Not including pre-amp inputs on AVRs is a crime

[lovinthehd]

Sorry... what? Is this is akin to saying power amplifiers are illegal? Or preamplifier/processors are illegal?

The inputs I'm talking about are merely to use the AVR as a separate multichannel amplifier once preamplifier and processing stage become obsolete.



I'm sorry, what does timing have to do with anything? It's a poop industry practice, and I don't care how standardized it gets, it's always worth pointing it out.

Timing with market forces does have a lot to do with it. It's just not that big a deal as you're making it out to be. As I mentioned, I'd rather see full sets of pre-outs as far more important/useful in avrs. AVR amps as power amps, meh.

 

[Trebdp83]

Oh boy, this one got some traction. So, there are still players on the market with 7.1 analog outs. The McIntosh MHT300 jumpers are for pre out purposes, not input and there is no multichannel in/ext. input source selection because it does not have a proper set of multichannel analog inputs. Can’t really see needing more power with that one. For proper multichannel analog inputs, look to the MX180 or MX123 processors connected to external amps.

Buying a new receiver to be powered by an old one, providing the new one has full pre outs and the old one has multichannel analog inputs is just, well, silly unless the new one simply can’t power an extra pair of height speakers. The multichannel in 7.1 analog ports were meant for multichannel out 7.1 analog ports from players, not to power new receivers.

Those with pricey legacy devices with 7.1 analog output ports will have to spend quite a bit for a new AVP/AVR with the 7.1 analog inputs. Using the pre outs of a new unit to power it with an old unit is, again, silly unless it is to power height channels that the new unit cannot power on its own. It’s really not worth all of the fuss.

 

[coolbronco]

There is another issue here. We are now past the point where RCA video outputs are no longer legal. Digital AV units are only allowed to have digital outputs that conform to current DRM rules. Whist the analog 5.1 inputs might be legal, current equipment does not have 5.1 or more RCA outputs, so there is really no point in putting them on the AVRs or AVPs. as only legacy equipment could use it. I am not even certain those 5.1 audio inputs are even legal any longer.
There is an absolute forcing of HDMI in AV equipment now. All the gear does contain analog left and right RCA inputs I think for stereo analog units, and that is all you need, and I have a feeling those are the only ones that are legal.
[/QUOTE
Just how are RCA video outputs illegal? If so, I'd say its time to find a unit that has that feature because the govt.
shouldn't be taking our A/V away. It's all we have left.

 

[TLS Guy]

Sorry... what? Is this is akin to saying power amplifiers are illegal? Or preamplifier/processors are illegal?

The inputs I'm talking about are merely to use the AVR as a separate multichannel amplifier once preamplifier and processing stage become obsolete.



I'm sorry, what does timing have to do with anything? It's a poop industry practice, and I don't care how standardized it gets, it's always worth pointing it out.

You have not understood the issue. The DRM legislation is to prevent piracy. HDMI with its continuous coded handshakes, is now to the point that piracy is not practically possible. So video players like BD players and streaming devices no longer have un-coded outputs. In other words there has been a forcing of HDMI to prevent piracy. Those multichannel RCA inputs were to connect players that did not have HDMI. This process was known as the analog sunset. It started in 2010 and was complete by 2013, and has the force of Federal law.

So we are now 13 years since the process began and it was complete 10 years ago. So any players that would connect with these inputs are now very old, and I suspect the majority have already been to the recycling center. So essentially there is no point to providing these inputs.

Lastly these inputs are not suitable to make a receiver a substitute for a power amp, as these inputs are preamp inputs and NOT power amp inputs.

Higher end receivers do have preouts after the preamp stage to connect to power amps.

So your whole concept makes no sense. If you are worried about obsolescence and not preserving your power amps, then your solution is to have external amps, powered either by and AVP or the preouts of a receiver.

Those are the facts, and what you are advocating makes absolutely no practical or commercial sense. Now do you understand?

 

[PENG]

I can't believe this practice is getting any traction on this forum, when Gene himself that railed against this practice for the longest time.

I would say you are in the vast minority lol... Your point is of course valid, but you just have to keep in mind and might just accept the fact that manufacturers typically wouldn't spend a lot of time worrying about losing a few customers for omitting that feature; and most customers would not want to pay even $5 more for a set of preamp inputs just in case they might one day use their AVR as a power amp. So your best bet is go with other options, one being a few AVRs that still offer the feature, or just grab a dedicated power amp when the time come, and I am sure you would agree that time may never come anyway. For a lot of people, I suspect there is a great chance they would end up using their old AVR in a secondary setup, than to use it as a multichannel pure power amp.

 

[Swerd]

I would say you are in the vast minority lol... Your point is of course valid, but …

I agree with you. And I also agree with the OP's basic beef.

It does seems like the OP has been away from the electronic audio gear & TV business for a long time. It's been decades since the electronic audio makers started to sell products that were intentionally designed for planned obsolescence. Yes, one can argue that rapid developments in computer chip and software design created this problem, but it is also clear that the manufacturers have deliberately used these developments to take unfair advantage over customers.

It is also true that planned obsolescence isn't limited to audio & TV. I see similar things with kitchen and other home appliances, including furnaces and air conditioners. I've owned refrigerators, washing machines, furnaces, as well as TVs or receivers that lasted 30 years or longer. Now, we're lucky if these items last 10 years.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I would say you are in the vast minority lol...

If it were up to @TLS Guy, putting amps inside the AVR is a crime. So it would be a crime to make AVR.

 

[Fried Chicken]

I would say you are in the vast minority lol... Your point is of course valid, but you just have to keep in mind and might just accept the fact that manufacturers typically wouldn't spend a lot of time worrying about losing a few customers for omitting that feature; and most customers would not want to pay even $5 more for a set of preamp inputs just in case they might one day use their AVR as a power amp. So your best bet is go with other options, one being a few AVRs that still offer the feature, or just grab a dedicated power amp when the time come, and I am sure you would agree that time may never come anyway. For a lot of people, I suspect there is a great chance they would end up using their old AVR in a secondary setup, than to use it as a multichannel pure power amp.

Well customers should care. It's a stupid and ridiculous practice, especially now that object-based surround is here and we're seeing 13 and 15-channel setups.

A simple "Yes you're right" from this forum would suffice, but to defend this practice, or criticize my complaint because "well the timing is off" is pure horseshit, and honestly speaks to a culture problem in this forum. I'm honestly a bit speechless here.

Let me repeat: it costs nothing to implement this, and allows separate amplifier head testing for AVRs. Of course the AVR manufacturers don't want to include this. This way they can justify selling amplifiers bundled with the pre/pros, and they can avoid measurements of their power amplifiers.

Good lord, I can't believe what I'm reading here. Captured consumers. Fanboys. Sheep. Everywhere.

 

[Fried Chicken]

Makes me understand Louis Rossmann's latest rant even better:

Corporate apologists.

 

[PENG]

Let me repeat: it costs nothing to implement this, and allows separate amplifier head testing for AVRs.

With due respect, repeating such untrue statement does not make it less untrue. Of course it will cost something, not nothing. And as mentioned by others, also has to consider real estate constraints.

May be TLSGuy or ADTG have more to say, but I am out and done on this, its obviously pointless.

 

[Fried Chicken]

With due respect, repeating such untrue statement does not make it less untrue. Of course it will cost something, not nothing. And as mentioned by others, also has to consider real estate constraints.

May be TLSGuy or ADTG have more to say, but I am out and done on this, its obviously pointless.

I'm so sorry, you're right... it costs maybe $5. The new Denon A1H costs $6k, so a whopping 0.083% of the cost of the unit.

As for precious real-estate...

Here's the RX-A3040's rear end:

And here's the RX-A3050's rear end:

 

[Trebdp83]

Well customers should care. It's a stupid and ridiculous practice, especially now that object-based surround is here and we're seeing 13 and 15-channel setups.

A simple "Yes you're right" from this forum would suffice, but to defend this practice, or criticize my complaint because "well the timing is off" is pure horseshit, and honestly speaks to a culture problem in this forum. I'm honestly a bit speechless here.

Let me repeat: it costs nothing to implement this, and allows separate amplifier head testing for AVRs. Of course the AVR manufacturers don't want to include this. This way they can justify selling amplifiers bundled with the pre/pros, and they can avoid measurements of their power amplifiers.

Good lord, I can't believe what I'm reading here. Captured consumers. Fanboys. Sheep. Everywhere.

Ok, that's enough. Yikes, I thought I was the a$$hole around here and have ranted about a great many things here myself. Each poster does not represent the Forum itself. The forum is just a place many gather to get and give information. No poster is responsible for anything but their own opinion.

I've bitched about this very topic in the past in other threads. I've moved on from the 7.1 analog ports because what they were meant to do can now be done with an HDMI connection. They were never meant for a connection to a pre amp, though it can be done. They are useful to those who need additional amplification for new units that process more channels than they can power or to those with older players with 5.1/7.1 analog output ports.

There are many older receivers with multichannel in 7.1 analog ports out there that can be had on the cheap. Hell, I have two of them collecting dust somewhere in my mess. They would be useful for a new receiver that had pre outs for channels it could not power or for additional Zones so that the new unit doesn't lose any amps in the Main Zone. So, if somebody has one of these multichannel in 7.1 analog port equipped receivers, fine. It would make more sense to worry about a full set of pre outs on a new unit than fuss over the lack of multichannel 7.1 analog inputs that were never meant to be connected to anything but a player with 7.1 analog output ports,, though they can be used with AVP/AVR pre outs.

Anybody really committed to the cause would have stopped upgrading in the first place and stayed with an analog connected 1080 setup. In for a penny, in for a pound with this new s#%t. Now, go give Yamaha your two cents. Maybe get into separates and keep hardy amps around for a long time and upgrade processors when necessary. You can just keep acting like a miserable little c#%t around here but that would be a continued waste of time for everybody. At the very least, change the title of the thread. They were called MULTI IN/EXT. IN and never PRE AMP in because that was never the intent. You might just need a good connection to one of your own ports to shut you up. Hey, I don't judge. Whatever works.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

With due respect, repeating such untrue statement does not make it less untrue. Of course it will cost something, not nothing.

May be TLSGuy or ADTG have more to say, but I am out and done on this, its obviously pointless.

I'm so sorry, you're right... it costs maybe $5.

Even if it costs $5 each, x 10 million units = $50 million.

 

[Movie2099]

I have no idea what has been said in this thread. But I just want to say, everyone here should purchase AudioQuest cables. They are the best cables on the market! If you want smooth chocolatey sound oozing from your mids, you want AudioQuest cables.

Thank you all for reading my post.

Have a great day!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I have no idea what has been said in this thread. But I just want to say, everyone here should purchase AudioQuest cables. They are the best cables on the market! If you want smooth chocolatey sound oozing from your mids, you want AudioQuest cables.

Thank you all for reading my post.

Have a great day!

So do you want the rest of us to speak our minds and have a discussion or just want us to shut up and agree with you?

 

[Movie2099]

So do you want the rest of us to speak our minds and have a discussion or just want us to shut up and agree with you?

If everyone could agree with me, that would be great.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If everyone could agree with me, that would be great.

SIR, YES SIR.

 

[ban25]

Oh boy, this one got some traction. So, there are still players on the market with 7.1 analog outs. The McIntosh MHT300 jumpers are for pre out purposes, not input and there is no multichannel in/ext. input source selection because it does not have a proper set of multichannel analog inputs. Can’t really see needing more power with that one. For proper multichannel analog inputs, look to the MX180 or MX123 processors connected to external amps.

Maybe I misinterpreted what the manual for the MHT300 states, or what the OP is asking for, or both. The manual states, on Page 7, that the jumpered RCAs above each set of binding posts on the back of the AVR are:

"Seven unbalanced amplifier inputs"

You can find the manual here:

https://www.mcintoshlabs.com/-/media/Files/mcintoshlabs/DocumentMaster/us/MHT300_OM_24120200.pdf?rev=ac2e807b2c944f8eac9df5659d4b7e0a&revision=ac2e807b-2c94-4f8e-ac9d-f5659d4b7e0a

It seems to me that the OP is asking for pre-amplifier inputs so that he can turn an AVR into an amp. Now, how many people actually want to do that? But it does seem like the MHT300 fits the bill.

 

[Trebdp83]

The MHT300 has jumpers so that an external amp can be connected to it if one thinks the amps in it cannot do the job. It also has separate pre outs for height channels. It does not have MULTI IN/EXT. IN 7.1 ports meant for players with 7.1 analog out ports. The jumpers basically connect the amps section to the processor in the MHT300. But, I wouldn't touch it for lots of other reasons at its $8,000 price tag. The Yamaha RX-A3040 would technically work for powering another AVP/AVR with its MULTI IN 7.1 analog ports, but that was not the intent of those ports.

 

[lovinthehd]

The MHT300 has jumpers so that an external amp can be connected to it if one thinks the amps in it cannot do the job. It also has separate pre outs for height channels. It does not have MULTI IN/EXT. IN 7.1 ports meant for players with 7.1 analog out ports. The jumpers basically connect the amps section to the processor in the MHT300. But, I wouldn't touch it for lots of other reasons at its $8,000 price tag. The Yamaha RX-A3040 would technically work for powering another AVP/AVR with its MULTI IN 7.1 analog ports, but that was not the intent of those ports.

Still, it is a separation of pre-amp from amp section like was common on a fair bit of 2ch gear years ago. You can go either way, use for external amp or external pre-amp; altho usually the scenario would be to use more powerful amps than the on-board ones in the avr. The McIntosh doesn't have particularly spectacular amp spec in any case, so likely use would still lean towards more capable external amps IMO.