Out with the Old and In with the New. A New Approach to AV in the Home

[TLS Guy]

For most the AV experience is limited to a flat screen, a sound bar and may be a small sub. Almost everyone I know has at least one rig like this.

Alternatives in most instances are not viable, mainly due to architectural issues and complexity. The issues.

An AVR or AVP is a huge barrier. The boxes are large with an absolute rabbits nest of wires coming out the back. If an AVR is the choice, then they more likely than not will have bought far more power amps than they will ever use, as the room is more likely than not unsuitable for surround audio on multiple counts. The amps the owner does used are compromised by the number of amps his does not use and likely never will. Then we get to the speakers, which create another set of interior design issues. When you tell the owner that half or more of the power he has paid for will be wasted in the crossovers of his speakers, he will question the wisdom of the whole undertaking. I should point out that even a simple second order two way crossover will reduce sensitivity by 3db which is half the power. As complexity increases the losses mount.

Then we get to the thorny issue of set up, more likely than not to be done wrong by the inexperienced further compromising results.

If anyone thinks this is a remotely sensible way to design current AV systems, please say so now.

So lets deal with this stage by stage.

I would say that streaming and cable are the dominant ways people receive program. There is some disc and we have the recent return to vinyl. The quality of streams has improved by leaps and bounds in recent years. With this years Prom season, I have been astounded by the quality that can be distributed via the Internet. Most of this quality can be obtained from two or three speakers and a sub or two. I maintain that adding more in unsuitable rooms is actually going to be a downgrade. In any event even a modest 2.1 system or for that matter 2.0 will easily exceed the performance of a sound bar.

In a system like this an AVR or AVP is not required. It could all be handled by the TV and apps. Systems already exist for putting the ubiquitous phones in control of programming.
Subs are already powered devices so that is no problem. So the rest of the system can be and should be. I have said all along the place for amplifiers is in the speakers. Passive speakers are so dated now and are yesterdays technology.

In active speakers you only pay for the amps you need, you don't have them sitting around doing nothing. In addition you only need to pay for amps big enough to power the driver it is connected to. A tweeter for instance requires little power and in most instances 15 or 20 watts would be plenty. Don't forget that ALL the power in this arrangement gets to the driver, and NOT half or less.

Not only that, but active crossovers are in general much better than passive ones, and give the option of a far wider selection of drivers. Just for instance, you can not match a woofer with a tweeter that is less sensitive, but it is no problem in an active speaker. In addition it gives far more flexibility in the control of slopes and overall frequency response. Responses can be changed on the fly remotely. In passive speaker you have to remove the crossover and change components physically.

The above actually means that it will be possible with the right products available for far more people to DIY their speakers.

Speakers though remain the big architectural barrier in many cases, especially given the huge popularity of the open "Great Room" concept in modern homes.

Now of the system in this house that has created the most interest among friends and acquaintances is this.

It sounds very good indeed and its potent as well. It fits in well with the gathering space.

So lets develop the concept further.

Make the TV the controller, and get rid of the AVP and the external power amps. Now the rig is even more compact.

So we now make the speakers active, which will improve them. The owner only pays for the amps he will use. You can make the active electronics panel mount below the speakers to make for very easy service and replacement. This system could easily be made to be reliable for a lifetime.

So far we have saved a lot of money. However in many instances dry wall work and the services of an electrician will be required. Dry wall work and a little paint however is not overly expensive, and the saving of an AVR or AVP likely more than pay for it.

One of the great features of the above system is the in wall TL sub, which really "Guilds the Lily". TL subs really lend themselves to in wall application.

I think we are at an impasse in AV in the home, and if current sources will persist in their current offerings and approaches, they will continue to loose money and leave the market. Then the sound bar becomes the only option.

With the right products there are opportunities aplenty for manufacturers, vendors and installers. A total revision is our systems approach is long overdue.

11.2 or higher AVRs are just a nonsense and will lead to no end of grief. We have just had a huge debacle involving the speaker below, which on investigation not only unfit for purpose, but also result in a short life for any amplifier connected to it.

We have to do better!

 

[MrBoat]

Most of the people I know now who have 5 or more channels, did so because they thought they had to. They did not try 2.0 or 2.1 first and then build on as desired. Some had a 2-channel when they were kids back in the '70s-'80s, but they never really got into it like I did. Theirs fell by the wayside until they got much older and they went straight to HT, while I kept mostly involved in 2-channel for all but about 10 years spread out over the 40-50 years I have been in it. I temporarily dropped out here and there, mostly due to the years of double jobs/shifts and raising young children, or equipment falling into disrepair.

Half of those I know in the hobby do not dedicate much of their time at all to music. I don't know anyone else who listens to a fraction of the music that I do each and every day. To my ears, outside of the overly enhanced sound effects of movies, I find music to be much more challenging of a system. By default of such goals, this 2.1 ends up being pretty capable for movies and video games as well. It's certainly immersive enough for all the effects that I care to pay attention to, at least.

 

[Teetertotter?]

That is a pretty good observation for MOST. I listen to internet music, 60's, Country and Classical and the AVR goes into stereo mode. The AVR has all kinds of sound adjustments. Having a wireless speaker system, might be nice. I am a 95% movie person or the 15% that require HT.

 

[j_garcia]

I think the reason why home audio has fallen by the wayside are because things tend to be too complex for the average person, not to mention expensive. Too many things to connect, too many components, etc... And so they opt for soundbars. If more companies focused on offering 2.1 setups, which used to be the norm, more people would buy them. They can be expanded by adding the necessary components, but the starting point should be simple.

 

[TLS Guy]

Most of the people I know now who have 5 or more channels, did so because they thought they had to. They did not try 2.0 or 2.1 first and then build on as desired. Some had a 2-channel when they were kids back in the '70s-'80s, but they never really got into it like I did. Theirs fell by the wayside until they got much older and they went straight to HT, while I kept mostly involved in 2-channel for all but about 10 years spread out over the 40-50 years I have been in it. I temporarily dropped out here and there, mostly due to the years of double jobs/shifts and raising young children, or equipment falling into disrepair.

Half of those I know in the hobby do not dedicate much of their time at all to music. I don't know anyone else who listens to a fraction of the music that I do each and every day. To my ears, outside of the overly enhanced sound effects of movies, I find music to be much more challenging of a system. By default of such goals, this 2.1 ends up being pretty capable for movies and video games as well. It's certainly immersive enough for all the effects that I care to pay attention to, at least.

You and I are absolutely correct about this. There is now a dearth of decent two channel receivers, integrated amps out there. Very few have bass management.
This is bad, as it forces people into those receivers, which is really bad. First they have gratuitous complexity, and they are increasingly stuffed with amps. When that happens people feel somehow obligated to use them whether it is really practical for them or not. That detracts from the dictum, that is absolutely correct, that two good channels best any added poorer ones. You and I are lucky that we can build our speakers. But I can tell you the notion that you can use any old poor speaker for surrounds etc. is NOT correct. In my HT room all the speakers are really good ones. That is the way it needs to be.

As it happens my two channel rig is what I'm listening to now, and its excellent.

Your observation that people don't listen to music anymore I think is on target. I do think you are correct that the standard required for music enjoyment is higher than for movies and TV shows, and I think by a good margin.

Being an optimist, I hopeful that either TVs will improve to the point where they can by a high quality versatile front end and then you can connect your active speakers to the TV including the sub. Alternatively we need small simple devices that can just capture the audio from a TVs eARC port and connect to speakers and sub.
I should have pointed out before and will do now, that sound bars are active speakers! It is this simplicity of connection to a TV that makes them such an attractive option.

There should be multiple products that would allow direct active speaker hookup to a TV. Then I think we good get back to a situation where more homes than not had a reasonably respectable audio system. Every child should grow up with an audio system with reasonably correct tonality I believe.

Unfortunately with the growth of HT things have really run off the rails. The system has got geared round these receivers, and most members here are oblivious as to how daft that situation really is. Among other things that has pushed the cost and ease of set up out of reach.

We need to do things much better and with more simple design. I firmly believe that all this room correction is actually added expense and needlessly created problems. For a decent home set up, I am sure that could be dispensed with at saving of costs, that include being forced to buy power amps you don't need.
It is daft that it costs more to buy an unit without amps, then with them. That is just plain nuts, and illustrative how out of whack the industry and whole scene is.

 

[shadyJ]

I also have to wonder if HT didn't help to kill off good sound. The complexity and added equipment might have turned off a lot of people to high-performance sound systems altogether. And, to be honest, A good surround sound system doesn't have a lot up on a good two-channel system. For this reason, I want to push the idea of just good two-channel system more, just a pair of good tower speakers would be far better than any soundbar. I think there are a lot of factors which pushed hi-fi systems from being a common household appliance to an esoteric and niche hobby, but I do think that the push to surround sound was a part of that.

 

[j_garcia]

WAF also pushed things out of favor. "Big ugly" towers won't work for most women, so small speakers became the norm and those don't deliver a great experience.

 

[TLS Guy]

WAF also pushed things out of favor. "Big ugly" towers won't work for most women, so small speakers became the norm and those don't deliver a great experience.

That is where us designers have to get creative.

I would point out that putting a small speaker on a stand is not that different aesthetically than a tower.

I think the issue is a cluttered appearance and taking up floor space.

I think more work needs to be put into in wall systems, but that will require knowledgeable installers who can also do dry wall work, or team up with an associate.

I can tell you that my in wall system has a high acceptance factor. It leaves little if anything on the table when it comes to SQ. One thing I can tell that there is very marginal difference between running it 2.1 or 3.1, and that includes dialog clarity.

If you stream the BPO for instance, that system will generate really good concert level sound in what is a very large space. I know that speaker system is not miniature, but its wall space is not great either. If you could connect it like a sound bar and you made the speakers active, which would not be difficult, it would be a really fine and unobtrusive system. That way you would also get rid of the two recessed lower cabinets.

My wife's instructions, where she wanted the quality she is used to, but no carpet floor space could be taken. I delivered and she is thrilled with it. However, you can regard it as a prototype if you like, and it could be technically and aesthetically refined and improved.

 

[Mikado463]

a basic and simple 5.1 is all I have(and need) for my use in our family room. My serious music listening is done through my 2 channel rig in my 'man cave'.

IMO the KISS principal works just fine ..........

 

[j_garcia]

Basically what I am hearing is we need well built, easy to install, active, wireless in-wall speakers. GET DESIGNING

 

[TLS Guy]

Basically what I am hearing is we need well built, easy to install, active, wireless in-wall speakers. GET DESIGNING

Wireless is may be. What we really need is an upgrade on the versatility of TVs, so that they have a sub out and can be connected to active speakers with preouts or via HDMI. Alternatively a small unobtrusive device that can be connected to the TV by HDMI and then used as an interface to active speakers. This technology actually exists, as it would be a sound bar less speakers. These generally connect to the TV eARC connector.

We should learn the lesson of the extreme popularity of sound bars. If you go to a Target or Walmart, these units are stacked wall high.

So they are a route to simpler cheaper good audio. I have a feeling people don't have a clue about auto Eq, and if they do buy a receiver I would be far more likely than not it is set up incorrectly.

Guys, things are off the rails big time, and the sales show it. Return to vinyl record players connected to powered or active speakers is another wake up call. They are stating to fly off the shelves I understand.

Talk of rabbit holes, we have been flying down the blind alleys.

I am convinced there is a route back to a reasonable and enjoyable audio in the home at reasonably affordable prices using simpler, and above all, more reliable technology.

I'm now waiting for Lovin to jump in about what he calls my rant against receivers.

I am unrepentant. In my view the AV receiver and all its power amps, has been about the dumbest product of my life time in this whole audio and visual arena. It was just always a very bad idea and destined to be doomed.

 

[highfigh]

For most the AV experience is limited to a flat screen, a sound bar and may be a small sub. Almost everyone I know has at least one rig like this.

Alternatives in most instances are not viable, mainly due to architectural issues and complexity. The issues.

An AVR or AVP is a huge barrier. The boxes are large with an absolute rabbits nest of wires coming out the back. If an AVR is the choice, then they more likely than not will have bought far more power amps than they will ever use, as the room is more likely than not unsuitable for surround audio on multiple counts. The amps the owner does used are compromised by the number of amps his does not use and likely never will. Then we get to the speakers, which create another set of interior design issues. When you tell the owner that half or more of the power he has paid for will be wasted in the crossovers of his speakers, he will question the wisdom of the whole undertaking. I should point out that even a simple second order two way crossover will reduce sensitivity by 3db which is half the power. As complexity increases the losses mount.

Then we get to the thorny issue of set up, more likely than not to be done wrong by the inexperienced further compromising results.

If anyone thinks this is a remotely sensible way to design current AV systems, please say so now.

So lets deal with this stage by stage.

I would say that streaming and cable are the dominant ways people receive program. There is some disc and we have the recent return to vinyl. The quality of streams has improved by leaps and bounds in recent years. With this years Prom season, I have been astounded by the quality that can be distributed via the Internet. Most of this quality can be obtained from two or three speakers and a sub or two. I maintain that adding more in unsuitable rooms is actually going to be a downgrade. In any event even a modest 2.1 system or for that matter 2.0 will easily exceed the performance of a sound bar.

In a system like this an AVR or AVP is not required. It could all be handled by the TV and apps. Systems already exist for putting the ubiquitous phones in control of programming.
Subs are already powered devices so that is no problem. So the rest of the system can be and should be. I have said all along the place for amplifiers is in the speakers. Passive speakers are so dated now and are yesterdays technology.

In active speakers you only pay for the amps you need, you don't have them sitting around doing nothing. In addition you only need to pay for amps big enough to power the driver it is connected to. A tweeter for instance requires little power and in most instances 15 or 20 watts would be plenty. Don't forget that ALL the power in this arrangement gets to the driver, and NOT half or less.

Not only that, but active crossovers are in general much better than passive ones, and give the option of a far wider selection of drivers. Just for instance, you can not match a woofer with a tweeter that is less sensitive, but it is no problem in an active speaker. In addition it gives far more flexibility in the control of slopes and overall frequency response. Responses can be changed on the fly remotely. In passive speaker you have to remove the crossover and change components physically.

The above actually means that it will be possible with the right products available for far more people to DIY their speakers.

Speakers though remain the big architectural barrier in many cases, especially given the huge popularity of the open "Great Room" concept in modern homes.

Now of the system in this house that has created the most interest among friends and acquaintances is this.

It sounds very good indeed and its potent as well. It fits in well with the gathering space.

So lets develop the concept further.

Make the TV the controller, and get rid of the AVP and the external power amps. Now the rig is even more compact.

So we now make the speakers active, which will improve them. The owner only pays for the amps he will use. You can make the active electronics panel mount below the speakers to make for very easy service and replacement. This system could easily be made to be reliable for a lifetime.

So far we have saved a lot of money. However in many instances dry wall work and the services of an electrician will be required. Dry wall work and a little paint however is not overly expensive, and the saving of an AVR or AVP likely more than pay for it.

One of the great features of the above system is the in wall TL sub, which really "Guilds the Lily". TL subs really lend themselves to in wall application.

I think we are at an impasse in AV in the home, and if current sources will persist in their current offerings and approaches, they will continue to loose money and leave the market. Then the sound bar becomes the only option.

With the right products there are opportunities aplenty for manufacturers, vendors and installers. A total revision is our systems approach is long overdue.

11.2 or higher AVRs are just a nonsense and will lead to no end of grief. We have just had a huge debacle involving the speaker below, which on investigation not only unfit for purpose, but also result in a short life for any amplifier connected to it.

We have to do better!

OK, an AVR or AVP involve a rabbit's nest of wires, but if someone organizes them methodically, it's not mayhem.

Some of us made a career out of doing this work and if you think a simple system like this is a rat/rabbit's nest, you should have seen some of the homes where I worked- after all of the cabling in the room where they all ended as the head end, were cut to length and the scrap removed, I would estimate that close to a mile of cable remained, just in that room.

The project manager asked if I wanted to go on a walk-through of that place before I started working for the contractor and he led me into that room, to see my reaction. I told him, "It all has to go somewhere" and that's the comment he was looking for.

 

[j_garcia]

I only say wireless because it means no opening walls to run wires. If it isn't easy, not as many will do it. Maybe wireless ON-wall speakers? Achieves enough WAF that it might work.

 

[TLS Guy]

I only say wireless because it means no opening walls to run wires. If it isn't easy, not as many will do it. Maybe wireless ON-wall speakers? Achieves enough WAF that it might work.

On wall would be second best, especially visually. If you are not paying 2K for a receiver, you have quite a lot of money in hand. It is not only getting into the wall for wiring, but also not to be limited by standard stud spacing. This is especially important when talking about an in wall sub. That is an area where my system is I think unique, as it has an excellent performing in wall sub.

 

[j_garcia]

I have only seen a very few on wall speakers that I liked. They otherwise are pretty unapealling.

 

[ben_]

I think this focus on in-wall overlooks just how many renters are out there. I think this is a big part of the popularity of soundbars and small vinyl setups.

 

[TLS Guy]

I think this focus on in-wall overlooks just how many renters are out there. I think this is a big part of the popularity of soundbars and small vinyl setups.

Yes, I have been thinking about that myself.

 

[ben_]

For a lot of current use cases, something like a modular system, with the ability to add components as-needed, could be a good compromise. Something along the lines of the Eurorack synth ecosystem, but for home audio. The Teac mini systems would be the nearest example I could think of, but with tighter integration of components, maybe in a single chassis that provides power amp capability. Small form factor, flexibility, a cheap price point, and the ability to support future upgrades and functionality will all be important.

 

[highfigh]

On wall would be second best, especially visually. If you are not paying 2K for a receiver, you have quite a lot of money in hand. It is not only getting into the wall for wiring, but also not to be limited by standard stud spacing. This is especially important when talking about an in wall sub. That is an area where my system is I think unique, as it has an excellent performing in wall sub.

You mentioned Sonos- they need to listen to installers. I went to a Yamaha sales session and noticed that their MusiCast speakers use a brick-style power supply and this makes installing them where in-wall or on-wall speakers had been because a barrel-type power plug can be connected to the existing speaker wires and it wouldn't need an electrical outlet, as Sonos and HEOS speakers require. The speaker wire can be used because the MusicCast amplified speakers don't use much power and if the wire is larger than 16 ga, it will handle the load.

 

[everettT]

People are starting to think next Gen as products like this are starting production for the consumer side. No clue what the price will be but it's simplicity is very cool.

Arvus H1-D

H1-D

www.arvus.com