Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung is paying $350M for audio brands B&W, Denon, Marantz and Polk

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 344 posts

Re: Samsung is paying $350M for audio brands B&W, Denon, Marantz and Polk

#161

Post by tonyhart7 »

trentnix wrote: post #77

Now there are more avenues for Samsung to shove bloatware down our throats. I have a modestly high-end home theater and it is utterly maddening waiting for devices to “boot” and “handshake”. And after the wait, I’m presented with another “User Agreement” to sign that insists on shoveling ads down my throat and harvesting data. How much do you have to pay for a quick boot, no ads, and a private movie or music experien…

"How much do you have to pay for a quick boot, no ads, and a private movie or music experience? Just like every retailer has embraced usury with their credit card programs, every technology company has decided they are in the data harvesting business."

isn't like this our goal here??? I mean we are comment on YC site that produce startup aiming just that

Re: Samsung is paying $350M for audio brands B&W, Denon, Marantz and Polk

#162

Post by toast0 »

hedora wrote: post #108
alabastervlog wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s mainly useful for getting good surround. If you don’t care about that, sure, not really necessary. That’s like the whole point of it. Side benefits include: - Adding more ports to often port-starved TVs or projectors. - Providing alternative port-switching interface if you hate your TV’s UI and want something simpler. - An organizational aid—you can put all your stuff somewhere away from the TV, and all that nee…

We just ran a wider conduit through the wall It has 4 hdmi cables, a usb extension cord and tv coax in it. (Didn’t bother with Ethernet the closet has a wifi access point in it.) The appletv is in the closet, but the other devices don’t make sense there. The linux box is about as big as a decent USB hub, and has a few wired game controllers plugged into it. The console is a switch, and going into the closet is too mu…

> Can you not get a surround sound audio receiver/amp anymore?

No, not really. If you want surround sound audio, you probably want it over HDMI, and then they may as well have video features too.

But, if you have enough ports on your TV, and it doesn't do dumb things, and eARC works, and the TV doesn't forget it's attached to the receiver... You can still plug in everything to the TV, and you don't have to uss the receiver to switch inputs. I typically run the movie disc players through the receiver, because they have high bitrate audio, and tvs like to mess that up.

Re: Samsung is paying $350M for audio brands B&W, Denon, Marantz and Polk

#164

Post by Disposal8433 »

neuroelectron wrote: post #17
bhouston wrote: post #11

I feel that sound bars + speakers directly attached to TVs has decimated the "home theatre receiver." "Back in the day", home theatre receivers made sense when you wanted Radio + CD inputs in addition to the TV input. But radio and CD players are gone. There is just TV. Even when I do audio, I run it through the TV. Thus why do you need a separate box? It just seems like a waste. Instead everyone these days are just…

I feel like this is tied to the overall decline in movie and music quality. Maybe I'm just getting old. There is no more "Titanic" or "Nirvana". Lots of people have noticed the decline in audio mixing in movies as well, which has led to a generation of younger adults who need captions for regular movies. A discrete audio system would probably help with this but for what? How many times are you going to watch latest A…

The whole "4/5 speakers around the room" never made sense to me. It always felt overly complicated for a premium price that no one could afford or cared about. I used to hang out with people who had luxury sound systems but it was way too expensive or complicated for my daily use.

For the past 15 years, I have used the same cheap combo of soundbar+subwoofer (Sony but anything goes) and it's perfect for everything I throw at it. The sound is equivalent to what I remember on those expensive sets, it's only $250, and I don't spend my whole time in front of the TV listening to high-quality remasters of classical concerts while smoking a cigar.

The high-end brands have failed to recognize that for most people a decent set of cheap speakers is equivalent to a cinema experience. They should have studied that instead of focusing on incomprehensible technical values and numbers. The software industry is guilty of this too.

Re: Samsung is paying $350M for audio brands B&W, Denon, Marantz and Polk

#165

Post by silisili »

AyyEye wrote: post #18
notfed wrote: post #2

Great...Samsung buying the competition. Denon makes great audio receivers. I expect them to turn to junk soon.

Maybe it's always been this way and I just never noticed but at some point in the last ten years or so Samsung became synonymous with bottom of the barrel quality, while still charging premium prices. I won't buy anything with a samsung sticker on it, even used, because it's inevitably going to have failing electronics, stupid design decisions, too many half-baked features, and horrible buggy software/firmware. Your…

Same boat. I made the unfortunate mistake of buying Samsung kitchen stuff.

The fridge ice maker had to have been designed by a troll. One piece of ice every 10 seconds or so. It took a minute to fill a simple dinner glass!

Then the microwave handle just...fell off the door. In all my years of owning bottom of the barrel to top end brands, I didn't even realize it was possible. The repairman said it was common, but because of all the plastic, they had to replace the entire door as the handle wasn't serviceable.

Never again. Not even their phones.

Re: Samsung is paying $350M for audio brands B&W, Denon, Marantz and Polk

#166

Post by hmm37 »

Mistletoe wrote: post #96
trentnix wrote: post #77

Now there are more avenues for Samsung to shove bloatware down our throats. I have a modestly high-end home theater and it is utterly maddening waiting for devices to “boot” and “handshake”. And after the wait, I’m presented with another “User Agreement” to sign that insists on shoveling ads down my throat and harvesting data. How much do you have to pay for a quick boot, no ads, and a private movie or music experien…

This is why I love vintage audio. I’m sitting here listening to classical on FM radio on my Marantz 2215B made in the 1970s and it is what you are describing and sublime.

Same here. Listening to Sibelius right now using a Marantz 2220b with equally old KLH 6 speakers, and a raspberry pi + dac to use internet radio. Sounds great, and pretty amazed it's still just working even though it's already more than 50+ years old.

The only issue is volume control, due to not having a remote for lazier folk. I can control it digitally but don't like "shaving" off bits to control volume.

Re: Samsung is paying $350M for audio brands B&W, Denon, Marantz and Polk

#167

Post by relistan »

These brands face massive competition from Chinese no-brand electronics on one end, and Apple, Sonos, and many others at the other end.

Basically any time a market changes drastically you see older players consolidate. Too often that leads to one big collapse of the consolidated entity. We’ll see what happens in time.

Re: Samsung is paying $350M for audio brands B&W, Denon, Marantz and Polk

#169

Post by dredmorbius »

criddell wrote: post #73
dredmorbius wrote: post #13

Well, that's four brands I'm never touching again. Far too many bad Samsung experiences.

Last year I bought a Denon RCD-N12 - a mini system - for my office. I mostly use it to play CDs but can stream to it from my iPad too. The thing is great and for me, playing CDs while I work is perfect because it forces me to get up every 45 minutes or so to swap out the CD.

Yep.

Multi-disk players, either stackable or the big rotating wheel kind, are also fun. Those can give you most of a day's audio if you like.

Re: Samsung is paying $350M for audio brands B&W, Denon, Marantz and Polk

#170

Post by halgir »

hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #143
timc3 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly are you waiting for. I have two Dolby atmos systems, denon receivers, Apple TVs, OSMC boxes on both, and LG Smart TVs disconnected from the internet. Start up time is less than a second.

are you telling me the reason my tv turns on slowly is because it has internet access?

Possibly. I have a Samsung TV with all of the associated bloatware. Did a hard reset, never connected to the internet, use it exclusively as a display for my Apple TV. Turns on and off using the Apple TV remote via HDMI-CEC, so I can stow away the bloated Samsung remote. Startup time is now perfectly tolerable.
Post reply on HN