Why expensive avrs?

msankadi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2012
Messages
655
Points
63
Location
Bangalore
Hi

I have a Yamaha htr 3072 avr. I was going through some of the other avrs more expensive ones as they offer features that I need like dual hdmi output.

I was wondering if apart from features like more audio formats inputs etx what are the advantages of a more expensive avr? Does it sound better?
 
Correctly put by OM.

However, you need to be sure what your requirements are. Many of the features of an AVR will never be used by you. Fir example, an AVR having 8k and 7/8 HDMI inputs will cost much more than an AVR having 4k and 5 HDMI inputs. If you're sure that you won't need 8k for the next 3 years at least, you can easily settle for the lesser one. Same goes for channel outputs - you might never use that 7th/8th channel.
Having said that, you can't compare between a 40k AVR and a 120k AVR. Maybe you don't need to go all the way up to 120k. Something in the range of 75k would be good for you.

P.S. - this ia not a blanket rule. Changes according to the situation.
 
AVRs have become complicated and very expensive these days.
Their lifespan and product cycles are also short.
Define your use case properly and then decide on buying one or upgrading.
Power section of recent AVRs is weaker than what it used to be.
And they heat up due to all the processing and multichannel amps inside a small box.
If your use case is satisfied with a simple 5.1 then you are in luck.
Many robust models may be available. Bigger your room, more speakers demands advanced processors, EQ and power!!

Choose your poison carefully.

Cheers,
Raghu
 
Does it sound better?
They do.
In saying that, what I don't like about AVR's is that all the Japanese manufacturers keep their best sounding ones right at the top of the price spectrum. Out of reach for most. Even the mid tier ones from brands like Marantz sound average. The absolute baseline models are piles of junk. You will hear more distortion than sound once you wire up all 7 channels. The sad part is even cheap AVR's cost an arm and leg these days. All brands now give you a huge stack of features and very little attention towards quality of the amplifier. Its unfortunate.

At the end of the day, once we have calibrated these things, all we do is turn them on and listen to a source. Those bells, whistles or features are hardly touched or used. I have not touched or changed the multiple sound fields available on my receiver even once!

Unfortunately, we don't have a great used market for AVR's. If that were the case, you can buy something top of the line for a fraction of their original retail price. Something thats even 5+ year old sounds fantastic.
 
I own an sunfire ultimate AVR which is like easily 10 years old atleast and which works great better than any newer generation AVR

it works as an pre amp as well (7 channel ) for which its processing capabilities are top notch :). I only had to switch to marantz AV 7705 for

newer multichannel formats. what I feel is if you aren't keen on newer formats like me you can save huge on little bit older generation which can lend you long life with less issues. and better Audio quality.
 
Adding to what others have said, the culprit can be licensing fees too!!!
Check the top of your AVR, you will atleast see 7-10 different logos, modes, streaming services and what not. Manufactures have to pay for all these licenses.

Just to add a small note:
On Xbox or Windows PC when you open dolby atmos app, you are prompted to buy the licensing fees in order to use Dolby Atmos for Headphones.
But if you using a AVR which already has this, you can bypass this, as while manufacturing the AVR the OEM had already paid his share of fees to Dolby.
 
The Indian customers for HT has a self imposed limit on themselves. That is sticking to AVR. People are spending lakhs on AVRs for being the latest, number of inputs which they are never going to use, reading the specs, looking at the features etc. But in terms of real cinematic experience, these AVRs fail miserably. I am sharing my journey from AVR to separates

I have used three AVRs before upgrading to separates. while shifting from one AVR to another gave me negligible or no improvement in terms sound quality, the upgradation to separates was mind blowing.

Just see the back sides of your AVR. On an average a 7 channel AVR consumes around 500 watts and they claim to deliver 130-140 watts per channel. How it's possible. My 5 channel Adcom power amp which claims to deliver 125-185 watts at 8 and 4 Ohms respectively has a maximum power consumption of over 1.6 KW.

Technically speaking:

An AVR has the following two major parts built into a single enclosure where as separates got two separate units (As the name suggests)

1. Processor: This has all inputs and and decoding like Dolby Digital, Atmos, DTS, DTS HD mstr etc. This can also takes care of the video part.

Usually a user will feel the need to upgrade this with invention of new audio formats and higher video resolution like 4K etc

2. Multichannel Power amplifier or mono blocks : This dumb (Sometimes ugly too) unit has only one task to do. Receive signal from the Processor through RCA or XLR and Send kick ass power to the speakers. Many people like me get addicted to this component and usually don't feel the need to change it for decades unless they need more power.

Solution: We should demand the local stores to sell processors. We have many talented amplifier designers here who can fulfill the demand for the power amp. This will save some money while not compromising with the cinematic experiences.

Hopping from one AVR to another will not result in any significant improvement in sound quality. Guys please audition for separates where ever you find. Be in a demo room or in any HFV members' place.
 
The Indian customers for HT has a self imposed limit on themselves. That is sticking to AVR. People are spending lakhs on AVRs for being the latest, number of inputs which they are never going to use, reading the specs, looking at the features etc. But in terms of real cinematic experience, these AVRs fail miserably. I am sharing my journey from AVR to separates

I have used three AVRs before upgrading to separates. while shifting from one AVR to another gave me negligible or no improvement in terms sound quality, the upgradation to separates was mind blowing.

Just see the back sides of your AVR. On an average a 7 channel AVR consumes around 500 watts and they claim to deliver 130-140 watts per channel. How it's possible. My 5 channel Adcom power amp which claims to deliver 125-185 watts at 8 and 4 Ohms respectively has a maximum power consumption of over 1.6 KW.

Technically speaking:

An AVR has the following two major parts built into a single enclosure where as separates got two separate units (As the name suggests)

1. Processor: This has all inputs and and decoding like Dolby Digital, Atmos, DTS, DTS HD mstr etc. This can also takes care of the video part.

Usually a user will feel the need to upgrade this with invention of new audio formats and higher video resolution like 4K etc

2. Multichannel Power amplifier or mono blocks : This dumb (Sometimes ugly too) unit has only one task to do. Receive signal from the Processor through RCA or XLR and Send kick ass power to the speakers. Many people like me get addicted to this component and usually don't feel the need to change it for decades unless they need more power.

Solution: We should demand the local stores to sell processors. We have many talented amplifier designers here who can fulfill the demand for the power amp. This will save some money while not compromising with the cinematic experiences.

Hopping from one AVR to another will not result in any significant improvement in sound quality. Guys please audition for separates where ever you find. Be in a demo room or in any HFV members' place.
Is it necessary to upgrade the AVR simply because of support extended to higher resolution video formats such as 4K 120hz and 8K (which went supported by AVRs circa 2019 and prior) if we can directly connect the source to the TV and have only the audio processing handled by the AVR via eARC(assuming the AVR supports eARC)?

I get the argument that AVRs can handle upto 7-8 HDMI inputs while a TV has only 3-4 but more often than not, users usually have 2-3 sources for video insofar as uber high/newer formats are concerned (such as the PS5 which supports 8K and 4K 120hz and a PC in my case).
 
@DB1989, I have done exactly what you described.
In fact my only source to TV is CC4K :D
All else is on OTT. Of course my HT is a 3.1 only

Cheers,
Raghu
 
@DB1989, I have done exactly what you described.
In fact my only source to TV is CC4K :D
All else is on OTT. Of course my HT is a 3.1 only

Cheers,
Raghu
Now that the creative (or jugaad) juices are flowing, the issue of multiple HDMI inputs can also be resolved through an external HDMI switcher if im not mistaken i.e. multiple sources>HDMI Switcher>TV HDMI input > Audio Output to AVR???

Adds an extra step and adds slightly (or majorly - YMMV) to the incovenience but much cheaper than upgrading to a newer AVR
 
Is it necessary to upgrade the AVR simply because of support extended to higher resolution video formats such as 4K 120hz and 8K (which went supported by AVRs circa 2019 and prior) if we can directly connect the source to the TV and have only the audio processing handled by the AVR via eARC(assuming the AVR supports eARC)?

I get the argument that AVRs can handle upto 7-8 HDMI inputs while a TV has only 3-4 but more often than not, users usually have 2-3 sources for video insofar as uber high/newer formats are concerned (such as the PS5 which supports 8K and 4K 120hz and a PC in my case).

If the blu ray player or source is close to the TV/projector then you can bypass the AVR and connect them directly. But if you are using a long HDMI cable like 10 mtr then your source may not be able to do that. The signal has to be boosted through the AVR to support that long cable.
I have the same issue.

But my my point was why the people are not moving beyond AVRs even they have a good budget?

According to me upgrading from one AVR to another is not going to yield any significant improvement in terms of sound quality.
 
If the blu ray player or source is close to the TV/projector then you can bypass the AVR and connect them directly. But if you are using a long HDMI cable like 10 mtr then your source may not be able to do that. The signal has to be boosted through the AVR to support that long cable.
I have the same issue.

But my my point was why the people are not moving beyond AVRs even they have a good budget?

According to me upgrading from one AVR to another is not going to yield any significant improvement in terms of sound quality.

Whats the budget to be allocated for a move from AVR to pre-power combos for say an upgrade from midrange of Denon the X3700H/X4700H ?
 
I have gone through the route of AVRs then separates and now a mix of AVR plus amps.

While the separates sound better, they are significantly more expensive. The Marantz processor and AVR cost very close to each other.
Also, while we may not need 4k 120Hz or 8k, in a 5 year cycle, some other useful technologies do come in, like HDR/Dolby Vision in video or Atmos in Audio.

In my case, I had bought the Emotiva (UMC 1) for around 35-40k and sold at 20k and bought a Marantz 6015 for 1 lakh. The Emotiva XMC-2 or RMC were significantly more expensive and the additional amp for the atmos channels (I still had the 5 channel power amp for the primary 5 channels).
 
Those
Whats the budget to be allocated for a move from AVR to pre-power combos for say an upgrade from midrange of Denon the X3700H/X4700H ?

Sir, you may not get more than 10-15 % improvement in sound quality by upgrading from mid to the mentioned models.

You get only some more features and some more format compatibility. As @sud98 has mentioned you can go for a UMC1 and use even three crown XLi amps. The whole setup will be less than 1L
 
So, what do you propose?


The dealers here are not not selling combos since there are no demand. The buyers must ask for that so that they start selling those.

Go for separates. If budget do not permit that then buy a processor only. You can go for crown amps or made to order amps which many competent members are selling here.
 
I have gone through the route of AVRs then separates and now a mix of AVR plus amps.

While the separates sound better, they are significantly more expensive. The Marantz processor and AVR cost very close to each other.
Also, while we may not need 4k 120Hz or 8k, in a 5 year cycle, some other useful technologies do come in, like HDR/Dolby Vision in video or Atmos in Audio.

In my case, I had bought the Emotiva (UMC 1) for around 35-40k and sold at 20k and bought a Marantz 6015 for 1 lakh. The Emotiva XMC-2 or RMC were significantly more expensive and the additional amp for the atmos channels (I still had the 5 channel power amp for the primary 5 channels).
That's what was my point. You may not feel the need to upgrade the amp for decades. Only the processor needs upgradation. You can buy more amps to add more channels
 
The dealers here are not not selling combos since there are no demand. The buyers must ask for that so that they start selling those.

Go for separates. If budget do not permit that then buy a processor only. You can go for crown amps or made to order amps which many competent members are selling here.
Well, $$$ is the biggest hindrance in Separates adaption. For around 1L, one can quickly grab midrange AV Receivers like X3700H which is more than enough for most AV enthusiasts. If one takes the Separate route, he may need at least 2 to 3L for a similar set-up, if not better.
 
The Marantz PM7000N offers big, spacious and insightful sound, class-leading clarity and a solid streaming platform in a award winning package.
Back
Top