6 ms·

Well that is basically the model of the home stereo today. People don’t realize sound was solved decades ago. How they could get the same stereo their grandfat

Well that is basically the model of the home stereo today. People don’t realize sound was solved decades ago. How they could get the same stereo their grandfather could have ordered from the sears catalog and some cabinets from that sears catalog and that would be better sound than they are capable of ever perceiving, and how it would last them their entire life on that one stereo and probably the lives of multiple generations of family members. With IO that has always been a standard and always will be a standard. And a stereo like this isn’t even terribly expensive. A couple hundred up front for never having to make another home audio equipment purchase in your life is some serious savings. Instead they are sold soundbars and other crap tiny speakers that are not built to last, and might use specific io to connect over open standards that have been around for decades. They end up spending quite a lot more money for a shit experience that they are none the wiser that there are even alternatives to, without becoming audiophiles themselves consuming hundreds of pages of relevant media in that niche. What a cash cow of an industry.

kd913 2y ago
I think there can be a difference here. Was looking recently at the power requirements of an amp + subwoofer + 5 5.1 JBL surround speakers. The setup was done decade ago, and the power needed for it was nuts. Something like 500W for a Denon amp and 250W for a JBL subwoofer? For reference something like a OG HomePod consumes what 45W? The Sony srs xg500 boombox can last 30hours and is a giant room shaking boombox. The difference in power efficiency between these old and new setups are nuts. Nevermind compatibility with AirPlay, streaming etc…
- kingnothing 2y ago
  There's also an absolutely massive difference in audio quality between a HomePod or Sonos anything and a proper amp + speakers.
  - jkolio 2y ago
    Yup. Newer products use various tricks to try to fill in the gaps that their physical reality can't overcome, but ultimately there's no getting around that reality. I will say that the Sony upright boom boxes aren't to be slept on (and, if one is active, fat chance). They're quite good for their intended use cases (parties, and closed Best Buys during clean-up/inventory).
- tpm 2y ago
  A 500W amp is probably a class A and can't really be made more efficient. It would still be 500W in 2024. Decades ago there were more efficient setups too, though of course now they sound better and also have lots more features and connectivity.
- kristjansson 2y ago
  > 500W Amplifiers are quoted in peak output, not average (and play some games with other parameters e.g. resistance) to capture bigger-number-better sales. A 750w system will consume nowhere near 750w at typical listening volumes (just like your 750w PC doesn't use 18 kWh every day.)
- throw-qqqqq 2y ago
  Unless you’re playing REALLY loud, I don’t think you are anywhere near 250 or 500W of consumption. I would guess it is the maximum rated power? Even with quite old and inefficient amp + speaker combo, 30W of sound is usually a lot(!). Tube amps are an exception. They can be very power hungry, but it’s difficult to buy such tech today compared to class D etc.
gazchop 2y ago
Nailed it. You don’t even have to buy new stuff now. Still rocking my early 90s system. Has required a couple of amp repairs (capacitors and sticky relay) but no big issue. Bought a Bluetooth DAC for streaming stuff. Job done.
worik 2y ago
> Well that is basically the model of the home stereo today. The entire digital ecosystem seems to be heading this way. Even cars
stetrain 2y ago
Well one of those options lets me click a button on the phone in my pocket and play music across multiple rooms without running any wires between rooms. And similarly supports surround-sound audio without running wires around or inside walls. I appreciate the value in a basic stereo system but there are some major differences in functionality to the end user.
- xp84 2y ago
  I'd point out that all that was needed to add that capability to a 1970 stereo is one of these devices: https://www.sonos.com/en-us/shop/port https://www.sonos.com/en-us/shop/port Although I laughed out loud that they're asking $450 for that little box. That's pretty cheeky. The BOM on that must be $15. Margin level: Apple! I wonder if they make it $450 to discourage doing just what I'm describing. To make people consider that for that kind of money they could buy one decent Sonos speaker and "simplify." Even though the Sonos speaker won't have anywhere near the sound quality or longevity of a 40-year-old stereo amp and speakers.
  - hmottestad 2y ago
    I have a 40-year old amp and speakers at home. My dad’s old stereo. Works fine, but it has so much static buzz. Sounds great though. I’m just a bit hesitant to leave it powered on all the time which means I don’t use it much compared to my Bluetooth speakers. Old power supplies are not very efficient. They can get hot. There is also a decent amount of dust. And then there is the risk of some old cap blowing.
    - mixmastamyk 2y ago
      Buzz is not normal. Either it was really low quality, (unlikely since it has lasted this long), or it is not properly grounded.
      - hmottestad 2y ago
        It's not properly grounded. I think I need to change out the power cable for one with ground, since the power cable that comes with the stereo only has two wires. There is a grounding point on the back of the chassis, but I don't have anything to ground it to except for the wall socket and at that point I should just use a proper power cable instead.
dfltr 2y ago
It feels like one of those low-sci-fi settings where we thought it'd be funny and quaint to have post-collapse scavengers endlessly repairing retro tech, but now it's actually happening and it's not funny anymore. Like for example: My dad bought a hulking integrated Akai amp / cassette / turntable combo in the early 80s. Every user-facing component was brushed aluminum, the volume pot was the size of a Dallas church, and it probably would have killed any living organism you dropped it on. My dad died over a decade ago and I guarantee that amp is still sitting in someone's living room heating the place up. I'm just mad it's not in mine.
mitjam 2y ago
Still enjoy my Elac speakers from 20+ years ago at an analog amp, a class D amp wouldn‘t be bad, though. For smaller speakers at computers I like active nearfield monitors and a good interface like Focusrite. Can recommend Genelec speakers, for example.
- a-french-anon 2y ago
  NB: the D in "class D" doesn't stand for "digital".
  - mitjam 2y ago
    Ah, thank you, really didn‘t know that (now I learned: A is a linear amplifying device, D is switching, but both are analog circuits)
rurp 2y ago
Yep, and this kind of needlessly wasteful consumerism is everywhere in the tech industry. All of the token statements about sustainability that come from the same industry that normalized and celebrates this kind of product strategy drives me a little crazy sometimes.
PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
> A couple hundred up front for never having to make another home audio equipment purchase in your life is some serious savings. I have a rather nice NAD amplifier that I bought about 29 years ago. It had to be repaired once at about the 6 year mark. Recently, it has developed a new electronic failure mode that I don't believe can be repaired. So ... yes, but let's not overdo the "never have to make another home audio purchase" part ...
jnwatson 2y ago
I've been dabbling in Hifi for most of my life, a hobby inherited from my father. I have some awareness of consumer Hifi over the last 50 years. Speaker and amplifier design are vastly better than even 15 years ago, partially because of better engineering and mostly because of advances in electronics. An entry level receiver today would wipe the floor with consumer level equipment from the 80s. Still, traditional Hifi is dying to the "crap tiny speaker" folks. The company that owns Denon and Marantz may go out business this year. It is ironic because traditional Hifi is in an amazing place in terms of value. I recently bought a budget (<$300) setup for my PC and I'm blown away by what a couple of modest bookshelf speakers, a modern mini-amp and a compact subwoofer can accomplish.
- jedberg 2y ago
  > The company that owns Denon and Marantz may go out business this year. Oh man. I guess I better stock up on the latest Marantz before the go out of business. The last one I had was my dad's and it lasted 50 years. Actually, it still works, it just requires you to manually power it on.
- kuschku 2y ago
  > Speaker and amplifier design are vastly better than even 15 years ago Let's break this down into the components: Speaker drivers: very little change Speaker chassis design: still changing, last major change was improved computational modeling Amplifier: Class D was the last major change, not much since DSP: Still evolving, getting better every day AV Receiver control boards: Standards are changing every day, whether that's new HDMI standards, new bluetooth versions, or new AirPlay/Chromecast protocols. TL;DR: Buy old speakers and a new receiver/amp.
  - pcchristie 2y ago
    Or buy a great, "dumb" amp and a modern Streamer (e.g. Wiim) as the best way to minimise waste when standards inevitably evolve.
    - alkonaut 2y ago
DidYaWipe 2y ago
Except the industry is nearly dead. Almost nobody is buying legitimate stereo systems anymore, and the ones that are out there (at almost any price) are mind-bogglingly incompetent. I'm shocked that Sonos is even a going concern at this point, although I suppose it is because of what I relate below. The home-audio market is consolidated into a tiny number of manufacturers masquerading under once-proud brands they bought. The crippling incompetence of the products themselves is depressing. A few years ago my Denon A/V receiver crapped out and I decided to go "upmarket" and get an NAD T758. I accept a bit of quirkiness from a smaller name, but "quirkiness" doesn't come close to describing the design and functionality defects that plagued this thing. Everything from baffling menu navigation (not kidding: Pressing Enter did not select a menu entry; you were supposed to use an arrow key) to the fact that it would only pass 720p video because it reported erroneous EDID info to HDMI devices. It didn't pass the info from the connected display device; it just provided its own EDID blob to everything, which reported a max resolution of 720p. The NAD also featured Dirac processing, which I shelled out for to get the full license and spent hours with a test mic profiling my room and speakers. Then... it would just lose the entire configuration. Deleted off the receiver. "We haven't been able to figure out why this happens," said NAD. In fact, in several years they never fixed a single one of the crippling defects I encountered and reported. But NAD isn't the only shitshow in town. Let me address the biggest impediment to whole-home audio (or even multi-zone audio): manufacturers' bizarre conceit that anyone can use secondary zones that only play ANALOG sources. The NAD was crippled by this stupidity, as is the top-of-the-line Pioneer I bought to replace it. In the case of the NAD, I addressed this defect by running RCA cables across the back of the receiver, from its preamp outputs to a CD-player input; and assigning that input to Zone 2. Why the hell didn't NAD just do that internally with a switch? On the Pioneer, it's actually worse. There ARE no preamp outputs. It has THREE zones, one of which I can tie to the main one but the third, yep, can only play analog sources. All I want to do is play the same shit on ALL MY SPEAKERS. My living-room ones, my patio ones, and my backyard ones. All I need is A, B, and C speaker switches. But NOPE. As far as I can tell, nobody makes this. Nobody addresses the 99% use case for multiple "zones." There are at least NINE AMPS in my receiver, but I can't play the same source on three pairs of speakers. BTW, I did build a patch bay with switches, to wire the secondary zone in parallel with the first... but this overloaded one pair of amps in the NAD and destroyed the entire receiver. Yep: NAD doesn't have a simple overload breaker. They just burn the entire amplifier board up; that's the breaker. Unfuckingbelievable. But back to the main issue: Who is seriously going to dick around trying to select sources and adjust volume to each zone (with what, by the way, an app?) on one receiver instead of simply buying a bookshelf system for every remote room you want to play music in? I sure as shit wouldn't, and I'm the kind of person who ran digital cables under my house to an equipment closet so I could have a proper surround setup in my living room. I have a projector and home-built screen, but even I would never bother with the stupid usage scenario Pioneer, NAD, and the two other makers envision: This scenario revolves around nonexistent people who are going to put on a RECORD or TAPE, then go to the other side of their house or down to their rec room for half an hour... and then come running back to the other side of the house to flip the record or tape over. WTF.
theshrike79 2y ago
I had a fancy separate stereo system with a HDMI switcher in the AV amp, well reviewed speakers I bought from a hi-fi enthusiast friend and all that. It was a massive pain to put out all the cables, adjust the system manually little by little (the setup mic kinda helped, but wasn't that good). Then I got a Sonos Beam and that set of "crap tiny speakers" with a fancy DSP brought so much more dimension to movies that it wasn't even funny. Upgraded to a Sub and it automatically offloaded those frequencies to it and the Beam got even better now that it didn't have to cosplay a subwoofer. For setup all I had to do was walk around the space and wave my phone around and the difference was clearly audible even to my non-discerning ears. Later I upgraded to an Arc + got two rears and everything got a lot better. The v2 app is utter crap, I haven't had to use it for anything else than Trueplay adjustment when we moved a while ago. The v1 let me debug what the soundbar was receiving (my TV was sending data in the wrong format and I was just getting fancy stereo instead of Dolby Atmos). V2 doesn't have any power user features at all. I'm not going back to a wired setup with a separate amp unless I get a dedicated theater room I can sound proof and manage the acoustics. I _am_ considering switching to a brand that doesn't need an app to setup, but it's slim pickings in the upper tier of soundbars.
- kridsdale1 2y ago
  Similar to you I had lugged my 7.1 speakers and amp and wires around to every address I’ve had in 20 years. For the current house I had enough and put a HomePod in every room and top tier Samsung bar + satellites + sub. It’s not as good at dimensions as discrete speakers but now I have reflected Atmos Waves off the ceiling and setup was super easy. I had to use the app one time to calibrate but I already had it since I have a Washing machine it connects to.
  - theshrike79 2y ago
    The DSPs in sound bars are absolute marvels. I haven't checked the AV amp market in a good half decade, but I'm guessing there aren't any valid options if you want 4k 120Hz + room correcting DSP that are even close to the price of a mid/high end sound bar.
- 2y ago
_2d30 2y ago
> People don’t realize sound was solved decades ago. This really isn't true at all. HiFi has an obscene amount of snake-oil and non-rigorous design decision making. Audio Science Review (https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php) has documented this very clearly and well.
whatevaa 2y ago
Sound might be solved, but multi-room audio is not. On major renovations you could layout speaker cables, but then you can't adjust positions. Custom solutions with, like, snapcast and raspberries (like mine), works and you don't need to deal with any of this, but then you need to deal with software setup annoyances. It get's technical.
marcosdumay 2y ago
> People don’t realize sound was solved decades ago. Not wireless transmission, and not uniform spatial distribution. AFAIK, Sonos was about those two. They didn't solve them either, there's still plenty of space to make a dent there.

kd913 2y ago

I think there can be a difference here. Was looking recently at the power requirements of an amp + subwoofer + 5 5.1 JBL surround speakers. The setup was done decade ago, and the power needed for it was nuts. Something like 500W for a Denon amp and 250W for a JBL subwoofer? For reference something like a OG HomePod consumes what 45W? The Sony srs xg500 boombox can last 30hours and is a giant room shaking boombox. The difference in power efficiency between these old and new setups are nuts. Nevermind compatibility with AirPlay, streaming etc…

kingnothing 2y ago
There's also an absolutely massive difference in audio quality between a HomePod or Sonos anything and a proper amp + speakers.
- jkolio 2y ago
  Yup. Newer products use various tricks to try to fill in the gaps that their physical reality can't overcome, but ultimately there's no getting around that reality. I will say that the Sony upright boom boxes aren't to be slept on (and, if one is active, fat chance). They're quite good for their intended use cases (parties, and closed Best Buys during clean-up/inventory).
tpm 2y ago
A 500W amp is probably a class A and can't really be made more efficient. It would still be 500W in 2024. Decades ago there were more efficient setups too, though of course now they sound better and also have lots more features and connectivity.
kristjansson 2y ago
> 500W Amplifiers are quoted in peak output, not average (and play some games with other parameters e.g. resistance) to capture bigger-number-better sales. A 750w system will consume nowhere near 750w at typical listening volumes (just like your 750w PC doesn't use 18 kWh every day.)
throw-qqqqq 2y ago
Unless you’re playing REALLY loud, I don’t think you are anywhere near 250 or 500W of consumption. I would guess it is the maximum rated power? Even with quite old and inefficient amp + speaker combo, 30W of sound is usually a lot(!). Tube amps are an exception. They can be very power hungry, but it’s difficult to buy such tech today compared to class D etc.

gazchop 2y ago

Nailed it. You don’t even have to buy new stuff now. Still rocking my early 90s system. Has required a couple of amp repairs (capacitors and sticky relay) but no big issue. Bought a Bluetooth DAC for streaming stuff. Job done.

worik 2y ago

> Well that is basically the model of the home stereo today. The entire digital ecosystem seems to be heading this way. Even cars

stetrain 2y ago

Well one of those options lets me click a button on the phone in my pocket and play music across multiple rooms without running any wires between rooms. And similarly supports surround-sound audio without running wires around or inside walls. I appreciate the value in a basic stereo system but there are some major differences in functionality to the end user.

xp84 2y ago
I'd point out that all that was needed to add that capability to a 1970 stereo is one of these devices: https://www.sonos.com/en-us/shop/port https://www.sonos.com/en-us/shop/port Although I laughed out loud that they're asking $450 for that little box. That's pretty cheeky. The BOM on that must be $15. Margin level: Apple! I wonder if they make it $450 to discourage doing just what I'm describing. To make people consider that for that kind of money they could buy one decent Sonos speaker and "simplify." Even though the Sonos speaker won't have anywhere near the sound quality or longevity of a 40-year-old stereo amp and speakers.
- hmottestad 2y ago
  I have a 40-year old amp and speakers at home. My dad’s old stereo. Works fine, but it has so much static buzz. Sounds great though. I’m just a bit hesitant to leave it powered on all the time which means I don’t use it much compared to my Bluetooth speakers. Old power supplies are not very efficient. They can get hot. There is also a decent amount of dust. And then there is the risk of some old cap blowing.
  - mixmastamyk 2y ago
    Buzz is not normal. Either it was really low quality, (unlikely since it has lasted this long), or it is not properly grounded.
    - hmottestad 2y ago
      It's not properly grounded. I think I need to change out the power cable for one with ground, since the power cable that comes with the stereo only has two wires. There is a grounding point on the back of the chassis, but I don't have anything to ground it to except for the wall socket and at that point I should just use a proper power cable instead.

dfltr 2y ago

It feels like one of those low-sci-fi settings where we thought it'd be funny and quaint to have post-collapse scavengers endlessly repairing retro tech, but now it's actually happening and it's not funny anymore. Like for example: My dad bought a hulking integrated Akai amp / cassette / turntable combo in the early 80s. Every user-facing component was brushed aluminum, the volume pot was the size of a Dallas church, and it probably would have killed any living organism you dropped it on. My dad died over a decade ago and I guarantee that amp is still sitting in someone's living room heating the place up. I'm just mad it's not in mine.

mitjam 2y ago

Still enjoy my Elac speakers from 20+ years ago at an analog amp, a class D amp wouldn‘t be bad, though. For smaller speakers at computers I like active nearfield monitors and a good interface like Focusrite. Can recommend Genelec speakers, for example.

a-french-anon 2y ago
NB: the D in "class D" doesn't stand for "digital".
- mitjam 2y ago
  Ah, thank you, really didn‘t know that (now I learned: A is a linear amplifying device, D is switching, but both are analog circuits)

rurp 2y ago

Yep, and this kind of needlessly wasteful consumerism is everywhere in the tech industry. All of the token statements about sustainability that come from the same industry that normalized and celebrates this kind of product strategy drives me a little crazy sometimes.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago

> A couple hundred up front for never having to make another home audio equipment purchase in your life is some serious savings. I have a rather nice NAD amplifier that I bought about 29 years ago. It had to be repaired once at about the 6 year mark. Recently, it has developed a new electronic failure mode that I don't believe can be repaired. So ... yes, but let's not overdo the "never have to make another home audio purchase" part ...

jnwatson 2y ago

I've been dabbling in Hifi for most of my life, a hobby inherited from my father. I have some awareness of consumer Hifi over the last 50 years. Speaker and amplifier design are vastly better than even 15 years ago, partially because of better engineering and mostly because of advances in electronics. An entry level receiver today would wipe the floor with consumer level equipment from the 80s. Still, traditional Hifi is dying to the "crap tiny speaker" folks. The company that owns Denon and Marantz may go out business this year. It is ironic because traditional Hifi is in an amazing place in terms of value. I recently bought a budget (<$300) setup for my PC and I'm blown away by what a couple of modest bookshelf speakers, a modern mini-amp and a compact subwoofer can accomplish.

jedberg 2y ago
> The company that owns Denon and Marantz may go out business this year. Oh man. I guess I better stock up on the latest Marantz before the go out of business. The last one I had was my dad's and it lasted 50 years. Actually, it still works, it just requires you to manually power it on.
kuschku 2y ago
> Speaker and amplifier design are vastly better than even 15 years ago Let's break this down into the components: Speaker drivers: very little change Speaker chassis design: still changing, last major change was improved computational modeling Amplifier: Class D was the last major change, not much since DSP: Still evolving, getting better every day AV Receiver control boards: Standards are changing every day, whether that's new HDMI standards, new bluetooth versions, or new AirPlay/Chromecast protocols. TL;DR: Buy old speakers and a new receiver/amp.
- pcchristie 2y ago
  Or buy a great, "dumb" amp and a modern Streamer (e.g. Wiim) as the best way to minimise waste when standards inevitably evolve.
  - alkonaut 2y ago

DidYaWipe 2y ago

Except the industry is nearly dead. Almost nobody is buying legitimate stereo systems anymore, and the ones that are out there (at almost any price) are mind-bogglingly incompetent. I'm shocked that Sonos is even a going concern at this point, although I suppose it is because of what I relate below. The home-audio market is consolidated into a tiny number of manufacturers masquerading under once-proud brands they bought. The crippling incompetence of the products themselves is depressing. A few years ago my Denon A/V receiver crapped out and I decided to go "upmarket" and get an NAD T758. I accept a bit of quirkiness from a smaller name, but "quirkiness" doesn't come close to describing the design and functionality defects that plagued this thing. Everything from baffling menu navigation (not kidding: Pressing Enter did not select a menu entry; you were supposed to use an arrow key) to the fact that it would only pass 720p video because it reported erroneous EDID info to HDMI devices. It didn't pass the info from the connected display device; it just provided its own EDID blob to everything, which reported a max resolution of 720p. The NAD also featured Dirac processing, which I shelled out for to get the full license and spent hours with a test mic profiling my room and speakers. Then... it would just lose the entire configuration. Deleted off the receiver. "We haven't been able to figure out why this happens," said NAD. In fact, in several years they never fixed a single one of the crippling defects I encountered and reported. But NAD isn't the only shitshow in town. Let me address the biggest impediment to whole-home audio (or even multi-zone audio): manufacturers' bizarre conceit that anyone can use secondary zones that only play ANALOG sources. The NAD was crippled by this stupidity, as is the top-of-the-line Pioneer I bought to replace it. In the case of the NAD, I addressed this defect by running RCA cables across the back of the receiver, from its preamp outputs to a CD-player input; and assigning that input to Zone 2. Why the hell didn't NAD just do that internally with a switch? On the Pioneer, it's actually worse. There ARE no preamp outputs. It has THREE zones, one of which I can tie to the main one but the third, yep, can only play analog sources. All I want to do is play the same shit on ALL MY SPEAKERS. My living-room ones, my patio ones, and my backyard ones. All I need is A, B, and C speaker switches. But NOPE. As far as I can tell, nobody makes this. Nobody addresses the 99% use case for multiple "zones." There are at least NINE AMPS in my receiver, but I can't play the same source on three pairs of speakers. BTW, I did build a patch bay with switches, to wire the secondary zone in parallel with the first... but this overloaded one pair of amps in the NAD and destroyed the entire receiver. Yep: NAD doesn't have a simple overload breaker. They just burn the entire amplifier board up; that's the breaker. Unfuckingbelievable. But back to the main issue: Who is seriously going to dick around trying to select sources and adjust volume to each zone (with what, by the way, an app?) on one receiver instead of simply buying a bookshelf system for every remote room you want to play music in? I sure as shit wouldn't, and I'm the kind of person who ran digital cables under my house to an equipment closet so I could have a proper surround setup in my living room. I have a projector and home-built screen, but even I would never bother with the stupid usage scenario Pioneer, NAD, and the two other makers envision: This scenario revolves around nonexistent people who are going to put on a RECORD or TAPE, then go to the other side of their house or down to their rec room for half an hour... and then come running back to the other side of the house to flip the record or tape over. WTF.

theshrike79 2y ago

I had a fancy separate stereo system with a HDMI switcher in the AV amp, well reviewed speakers I bought from a hi-fi enthusiast friend and all that. It was a massive pain to put out all the cables, adjust the system manually little by little (the setup mic kinda helped, but wasn't that good). Then I got a Sonos Beam and that set of "crap tiny speakers" with a fancy DSP brought so much more dimension to movies that it wasn't even funny. Upgraded to a Sub and it automatically offloaded those frequencies to it and the Beam got even better now that it didn't have to cosplay a subwoofer. For setup all I had to do was walk around the space and wave my phone around and the difference was clearly audible even to my non-discerning ears. Later I upgraded to an Arc + got two rears and everything got a lot better. The v2 app is utter crap, I haven't had to use it for anything else than Trueplay adjustment when we moved a while ago. The v1 let me debug what the soundbar was receiving (my TV was sending data in the wrong format and I was just getting fancy stereo instead of Dolby Atmos). V2 doesn't have any power user features at all. I'm not going back to a wired setup with a separate amp unless I get a dedicated theater room I can sound proof and manage the acoustics. I _am_ considering switching to a brand that doesn't need an app to setup, but it's slim pickings in the upper tier of soundbars.

kridsdale1 2y ago
Similar to you I had lugged my 7.1 speakers and amp and wires around to every address I’ve had in 20 years. For the current house I had enough and put a HomePod in every room and top tier Samsung bar + satellites + sub. It’s not as good at dimensions as discrete speakers but now I have reflected Atmos Waves off the ceiling and setup was super easy. I had to use the app one time to calibrate but I already had it since I have a Washing machine it connects to.
- theshrike79 2y ago
  The DSPs in sound bars are absolute marvels. I haven't checked the AV amp market in a good half decade, but I'm guessing there aren't any valid options if you want 4k 120Hz + room correcting DSP that are even close to the price of a mid/high end sound bar.
2y ago

_2d30 2y ago

> People don’t realize sound was solved decades ago. This really isn't true at all. HiFi has an obscene amount of snake-oil and non-rigorous design decision making. Audio Science Review (https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php) has documented this very clearly and well.

whatevaa 2y ago

Sound might be solved, but multi-room audio is not. On major renovations you could layout speaker cables, but then you can't adjust positions. Custom solutions with, like, snapcast and raspberries (like mine), works and you don't need to deal with any of this, but then you need to deal with software setup annoyances. It get's technical.

marcosdumay 2y ago

> People don’t realize sound was solved decades ago. Not wireless transmission, and not uniform spatial distribution. AFAIK, Sonos was about those two. They didn't solve them either, there's still plenty of space to make a dent there.