Live data from Hacker News

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

engadget.com

11–20 of 344 posts

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

#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 attaching their speaker systems directly to the TV.

And with wireless speakers, e.g. Sonos and similar systems, a centralized audio amplifier just doesn't make sense at all.

So all that is left is ultra-high end applications and there are few of those.

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

#12

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…

Soundbars -- and also improved built-in TV speakers -- have eaten the low-end receiver market, for sure, but there are still a lot of other installations. A soundbar and stuff like Sonos are still compromises vs discrete channel speakers, and many people are still willing to pay for better sound. You don't have to go too high end to want better sound.

Marantz gear in particular is great, and Samsung buying them seems really unfortunate. Might be better than some private equity randos though.

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

#14
post #4

There are lots of speaker manufacturers; I'm not too concerned about Polk and B&W. But! There are relatively few home theater receiver makers, and the Denon/Marantz siblings have been a big chunk of them for decades. (Sony, Yamaha, Onkyo, Denon. Nobody else covers the low and mid cost market.)

The thing is, traditional receivers wanted to be the "brains" of home theater, switching video inputs, managing audio, turning everything on.

That role is no longer sensible when used with smart TVs/Apple TV boxes/Android TV boxes.

As a result, traditional receivers are relegated to be being audio decoders and amplifiers. Honestly, I think there's already more manufactured and lying around than the world really needs. It was inevitable that a few product lines would be consolidated.

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

#15
post #4

There are lots of speaker manufacturers; I'm not too concerned about Polk and B&W. But! There are relatively few home theater receiver makers, and the Denon/Marantz siblings have been a big chunk of them for decades. (Sony, Yamaha, Onkyo, Denon. Nobody else covers the low and mid cost market.)

I'm curious how large this market is. Speaking only anecdotally, when I was in my 20s, I bought a Sony "home theatre in a box" which included receiver, small subwoofer, and small satellite speakers. Over time, I upgraded to an Onkyo reciever and Polk center, surrounds, and subwoofer. But... then I decided I wanted a more minimal look, and switched to a JBL sound bar + subwoofer, which has detachable surrounds -- but…

Probably one issue could also be that a lot of this stuff is actually pretty well made, and repairable. My old NAD amplifier is more than 25 year old and doing great. I don't need a new one. I've switched speakers a few times, to better fit the rooms as we've moved, but the amplifier just sits in a corner with the CD player and turntable.

I'd agree with others, speakers aren't that concerning. There are niche speaker manufacturers and used or refurbished is still a good option. To be honest, I'd also look to the used market if I where to replace my amp.

Personally I don't have anything against Samsung, but I doubt they'll be a good steward of those brands. Corporate interest and niche high quality audio seems to at opposite ends of the spectrum. I could be wrong, Sony makes nice stuff, maybe Samsung will as well.

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

#16
post #4

There are lots of speaker manufacturers; I'm not too concerned about Polk and B&W. But! There are relatively few home theater receiver makers, and the Denon/Marantz siblings have been a big chunk of them for decades. (Sony, Yamaha, Onkyo, Denon. Nobody else covers the low and mid cost market.)

The thing is, traditional receivers wanted to be the "brains" of home theater, switching video inputs, managing audio, turning everything on. That role is no longer sensible when used with smart TVs/Apple TV boxes/Android TV boxes. As a result, traditional receivers are relegated to be being audio decoders and amplifiers. Honestly, I think there's already more manufactured and lying around than the world really needs…

eARC or whatever it is really changed this. I don't need a receiver with buttons anymore, I just need one that handles eARC gracefully.

We're about five years away from "no remotes" anymore, imo. As it is I only need to find the TV remote when something goes really wonky - and even then I can reset it by using the smart app to power cycle the outlet ;)

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

#17

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 Avengers?

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

#18
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 typical no-name alibaba whatever is likely to be at least on-par with anything Samsung puts out while costing less.

Even ignoring price, I can't think of a mainstream brand I consider worse from a quality perspective than Samsung. The only other brand I consider as bad is Sony, and that's more ideological than quality because of their shenanigans and contempt for their customers -- at least their hardware isn't almost across the board destined for the scrap heap. I've seen too many nearly new samsung appliances just die due to bad electronics and they want to charge nearly the cost of the appliance for a replacement circuit board.

On topic for audio -- I got a samsung receiver for $20 from the thrift store and while it sort of does the job of being an amplifier, everything else about it is horrible. Worst interface of any receiver I've used since the 80s, its easy to change a setting accidentally while being difficult to change it back, and it doesn't power back on after a power outage requiring me to manually press the (capacitive/touch) power button on it. Also that (TOUCH!) Power 'button' is right next to the volume knob so you accidentally touch it while changing the volume, shutting the receiver off. But booting it back up requires holding the (capacitive) button. A quick press makes it flash so you think it is booting but the joke is on you, you need to hold it. Also you have to hold it properly, because sometimes it simply fails to register so after holding it for a few seconds and it doesn't boot, you have to take your finger off and try again. It's a receiver and you can't even select an input -- you need to cycle through all of them one at a time. So the one connected to your TV starts blasting erectile dysfunction audio at boosted commercial volume through your speakers when you're just trying to switch to bluetooth so you can listen to some lo-fi. You can't even make this stuff up. It's a joke and I don't believe anyone involved cared one bit about making a decent product.

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

#19
post #4

There are lots of speaker manufacturers; I'm not too concerned about Polk and B&W. But! There are relatively few home theater receiver makers, and the Denon/Marantz siblings have been a big chunk of them for decades. (Sony, Yamaha, Onkyo, Denon. Nobody else covers the low and mid cost market.)

I'm curious how large this market is. Speaking only anecdotally, when I was in my 20s, I bought a Sony "home theatre in a box" which included receiver, small subwoofer, and small satellite speakers. Over time, I upgraded to an Onkyo reciever and Polk center, surrounds, and subwoofer. But... then I decided I wanted a more minimal look, and switched to a JBL sound bar + subwoofer, which has detachable surrounds -- but…

You could estimate it from sales or something, but Walmart has a huge wall full of various TVs, and barely one half of one aisle-side of soundbars, and no receivers/speaker setups.

I suspect something like 80% of people use the TV, and of those who upgrade, use a soundbar, maybe.

And even those with a dedicated theatre room, probably have other TVs that are just TV audio.

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

#20
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious how large this market is. Speaking only anecdotally, when I was in my 20s, I bought a Sony "home theatre in a box" which included receiver, small subwoofer, and small satellite speakers. Over time, I upgraded to an Onkyo reciever and Polk center, surrounds, and subwoofer. But... then I decided I wanted a more minimal look, and switched to a JBL sound bar + subwoofer, which has detachable surrounds -- but…

You could estimate it from sales or something, but Walmart has a huge wall full of various TVs, and barely one half of one aisle-side of soundbars, and no receivers/speaker setups. I suspect something like 80% of people use the TV, and of those who upgrade, use a soundbar, maybe. And even those with a dedicated theatre room, probably have other TVs that are just TV audio.

People who have a home theater aren’t exactly the core market for Wally World.
Post reply on HN