What Would You Like to See in Your Next AVR? - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 07:28 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,043
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1461 Post(s)
Liked: 2744
Quote:
Originally Posted by hessel holland View Post

Volume trim buttons directly on the remote for center channel and subs without having to go into menu.

Oh wow, that really would be great.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 08:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 11,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by hessel holland View Post

Volume trim buttons directly on the remote for center channel and subs without having to go into menu.

That would be great. But why not have the trim level settings for all channels. I have my Harmony 688 setup so I can adjust all channel levels for my 4311 with the touch of a few buttons. It is too bad that the 4520 no longer has the capability to do this frown.gif.

Bill

My SACD collection, watch it grow and my wallet shrink ;-).

 

Denon 4311 (in preamp mode), Parasound 2100, Boston Acoustics A7200 amp, Oppo BDP-103, Consonance CD120, Panasonic TC-P60GT50 plasma, Panamax 5100EX, Salk Song Towers, Song Center, ADS 300C (surrounds) and two Rythmik F12SEs.
Bill Mac is online now  
post #183 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 09:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mo949's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 509
Quote:
Originally Posted by hessel holland View Post

Volume trim buttons directly on the remote for center channel and subs without having to go into menu.

funny you mention that. I had it on my ancient technics receiver (circa 2000). It had a sub trim and you could set the level+ level- button to default to center channel, while still having a seperate master volume control. Ever since the great implementation of audyssey's dynamic volume I haven't needed them though since I can find a good balance for the household now.
mo949 is offline  
post #184 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 09:31 AM
Senior Member
 
BRAISKI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: CANADA
Posts: 412
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 12
11.3
No more Phono!
Gigabit Switch
1 set of composite/S-video/component video
Preferably Left channels will have all the binding post on the left and right on the right, its so annoying for cable management.

Denon 2809CI
C: Def Tech - CLR2002
F: Def Tech - BP2002TL
S: Def Tech - BP1.2X
SB: Def Tech - PM400
Sub: Still looking
BRAISKI is offline  
post #185 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 11:02 AM
Member
 
ajaronis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
One that does not say "Made in China."
Phrehdd and dmarqueset like this.
ajaronis is offline  
post #186 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 11:09 AM
Senior Member
 
KingLeerUK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Assuming for the moment that my post about modularity in an AVR is too pie in the sky, here is what I'd like to see:

  • HDMI HDCP pass through, standard at every price-point; the AVR does not have to be on to watch some sources with just the display speakers
  • rated power output across all frequencies, no more fudged numbers
  • more front-panel direct controls to settings, the idea floated above about having dedicated trims for channels sounds wonderful but why stop there?
  • Bluetooth audio OUT to broadcast to wireless headphones for night-time/personal listening, and as heretical as it sounds get rid of the front-panel headphone connector. Does anybody even use it anymore?
  • fewer analogue sources, no more S-video inputs. Maybe just have one stereo analogue source audio input, and then a legacy fixed component+composite+L/R audio source to accommodate older DVD, Laserdisc, etc. formats.

KingLeerUK is offline  
post #187 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 11:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mastermaybe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post

Please, AVR manufacturers, do not put network switches in your receivers. You can buy a switch from newegg for $10 and I really don't need any more cables sticking out the back of my AVR, nor do I need the added surface area in the back.

Ditto for built in surge protectors.

If you can save money by eliminating video processing, please do so. Every TV can upscale to it's native format, so there's no need for the AVR to do so also.

Remove 90% of the RCA jacks in the back. Keep one or two, just in case, but there's no need for 20. If I have to play my old game console on the CD input source, I can live with it.

Don't even think about adding peristent memory for content storage. A computer is much better suited for this.

Ok. The CRUCIAL points of understanding my suggestion of the inclusion of a network switch (hard drives and surge protectors are something else altogether and bad ideas for other reasons):

1. The abortion of nearly worthless legacy inputs makes the say, 4 port switch VERY easy to implement. Their should absolutely zero additional rear real estate required as the ports would be the size of my pinky.

2. The switch and ethernet cables have to go SOMEWHERE, and seeing that many have networked televisions, video game consoles, media players, blu ray players, on and on right in with their AVR, it can very much make an infinite amount of sense to incorporate a switch into the AVR and eliminate the switch located elsewhere- taking up more space and adding clutter- altogether.

All that said, the real 800lb gorilla is: if you can use it: great. If not, don't. Again, after all the S-videos, stereo analog inputs, and the like are dumped the rear panel of a high-end AVR should be quite sparse.


James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

 

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

mastermaybe is online now  
post #188 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 11:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mastermaybe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMonMan View Post


If you are referring to me, I apologize if my posts went a little too long for a public forum which requested input. My mistake, I did not realize you were required to read my posts. Thanks for your contributions to the discussion as well.

We are not, and we didn't. No apology necessary.

James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

 

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

mastermaybe is online now  
post #189 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 11:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mastermaybe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

I'm certainly not the most technical guy but your theory is flawed IMO. More power does not automatically equate to better SQ. Ones speakers and their placement in the room will play a much bigger role in a systems SQ than the power of ones amp. Audyssey can also play a much larger role in a systems overall SQ than an amps power as well. You could have a 500 watt amp with entry level speakers placed poorly in ones room and all that power is not going to make the system sound any better than if a 100 watt amp was used. This is of course if the amps in question are quality well built amps (external or in an AVR).

Bill

Dead on. Amplifier hype and the failure of people to realize that the difference between 60 and a "real" 100 watts is virtually meaningless is enough to just walk away on avs these days.

Moderately sensitive loudspeakers (92+ db) in even a large room (400 sg ft) will produce levels most won't WANT to listen to for an extended amount of time with 50 watts or less...85 dbs with ~100 db peaks at 12' in the case of just 50 watts). Want more? Buy an external amplifier...for your "extra" 3-6dbs, lmao.

James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

 

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

mastermaybe is online now  
post #190 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 11:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mastermaybe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispAndClean View Post

I'd like to see an "AirPlay device" per zone, rather than a single one for the A/V receiver. I'd be willing to pay about a $100 premium for this feature in a 3-zone A/V receiver.

CrispNClean

Cool suggestion.

James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

 

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

mastermaybe is online now  
post #191 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 01:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GotHDTV?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chevy Chase, MD
Posts: 1,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
I'm surprised nobody has said this, but I'd like to see DTS Headphone X support built in.

http://www.dts.com/professionals/sound-technologies/headphonex.aspx
imagic likes this.
GotHDTV? is offline  
post #192 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 03:11 PM
Member
 
weez82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Oregon City, OR
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Dont know if anyone posted this but I would love to have a small form factor AVR. Something like 10" x 5' x 8' (w x h x d) or smaller. Just giving random dimensions as an example smile.gif. But I doubt it's even possible or if it is, there is just no market for it frown.gif

weez82 is offline  
post #193 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 04:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 162 Post(s)
Liked: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by snyderkv View Post

You forgot about headroom required to handle transients ***

No, I didn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snyderkv View Post

I requested amps with more power to meet my personal goals.***

The irony is, you didn't really. There are already AVRs on the market that more than meet your alleged needs. For example, my crappy old Denon 4308 was benched by Home Theater Magazine to do ~120W/8Ω all channels driven (which in real life basically never happens), and into the more realistic 2-channel tests benched ~220W/8Ω and ~340W/4Ω. So what you seek has been on the market for years and years.

(And for the record, that 4308 sounded inferior to my Anthem MRX 300. HTMag benched the Anthem at, I think, about 3dBW less power down the line. The sonic superiority of the Anthem box is from the superior ARC system vs. to Audyssey MultEQ XT.)

True, an AVR won't do as well as a stout separate amp on a Powercube-type test, just because there's other stuff besides amplification to fit in an AVR chassis! For reference, here's what a properly safety-certified Class AB 100W/8Ω/7ch driven amp that can drive basically any load looks like inside:



For the record, that chassis is 17.4" x 7.8"x 17.8" (WxHxD). Do you see any room for switching, decoding, or room correction circuitry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by snyderkv View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

But that out of the way, "more watts," beyond what are needed to reach one's SPL goals, are irrelevant to sound quality. Not irrelevant to bragging rights, perhaps, but to sound quality.

Providing a source to prove why this statement is wrong. Bold covers points I already made

Source: http://www.axiomaudio.com/power

Axiom's propagandists are deaf idiots if they think a Tannoy speaker is more colored than the cheap, uncontrolled directivity dross they peddle.

Note also Axiom's pecuniary interest in pushing high power, because they offer a very high-powered class D amp.

I'd also like to see their power compression results from 1.2kW into their silly little drive-units.
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

[On that one point I'd say the whole audio industry should switch to balanced XLR, it's akin the the switch from carburators to fuel injection in the auto industry - straight up better and more reliable, plus XLR is the true industry standard for interconnects at the professional level. It's a no-brainer IMO.

Yes! XLR for line level, but more importantly Speakons for speaker terminals. The monopolar binding post is an especially nasty little kludge.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #194 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 06:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztech View Post

Your last line it what the mfg's bank on because this is what moves large quantities while the audiophile may make up less than 5% of total sales and while the trend is more channels in marketing ask any installer if he has actually
put in more than 7.1.which technically is all there is thats discreet the rest is synthesized.and a hard sell to the average household little lone the WAF.

Right. Even 7.1 can be hard to install depending on the room. The 1% who cares about external amps and such is probably either installing in a dedicated room, or has figured out the WAF with the decor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrehdd View Post

The idea was to create the most common denominator system that can be grown. This is similar to a computer where cards can be added.
Not everyone has the same needs but alas, I may be happy with a rather simple Audessy (sp) set up while you may need something to handle an 11.x system. There are different levels of needs and not one box serves all.

It would be really nice to have a base box that can be kept for years and the latest trends reflected in add ons only. This is why I prefer a more modular approach as it would allow both your needs and my needs to be met with the very same unit rather than having to over time, trade up for the latest and greatest "features."

What doesn't seem to be getting through here to a number of posters is that the AVRs are so integrated now that the modularity would have limited expandability, and add so much to the cost that it is cheaper just to build an AVR with everything, or in the case of streaming sticks and 11 channels of amps, let it be done fully externally. Once you have an AVR, unless you need radically different functionality, you're going to have it for a while. The new ones currently being sold support 3D and 4K, it's going to be quite a while before we go beyond that! Even older ones can be routed around to handle 4K.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingLeerUK View Post

Assuming for the moment that my post about modularity in an AVR is too pie in the sky, here is what I'd like to see:

...
[*] Bluetooth audio OUT to broadcast to wireless headphones for night-time/personal listening, and as heretical as it sounds get rid of the front-panel headphone connector. Does anybody even use it anymore?
[*] fewer analogue sources, no more S-video inputs. Maybe just have one stereo analogue source audio input, and then a legacy fixed component+composite+L/R audio source to accommodate older DVD, Laserdisc, etc. formats.
[/LIST]

Bluetooth out is a good idea. You need multiple analog sources for Nintendo and VCRs. They're going to be around for a long, long, time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

Ok. The CRUCIAL points of understanding my suggestion of the inclusion of a network switch (hard drives and surge protectors are something else altogether and bad ideas for other reasons):

1. The abortion of nearly worthless legacy inputs makes the say, 4 port switch VERY easy to implement. Their should absolutely zero additional rear real estate required as the ports would be the size of my pinky.

So I can replace my network switch with an analog switcher for composite? I already have both in my setup, but that would be the tradeoff for many setups. Because that totally makes sense.
BiggAW is offline  
post #195 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 07:40 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 11,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

For reference, here's what a properly safety-certified Class AB 100W/8Ω/7ch driven amp that can drive basically any load looks like inside:



For the record, that chassis is 17.4" x 7.8"x 17.8" (WxHxD). Do you see any room for switching, decoding, or room correction circuitry?

That looks like the inside of the Sherwood Newcastle A-965. I have the Boston Acoustics A7200 which is a clone of the A-965. I think the A-965/A7200 are excellent sounding amps. There are not many reviews of either amp but I would say the 100wpc @ 8ohms is a bit on the conservative side wink.gif.

Bill

My SACD collection, watch it grow and my wallet shrink ;-).

 

Denon 4311 (in preamp mode), Parasound 2100, Boston Acoustics A7200 amp, Oppo BDP-103, Consonance CD120, Panasonic TC-P60GT50 plasma, Panamax 5100EX, Salk Song Towers, Song Center, ADS 300C (surrounds) and two Rythmik F12SEs.
Bill Mac is online now  
post #196 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 07:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Phrehdd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 494
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

Ok. The CRUCIAL points of understanding my suggestion of the inclusion of a network switch (hard drives and surge protectors are something else altogether and bad ideas for other reasons):

1. The abortion of nearly worthless legacy inputs makes the say, 4 port switch VERY easy to implement. Their should absolutely zero additional rear real estate required as the ports would be the size of my pinky.

2. The switch and ethernet cables have to go SOMEWHERE, and seeing that many have networked televisions, video game consoles, media players, blu ray players, on and on right in with their AVR, it can very much make an infinite amount of sense to incorporate a switch into the AVR and eliminate the switch located elsewhere- taking up more space and adding clutter- altogether.

All that said, the real 800lb gorilla is: if you can use it: great. If not, don't. Again, after all the S-videos, stereo analog inputs, and the like are dumped the rear panel of a high-end AVR should be quite sparse.


James

James - I understand your idea and agree with the reasoning - just a thought - why not simply have it all go through HDMI. One need only connect one unit to Ethernet (or wireless) and the rest use the HDMI connection.

Just understand that building in a typical network means more than connection as in either using static IPs or reserved DHCP. I would have no issue if the AVR created its own network but there has to be some way to administer it from IPs, possible port forwarding and more. I like the idea in general and sounds like a good "module" or "drawer" (grin).
Phrehdd is offline  
post #197 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 07:57 PM
Senior Member
 
Phrehdd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 494
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post

Right. Even 7.1 can be hard to install depending on the room. The 1% who cares about external amps and such is probably either installing in a dedicated room, or has figured out the WAF with the decor.
What doesn't seem to be getting through here to a number of posters is that the AVRs are so integrated now that the modularity would have limited expandability, and add so much to the cost that it is cheaper just to build an AVR with everything, or in the case of streaming sticks and 11 channels of amps, let it be done fully externally. Once you have an AVR, unless you need radically different functionality, you're going to have it for a while. The new ones currently being sold support 3D and 4K, it's going to be quite a while before we go beyond that! Even older ones can be routed around to handle 4K.
Bluetooth out is a good idea. You need multiple analog sources for Nintendo and VCRs. They're going to be around for a long, long, time.
So I can replace my network switch with an analog switcher for composite? I already have both in my setup, but that would be the tradeoff for many setups. Because that totally makes sense.

Which Bluetooth? The newest version supported by Apple or the older version that is more standard? Sounds like one would be happy to simply upgrade Bluetooth by removing the old and popping in the new standard rather than having to start all over again to get that feature. Bluetooth 4 is the way of the future yet AVR is basically behind.
Phrehdd is offline  
post #198 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 08:07 PM
Member
 
JakeRobb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Okay, so I went back and did some more reading of replies in this thread. Interesting to hear that I'm not the only one interested in a modular setup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam S View Post

This has been tried (Onkyo, Meridian, etc) and it never works. Your processor/receiver still has to have brain (aka decoding/processing chips) and those get outdated after 3 or so years. And the development costs means your starting at $3K, not $500. And if you're already at $3K, you might as well upgrade every 5 years, anyways when the "brain" gets outdated.

As others have suggested, that could possibly be made modular too. Obviously nothing (except perhaps the physical chassis itself) is going to last forever. Think of the PC industry standard ATX case, and its variants like mini-ATX. That standard has been around what, 15 years?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam S View Post

You're missing the point. Those designs were targeted at higher end products specifically because they were so expensive to design and produce.

Big CE companies can barely make an affordable point and shoot camera that runs on Android. We're a long way from some attempting something like that on a low-margin AVR line.

Yes, AVRs need CPU power to accommodate new decoders and room correction. It's not "minimal". If you want anything more than 7.1 channels of decoding, and room correction, you need at least 3 modern, purpose-built SHARC decoders. That's not cheap.
Try a modern, multi-core CPU or GPU. I'll bet one of them is up to the task. I don't know what you consider "cheap", but they're not out-of-the-question expensive if we're talking about a product that could sell in decent numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpbpete View Post

What I'd like to see most is a receiver that wants to be the center of the universe for my HT. It should handle everything audio and video that I throw at it. Now that doesn't mean it has to be hardware laden, I have plenty of toys that do a lot of things, but i want the ability to run them thru my avr. So that leaves software, Android anyone? With Android you can have DLNA, AIRPLAY, XM,SIRIUS, HD CONVERSION,HD STREAMING, A great OSD, Wireless connectivity, Intenet Streaming, Etc.... As for hardware I don't need phono and vrc anymore guys, anyone that needs them can get a vintage amp. I do need to be able to upgrade my unit, so Pre-outs are required or modules would be nice. As we go up in price High current toroidal amps are needed. So here's my simplified wish list...

Android is possibly the worst possible choice for a system that would need to be capable of smooth, uninterrupted real-time processing. I suppose you could have dedicated processing hardware, leaving Android running on a separate CPU responsible for UI, switching, etc., but honestly, I think Android is massively overrated, even for things it was intended for. To apply it to a situation where there's no touch interface (like an AVR) is a simply ridiculous misuse of that operating system. I'm a software engineer who owns and uses an Android phone every day (on a two-year contract that expires in two more agonizing months), so don't think I don't know what I'm talking about here. Android certainly has some things to its credit, but overall it is third-best after iOS and, I shudder to say, Win8 in terms of mobile operating systems.

It's important to note that your list of things you can have with Android is the same list you can have on any modern hardware running a modern operating system, given that someone somewhere has an interest in developing the necessary software. Between the AVR manufacturers themselves and third parties, I struggle to see how those wouldn't pop up quickly on the right platform.

Rather than jump aboard the Android ship, I think the right move here is to develop an entirely separate operating system (which could possibly still be open-source, and perhaps even capable of running Android apps with little porting effort) dedicated specifically to the purpose of running a modular AVR.

Living Room: Denon 2113ci + BIC V1020 + Panasonic BDT220 + AppleTV + uVerse DVR + Panasonic P42S2 plasma
Theater: Denon 2313ci + Klipsch RW12d + Panasonic BDT220 + Mac mini + uVerse wired receiver + Epson 8350 PJ + 100" screen
JakeRobb is offline  
post #199 of 354 Old 03-18-2013, 08:51 PM
Member
 
802Diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingLeerUK View Post

Assuming for the moment that my post about modularity in an AVR is too pie in the sky, here is what I'd like to see:

  • HDMI HDCP pass through, standard at every price-point; the AVR does not have to be on to watch some sources with just the display speakers
  • rated power output across all frequencies, no more fudged numbers
  • more front-panel direct controls to settings, the idea floated above about having dedicated trims for channels sounds wonderful but why stop there?
  • Bluetooth audio OUT to broadcast to wireless headphones for night-time/personal listening, and as heretical as it sounds get rid of the front-panel headphone connector. Does anybody even use it anymore?
  • fewer analogue sources, no more S-video inputs. Maybe just have one stereo analogue source audio input, and then a legacy fixed component+composite+L/R audio source to accommodate older DVD, Laserdisc, etc. formats.

You would have me out of the game:
-HDMI pass through is irrelevant for me. I can't listen to the sound of my television (any television for that matter.) Anyway, if I have a nice amp and nice speakers (which i have) why on earth would I want to listen to the sound of a television?
- It's just a specification, And a meaningless one for that matter is that so difficult to grasp...?
- And everytime you want to change sth you have to get up, while it's so easy to do with the RC?
- Bluetooth Out seems nice, but I don't want to loose my jack for that and even want less to pay for it.
- I need a the very minimum at least three, but I skip an AVR if it only had three. Call me old fashioned.

802Diamond is offline  
post #200 of 354 Old 03-19-2013, 12:11 AM
 
GIEGAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 322
like to see...?

Yep...
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

More channels. Have 9.1 -- looking for 11.3.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucka View Post

Higher quality amplifiers built in with a stiffer power supply (Able to maintain a higher wattage if all channels driven).

Oh yeah...
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitviper33 View Post

1. A big, quality power supply. (Because we're buying a receiver, not a pre/pro.)
2. Balanced and unbalanced pre-outs. (Because even with good power, many of us won't have it powering all of our speakers.)
3. Excellent room correction and auto EQ with control over the full spectrum. (That means 3Hz-20kHz.)
4. Manual controls for crossover slopes and Butterworth and Linkwitz transforms. (Because even with good auto EQ, it's probably still going to need some tweaking.)
5. A simple to use and understand on screen interface.

A receiver doesn't need to be a source. A tuner is nice, but I can buy an external one and plug it in easily enough.

This too...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

-A room correction system that PROPERLY handles the modal region. That is, it doesn't ping the mains and subs separately, but sweeps them as a unit to account for not just each piece's FR, but the interactions between them.

-A truly modern modal region correction system with outputs for at least 4 subs, along the lines of Harman SFM or Geddes' method. (It's really a shame that HK hasn't been able to leverage all of Harman's IP and introduce good multisub support on their boxes..)

Nailed it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnrgagne View Post

I would want the following;

- HDMI switching that can handle any future video upgrades to come down the path and still extract the audio. No VP since most displays now have pretty decent ones.

- High powered true-digital multi mono-block amplifier section with fully assignable channels, (maybe 11?) with corresponding pre-out assignability.

- High-quality phono pre-amp with an excellent ADC, for that and one or two more analog inputs.

- Audyssey XT32 Pro or equivalent room correction and nothing less, and add in the ability to actively bi-amp with the assignable channels using that EQ. (digital x-over)

All the great 'like to see' stuff above, BUT... why not a hybrid? Call it an AVR Lite. The marketing dept will go for Pre-Pro Plus. wink.gif Features:
  • As many main channels as you can dream up: 11, 12, 13, whatever (there's talk of "voice of God" overhead surrounds isn't there?)
  • Full set of pre-amp outs, balanced and unbalanced
  • Sacrifice amp quantity for quality. Limit of 5 only good quality amps with a stout power supply, all amps freely assignable

So, start out using the 5 internal amps. As your surround system progressively grows, keep adding external amps and reassigning internal amps. Internal amps never need go unused and choice of external amps can target the power requirements of the channel. Heaven forbid - a clear, logical upgrade path! eek.gif Which is probably why it won't happen... it kills off planned obsolescence and slows the upgrade "churn".

Fun thread.
GIEGAR is offline  
post #201 of 354 Old 03-19-2013, 12:40 AM
Senior Member
 
Phrehdd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 494
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Android? Hmmmm that is okay but why not stick to tried and true - a flavour of Linux?

Linux is used on so many low level processing units already so it should be no great feat to use it within a more dynamic AVR.

There are programmer "cards" out there that are complete with CPU and Linux that are meant to be used with various systems.
Phrehdd is offline  
post #202 of 354 Old 03-19-2013, 05:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 162 Post(s)
Liked: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

For reference, here's what a properly safety-certified Class AB 100W/8Ω/7ch driven amp that can drive basically any load looks like inside:



For the record, that chassis is 17.4" x 7.8"x 17.8" (WxHxD). Do you see any room for switching, decoding, or room correction circuitry?

That looks like the inside of the Sherwood Newcastle A-965. I have the Boston Acoustics A7200 which is a clone of the A-965. I think the A-965/A7200 are excellent sounding amps. There are not many reviews of either amp but I would say the 100wpc @ 8ohms is a bit on the conservative side wink.gif.

Bill

Indeed it is an A-965. They're exceptionally quiet amps, true. That's really the only thing that distinguishes them from other amps in their price class. (They more on an Anthem Statement/Bryston/McIntosh level in terms of low self-noise.) Like any competently-designed amp, the A-965 and clones have no sound at all.

As for reviews, I don't know if power is any different for US vs. EU voltages, but the rated power is IIRC the same. The German magazine Hifi Test benched one and got 141W/8Ω/2ch, 141W/4Ω/2ch, 214W/4Ω/2ch, and 174W/4Ω/5ch. They didn't test it with 7ch driven. (Hifi Test 1/2006, at 116).

So in that light, 100W/8Ω/7ch and 160W/4Ω/7ch is probably a fair rating. The difference between 100W and 141W is 1.5dB, or probably less than the power compression most loudspeakers will suffer if fed that much power on a sustained basis.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #203 of 354 Old 03-19-2013, 05:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mastermaybe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrehdd View Post

James - I understand your idea and agree with the reasoning - just a thought - why not simply have it all go through HDMI. One need only connect one unit to Ethernet (or wireless) and the rest use the HDMI connection.

Just understand that building in a typical network means more than connection as in either using static IPs or reserved DHCP. I would have no issue if the AVR created its own network but there has to be some way to administer it from IPs, possible port forwarding and more. I like the idea in general and sounds like a good "module" or "drawer" (grin).

You mean HDMI with ethernet, correct? Yeah, that would be fine. What seems to be getting lost here on a few is that it's a terrifically MINOR inclusion that could really help a number who simply do not own or want to eliminate an existing switch for a few devices in their rack...no one is FORCING anyone to use it. The Denon 4520 has a four port switch (only 10/100 too, mind you) and if you visit the thread you'll see there's a good number who are using it. To me a high(er)-end AVR HAS to continue to be versatile in 2013...multi-zone, streaming, video processing, complex switching, etc...this is part of that reality. If you're looking for a standalone vanilla 5/7.1 surround processor with hdmi inputs, there are plenty of over-priced pre-pros (and bare bones AVRs) out there that will work for you.

The definition of a "receiver" continues to evolve within this hobby and the fact that some want less under the (completely unproven) assumption that sound quality improves as features get stripped- or worse, the "I don't need them so no one else does" crowd is not going change that evolution. And again, crucially, those stripped devices already exist, so they're not without options.

To be quite honest, I think the major AVR manu's get it about 95% correct right now. Just look at what you can own for under a $1000. I know, boo, hiss.

James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

 

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

mastermaybe is online now  
post #204 of 354 Old 03-19-2013, 06:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mikenificent1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Audyssey LFC, Spotify, Dual discrete subwoofer outputs, digital amplification, 150+ watts per channel, less than $1500, the lower the better lol
Mikenificent1 is offline  
post #205 of 354 Old 03-19-2013, 06:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
oztech's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Houston Texas
Posts: 7,661
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 93
The trend I hate is 9.1/11.1 as instead of producing a quality set of amps they cram them with mediocre amps and yes I am fully aware I could buy separates but the main idea of a receiver I should not have to and remember not that long ago Denon,Onkyo and Pioneer were all producing AVR's in test reviews giving them credit for robust amps to drive all but the most demanding speakers.
Sometimes I think mfg's lose sight of things the majority of clients appreciate good 5.1/71 layout with quality room correction but they are not willing to turn their den or living room into a department store demo with speakers and separate amps stacked everywhere the small percentage that have dedicated theater rooms are fortunate and few on the grande scale of things and I hope they can keep the industry alive but for the rest of us they need to pay attention to our needs you know the people that actually buy in large quantities. A great example just look at the response of the mid level AVR's in the forum they outnumber by view and response.
oztech is offline  
post #206 of 354 Old 03-19-2013, 07:48 AM
Senior Member
 
snyderkv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post


There are already AVRs on the market that more than meet your alleged needs.
snyderkv is online now  
post #207 of 354 Old 03-19-2013, 07:59 AM
Senior Member
 
snyderkv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

If you do that then you will find that they will lead you to discussions on how important room acoustics are.
Bill

Are you incoherent? we aren't talking about room acoustics!!!. The question is what would we like in an AVR? For this particular link in the chain, power has the biggest bearing on SQ than anything else within the "AVR". Why do you keep referring to room acoustics? Audyssey will change the perception of sound, envolopement etc, but is secondary to me since it won't provide more power or headroom for those dynamic peaks/transients when needed
snyderkv is online now  
post #208 of 354 Old 03-19-2013, 08:05 AM
Senior Member
 
snyderkv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Code View Post

One significant point that you failed to mention is...
Choice of source material...
Today readily available are lossless digital, audio streams that easily exceed 120dB in dynamic range vs. the previous high of 80dB from the previous analog days...
Take the 1812 Overture from a silent background to the tremendous boom of the cannons, both the amplifier output stage/power supply and loudspeaker system has to respond to this instaneous peak of energy...
Check out some of the Chesky hi-bit rate CDs..
Also the DTS blu-ray demo disk available from WCES 2013 will qwickly separate the high-performance delivery systems from the toys..
Today too many users evaluate their system using compressed streams which don't adequately challenge the audio system's performance/sonic capability....
Certain amplifiers may (or claim to) be high powered but when stressed by a high dynamic range source stream the negative, audible by-products are very apparent..

Keep in mind, we are talking about dynamic range which swing from the lowest level to the highest levels, not SPL..

Just my $0.02.. wink.gif

Yes I failed to school the children on this. That is why you need headroom/reserve power. You're preaching to the choir
snyderkv is online now  
post #209 of 354 Old 03-19-2013, 08:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 11,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by snyderkv View Post

Are you incoherent? we aren't talking about room acoustics!!!. The question is what would we like in an AVR? For this particular link in the chain, power has the biggest bearing on SQ than anything else within the AVR. Audyssey will change the perception of sound, envolopement etc, but is secondary to me since it won't provide more power or headroom for dynamic peaks

I'm fully coherent. The reason for mentioning room acoustics was in response to your statement that amps are a more important factor than room acoustics. Of course Audyssey will not provide more power or headroom. But here is where you are unable to grasp what I have been saying. If your amp has plenty of power and not in any danger of clipping it will have minimal if no bearing on the overall SQ of ones system. You are totally hungup on the fact that you seem to believe everyones system has power handling issues when that is totally false.

So let me ask you a very simple question.

Do you believe an amp used within its specs and not clipping is more important than room acoustics in the overall SQ of ones system? Let me make this clear that this is an amp that has the required power or headroom (not clipping). So how about a simple yes or no to my question.

Bill

My SACD collection, watch it grow and my wallet shrink ;-).

 

Denon 4311 (in preamp mode), Parasound 2100, Boston Acoustics A7200 amp, Oppo BDP-103, Consonance CD120, Panasonic TC-P60GT50 plasma, Panamax 5100EX, Salk Song Towers, Song Center, ADS 300C (surrounds) and two Rythmik F12SEs.
Bill Mac is online now  
post #210 of 354 Old 03-19-2013, 08:36 AM
Senior Member
 
snyderkv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

I'm fully coherent. The reason for mentioning room acoustics was in response to your statement that amps are a more important factor than room acoustics. Of course Audyssey will not provide more power or headroom. But here is where you are unable to grasp what I have been saying. If your amp has plenty of power and not in any danger of clipping it will have minimal if no bearing on the overall SQ of ones system. You are totally hungup on the fact that you seem to believe everyones system has power handling issues when that is totally false.

So let me ask you a very simple question.

Do you believe an amp used within its specs and not clipping is more important than room acoustics in the overall SQ of ones system? Let me make this clear that this is an amp that has the required power or headroom (not clipping). So how about a simple yes or no to my question.

Bill

Correct, a radio shack amp won't sound any different than a 1000w Krell (under clipping) removing manufacturer settings i.e. EQ, signal processing, gains etc

BUT! power would be the most important thing to figure out first don't you think. I don't buy a race car without knowing how much power it's making first. Once that's taken care of, sure, configure your Audyssey at that point. But it's secondary to me until I settle on something with enough power to handle my preferred listening level, speakers, source etc otherwise Audyssey won't do you any good

I don't think everything has power issues. But I don't believe people when they say their 35 watt amp isn't clipping. maybe they just hanve't heard an ABX test
snyderkv is online now  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Component Receivers

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off