That role is no longer sensible when used with smart TVs/Apple TV boxes/Android TV boxes.
As a result, traditional receivers are relegated to be being audio decoders and amplifiers. Honestly, I think there's already more manufactured and lying around than the world really needs. It was inevitable that a few product lines would be consolidated.
I really really wish there were digital audio decoder/processors available. It sucks so bad that you either buy a semi affordable consumer amplifier with 7.2.2 Dolby Atmos out and ok amplification, or if you want to step up you need a $4000+ processor whose only real job is decoding Dolby formats & turning them into analog outs for amplification. And there's almost no market, just a couple odd products like Emotiva's XMC-2: https://emotiva.com/products/xmc-2-plus-16-channel-9-1-6-dis...
Opener standards like DTS would hopefully have some remedy here but if the source material isn't available it hardly matters. Hoping for actual open standards Immersive Audio Model and Format (iamf) and the Eclipsa Audio Format profiles atop that maybe some day give us good spatial audio that an rpi and multichannel sound out board can help us free ourselves from this vile civilization-scale Dolby tarpit with. https://opensource.googleblog.com/2025/01/introducing-eclips...
https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/HDMI-1-4-Splitter-1-i...
$25 minimum order (for ten) + shipping and tariffs. No idea if these work, but they’re the top internet hit. The metadata says they do.
I used their stuff for a four-speaker audio setup but they do affordable home theater devices as well.
It's amazing the difference you can make with a basic DSP engine and a tape measure.
90+% of the things people complain about would no longer be a problem if they got a traditional A/V receiver, plugged all their sources such as streaming boxes and game consoles into the receiver, and just used the smart TV as a monitor (and as a tuner if they watch OTA television).
Until that is no longer the case there will be a role for traditional A/V receivers.
The problem there is the terrible UI of those A/V receivers, designed by committee that upholds long-standing traditions. It takes a lot of fussing with the complicated remote to get to where you want, which is perhaps fine for geeks, but annoying in a family setup, where all household members would like to know how to watch Netflix.
BTW, these traditions are ridiculous: as an example, my DENON receiver has two monstrous knobs on the front, like most AV receivers. The one on the left I will never use in its entire lifetime: it is for manually sequentially switching input sources, which nobody does anymore. And yet they still place it as the most prominent feature/control on the front panel.
The buttons that I'd like to use are small, black-on-black with dark gray labeling in 8pt type, so basically impossible to use unless you use a magnifying glass and a flashlight.
...then the AppleTV was released, with a remote that made the Harmony look like the console of a nuclear power plant by comparison, and I never went back
The problem is that as video technology has advanced, it makes less and less sense to pay for video processing technology on a receiver. Your new TV supports HDMI 2.1 with 120hz and VRR for your new PS5.
Does your receiver? Are you willing to spend $1000 to upgrade your receiver to simply correctly pass through that video signal, with little meaningful audio upgrade?
I think you hit the only problem I have with receivers being the upgrade of them as new versions of HDMI come out.
- An old LCD TV with 4(?) HDMI inputs and a few legacy ports.
- linux box with hdmi out
- apple tv with hdmi out
- console with hdmi out
- line out cable from TV to 1970’s receiver’s line in.
- line out from sonos to another line in on the receiver.
- roof antenna, with a Y to the TV and receiver
- turntable
- two extremely nice speakers
(Before someone asks, the TV has some sort of multichannel digital audio out. I don’t care. If I did, that’d give me surround sound. Similarly, I could get a subwoofer if I wanted.)
This is completely fine. The apple tv and console auto-switch the tv to their output, and sync the power buttons. The linux box doesn’t, but probably could if I decided to RTFM. The apple tv can be controlled with the tv remote, but its native remote is nicer. We only use the TV remote to access linux.
We only touch the receiver to switch between TV, turntable, sonos and radio.
How would an A/V receiver possibly improve this? (Note: I want the analog radio and record player with their nice mechanical switches and warm FM sound, and will run the sonos s1 app until the cloud side of it dies.)
Side benefits include:
- Adding more ports to often port-starved TVs or projectors.
- Providing alternative port-switching interface if you hate your TV’s UI and want something simpler.
- An organizational aid—you can put all your stuff somewhere away from the TV, and all that needs to reach it is a single HDMI cable. This can create interesting room layout options that are otherwise impractical.
All of these can also be accomplished by a simple HDMI port switch, but still, it’s handy.
The appletv is in the closet, but the other devices don’t make sense there. The linux box is about as big as a decent USB hub, and has a few wired game controllers plugged into it. The console is a switch, and going into the closet is too much trouble. I could put the sonos in the closet, but the play/mute button on it is too convenient when I don’t have a phone handy. The other stuff is self explanatory.
Can you not get a surround sound audio receiver/amp anymore? The digital out on the tv presumably would feed it. I had an old one like that, but it died.
No, not really. If you want surround sound audio, you probably want it over HDMI, and then they may as well have video features too.
But, if you have enough ports on your TV, and it doesn't do dumb things, and eARC works, and the TV doesn't forget it's attached to the receiver... You can still plug in everything to the TV, and you don't have to uss the receiver to switch inputs. I typically run the movie disc players through the receiver, because they have high bitrate audio, and tvs like to mess that up.
Its just I wouldn't want the TV doing the switching because you are still managing two remotes for that and I dont want the wiring to the TV, I would want more speakers and some basic room eq, delay correction and subwoofer management. And I always end up with more devices. I also want Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos.
My receiver does everything yours does and more, and the TV auto switches on and off but I am also been into this stuff for years.
Plus AV receivers can consolidate all the connections so there is only one run to the TV. This could be done with an HDMI switch if you can find one that integrates as well as a receiver, with similar number of inputs and isn't a large fraction of the cost.
Plus many (most?) very nice speakers need an external amplifier. Once you look at the cost of a bare bones amp, an A/V receiver with everything else they offer makes a ton of sense. Even for two channels.
The console might be suboptimal, but it knows the TV is in 2 channel mode, so it it’s emitting surround encoded signal, that’s just dumb.
I don't think too many people have, for example, a Samsung TV and a Firestick and use the 2 interchangeably for different apps.
I had this problem until the Samsung interface got too unbearably slow (6 year old tv), so I just bought a Google TV and that goes through my receiver's HDMI in port. Before this update, I was using optical out from the TV into my receiver, but the quality was noticeably degraded. I'm lucky I also don't use the radio function or a record player since that would just add to the chaos.
We're about five years away from "no remotes" anymore, imo. As it is I only need to find the TV remote when something goes really wonky - and even then I can reset it by using the smart app to power cycle the outlet ;)
Really what it should be is:
- a "remote" multiplexer comes in the box with my TV. It speaks HDMI/CEC to the TV telling it what input is active so that the TV's UI can reflect that and it can do things like switch between movie and game mode picture tuning.
- the former AVR should become a purely eARC box with no buttons, not even a power button— it comes on on command of the TV, and adjusts its amplification volume according to the same eARC signals that a soundbar uses. Any initial calibration or speaker setup is done via a single-use phone app.
TV
Apple TV on earc connection (HomePods for sound)
Blackbird switch with all other devices.
It can automatically switch between everything, but also has an IR remote for selecting an input.
Please no. No more phone apps that are unmaintained, barely work in the first place, and don't work at all within 2 years or when the vendor goes bankrupt. Things should be physical buttons and work offline.
Maybe it also matters in a home theatre that's oriented around a projector rather than TV.
I get the impression everyone eventually settles on a roku ($35, but full of spam) AppleTV (a bit over $100; better in all ways), or maybe goes with the google thing.
All of those cost < 10% the price of upgrading a TV, and all of our TVs have outlasted the (incredibly shitty) software they were bundled with.
I have a recent top of the line Samsung TV, and last year's 5.1 Samsung soundbar and even though both components are from the same brand there are some very frustrating times eARC fails. The rest of the time it works like magic.
My TV and audio equipment happen to have an optical connection and after switching to that away from ARC, the issue has gone away.
I have a HomePod in my living room and it gets used, but I also have a traditional receiver hooked up to my external speakers, with a turntable and CD player plugged into the receiver.
Yes at first glance a TV does the switching, and the rest. But a modern receiver can be better. Better switching, better ability to handle multiple speakers ( particularly for Dolby Atmos ) including Room EQ. Alot of TVs only have 2 HDMI ports with all the latest features.
the receiver doesn't need to be under the TV. it can sit in a basement. the question is if you really want to have proper sound or it's only a nice to have.
> use my TV without taking a class first
this is not an issue at all. HDMI ARC handles this.
Sometimes it stops working, but a reboot of the remote fixes it. The idea that I need to reboot a remote hurts my soul a little, but at least it works. Hold the TV and Volume Down buttons until the LED on the Apple TV turns off. Wait a bit and you’ll see a notice that it disconnects. Wait a while longer and press a button (volume seems safest) and it will connect again.
There are also some settings around the remote and volume. It can be set to use HDMI, the TV’s IR, and there is a learn option. The TV I’m currently on is using the IR direct to the TV… I guess this is why it doesn’t work when I try to use the app, but I almost never use that anyway.
There's no need for a super-complicated setup for good sound.
I do audio work but they took my brothers recommendation on the home theater so I'm a bit 'you made your bed' about it haha.
Speaking only anecdotally, when I was in my 20s, I bought a Sony "home theatre in a box" which included receiver, small subwoofer, and small satellite speakers. Over time, I upgraded to an Onkyo reciever and Polk center, surrounds, and subwoofer.
But... then I decided I wanted a more minimal look, and switched to a JBL sound bar + subwoofer, which has detachable surrounds -- but I almost never utilize them.
For sure, the sound is nothing compared to what I had before, but I'm mostly OK with it. All that to say, how popular are sound bars, and how popular are dedicated receivers?
I suspect something like 80% of people use the TV, and of those who upgrade, use a soundbar, maybe.
And even those with a dedicated theatre room, probably have other TVs that are just TV audio.
Granted, I'm not an audiophile, but I've been in/around audio mix bays long enough that I notice shit audio. It's one of those things that once you see/hear it, you can't un-see/un-hear it. Sometimes I really wish I took the blue pill in this regard
My soundbar can connect a second wireless subwoofer as well as a rear speaker set, and the setup process is extremely easy, which is one of the major hurdles with Hi-Fi equipment.
It has to be absolutely seamless; the received stopped working and the TV was making the noise instead, and it took a month for me to be finally arsed to go fix it.
They also hadn’t given up on original music. It’s crazy how much the soundtrack elevates otherwise-not-amazing films like Twister. I desperately wish they’d at least go back to caring about that.
Thinking over everyone I know who has a TV, I'm the only one with a receiver connected. I think one has a soundbar.
I'd agree with others, speakers aren't that concerning. There are niche speaker manufacturers and used or refurbished is still a good option. To be honest, I'd also look to the used market if I where to replace my amp.
Personally I don't have anything against Samsung, but I doubt they'll be a good steward of those brands. Corporate interest and niche high quality audio seems to at opposite ends of the spectrum. I could be wrong, Sony makes nice stuff, maybe Samsung will as well.
I just object to the concentration of market power.
Now, whether that means anything when 99% of everything made for watching is just playing in the background while you're reading HN on your phone is debatable. Still wouldn't trade the setup even if I'm watching one movie per month. (I'm not even close to that high of a number...)
Just in the past few years I was finally in a position to get a nice center channel, then sub, then surrounds, and then I eventually paid an electrician to pull the wires and do a 5.1.2 setup. It's certainly far from essential and overall is still pretty budget, but I love how it sounds for movies, PS5, etc.
Given Samsung’s track record with enshittification and support timelines I’m worried that this acquisition means all that will be going away, which is a shame. Guess I’ll be looking at Sony and Yamaha models instead going forward.
But! There are relatively few home theater receiver makers, and the Denon/Marantz siblings have been a big chunk of them for decades.
(Sony, Yamaha, Onkyo, Denon. Nobody else covers the low and mid cost market.)