps the SINAD at 5W is very comparable (85 vs 88 for X3700H). This evasive behavior does tell clearly that the company used an inferior part for some reason (fire at AKM factory) but I am not sure that matters outside of measurements.


In my opinion, the comparison between Cinema 50 (many in the forum have it) and X4800H (preorders starting to show up) is fair because they are priced similarly and have some audio enhancements in the specs that Cinema 60 or X3800H doesn't (Cinema 60 is definitely the weakest of them all). In terms of specs, I don't see X4800 standing out over Cinema 50 in quality, just has slightly higher output / extra HDMI / zone.

Also from OP's review, Cinema 50 seems to be better than X3800H with SINAD at 5W (89dB for RCA) being slightly higher than X3700H though I'd wait for Amir's review before arriving at a conclusion just to make sure it's the same bench used for measurements and also, the HDMI input matters more to me than optical / RCA.


If it doesn't void the warranty, I could take the lid off of my Cinema 50 and take a picture. Assuming the DAC isn't hidden, of course.

Based on specs and measurements, the Cinema 40 and x4800h are the equivalents. The C50 is more comparable to the x3800h but has a slightly stronger power supply.

It is the same scenarios as the sr6015 vs avr-x3700h, and sr7015 vs avr-x4700h.

If you want to compare based on price when you are right, but..

 

[rexian]

Based on specs and measurements, the Cinema 40 and x4800h are the equivalents. The C50 is more comparable to the x3800h but has a slightly stronger power supply.

It is the same scenarios as the sr6015 vs avr-x3700h, and sr7015 vs avr-x4700h.

If you want to compare based on price when you are right, but..

You are definitely right for the older generation but with Marantz touting Cinema 40 to be closer to 8015 (of course no measurements available yet), wouldn't that make Cinema 50 above X3800h and closer to x4800h? Other than price, the audio specs also seem to compare more with X4800H as I posted the screenshots. Which specs are you looking at?

 

[techsamurai]

Denon has never said anthing about maximum power consumption. Manufacturers rarely (if ever) told us how they came up with such numbers. Yamaha does a little better, they typically provide 2 numbers, power consumption and maximum power consumption. Regardless, those numbers, without stating how they are derived, don't mean a whole lot.

Actually, the Max Power consumption does translate into higher wattage generally speaking.

For instance, the 8015 has a Max Power Consumption of 780 Watts which is how I knew it had the same toroidal as the 8012, 8002, and the original 8001. The 8000 series has only had 4 models unlike the other series. The 8015 benched within 5-10 watts of the 8002 and 8001 as some wattage in the newer models are reserved for other processing making a bit less powerful.

The 7015 has a power consumption of 710 watts which is identical to the 7002 and every model in between.

The Cinema 50 has 680 watts which is identical to the 6011-6015. The 6004-6010 had 650 watts. The 6003 had 600 watts.

The Cinema 60 has 650 watts which is identical to the 5004-5015. The 5002 had 500 watts so there was a strange increase to 650 watts perhaps to compete with other brands in the 5000 series.

 

[peng]

You are definitely right for the older generation but with Marantz touting Cinema 40 to be closer to 8015 (of course no measurements available yet), wouldn't that make Cinema 50 above X3800h and closer to x4800h? Other than price, the audio specs also seem to compare more with X4800H as I posted the screenshots. Which specs are you looking at?

How do you know if the 4800 is not up a little now to be closer to the 6700? It is now made in Japan too. The 4700 was made in Vietnam.

Some quick tell tale specs, compare the following, you will see the 40 is comparable to the 4800, the 50 is not.

Power output 125 W, distortions 0.05%, power consumption 710 W.

As I said, if you go by price, yes, but not specs. Marantz has higher list prices for the past 5 to 6 years. You have to pay for the HDAMs, and the more musical sound myth. I know that well, owned 5, (including the separates) installed one.

 

[peng]

Actually, the Max Power consumption does translate into higher wattage generally speaking.

For instance, the 8015 has a Max Power Consumption of 780 Watts which is how I knew it had the same toroidal as the 8012, 8002, and the original 8001. The 8000 series has only had 4 models unlike the other series. The 8015 benched within 5-10 watts of the 8002 and 8001 as some wattage in the newer models are reserved for other processing making a bit less powerful.

The 7015 has a power consumption of 710 watts which is identical to the 7002 and every model in between.

The Cinema 50 has 680 watts which is identical to the 6011-6015. The 6004-6010 had 650 watts. The 6003 had 600 watts.

The Cinema 60 has 650 watts which is identical to the 5004-5015. The 5002 had 500 watts so there was a strange increase to 650 watts perhaps to compete with other brands in the 5000 series.

My point was, power consumption figures don't mean a whole not, without stating the load condition. Of course if you compare the models in the Marantz and Denon groups, those with higher consumption number would indicate higher output power than those with lower power consumption. That's stating the obvious, so no argument there.

 

[techsamurai]

My point was, power consumption figures don't mean a whole not, without stating the load condition. Of course if you compare the models in the Marantz and Denon groups, those with higher consumption number would indicate higher output power than those with lower power consumption. That's stating the obvious, so no argument there.

Yeah but it's still a bit surprising how close the 6000, 7000 and 8000 series are in terms of power.

The 7011's measurements are:

2 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 138.7 watts

5 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 104.9 watts

7 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 75.1 watts

The 8002's measurements are:

2 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 174.1 watts

5 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 119.0 watts

7 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 109.1 watts

The 7011 (which is probably a good representation of the power of the Cinema 40) is actually a decent match against the 8002 up to 5 channels and only drops in 7 channels. Of course, the 8000 has a toroidal transformer and is one of 2 AVRs that still include one (Rotel is the other one).

Are there any measurements of power usage during a dynamic movie with and without a sub to see if these values have any meaning?

 

[ban25]

You are definitely right for the older generation but with Marantz touting Cinema 40 to be closer to 8015 (of course no measurements available yet), wouldn't that make Cinema 50 above X3800h and closer to x4800h? Other than price, the audio specs also seem to compare more with X4800H as I posted the screenshots. Which specs are you looking at?

The specs have been published for both for months, and they are equivalent:

https://www.marantz.com/en-ca/product/av-receivers/cinema40

AVR-X4800H - Refurbished - 9.4 Ch. 125W 8K AV Receiver with HEOS® Built-in | Denon - US

The Denon AVR-X4800H is a 9.4 Ch. 125W AV receiver for breathtaking home theater with Dolby Atmos, 8K Ultra HD, DTS:X, and HEOS® Built-in streaming.

www.denon.com

Any comparison with the 8015 is just marketing talk. The 8015 is an 11 channel product, not 9 channels like X4800H/C40. For this year, the equivalent to the 8015 is either the Denon A1H (AVR) or the AV10 / AMP10 separates. It seems this is helping D+M differentiate their lines (if you want all-in-one, buy Denon, if you want separates, buy Marantz). You can expect an 11-channel Cinema 30 / X6800H to slot into the product lineup next year.

 

[techsamurai]

The specs have been published for both for months, and they are equivalent:

https://www.marantz.com/en-ca/product/av-receivers/cinema40

AVR-X4800H - Refurbished - 9.4 Ch. 125W 8K AV Receiver with HEOS® Built-in | Denon - US

The Denon AVR-X4800H is a 9.4 Ch. 125W AV receiver for breathtaking home theater with Dolby Atmos, 8K Ultra HD, DTS:X, and HEOS® Built-in streaming.

www.denon.com

Any comparison with the 8015 is just marketing talk. The 8015 is an 11 channel product, not 9 channels like X4800H/C40. For this year, the equivalent to the 8015 is either the Denon A1H (AVR) or the AV10 / AMP10 separates. It seems this is helping D+M differentiate their lines (if you want all-in-one, buy Denon, if you want separates, buy Marantz). You can expect an 11-channel Cinema 30 / X6800H to slot into the product lineup next year.

I think the biggest change between the C40 and 8015 is the toroidal transformer. The 8015 was the only AVR along with the Rotel to offer it that I know of. They used to be pretty common 10-15 years ago.

 

[rexian]

How do you know if the 4800 is not up a little now to be closer to the 6700? It is now made in Japan too. The 4700 was made in Vietnam.

Some quick tell tale specs, compare the following, you will see the 40 is comparable to the 4800, the 50 is not.

I don't, but neither does anyone outside of Denon at the moment hence I am calling it (X4800H clearly above Cinema 50 in audio quality) speculative for now. I didn't hear Denon marketing folks touting like Marantz did. Marantz also completely changed the model numbers and that indicates they believe Cinema series is more than just an annual evolution. All will be revealed as soon as Amir gets an X4800H (and Cinema 50) to test

Power output 125 W, distortions 0.05%, power consumption 710 W.

As I said, if you go by price, yes, but not specs. Marantz has higher list prices for the past 5 to 6 years. You have to pay for the HDAMs, and the more musical sound myth. I know that well, owned 5, (including the separates) installed one.

Cinema 50 is at 680W and X3800H at 660W - so clearly in the middle. Maybe this is how D+M wants to rank their AVRs --> Cinema 40 > X4800H > Cinema 50 > X3800H. I mentioned the power and HDMI/Zone being the difference - audibly there will be miniscule difference 110W vs 125W but it is an upgrade nonetheless.

The more important thing in this X3800H/Cinema 50 pairing is what the measurements have found so far - OP found Cinema 50 was 4dB better than X3800H, and even X3700H, at 5W SINAD. Could be a better DAC or HDAM doing some magic.

 

[rexian]

The specs have been published for both for months, and they are equivalent:

https://www.marantz.com/en-ca/product/av-receivers/cinema40

AVR-X4800H - Refurbished - 9.4 Ch. 125W 8K AV Receiver with HEOS® Built-in | Denon - US

The Denon AVR-X4800H is a 9.4 Ch. 125W AV receiver for breathtaking home theater with Dolby Atmos, 8K Ultra HD, DTS:X, and HEOS® Built-in streaming.

www.denon.com

Any comparison with the 8015 is just marketing talk. The 8015 is an 11 channel product, not 9 channels like X4800H/C40. For this year, the equivalent to the 8015 is either the Denon A1H (AVR) or the AV10 / AMP10 separates. It seems this is helping D+M differentiate their lines (if you want all-in-one, buy Denon, if you want separates, buy Marantz). You can expect an 11-channel Cinema 30 / X6800H to slot into the product lineup next year.

The Marantz guy was talking about perceived audio quality, not on power or number of channels. I did look at both the specs but not everything is clear on specs like quality and that's why we need the bench tests. If in terms of power or zone or HDMI ports we are saying X4800H is higher, I am with you. I was debating on the audio quality front. I don't need the extras X4800H offers but wanted something slightly better than X3800H and Cinema 50 appears to fit in right there. If X4800H turns out audibly better, I'll return Cinema 50 and get that (just a week or so left to decide).