# AV Receivers



## NBPk402 (Feb 21, 2012)

In the old days we had stereo receivers and they had am/fm tuners built in... Now we have AV Receivers. Why don't the manufacturers include a HDTV tuner in their receivers? They are "AV Receivers" and HDTV is video. They have apps for music and video. Why not add a antenna hookup on the back and add a tuner internally?

You make think it is silly but for people that are cutting the cord on cable it would be real nice.


----------



## telemike (Apr 8, 2013)

That would be a good idea, but just about any tv sold lately has a built in digital tv tuner. My first big tv has an HD Monitor, no digital tuner included, you have to buy it extra and that tv cost me about $4000. Now, a $400 tv is better than that one


----------



## NBPk402 (Feb 21, 2012)

Except for front projection owners like me. :-( I do have flat panels with built in HD tuners and they are much better than the aftermarket tuners I have seen. If projectors had them that would be fine too.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Thats an interesting idea, Having an HD tuner could be advantages to many. I do wonder if its an interference issue? Even though its a digital signal now I wonder if there are some issues with that?


----------



## NBPk402 (Feb 21, 2012)

tonyvdb said:


> Thats an interesting idea, Having an HD tuner could be advantages to many. I do wonder if its an interference issue? Even though its a digital signal now I wonder if there are some issues with that?


Don't know... But my Denon 4520 has HDRadio built in. HDTV would be a awesome feature imo.


----------



## asere (Dec 7, 2011)

Is there really an audible difference with HD radio?


----------



## NBPk402 (Feb 21, 2012)

asere said:


> Is there really an audible difference with HD radio?


Yes... When I listen to a HDRadio station in my car it sounds like a CD until it loses the HD signal then it loses all the highs.


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

It seems there are many features that are duplicated in the A/V chain. It could be useful with projectors even though any of your HDTV's could pass the stream to the AVR which could then route it to the projector.

A more interesting feature would be cable card capability to decode a cable signal. Depending on the company (Comcast, Dish, etc), you could download a firmware update & not need a set top box. Now that seems like a selling point.


----------



## asere (Dec 7, 2011)

Tonto said:


> It seems there are many features that are duplicated in the A/V chain. It could be useful with projectors even though any of your HDTV's could pass the stream to the AVR which could then route it to the projector.
> 
> A more interesting feature would be cable card capability to decode a cable signal. Depending on the company (Comcast, Dish, etc), you could download a firmware update & not need a set top box. Now that seems like a selling point.


You hit the nail. Great idea!


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

I think so as well. And the cable companies would benefit from decreased inventory. As new technology comes along we would just get a new firmware update. I wonder what Comcast did with all their analog set top boxes?

Next would be AVR's with hard drives which would do away with HTPC's. I'm just saying.


----------



## NBPk402 (Feb 21, 2012)

Tonto said:


> It seems there are many features that are duplicated in the A/V chain. It could be useful with projectors even though any of your HDTV's could pass the stream to the AVR which could then route it to the projector.
> 
> A more interesting feature would be cable card capability to decode a cable signal. Depending on the company (Comcast, Dish, etc), you could download a firmware update & not need a set top box. Now that seems like a selling point.


In order to do that I would have to leave my HDTV on even though it is not being watched...Correct? There is a growing market that is cutting the cable cord (I just did it too) and HDTV OTA is the way they are going. Once you have the hookup in the receiver I would assume it could go either way...cable card or OTA.


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

ellisr63 said:


> In the old days we had stereo receivers and they had am/fm tuners built in... Now we have AV Receivers. Why don't the manufacturers include a HDTV tuner in their receivers? They are "AV Receivers" and HDTV is video. They have apps for music and video. Why not add a antenna hookup on the back and add a tuner internally?
> 
> You make think it is silly but for people that are cutting the cord on cable it would be real nice.



It is a good idea. An ATSC/QAM tuner would be nice and would simplify remote jockeying, but noting else. A DVR and BD Player would also be nice additions too. But I think the reason is, added cost and complexity, most AVRs are value oriented devices built to a price point; adding a tuner, as well as necessary internal software support & additional engineering will add to cost and potentially reduce reliability. Plus the quality of tuners varies wildly, your best bet is to have an outboard unit. That is unless they design the AVR with a swapable tuner slot using an industry standard (yet to happen); maybe USB3 based TV tuners would be the solution. 

But at least most modern AVRs include some youtube or netflix support, which is said to become the modern replacement for tuner based subscription TV :nono:.


----------



## MrAngles (May 1, 2012)

All this is starting to remind me of TV/VCR combo units. I like separate components in home theater for many reasons, but probably the biggest is that if you need to replace one component for any reason (stops working, new technology becomes available, etc) you don't have to replace it all. Having a DVR or a blu-ray player built into a receiver is just asking to replace the whole device sooner. I could see putting something as simple, low cost and industry standard as ATSC and QAM tuner in an AVR though.

Personally though I'm looking at getting a Boxee TV box for my tuner. It would be nice if more media players had tuners built in, that makes more sense to me than putting it in an AVR.


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

MrAngles said:


> All this is starting to remind me of TV/VCR combo units. I like separate components in home theater for many reasons, but probably the biggest is that if you need to replace one component for any reason (stops working, new technology becomes available, etc) you don't have to replace it all. Having a DVR or a blu-ray player built into a receiver is just asking to replace the whole device sooner. I could see putting something as simple, low cost and industry standard as ATSC and QAM tuner in an AVR though.
> 
> Personally though I'm looking at getting a Boxee TV box for my tuner. It would be nice if more media players had tuners built in, that makes more sense to me than putting it in an AVR.


I completely agree with you.


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

Cable cards have much less capability than the settop box.

I prefer separate units to do separate functions.


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

chashint said:


> Cable cards have much less capability than the settop box.
> 
> I prefer separate units to do separate functions.


CableCards do have two way capability but the problem was TV manufacturers never fully implemented it, Panasonic tried it about 3 or 4 years ago but discontinued it after 1 tv model. Also remember that there are also cablecard based DVRs. So your statement is a tad vague and partly true.


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

Does it matter whose fault it is is the channel guide does not work?


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

chashint said:


> Does it matter whose fault it is is the channel guide does not work?


I still prefer the old paper print version, its much more reliable, easier to use, quicker with no scrolling through 1000 channels, and you can channel surf while you use the guide. As an alternative, I do like AOL TV listings and find them just as convenient.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Cablecard failed because the cable companies made it nearly impossible for the TV makers to make it work and did not want to support the technology. Virtually all of the problems that we had with the early cable card sets ended up being with the cable providers who did not implement properly and did not provide technical support. There was no pay value in it for them. They wanted the storage functionality in the boxes that they provide rather than the set or online.


----------



## 8086 (Aug 4, 2009)

lcaillo said:


> Cablecard failed because the cable companies made it nearly impossible for the TV makers to make it work and did not want to support the technology. Virtually all of the problems that we had with the early cable card sets ended up being with the cable providers who did not implement properly and did not provide technical support. There was no pay value in it for them. They wanted the storage functionality in the boxes that they provide rather than the set or online.


If I remember correctly a lot of their hate for cablecard came from the one way communication which denied them the ability to sell premium content on demand. Tru-Two Way Tried to address the issue.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

The one way cablecard also denied the user the ability to buy it. My friends in the cable industry were very clear that the intent was to never give more than minimal support to cablecard and hope that it died on the vine before the 2 way flavor was widely available. The reason was to maintain control of storage and to maintain the need for the STB product category. Cablecard also required a whole new set of skills and support that they did not want to invest in.


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

So what you are saying is maybe there would be an incentive for AVR's to utilize 2 way cable card technology considering the coming changes from the cable companies. I understand cable wanting to protect their interests, but they need to do it with me in mind. From the sound of it, I'm not feeling the love.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I would not expect to feel much love from the cable companies. They have little incentive to be responsive to your desires when they largely dictate the terms of the relationship.


----------



## JohnCarter19 (May 9, 2021)

hmm having it built-in will be a good addon.. I believe the reason they get separate is we usually get better sound quality out of external ac receivers than the build ones, what do you think? and what do you think about denon ac receivers?


----------



## alexwqs1337 (11 mo ago)

JohnCarter19 said:


> hmm having it built-in will be a good addon.. I believe the reason they get separate is we usually get better sound quality out of external ac receivers than the build ones, what do you think? and what do you think about denon ac receivers?


Same question.


----------

