expirediconian | Staff posted Dec 13, 2024 08:37 PM
Item 1 of 3
Item 1 of 3
expirediconian | Staff posted Dec 13, 2024 08:37 PM
Integra DRX 3.4 100W 9.2-Channel 8K Network AV Receiver
+ Free Shipping$579
$1,500
61% offAdorama
Visit AdoramaGood Deal
Bad Deal
Save
Share
Leave a Comment
Top Comments
I finally got the 3.4 set up. For context I'm coming from an Onkyo TR-NX 818. It had 130 watts per channel vs this at 100. My first day setting it up and playing around with it I was underwhelmed. I purchased the Klipsch RP 1200SW at the same time to pair with my KSW 15. I've had my KSW 15 for over 24 years and it has served me very well. Switching to a two subwoofer system has been amazing. At first that was the only thing that had impressed me. I was really second guessing the purchase of the Integra.
This morning I got up early, moved some furniture around, and played with the sub woofer placement. Then I ran Dirac for the first time. I did the full placement testing with the supplied mic. WOW … everything came alive. I can't wait to try Dirac with my laptop, then I'm going to buy the minidsp UMIK-1 mic.
I wasn't expecting to be wowed this much, especially coming from an Audyssey XT32 set up on my old TX-NR 818. I know it will progressively get better redoing it with the laptop, than the new minidsp mic. The bass has really tightened up. Original I didn't have both subs parallel from each other, so that helped also, at least with some standing waves. I don't feel the need to invest in an Emotiva Basx A3, or an Outlaw amp anymore. I probably will once I upgrade to 5.2.4, but for now I'm set and satisfied.
There is no reciever at this price with 9 channels, pre outs, HDMI 2.1 on all ports, and Dirac built in. Also higher grade components compared to similar Onkyo and Pioneer models.
294 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
1) Turning off any channels going to externals amps gives more power to the remaining channels.
2) Sometimes in a "preamp mode", the AVR provides higher voltage to the pre-out connection, especially important since many external amps require a minimum voltage so that a pricey high gain amp is not always necessary!
I was with Integra all last week and they was saying that you can do a 7.2.4 adding a external power amplifier
People often argue more POWER(supply) is "better" and or they point out manufacturers power rating is only driving two channels.
Driving more channels drops the POWER rating, insinuating less is not "better".
The argument in basic terms, more power means your speakers are driven more efficiently which means "better" sonics.
So if that's true then turning off/disengaging internal amps not being used means the internal power is driving less channels which should be good(better).
Some of the new Denon/Marantz models(ie 3800/Cinema 50)lets you do this individually per channel.
Even the new higher priced Pioneer(RZ70)/Onkyo(LX805) only let you do it to your L/R fronts OR all 11 channels.
This can be advantageous especially if not all your speakers need all that extra power imo.
I was with Integra all last week and they was saying that you can do a 7.2.4 adding a external power amplifier
There is just no way any receiver sounds any different from any other receiver. They have .08% THD. So the amps are rated to sound 99.92% identical to all other receivers and the only difference there could be is the room correction implementation, power, or components. iMO Dirac live is unbeatable by any of the alternatives so I just can't see how this wouldn't sound better given a proper room correction setup.
This means on speakers where the impedance load dips down below 4 and even to 2ohms, if the volume gets turned up, the amp eventually can't provide the required current and will not sound as powerful and full as an amp that can.(this will be most commonly presented on dynamic peaks, usually in the bass and midbass areas)
Also when difficult phase angles are presented to the amp at lower impedances it will produce a lot of heat & that is bad in such a tight small package with very little in terms of heat sinking.
Still I agree that generally under most typical conditions that most people actually use their gear in this is more or less a non-existent to a minor issue. For some users it is a very big issue that will not work out properly (certain speakers, large rooms, high level playback)
I've put together a budget-friendly home theater using a Jamo S809 tower, an S89 center, a Dayton bookshelf for the front height, and Dayton Audio satellite. There are two subs - one Dayton Audio 10" and one Monoprice 10". Not the typical audiophile's setup
That said the Dirac software in the this AVR will definitely provide a very large improvement in most cases. It might be worth buying this AVR now while on sale, seeing what you like in Dirac (I recommend using it from 20hrz to about 400-500hrz in smaller rooms and 20hrz to 200-300hrz in larger rooms, not above that frequency range) and then buying new speakers sometime later on. The room really affects the sound at and below the frequencies I listed and used smartly Dirac can help take the rooms effects down to minimal levels for listeners sitting in the sweet spot. This can be a substantial change exceeded many speaker upgrades.
**EDIT I just realized you have Audessey in the Denon, so maybe not a big boost here for you. Hopefully this still helps others with other AVRs that do not employee Dirac or similar.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
A "bench mark" like a bench test or weight does not define how good or bad something will sound(perform).
Can people believe they do, yes people do it all the time.
That's a personal opinion/belief, not a universal one, there is no debating that.
We can measure electronics far, far beyond any humans threshold of hearing potential and have essentially fully studied what parameters are important in that area.
Once the it gets to the transducers, the speakers, which convert the electrical signal into air pressure changes in your room that hit your ears and body a lot happens which is very complex and hard to measure as decisively. Blind testing helps a lot and a lot of that has been done. The results of the blinding testing which has been made public is not 100% comprehensive or universal fact nor anything like that but definitely it is compelling.
Certainly someone may prefer things like extra treble or a dip in the midrange or extra bass or really expansive sound or pinpoint imaging. Sure, completely real and fun. Absolutely tailor the sound to your taste and for enjoyment.
But there is no excuse for electronics that do not measure well and benchmark well, as these days they can be made that way for a very affordable price. Then after they are made to measure perfectly well and priced affordably, let the user tailor the bass or whatever with a dial not a roll of dice. Let them chose their speakers dispersion, be it wide and life sized or tight and pinpoint with their choice in speakers that have been tested to have the properties so desired.
Don't think this takes the magic out of it, how this all works is magical, electricity is truly a magical inexplicable force and nobody is ruining the mystery of life by pushing electronics devices that actually measure with high fidelity. IMHO what asking for tight benchmarks is doing is keeping your cash in the hands of people who care about what they make and are willing to prove it.
We can measure electronics far, far beyond any humans threshold of hearing potential and have essentially fully studied what parameters are important in that area.
Once the it gets to the transducers, the speakers, which convert the electrical signal into air pressure changes in your room that hit your ears and body a lot happens which is very complex and hard to measure as decisively. Blind testing helps a lot and a lot of that has been done. The results of the blinding testing which has been made public is not 100% comprehensive or universal fact nor anything like that but definitely it is compelling.
Certainly someone may prefer things like extra treble or a dip in the midrange or extra bass or really expansive sound or pinpoint imaging. Sure, completely real and fun. Absolutely tailor the sound to your taste and for enjoyment.
But there is no excuse for electronics that do not measure well and benchmark well, as these days they can be made that way for a very affordable price. Then after they are made to measure perfectly well and priced affordably, let the user tailor the bass or whatever with a dial not a roll of dice. Let them chose their speakers dispersion, be it wide and life sized or tight and pinpoint with their choice in speakers that have been tested to have the properties so desired.
Don't think this takes the magic out of it, how this all works is magical, electricity is truly a magical inexplicable force and nobody is ruining the mystery of life by pushing electronics devices that actually measure with high fidelity. IMHO what asking for tight benchmarks is doing is keeping your cash in the hands of people who care about what they make and are willing to prove it.
A bench test is a measurement of what something is capable of, it does not measure what it sounds like.
That's the fallacy & the uniqueness/mystery of sound, it's not measurable especially universally imo.
Your colorful second paragraph touches on just a few of the reasons.
In basic terms which you alluded to, from that bench test to the point you actually listen to it, MANY things affect what it sounds like.
So that measurement of capability, in the end loses pretty much any proof of fidelity to anyone imo.
Even you pointed out how science has tried to crack this mystery with blind test and it's never 100% results, given in averages.
Keep in mind what those blind test don't take into consideration is the worth of that difference, making it exponentially much more complicated imo.
This also begs the question.
If these bench test have so much value to defining high fidelity why audition or as you always talk about "tailoring the sound to your taste and for enjoyment"(ie EQing,PEQ)?
A bench test is a measurement of what something is capable of, it does not measure what it sounds like.
That's the fallacy & the uniqueness/mystery of sound, it's not measurable especially universally imo.
Your colorful second paragraph touches on just a few of the reasons.
In basic terms which you alluded to, from that bench test to the point you actually listen to it, MANY things affect what it sounds like.
So that measurement of capability, in the end loses pretty much any proof of fidelity to anyone imo.
Even you pointed out how science has tried to crack this mystery with blind test and it's never 100% results, given in averages.
Keep in mind what those blind test don't take into consideration is the worth of that difference, making it exponentially much more complicated imo.
This also begs the question.
If these bench test have so much value to defining high fidelity why audition or as you always talk about "tailoring the sound to your taste and for enjoyment"(ie EQing,PEQ)?
Here's an example:
In Amir's review of the 7100 receiver (of which the DRX 3.4 is a clone) and the Denon 3800, he noted the following performance under 8 and 4 ohms speaker impedance:
Onkyo 7100
8 ohms - 121W into 2 channels
4 ohms - 35W into 2 channels (will stay in this "limp mode" unless the unit is unplugged or sufficiently cooled down)
Denon 3800
8 ohms - 114W into 2 channels
4 ohms - 168W into 2 channels (not a doubling of the power but not even close to a "limp mode"!
(For links to Amir's reviews, simply Google "Onkyo TX-NR7100 AVR Review asr" and "Denon AVR-X3800H Review asr" since SD has blocked the site because of its scientific nature).
Even non-audiophiles (no blind test needed) have noticed a difference when listening to challenging parts in movies in their homes w/their low impedance speakers and some have ended up returning the AVR if they don't plan on using external amps. This is the reason I always ask "What speakers do you have?" when these AVRs are being considered. If you have challenging KEFs and/or Martin Logan speakers and still want this AVR, then get ready for a dose of "I told you so"!
Here's an example:
In Amir's review of the 7100 receiver (of which the DRX 3.4 is a clone) and the Denon 3800, he noted the following performance under 8 and 4 ohms speaker impedance:
Onkyo 7100
8 ohms - 121W into 2 channels
4 ohms - 35W into 2 channels (will stay in this "limp mode" unless the unit is unplugged or sufficiently cooled down)
Denon 3800
8 ohms - 114W into 2 channels
4 ohms - 168W into 2 channels (not a doubling of the power but not even close to a "limp mode"!
(For links to Amir's reviews, simply Google "Onkyo TX-NR7100 AVR Review asr" and "Denon AVR-X3800H Review asr" since SD has blocked the site because of its scientific nature).
Even non-audiophiles (no blind test needed) have noticed a difference when listening to challenging parts in movies in their homes w/their low impedance speakers and some have ended up returning the AVR if they don't plan on using external amps. This is the reason I always ask "What speakers do you have?" when these AVRs are being considered. If you have challenging KEFs and/or Martin Logan speakers and still want this AVR, then get ready for a dose of "I told you so"!
So all those numbers don't really tell you anything about how it will sound.
Just in this thread alone you have actual owners that oppose your cherry-picked opinions.
As a matter of fact one said they picked this up on BF and "Couldn't be happier and can really drive my KEF q750, q6 and q150s. Sounds amazing!".
Obviously you have "some" that returned and "some" were amazed.
Those benchmarks will tell you very little if anything how it will sound to anyone in their layout/environment imo.
1) User can't tell the difference
2) User is getting help from external amps and using the DRX 3.4 as a prepro. Very popular combo for this AVR!
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Leave a Comment