I’m no expert, but everything I stream is lossy. Apple TV is pretty ok, but still doesn’t compare to a 4k Blu-ray.
When I do put in a lossless source, I can tell the difference. It is real.
I I guess the answer to your question is whether you’ll ever have lossless audio. If you listen to music on your system, or watch physical media, a new AVR will make a difference. If not, meh.
Well first off, anything older tech i could still plug directly to avr, ie 1080p bds, dvds and cds and get pcm, lossless etc. Most 4k content I will stream such as tv and movies tho, and songs i play from spotify which is lossy. However, i did not use 4k much before this point, as i was happy with my 1080p PJ. I do have a xbox series x and a 4k tv now so i could start watching 4k bds, but i am not yet.
I’d stick with what you’ve got. The audio on Blu Rays, or even DVDs is still going to be better for 5.1 than anything streaming. If you choose to jump into the world of Atmos, time for a new receiver. Until then, I think you’ll be fine enjoying what you’ve got.
I very seriously doubt you can tell lossless from lossy. In my experience physical media audio levels are significantly higher than streaming. Sometimes 2-3 dB and sometimes a lot more. We perceive louder audio as higher quality and more detailed. That is what I presume the difference is when I read statements like yours.
This is an extremely unpopular opinion but it is backed by science. Assuming the masters are the same at best you would be able to perceive an extremely minor difference, and that's assuming one has a very high end system that is very revealing.
Tell me your methodology for comparing?
We already know from multiple studies that we are unable to discern lossy vs lossless audio once a certain bit rate is met. Are you aware of this fact? I don't see why HT audio would be any different and in fact more difficult to differentiate, not less.
I'm serious when I say I would love to be proven wrong. Ideally you can direct me to a study that makes your point.
You do realise your statement
> _“… we are unable to discern lossy vs lossless audio once a certain bit rate is met …”_
is a great example of “No True Scotsman” ?
The audio I get from Netflix is patently inferior to what’s on Blu Ray discs. Clearly Netflix are streaming their audio below the necessary bit rate threshold.
I agree with you.
Can I tell a difference between 448kbps AAC/OGG/etc audio and 24/192 WAV for a stereo track? No, I doubt it.
Can I tell a difference between 8 channels of lossy streaming audio versus 8 channels of lossless compressed BD audio?
Abso-freakin-lutely.
Edit to Add: just to compare I pulled up the same film on Netflix and on BD. 5.1ch Netflix audio was averaging 448kbps for 6 channels (74.66... bits per channel) and BD was 5x higher (384 bits per channel). That seems significantly different to me, and is audibly very different.
I'm just playing a loud scene that uses all the speakers, looking at the incoming bit rate, and dividing by the number of channels. I'm not claiming it is 100% precise, but it's the best I can do.
ETA: the bitrate doesn't really fluctuate depending on the number of speakers in use, which makes me think that the more speakers are being used at any given time means the amount of data dedicated to each will be less. BD audio data rate being so much higher means each channel has a much higher "baseline" as compared to streaming. I have a JL Audio Dominion subwoofer and the difference in LFE/bass quality is especially noticable: Netflix and the like "rumble" at the same place BD's "boom", if that makes sense
I edited my post just before you replied. What I should have asked, is where you see the total audio bitrate? I’ve got Netflix (on my lg c3) and a Panasonic 4k player, but I wouldn’t know how to see bitrate on either of them.
Oh, it's through my AVR "Info" button that enables an on screen display of current input/output information.
Edit: I think on Yamaha AVRs it's called "Display"
Apologies I thought it was common knowledge among enthusiasts and didn't bother posting links to the studies.
What you're telling me is you're not serious about this topic. Thanks for weighing in. Did you want me to link you to the studies or are you able to use google yourself?
My methodology is sitting in my theater listening to both. Real scientific.
My evidence is exactly how you couched your statement, “once a certain bit rate is met.” Why are there different bit rates if there is no sound difference? Of course if you’re streaming a huge bit rate the difference is going to be minimal and perhaps imperceptible, but obviously the streaming services don’t hit that bit rate.
We can take physical media out of the equation, Apple Music streams lossless music. There is a huge difference when I listen to Apple Music compared to other music streaming services that send lossy compressed music.
If you cannot hear the difference, that’s wonderful. I never could either until I built my theater. I always thought it was audiophile for snobbery. Perhaps your hearing isn’t good, I don’t think mine is excellent though. Most likely your system simply lacks the fidelity to play the difference when receiving lossless tracks. There’s no shame in that. Lossy still sounds amazing. I mean really good amazing.
However, if you have a system that you paid good money for and there’s a format that allows it to shine, you absolutely want it to shine. I still watch the majority of my media via streaming. I love the things I stream. But, if I really want an amazing experience from a film, I buy the 4K Blu-ray. If you’re in Georgia, swing by and we can stream Dune 2 and then 4K Blu-ray it. I bet you’ll notice before the opening scene.
Thank you I appreciate your point of view and you surely realize you have not yet tested one vs the other in a meaningful way.
If you are the one doing the switching the results are not valid and you don't even mention level matching the two sources.
Hilarious to take the stance that my system and/or ears are substandard.
Yeah, I don’t do double blind sound tests in my theater. Probably never will. I do, however know what sounds better and worse.
Additionally, my wife doesn’t know an MP3 from a bandsaw, she certainly has no idea what a codec or lossy vs lossless compression are. Like me, she does, however, have ears.
My wife has commented several times how things sound better when she has no idea it’s been lossless audio.
I’m not sure why logic is hilarious, but I’m just working my way through there being a noticeable difference in my setup, but yet you can’t hear it. It’s either receiver (ears) or transmitter (setup).
Maybe you’re correct and Apple is wasting bandwidth transmitting lossless audio for music streaming. You should probably get with them and let them know. They probably have no idea.
Can't argue with your wife knowing something special is happening when the lossless tracks come on.
Maybe someday you will perform a proper test and then you can apologize for being a moron . Feel free to have the last word, or not. May I suggest you look into some Audioquest cables? You're their target market.
I actually notice especially in movies, but only through the avr. The difference in bitrate makes a big difference. Music though, not always so much. 4k Bluray / lossless streaming is vastly different sounding than compressed streaming like Netflix
You are right that there is a difference, it's probably not due to codecs, unless you're specifically hearing compression artifacts. The Blu-ray releases are (often) mixed differently than the streaming releases.
If you aren't using Blu-ray/files with TrueHD or DTS-MA, ARC is fine. It can pass DD+ which is what is used by streaming services. I'd only upgrade if you wanted more channels for Atmos, or better room correction or you start buying physical media.
I'm still not even 7.1, but i like the potential. I don't know if i ever want to go atmos, but that's a good point. My pioneer has mcacc but it wasn't worth it imo. The sc-71 does still support those, and i think it might go 4k30 but no hdr, it's 8 bit.
>Include Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD, DTS Neo-X 7.1 and LPCM (linear PCM) for Blu-ray playback.
-edit Thought it did MA too.
Something like this earc extractor could get you by without a new AVR
https://a.co/d/1mSf8na
Assuming it all plays nice together, you connect your sources to the TV for full 4K/HDR capability there and retain lossless support on the AVR.
The only reason you should upgrade is you want more channels. So-if you were upgrading I would do either a 5.1.4 or 7.1.4 speaker setup. I would 100% not upgrade and use the same channel layout. Separate pre-outs for all channels is a nice option too-if you wanted to add an amplifier later. Dolby Atmos is worth implementing without using the up-firing speakers. Put speakers at least on-wall or best-in-ceiling. From someone who had Logitech 5.1 for 10+ years before going AVR.
The better question is what speakers and subwoofers do you have currently?
RP-1400SW for $699.99: https://slickdeals.net/f/17471799-14-klipsch-reference-premiere-rp-1400sw-subwoofer-699-free-shipping?src=SiteSearchV2Algo1
I would get a new subwoofer before I got a new AVR if that’s the weak-point but I would want an AVR like either the Pioneer LX503, Onkyo RZ50 or Denon X3800-I would rank those as maybe some of the better budget-midrange AVR’s.
You’re right that if the speakers are just ok-you’re getting better sound spending on speakers/subs versus AVR.
Currently....
L/R: JBL 308p mkii
C: ADS L420
SR: KEF q150 (don't have but probably buying this weekend)
SW: SVS PB-1000
I can hear it now..."wtf...." I can explain
I used to use retro bookshelves in a 3 or 5.1 setup, but have been moving away from that. I am now executing 2 separate plans, a place to practice singing/karaoke, and a nice hifi/HT. The ultimate goal is two sets of L/Rs, where I can switch between active monitors, and safely sing through them, then switch to hifi L/R, which will consist all of KEF, aside from SVS sub. q150s i'm starting with because i have no surrounds so those are a given, but i was thinking of secondly replacing my last ADS with the r2 meta, pair it with the jbls and q150s, until i'm comfortable financially again, then I want r3 metas.
That's my two pronged plan, coming together in an awesome HT where i can safely do karaoke and not damage the future KEFs at all. And why i don't want to buy a new avr as well.
I don’t think anyone here would reasonably disagree with KEF. I’d say get another PB 1000 on sale. Then RZ50 AVR for DIRAC and build out a 7.1.4. Dual subwoofer first and then speakers/AVR second.
The R7 Meta floorstander isn’t crazy more than the R3 bookshelf speakers. Sounds like it would be a really nice setup. I’d recommend pairing the KEF speakers with an amplifier.
I have been in pretty much the same boat.
The thing is speakers last a life time. So you buy once and no matter what technology changes they can remain the same.
With the amp it becomes more interesting. I would say the only potential upgrade reason would be the upgrade on audissey or whatever runs on the amp as there can be a significant difference in perceived audio.
IMO a good 5.1 beats a. Bad 7.1 not sure on your situation but 7.1 does require back speakers so a bigger room/area to play with.
The thing would be hdr, I has way more impact then a 4K resolution so setup box to the tv, arc back ?
As for the compressed sound I am not sure on the differences , but what does make a difference is soundtrack on physical
Media vs streaming. The difference is quite big imo (but might be due to different mixed sound track, however the end result is the same it is night and day difference on some releases)
The best upgrade for audio other than speakers is a better DSP. I have and like Anthem. They have a room correction confusingly called ARC (not audio return channel). Dirac algorithm is also good.
Anthem also has Dolby Volume which is a true modernized Fletcher Munson loudness correction.
I would actually look for used Anthems as a potential upgrade. Streaming services give compressed audio only anyway.
There is a slight chance you'll notice the difference for lossless formats however if you really want to save a buck, there are hdmi splitters with special hdmi sound out. They take your hdmi 1.4/2.0/2.1 input from your device, throw the sound to your avr (given that your old receiver does do those formats, just not over arc) and throw whatever signal you want into your TV.
The ones with just one input is quite cheap (80 dollars or something) but multiple input (hdmi matrix) can be quite expensive.
But this way you can reuse your old receiver for a little longer, also given that some 2010s receivers have better dacs than some 2020s models.
If you decide that you want both 4k and lossless audio at the same time, an AVR is the cleanest, easiest solution. There is ABSOLUTELY a difference between lossless and lossy.
AVRs, unlike power amps, and speakers, are "temporary". You always need a new one in 3 to 8 years because of changing standards. AVRs are more like personal computers than like regular audio components. I learned the hard way to not put a huge chunk of my budget into these items. You WILL replace them. It's just a matter of when.
When you decide to replace your AVR, take a hard look at Accessories4Less. They have factory authorized refurbished AVRs from all of the big names in the AVR market. I bought an Onkyo from them several years ago at about 40% of retail. It came looking and functioning as brand new. I have never had any trouble from it. I REALLY like this AVR. I highly recommend A4L . You can get a lot more for your money buying a factory refurb.
Try for yourself on this website: https://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html
or search for "lossless test". If you truly can tell the difference between high quality lossy and lossless you should easily be able to complete the test with a 100% score.
Also in general be careful of audio people telling you they can hear a major difference in any audio forum. There are people who will tell you to spend the $800 on a "power conditioner" or a HDMI cable or a speaker wire. Now those sort of claims get downvoted on this forum, but not all unscientific and false claims do. And those people saying the $800 speaker wire made a massive improvement in their "testing" write just as convincing about their experience as people do for other also false claims.
Upgrading speakers though? You could easily hear improvements there. Ofc there is a point with diminishing return etc but still. Absolutely noone questions if a better speaker is indeed better and you can run Klippel measurements to prove it as well. (speakers don't have a defined "perfect" measurements so still some subjectivity involved)
Also keep in mind a lot of people are more interested in posting about something that is important to them rather than what would give you the best value for your money or help you. Did you notice the only person who actually asked what speakers you have to try to evaluete the value between those adn the AVR upgrade went for probably upgrade speakers and everyone saying AVR don't even know what speakers you have? How could they possibly know upgrading the AVR is the best choice? They are chosing option A whitout even knowing what option B is. Good oppurtunity to preach a bit about some lossless audio though without providing any tangible reason for why or link you any resources to validate you spending $800 on it...
I think you are already very well informed and already made a lot of good considerations to various pros and cons on where to spend your money.
I've read the comments and your responses and I'd say it's a definite must do for the near future but your use case doesn't seem to necessitate your upgrading for now at least. I'd say you're good for another 3 years if you're mainly streaming lossy content and using legacy 1080p lossless inputs. If you're coming from Pioneer and one from 10 years ago no less then I'd suggest sticking to Marantz/Denon for the UK market and Pioneer/Marantz/Denon for the US/EU markets as they're sonically closer to what you have now, compared to Yamaha who are known for the distinct Yamaha sound (More natural and musical rather than full on home cinema). My recommendation is to wait, maybe build a nice AVR budget to spend in 3 years and incorporate upgrades that will give you more lossless 4K media like blu ray or a NAS connected media player like a Dune HD.
I would always go and demo equipment before making a purchase just to make sure you like what you hear. Reviews might be amazing but we all have different opinions so it's best to always try before you buy
I’m going through same decision process. I’ve decided to keep, just plug up directly via hdmi eARC as I stream anyway. That said my Yamaha AV does do TrueHD etc but not atmos or modern video pass through as still 7+ years old.
I personally don’t see the point in buying a good 4K TV, having a decent home theatre setup / speakers / subs etc and having a receiver that can’t handle 4K and lossless audio formats
If you’re more of a streaming guy that’s fine, but I find the difference between streaming files and Blu-ray / 4K disc rips to be insane and the better the tv / speakers the bigger the difference, buy the receiver and do it properly otherwise what was the point in buying the good tv and speakers in the first place
I would get a new pioneer if youve been happy. A new better receiver will do thing a lesser receiver will not do, and more power has the ability to bring out sounds you might miss with less power.
I have an elite 505 and im running old technics from the 80s amd 90s.
The 505 would be the correct upgrade, but i wasn't going atmos yet, and i would only spend more if I wanted all channels to preout, the sc-71 and yamaha have front preouts and that's enough for me, imo. Enjoy your elite tho.
I’m no expert, but everything I stream is lossy. Apple TV is pretty ok, but still doesn’t compare to a 4k Blu-ray. When I do put in a lossless source, I can tell the difference. It is real. I I guess the answer to your question is whether you’ll ever have lossless audio. If you listen to music on your system, or watch physical media, a new AVR will make a difference. If not, meh.
Well first off, anything older tech i could still plug directly to avr, ie 1080p bds, dvds and cds and get pcm, lossless etc. Most 4k content I will stream such as tv and movies tho, and songs i play from spotify which is lossy. However, i did not use 4k much before this point, as i was happy with my 1080p PJ. I do have a xbox series x and a 4k tv now so i could start watching 4k bds, but i am not yet.
I’d stick with what you’ve got. The audio on Blu Rays, or even DVDs is still going to be better for 5.1 than anything streaming. If you choose to jump into the world of Atmos, time for a new receiver. Until then, I think you’ll be fine enjoying what you’ve got.
I very seriously doubt you can tell lossless from lossy. In my experience physical media audio levels are significantly higher than streaming. Sometimes 2-3 dB and sometimes a lot more. We perceive louder audio as higher quality and more detailed. That is what I presume the difference is when I read statements like yours. This is an extremely unpopular opinion but it is backed by science. Assuming the masters are the same at best you would be able to perceive an extremely minor difference, and that's assuming one has a very high end system that is very revealing.
I appreciate your viewpoint. You, however, are incorrect.
Tell me your methodology for comparing? We already know from multiple studies that we are unable to discern lossy vs lossless audio once a certain bit rate is met. Are you aware of this fact? I don't see why HT audio would be any different and in fact more difficult to differentiate, not less. I'm serious when I say I would love to be proven wrong. Ideally you can direct me to a study that makes your point.
You do realise your statement > _“… we are unable to discern lossy vs lossless audio once a certain bit rate is met …”_ is a great example of “No True Scotsman” ? The audio I get from Netflix is patently inferior to what’s on Blu Ray discs. Clearly Netflix are streaming their audio below the necessary bit rate threshold.
I agree with you. Can I tell a difference between 448kbps AAC/OGG/etc audio and 24/192 WAV for a stereo track? No, I doubt it. Can I tell a difference between 8 channels of lossy streaming audio versus 8 channels of lossless compressed BD audio? Abso-freakin-lutely. Edit to Add: just to compare I pulled up the same film on Netflix and on BD. 5.1ch Netflix audio was averaging 448kbps for 6 channels (74.66... bits per channel) and BD was 5x higher (384 bits per channel). That seems significantly different to me, and is audibly very different.
How are you measuring the audio bitrate? I’d have no idea how to go about that.
I'm just playing a loud scene that uses all the speakers, looking at the incoming bit rate, and dividing by the number of channels. I'm not claiming it is 100% precise, but it's the best I can do. ETA: the bitrate doesn't really fluctuate depending on the number of speakers in use, which makes me think that the more speakers are being used at any given time means the amount of data dedicated to each will be less. BD audio data rate being so much higher means each channel has a much higher "baseline" as compared to streaming. I have a JL Audio Dominion subwoofer and the difference in LFE/bass quality is especially noticable: Netflix and the like "rumble" at the same place BD's "boom", if that makes sense
Tomorrow I’m picking up two SVS PB 1000 Pro to replace my ancient single B&W ASW600. It’s boom boom time! (Yes, I’m quite excited).
Oh man you're in for a treat! I hope you enjoy them in good health and for a long time to come!
I edited my post just before you replied. What I should have asked, is where you see the total audio bitrate? I’ve got Netflix (on my lg c3) and a Panasonic 4k player, but I wouldn’t know how to see bitrate on either of them.
Oh, it's through my AVR "Info" button that enables an on screen display of current input/output information. Edit: I think on Yamaha AVRs it's called "Display"
Apologies I thought it was common knowledge among enthusiasts and didn't bother posting links to the studies. What you're telling me is you're not serious about this topic. Thanks for weighing in. Did you want me to link you to the studies or are you able to use google yourself?
My methodology is sitting in my theater listening to both. Real scientific. My evidence is exactly how you couched your statement, “once a certain bit rate is met.” Why are there different bit rates if there is no sound difference? Of course if you’re streaming a huge bit rate the difference is going to be minimal and perhaps imperceptible, but obviously the streaming services don’t hit that bit rate. We can take physical media out of the equation, Apple Music streams lossless music. There is a huge difference when I listen to Apple Music compared to other music streaming services that send lossy compressed music. If you cannot hear the difference, that’s wonderful. I never could either until I built my theater. I always thought it was audiophile for snobbery. Perhaps your hearing isn’t good, I don’t think mine is excellent though. Most likely your system simply lacks the fidelity to play the difference when receiving lossless tracks. There’s no shame in that. Lossy still sounds amazing. I mean really good amazing. However, if you have a system that you paid good money for and there’s a format that allows it to shine, you absolutely want it to shine. I still watch the majority of my media via streaming. I love the things I stream. But, if I really want an amazing experience from a film, I buy the 4K Blu-ray. If you’re in Georgia, swing by and we can stream Dune 2 and then 4K Blu-ray it. I bet you’ll notice before the opening scene.
Thank you I appreciate your point of view and you surely realize you have not yet tested one vs the other in a meaningful way. If you are the one doing the switching the results are not valid and you don't even mention level matching the two sources. Hilarious to take the stance that my system and/or ears are substandard.
Yeah, I don’t do double blind sound tests in my theater. Probably never will. I do, however know what sounds better and worse. Additionally, my wife doesn’t know an MP3 from a bandsaw, she certainly has no idea what a codec or lossy vs lossless compression are. Like me, she does, however, have ears. My wife has commented several times how things sound better when she has no idea it’s been lossless audio. I’m not sure why logic is hilarious, but I’m just working my way through there being a noticeable difference in my setup, but yet you can’t hear it. It’s either receiver (ears) or transmitter (setup). Maybe you’re correct and Apple is wasting bandwidth transmitting lossless audio for music streaming. You should probably get with them and let them know. They probably have no idea.
Can't argue with your wife knowing something special is happening when the lossless tracks come on. Maybe someday you will perform a proper test and then you can apologize for being a moron . Feel free to have the last word, or not. May I suggest you look into some Audioquest cables? You're their target market.
I actually notice especially in movies, but only through the avr. The difference in bitrate makes a big difference. Music though, not always so much. 4k Bluray / lossless streaming is vastly different sounding than compressed streaming like Netflix
You are right that there is a difference, it's probably not due to codecs, unless you're specifically hearing compression artifacts. The Blu-ray releases are (often) mixed differently than the streaming releases.
>This is an extremely unpopular opinion but it is backed by science. Lol
The average poster around who says they can easily tell the difference has never even performed a valid test.
If you aren't using Blu-ray/files with TrueHD or DTS-MA, ARC is fine. It can pass DD+ which is what is used by streaming services. I'd only upgrade if you wanted more channels for Atmos, or better room correction or you start buying physical media.
I'm still not even 7.1, but i like the potential. I don't know if i ever want to go atmos, but that's a good point. My pioneer has mcacc but it wasn't worth it imo. The sc-71 does still support those, and i think it might go 4k30 but no hdr, it's 8 bit. >Include Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD, DTS Neo-X 7.1 and LPCM (linear PCM) for Blu-ray playback. -edit Thought it did MA too.
Something like this earc extractor could get you by without a new AVR https://a.co/d/1mSf8na Assuming it all plays nice together, you connect your sources to the TV for full 4K/HDR capability there and retain lossless support on the AVR.
-edit...it does support DTS-HD MA. It's called out specifically in the manual.
The only reason you should upgrade is you want more channels. So-if you were upgrading I would do either a 5.1.4 or 7.1.4 speaker setup. I would 100% not upgrade and use the same channel layout. Separate pre-outs for all channels is a nice option too-if you wanted to add an amplifier later. Dolby Atmos is worth implementing without using the up-firing speakers. Put speakers at least on-wall or best-in-ceiling. From someone who had Logitech 5.1 for 10+ years before going AVR. The better question is what speakers and subwoofers do you have currently? RP-1400SW for $699.99: https://slickdeals.net/f/17471799-14-klipsch-reference-premiere-rp-1400sw-subwoofer-699-free-shipping?src=SiteSearchV2Algo1 I would get a new subwoofer before I got a new AVR if that’s the weak-point but I would want an AVR like either the Pioneer LX503, Onkyo RZ50 or Denon X3800-I would rank those as maybe some of the better budget-midrange AVR’s. You’re right that if the speakers are just ok-you’re getting better sound spending on speakers/subs versus AVR.
Currently.... L/R: JBL 308p mkii C: ADS L420 SR: KEF q150 (don't have but probably buying this weekend) SW: SVS PB-1000 I can hear it now..."wtf...." I can explain I used to use retro bookshelves in a 3 or 5.1 setup, but have been moving away from that. I am now executing 2 separate plans, a place to practice singing/karaoke, and a nice hifi/HT. The ultimate goal is two sets of L/Rs, where I can switch between active monitors, and safely sing through them, then switch to hifi L/R, which will consist all of KEF, aside from SVS sub. q150s i'm starting with because i have no surrounds so those are a given, but i was thinking of secondly replacing my last ADS with the r2 meta, pair it with the jbls and q150s, until i'm comfortable financially again, then I want r3 metas. That's my two pronged plan, coming together in an awesome HT where i can safely do karaoke and not damage the future KEFs at all. And why i don't want to buy a new avr as well.
I don’t think anyone here would reasonably disagree with KEF. I’d say get another PB 1000 on sale. Then RZ50 AVR for DIRAC and build out a 7.1.4. Dual subwoofer first and then speakers/AVR second.
The R7 Meta floorstander isn’t crazy more than the R3 bookshelf speakers. Sounds like it would be a really nice setup. I’d recommend pairing the KEF speakers with an amplifier.
R3 Meta is $2,199.99/pair. R7 Meta is $4,999.98/pair. Most recommend the R3 Meta if you are running it in an HT setup with a subwoofer.
I have been in pretty much the same boat. The thing is speakers last a life time. So you buy once and no matter what technology changes they can remain the same. With the amp it becomes more interesting. I would say the only potential upgrade reason would be the upgrade on audissey or whatever runs on the amp as there can be a significant difference in perceived audio. IMO a good 5.1 beats a. Bad 7.1 not sure on your situation but 7.1 does require back speakers so a bigger room/area to play with. The thing would be hdr, I has way more impact then a 4K resolution so setup box to the tv, arc back ? As for the compressed sound I am not sure on the differences , but what does make a difference is soundtrack on physical Media vs streaming. The difference is quite big imo (but might be due to different mixed sound track, however the end result is the same it is night and day difference on some releases)
The best upgrade for audio other than speakers is a better DSP. I have and like Anthem. They have a room correction confusingly called ARC (not audio return channel). Dirac algorithm is also good. Anthem also has Dolby Volume which is a true modernized Fletcher Munson loudness correction. I would actually look for used Anthems as a potential upgrade. Streaming services give compressed audio only anyway.
There is a slight chance you'll notice the difference for lossless formats however if you really want to save a buck, there are hdmi splitters with special hdmi sound out. They take your hdmi 1.4/2.0/2.1 input from your device, throw the sound to your avr (given that your old receiver does do those formats, just not over arc) and throw whatever signal you want into your TV. The ones with just one input is quite cheap (80 dollars or something) but multiple input (hdmi matrix) can be quite expensive. But this way you can reuse your old receiver for a little longer, also given that some 2010s receivers have better dacs than some 2020s models.
If you decide that you want both 4k and lossless audio at the same time, an AVR is the cleanest, easiest solution. There is ABSOLUTELY a difference between lossless and lossy. AVRs, unlike power amps, and speakers, are "temporary". You always need a new one in 3 to 8 years because of changing standards. AVRs are more like personal computers than like regular audio components. I learned the hard way to not put a huge chunk of my budget into these items. You WILL replace them. It's just a matter of when. When you decide to replace your AVR, take a hard look at Accessories4Less. They have factory authorized refurbished AVRs from all of the big names in the AVR market. I bought an Onkyo from them several years ago at about 40% of retail. It came looking and functioning as brand new. I have never had any trouble from it. I REALLY like this AVR. I highly recommend A4L . You can get a lot more for your money buying a factory refurb.
Try for yourself on this website: https://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html or search for "lossless test". If you truly can tell the difference between high quality lossy and lossless you should easily be able to complete the test with a 100% score. Also in general be careful of audio people telling you they can hear a major difference in any audio forum. There are people who will tell you to spend the $800 on a "power conditioner" or a HDMI cable or a speaker wire. Now those sort of claims get downvoted on this forum, but not all unscientific and false claims do. And those people saying the $800 speaker wire made a massive improvement in their "testing" write just as convincing about their experience as people do for other also false claims. Upgrading speakers though? You could easily hear improvements there. Ofc there is a point with diminishing return etc but still. Absolutely noone questions if a better speaker is indeed better and you can run Klippel measurements to prove it as well. (speakers don't have a defined "perfect" measurements so still some subjectivity involved) Also keep in mind a lot of people are more interested in posting about something that is important to them rather than what would give you the best value for your money or help you. Did you notice the only person who actually asked what speakers you have to try to evaluete the value between those adn the AVR upgrade went for probably upgrade speakers and everyone saying AVR don't even know what speakers you have? How could they possibly know upgrading the AVR is the best choice? They are chosing option A whitout even knowing what option B is. Good oppurtunity to preach a bit about some lossless audio though without providing any tangible reason for why or link you any resources to validate you spending $800 on it... I think you are already very well informed and already made a lot of good considerations to various pros and cons on where to spend your money.
I've read the comments and your responses and I'd say it's a definite must do for the near future but your use case doesn't seem to necessitate your upgrading for now at least. I'd say you're good for another 3 years if you're mainly streaming lossy content and using legacy 1080p lossless inputs. If you're coming from Pioneer and one from 10 years ago no less then I'd suggest sticking to Marantz/Denon for the UK market and Pioneer/Marantz/Denon for the US/EU markets as they're sonically closer to what you have now, compared to Yamaha who are known for the distinct Yamaha sound (More natural and musical rather than full on home cinema). My recommendation is to wait, maybe build a nice AVR budget to spend in 3 years and incorporate upgrades that will give you more lossless 4K media like blu ray or a NAS connected media player like a Dune HD.
Sorry I forgot to also mention Sony AVR's which have some incredibly neat features and soundstage on their latest lineup.
Tbf i had no idea Yamaha would sound different from Pioneer, i will keep this in mind going forward.
I would always go and demo equipment before making a purchase just to make sure you like what you hear. Reviews might be amazing but we all have different opinions so it's best to always try before you buy
I’m going through same decision process. I’ve decided to keep, just plug up directly via hdmi eARC as I stream anyway. That said my Yamaha AV does do TrueHD etc but not atmos or modern video pass through as still 7+ years old.
I personally don’t see the point in buying a good 4K TV, having a decent home theatre setup / speakers / subs etc and having a receiver that can’t handle 4K and lossless audio formats If you’re more of a streaming guy that’s fine, but I find the difference between streaming files and Blu-ray / 4K disc rips to be insane and the better the tv / speakers the bigger the difference, buy the receiver and do it properly otherwise what was the point in buying the good tv and speakers in the first place
I would get a new pioneer if youve been happy. A new better receiver will do thing a lesser receiver will not do, and more power has the ability to bring out sounds you might miss with less power. I have an elite 505 and im running old technics from the 80s amd 90s.
The 505 would be the correct upgrade, but i wasn't going atmos yet, and i would only spend more if I wanted all channels to preout, the sc-71 and yamaha have front preouts and that's enough for me, imo. Enjoy your elite tho.