Originally Posted by BarnacleBill
This is not a reply to the OP, but to the MP3 experts. Given that all the music will be on MP3 files, are the suggestions overkill? Can premium equipment and speakers make a difference with MP3 files? I'm not saying any of the suggestions are wrong, but what are the limitations of MP3 and at what point are you paying for capabilities you can't hear?
Well, MP3 quality is not shabby. You know at some point (before my time) Audiophiles were buying equipment for cassette as a medium.
It is all relative to what is at your disposal.
Yes, to get the music in its purest form is ideal. Also things can vary from artist to artist. I listen to a little bit of everything, and I don't expect dynamic experience from my pop or hip-hop music.
Originally Posted by grnsr
ok I realize the BT doesn't come close to delivering the audiophile quality - but all of my music is on my phone/hard-disk as MP3 and it will take forever (meaning never) to build a new collection of CD quality music files...
so I've already compromised on the file format/size and so BT offers the convenience of just coming home and just continuing the same song I was listening to in the car on my way back from work...or the Mobile high Def link promises even more convenience of video playback of "home movies" without first having to download it to my comp/hard-disk
ok so the Android app on Yamaha works the same way as BT?
then is the Yamaha receiver sound quality comparable to the Marantz or Cambridge? which of the Yamaha receiver models would be comparable to the Sony STR-DN1040 or STR-DA1800ES
Why can't some of the better receivers like Marantz, Cambridge, Harman Kardon etc have BT - do they fear offending the sensibilities of the audiophiles by pandering to commoners?
Thanks again folks for all the patient advice...
Well before you get so hung up on hearing our opinion you should consider your original goals. First the "app" I speak of works very much like Airplay or BT (1:1) connection. You bring up a song and you play it. If you have a ton of songs you can easily use iTunes and Airplay on a receiver. I am not an Apple fanboy by a mile but if thats the easiest solution it is what it is. Android apps can hijack Airplay and make it work for you.
Sonos is fantastic. It is flexible, updatable and works on Android, Apple, PC platforms. I am speaking specifically about the Sonos: Connect for you. This devices has a really well made DAC built in. It has the option to output via Coaxial Audio, Optical Audio or RCA. The system is not 1:1 so you can expand it if you love it. If you didn't look into this when I first mentioned I encourage you to do so. Expensive, but it will answer your problems. You can control this via app, and play songs from the phone, internet radio, steaming services (like Pandora), or a Hard drive. Wireless access for all of it.
I think all receivers have a different sound. Do any of them sound bad to me? Not really any of the major brands. I wouldn't get caught up with sound quality as much as actual power for yours speakers. There are a handful of features here and there that may sway you from one brand to another. Everyone will have a different opinion on these and you will never make a decision if you listen to all of us. If you can't get out to listen to speakers and receivers, just get a popular receiver that you get a good deal on. You won't be disappointed. I personally like all the brands listed above except for Sony non-ES models.
Why wouldn't a premium audio company include BT? Well there's a primary goal of receivers, to drive the speakers. The more functions and features stuffed into an AVR, the price must go up or the quality of some stuff must go down. On top of that, the power supply must drive all these bells and whistles. In the same way separate audio components make for a better audio system, separating some features out makes for a more pure receiver. IMO the receivers that really throw a lot of power out and have every common feature are $2k and up.