or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › AV Receivers need a makeover
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AV Receivers need a makeover - Page 2

post #31 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

As if "badly overpriced" was some exception in the world of high-end audio. I for one would love to see a receiver based on a real computer, with a gorgeous interface and no redundant, obsolete ports. Seems like that's what everyone is asking for. Also don't forget, other companies make phones and tablets and Apple's products are not really more expensive. Apple TV costs about the same as a Roku. It's only their computers that come at a real premium and even there, the added value is self-evident.

Apple stuff is premium and expensive, but ultimately nothing compared to what some high-end audio equipment costs, in terms of relative markup vs. what you get for it. A piar of "Beats" headphones can cost as much as an iPad mini. Which product is "badly overpriced"?
You justify the idea of an overpriced Apple product by comparing it to other overpriced audio products? Not much of a defense. There are two categories of overpriced audio goods: the "my product has superior sound quality that has no objective basis, but my marketing and the writings of high end writers will try to convince you really exists" product (ie $100/ft audio cables) and the "I'll get you to pay extra for your lack of technical savvy" product (ie Bose). I don't see Apple able to make either case. The only tack they could really try is "pay more, because we're prettier and more chic". A/V receivers don't really fit their business model, which is to develop a market for a new type of product and milk it for all it's worth. A/V receivers aren't such a market. Who really cares about a "pretty interface"? You only look at it during setup. 99.9+% of the time, you don't even see the interface. You're usually just selecting an input and adjusting the volume. Who needs a "pretty interface" for that?
Edited by RobertR - 4/1/13 at 1:39pm
post #32 of 119
Well, I will require rackmount ears and XLR connections on my next surround unit - and I prefer to use a processor with external amps rather than an AVR. Rackmount severely limits the size factor of a unit, at least in width... tongue.gif

Yes, the author sounds like a prime candidate for one of those 'classy' Bose systems, lol... wink.gif
post #33 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

You justify the idea of an overpriced Apple product by comparing it to other overpriced audio products? Not much of a defense. There are two categories of overpriced audio goods: the "my product has superior sound quality that has no objective basis, but my marketing and the writings of high end writers will try to convince you really exists" product (ie $100/ft audio cables) and the "I'll get you to pay extra for your lack of technical savvy" product (ie Bose). I don't see Apple able to make either case. The only tack they could really try is "pay more, because we're prettier and more chic". A/V receivers don't really fit their business model, which is to develop a market for a new type of product and milk it for all it's worth. A/V receivers aren't such a market. Who really cares about a "pretty interface"? You only look at it during setup. 99.9+% of the time, you don't even see the interface. You're usually just selecting an input and adjusting the volume. Who needs a "pretty interface" for that?

I'm sure Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo etc. will still be around so you'll be fine; you'll be able to buy black boxes for years to come. I prefer to think forward about what's possible, instead of clinging to obsolescence. That's the point of this thread, after all. I for one love the idea of a receiver that could do a whole lot more than any receiver that exists today. How about an Audyssey app with visual, touch-editable EQ graphs!
post #34 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

How about an Audyssey app with visual, touch-editable EQ graphs!
I think the idea of paying extra for computer functionality that you would use 1/10 of 1% of the time (or less) instead of connecting the receiver to your PC would be a tough sell....a very tough sell.
post #35 of 119
If speaker wires are to be provided, shouldn't they come with the speakers? As kingdavid21 pointed out, certainly the length is unsure. But at least if speaker wire came with each speaker, you'd be assured of getting the correct "number" of wires (I'm assuming here that anyone who wants to be provided the speaker wire won't have the tools or the ability to cut and strip it).

As I'm writing this, I realize that really the Cnet guy just wants an HTIB. That must be where he got the idea.
post #36 of 119
That article is all over the place. They touch on some relevant points, but the article is incoherent as a whole.

1. Make them smaller:

Really? Put more heat-producing stuff in less space? When I've got all 7 channels cranking, I don't want a smaller box. That thing puts enough heat out as it is. Also, the connections are already close enough together, I don't need it to be any worse.

2. Make them prettier:

I like having something that's a standard size and doesn't look different. I already have enough different looks going on below my TV.

3. Get rid of most features:

I'd agree about not integrating streaming, but audio modes are useful. Movies sound great with the THX modes on my AVR. AM/FM is not a niche feature, and it's super cheap to put in. Analog video up-conversion is great, as otherwise, you have to switch inputs on the TV to go to a component or composite input. I do this through a DVDO EDGE, which is great, as there's one box that switches everything for the entire setup, even with 6 HDMI components, one component video component, and three composite video components. 7.1 channels is definitely not niche, that is pretty much the standard at this point.

4. Embrace wireless:

Probably not a bad idea. Most other things are wireless, although people who are serious about this stuff aren't using wifi, as it's not that reliable.

5. Include a true high-definition interface:

Yes. And this should include a better interface as well. One that makes some semblance of sense. If they could move some remote functions to on screen menus that would help a lot as well, like all the different audio modes.

6. Make a usable remote:

Yes. Make it WAY simpler. Many of them try to provide universal remotes that switch the AVR with them, but I highly doubt that more than 1% of users have ever programmed the remotes to do that. I know I sure haven't.

7. Include speaker cables in the box:

They would either suck, like HTIBs, or they would increase the cost and shipping weight a lot. I used 200 feet of 12 gauge wire in my small apartment, I'm expecting to go well north of 300' with a house (probably 1/2 of it re-used from now) if the wires aren't already in the walls. Let me buy my own Monoprice cables. It's not rocket science to strip wires. You don't need banana plugs, pretty much all units accept bare wires.

8 Embrace Stereo:

Stereo is only for music-only zones, as TV and movies need 5.1 hence AVRs having 5.1 channels or more. Soundbars don't cut it either. You're not going to get surround sound unless you actually put speakers back there.

Why would anyone want only 2 channels? The center channel is the most important for TV and movies, and often does the most work (depending on how a channel mixes their audio), and the surrounds are what really makes HD. HD really isn't HD without at least 5.1 surround sound.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goalline View Post

Er. One word. BOSE!

Problem solved.

3 grand for a system that my $700 Onkyo can easily outperform? No thanks. A sub that's doing midrange as well because the speakers are 2"? No thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBWIII View Post

As I'm writing this, I realize that really the Cnet guy just wants an HTIB. That must be where he got the idea.

My HTIB came with a ginormous AVR, and I'm quite happy with it, even though I only have one HDMI inputs (audio from DVDO EDGE) and a stereo analog connection connected to it. I still like it's size, and features for potential future uses. I have no issue with it's size.
post #37 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoogerBomb View Post

I'm all for getting rid of all the stupid legacy composite inputs and the l/r audio inputs that come with them. They take up an assload of space and are used by maybe 1/ 10 of 1% of people today. Do people really need 5 or 6 composite inputs and only 2 hdmi inputs? Why's hasn't this been reversed yet? They concert hall, hall in Munich, and other settings are a complete waste of storage space. Use that space for a far better on screen interface, Yamahas interface is poorly designed and has the graphics of a Commodore 64.

I guess I am in the 1/10 of 1%. My AVR doesn't have enough active legacy inputs for my equipment. When I bought it, I thought that I had enough inputs but discovered that some of them were shared and thus unusable for my purposes.

I don't understand what you mean by "Use that space for a far better on screen interface." Do you mean use the ROM space for a better interface code ? Or do you mean use more of the front panel for a display?
Nowadays, very large memory (even ROM) is relatively in-expensive. So I don't think that is a limitation. The DSP modes may actually be on the DSP chip's ROM. I don't know. The display may or may not be in the DSP ROM. It could be controlled by a microprocessor with it's own ROM. In any case, that could be changed.

The front panel of the AVR provides plenty of space to add a different display. Unless things have changed, display devices where expensive. A larger display could still be added but it would add to the cost.
post #38 of 119
Another quick point

Why are .4 recievers so uncommon? I would love to run 4 subs and equalize them within the reciever. Subs are not powered by the reciever anyway, I don't see why it would cost much more to include. it would help future proof recievers and would really help those whose listening areas are too large for 1 or 2 subwoofers to pressurize . I know that they can be EQ'd Seperatly but why make us go through the hassle? I would be glad to throw in a few more bucks for that capability.
post #39 of 119
Is this guy (M.M ) saying Harman Kardon's AVRs have a cheap industrial design?
post #40 of 119
What I do NOT want in my receiver:
1. Wifi - I just paid $2k+ for my receiver and the WiFi is 'old' tech in 6 months? I'll hardwire, have the reliability and be all kinds of happy.
2. Media Streamer built-in. Again, no. We all know video codecs are constantly changing. I'll keep the HTPC connected to the reciever for media streaming. Or go the easy way with something like an Apple TV or the like.
3. A touch-screen on the front of the receiver. Really? Like it's not going to be distracting when you have the receiver in the front of the room and the novelty wears off.
4. My receiver will never weigh in at less than 35lbs. Ever. I want it built like a tank. It is the 'brain' of the system.
5. My receiver shall not be any color other than black. And it won't be 'cute' or odd shaped.
6. Speaker wire included. Not even going to address this as it's just silly. [Wait, I could use it to lash the guys that sold me a crappy recevier with it included.]
7. Zone 2, 3, 4, 5, ....... If I want house audio, I'll do it properly with a dedicated 2 channel amp, speaker selector and player.
8. On-board storage for media. Why pay the manufacturers for it when it won't be enough anyhow? [BTW: I'm @ 15TB and growing so having even 1TB of over-priced, most likely crappy brand of storage is silly.]

What I do want:
1. Power [135W/ch min.] and at least 7.1 channels. 5.1 just doesn't cut it for me anymore.
2. Here's a thought: How bout a setting in the menu so the receiver lights can be set to whatever color you want? Drives me nuts when the components all have different colored displays.
3. HDMI ports and legacy ports - TONS of them.
4. 12v triggers - everytime.
5. A point we agree on: Clean up the menu GUIs. I'm not asking for a ton here but at least boost the GUI so that the font doesn't look like it came straight off an Atari 2600. And, yes, the input names NEED to be assignable on the front display.
6. FAST + RELIABLE HDMI SWITCHING!!!
7. Discrete IR codes for everything you can think of. Even the sleep timer!
8. The volume knob should always be the single largest control on the receiver.
9. An upgrade path for new audio codecs as they come out.

Indifferent:
Better included remote - who cares? Once you purchase a really good universal remote you aren't going back - ever.

my .02
Edited by adrian ballard - 4/1/13 at 3:56pm
post #41 of 119
For the person who mentioned "Bose" - bose in my native language means monkey poop.


All kidding aside, yes there is room for improvement.

Everyone has different ideas and needs. Most seem to agree that the extra settings like Concert Hall, Jazz etc. should be tossed out. For older inputs, I rather have an interface on the back where you can add a module for whatever the interface requires.

Size of the AVR to me really doesn't matter though I did find the size of my Marantz NR1602 to be simply a bonus.

What I would like to see on future AVR -

1) Front plate replaced with a gorilla glass covered touch screen that can also be somewhat modified via computer. Locate the buttons where you want, the colours, how bright etc. Obviously front imputs need their labels close by but would be nice to adjust the font size to be readable in bright light and in the dark.

2) AVR makers should consider improvements on their remotes so they line up with some traditional buttons that are placed in the same place for all. There is some of this but not nearly enough. Perhaps getting rid of IR in favour of RF and Bluetooth is the way to go.

3) Improvement on the V in AVR. There is obviously an emphasis on audio but not much (on lower end AVRs for sure) about video quality, adjustments and more.

4) Some of the features (many will disagree) should be modular akin to card in a computer in terms of adding function. Let people start with a base system of 5.x, 7.x, 11.x etc. and be able to add features such as various inputs, video enhancements (wouldn't it be nice if one could put something like a Darbee into a module that you simply add to your AVR?).

5) More direct connectivity - USB 3 with a minimum of 3 ports comes to mind.

6) Set up the AVR standards to allow network through the HDMI 1.4x cables. From the AVR one can pass through full Internet connection to other net able devices. Only the AVR need be connected to a home network directly. Makers of other devices will follow through as this would be for them a selling point/bells and whistles.

7) Be required to identify clearly out put - x watts per ALL channels playing at the same time vs distributed wattage.

8) Consider for middle to upper line AVR - smarter machines via usable CPU (ARM, Atom etc.)

That's my take on improvements.
post #42 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian ballard View Post

What I do NOT want in my receiver:
1. Wifi - I just paid $2k+ for my receiver and the WiFi is 'old' tech in 6 months? I'll hardwire, have the reliability and be all kinds of happy.
2. Media Streamer built-in. Again, no. We all know video codecs are constantly changing. I'll keep the HTPC connected to the reciever for media streaming. Or go the easy way with something like an Apple TV or the like.
3. A touch-screen on the front of the receiver. Really? Like it's not going to be distracting when you have the receiver in the front of the room and the novelty wears off.
4. My receiver will never weigh in at less than 35lbs. Ever. I want it built like a tank. It is the 'brain' of the system.
5. My receiver shall not be any color other than black. And it won't be 'cute' or odd shaped.
6. Speaker wire included. Not even going to address this as it's just silly. [Wait, I could use it to lash the guys that sold me a crappy recevier with it included.]
7. Zone 2, 3, 4, 5, ....... If I want house audio, I'll do it properly with a dedicated 2 channel amp, speaker selector and player.
8. On-board storage for media. Why pay the manufacturers for it when it won't be enough anyhow? [BTW: I'm @ 15TB and growing so having even 1TB of over-priced, most likely crappy brand of storage is silly.]

What I do want:
1. Power [135W/ch min.] and at least 7.1 channels. 5.1 just doesn't cut it for me anymore.
2. Here's a thought: How bout a setting in the menu so the receiver lights can be set to whatever color you want? Drives me nuts when the components all have different colored displays.
3. HDMI ports and legacy ports - TONS of them.
4. 12v triggers - everytime.
5. A point we agree on: Clean up the menu GUIs. I'm not asking for a ton here but at least boost the GUI so that the font doesn't look like it came straight off an Atari 2600. And, yes, the input names NEED to be assignable on the front display.
6. FAST + RELIABLE HDMI SWITCHING!!!
7. Discrete IR codes for everything you can think of. Even the sleep timer!
8. The volume knob should always be the single largest control on the receiver.
9. An upgrade path for new audio codecs as they come out.

Indifferent:
Better included remote - who cares? Once you purchase a really good universal remote you aren't going back - ever.

my .02

Almost all of your points are spot on- but what's the hurt in having Wifi, as long as it is in addition to wifi, not instead of? I like hardwiring, but offering more options can't be a bad thing.
post #43 of 119
My responses to the linked article are:

"form follows function - most receivers are a BIG, heavy black box because the form factor works, it is what the target market for these devices (25+ year old males) have come to expect when purchasing such a device."

"legacy inputs, analogue upconversion and sound field modes are certainly things that are antiquated but for a receiver to omit them would be commercial suicide"

About the only thing the author had going for his argument is that most of the OSD setup systems for receivers are antiquated and obtuse to use. But this is hardly news, and improvement in this area will be slow because most users don't spend very much time in the setup menu for a receiver. You might invest 3-4 hours for the initial configuration and after that you may never visit the menus again until you add or change a source component in your system. "New and Improved OSD" is not a very marketable sales point for a feature that is used so rarely.

My response to this article even being posted as a topic of discussion at AVS is: "slow news day?" wink.gif
post #44 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoogerBomb View Post

I'm all for getting rid of all the stupid legacy composite inputs and the l/r audio inputs that come with them. They take up an assload of space and are used by maybe 1/ 10 of 1% of people today. Do people really need 5 or 6 composite inputs and only 2 hdmi inputs?

Well, I am 1/10 of 1% of the people you are talking about. Once a receiver has video processing of some kind, it is fairly cheap to add s-video or composite inputs. I have a Yamaha MusicCast MCX1000 that has composites/s-video I/O and I would like to keep using it, thank you very much...

This has been discussed to death: yes, some, maybe the majority does not need this or this feature, but some want them: are you gonna set people in the cold, for the sake of the AV receiver making more modern (whatever that means...) Does it hurt? When looking at a film, are you really thinking "this would really be better when they had left out the legacy inputs."?
post #45 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krutsch View Post

+99 Make them smaller and more elegant looking.

The folks at BestBuy / Magnolia told me that the Marantz Slimline series (NR160X/140X) outsells all other AVRs in Magnolia combined. And guess why? It's unobtrusive and that's what their audience cares about most.

I would seriously doubt that. As a salesman, when I talk about the Marantz, for half of the people it is too small, and for the other half it is still too big...
post #46 of 119
There is one thing in his arguments that I can somewhat agree with. I use my home theatre as a stereo set up. When I bought it, I bought a receiver and a pair of Cantons, meaning to gradually add center, sub and rears. That never came. I do want to be able to hook all things HDMi to my receiver though. So, a stereo receiver with HDMI and presumably better stereo audio performance would not be out of my way...
post #47 of 119
I'm mixed on the article. I don't agree with the points, and really don't the comparison to a sound bar. Those two products server different functions. It's an apple to oranges comparison.

Personally, I want the receiver to do is be able to handle DD and DTS up to 7.2 for a proper home theater to be able to watch movies, sports, and TV shows as intended. I didn't buy 7.1 speaker setup to use stereo.

Given the other devices people have, I think including blue tooth, WiFi, and Ethernet connections should be given. The legacy ports is mixed feelings. I can see where there is a need. At the same, I question how many legacy ports does one need? The upconversion is a questionable to me because I questions how many people don't have devices that already do it. I know I have an old DVD player that doesn't, but it's my first DVD player which predates it. Yet, not an issue because it's sitting in a box. I have plenty of other devices that can handle it's function.

I think the inclusion of preterminated speaker wire is a bit obtuse. It's not that they couldn't be useful for general consumer, but they're most likely going to be cheap and crappy. Look at the cables that are included with other devices, so why would it be different?

What I would like to see the more is a separation of the amp from the receiver without having to go the high end. Speakers last for years. What the amp doesn't change either. It's only the codecs, inputs and outputs that change. So, i'm having to get high end unit to have the power I need for my speakers just to have updated codecs, inputs or outputs? I'm not sure how much a cost the amplifiers are in the AVR, so maybe it's ridiculousness notion for the general consumer. I just like the idea of only spending a couple hundred bucks to update versus thousands. Plus, this could do one thing that author wants, make the AVR smaller. It's the amps that make the box big and bulky.

For me, I've gone to more less devices is better approach. I just found that most of the equipment I had setup, I rarely used. And that equipment was what used the legacy ports.

On a side note, I understand the point of having AVR function of internet sharing device. Basically, this person is asking for it to have routing function. I think for the general consumer, this is not a good idea because there are issues that can definitely come up that can cause major issues with the devices connected to it to get a good and proper internet connection. Having a good router and property setup home network should serve all internet and network needs.
post #48 of 119
I don't think the feature creep in most receivers is the problem -- the problem is that the manufacturers are so busy piling these features on that they get buried under the features from the previous year without a reliable or organized way to access them. This is where an improved GUI comes in. The interface on my Marantz is laid out illogically and is rendered in sub-standard definition. I don't care if I rarely access it, because when I have to, it's a pain to use. It just doesn't make sense that garbage sub-$100 blu-ray players have a nicer interface than receivers costing $500+. The "app control" thing is annoying too -- I think manufacturers should actually make their smartphone apps pleasant to use and responsive, or drop them totally if they're going to be half-baked (Again, referring to the Denon/Marantz app here). Just because I am more involved in A/V than your average joe buying a receiver doesn't mean I enjoy using ****** interfaces just because I can manage them.

Size - I don't really understand this, if you want space-saving, get a soundbar or a junky integrated HTIB/Blu-ray player thing. Receivers need space inside to vent so I don't think this is a good idea. Plus, with the average size of TVs increasing (60, 65, and 70" are increasingly becoming commonplace), I just don't understand the aversion to audio equipment. You've got a freaking 70" screen on your wall, what's a black box on a cabinet going to hurt?

Wi-fi - don't understand why this isn't built into every midrange receiver by now. In addition, of course, to a wired connection.

legacy inputs - these are already disappearing on all but the highest end AVRs. What I'd like to see is at least a phono input put back on inexpensive surround receivers. With the resurgence of vinyl more and more people are looking to plug a turntable into their home theater system, and they don't really exist anymore. Putting pre-outs and 12v triggers back on more receivers would be nice too.

personally, I'd like to see better build quality and more color options. AVR designs are increasingly plastic-y and fragile (see: Denon's hideous designs for their XX13 and new '14 models) and I think more premium materials and beefier amplification is the way to go. Also, I would have chosen to buy my AVR in champagne color in a heartbeat were it available here in the states.
post #49 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingdavid21 View Post

Another quick point

Why are .4 recievers so uncommon? I would love to run 4 subs and equalize them within the reciever. Subs are not powered by the reciever anyway, I don't see why it would cost much more to include. it would help future proof recievers and would really help those whose listening areas are too large for 1 or 2 subwoofers to pressurize . I know that they can be EQ'd Seperatly but why make us go through the hassle? I would be glad to throw in a few more bucks for that capability.
I don't know man... I've been using these boards for a while, and lurking for even longer, and I've heard maybe one, two other people even mention using four subs (let alone implement it). My advice would be to figure out what movie theaters use and buy that stuff. This will just never be popular enough with consumers to become common.
post #50 of 119
One way to make things smaller is not using a receiver at all. A preamp can be very small and a power amp can be hidden away. Streaming only needs a box the size of a Roku or Apple TV or even put the streaming in the TV itself. Look at the size of the new Outlaw and Emotiva preamps. Hey the future's here:D
post #51 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrehdd View Post

For the person who mentioned "Bose" - bose in my native language means monkey poop.


I think the author makes it clear he is longing for monkey poop. Lots of it. wink.gif Unfortunately all he produces is bull poop.
post #52 of 119
I can kind of see where the point of the article but as other people have already stated it's all over the place. For a lot of the people on this forum they are mostly happy with the way receivers are currently. I on the other hand don't understand 99% of what my receiver does. I do however understand that anything less gives me significantly less audio quality. For someone like me I wish there was a more simple AVR. Give me a bunch of HDMI ports and the appropriate speaker connections for 5.1/7.1 audio. Part of the issue may very well be the interface an all the options. I have a Harman Kardon and it apparently has one of the better UI's available. I have no idea how to set anything up. I'm an extremely technical person but I don't have the patience to figure out 100 different sound settings. I just want audio to come out the correct speakers at a high quality.

That being said.... one could say that's exactly what my receiver does. I just plug everything in and out of the box it sounds better than any other type of solution such as a soundbar or htib. The issue comes in when the cat steps on the remote and it switches to some alien audio setting and it all of sudden sounds like crap and I spend the next 3 days trying to get it to sound normal again. Maybe there just isn't a market for people like me. Someone who wants higher quality but isn't interested in obtaining a degree in how to use my AVR. Most people are probably fine with the htib solution.
post #53 of 119
I totally agree with CNET.

I didn't know what a AV Receiver was for just some months ago. But one day I decided that I wanted to add some quality to my music playbackand enjoy 5.1 sound experience and the conclusion was that I needed a Receiver.

I couldn't believe that in times like these those big black and ugly boxes were almost the only choice. I have an Xbox, a flat LED tv, airport extreme, airport express, iphones, macbooks, non-mac laptops, etc.. and my Yamaha receiver is by far the most ugly thing I have at home and the only one full of features that I never use (inputs, sound modes, etc).

You can't disagree with CNET you hardcore fans.
post #54 of 119
I see how you can prefer the sleek designs of your TV or Apple products (and apparently your Xbox, for some reason), but how can a relatively plain black box be ugly, let alone the "most ugly" thing you have?

At any rate, if you hate its appearance, hide it! In my opinion, the racks of visible, cluttered, mismatched components are the real eyesore.
post #55 of 119
1.) Step up the build quality the forums are littered with problems that should not exist close to or soon after the warranty runs out.
2.) As someone else already stated give me an honest 150wpc all channels driven in 5.1/7.1 configuration and kill the 9.1/11.2 that we can't talk clients into installing take that money and invest in 1.
3.) Keep the FM and offer HD and RDS since DJ's can't be bothered with song and artists these days.
4.) Take a que from Apple on setup and user interface if its to complicated you only tick buyers off.
5.) Get rid of all but 1 or 2 legacy inputs this is the 21st century instead give us more HDMI .
6.) Since HDMI is a 2way communication can we have a sleep timer that would make all sleep .
7.) Add flashing display for tone def so that when they crank the AVR to high it will give them a clue its clipping.
8.) Put a sensor in that will warn user of extreme temp on the display because there are a lot of people that ignore adequate ventilation and stack equipment on top of each other or ignore mfg's recommended clearance.
9.) If the AVR is over 1500.00 it should automatically come with a 2yr warranty and if over 2000.00 3yr.
10.) Keep it rack space friendly more of those are being installed than the general public is aware of especially ones like the Middle Atlantic 's.
post #56 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztech View Post

8.) Put a sensor in that will warn user of extreme temp on the display because there are a lot of people that ignore adequate ventilation and stack equipment on top of each other or ignore mfg's recommended clearance.
Great idea!
post #57 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian ballard View Post


What I do want:
3. HDMI ports and legacy ports - TONS of them.

Yes!!!! The legacy ports should be active and not paired with other inputs. I bought a Denon with enough physical connections. However some of the legacy inputs share processing with HDMI. SO both cannot be active at the same time. This renders some of my equipment as unusable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian ballard View Post


9. An upgrade path for new audio codecs as they come out.

I like that idea. I don't think that will happen as some of these codecs probably require more processing power than provided by the current chip.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrehdd View Post


All kidding aside, yes there is room for improvement.

Everyone has different ideas and needs. Most seem to agree that the extra settings like Concert Hall, Jazz etc. should be tossed out. For older inputs, I rather have an interface on the back where you can add a module for whatever the interface requires.


What I would like to see on future AVR -

4) Some of the features (many will disagree) should be modular akin to card in a computer in terms of adding function. Let people start with a base system of 5.x, 7.x, 11.x etc. and be able to add features such as various inputs, video enhancements (wouldn't it be nice if one could put something like a Darbee into a module that you simply add to your AVR?).

I think that modularity in the form of plug-in cards is the correct way. However, the manufactures would have to agree to a standard. This would allow smaller operations to create niche cards. NAD Electronics has a modular receiver but they don't publish any information on the bus. They don't licence the information either. So you have to depend on NAD. This is unlike how the computer world works - PC's have standard interfaces where cards can be produced by any manufacturer. Even specialized cards with small production runs.
Edited by dhvsfan - 4/2/13 at 9:37am
post #58 of 119
Makeover, 35 years later and the little SX-780 still works flawlessly. Although I still can't find the HDMI in/out.





[ r_sx780[1].jpg 33k .jpg file =68378]r_sx780(1).jpg (33k. jpg file)[/ATTACHMENT]
Edited by alanjkelly - 4/2/13 at 12:06pm
post #59 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by alanjkelly View Post

Makeover, 35 years later and the little SX-780 still works flawlessly. Although I still can't find the HDMI in/out.





[ r_sx780[1].jpg 33k .jpg file =68378]r_sx780(1).jpg (33k. jpg file)[/ATTACHMENT]
Jeez, that brings back memories of my Pioneer SX-727:

post #60 of 119
Funny how you remember things. I was 12 and still remember the day I hooked it up. Of course I thought it was the end all be all. At least it still works!



New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Latest Industry News
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › AV Receivers need a makeover