Sanity check please...….The upgraditis bug has bit and I'm in the process of upgrading my home theater equipment. The current equipment is McIntosh MHT100 / amp, Pioneer Elite SC-72 / preamp, Panasonic 820 / 4kBDP, Apple 4K/ media player, McIntosh MVP-851 / CD player. I plan to stay in a 5.1 configuration or maybe go up to a 7.1. I will be adding a MC207 to power the speakers. My original plan was to pair this with a Yamaha CX-A5200 or a Marantz AV7705 as the processor. I would prefer to go all McIntosh and in that vane I was thinking I could purchase a used MX-121, run all video connections to the TV (Sony XBR65A8G 4k OLED) and run all audio to the MX-121. A used MX-121 runs about the same as the Yamaha or Marantz and supports DD & DTS. The MX-121 only supports the HDMI 1.4b standard, but I don't see that this will be an issue as all video will be connected directly to the TV and the ARC connection from TV to the processor will be sufficient for my 5.1 config. The only things I give up by going with the MX-121 over the Yamaha or Marantz is using the processor as a HDMI switch and an internal AM/FM tuner. The new equipment would consist of McIntosh MC207, MX-121, MVP-851, Panasonic 820, Apple 4k, future AM/FM external tuner, and the speakers are Dynaudio Audience 82s / 122 / 62s all 4 Ohm. I have no desire, now or in the future, to upgrade to the current immersive sound standards that are being pushed. My thoughts are the MX-121 is going to sound better than the Yamaha or Marantz, and should be able to handle any current audio signal and replay it as DD or DTS 5.1 . Am I missing anything that I should be concerned with? I appreciate any thoughts concerning my planned upgrade......thanks
New AVR Processor
- Thread starter bvk_houtx
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
whoaru99
Epic Member
After the convenience of running everything through a pre/pro I could never recommend a setup with separate audio/video paths. Too much of a kludge for me, having done that sort of thing back in the component video and early HDMI days.
In a secondary system I still run an Anthem AVM-20 in that separate audio/video path setup but I do it only because I still have it. I would not buy something today to continue in that tradition.
As well, I think ARC will not convey the high res/lossless audio streams from BD back to the processor. Some players have two HDMI output that can help with that if you can tolerate the switching aspects.
In a secondary system I still run an Anthem AVM-20 in that separate audio/video path setup but I do it only because I still have it. I would not buy something today to continue in that tradition.
As well, I think ARC will not convey the high res/lossless audio streams from BD back to the processor. Some players have two HDMI output that can help with that if you can tolerate the switching aspects.
Last edited:
damacman
Resident Psycho
For the life of me, I cannot understand the fascination of purchasing these old MX units on the used market. They were overpriced to begin with, don't age well, and are riddled with operational snafus. We have thread after thread of owner outlined issues here. This is akin to buying a TOTL 486 computer at twice the price of a brand new one.
Buy another brand's NEW AVP with a warranty for half the money and you're light years ahead. Take the money saved and buy a Mc DAC or something to get your Mc fix.
Buy another brand's NEW AVP with a warranty for half the money and you're light years ahead. Take the money saved and buy a Mc DAC or something to get your Mc fix.
News to me also. For the record, mine's been running perfectly for 6 years so far with no operational or other problems and it makes an excellent stereo analog preamp when in "Pure Direct" mode. I don't recall reading about other people have issues with the 121 either.
But, if I had a 4K TV, I would want a processor that could switch the 4K HDMI signal and I would not want to switch video sources with the TV and audio with the processor. BTW, you might have sound-video sync issues if you switch separately as you propose even with ARC. Also not sure if the ARC HDMI link back to the MX (if that's your plan) would work since the TV has a newer version of HDMI compared to the MX121.
whoaru99
Epic Member
ARC is backward compatible as long as both units are HDMI version 1.4 or higher. ARC was not part of HDMI prior to version 1.4. That's why the backward compatibility stops there.
HDMI v1.4 came out around 2009 for frame of reference. But, as always, have to check the specs if the gear is older to be sure about the version.
HDMI v1.4 came out around 2009 for frame of reference. But, as always, have to check the specs if the gear is older to be sure about the version.
I've decided to purchase the Marantz AV7705. It should arrive Friday or Saturday. With the shelter in place edict I should have plenty of time to put it together and let my ears enjoy. This upgraditis bug all started when I just had to have a 4K TV. Now I've swapped out amp, processor, BDP, the only thing remaining is subwoofer. I've already looked at the Rythmik website as they get a lot of good press as best-bang-for-the-buck. Thanks again to all who provided feed-back, it was very helpful.
damacman
Resident Psycho
Some unsolicited advice - explore Atmos speaker placement possibilities. IMHO, the single greatest advancement in home sound reproduction I've yet heard. Once you hear it in your space, all notions if it just being the next thing will be forgotten.
twiiii
Lunatic Member
I waited a little over a year to replace my MX 119 with a MX 151 until the MX 160 came out and the bottom fell so as I could get the 151 for less than $2800 difference. I got room perfect, the 14 inputs I needed. The balanced inputs, to. What was great was it still had S-connections, component, and even base band video inputs. Which none of the newer MX 170, 160 122, or 123 have. So I am set. Don't need or want the music flying all around the room and over my head. ATMOS reminds me of QUAD. For a lot of movies I just run the front 3 channels as the rear effects are to fake. Just another gimmick. Don't for get 8K is coming and all the current processors will be obsolete. So hold on to your money. Oh! the 151 sounds great in the stereo mode, too. Reminds me of my C-29 from the past. In that respect the MX 119 and 120 never measured up. Plus I can use the digital out put of the MP100 to feed the 151 while the analog output feeds the C-34. Yes the MP100 phono pre-amp sounds better than the phono section of the C-34. Its not necessarily quieter, but the sound has cleaner upper bass and lower ,midrange and the highs are well defined, but not irritable like some other OB units.
whoaru99
Epic Member
That's half true. 8k is coming, but it does not obsolete current processors.
A current processor will be HDMI 2.0 or 2.1.
HDMI 2.0 (which has been since ~2013) does support 8k.
HDMI 2.1 supports higher frame rates of 8k and resolution up to 10k.
damacman
Resident Psycho
twiiii - you so miss the point of Atmos. You're its biggest critic on AK, yet you've never heard it in your space. Shame.
Such criticism is simply unwarranted.
Skobel424
Active Member
I had been thinking of doing the same thing but I realized by the time I had gone through all the effort and spending money on extra boxes and what not I’m not really saving anything by buying a used Mac processor. I’d have to agree and say your better off getting a late model Marantz. I haven’t pulled the trigger yet on one but I’m still a few weeks away from needing it.
This has been a personal battle of mine. To Atmos or not to Atmos. I need a new processor anyway so it’s going to have it regardless, and I’ve got the extra amps to get it done. I just the fact that the height amps and speakers won’t be matching the rest. I really don’t think it would make much of a difference though would it? Are you using two or four height speakers?
damacman
Resident Psycho
Four, and they ain't timbre matched to the rest ...
It depends on several factors, including the room, size and shape, and the specific speakers. For my implementation, I could not purchase speakers that matched my main speakers, so, I purchased in ceiling speakers that had the same size woofer as my main speakers. I believe that the closer one can match the main speakers the better, however; I do not believe that it is critical.
Four, however; what will work best for you could be determined by your room. i.e. for a smaller room two speakers may work better.
Having lived with a Dolby ATMOS setup for more than a year now, I have found it to be a significant upgrade for both listening to music and video/movie watching.
twiiii
Lunatic Member
When 8K comes out there will be a new audio format that supports even more processing for different front elevation speakers, etc. I know it will be backwards compatible if it has Dolby's name on it, but the instant gratification crowd will be lined up for the new gadgets making our well made older units supposedly obsolete. Its not the Video that concerns me its the eternal compromising of the sound reproduction and creation. What made Stereo in the beginning great was the lack of tampering. Actual authentic sound was captured on the tape. Yes there was limiting applied to keep the groove modulations under control. but when the mics were placed properly the enjoyable performance was captured with the authentic room sound, too. Once engineers started converting multichannel mono into stereo realistic sound started disappearing and studio created sound took it place. And most of the time today that all we have is studio created sound using processors, to many microphones, and to many knobs and sound mixed a lot of the time by committee. Now I agree Mercury Living Prescence placed their 3 mics to close some times as did Telarc. But its a shame only a few independents and a company like Reference Recordings are left that try to get it right. Now I will admit some of the Movie sound masters do a great job when given the chance. They can do classical style music as well or better than any of the sound only companies. Its all about artistic talent and keeping it simple stupid.
twiiii
Lunatic Member
There was a time when Denon and Marantz and Mac were owned by the same company. They all made separate processors and multi channel amps. They all used the same disc drives for their disc players. I think it was during the time of the MX 134. Well I heard the Mac compared to the Denon and the Mac stuff sounded better than amp would put out full power on all channels, had power guard and the processing sounded better with the MAC. I also heard there Denon compared to the Marantz and the Denon sounded better too. So if you can't afford the Mac , then I guess you are stuck with the Marantz. The question is is this to be a long term invest meant or a short term until the next sound format change. If its short term, definitely the Marantz, if it long term definitely the MAC. They will both be obsolete in less than 5 years.
whoaru99
Epic Member
Naw...it doesn't make anything obsolete. Advancements simply encourage cutting edge buyers to provide good, non-current models to the 2nd hand market at reduced prices.
Personally, I'll never buy a really expensive processor again. $1000-$1500, give or take, yup, I can live with that spread over a few years. More than that? Nope, did it once, not again. HT processors are not a long term investment regardless of the brand.
Personally, I'll never buy a really expensive processor again. $1000-$1500, give or take, yup, I can live with that spread over a few years. More than that? Nope, did it once, not again. HT processors are not a long term investment regardless of the brand.
Last edited:
MACKIE1975
Super Member
Buying electronic, cars ... is not an investment. It is spending.
whoaru99
Epic Member
Arguably some are, as they're worth more than their original price even including dollar adjustment. But, I've never seen and doubt I ever will, an HT processor in that category.