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

321–330 of 344 posts

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

#321

Post by ryukoposting »

photonthug wrote: post #308
ryukoposting wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How much do you have to pay for a quick boot, no ads, and a private movie or music experience? Not much. Buy used. Buying new stereo equipment is an activity of the wealthy. Everywhere I've ever lived, CraigsList is overrun with excellent used speakers and receivers at reasonable prices. I won't inundate you with brand-flexing, but I'll say I'm very happy with my home theater system. 4K OLED TV, big ol' tower speak…

Very savvy, so what’s the plan for when the used market is also completely made of bloated shitware?

Keep using the stuff I have. If you can use a soldering iron, a stereo system's service life is basically forever. Home theater is different because of video standards, but it doesn't seem like 4K and HDMI are going away anytime soon. I need a component input for my PS2 and Wii, so having slightly older hardware actually works out nicely.

And, to be fair, not all new stereo equipment is malware-infested trash. I'm sure there are plenty of new receivers that quietly go about their job - but not from Samsung subsidiaries, apparently.

Now if only the Logitech Harmony remotes would come back.

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

#322

Post by bigiain »

hedora wrote: post #116
bigiain wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same. Back in the mid 80s I spent way more than was sensible and bought myself seperate NAD pre/power amps, Boston Acoustic Speakers, and a Rega turntable for my birthday. I not only still have and use all that gear, but have since bought more of the same brands 2nd hand mostly from the same era, so I now have 5.1 surround in my lounge room, and stereo amp/speaker sets in my kitchen, office, bedroom, and guest bedroo…

I’d think there would be a market opportunity here. I have an old 70’s amp, and the switches/knobs are a bit noisy. Sure, I spray it down with contact cleaner, and it fixes it for a few years each time, but the dial light bulbs are starting to burn out. Most of its internals are hand soldered and switches /relays/etc that would be cheaper, better and more reliable with modern technology. Even though it was hand wired…

For a while, I was running an Arduino/PiZero gadget I built that sat under my a NAD 1100 preamp which had a pair of stepper motors and used orings and 3d printed pulleys to turn the volume and input selection knobs. This worked nicely, since I had both remote (IR & WiFi) control, and could still turn the knobs by hand.

You can almost always replace knobs and switches, usually with high quality ones, if you're prepared to hunt around various internet sites to fond them (and often you need to be prepared to just buy something that looks like it's close and accept wasting the money if it doesn't quite fit).

FOr me, and for no real good reason, I prefer to keep my vintage hifi gear as "original" as possible, and I'm not personally interested in "upgrading" the guts. Having said that, I dfrunk-eBayed a really nice old 70s vintage New Zealand built/designed Perraux 2100EXR power amp a while back, assuming I could repair the listed faults - but it turns out too many of the internal components are completely obsolete and unobtainable, and I'm _strongly_ considering gutting it and filling the enclosure with modern class d amp modules. It _might_ become a 7 channel home theatre amp hidden behind the old 70s rack mount amp faceplate. That kinda feels too much like cheating though?

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

#323

Post by tzs »

mastercheif wrote: post #234
tzs wrote: post #61

I've got a Samsung TV and a Samsung monitor in the same room. About 20% of the time when I use the TV remote from the couch to turn off the TV it also turns of the monitor. If I'm at the computer and turn off the TV with the TV remote it turns off the monitor the majority of the time. I wonder if Samsung will manage to make to so Denon and Marantz receivers will also sometimes turn off when you turn off a Samsung TV?

This is because the remotes use IR for the power commands. There’s really no getting around it. A small piece of electrical tape over the IR window on the monitor will fix it.

The Samsung remotes are using RF. They may also have IR but if so it is operating in parallel to the RF.

The TV remote will turn off the monitor even if I wrap the remote in a blanket which should block IR or hold it behind some blackout curtains.

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

#324

Post by hollerith »

tzs wrote: post #323
mastercheif wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is because the remotes use IR for the power commands. There’s really no getting around it. A small piece of electrical tape over the IR window on the monitor will fix it.

The Samsung remotes are using RF. They may also have IR but if so it is operating in parallel to the RF. The TV remote will turn off the monitor even if I wrap the remote in a blanket which should block IR or hold it behind some blackout curtains.

A typical blanket will transmit about half of light at 940 nm (the wavelength used by most TV remotes).

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

#326

Post by timc3 »

princevegeta89 wrote: post #35
dsr_ wrote: 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.)

Out of the list, only B&W and Marantz are decent. Others are average to low quality consumer-grade audio equipment companies.

I rate Denon above Marantz for AV. Marantz looks nicer, but its massively overrated and overpriced, and the sound quality is worse than Denon at the same price point.

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

#327

Post by timc3 »

gsibble wrote: post #258
kyriakos wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 2 problems currently with movie audio. One is that the channel separation is not as good as it used to be. New movies have 5.1 audio the effect is minimal which no longer justifies the expense on the sound system. People online are saying this is because many movies are made for primarily for streaming and that majority of people listen on their TV or sound bar instead of dedicated surround systems. The sec…

I mean, I am an audio/videophile with a proper 7.1.4 Atmos setup at home. I cannot even watch streaming tv or movies on it as it sounds so bad. But I put in a 4K UHD disc and wow. It sounds better than a real movie theater. I just think most people are never exposed to what high end movie audio sounds like anymore. I can tell you that channel separation is as good as ever. It's just most people never realize what's p…

Which is weird, because everyone producing video should know that audio is the most important element in a video.

As a point of reference my wife also loves good movies and cares whether she can hear the audio properly but it might be because English is her second language.

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

#328

Post by timc3 »

j_heffe wrote: post #317
morellt wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this ties in more with the decrease in quality of movie/music sound mixing. There are current movies coming to theaters with mixing so bad that they have to rerelease it with the proper audio (such as Across the Spiderverse). Many, MANY albums that release today have noticeable digital clipping because engineers have now assumed that high gain is always better etc. etc. There used to be a reason to have a 5.1…

I think audio really took a hit in the 90s and early 2000s when home theater became a lot cheaper and a lot more accessible and so too did the quality. Guys would spend their life savings on some crazy Polk or JBLs back in the day, and they were genuinely good quality and expensive. I always thought "Blinded by the light" was a garbage song hearing it on the radio all the time, but after listening to the album on my…

I disagree.

I have what essentially is a mastering suite (i just don't do mastering very often) at home and the difference in quality between the majority of modern music and the majority of older music say 25 years and older is large. There are many exceptions that sound amazing that are older, often done by very talented people in the best studios at the time. But one difference, hugely generalising, is dynamics, older music can have more dynamic range with modern music being basically a sausage of audio.

When people come over and want to listen, I usually have to tell them that it might actually be a disappointment to hear your favourite album is badly recorded next to something that is musically garbage but sounds fantastic. Or you wont be able to unhear the amount of distortion on Adele’s voice.

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

#329

Post by starky »

gsibble wrote: post #255
ipsum2 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've listed DAC/Amp brands, what about actual speakers?

I'm an audiophile (Revel speakers) and while I know of some good Chinese DAC/Amp brands I don't know of any Chinese speaker manufacturers yet. Top speakers are still extremely expensive, and sound just as good as well.

Even then, what Chinese companies are competing in the home theatre AVR space like Marantz/Denon does? The companies I think of from China at most do speaker amps.

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

#330

Post by starky »

SoftTalker wrote: post #71

Marantz used to be top of the line home audio gear, hand built, point to point wired. Now just another stick-on label on generic Korean mass produced systems. Sad to see them and other former great names in audio reduced to that.

Marantz has been that way for more than a decade at this point. I bought my Denon AVR in 2013 and even then all of the Marantz lineup was just a different case they charged more for.
Post reply on HN