For the most part, today's AVRs are capable of transparent sound reproduction, in the sense that frequency response is flat, noise is low, and distortion is typically below 1%:
If you have inefficient speakers or don't hear well or live somewhere noisy, probably.
Otherwise noise is an issue, here's the data from Amir
So typical (median) value is 81 db
(
Edit, as pointed out this is SINAD, but it is dominated by noise for the typical AVR so the distinction makes no practical difference in this context. This can be checked in Amir's full reviews)
That's referenced to 5 Watts, so 7 dB worse referenced to 1 W.
74 dB below 1 W but moderately efficient speakers are ~ 90 dB/1 m sensitive so ~ 16 dB of noise @ 1m, that's typically audible in a quiet room.
Partly because typical room noise doesn't mask hiss very well, possibly there are directional effects too, we have evolved to separate noises from different directions.
OK, there are a few quibbles, you probably sit further than 1 m for home theatre unless you use near field monitors, and maybe the 4 ohm assumption is a bit out.
On the other side, I have very efficient JBL speakers with compression drivers and live in a quiet suburb of a quiet city in a house with double brick exterior walls which reduces inbound noise transmission massively and solar passive so no HVAC internal noise.
My typical AVR is clearly audible, not transparent at all.
That's partly what prompted this thread.
The typical 7.1-channel AVR is very cheap
"Cheap" is a subjective opinion of course. But I just can't say it for thousand dollar AVRs when Bluetooth, radio, streamers and the like really are cheap and should only add a minimum to the cost.
Let alone $17,000 pre-pros with worse performance than $100 DACs, when they don't even have the excuse of "it has...radio, and power amplifiers."
Reliability of my Marantz NR1608 hasn't been perfect, but, knock on wood, I think I've solved the problem... some of the internal connections. I shouldn't need to do this on a late-model receiver...
No, you shouldn't.
That was another part of what prompted this thread.
Poor reliability from my Harman Kardon AVR, partly due to poor architecture, too much junk and too many connectors to fail.
To unload some of the functionality into a separate module would help.
The HP 12c avatar takes me back to my days in B-School.
Actually it's an 11c, I did Mathematical Statistics and Computer Science so it was a toss up between the 16c for the hexadecimal functions and the 11c for the stats.
20 years later I went back to B-school myself, and the 11c still worked perfectly.
It epitomises what I like, reliability and functionality that doesn't date so I wrote a little thank you note
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...industrial-design-favorites.17080/post-584451
I don't think many AVRs will be much use in 20 years.
.All those DACs with no EQ or room correction are useless, even relatively cheap AVRs include these baseline requirements...
Well...I never mentioned any intention to remove EQ and room correction.
I just don't think that the AVR is necessarily the best place to put it.
Speaker EQ should be tied with the speakers.
Why replace all the DSP just because new video standards have made the Codecs and/or connectors obsolete?
Not to mention the need to redo all the room equalisation and set up.
And they trick people [that] 95 vs 115 matters when it doesn't matter at all.
Maybe, but we typically aren't close to 95 see data above.
Since the standard for cinema sound has peak levels of 105 dB SPL I would say that that is about the level when we don't care (or I don't).
Perhaps a little better if you want absolute silence even if you happen to be near the speakers momentarily (not when they play @ 105 !)
SINAD is just one metric. I would quote
@JJB70's
post ...
Yes, for sure SINAD is just one metric, and frequently abused.
But in my case it happens to be quite relevant, in particular the noise aspect so I'll use S/N.
I think...a SINAD >80 dB is transparent. No adverb required.
I used the word for a reason.
120 dB S/N means even if the amps are turned up to the maximum tolerable level then the noise is inaudible so I'd call that "utterly" transparent.
80 dB S/N, as shown above is audible with efficient speakers.
My own speakers are _very_ efficient and noise is audible even far from the speakers.
...to concoct its own Processor. It will likely cost that person more than anticipated or fail entirely as the most advanced CODECs do not seem to be available
Yes, I have no intention to do this.
As I explained, it seems best to let the AVR do the video and decode.
The idea is only to extract the audio before the DAC
I would start with the best Pre/Pros available: Either the TrinnoV Altitude 16 or 32 or Storm Audio.
By the time these are landed in Australia they are >$20,000.
Too much for a component that will be obsolete in a few years, just like HDMI replaced component, then 4k then 8k etc,
Which leads to my point, I want the part that becomes obsolescent to be cheap part.
After all, the sound bits from a cheap AVR should be just the same as the bits from an expensive one.
From there I would decide on the complement of speakers and subwoofers... For speakers, the powered speakers with serious dynamic capabilities, JBL in front...
As explained above, JBL already done!
This is essentially what... Genelec SAM monitors [do]. They can take care of D/A conversion, bass management, crossover, room correction and volume control, except that the interface to control that...is a bit too inflexible....
Thank you for that information.
To my mind that seems exactly the way to do it so it reassures me to learn that a company of people as smart and successful as Genelec also think so.
It probably helps that they can do a "clean slate" solution, unrestricted by any investment, financial or otherwise in the AVR model.
Best of luck with your enhancement project.
Best wishes
David