Chinese companies like Topping / SMSL / Sabaj etc. make excellent DACs, streamers, amps, power supplies, etc. They measure and sound excellent. These are building blocks for stereo integrated amps, stereo / surround sound receivers. So why would these companies not put together their DACs/Amps in one big box to build a decent 100W per channel integrated amp with HDMI or even a full 9.2 channel AVR with same wattage? A Fosi ZA3 monoblock capable amp sells for $130 retail with all the packaging and power supply. Wondering if they can come up with a sub $1000 AVR made from their own parts.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Why no cheap AVRs from Topping / SMSL etc.
- Thread starter tc2007
- Start date
How much does licensing HDMI, Dolby, DTS, etc cost? Let alone Dirac, Audyssey, etc? Have seen comments this is a great part of the cost but have never seen numbers. Fosi has been asking about some alternative gear like here https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...advice-on-developing-a-5-1-channel-dac.48502/
- Thread Starter
- #3
Emotiva sells a full blown 13 channel, Atmos processor for around $1000. It's a Tonewinner rebadge. So they both are making a profit. The problem arises when companies, that make mass produced AVRs, try to add 9+ amps to the box. These TI chip based amps have greatly improved in output and measurements in the last 2-3 years. I think the time is ripe for companies to consider using these instead of the crappy measuring 50W A/B amps they currently offer.
Dolby Atmos and other surround / streaming technologies are available in the cheapest soundbars and $350 Costco AVRs. I don't think they cost a whole lot.
Dolby Atmos and other surround / streaming technologies are available in the cheapest soundbars and $350 Costco AVRs. I don't think they cost a whole lot.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 4,808
- Likes
- 3,749
I agree. And it really takes economics of scale to make these devices viable.
An AVR is way more complicated than what they have released. And they could not sell an AVR with the business model they have been running. People who are in the market for AVRs mostly go to established brands with strong distribution networks. Yes you might buy one, and your friend buys another, but that is still not enough. Strength of AVR is built with economy of scale
Then again Emotiva pre-pros have been known to be buggy and that $1100 model is unavailable at the moment. Their other processors are significantly more....
- Thread Starter
- #7
They all have to start somewhere. These brands (Fosi / Wiim / Eversolo) are already famous and with YouTube marketing it's not an impossible task. One year ago Eversolo was relatively unknown in the "audiophile" circles. They have disrupted the streamer market for sure with a competitively priced product. I think it can be done and it will be. Just a matter of time. I wouldn't be surprised if Eversolo or Wiim comes up with something like this.
PS: Schiit came up with 5.1 surround processor last year. Pretty barebones but a good start.
I would love to see someone release a true 3.1 AVR. I think it's a huge gap in the market and an opportunity for a cheaper entry, smaller amp
I suspect lots of people are willing to put LCR speakers around their TV but do not have/want to pull their sofa off the wall, install anything on their ceiling or stick surrounds in the middle of their living room floor.
3.1 is a big improvement over 2 or 2.1 in my opinion. Maybe no one else's. Definitely a huge improvement over a sound bar which is basically 3.1
I ran 3.1 for years when I lived in an apartment with limited space. AVR does a good job of mixing the surround signal into the fronts.
I suspect lots of people are willing to put LCR speakers around their TV but do not have/want to pull their sofa off the wall, install anything on their ceiling or stick surrounds in the middle of their living room floor.
3.1 is a big improvement over 2 or 2.1 in my opinion. Maybe no one else's. Definitely a huge improvement over a sound bar which is basically 3.1
I ran 3.1 for years when I lived in an apartment with limited space. AVR does a good job of mixing the surround signal into the fronts.
I wouldn't mind seeing this and agree many living room/bedroom setups might be best left just at 3.1 for a few reasons. Just doubt it has the market demand....
- Thread Starter
- #10
+1 on low demand. Maybe in EU / Asia where space is limited. Definitely not in N.A.
Anything that improves the current status quo of crappy sound from 90% of AVRs (unless you go separates or spend $2000) would be welcome. Digital amps / good Class D amps are greatly underutilized in this segment.
Reminds me of my first HT 15+ years ago in my apartment. I had Polk RM101's on top of my room almost touching ceilings so I could avoid running the wires on the ground
They weren't pointed down. I didn't know anything about room correction until 2021. Never calibrated my AVRs until then.
Anything that improves the current status quo of crappy sound from 90% of AVRs (unless you go separates or spend $2000) would be welcome. Digital amps / good Class D amps are greatly underutilized in this segment.
Reminds me of my first HT 15+ years ago in my apartment. I had Polk RM101's on top of my room almost touching ceilings so I could avoid running the wires on the ground
They weren't pointed down. I didn't know anything about room correction until 2021. Never calibrated my AVRs until then.Nonsense on the crappy sound from avr thing, tho....altho the upper end avrs are where the best feature sets are in any case and prices have gone up. Still better value than most 2ch integrated amps.
AVRs are incredibly more challenging to design. Video signals are involved at far higher speeds. Software stack is massive as well. And most of the market would probably not care about extra performance of DACs to provide a differentiation for SMSL/Topping, etc.
Also these days I think the video aspect of an avr is less needed other than hdmi pass-thru and as legacy connections are being eliminated, so might video processing? I haven't used video processing in an avr for a while and all my video sources are hdmi....nice to have I suppose but....
Dolby Digital and DTS patents are expired. I am surprised that no-one seems to take advantage of that. You don’t need to pay any licenses. Sure if you want/need Atmos or later codecs, it is another story,
I am sure you don’t need chips. You can do it easily with software. I edited my comment on new codecs.
Beyond me or what I've run across. As I just added, maybe using the ID (via copyright)
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 4,808
- Likes
- 3,749
No way around software needing chips to run it. Going to a general purpose CPU probably won't save money.
- Thread Starter
- #20
Appears that Schiit Syn is one of those devices. It can do 5.1 via Optical in, just add amps.
Similar threads
