TV + Soundbar = why a receiver?

[tridy]

It is time for me to think about upgrading the TV and audio this year and I am puzzled about the choice here.

1) If a TV works works as HDMI switch and feeds audio signal via optical to a soundbar (that has its own power), why would I want a receiver?

2) Why do (most or all?) soundbars pass through the video signal? If there is no digital/optical audio out from the TV then I can see the case. But, otherwise, doesn't soundbar processing video make them into a receiver on its own?

If we isolate the soundbar (hence the name, right?) as a device that should work only with the sound functionality, it would be up-to-date for quite a few years, while video stuff (hdmi version, supported resolution) will probably get out-of-date faster.

I must be missing something here, right?

thanks

 

[Mr5oh]

Receivers supply the amplification for the speakers on the sound bar. This way the sound bars are reasonable price wise. You'd rather one consistent piece of hardware be doing the audio processing like the receiver, rather than the TV, sound bar, and then possibly a receiver driving other speakers as well.

It's smart to keep these items "dumb". Not to mention receivers aren't that expensive relatively speaking. Nicer speakers can be. You may have several speakers, this way you can replace one item, rather than all of your speakers, so your "argument" works in both directions.

 

[tridy]

thanks. I see your point.

How about that if we deduct the price of the receiver and add it to the price of the soundbar, I think it is possible to get a good quality soundbar with the wireless speakers (that will not require the power from the receiver).

One important element is that in the new apartment, I do not want to work through hiding the wires for the back speakers (5.1). I have done it once in my current apartment, and there is no way I am doing anything to the new apartment walls . The fewer wires -- the better.

Another reason - is the heat coming from the receiver. Have they got any better these days, so one can keep them inside a somehow tight cabinet without overheating? In case of the wireless soundbar each speaker is powered independently and heat is spread as well.

It is a good argument, I think, that it is not a good idea for a TV to be processing audio (and video ) much. So, I will look at the soundbars to see if they do a good job there.

regards

 

[ssddx]

while televisions do have a dac and do have a switch inside them, they lack amplifiers so really are only suitable for pairing up with external amps before going to speakers or powered speakers of some manner.

hdmi pass through is meant so that sources can connect directly to the speaker system and then go to the tv. while certainly you could go from tv to speakers instead there are a few cases where it is better to do the opposite, plus hdmi is better than optical. no, they are not receivers although some of them do have switches and they do need amplifiers but they can act somewhat similar although in a more limited way.

speakers generally age gracefully. many designs have been on the market for a good many years so that part is true. formats and cables used generally change more often although its not a deal breaker as older formats are still supported.

so, you want a soundbar? you have to pick between a passive version and an active version. passives would require an external amp of some sort but are dumb. actives have their own amp built in and often have passthrough, optical input or similar so are convenient but will age a bit less gracefully.

actives are often best for just the soundbar only although some do have +sub and +rear speakers as part of a kit. you're often a bit limited in your choices but there are options. passives can be paired with any speakers you want.

the biggest question: why a soundbar? if you want 5.1 to begin with just go with normal speakers and a receiver. you can get budget systems like the energy classic 5.1 and cheap receivers for ~$500 total give or take. running speaker wire is easy and you might be the most happy with such a setup. yes wireless is convenient and other systems take up less room but there are always shortcomings for convenience.

just my opinion of course.

 

[americanaudiophile]

1. TV will not pass lossless audio such a Dolby TrueHD which are available on BD discs. Optical can't handle the data rate. A receiver handle these better audio options, offer real surround sound, much more power, and sometimes better video processing than the TV might have. Receivers let you use much higher quality speakers than all but a few expensive soundbars. You can choose the ones you like, the type of speaker and match them to the room and placement you require. No soundbar is the equivalent.
2. Most newer TVs have both HDMI ARC and optical audio output. If you use the HDMI ARC input just to get audio into the soundbar you lose that input on the TV so the soundbar has an HDMI input so you don't. ARC saves you having to use an additional cable which might need to be long and hard to run.
3. HDMI does get updated. Newest version coming out is 2.1 later this year. It is backward compatible with older versions so you don't really lose the ARC function with an older soundbar.

 

[jsmithepa]

I sense your desire for something compact and no wires is going to override what folks here are saying to you. With a SB, expect to run into "can I do this?" and the answer is often "no."

 

[tridy]

So, from what you are guys saying it is better to go with wires and a receiver. I was looking at SONOS produucts for some time and their playbar that uses optical in, and if you are saying that optical would not support all features, I will need to reconsider. I crrently own some 5+ years old CERWIN VEGA CVHD 5.1 with stands (http/cerwinvega.com/home-audio/home-theater-speaker-systems/cvhd-51-speakers.html) and a FullHD Onkyo receiver and a FullHD TV. If I would go with the same speakers into the new apartment, getting a new 4K TV then I will keep the speakers and will require only a new receiver.

I don't know why but thinking about hiding the wires that go to the rear speakers makes me feel really uncomfortable. Getting to the opposite wall will require going via the ceilings, maybe flat cables, painting over, oooof. But I will give it more though.


A bit off-topic but what would you suggest when trying to hide cables, meaning there is no (concrete and it's a newly built apartment) wall cutting.

Thanks for your replies.

 

[jsmithepa]

Say you get wireless rears, those puppies still need to be powered so a nearby outlet (or two) is still needed, so not really totally wireless.

Carpets hide wires real well. You call, your aesthetic sensibility.

 

[tridy]

Say you get wireless rears, those puppies still need to be powered so a nearby outlet (or two) is still needed, so not really totally wireless.
...

The rears are on the stands, and power outlet will be nearby behind the sofa, it would be good enough. The thing is that there will be no carpets, just a wooden floor, and I cannot interrupt the construction process and ask them to put flat wires under the wooden floor. So what I do not like is the wires on the floor across the room, sort of.

Is it worth looking at any of the "wireless rear speaker kits"?
Some time ago I looked at
https/www.rocketfishproducts.com/pdp/RF-WHTIB/8275528
looks like a good idea but I could not find anything like that in EU.

 

[ssddx]

heres the thing, while optical has came a long way so far it still is very limited.

optical used to be 2.0 and it still is in many cases. when in 2.0 mode you get full quality uncompressed audio that equals hdmi. nowadays however many supports 5.1 but that is because it uses a compressed dolby digital format (both source and destination device would need to support it also or its going to be only 2.0). side by side with hdmi, optical in 5.1 is going to be worse (whether your ears hear any difference depends on you). optical also doesnt allow for things like hdmi-arc, video passthrough or other such new technologies so you will always need to rely on optical outputs on devices (or buying hdmi to optical converters).

its good, but at the same time its a bit limiting. hdmi is currently the standard (not that this cant change in the future of course) so it means this gives you the most options currently.

agreed, wireless rear speakers require power. you will still have powere cables which means is not truly wireless. if you need to hide such cables, then you might as well hide speaker wire as well. often people do not consider this though and think the speaker just sits there. yes, there are truly wireless systems although generally they are battery powered and need charging (will be a pain and will be added cost when batteries fail). normally those are more for portable or party use though.

ways to hide speaker wire?
- flatwire. its about as thick as heavy tape and can be ran along walls and painted over
- running it along the top of baseboard. there are covers you can place over it as well.
- running it inside baseboard if you have groove cutouts
- running it under floors
- running it above drop ceilings
- running it through walls (better in new construction not existing)
- running it under carpet, secured down to the floor

what is best for you? likely under the carpet (edit, looks like your post came after i started writing so this isnt an option) or along baseboards as its easily removable without lasting harm. flatwire is also an idea if you are allowed repainting.

using existing speakers would certainly be cheaper. you already have a set so i'd go with that.

not that you couldnt go with a soundbar system. you can and honestly some arent bad at all but its not a true wireless system and there will be a few limitations you come across on the way.

 

[tridy]

Alright, I will try going with the existing speakers and a new receiver. I will see what I can do with the wires later on.

a) maybe I will try remove the baseboard from 2 walls try lifting it a bit and squeeze the flat wires under the wooden floor. Does not sound too realistic though.

b) baseboards covers might work out quite well, but I think there might be "gaps" between walls

c) flatwire (will it stick properly and not peel off?) sounds simple but reviews say people had problems with them

d) carpet. My wife actually wanted one


Thank you very much for helping me to decide!

If everything goes as expected, I will post the results some time November - December

regards

 

[ssddx]

https/www.google.com/search?q=baseboard+speaker+wire+cover&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwierJG8zZDSAhVO0mMKHTaiD_sQ_AUICSgC&biw=1242&bih=602#imgrc=ISaBzwtPszAZlM:

look at all the options available for baseboard wire covers. they include 90 degree covers too so no gaps.

i've never used flatwire but with the right adhesive it shouldnt be a problem.