Why a new A/V receiver can not sound as good as a 30-year-old one

[ingenieus]

It seems all that new technology and the licensing fees for it eats up the budget, so there is no money left for the stuff that matters. Like a big enough transformer for the PSU.

Very interesting to know.

Why Your Dad’s 30-Year-Old Stereo System Sounds Better than Your new One

If you fashion yourself as an audiophile and just threw down a decent wad of cash on a new A/V receiver, you probably won't like hearing that the receivers of yesteryear produce comparable sound. Why is that? Technological advancement, ironically.
Cnet's Steve Guttenberg sheds light on this interesting development that over the years, actual sound quality became a secondary selling point since most people started buying their equipment either online or from big box retailers. People started caring more about the number of connections and wireless interfaces and wattage of systems. As a result, there was less money in R&D budgets to spend on advancements in sound.

OK, so what's wrong with that? The receiver engineers have to devote the lion's share of their design skills and budget to making the features work. Every year receiver manufacturers pay out more and more money (in the form of royalties and licensing fees) to Apple, Audyssey, Bluetooth, HD Radio, XM-Sirius, Dolby, DTS and other companies, and those dollars consume an ever bigger chunk of the design budget. The engineers have to make do with whatever is left to make the receiver sound good. Retail prices of receivers, the ones that sell in big numbers, never go up. The $300 to $500 models are where most of the sales action is, just like 10, 20 or 30 years ago, when their $300 to $500 models weren't packed to the gills with the features I just listed. Something's got to go, and sound quality usually takes the hit.

What's more is that over the past few decades, the average power of receivers has gone down in high-end receivers. While the entry level and mid-range receivers have more watts than before (from 20w-30w then, to 90w-100w now), high-end receivers top out around 140w-150w. Gutenberg references a 270w Pioneer receiver from 1980, and a test of that receiver by Innovative Audio shows that it can go toe-to-toe with the newest gear. So if you're solely interested in a receiver for music, going vintage might not be the worst idea.

Why Your Dad's 30-Year-Old Stereo System Sounds Better than Your new One

[DF96]

So money spend on bells and whistles (and blue LEDs etc.) can't be spent on sound quality! Who would have thought it?

[Conrad Hoffman]

OTOH, the designers don't have to do much research or spend much money. They just have to read Self and Cordell's books and read diyAudio. We know how to do this stuff now better than ever before. Also, design goals, like it or not, are different than they used to be. Sound quality is not most peoples priority, even if they make feeble noises to the contrary. Features and appearance rule and anyone who doesn't understand this will soon be out of business.

[Pano]

Yep, they sell what sells. That's business.

[ostripper]

Ha ! What a topic. Look below (1 and 2 ) , tell me how a typical $400 5.1/ 7.1
can even come close to a DIYA amp or classic receiver.

They just have to read Self and Cordell's books and read diyAudio.

I don't think so. Self would say their output stages are "ill-conceived"
Cordell would laugh.

Receiver below is 2005 STR-DB940 , repaired 2 of them ... stole 2 trafo's for my test PS and subwoofer from 2 similar. 5 -7 channels of Sanken darlington OP's , 55-0-55Vdc 15kuf X 2 power supply. All 7 channels run from a copper rail "bus" , IC voltage stages (4 channel per IC) running the sankens.

Rated at 72-80w/ch PMPO maybe ... not all 7 at once !! 1 or 2 channels alone would barely develop this output with that PS... and even then hit the sanken's SOA.

They do have a nice remote control , great for couch potato's ... large alpha numeric displays and ample hookup capabilities. You can augment one with a real sub/amp setup to have a moderately impressive system (line level "subwoofer out".

OS

[ingenieus]

Building a surround sound processor with multi-channel source selection switches and volume control is not for the feint of heart. Neither is an FM/AM tuner.

Quite a few budget AV receivers have got pre-out sockets. Just how good is the signal coming out of the average one? Is it worth using such an el cheapo receiver's pre-amp (bought off eBay e.a. perhaps) to drive DIY power amplifiers? Would this perhaps be the way for the impecunious to have their cake and eat it?

PS - that heatsink in the right-hand pic looks like a good way of getting rid of heat without breaking the bank. Might be a bit of a challenge to make in a home workshop, tho.

[ostripper]

The sony amplifier voltage stage IC is the key to thermal considerations. Some type of active bias control of the sanken darlingtons. They run COOL , real cool. Never more than 25-30ma bias... NO bias adj..

OS

[Andrew Eckhardt]

One problem with the new mass produced gear is it all uses mcu driven analog switches and volume/gain control.

You can argue that the latest ICs have low enough distortion, but its distortion that doesn't exist in the old mechanical switch and potentiometer rigs.

[Conrad Hoffman]

All that stuff is true enough, but the customers don't understand or care in the least. The manufacturers would be idiots to do things that raise costs and won't help them sell more equipment. They need reliability so they don't lose their shirts on warranty costs and they need marketing buzz words. Other than that it just needs to work well enough to keep people used to MP3s happy, and IMO that's not too difficult.

[ostripper]

Yes , an 128kb/s MP3 on the sony is a good "match". The FLAC with a high crest factor will sound "strained". Large DIYA amp with 3-4 OP pairs .... that same FLAC will be in a different league .... no subjectivity here. Distinct , oblivious , "right in your face" difference.

PS - don't make fun of the MP3's , some 256-320kb/s ones personally ripped with the right codec have quite the transients/depth. 95% of the FLAC / 1/4 the file.

OS