Audio-only HT Receiver

kcspence · 2021-07-23

Why isn't this a thing? All high-end TVs have wireless internet, plenty of HDMI inputs, and eArc. I should be able to send audio to a 7.2ish receiver/amp without paying for redundant video-handling functionality. I must be missing something. Please correct my ignorance.

D

davidj1

· #2 · Jul 23, 2021

Yes agree I would buy this. I have no need for video inputs personally and currently run a 2.1ch amp with RCAs to it. I also don’t want a device meddling with my video signal and potentially causing PQ degradation.

I assume many here disagree - many seem to be using hdmi as a audio path and video comes with it by default. It also seems to be a ‘useful’ device hub with many video/audio inputs that people value over perhaps a ‘purist’ audio only processing.

Reply

Save

Like

Reactions: 1

bobknavs

· #3 · Jul 23, 2021

If you locate something, let us know.

You may find that it costs more than a receiver with video passthrough. Just like a pre-amp/processor costs more than an AVR, even the the pre/pro includes no power amps,

Reply

Save

Like

Reactions: 2

qirex

· #4 · Jul 23, 2021

If you use ARC or eARC that's basically how a receiver functions. In a shrinking market you're not going to see a ton of niche products plus economies of scale means it's easier for manufacturers to make one box that does everything for a single price. In a different segment of the market ARC ports are starting to make their way into 2 channel gear but that's a cheap feature to add because bitstream PCM doesn't have any expensive Dolby or DTS licenses to support.

Reply

Save

Like

Reactions: 1

rekbones

· #5 · Jul 23, 2021

HDMI is the only protocol that supports lossless audio.

Reply

Save

Like

head_unit

· #6 · Dec 15, 2021

kcspence said:
Why isn't this a thing?

Because product planners are deathly afraid to try anything different. This is somewhat justifiable, because the internal product trainers and sales reps' and dealers' capacity to explain anything out of the ordinary has been decreasing.* Plus, as soon as you have to start explaining anything at all to customers, it's a losing battle. It's easier to just tack on a million features so customers pay more to get 16k 960 Hz nannycam switching for their personal videos, er, ahem anyway even if said customers really have no idea what the features do. Finally, a "simpler" device becomes more expensive, as we already see with pre-pros and stereo receivers, due to less quantity. The brands that adopt more unique ideas tend to be smaller ones, which don't have enough power to move the market.

*at least that was my experience. I've been out of that end of things for a while, but doubt the situation has improved. Some exceptions, surely, like those Sound United guys in the one video seem to have some clue at least when I skimmed it.

See less See more

Reply

Save

Like

head_unit

· #7 · Dec 15, 2021

kcspence said:
Why isn't this a thing?

Because product planners are deathly afraid to try anything different. This is somewhat justifiable, because the internal product trainers and sales reps' and dealers' capacity to explain anything out of the ordinary has been decreasing.* Plus, as soon as you have to start explaining anything at all to customers, it's a losing battle. It's easier to just tack on a million features so customers pay more to get 16k 960 Hz nannycam switching for their personal videos, er, ahem anyway even if said customers really have no idea what the features do. Finally, a "simpler" device becomes more expensive, as we already see with pre-pros and stereo receivers, due to less quantity. The brands that adopt more unique ideas tend to be smaller ones, which don't have enough power to move the market.

*at least that was my experience. I've been out of that end of things for a while, but doubt the situation has improved. Some exceptions, surely, like those Sound United guys in the one video seem to have some clue at least when I skimmed it.

See less See more

Reply

Save

Like

Top Contributors this Month