ARTICLE: Post AV - the stereo gear gunning for your AV Receiver

Thanks for an interesting continuation to your theme Ed. I'm also on the cusp of changing from 5.1 AV to, in my case, soundbar and separate 2.1 stereo. I originally bought the Arcam/B & W AV setup fourteen years ago so I could get movie surround sound and to look forward to the sunny uplands of SACD and DVD-A music. I also went Squeezebox at the same time for mult-room and streaming. The uplands never arrived but, never mind, the AV setup was better at PCM than my previous all-music 2.1 system. Unfortunately, my wife has never mastered the switching routine of the TV/AV amp/SB and has to get me evertime she wants to watch or listen to something. Also, while the B& W sub/sats are visually discreet, the amp and DVD player aren't and need a lot of space. And don't get me started on wires (tiled floor, so no opportunity to hide them). I just need something that's easy to operate, doesn't dominate the room and will stay current for longer. The new breed of all-in-one streamers and/or active wireless speakers will suit me fine.
 
Thanks for an interesting continuation to your theme Ed. I'm also on the cusp of changing from 5.1 AV to, in my case, soundbar and separate 2.1 stereo. I originally bought the Arcam/B & W AV setup fourteen years ago so I could get movie surround sound and to look forward to the sunny uplands of SACD and DVD-A music. I also went Squeezebox at the same time for mult-room and streaming. The uplands never arrived but, never mind, the AV setup was better at PCM than my previous all-music 2.1 system. Unfortunately, my wife has never mastered the switching routine of the TV/AV amp/SB and has to get me evertime she wants to watch or listen to something. Also, while the B& W sub/sats are visually discreet, the amp and DVD player aren't and need a lot of space. And don't get me started on wires (tiled floor, so no opportunity to hide them). I just need something that's easy to operate, doesn't dominate the room and will stay current for longer. The new breed of all-in-one streamers and/or active wireless speakers will suit me fine.
The Logitech Harmony Elite is the single greatest piece of AV kit I have bought, as it means nobody in the house has to think twice about how to watch or listen to what they want. Just press the correct button on the screen, and everything switches correctly.
 
I will not be "returning" to pure stereo - nostalgia is fine if that's your thing, but I appreciate the advances I've heard in the 45 years since I started collecting LPs. Obviously getting the same sort of per channel performance for 8 channels (7.1) will cost four times as much as for 2 channels (well, not quite: the surround speakers are cheaper because they don't need to go as low as the front speakers), but once you have decent processor / preamplifier:
1) Stereo performance and surround are identical, as the sources, power amplification and speakers are anyway the same, and for the most part are not subject to permanent functional upgrade demands.
2) You can also listen to multichannel SACD and BDA in multichannel - and that unique benefit makes the whole expense worth while.
 
I find the newly announced NAD M33 all-in-one integrated amp incredibly compelling for exactly this reason. With eARC the M33 can connect directly to my TV allowing the TV to act as a source switcher when I'm watching movies or playing video games or streaming, while the amplifier section (Purifi) and digital section are of the highest quality, unlike receivers which cram 13 channels into a tiny chassis. And the M33 like its brethren have full Dirac room EQ and bass management.

You beat me to it - that Nad M33 looks incredible - game changer
 
Good article.
Like many here, I have 5.1 - it's great but to be honest if I went down the 2.1 (or 2.0) route would I really be missing out? I totally get the idea of 'as the director intended' and really enjoy going to Atmos enable cinemas. But at home - a great movie is more about the story line (or put simply) - content. An example would be the Bicycle Thief - up there as one of the greats and no amount of trickery will enhance that.

I'm contemplating changing by front Left/Right satellites for Floor standers (music is taking more precedents these days) . Probably will keep remaining kit - but if I were starting out again and kept it to 2.1 (or 2.0) I think I would remain very satisfied with the overall experience.
 
I also thought about going just to 2.1, but so far I would really miss the centre, or so I think. Some ppl say, that I would get used to it. There are also some 3.0 or 3.1 amps, but those are mostly rare and quite expensive ....

If you nail your speaker positioning you wouldn't even notice the centre was absent.
 
Interesting article, thanks :)

Over the years I'm disliking the "clutter" of multi-channel setups more and more; I personally would never invest in something like Atmos because a lounge would looking fudgeing terrible with speakers all over the ceiling as well! But I also don't like the look of soundbars; the projection from wall should not be more than the screen itself is my view.

Seriously considering the Panasonic GZ/HZ 2000 with the built-in Atmos and binning my AVR and speakers!
 
I think multichannel is certainly becoming more niche, really for people who have dedicated rooms. Most people are looking for simple AV solutions in their living rooms, they just want something that works with minimum fuss and doesn't take up loads of space. Add to that just how densely packed the population of this small country is becoming, most people can't get the full benefit from a true home cinema set up as the volume of uncompressed audio soundtracks through 5.1 plus speakers will almost guarantee a fall out with the neighbours. I have had this problem with DTS HD-MA discs so now I just set the source to default to DD+ so I can use the dynamic compression feature on my receiver, and I don't even have a sub!
 
Agreed, a proper stereo amplifier is best if that's all you want it to do, but the depreciation over 5 or so years for av receivers is so massive that very capable bits of kit can be bought for not much money, so the spending double to get the equivalent performance rule is negated quite quickly if you don't require, for instance atmos etc. And the dedicated stereo amplifier won't be so convenient for multiple video sources. Worth thinking about at least....

Andy
That's why HDMI ARC is so important; it allows your TV to be the switcher of multiple video sources as long as both TV and integrated amplifier have ARC capability.
 
If you nail your speaker positioning you wouldn't even notice the centre was absent.

I can remember reading a feature in a magazine years ago where a home cinema system (large projection screen) was tested and it had Wilson Grand Slamm's as the front speakers, I'm sure it had Martin Logan as side and rears too. They didn't even bother with a centre speaker as the Wilson's soundstage made the requirement for one redundant. Bit of an extreme example obviously but a little further down the food chain didn't Naim's original efforts with AV forgo the centre speaker as well? They actually cited the fact that in most cases a home setup at this level would almost certainly go to the effort to make sure that the viewers were in the sweet spot for the audio anyway (as oppose to being off axis like is common in a cinema scenario)
 
The one solution that is conspicuously missing is Lyngdorf. I run a TDA-2170 for 2 channel and combined with room perfect is the best 2 channel sound i've ever achieved in my listening space. Plus its home theatre mode integrates it seamlessly with a home theatre. I have it running with a Marantz 7010 so best of both worlds.
I thought starting at £2800 it was expensive, but seeing the price of some of the alternatives it actually seems like a bit of a bargain now.

Jay
 
I used to run a Naim 72 / 140 with my old Yamaha. I had it configured with the line outs via the Naim tape loop. Turn the Naim up half way and use the Yamaha as the master volume. Worked a treat and if I was listening to audio sources they would be fed directly to the Naim (and don't even turn on the Yamaha). Best of both worlds.

Mind, some back then would argue that a 'big' (at the time 29" was considered big) CRT sitting between the speakers would impair the sonics.
 
I've done the multiple-box, big-speaker hi-fi thing in the past, and now the multiple-speaker, big box AV thing, and both have aesthetics that leave me yearning for something less intrusive. I know I'm coming across as more an interior decorator than an audio purist, but I suspect I'm not alone. I do a lot of entertaining and the room needs to be versatile; short of taking a sledgehmmer to the walls I'm stuck with with a far-from-ideal layout where the smaller the electronics the better. It will likely cost more to get the level of sound quality I'm after, but I can live with that.
 
If you nail your speaker positioning you wouldn't even notice the centre was absent.

Yes, that's most probably just me. You know, sometimes you have to go thru some experience, to realise your faults. And I never had any home cinema, so I just wanted to give it a try ... and most probably lose some money on my route :)

My final idea is an AVR for movies, combined with the stereo amp using ht bypass (main-in/direct-in) feature, to get best of both worlds.

How would you easily get your movies properly downmixed to 2.0/2.1, with the old-good stereo amp? We really need new kind of devices for such stuff - combination of a stereo amp, network streamer and AVR. So far, I am not convinced that we are there with the average stereo receivers available (Denon, Marantz and the likes) .....
 
How would you easily get your movies properly downmixed to 2.0/2.1, with the old-good stereo amp? We really need new kind of devices for such stuff - combination of a stereo amp, network streamer and AVR. So far, I am not convinced that we are there with the average stereo receivers available (Denon, Marantz and the likes) .....


Most if not all digital sources have the option to mixdown multichannel encoded audio to just 2 channel PCM.
 
Most if not all digital sources have the option to mixdown multichannel encoded audio to just 2 channel PCM.
And if they follow the Dolby guidelines, they will throw away the LFE channel. Technically, that's "properly", because it's what Dolby says to do, but I don't think it's ideal.
 
I gave up on AV a good number of years ago, I certainly don't miss the software glitches and bugs that came along with the likes of the Arcam AVR600. I have since moved to Naim separates, they just work and work very well. Really not missing 5.1 when I can have an amazing imagining in stereo.
 
I don't think it is just an age thing though. I think that part of the problem is that the AV sector drained the enthusiasm of many people with over rapid product cycles, inescapable obsolescence, and heartbreaking depreciation.

Yep. Engineering-led solutions to problems that don't exist, is how I would describe it.

The profitability of a manufacturer depends on people replenishing kit faster than its usable lifespan but, in order to drive this, it is necessary to constantly be offering something "new" with which previous kit is not compatible.

This runs into a brick wall eventually, as I think mobile phones have now done, in that manufacturers are really struggling to distinguish new models and identify features that are worthwhile additions to those of four or five years ago.

See my signature, I am still running an Arcam AV9/P7 combo. I paid £300 for both of them. The only thing I wish it had is LPCM over HDMI. Other than that I am not 'missing' any features.

I have been very tempted to switch to a pure stereo setup lately. The wife would be much happier with fewer boxes. Good though the Arcam combo is, it is easily bested in stereo by a mid-level stereo amp.

I am not sold on 4k/Atmos. I never felt 5.1 was lacking 'involvement'.

I think the problem for Home Cinema now is that it has solved almost all of its engineering challenges.

As to whether I will switch totally to stereo, hearing a Rega amp in my system has made it mighty tempting!
 
Ditched the big AV receiver, floorstanders, surrounds and sub last year. Now running a reasonably high-spec Samsung soundbar & active sub.

Two reasons:

1) Child in bed upstairs and not a big house, so can’t run at decent volumes where you get the benefit of surround.

2) For ordinary TV in stereo, tried 4/5 different combinations of amps and centre speakers, I could never get clear dialog at low volumes using PL2 or Neo6. It either got lost in the mix, or I had to crank the centre channel until it was too dominant. Used room EQ, SPL meter but never satisfactory.

With the soundbar I get extremely clear dialog, some “virtual” surround effects, HDMI ARC control & switching, decent music performance over Bluetooth and it’s one box plus a wireless sub hidden away.
 
Boabis, it's good to hear that your soundbar gives you clear dialogue. It's one of the disappointments of my M1 sats is that dialogue is not that clear (though better than from the TV). The wife and I are both losing the top end of our range, and dialogue is easily swamped by muddy background music. I was worried that the limited channel separation in a soundbar would exacerbate this, but perhaps not.
 
Something like Klipsch The Fives in a floorstanding size and a reasonable price could also be an option for many, assuming there's no need for external sources using the smart services of today's TVs.
 
Boabis, it's good to hear that your soundbar gives you clear dialogue. It's one of the disappointments of my M1 sats is that dialogue is not that clear (though better than from the TV). The wife and I are both losing the top end of our range, and dialogue is easily swamped by muddy background music. I was worried that the limited channel separation in a soundbar would exacerbate this, but perhaps not.

Soundbars, by definition, are a bit of a cheat when it comes to sound quality. Until you get to the £750+ range, they are really designed to supplant built-in TV speakers, so they will boost dialog and bass to give the sound more “presence”.

My retired parents (who are losing a bit of hearing these days) have both really benefited from adding a soundbar, no more subtitles!
 
A soundbar will in many cases include a centre speaker though (within the cabinet) and should be able to portray audio intended for centre stage pretty efficiently. What you'd lose out on is the wider front soundstage you'd get from using 2 seperate individual speakers placed further apart. It should also be said that you'd still need to use an external subwoofer in association with a soundbar due to the size of the drivers being employed and their inability to portray low end bass. Those serious about listening to stereo audio aren't really moving to soundbars. Soundbars are however becoming a serious lifestyle alternative to AV receivers.

I'd also like to suggest that you can have an AV receiver and a multiple speaker setup without having to play audio any louder than you'd portray it via a stereo setup.. You are not attaining the ability to portray details associated with audio mixed with higher dynamic range at lower volumes when using just 2 speakers. THe dynamic range is exacty the same and you'd still lose some of the quieter aspects if portraying such audio at lower volumes via a stereo setup. It is up to the listener as to what volume they portray the cntentt and this is true of both a multi speakers or a stereo setup. Using an AV receiver doesn't dictate the volume, you do. My neighbours don't own an AV receiver or a multichannel AV system, but their TV and or their stereo are often a lot louder than I have my AV receiver set to.
 
Last edited:
I'd also like to suggest that you can have an AV receiver and a multiple speaker setup without having to play audio any louder than you'd portray it via a stereo setup.. You are not attaining the ability to portray details associated with audio mixed with higher dynamic range at lower volumes when using just 2 speakers. THe dynamic range is exacty the same and you'd still lose some of the quieter aspects if portraying such audio at lower volumes via a stereo setup.

This isn't quite true, as the whole point of running five speakers is that the potential dynamic range (when properly calibrated) is much greater than with two. I won't get into the physics except to say that if two speakers playing the same sound at the same volume sounds twice as loud, then five/seven doing the same thing gives much more headroom.

This does lead to problems with mixing where the studio engineer does not necessarily have a small television speaker in mind.
 
No, having multiple speakers has nothing at all to do with dynamic range. You have the additional sprakers to attain surround sound by portraying different channels of audio all around you. You attain the same dynamic range by setting the volume to a level heard from your location that results in the same levels as those experienced by the person who mixed the soundtrack. This is basically standardised for film soundtracks and the level a studio has reference calibrated is 85db relative to a pink noise test tone.

You'd still need to portray audio at reference if listening in stereo in order to get the dynamic range experienced by the person who mixed it.


It doesn't cause the person mixing it any issues. The reference is standardised and this is basically the same level to which your AV receiver calibrates itself to (generally home setup use 75db as reference). The relative volume scale would subsequantly result in 0db being reference post calibration. Yes, this is loud and most households wouldn't be the best place to play a soundtrack at such levels.

Home theatre was originally about trying to recreate the same experience you'd get within a cinema at home. The same reference is used to calibrate the theatre's sound system and this ensures consistency from mix, to theatre and now to home theatre. Home theatre releases are subject to much the same standards when it comes to how their soundtracks are mixed as were applied to the theatre mixes.
 
Last edited:

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom