What I want: Apple Receiver
I would love to see Apple make a receiver. I'm currently shopping for a new one, and almost all the ones in the $500 range seem to have some tragic flaw. They're certainly all a nightmare to set up and configure. The receiver is really the heart of the home theater setup. The AppleTV is really not much more than a hard drive. If Apple could make a receiver that was as plug-and-play as their computers, it would be a godsend to the causal home theater user. Obviously, we can all come up with a couple dozen major features that we'd like to see incorporated, but for me, the most important thing would be to make it simple to set up and simple to use. I'd buy it today. Anyone think this is likely?
Comments
I would love to see Apple make a receiver. I'm currently shopping for a new one, and almost all the ones in the $500 range seem to have some tragic flaw. They're certainly all a nightmare to set up and configure. The receiver is really the heart of the home theater setup. The AppleTV is really not much more than a hard drive. If Apple could make a receiver that was as plug-and-play as their computers, it would be a godsend to the causal home theater user. Obviously, we can all come up with a couple dozen major features that we'd like to see incorporated, but for me, the most important thing would be to make it simple to set up and simple to use. I'd buy it today. Anyone think this is likely?
If they could pull off minimalist design, good quality sound and a reasonable price it might work. Of course we have seen Apples attempts with things like the boom box, but I don't mean that sort of minimalist design.
Rather I want to see the basic controls without the fiddly and seldom used controls of a modern reciever. In other words volume, balance and channel select controls and little else.
In any event I have to ask, what have you been looking at? There use to be some nice stuff in that price range but I haven't followed the industry in years. My Marrantz reciever is like 30 years old now, they don't build them like that anymore.
Dave
all the major brands in the $350-600 price range. Sony, Pioneer, Denon, Yamaha. I bought a refurbished Pioneer about a year ago and should have returned it.
Not to dismiss those fine brands but the audio component world far larger than four makers. I'd suggest getting some magazines to read, look for quality recievers and integrated amps that take the minimalist approach.
It kicks off at high volumes for no apparent reason.
Have you considered you are playing it to loud? More so did you properly size the amp to your speakers.
I'd like a receiver with simple controls that recognizes what's been plugged into it and adjusts accordingly.
That is not likely to happen. The only possibility here would be for Apple to define an entire ecosystem of components with standards fo data interchange.
That's easy to set up and calibrate.
See you totally loose me here, you talk about calibration but the reality is there is nothing to calibrate in an easy to use amp. Your requests here are at odds with each other. Besides most of the crap engineered into modern recievers is a total waste.
Bluetooth, wifi, 2TB hard drive, iPod connectivity, DVR, iTunes-capable, etc., would all be nice. But I just want something that works well and doesn't require ten remotes and hours of my time. But yeah, that boom box was not a great idea.
What you want isn't possible in my opinion. If you add features you add complexity. Is Apple good at abstracting away complexity, certainly, but they are also good at avoiding useless features. If Apple where to build such a device I'm certain they would minimize features to keep the unit easy to use. Besides as mentioned above you don't really need all those features. Ultimately all a reciever needs to do is to amplify the source signal.
Dave
For instance, Audyssey room EQ. An included microphone is used to measure the volume, frequency response, distance, and phase of each speaker in the system. This is done for all the listening positions in the room and then the sound to each speaker is adjusted separately to achieve a flat frequency response and convincing sound stage for surround sound. This isn't just the simple 5 or even 16 band EQ that you may have experience with. Some systems boast a 128 band EQ per channel!
I recently upgraded to such a system and it made an unbelievable difference in my home theater. The on-screen graph of the applied EQ was pretty surprising. I wouldn't have guessed that my speakers and room were coloring the sound that significantly.
How does this relate to Apple? I'm not sure. But I am sure that this functionality belongs in the receiver, and that receivers are getting more complicated as a result.
Another tidbit on receiver complexity...
After configuring the network settings on this receiver, the first thing I did was trigger a firmware update over the internet. Then I purchase a software feature pack, also delivered via the network connection.
Receivers are undergoing an interesting transformation right now... It used to be simple source selecting, surround sound modes, and static equalization. Receivers are now trying to do much more complicated things though.
You missed my whole point you don't need that crap.
For instance, Audyssey room EQ. An included microphone is used to measure the volume, frequency response, distance, and phase of each speaker in the system. This is done for all the listening positions in the room and then the sound to each speaker is adjusted separately to achieve a flat frequency response and convincing sound stage for surround sound. This isn't just the simple 5 or even 16 band EQ that you may have experience with. Some systems boast a 128 band EQ per channel!
I set my balance and tone controls to the middle position and leave them there. In fact because they are getting a bit old I've though seriously of bypassing them with hardwire. Honestly they serve no useful purpose. The money I save by ignoring this end of the market could easily go into a new Mac, printer or DSLR.
I recently upgraded to such a system and it made an unbelievable difference in my home theater. The on-screen graph of the applied EQ was pretty surprising.
OK so you have pretty pictures but can you actually gear the difference? Further if you move from the position the system was calibrated for does it make a difference. The problem is this you have a great piece of technology that might do well in a dedicated viewing room. The problem is few of us have such dedicated rooms and use our living rooms for well living. Heck sometimes we send the speaker outputs to the cellar or back porch.
I wouldn't have guessed that my speakers and room were coloring the sound that significantly.
how did you get by without the system in the first place?
How does this relate to Apple? I'm not sure. But I am sure that this functionality belongs in the receiver, and that receivers are getting more complicated as a result.
I disagree totally these recievers are nothing more than the manufactures finding new ways to strike your ego or whatever. The world got by fine without them for years.
Another tidbit on receiver complexity...
After configuring the network settings on this receiver, the first thing I did was trigger a firmware update over the internet. Then I purchase a software feature pack, also delivered via the network connection.
My god man they have got you by the short hairs but good. What are you going to do on the day you decide to sit in a chair that wasn't at the calibration point? How about if the wife or maid bumps a speaker with a vacuum or during a mailman visit, will you know can you hear the difference and finally does it matter if you can't hear the difference.
Your house is nothing more than a modern day cave. Treat it like one and you will be much happier. You won't get worked up over dislodged speakers or flower pots sitting on top of them. This is nothing to snezze at as I've seen some relationships hit a very rocky road over guys and their fascination with audio equipment.
Dave
You missed my whole point you don't need that crap.
I set my balance and tone controls to the middle position and leave them there. In fact because they are getting a bit old I've though seriously of bypassing them with hardwire. Honestly they serve no useful purpose. The money I save by ignoring this end of the market could easily go into a new Mac, printer or DSLR.
OK so you have pretty pictures but can you actually gear the difference? Further if you move from the position the system was calibrated for does it make a difference. The problem is this you have a great piece of technology that might do well in a dedicated viewing room. The problem is few of us have such dedicated rooms and use our living rooms for well living. Heck sometimes we send the speaker outputs to the cellar or back porch.
how did you get by without the system in the first place?
I disagree totally these recievers are nothing more than the manufactures finding new ways to strike your ego or whatever. The world got by fine without them for years.
My god man they have got you by the short hairs but good. What are you going to do on the day you decide to sit in a chair that wasn't at the calibration point? How about if the wife or maid bumps a speaker with a vacuum or during a mailman visit, will you know can you hear the difference and finally does it matter if you can't hear the difference.
Your house is nothing more than a modern day cave. Treat it like one and you will be much happier. You won't get worked up over dislodged speakers or flower pots sitting on top of them. This is nothing to snezze at as I've seen some relationships hit a very rocky road over guys and their fascination with audio equipment.
Dave
Do you hate modern receivers, me, or just everything on the entire planet?