Yeah, I'm one of those freakazoid enthusiasts who actually likes to look at his gear while it's on and functioning (glancing at it from time to time during a film to make sure the audio codec playing back is correct, etc.), and I appreciate the way a receiver/player looks and feels to the touch, even if the buttons aren't being used that much.
Alas, I wouldn't be able to stomach looking at that massive volume knob on the Yamahas for all the years I'm likely to own my next AVR, nor the all-but-useless porthole of the Marantz units.
What was Yamaha thinking with this design? It's almost like they took a page from Onkyo's book back when they were designing their integrated amps with the oversized volume controller in the middle of the faceplate (always seemed odd to me; a volume control should go to the right side IMO). At any rate, these AVRs definitely look like integrated amps rather than multichannel receivers (not that this is necessarily a BAD thing....it just seems "inappropriate").
That's another thing that bothers me -- we need to begin getting away from the "Audio/Video RECEIVER" moniker because it's severely outdated at this point; the phrase "receiver" hearkens back to when vintage units would integrate a radio tuner into the chassis, and while the new models still do, it just seems antiquated at this point to keep calling them "receivers." Should be something along the lines of "AV Amplifiers" or "AV Amps," etc.
Even if manufacturers decide to drop the tuners from these things to save a bit of money and pass that onto us, I wouldn't have a problem with it; STEREO receivers are another thing, IMO, as those are more focused on two-channel enthusiasts who may be looking for an all-in-one solution that includes a radio (I'm one of those people, and I run an excellent Onkyo TX-8555 stereo receiver in my dedicated hi-fi setup). If the manufacturers dropped the tuners in the surround receivers, they could TRULY be called "A/V Amps."
