4 ms·

AVRs are a huge hassle to deal with, and overkill when you only have 2 or 3 devices to switch between and/or don’t have many audio-only devices. AVRs made more

AVRs are a huge hassle to deal with, and overkill when you only have 2 or 3 devices to switch between and/or don’t have many audio-only devices. AVRs made more sense during the days when we’d have CD players, tape decks, VCRs and DVD player, vinyl record players, cable/satellite STBs, and a game console or two all hooked up. Now it’s just an STB (if you aren’t a cord-cutter), a Roku/AppleTV/Chromecast/FireTV, and maybe a Blu-ray player (or BD-capable games console, which also doubles as a Roku/AppleTV/etc).

chihuahua 6y ago
Without an AV Receiver, how would you drive a set of speakers?
- recursive 6y ago
  I use powered studio monitors. They drive themselves.
- DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
  That's what HDMI ARC is for - the TV can be connected to a normal speaker amplifier (so the TV acts as the receiver, basically). I'm wary of using HDMI AVRs today because they add input lag.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
chrisweekly 6y ago
It seems our experiences and priorities are quite different. I've never found any "hassle" in using an AVR for its intended, dedicated purpose: centrally managing various audio and video inputs and outputs and driving surround speakers & subwoofer. Inputs include Cable box/DVR, PS4, AppleTV, and (sometimes) Nintendo Switch. Audio out leverages our home theater surround system, and video out is a single HDMI into the tv. I have no interest in using any "smart" tv features, tv speakers, nor attempts at playing the role of a dedicated receiver. Unless you're a hardcore gamer measuring latency, IMHO use of an AVR is simply the right tool for the job. Nothing overkill about it. Put the "smarts" in a decent universal remote, keep the tv as dumb (literally; it's for video only) as possible, ensure everything sounds great, and never fiddle with the cables ones it's set up. YMMV, but this has served me very well for over 15 years.
- quickthrowman 6y ago
  I have the inverse of your setup. PS4, Apple TV, and Blu Ray Player use the 3 HDMI inputs on the TV, with an optical out audio cable to an input on my Sony receiver. My receiver is older and doesn’t have HDMI in, but this solution works well with the TV I have. When a device is turned on, the TV wakes up and switches to that input. If the PS4 is on and I turn on the Apple TV, it will auto-switch. I never need to touch the TV remote at all since the devices go to sleep automatically, which is nice. Apple TV remote handles the receiver volume, and the audio input never changes on the receiver, so I don’t need the TV or receiver remotes at all.
  - chrisweekly 6y ago
    Yep, different strokes for different folks. :) I've never had a TV w decent audio out (nor reasonable input sec switching), rather started w focus on amazing sound (Hsu Research Ventriloquist 7.1 w down-firing sub), and eventually the receiver's role was expanded to encompass video. Whatever works for you!

chihuahua 6y ago

Without an AV Receiver, how would you drive a set of speakers?

recursive 6y ago
I use powered studio monitors. They drive themselves.
DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
That's what HDMI ARC is for - the TV can be connected to a normal speaker amplifier (so the TV acts as the receiver, basically). I'm wary of using HDMI AVRs today because they add input lag.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

chrisweekly 6y ago

It seems our experiences and priorities are quite different. I've never found any "hassle" in using an AVR for its intended, dedicated purpose: centrally managing various audio and video inputs and outputs and driving surround speakers & subwoofer. Inputs include Cable box/DVR, PS4, AppleTV, and (sometimes) Nintendo Switch. Audio out leverages our home theater surround system, and video out is a single HDMI into the tv. I have no interest in using any "smart" tv features, tv speakers, nor attempts at playing the role of a dedicated receiver. Unless you're a hardcore gamer measuring latency, IMHO use of an AVR is simply the right tool for the job. Nothing overkill about it. Put the "smarts" in a decent universal remote, keep the tv as dumb (literally; it's for video only) as possible, ensure everything sounds great, and never fiddle with the cables ones it's set up. YMMV, but this has served me very well for over 15 years.

quickthrowman 6y ago
I have the inverse of your setup. PS4, Apple TV, and Blu Ray Player use the 3 HDMI inputs on the TV, with an optical out audio cable to an input on my Sony receiver. My receiver is older and doesn’t have HDMI in, but this solution works well with the TV I have. When a device is turned on, the TV wakes up and switches to that input. If the PS4 is on and I turn on the Apple TV, it will auto-switch. I never need to touch the TV remote at all since the devices go to sleep automatically, which is nice. Apple TV remote handles the receiver volume, and the audio input never changes on the receiver, so I don’t need the TV or receiver remotes at all.
- chrisweekly 6y ago
  Yep, different strokes for different folks. :) I've never had a TV w decent audio out (nor reasonable input sec switching), rather started w focus on amazing sound (Hsu Research Ventriloquist 7.1 w down-firing sub), and eventually the receiver's role was expanded to encompass video. Whatever works for you!