Denon AVR vs AVC?

[EWL5]

To @TimoJ 's point:

AVR-X1700H = £649
AVR-X1700H DAB = £699
£50 premium for DAB

AVR-X1800H = £699
AVR-X1800H DAB = £749
£50 premium for DAB

AVR-X2800H = £869
AVR-X2800H DAB = £899
£30 premium for DAB


It seems possible to sell the non-DAB versions (which do still have FM) in the UK without breaking any laws.

That's a pretty decent markup for antennas if the internals are the same!

 

[-Matt-]

It seems possible to sell the non-DAB versions (which do still have FM) in the UK without breaking any laws.

Unless, perhaps, the legislation only applies to devices that cost more than X? (where X is e.g. £1000).

 

[-Matt-]

That's a pretty decent markup for antennas if the internals are the same!

HaHa!

I expect a different sub-board is needed for DAB.

 

[voodooless]

GPT-4 to the rescue:
View attachment 344911

I would not trust much of what Copilot says, as @-Matt- said, this little bit already contains factual errors. try telling it, it's wrong, it will wine and b*tch and tell you it is still right, even after you point out several times that it clearly is not. Eventually, it will just refuse to talk to you about it, like a petulant child . I had this happen several times now and decided this tool is mostly pointless. The original GPT chat seems to be much more friendly and accurate, but still in no way perfect.


As to why Denon made this segmentation... I don't know. Maybe because they think that radio is more widely used in the US? I think especially AM radio is a lot more popular in the US than in the EU.

 

[antcollinet]

Fair enough, but it is still nice to have the option.

I'm just curious why Denon think it is ok to remove that option for euro markets but maintain it for US.

It'l either be regulatory - as currently being discussed, or due to local market requirements. If perceived that the EU market doesn't value the feature, Denon will save the money.

 

[-Matt-]

I think that this may be the piece of German law that was mentioned above:

https://www.bmwk.de/Redaktion/DE/Do...ationsgesetzes.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1

Google translate tells me that the first part (4) relates to car manufacturer's having to install DAB radios in new cars.

Whilst part (5) relates to other consumer devices for receiving radio.

Google translation of part (5):

Any consumer [sic]device intended for sale, rental or for the first time provided elsewhere on the market, primarily for the reception of Sound broadcasting specific radio device that can display the program name and does not fall under paragraph 4, must contain a recipient who is at least enables the reception and playback of digital radio services. Of that Excluded are kits for radio systems and devices that are part of a radio system of the amateur radio service and devices in which the radio receiver is a has a purely secondary function.


It seems that smartphones and laptops that have FM radio reception are exempt from having to have DAB because the radio reception part is a secondary function.

I think it would be pretty easy to argue that radio reception is a secondary function of an ARV - although having "Receiver" in the product name might pose an extra challenge!

 

[-Matt-]

It'l either be regulatory - as currently being discussed, or due to local market requirements. If perceived that the EU market doesn't value the feature, Denon will save the money.

Yes, I suppose Denon have some internal market research that tells them that dropping the AM/FM radio in the EU won't cause them to lose a significant number of sales relative to competitors.

Perhaps based on comments like this:

I can't remember the last time I used an actual radio tuner except in the car. Not even DAB.

Perhaps they believe that if they did this in the US they would lose sales?

Or maybe we can expect to see the feature dropped there soon too?

 

[-Matt-]

There is also this section:

Which seems to say that for high-end radio reception equipment it should represent a minimal additional cost for manufacturer's to include digital radio - therefore no new devices should be allowed to be brought to the market without it. This might be why it only applies to more expensive AVR's?


Google translated version:

For device manufacturers, the legal requirement of Section 48 Paragraph 5 TKG is higher Equipping end devices with a digital receiving part involves a slight additional effort. With a view to the high and increasing sales figures of radio devices sold that are currently suitable for receiving digital content it can be assumed that there will only be a slight additional cost for the economy. Devices that do not have this functionality will no longer be able to be placed on the market in the future become. Since the radio devices can display the program name, but not one. The receiver, which enables the reception and playback of digital radio services, will no longer be allowed to be brought onto the market until December 21, 2020, so manufacturers have enough time to convert their production. The associated expenses are within the limits that manufacturers already have to make regular product adjustments. Until this point, the no longer “marketable” Devices are also sold.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

There is also this section:

View attachment 344967

Which seems to say that for high-end radio reception equipment it should represent a minimal additional cost for manufacturer's to include digital radio - therefore no new devices should be allowed to be brought to the market without it. This might be why it only applies to more expensive AVR's?


Google translated version:

For device manufacturers, the legal requirement of Section 48 Paragraph 5 TKG is higher Equipping end devices with a digital receiving part involves a slight additional effort. With a view to the high and increasing sales figures of radio devices sold that are currently suitable for receiving digital content it can be assumed that there will only be a slight additional cost for the economy. Devices that do not have this functionality will no longer be able to be placed on the market in the future become. Since the radio devices can display the program name, but not one. The receiver, which enables the reception and playback of digital radio services, will no longer be allowed to be brought onto the market until December 21, 2020, so manufacturers have enough time to convert their production. The associated expenses are within the limits that manufacturers already have to make regular product adjustments. Until this point, the no longer “marketable” Devices are also sold.

There's mention in here of a display, so it looks as if that may also be a differentiator since few AVC/AVR have no display.

 

[-Matt-]

All this talk of radio prompted me to try out some of the TuneIn radio stations within the HEOS app.

I've not really used HEOS much before as I always found the gui displayed on the TV to be clunky and slow. However, for radio you don't even need the TV to be on, just click the station that you want in the HEOS app.

Quality was... well... radio!

But overall first impressions (to my surprise) were that this is a fairly workable option.

 

[antcollinet]

All this talk of radio prompted me to try out some of the TuneIn radio stations within the HEOS app.

I've not really used HEOS much before as I always found the gui displayed on the TV to be clunky and slow. However, for radio you don't even need the TV to be on, just click the station that you want in the HEOS app.

Quality was... well... radio!

But overall first impressions (to my surprise) were that this is a fairly workable option.

My only objection to that is "yet another app"

 

[Propheticus]

Quality was... well... radio!

fyi, some stations offer several bitrate streams and TuneIn defaults to the first in the list. Some stations put their highest quality stream on spot 1 (high to low), but some have their lowest bitrate on spot 1 (low to high). You can check using the station info (circled "i" icon).