It seems to me that Stereo Audio quality is better in a dedicated Stereo component rather than in an A/V component ( In Stereo mode )
Why is that?
Why can’t be an A/V component that’s include best Stereo and A/V in one component?
Thanks
Ronen.
Cost.
1 Like
This is why I have 3x M700 and a S300. Connected to a decent AV Preamp and that’s essentially an Audiophile’s Surround Rig. To put that kind of quality audio into one box is not economical and won’t sell to be quite honest. The AVR market appeals to people on a budget (hell, I’ve gone through 4 so far in 22 years of playing with AVR’s).
The nice thing with an AVR preamp should it become obsolete, you’ll still have some great Amps to play with.
1 Like
Thanks
There’s a few reason (and maybe more that I just didn’t think of…) that I can see. First, in a A/V component, you need many more parts as you will need to handle lots of channels, process complex multichannel data, handle video, etc. Most people will not do each one separately (it’s possible, just LOTS of components needed…). Second, the cost of all these parts means that you need to cut corners somewhere else to stay at a target price point. There’s quite a few stereo components that are truly “cost-no-object”, but you have extremely few a/v components that falls into that category.
Third, and I think maybe the most important, a/v components are designed to sound great in a multi-channel environment with video to go with it. I doubt accuracy is as high of a design criteria for a/v components as it is for stereo components. What I mean is that the design team sets out to achieve a certain type of sound that excels for movies, which doesn’t necessarily correspond to being 100% accurate.
Just my 2c
1 Like