Anthem AVM 20 or Integra DTC 9.8

The Integra 9.8 seems very attractive, but I'm confused about what seems a consensus that it's not so good for analog. Analog seems to entail less processing than digital, given there is no DAC. Did Integra skimp on the analog circuits in favor of more elaborate digital? I think SACD is available with HDMI 1.3 processing.

db

Dbphd -

This "bad analog" thing is an opinion that seems to be catching hold on this board - since I have not used the analog inputs, I am not sure if this is an urban legend in the making.

FWIW Integra is Onkyo's upscale brand (the Lexus if you will) The 9.8 was built to be their statement/flagship unit. Each one is handbuilt. More urban myth is that they take a beating on each one. The 9.9 came out at the end of 2008. The same thing with a couple of nice improvements. Again for the moment the standards are standing still.

There is no doubt that it, and the equivalent units from Marantz and Denon are "game changers". They are the kinds of highly complex, feature rich units that the Japanese have always led the world at building. And judging from the number of posts here on HT (something I never saw much of the past few years) a lot of folks are trying to come to terms with all this new technology.

People generally refer to it as "lean" - but never anything "worse". It may be a question of a preference for analog - even thermionics - or simply a question of house sound. If Luxman built one people would probably be happier... And it may be that the Denon or Marantz might suit your tastes better. NAD also builds one.

I have run it with two amps (Anthem and Butler) and found it to be very amp dependent - which suggest to me that it is pretty neutral.

Which brings me back to the point I was trying to make - it is a great HT piece. It worked for me because I was starting with a blank sheet of paper. I built my system around it and it is spectacular for TV and movies. Music sounds just swell too - but I don't use it for critical listening.

FWIW it replaced a B&K receiver - the difference it made to the room was enormous, as is the quantum leap in the GUI. I attribute a lot of this to the Audyssey and the rest to better amps and HDMI sources. My ISF tech ran his high end scopes on the audio and the plot was very good for a difficult room. He had no interest in trying to better it.

But like a lot of people who built combined two channel/HT solutions relying on bypass switches and the like, you need more then an HT solution. That's where it gets tricky.

Ckorody,

Can you tell us what the improvements are in the 9.9?

I've download the manual for the 9.8, but have yet to check if it has a pass through like the Proceed PDSD that passes analog from the PAV without processing. If it does, I could use my original PAV as the analog section, and use the analog-dead PAV/PDSD in another system.

db

9.9 adds DynamicVolume, DynamicEQ and individual ISF settings per input.

Also, the analog is OK but not stellar on the 9.8 and, I suspect, is the same on the 9.9. I plead guilty to contributing to this general impression: http://stereophile.com/musicintheround/108mitr/

Kal

Like my buddy, the learned writer Kal said - the 9.9 (and no doubt the next generation of Denon and Marantz) are all about additional Audyssey features and controlling the individual ISF inputs

IMHO the ISF is the more important

here's the deal - the Integra 9.8 video scaler (Reon) is applied globally - meaning that the same corrections (sharpening, color, noise reduction etc) are applied to every source. Clearly this makes little sense if you have (for arguments sake) a DirectTV HDR, a BluRay and a VHS deck because each needs a different set-up.

So on the 9.8 is you either crap everything up to benefit the lowest common denominator or you bypass the whole thing to preserve the integrity of the BD 1080P source

BTW I am sure that this sounds pretty abstract to someone who has not had the chance to play with this gear - but after you do I hope that the observation moves from clear as mud to clear as gin

With control of individual inputs you can spruce up the sources that need it and bypass those that don't need tweaking - this is a very nice improvement

For a not entirely accurate parallel its like being able to preset audio and EQ for each source instead of having to use one setting for everything...

As far as the by-pass and all that stuff. Since you are a educated, scholarly type I will leave it to you to suss out the details you are interested in

My impression which is not supported by research - is that the Audyssey is either in or out across all sources. I suppose you can switch it off when you want to and run analog "direct" - there is a stereo direct mode

Here is the quote from the manual on the subject:

Direct
In this mode, audio from the input source is output
directly with minimal processing, providing high-fidelity reproduction. All of the source’s audio channels are output as they are.

Stereo
Sound is output by the front left and right speakers.