Why Don't High SINAD Receivers Exist?

[thunderchicken]

We have $100 dacs with state of the art performance, why isn't there a multichannel version available? It's not a question of price anymore, with units at $5k not breaking 100dB SINAD. If the tech is there for low-buck two channel, why aren't companies like Topping doing multichannel? Seems like someone, somewhere should be able to do a 5.1 or 7.1 system at 110dB SINAD for a little less than $1000.

I'm in the market for a HT setup and I'm willing to pay upwards of $1500 for the receiver, but I don't see any value in paying $1500 when $250 gets me similar sound quality and features (SINAD around 85, HDMI switching, 4K, room correction, and a remote). I can't be alone in this.

Is there really nothing on the market that differentiates on performance instead of add-on features or looks?

 

[Promit]

I'll summarize the big points:

• Tons of processing modes, options, and settings. Each additional step of doing something to the audio takes away just a little more, even in digital. Bass management, room correction, surround mixing, spatial effects, what have you. Often these degrade quality even in bypass mode.
• Black box systems. AVR manufacturers don't actually develop a lot of this garbage - they have to license chips and implementations from hardware companies like TI, and software/patent companies like Dolby. If that chip messed up your audio path (again, even in bypass mode) then now you have to do an onboard hardware bypass and these signal chains get complicated fast.
• DRM continues to be the bane of our existence. This is linked in with the previous point, but it limits manufacturers from using techniques like digital bitstreaming to outboard equipment.
• Stuffing all this stuff in a single box actually gets technically complicated. Those amplifier channels don't want to be so close to a bunch of digital components throwing out noise like nobody's business. Every additional connection, ribbon, or even trace becomes an opportunity for crosstalk in a sloppy implementation.
• Let's be frank - who's actually looking to check any of this, other than Amir? Pretty much every reviewer of note hooks up the AVR, and then begins rambling about nonsense like air or arbitrary loudness before clipping.

The funny thing is, because most of the problems are in the front-end processing, the actual amps are sometimes pretty decent. So you can run e.g. an HTPC through HDMI but then run the audio analog off an inexpensive outboard DAC right into that receiver again to drive the speakers.

 

[Senior NEET Engineer]

From my point of view the $100 DAC will sound worse. No subwoofer management, no Dirac Live, only two channels, no support for decoding immersive formats, etc. Such a device is not anywhere near state of the art performance.

 

[amirm]

From my point of view the $100 DAC will sound worse. No subwoofer management, no Dirac Live, only two channels, no support for decoding immersive formats, etc.

You can easily get 8 channel DACs. Dirac can run in software upstream of the DAC as I use.

 

[Sancus]

You can easily get 8 channel DACs. Dirac can run in software upstream of the DAC as I use.

They're not selling licenses for that anymore though, afaik. And it does leave the question of where the Dirac bass module will fit in, if it is ever available for purely software license. But yes, you can still buy a minidsp type solution.

The real problem arises when you want Atmos or Auro3D, those limit you to receivers and prepros.

 

[Jarrett]

Audiophiles don't buy receivers

 

[solderdude]

I'll summarize the big points:

• Tons of processing modes, options, and settings. Each additional step of doing something to the audio takes away just a little more, even in digital. Bass management, room correction, surround mixing, spatial effects, what have you. Often these degrade quality even in bypass mode.
• Black box systems. AVR manufacturers don't actually develop a lot of this garbage - they have to license chips and implementations from hardware companies like TI, and software/patent companies like Dolby. If that chip messed up your audio path (again, even in bypass mode) then now you have to do an onboard hardware bypass and these signal chains get complicated fast.
• DRM continues to be the bane of our existence. This is linked in with the previous point, but it limits manufacturers from using techniques like digital bitstreaming to outboard equipment.
• Stuffing all this stuff in a single box actually gets technically complicated. Those amplifier channels don't want to be so close to a bunch of digital components throwing out noise like nobody's business. Every additional connection, ribbon, or even trace becomes an opportunity for crosstalk in a sloppy implementation.
• Let's be frank - who's actually looking to check any of this, other than Amir? Pretty much every reviewer of note hooks up the AVR, and then begins rambling about nonsense like air or arbitrary loudness before clipping.

The funny thing is, because most of the problems are in the front-end processing, the actual amps are sometimes pretty decent. So you can run e.g. an HTPC through HDMI but then run the audio analog off an inexpensive outboard DAC right into that receiver again to drive the speakers.

add to that the many, many connections to screens, entertainment devices, cable, ethernet and whatnot all increasing the chance of groundloops.

Those receivers are meant for entertainment not the most serious hifi enjoyment. Also I don't think some of them are that poor quality and not everyone needs SINAD above 90dB.

 

[Mnyb]

The digital processing part can easily be transparent and is , it’s however hard to asses in an AVR where you can’t get the signal anymore

The hdmi debacle combined with DRM have sunken the whole HT market to mediocrity .

I do agree that the total experience gets better for music to with DRC and sub integration and some immersive format for music ( immersive formats for music like trifield and ambisonic and what they are named in other products are not gimmicks , they to operate on the assumption that two speakers is the worst possible solution to the acoustic and the issue of presenting a stereo recording).

It demonstrate that room correction and subwoofer always trumps “Sinad” until it gets really bad , but not even the NAD at the bottom of the list is bad enough

But it is sad that a premium product simply can not be bought at all anymore.

Can anyone send one of those ultra expensive prepro’s to Amir ?

 

[nm4711]

DRM continues to be the bane of our existence. This is linked in with the previous point, but it limits manufacturers from using techniques like digital bitstreaming to outboard equipment.

I haven't seen any digital output on an AVR for a long time, too. But it seems like the JBL Synthesis AVRs can output all processed channels via Dante. But of course they are pretty expensive.

 

[tuga]

I'll summarize the big points:

• Tons of processing modes, options, and settings. Each additional step of doing something to the audio takes away just a little more, even in digital. Bass management, room correction, surround mixing, spatial effects, what have you. Often these degrade quality even in bypass mode.
• Black box systems. AVR manufacturers don't actually develop a lot of this garbage - they have to license chips and implementations from hardware companies like TI, and software/patent companies like Dolby. If that chip messed up your audio path (again, even in bypass mode) then now you have to do an onboard hardware bypass and these signal chains get complicated fast.
• DRM continues to be the bane of our existence. This is linked in with the previous point, but it limits manufacturers from using techniques like digital bitstreaming to outboard equipment.
• Stuffing all this stuff in a single box actually gets technically complicated. Those amplifier channels don't want to be so close to a bunch of digital components throwing out noise like nobody's business. Every additional connection, ribbon, or even trace becomes an opportunity for crosstalk in a sloppy implementation.
• Let's be frank - who's actually looking to check any of this, other than Amir? Pretty much every reviewer of note hooks up the AVR, and then begins rambling about nonsense like air or arbitrary loudness before clipping.

The funny thing is, because most of the problems are in the front-end processing, the actual amps are sometimes pretty decent. So you can run e.g. an HTPC through HDMI but then run the audio analog off an inexpensive outboard DAC right into that receiver again to drive the speakers.

Jack of all trades, master of none.

 

[LTig]

add to that the many, many connections to screens, entertainment devices, cable, ethernet and whatnot all increasing the chance of groundloops.

Yep, and also the often imperfect analog processing after the DAC (multi channel volume control). As I interpret the measurements done here so far in most cases the DAC chips are not the culprit for bad SINAD.

If there was no need for analog volume control I would put a bunch of cheap DACs (hint: $9 Apple dongle) in a small shielded compartment at the backside of an AVP and feed them with SPDIF or I2S data.

 

[Mnyb]

Yep, and also the often imperfect analog processing after the DAC (multi channel volume control). As I interpret the measurements done here so far in most cases the DAC chips are not the culprit for bad SINAD.

If there was no need for analog volume control I would put a bunch of cheap DACs (hint: $9 Apple dongle) in a small shielded compartment at the backside of an AVP and feed them with SPDIF or I2S data.

Ah that one , many treads here points to AVR’s using the same one chip volume control for all channels and its so comman because they eom their “ motherboards “ from the same place , so in reality there is a selection very few AVR’s with some difference in the power amp setup . But much more brands and models are sold

 

[retro]

They're not selling licenses for that anymore though, afaik.

They are.

 

[Sancus]

They are.

Where? Their site only lists the new 2.x versions for proprietary hardware. The PC/Mac versions are still the old 1.x, which isn't listed in their shop. They have said multiple times they eventually plan to sell PC/Mac 2.x, but as far as I know this hasn't happened and there's no ETA.

 

[Wes]

I bet the Creek with the FM plugin would measure really well.

 

[Senior NEET Engineer]

You can easily get 8 channel DACs. Dirac can run in software upstream of the DAC as I use.

An Okto DAC8 + Dirac license would be $1,750. I think that is better baseline than "$100 DAC".

OP is additionally wanting home theater features that would add a lot more cost and complexity.

 

[Bear123]

I'd love for the measurements being done here on ASR to contribute to better engineering and measured performance from AVR's....I hope this happens.

However, audibly, I think the SINAD of most of the current AVRs is a complete non issue. I just don't think anyone is going to notice .007% SINAD in the signal being sent to their speakers when listening to music or movie sound tracks. Honestly, does anyone think they can really hear that? Nor will anyone notice the .0009% SINAD from the HTP-1, especially considering all speakers will have orders of magnitude higher distortion.

The benefits of bass management, speaker eq below Schroeder, dual sub eq, and features such as DEQ will make orders of magnitude improvements in sound quality and fidelity compared to the best measuring SOTA DAC and a pair of speakers without eq and subs. And this doesn't even touch on the subject of low fidelity components such as tubes being used in conjunction with great measuring DAC's.

 

[Senior NEET Engineer]

Does anyone think they would be able to tell the difference between .007% distortion and something lower than this from a DAC that measures better?

I can't. Currently have Topping DX3 Pro, miniDSP SHD, NAD 758 V3, and Emotiva XMC-1.

 

[Bear123]

I can't. Currently have Topping DX3 Pro, miniDSP SHD, NAD 758 V3, and Emotiva XMC-1.

Dude, S18 IPAL????? Very nice. How do you like it.

Also, only one?

 

[thunderchicken]

*update*

I bought a Denon S-650H for $274 shipped, along with an Elac UC5 center channel. I'm "upgrading" from my hifi stereo to a 3.2 setup.

The hifi was/is a D70 DAC->Arcam A80->Boston Acoustics T930 and a 15 year old DefTech 10" sub.

Keeping the T930s in the mix for now, but have two Dayton 10" subs to replace the DefTech. Might upgrade to Elac towers and surrounds, but I DIY'd some bookshelf speakers a few years back and want to build a complete 5.2 set now. I don't have the time or space (how ironic with the COVID shutdowns) to do that now, so I broke down and bought the center channel. Don't care that nothing matches because it will sooner or later, whether buying or building