Why expensive avrs?

[Decadent_Spectre]

Just wondering here, I'm not too familiar with the codecs for decoding dolby etc (not too much into HT) but wouldn't using a PC as source with decoding, if it's possible, allow the elimination of the AVR/Pre/pro and go straight to amp?

 

[superczar]

Just wondering here, I'm not too familiar with the codecs for decoding dolby etc (not too much into HT) but wouldn't using a PC as source with decoding, if it's possible, allow the elimination of the AVR/Pre/pro and go straight to amp?

In theory, yes
In practice, it will get too cumbersome very quickly for multiple reasons:

a) Good quality sound cards aren't particularly cheap

b) Adding up multiple discrete amplifier will get more expensive than a mid range AVR

c) Room correction (which is unfortunately a must have for most of us) implementation gets almost impossible - possible in theory but you will run into several constraints when you actually get into it

d) limited to a single source so no way to e.g. get surround from a connected console

In addition, OTT has its own issues with playback on PCs, not insurmountable - but far from being a simple and easy to use method that most people want in the living room or media room

 

[ankitbhargava]

I am already on the journey to migrate from AVR to Separates. Right now I am using my AVR only as Pre-Pro.
Would love to hear the worth of improvement in sound/picture quality from the FMs who have upgraded from AVR to Separates!

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

In theory, yes
In practice, it will get too cumbersome very quickly for multiple reasons:

a) Good quality sound cards aren't particularly cheap

b) Adding up multiple discrete amplifier will get more expensive than a mid range AVR

c) Room correction (which is unfortunately a must have for most of us) implementation gets almost impossible - possible in theory but you will run into several constraints when you actually get into it

d) limited to a single source so no way to e.g. get surround from a connected console

In addition, OTT has its own issues with playback on PCs, not insurmountable - but far from being a simple and easy to use method that most people want in the living room or media room

A well thought out reply. Thanks.

A thought about room correction is that it is doable, the simplest and easiest (though not most effective IMO) would be something like JRiver or Dirac for PC.

Am I right to understand that the general reason for not using the PC is -

Cost
Ease of use/Practicality

 

[superczar]

I am already on the journey to migrate from AVR to Separates. Right now I am using my AVR only as Pre-Pro.
Would love to hear the worth of improvement in sound/picture quality from the FMs who have upgraded from AVR to Separates!

I have thought of going this route on at least a couple of instances in the last several years - but have always stopped short of going the whole hog.

My first attempt was maybe 5 years ago when I was spotted a great deal on a Marantz AV7701.. However before taking the plunge, I decided to test separates by moving an existing Integrated Amp (Marantz PM-17) to the AV setup wired to the pre-out on the AVR (Marantz SR6010)
I personally found the improvement underwhelming - perhaps a little improvement in overall dynamics but could never really tell for sure.

The Amp was certainly not at fault - but the capabilities of the SR6010 may have been a possible culprit.
Anyway, because of the relatively limited improvements I perceived, I decided to cancel the plan of going separates.

Last year, during the lockdown I was bored and started looking at separates options for a different setup in the living room (based on a Denon X3500)
This time I decided to experiment with a class D Amp (Crown XLS) to keep cashflow losses in check before plonking down big bucks for a Pre. After getting the XLS, I felt that the HT playback remained largely unchanged but stereo playback had some small improvements (Some more detail if you will )

YMMV may vary of course, especially after replacing the AVR with a full fat pre-processor (which I never really got around to doing)
Also, having discrete amps will surely help with loud passages

As things stand though, I have left The old SR6010 paired with a very old Marantz PM17 (for LR only) in my HT room and the X3500 paired with the crown XLS in the living room (Again, LR only)

A well thought out reply. Thanks.

A thought about room correction is that it is doable, the simplest and easiest (though not most effective IMO) would be something like JRiver or Dirac for PC.

Am I right to understand that the general reason for not using the PC is -

Cost
Ease of use/Practicality

Dirac is expensive and I dont think they sell PC licenses any more - at least they weren't when I was experimenting in a similar vein a few years ago. So that effective leaves only DDRC on mini-dsp as a viable option.

Jriver - worth a try probably, no real experience with it ..

This could be just me but I think when it comes to room correction, i have my doubts about freeware/very low cost sw based room correction ..
Its a biased opinion colored by my early experiments with REW..
ARC and Audyssey XT32 are the methods I use and REW results were not even remotely comparable

Having said that, There is surely a big market for good room software based room correction - especially when you consider that processing power is cheap and obscenely priced RC options like Trinnov are built on x64 platforms anyway..
Just need someone to crack it!

 

[ankitbhargava]

I have thought of going this route on at least a couple of instances in the last several years - but have always stopped short of going the whole hog.

My first attempt was maybe 5 years ago when I was spotted a great deal on a Marantz AV7701.. However before taking the plunge, I decided to test separates by moving an existing Integrated Amp (Marantz PM-17) to the AV setup wired to the pre-out on the AVR (Marantz SR6010)
I personally found the improvement underwhelming - perhaps a little improvement in overall dynamics but could never really tell for sure.

The Amp was certainly not at fault - but the capabilities of the SR6010 may have been a possible culprit.
Anyway, because of the relatively limited improvements I perceived, I decided to cancel the plan of going separates.

Last year, during the lockdown I was bored and started looking at separates options for a different setup in the living room (based on a Denon X3500)
This time I decided to experiment with a class D Amp (Crown XLS) to keep cashflow losses in check before plonking down big bucks for a Pre. After getting the XLS, I felt that the HT playback remained largely unchanged but stereo playback had some small improvements (Some more detail if you will )

YMMV may vary of course, especially after replacing the AVR with a full fat pre-processor (which I never really got around to doing)
Also, having discrete amps will surely help with loud passages

As things stand though, I have left The old SR6010 paired with a very old Marantz PM17 (for LR only) in my HT room and the X3500 paired with the crown XLS in the living room (Again, LR only)


Dirac is expensive and I dont think they sell PC licenses any more - at least they weren't when I was experimenting in a similar vein a few years ago. So that effective leaves only DDRC on mini-dsp as a viable option.

Jriver - worth a try probably, no real experience with it ..

This could be just me but I think when it comes to room correction, i have my doubts about freeware/very low cost sw based room correction ..
Its a biased opinion colored by my early experiments with REW..
ARC and Audyssey XT32 are the methods I use and REW results were not even remotely comparable

Having said that, There is surely a big market for good room software based room correction - especially when you consider that processing power is cheap and obscenely priced RC options like Trinnov are built on x64 platforms anyway..
Just need someone to crack it!

Upgrading from using the Amps of AVR to using Amps for my entire 7.2.4 has improved the quality of sound to multifold, I did try Crown too but couldn't find much of improvement (altogether different discussion though).

My first contention of migrating from AVR to Separates was to fetch more life of equipment however I have been wandering if that also promises a VERY significant improvement.

@jbkar may have more detailed explanation of his experience

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

I have thought of going this route on at least a couple of instances in the last several years - but have always stopped short of going the whole hog.

My first attempt was maybe 5 years ago when I was spotted a great deal on a Marantz AV7701.. However before taking the plunge, I decided to test separates by moving an existing Integrated Amp (Marantz PM-17) to the AV setup wired to the pre-out on the AVR (Marantz SR6010)
I personally found the improvement underwhelming - perhaps a little improvement in overall dynamics but could never really tell for sure.

The Amp was certainly not at fault - but the capabilities of the SR6010 may have been a possible culprit.
Anyway, because of the relatively limited improvements I perceived, I decided to cancel the plan of going separates.

Last year, during the lockdown I was bored and started looking at separates options for a different setup in the living room (based on a Denon X3500)
This time I decided to experiment with a class D Amp (Crown XLS) to keep cashflow losses in check before plonking down big bucks for a Pre. After getting the XLS, I felt that the HT playback remained largely unchanged but stereo playback had some small improvements (Some more detail if you will )

YMMV may vary of course, especially after replacing the AVR with a full fat pre-processor (which I never really got around to doing)
Also, having discrete amps will surely help with loud passages

As things stand though, I have left The old SR6010 paired with a very old Marantz PM17 (for LR only) in my HT room and the X3500 paired with the crown XLS in the living room (Again, LR only)


Dirac is expensive and I dont think they sell PC licenses any more - at least they weren't when I was experimenting in a similar vein a few years ago. So that effective leaves only DDRC on mini-dsp as a viable option.

Jriver - worth a try probably, no real experience with it ..

This could be just me but I think when it comes to room correction, i have my doubts about freeware/very low cost sw based room correction ..
Its a biased opinion colored by my early experiments with REW..
ARC and Audyssey XT32 are the methods I use and REW results were not even remotely comparable

Having said that, There is surely a big market for good room software based room correction - especially when you consider that processing power is cheap and obscenely priced RC options like Trinnov are built on x64 platforms anyway..
Just need someone to crack it!

Dirac certainly was expensive for software, I am not aware if they still sell PC licenses, never checked after my initial trial.

No experience with miniDSP (not a fan) but JRiver works decently. You'd need a mic as it is not auto EQ. That brings me to an important point, I find auto EQ to be terrible. I also believe hardware based DSP with either manual (by ear) or measured tweaking is better. I personally prefer by ear. In the distant past I have used Onkyo's auto EQ as well which was utter rubbish.

Room correction software exists but they are not cheap or easy to use for the average user. In this regard AutoEQ shines where it is significantly easy to do for the end user though the results are poor.

 

[superczar]

Upgrading from using the Amps of AVR to using Amps for my entire 7.2.4 has improved the quality of sound to multifold, I did try Crown too but couldn't find much of improvement (altogether different discussion though).

My first contention of migrating from AVR to Separates was to fetch more life of equipment however I have been wandering if that also promises a VERY significant improvement.

@jbkar may have more detailed explanation of his experience

yeah, maybe my limited experiments (2 channel only) may have thrown a monkey wrench into the works - either way, as it turned out, most of my movie watching now happens on an ipad pro and AP max with spatial atmos , no thanks to my kid so I guess all upgrades/expansions/experiments will have to be deferred for a few years.

Dirac certainly was expensive for software, I am not aware if they still sell PC licenses, never checked after my initial trial.

No experience with miniDSP (not a fan) but JRiver works decently. You'd need a mic as it is not auto EQ. That brings me to an important point, I find auto EQ to be terrible. I also believe hardware based DSP with either manual (by ear) or measured tweaking is better. I personally prefer by ear. In the distant past I have used Onkyo's auto EQ as well which was utter rubbish.

Room correction software exists but they are not cheap or easy to use for the average user. In this regard AutoEQ shines where it is significantly easy to do for the end user though the results are poor.

MiniDSP is currently the only non AVR method to use DIRAC (AFAIK)
What is AutoEQ though? I thought it was an open source package for equalizing headphones - could be wrong though

Anyway, back to your original question, It would likely be a lot more cost effective to get an entry level or mid range AVR
Contrary to what reviews would have you believe, even the entry audyssey algorithms are pretty good at cleaning the output, esp the bass - and while XT32 or ARC is a definite step up, the base package coupled with the editor app yields reasonably good results

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

yeah, maybe my limited experiments (2 channel only) may have thrown a monkey wrench into the works - either way, as it turned out, most of my movie watching now happens on an ipad pro and AP max with spatial atmos , no thanks to my kid so I guess all upgrades/expansions/experiments will have to be deferred for a few years.

MiniDSP is currently the only non AVR method to use DIRAC (AFAIK)
What is AutoEQ though? I thought it was an open source package for equalizing headphones - could be wrong though

Anyway, back to your original question, It would likely be a lot more cost effective to get an entry level or mid range AVR
Contrary to what reviews would have you believe, even the entry audyssey algorithms are pretty good at cleaning the output, esp the bass - and while XT32 or ARC is a definite step up, the base package coupled with the editor app yields reasonably good results

I don't actually follow miniDSP or Dirac so can't say.

Sorry I should have been clearer, by AutoEQ I mean software that automatically generates filters and applies correction after you take measurements rather tan manually measuring it and applying filters or doing so by ear.

I understand what you mean, unless your going down the rabbit hole there is no interest for people to spend this much money,time and effort in this route.

You might be correct for those who are not as interested but for people particular about their sound I think that the automated EQ setups might prove useless, it certainly did for me, YMMV of course. I do not follow reviews so I have no idea on the general consensus for automated EQ.

 

[sidvee]

I personally found the improvement underwhelming - perhaps a little improvement in overall dynamics but could never really tell for sure.

The Amp was certainly not at fault - but the capabilities of the SR6010 may have been a possible culprit.

I felt that the HT playback remained largely unchanged but stereo playback had some small improvements (Some more detail if you will )


YMMV may vary of course, especially after replacing the AVR with a full fat pre-processor (which I never really got around to doing)
Also, having discrete amps will surely help with loud passages

I have had this experience 2 times with expensive separates - 1st time with a B&K processor and a 7 channel parasound amp which weighed 100 lbs (18 years ago - about $8k), and then again with a marantz pre and 7 channel power amp. Now I don't bother with this much - improvements are miniscule for HT. For Stereo another different matter entirely.
I just stick with AVR's for HT and change them every 3-4 years to get the lastest and greatest formats like eARC etc.
Cheers,
Sid

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

Believe it or not the primary bottleneck for HT is typically SPL, and the speakers and power needed to achieve it.

Many people use small "standard" bookshelves or even floor standers but they often lack SPL and clarity to deliver the cinema experience people are used to in commercial theaters.

I don't believe the issue is using seperates unless your speakers are underpowered.

 

[ankitbhargava]

Believe it or not the primary bottleneck for HT is typically SPL, and the speakers and power needed to achieve it.

Many people use small "standard" bookshelves or even floor standers but they often lack SPL and clarity to deliver the cinema experience people are used to in commercial theaters.

I don't believe the issue is using seperates unless your speakers are underpowered.

I can understand the "gap" related to clarity/quality/ wand what not but as far as SPL goes its only about SPL from each individual speaker while content is being played live.

After I started using Amps, I realised that my surrounds and atmos were almost not present while they were being run by AVR.

During room calibration of course they show up SPL but nit while playing the actual content when all/many channels have to get engaged simultaneously.

 

[insane79]

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?

Well, the expensive avrs have the ability to drive even low impedance speakers, they normally have better internal amps, better room correction & build quality. Eg- Anthem, Arcam & Nad are expensive avrs but have the features i mentioned.

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

I can understand the "gap" related to clarity/quality/ wand what not but as far as SPL goes its only about SPL from each individual speaker while content is being played live.

After I started using Amps, I realised that my surrounds and atmos were almost not present while they were being run by AVR.

During room calibration of course they show up SPL but nit while playing the actual content when all/many channels have to get engaged simultaneously.

HT is very dynamic in nature, if the speaker/amp combo is not capable it is compressing and/or clipping.

 

[superczar]

I can understand the "gap" related to clarity/quality/ wand what not but as far as SPL goes its only about SPL from each individual speaker while content is being played live.

After I started using Amps, I realised that my surrounds and atmos were almost not present while they were being run by AVR.

During room calibration of course they show up SPL but nit while playing the actual content when all/many channels have to get engaged simultaneously.

This would be a rather unusual outcome though.

Assuming your AVR (with 0 external amps) has adequate power to drive LR speakers in stereo direct mode at say 75db or so without clipping.
Most entry level and certainly all mid range AVRs have adequate power to do so (and let’s not get into the relatively small improvements on dynamics with external amps for now) .

Do note that this is while handling the most power hungry band (namely the 20-80hz) without the subs kicking in (assuming you have vanilla stereo).

During HT playback at say 70db (i.e. -10 volume if using the standard D&M scale) , most of the power ask is from a single center speaker - in a low power band (mid-range and highs)
Additionally there is a massive amount of headroom being released from the AVR because the super hungry 20-80 band is getting cutover to the external amps on the sub(s) anyway.

The remaining headroom should in all likelihood be adequate for the measly power ask from the rest of the speakers , especially considering the SPL from LR/SL/SR is anyway rather low during HT playback, no?

 

[sandeepmohan]

Believe it or not the primary bottleneck for HT is typically SPL, and the speakers and power needed to achieve it.

Can you elaborate on this?
Honestly; you can't expect cinema levels of SPL in your living room. That would make your ears bleed. I like loud but not when it starts to make my ears hurt.

Most of us don't have the room to place massive 15" drivers in our room, so we make our peace with small loudspeakers and subwoofers taking over bass duties.

Speakers need power to drive them. The lesser the quality of this power, the more distortion you hear. AC receiver are rated at single channel drive mostly and their distortion rating are also one channel drive. Get 5 or more channels going and all those figures go for a six.

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

Can you elaborate on this?
Honestly; you can't expect cinema levels of SPL in your living room. That would make your ears bleed. I like loud but not when it starts to make my ears hurt.

Most of us don't have the room to place massive 15" drivers in our room, so we make our peace with small loudspeakers and subwoofers taking over bass duties.

Speakers need power to drive them. The lesser the quality of this power, the more distortion you hear. AC receiver are rated at single channel drive mostly and their distortion rating are also one channel drive. Get 5 or more channels going and all those figures go for a six.

Many people go to the cinema, this is their (subjective) reference. One can not achieve this at home without equal or similar SPLs obviously. If one puts speakers with 5-8" midbass drivers and 8-12" subwoofers then it simply isn't going to happen in general. Also at home IMO with these standard home audio speakers the speaker/amp combo is compressing/clipping and not reproducing the peak that is so important in HT. I'm not saying everyone should do it, merely pointing out that the seperates route can't really be expected to provide a meaningful improvement in general, yes if you go with a more powerful amp then that may help but it is still limited depending on the amps power capacity and the speaker it is paired with.

I hope you did not think I was endorsing AVRs, I do not even consider them, not that I am a HT guy. Power is important in terms of power output,distortion (both THD and IMD) but theres more to it, there is the subjective side and while this may mean less in HT, it is still important. As I have posted before a good amp with a higher peak capability (Class D) can be preferable in HT as it is all about those peaks when it comes to special effects, even the bass channel is in general one of peaks rather than a continuous beat.

Edit : In case of lower impedance speakers/subs, let's not forget about the required current.

 

[ankitbhargava]

This would be a rather unusual outcome though.

Assuming your AVR (with 0 external amps) has adequate power to drive LR speakers in stereo direct mode at say 75db or so without clipping.
Most entry level and certainly all mid range AVRs have adequate power to do so (and let’s not get into the relatively small improvements on dynamics with external amps for now) .

Do note that this is while handling the most power hungry band (namely the 20-80hz) without the subs kicking in (assuming you have vanilla stereo).

During HT playback at say 70db (i.e. -10 volume if using the standard D&M scale) , most of the power ask is from a single center speaker - in a low power band (mid-range and highs)
Additionally there is a massive amount of headroom being released from the AVR because the super hungry 20-80 band is getting cutover to the external amps on the sub(s) anyway.

The remaining headroom should in all likelihood be adequate for the measly power ask from the rest of the speakers , especially considering the SPL from LR/SL/SR is anyway rather low during HT playback, no?

This could be true in theory and may be for optimised Room size with treatment (to compensate the other aspects) + playing through the Blu Rays.

When it comes to streaming OTT, my setup is a living proof that AVR v/s PAs the difference is night and day. Just no comparison at all.

 

[manojrc]

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?

Like everything else in life, when it comes to AVR also, after certain price point, the law of diminishing marginal return kicks in. From that point onwards, you are paying for pride of ownership,aesthetic, exclusivity, brand & bragging power. These may be important for some folks, but none of these can have an impact on quality of sound.