Is This Why An AV3 Maybe A Non Starter ?

Posted by: Neill Ferguson on 17 April 2010

I seen this on another forum and it may interest some of you I have copied and pasted if that's against the rules then I apologise just now I thought it was well written and an interesting point:

Hi Guys,

This is an interesting subject and whilst I feel a little maligned at some other comments I'll try and give a neutral response.

A modern AV processor is an incredibly complicated unit. It needs to handle switching of audio and video in both the analogue and digital domains. It needs to provide powerful DSP to decode and process these signals. It also needs to convert digital signals back to analogue and apply volume control.

On top of this many companies complicate things even further by attempting to build vdeo processing in to their products.

In the past it was possible for smaller companies to offer products in this sector because they could do analogue very well, there were very limited digital requirements and royalties for features like Dolby Pro Logic were managable. In the digital area it is important to remember that SPDIF is an almost 30 year old technology now so it is a long time since there was a lot of complicated development in this area. There were no fancy auto setup options or other complications.

This situation pretty much lasted up until about 4 or 5 years ago. I have a Pioneer 2011 receiver in my home that I purchased in 2004. This unit supports DD, DTS, has a number of decoding/dsp options, rudimentary auto setup and analogue only video switching with no video processing. Although for all that, the unit plays back DTS tracks 7dB lower in the left front channel than the right and I never saw that in any review at the time...

The change coincided with the appearance of HDMI. Suddenly the whole comfortable paradigm of producing these devices changed and you had this combined audio and video interface with a horrible protection scheme. Suddenly the digital design element became orders of magnitude more complex and since that really defined your device - more important.

As we all know, the first HDMI devices were grossly unreliable. HDCP caused no end of problems but the interfaces were rampant with bugs in the audio and video. I am certain that a number of companies at that time took one look at decided not to touch it until the problems were all sorted. Mutliple HDMI revs later we still have a ton of problems with HDCP but at least the gross errors seem to be pretty well worked out.

On top of this you were faced with another problem if you unwisely decided to do video processing at this time. A number of companies started to use the HQV Realta chip in their devices. This massively expensive part promises awesome performance but working with it was a nightmare beyond belief. Even buying this in on an Silicon Optix platform did not isolate at all from the software development requirement. The API for this piece was massive and impregnable and support was supplied by only a small team who ultimately relied on one Russian genius to explain the intricacies of how it worked. One of the companies we worked with tried using Realta to make a dedicated VP device. Even with a large team of PHD level engineers working only on the video side for 20 months they couldn't get performance to match what the device is capable of and programming difficulty was the single root cause. One of the biggest differences between Realta and Reon is that Reon actually has a decent interface for the engineers!

The final nail in the cofin for small companies was the emergence of sophisticated auto setup routines like YPAO, MCACC or third party solutions like Audyssey.

A small company can't afford the level of investment and long term research to develop such a system themselves but building in a unit like Audyssey requires ever more powerful DSPs to be employed and a per unit license fee that must be paid.

So you arrive at the situation we are at now, the development complexity is several orders of magnitude beyond where we were even 5 years ago. This brings commensurate increase in non recurring engineering costs especially in digital design, software development and product testing. Finally your design now includes a huge amount of SMT devices, multi layer circuit boards and more all of which wraps up to a massively complex build that means you have to start using contract manufacturers who never match the quality promises they give in the bid stage.

All of this comes at a time of economic uncertainty and falling retail prices driven by the aggressive developments from the far eastern companies.

So you have a huge risk in you NRE costs, falling margins, reliance on third party manufacturing and the voracious appetite of Joe public for new badges on the front panel regardless on sound performance improvements.

In the face of this it is pretty hard to see why any responsible CFO would sanction the development of an HD ready AV processor. We have already seen one venerable British company risk it all on HDMI devices and they are now on their knees with no obvious escape route.

The rest have looked at other areas where those NRE and licensing costs are much less and profit margins have not been eroded. That means relatively high end music systems and is a trend that can be seen easily by looking at their product lines.

Just my thoughts of course.
__________________
Neil Davidson
Genesis Technologies
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by Don Hooper
Neil,

This is the sort of so called progress that put small companies at risk. Only the big boys can do this.

Well written.

Don
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by Neill Ferguson
Don

I thought it was an interesting find and clearly the implementing of HDMI is a lot more complicated than first imagined.

It really makes me wonder if a little dated the AV2 really is that out of touch it still has a six channel input and internal decoding off DDHD and DTSHD can be done within the player.
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by Don Hooper
Neill,

I own an AV2 and use it with a Pioneer Bluerau and Sky HD box. Very happy with the results.

I don't feel the need to change if for the Emperor's new cloths.

Don
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by Neill Ferguson
Don

I have one as well and its really hard to justify the outlay on a new product that might only be marginally better than the current Av2.

I replied over on another thread that what I found interesting and never really fully understood was how difficult HDMI was to manage correctly. If you look at meridian none of there current Av pre's have HDMI they off a separate box for this purpose.

I do wonder if an HDMI switcher box from Naim could be a bolt on solution to a slightly updated AV2 however knowing the history with the scaler card and the VS1 then it seems unlikely. I think we just have to accept for the time being Naim are a two channel hi fi company with no current AV products listed. Pity really as when they do do AV they do it well.

Neill
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by lawoftrust
Neill,

I agree, it is a pity that smaller companies will not be able to follow the "modern" route. Maybe some will do but there is a high risk at stage when making such investments without any security about appropriate returns.

As nice as the AV2 is, I do not need a processor that only works to control volume or can handle a core stream of a superior format.
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by tonym
As a fellow AV2 owner I agree it's a cracking processor - just feed your HDMI direct to your display for video, let your BluRay player decode the HD sound formats & feed the 5.1 or 7.1 direct to the AV2.

I very much doubt if you'll get better quality surround sound.
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by lawoftrust
sorry tonym, I completely disagree, an Arcam AV888 but even a Marantz AV 8003 clearly excel with HD formats supplied via HDMI so very clearly over an AV2, let alone a Classe SP800. Did you ever do an actual test in your fantastic system? You should easily discover the advantages.

That does say nothing about the AV2s quality in DD/DTS decoding which is really good but for HD formats it is only a piece of kit for a die hard Naim owner.
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by Neill Ferguson
Lawoftrust

Its interesting as the post is taken from another forum it is against the rules to link to the thread however someone on the forum/thread tested the Classe machine you mention which I believe costs in the region of 12k and said it wasn't a lot better than there current system and showed very few notable improvements. The Krell machine costs 12 k if your getting into those sort of box costs your talking 60k plus systems maybe more.

I still think the AV2 holds it's own against the Arcam and Marantz machine you mentioned. It's not ideal having the signal path split in two but as a solution it works. I think overall its shows the difficulty Naim has in producing a new AV pre. They kinda missed the boat with the dvd5 and nvi which came after the dvd boom had peaked really Naim have to make a choice there either in or out of AV. If they leave it any longer then they risk being left behind by others and playing catch up in an ever moving market.
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by lawoftrust
Sorry Neill but when listening go the AV2 with uncompressed HD Formats, the only thing you actually hear is your BR Player's ability to decode the format. The AV2 does not do anything hear apart from Controlling Volume and some minor tasks, nothing essential.

I did do several tests with AV-processors and with hd formats all of them excelled over the AV2, even when using high quality sources. So when it comes to HD formats and one is truly focussed on them you can surely better the performance of an AV2, if you stay with DVD etc or BR is only Part of your system, then I understand why one wants to stay with the AV2. That does not blame the AV2 at all but it is not the kind of pro that offers best performance for HD (and by the way it was never constructed to do that). An AV3, again only focussed on audio, Not video, and decoding the HD formats would be a dream.
However, anybody may of course have a different point of view but that should always be based on fair tests in ones own chains. And from my perspective, that does not need a 12K Processor (which in my view and that of numerous others clearly was a big step up versus its predecessor by the way), the latter only meant as a benchmark for performance in that way.
Posted on: 19 April 2010 by Frank Abela
With the advent of 3DTV from Sky and 3D-BD (with the associated later HDMI spec which obsoletes all previous HDMI specs), is it any wonder that the specialists have dragged their heels on AV? Considering that there has been talk of 2K and 4K display technologues in the home for the last 3 years or so, is it any wonder that most specialists won't even adopt 3D-BD for some time, not forgetting the inevitable later spec HDMI versions required to run those formats...?

It's an insane situation. The big boys need to provide some stability in order for the market to have enough confidence to invest serious money into these things. After all, these new 3DTVs aren't much more expensive than last year's models, so where's the return on the big boys' investment into those technologies?
Posted on: 20 April 2010 by Roy Donaldson
Have to say that with all the uncertainty in the market I took the easy route. Got myself a £130 quid Sony BD player and let it feed 1.5Mbps DTS into the coax input of my AV2.

I know it's not a great solution, but with the flux in the market just now it was an easy and cheap way to do this. Looking at going the 5.1 analog in route I was going to be at least £200 for a set of Chord cables to connect a BD player in.

I look forward to a Naim AV3 processor and will be at the head of the queue to listen to one when it arrives.

Roy.
Posted on: 20 April 2010 by Neill Ferguson
quote:
Originally posted by Roy Donaldson:
Have to say that with all the uncertainty in the market I took the easy route. Got myself a £130 quid Sony BD player and let it feed 1.5Mbps DTS into the coax input of my AV2.

I know it's not a great solution, but with the flux in the market just now it was an easy and cheap way to do this. Looking at going the 5.1 analog in route I was going to be at least £200 for a set of Chord cables to connect a BD player in.

I look forward to a Naim AV3 processor and will be at the head of the queue to listen to one when it arrives.

Roy.


Something your not telling us Roy I'm not sure we will ever get an AV3 Confused
Posted on: 24 April 2010 by zorba
So far any information I have read (bar a few expensive options) always state that when it comes to playing MUSIC av receivers are easily surpassed by even low end dedicated stereo amps, maybe due to noisy and low rent signal paths.

I have always thought of the AV2 as a high end preamp with multi channel preamplification capabilities (plus all the extras) that amplifies all sound channels at the same quality as the front L + R. Built by a real hi fi company.

These clean signal paths should then allow the customer to hear the maximum potential of their chosen source.

As we all know there are av sources out there that are way over the price of an AV2, some would say the AV2 would be a bottle neck for sound with these expensive sources but it is not unheard of even on this forum that exist CDS3's fronted by a Nait 5i with owners getting results with nothing more for want.

What av sources out there can compare with a CDS3 in audio? I would like to think that the AV2 has at least the preamp performance of the Nait 5i.

I have been looking at the AV2 option and it disheartens me that there have been REAL comparisons made with the following results;

"an Arcam AV888 (can accept this) but even a Marantz AV 8003 (upsets me) clearly excel with HD formats supplied via HDMI so very clearly over an AV2,"

Do you mean with the above that HDMI as a signal path is much better than the signal paths of the AV2 being fed HD via multi analogue? Or that the other machines have better preamp stages? Or that the HD dac within the other processors processes the HD source better than the source?
Posted on: 25 April 2010 by lawoftrust
Zorba,
this clearly refers to the last Option mentioned by you, simply do a comparison of the decoding in the pre-amp versus decoding in the source. Do not base your decisions on guesses or clues you may have but do your own testing. Apart from the much better flexibility, all mentioned pres simply sounded better. I would have preferred to have adifferent result but eg a Marantz 9004 analogue into an AV2 did match a marantz 8003 pre fed digitally by the marantz 9004 or a denon 2500 bt. That is what my ears told me and what others participating confirmed.
Posted on: 25 April 2010 by karyboue
So an ever better option would a BD player decoded by an AV HD amp (with pre-outs) connected to the AV2 ?
Posted on: 26 April 2010 by zorba
Could it be possible that the AV2 allowed the the full potential of the Marantz 9004 analogue outputs to be heard and that as fantastic as this bd players specs are in the analogue department it is not as good sounding when compared to its own digital out?

Are there any HD av sources out there that output their multi analogue sound to the same or better standard than their digital?
Posted on: 26 April 2010 by lawoftrust
@ zorba

From my experience, compared to various other BRPs, the Marantz has one of the finest analogue output stages available (and for the price it should have). And, it is of course not a bad or mediocre sound quality you get from Marantz 9004 AV", it is just not as good as it can be. A Denon A1 BRP Player was not competitive against the Marantz analogue.

I, for myself would not invest in a high end BRP soundwise (picture is another story) if I would have to connect it analogue to an AV2, as you lose to much of the qualities. A decent player like the highly regarded Oppo will nevertheless be a combo that gives you great pleasure, unless yo expect to be at the cutting edge of Blueray.

I for myself live currently happy with my Denon DVDP and wait for solutions without fans etc.

@ karyboue

I would think that in that case I would buy a decent processor and drop the AV2, unless you do not use a dedicated Stereo pre.
Posted on: 26 April 2010 by karyboue
quote:

@ karyboue

I would think that in that case I would buy a decent processor and drop the AV2, unless you do not use a dedicated Stereo pre.



Yes I use the AV2 as a stereo pre but also to decode non-HD units : DVD5, TV, DVD/HDD recorder and Apple TV.


Next month, I replace my low-end Sony BDP 360 and AppleTV, that I use to play mkv TV shows only, with a Philips BDP 7500B2 : cheapest 3D player with 7.1 (cheap) burr-brown 7.1 output (250€). Some kind of sound upgrade over the Sony digital output Winker . If AV3 is really a non starter I'll think about changing my AV2 for may be an Arcam or even better pre when Panasonic launches a 3D BD/HDD recorder that will replace all my digital boxes (except DVD5 that is my CD player) ... (next year ?)



But when I was speaking of a BP player + HD amp to connect to the 7.1 analog inputs of the AV2, I was thinking of something like a 300€ Yamaha RX-V465 dedicated only to HD decoding of the BD player. What do you think of that ?
I suppose that the AV2 DD/DTS and DPLII/DTS Neo decoding is better than the decoding of a low end Yamaha HD amp ?



In conclusion, what you tell us is the same that we experienced in the late 90's :
DVD player + DD/DTS pre is way better than DVD player's internal decoding + analog prologic pre.
Posted on: 26 April 2010 by lawoftrust
@karyboue

what I referred to is to max out the possibilities of BlueRay. In the set-up described by you I am pretty sure that the core DD/DTS stream decoded by the AV2 is way better than the analogue signal previously decoded by the Player.
Posted on: 26 April 2010 by karyboue
quote:
Originally posted by lawoftrust:
@karyboue

what I referred to is to max out the possibilities of BlueRay. In the set-up described by you I am pretty sure that the core DD/DTS stream decoded by the AV2 is way better than the analogue signal previously decoded by the Player.


???
So you think that the core DD/DTS decoded by the AV2 would better than the HD signal decoded by a Philips BDP 7500B2 send on the AV2 via analog ?


I'll buy this player anyway because it's cheap, 3D and it reads mkv.
But I may save money if don't buy 7.1 RCA->DIN cables ?
Posted on: 26 April 2010 by Neill Ferguson
Neill,

I feel your pain, but by all accounts it seems like the high end AV market has shrunk considerably in the last couple of years. As I stated in another thread over in the Home Theatre room, Naim have expressed their intention to stay with AV - but only if there's a market of sufficient demand to justify it. It doesn't help that standards change so rapidly and licensing of various technologies gets really complex (as well as expensive). Whatever the future may hold here, I'm certainly excited at the prospect of a new AV processor, should that see the light of day. I still think the AV2 is a fabulous bit of kit, but can understand why Naim have dropped it. It's a tough sell with no hi-res decoding onboard, no matter how good the analog stages onboard.

Regarding the n-Sat, I think the shift to promoting it as a 2 channel speaker rather than as part of a multi-channel set-up might actually have given sales a shot in the arm. I can't be sure, because I don't have the sales figures to hand, but there's no disputing its ability in a pure stereo system. As for the n-stand, yes it's a shame, but understandable too what with Naim's exacting quality standards. Of course, you can still buy the wall brackets for them, and there are plenty of other makes of speaker stand to choose from. A couple have been reported on this forum as providing excellent performance with the n-Sat.

Posted by Richard on another thread. I have posted it here I hope he doesn't mind as I feel its relevant to this thread.
Posted on: 26 April 2010 by lawoftrust
Karyboue

you should test both types of connections Bit I would Not be astonished if the AV2 excels. And by the way, I had nö intention to blame any Investment you may plan.
Posted on: 26 April 2010 by karyboue
quote:
Originally posted by lawoftrust:
Karyboue

you should test both types of connections Bit I would Not be astonished if the AV2 excels. And by the way, I had nö intention to blame any Investment you may plan.


Thanks for your answers.
I'll try both solutions.
Posted on: 26 April 2010 by karyboue
quote:
Originally posted by Neill Ferguson:
Neill,

I feel your pain, but by all accounts it seems like the high end AV market has shrunk considerably in the last couple of years. As I stated in another thread over in the Home Theatre room, Naim have expressed their intention to stay with AV - but only if there's a market of sufficient demand to justify it. It doesn't help that standards change so rapidly and licensing of various technologies gets really complex (as well as expensive). Whatever the future may hold here, I'm certainly excited at the prospect of a new AV processor, should that see the light of day. I still think the AV2 is a fabulous bit of kit, but can understand why Naim have dropped it. It's a tough sell with no hi-res decoding onboard, no matter how good the analog stages onboard.

Regarding the n-Sat, I think the shift to promoting it as a 2 channel speaker rather than as part of a multi-channel set-up might actually have given sales a shot in the arm. I can't be sure, because I don't have the sales figures to hand, but there's no disputing its ability in a pure stereo system. As for the n-stand, yes it's a shame, but understandable too what with Naim's exacting quality standards. Of course, you can still buy the wall brackets for them, and there are plenty of other makes of speaker stand to choose from. A couple have been reported on this forum as providing excellent performance with the n-Sat.

Posted by Richard on another thread. I have posted it here I hope he doesn't mind as I feel its relevant to this thread.


Thanks for that quote.

Don't think but wait ...
Posted on: 26 April 2010 by Neill Ferguson
quote:
Originally posted by karyboue:
quote:
Originally posted by Neill Ferguson:
Neill,

I feel your pain, but by all accounts it seems like the high end AV market has shrunk considerably in the last couple of years. As I stated in another thread over in the Home Theatre room, Naim have expressed their intention to stay with AV - but only if there's a market of sufficient demand to justify it. It doesn't help that standards change so rapidly and licensing of various technologies gets really complex (as well as expensive). Whatever the future may hold here, I'm certainly excited at the prospect of a new AV processor, should that see the light of day. I still think the AV2 is a fabulous bit of kit, but can understand why Naim have dropped it. It's a tough sell with no hi-res decoding onboard, no matter how good the analog stages onboard.

Regarding the n-Sat, I think the shift to promoting it as a 2 channel speaker rather than as part of a multi-channel set-up might actually have given sales a shot in the arm. I can't be sure, because I don't have the sales figures to hand, but there's no disputing its ability in a pure stereo system. As for the n-stand, yes it's a shame, but understandable too what with Naim's exacting quality standards. Of course, you can still buy the wall brackets for them, and there are plenty of other makes of speaker stand to choose from. A couple have been reported on this forum as providing excellent performance with the n-Sat.

Posted by Richard on another thread. I have posted it here I hope he doesn't mind as I feel its relevant to this thread.


Thanks for that quote.

Don't think but wait ...


Maybe yes maybe no