Integra DHC-80.6 is a complete analog of Onkyo PR-SC5530 in terms of circuitry, but quality of assembly is notably higher, plus some program alterations are available. In the market since 2014. Its precursor is Integra DHC-80.3 / Onkyo PR-SC5509 – a unique device in terms of upgrade potential, manufactured since 2011. New features have been introduced since then, like Dolby Atmos system and HDMI 2.0 supporting 4K/60 Hz video. That is why a new processor combining those features was presented. Besides, acoustic system configuration possibilities have become really manifold. For example, you can specify that acoustics is in the ceiling – this was not available earlier. From the perspective of “out-of-the-box” sound, there is nothing prominent about this processor’s multichannel sound, especially stereo. The sound is relatively simple, without any pretense of Hi-Fi and Hi-End.

Integra DTR-70.4 is analogous to Onkyo TX-NR3010 and Onkyo TX-NR5010 receivers, but it’s superior to those! It’s great virtue, in my opinion, is the availability of trigger outlets and gilded connectors in the back panel, which Onkyo TX-NR3010 does not have. Integra DTR-70.4 came into the market in 2013. In terms of functionality, it is very much alike the previous Onkyo / Integra range. The possibility of simultaneous operation of frontal and width channels was introduced, for which purpose one PCM1796 D-to-A converter was added. As regards the sound, the circuitry remained unchanged. That is why upgrades described in the article on Integra DHC-80.3 / Onkyo PR-SC5509 are also applicable to Integra DTR-70.4. But I moved a little further. Since there were no processors in the new range, I decided to transform this receiver into a processor – the only difference being that the receiver...

I happened to get Marantz AV8801 by chance. I already knew its structure and imagined how it sounds, for it’s no mystery that it’s practically an exact copy of Denon AVR-4520 receiver, but in the form of an AV processor. My client bought it only for its impressive design - Integra DHC-80.3 did not fit into his interior. At the time of testing, Marantz AV8801 cost about 60% more than Integra DHC-80.3 and Yamaha CX-A5000 – quite a substantial difference, isn’t it? 189000 RUB for Marantz AV8801 and 114000 RUB for Integra DHC-80.3. Well, is it worth it? The processor looks very attractive both on the outside and the inside. The round window looks unusual and stylish. Visually, the materials are of good quality, neat connectors in the back panel. It is very carefully arranged on the inside. Shielded loops, copper-plated chassis, five PCM1796 D-to-A converters. Pretty copper bolts. To sum up, it is very well assembled.

In August 2014 I was testing Yamaha CX-A5000 AV processor. I was looking forward for it to come into market, and finally received it and tested. What awakened my interest in this device in the first place was the fact that multichannel DAC was assembled on ESS Sabre 9018. 2 pieces. The processor has an unusual five-band parametric equalizer. All this seemed quite intriguing. I disassembled it and looked inside – and I must say I liked what I saw. The quality of assembly and components is fair. Good electrolytic capacitors and operating amplifiers. Solid casing, double bottom.The overall impression was nice. What I disliked was that analog part’s power was based on a toroidal transformer, and for all other purposes a simple pulse power unit was provided. Maybe, this is what eventually spoiled the sound. The equalizer has nothing outstanding about it. Frequency selection for setup is small...

Integra DHC-80.3 processor came into the market in 2011. Its complete analog is Onkyo PR-SC5509. The difference between Integra DHC-80.3 and Onkyo PR-SC5509 is insignificant. Integra DHC-80.3 has a 15-channel equalizer for room acoustics calibration, and fine tuning on the device’s menu. Onkyo PR-SC5509 has an 8-channel equalizer, but on the other hand it has a Pure Audio button. As for me, Integra seems to be more carefully and reliably assembled. The sound of these processors “out-of-the-box” is not very pleasing – I’d rather say it is shrill and rough. A typical tweet-and-boom. There are objective reasons for such sound. It was easily outplayed by AV processors by Marantz and Yamaha. But as a potential upgrade donor it is definitely second to none of its competitors. In the end of this article I will name all models suitable for upgrade by this technology with slight variations.

Although Onkyo PR-SC886 is quite an old device, it still remains competitive in terms of sound quality. Certainly, I haven’t made so many upgrade versions for it as I have for Onkyo PR-SC5507 and newer. It does not have as many channels as the latest receivers and processors do, but many listeners don’t need that anyway. It can be bought at secondary market at a relatively low price, but the result can be really nice. I have only developed two upgrade versions for it. The difference between these versions lies in the functionality only. In the first version the functionality is the same as in the standard Onkyo PR-SC886, and in the second version it’s curtailed, but the sound is drastically better. To achieve that, multichannel analog circuits should be removed from the analog path circuit. In all other respects the upgraded versions are the same.

Ages ago I had a Hi-End AV processor EAD Theatermaster signature. It supported DTS, DD and PCM formats, no HD. Maximum supported in stereo was 24/48. I used to listen to it for several years before HD video formats had emerged. I decided to sell it and buy Onkyo 886 AV processor. Onkyo’s sound was far from perfect, but that’s another story. My friend had the same EAD, but a lower, Ovation, version. He listened to it even longer and then decided to upgrade it, but first asked me to check whether there was any point in doing that. D-to-A converters were not so bad. PCM1702, digital filter PMD100, jitter killer available. I redrew the circuit to figure out what was going on in there. And I liked what I saw. Filter quality is actually not very good, low-pass filter was a Chebyshev set to 40 kHz. But volume control was an interesting one – volume was regulated via i/u resistor consisting of 3 relays with 6 dB step...

In 2006 I made up my mind to assemble a good multichannel and stereo system in one. By that time I already had a very good stereo system, but listening to the music in stereo, and then switching the hardware over for movies or multichannel audio was quite a boring thing to do. I started thinking of how to create a quality universal system for audio and video. My market study showed lack of good multichannel devices. The only satisfactory six-channel preamplifier I managed to find was Accuphase CX-260 which cost over 10000USD. Then I decided to buy preamplifier/processor EAD Theatermaster Ovation on approbation. My impressions are outlined in a separate article. Shortly – I can say it is a wonderful device that sounded good both before upgrade and after it. By the way, as I said in my first article on multichannel devices, in 1997 this processor cost 4500 USD for a basic version...

I’ve been engaged in designing stereo and multichannel Hi-End systems for quite a while, and after all this time I came to a conclusion that the market suggests just a few (almost none) well-assembled and properly sounding multichannel devices, although many users would probably wish to combine two systems – stereo and multichannel – in one single box. Nevertheless, separate systems are imposed on us – one for music, another one for movies. Supposedly, combining them in one device is impracticable. Shall we consider the class of receivers and inexpensive AV processors, these devices really a priori do not provide for quality audio reproduction. This feature is unavailable due to objective and marketing reasons. Then why do they support SACD and other high-quality audio formats? Why are they there if the device cannot even handle mp3 properly? Nonsense, you may say, quality content is available in the market, but multichannel devices are so hard to find. Wonders never cease!