What Defines an AV Receiver These Days Anyway?

[chrisy]

Jerry Del Colliano of HomeTheaterReview.com asks the question:

"What Defines an AV Receiver These Days Anyway?"


In the old days a "receiver" was roughly defined as an AV component that included a preamp, an internal power amp and some form of AM/FM tuner all in one chassis. While integrated amps (a preamp and amp all in one unit without the tuner) were a little more respected in the audiophile community - many of us got our first start at high performance audio via a receiver of some sort. My first receiver was an NAD that ultimately was used as a make-shift audiophile preamp as my system grew when I was a teenager in prep school back in Philadelphia. Since those days, the receiver has transformed into a completely different beast today.

Ask any male Baby Boomer where he grew up and which FM radio station he listened to and you will nearly always get an enthusiastic response. In the late 1960's and early 1970's my father was the program director for the two coolest AM and FM rock-pop stations in the Philadelphia market - WIFL and WIBG. Many people his age still think back fondly to listening to all of the incredible music of the day from Jimi Hendrix to The Beatles to Motown to Aerosmith, Led Zeppelin and so much more. This music was broadcast free of charge and wirelessly. Via terrestrial FM radio hundreds of Americans got a viable source for music (albeit not a very high resolution one) especially new music that was incredibly culturally relevant. In Europe during the same period, FM radio programming was even better than in the United States with great shows, live programming and arguably better audio which all resulted in an even more loyal following for FM radio than in the States. Globally by the 1970s FM radio content was a must-have in any mainstream or even performance based audio system thus the generation-long love affair with the AV receiver.

With the meteoric rise in popularity in home theater in the very late 1970's paired with the success of Dolby surround sound and the VHS tape recorder - AV receivers added even more functionality including surround sound processing, video switching and more. As AV systems became more digital they now switched, processed and dealt with more and more sophisticated sources while still always remaining faithful to their AM/FM roots. AV receivers evolved and consumers ate up the new feature sets while upgrading their systems year after year.

Roll the tape forward to 1996 and the deregulation of terrestrial radio in the United States - we saw American radio boom right along with the dotcom companies that were so popular in the day. And like so-many of their dotcom brethren - radio consolidators have busted like a degenerate gambler on the worst of Las Vegas binges. Stocks of once mighty radio companies are now worth mere pennies a share - with many reportedly close to bankruptcy today. Radio stations that once sold for 16 times "top line" one-year revenue can barely sell for one-time yearly revenue. Howard Stern, the backbone of the FM talk dynasty at CBS-Infinity, is now the strongest draw at pay-satellite radio provider at Sirius-XM satellite radio. As an industry, many radio programming critics argue that there hasn't been a meaningful new terrestrial radio format since "Arrow" (which was really a 1970's rock oldies format) in over 25 years. Terrestrial radio once one of the most mighty of mainstream medias just a decade or two ago - is today deader than a doornail.

With radio solidly festering in the proverbial new media shitcan - today AV receivers are asked to do more and more hard work. Switching HDCP copy protected HDMI signals is no small technical feat. Processing HD audio codecs from Blu-ray discs like Dolby TrueHD and DTS Master Audio are even more intense yet this doesn't even cover the scope of today's AV receivers. Increasingly, today's under-$1,000 receivers are adding satellite radio as an included feature. Now these same receivers are becoming network devices that speak to other computers, hard drives, cell phones and other devices throughout the home via wireless protocols as well as connections such as Bluetooth.

Today, AV receivers have transcended their traditional role and for most American AV consumers represent the hearth and soul of your home entertainment system as it increasingly is fed "on-demand" "pay-per-view" and HD downloaded content while being controlled by the likes of an Apple iPod touch via wireless or Bluetooth connection.

The radio industry thinks they have a comeback in them. They are dead wrong. Radio and the music business executives are quick to blame Napster and other peer-to-peer file sharing systems for their troubles yet ask any Howard Stern fan how much better the show is (even paying $12 per month) without the 14 minute commercial sets twice an hour. The music industry's long and nasty divorce with FM radio has forced music enthusiasts and today's youth to other media to find new places and formats to buy new music. No company has benefited from this phenomenon more from this than Apple Computer who today can wirelessly connect every media file you have in your house (even some 720p HD files) to your home theaters, HDTVs and other locations with the ultimate level of ease of use that only Apple can deliver.

Considering the fact that I have never actually over from satellite to the FM radio in my car for the two years that I have owned it - I ask the question: with all of the processing power needed to manage today's complex home theater systems - is it time to consider leaving AM-FM tuners out of next generation AV receivers? Clearly receivers "receive" a lot more than analog terrestrial radio. Do consumers really care if you get your local FM station in your next receiver assuming you might have access to say 1,000 plus Internet Radio stations instead for the same money. Even if you must still have your AM and FM in your system - there is no question the definition of what an AV receiver is today has changed radically even in the last year.

Source: HomeTheaterReview.com

[Bob_99]

Being in the market to replace my Outlaw 990, I have been asking that very question about the need for a radio tuner. I'm sure I'm not the alone and I wonder how a product would fare in the market if it did come out with no tuner. My best guess is that since most of the radio is on one or two chips, it probably doesn't increase the cost that much and it's probably the cheapest feature to add to a receiver even if there's nothing worth listening to on the radio (IMO).

Bob

[Tonto]

I agree that AV receivers are full featured/over featured in many cases for the average consumer. This has been my assessment for years.

I wish companies would scale down some of their products. I mean, how many input/outputs does the average consumer need. And with many of the components duplicating tasks, it makes for waste. Only 1 processor can be utilized, so why must each component have one (BD Player, Receiver, & Projector).

Companies who make all these components, could make a "high end" selection without the redundancy & trim costs. I mean, the BD Player could pass the signal to the receiver which would then processes it & pass it for display by the projector. Pool the money of all 3 processors into just 1 great one for the receiver. I think its time to offer a great receiver with multiple HDMI inputs/outputs & trim out the others. Even computer video cards have HDMI outputs (media servers).

Now it may be that all the extra hardware doesn't really cost that much to make & install.? Is it there just to draw the Ohhh's & Ahhh's...I personally don't need that stuff, but I do want the top end processor.

Guess I got a bit off topic, sorry. But the short deal is, while I still listen to the radio, do I have to have a tuner. No, because I already have one & could connect it to my main HTR. But that goes back to my main contention, trim all the extra stuff leaving you with a "quality" HTR & offer that for sale.

Are companies are missing the boat here?

[tonyvdb]

The issue here is that most people who are buying the "high end" receiver also use a good quality turntable as well as CD player and maybe even a good tape player and need the added analog and digital inputs. Companies use mass production to keep costs down and by making a receiver or pre-pro with less inputs and features is not going to save money as it would then need a separate production run.
I do agree that I rarely listen to the radio and cant think of one time I have even used it in my home theater setup but its not taking up space so it really in not a problem if its there.

[Bob_99]

if I were to make a quick observation, I would guess that everyone seems to have different needs and it's probably more cost effective to make fewer models that cover everything. I myself would like more put into the sound quality and fewer features, but then, that's just me.

Bob

[Tonto]

tonyvdb wrote:

The issue here is that most people who are buying the "high end" receiver also use a good quality turntable as well as CD player and maybe even a good tape player and need the added analog and digital inputs. Companies use mass production to keep costs down and by making a receiver or pre-pro with less inputs and features is not going to save money as it would then need a separate production run.
I do agree that I rarely listen to the radio and cant think of one time I have even used it in my home theater setup but its not taking up space so it really in not a problem if its there.

Thanks Tonyvbd

You see, thats what I am saying. While it might not seem feasible to set up another production run, I counter that it would be very much worth while.

All the companies are competing against each other..."Hey look, mines the greatest." It's like big government, they just keep throwing more money at it...even though it's not what we want (not starting an Obama threat here). I mean, this business in competitive, you let one company offer higher quality on a scaled down product line that works with their other peripherals (see, this is the ticket, you would buy their BD Player, Projector, Flat Panel, etc because they work together without the waste) & they grab the niche. Already in this thread, we have 3 people that don't need the extras. Hook up & integration would be a breeze...it's a win/win for the customer & manufacturer.

Who needs a projector with component video, VGA, RS 32, composite video inputs, & a processor. It just needs to display the signal very well! Spread these saving throughout the system & I bet you can significantly reduce your price. The deal is in the package.

[graphicguy]

I've always felt that there was room in the market place for a stripped down AVR. Forget legacy connections. Component, S/PDIF, HDMI connections should fit the bill for 90% of what people need.

Build a solid amp section. Use solid DACs. Throw in room correction. And, make it 7.1 capable (still can't see much of a market for height channels, yet....most are still struggling to fit 7.1 speakers into their home theaters.

The manufacturer that can do that, hit an under $1,000 price point, and the market will respond.