Home Audio System for Streaming from Phone

[squib 1,125]

If it weren’t for football, we would never turn our TV on. Instead we play music nightly. Right now I am connecting to either a portable Bluetooth speaker or through an Alexa and then playing Spotify. Tired of the crappy mono sound and want to get a solid setup. 
 

The room for the install is pretty big and is a combined kitchen/living room open space. I can place speakers on top of kitchen cabinets or the like. 
 

Portability is not important. I will hook it all up and then leave it be. Will just need to Bluetooth in or I guess I could go with some Aux cord setup if needed. 
 

Have looked at a receiver system where I buy it and speakers. Have also looked at some all-in-ones like some Bose deals or sound bar type devices. 
 

I also have some built in speakers in the ceiling throughout the house and out by the pool but I know nothing about them. They are in the ceiling. Look like 6x9s. No idea on quality. 
 

My budget is about $500 but I could be talked into more if necessary. It’s really our main entertainment, and I would like a better option than what I am working with now. 
 

Anyone have some recs or can point me in a good direction?  Thanks in advance. 

[Lobwedgephil 1,139]

Sonos. 

[Spur08 382]

Sonos. 

Este

[Sam Lin 3,561]

If you already have the in-house speakers, you should find what system was previously installed or find where they are wired; if they have no amp, you'd need to add an amp, but then all you need is to add a bluetooth receiver as an input. This has the advantage of giving you many more rooms of sound since you already have multiple zones of speakers. Amazon has a bunch of them, this is a random result (I have no specific recommendation for model):

https://smile.amazon.com/B06-Plus-Bluetooth-Receiver-Streaming/dp/B078J3GTRK/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=aptx+receiver&qid=1599536440&sr=8-4

 

Sonos is a solid product, but very expensive if you consider multiple zones or even wanting stereo sound. If you want to just put some speakers on the cabinets or on a shelf, and stream to them, I'd recommend Audioengine. These are the cheaper A2, your budget of 500 allows their A5.

https://smile.amazon.com/Audioengine-A2-Wireless-Bluetooth-Amplifier/dp/B07MYV2527/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=audioengine+bluetooth&qid=1599536664&sr=8-4

[crash_davis 23,115]

Fuck Sonos. They are as bad as Apple is when it comes to proprietary bullshit and planned obsolescence. Plus if you put a little time into it, you can get much better system for less.

Get a 2.1 system. Receivers are cheap. You can get a non-AVR (no HDMI system) receivers for cheap (like $30-50) on Facebook Marketplace, aidslist, fleabay, etc. Facebook marketplace is a great place to buy pre-owned hifi gear. You can get great speakers (many great sounding speakers for $200 or less) and audio equipment for a fraction of the cost. 

You can buy a BT 5.0 aptx dongle for about $20. Hook up that dongle to L R jacks in the AUX ports of the receiver. Paired with decent speakers and you have a system which sound 10X better than BT speakers or Sonos.

Really depends on how much you want to spend.

 

[crash_davis 23,115]

where are you located. I can do a quick FB Marketplace search and find you a good system for $3-500. Will try to find a zoned receiver to connect your other speaker systems.

[Enchubben 5,510]

I’m in a new build now and installing indoor/outdoor at the same time on a 2 zone system. 

I’m going with a Denon receiver/Heos Amp,    12” Martin Logan subwoofer, 2 pair of Elura 8” speakers inside along with a Keff center speaker under TV. Outside are two Elura outdoor speakers. 

There is nothing wrong with going Sonos. Although you will pay a bit more, generally speaking, there are less problems with it, and you have more expandability optIons down the road. It is the quintessential apple of audio. I think if you go Sonos as opposed to heos (which you can do with pioneer and integra receivers as both new models are Sonos ready) you also need to buy a Sonos port for multiple zones.

[Quagmire 2,147]

If you don’t want to mess with receivers , wiring , shitload of cords. Go Sonos, love mine , their play one speakers sound excellent for the size , can group speakers together , expand slowly , works with almost any music service etc.



I do wish they would let you integrate with other systems but it is what it is.

Started with 1 speaker and now have 7.

[52-80 19,246]

19 hours ago, crash_davis said:

Fuck Sonos. They are as bad as Apple is when it comes to proprietary bullshit and planned obsolescence. Plus if you put a little time into it, you can get much better system for less.

Get a 2.1 system. Receivers are cheap. You can get a non-AVR (no HDMI system) receivers for cheap (like $30-50) on Facebook Marketplace, aidslist, fleabay, etc. Facebook marketplace is a great place to buy pre-owned hifi gear. You can get great speakers (many great sounding speakers for $200 or less) and audio equipment for a fraction of the cost. 

You can buy a BT 5.0 aptx dongle for about $20. Hook up that dongle to L R jacks in the AUX ports of the receiver. Paired with decent speakers and you have a system which sound 10X better than BT speakers or Sonos.

Really depends on how much you want to spend.

 

This is.......wrong

 

1.  Sonos has longgg history of very deep produt support.  They don't pump out annual replacement products, and they had their first ever software-based system split.  The current software supports products that are almost 10 years old.  The "old" system are still functional, and can still be driven on software that runs concurrent with new software.

2.  Likewise, Apple probably has the longest and most consistent level of software support compared to competitors on both desktop and laptop.  The "proprietary bullshit" is why their products have better longevity.

3.  Sonos (and other smartspeaker) is a different use case than wireless BT.  Bluetooth requires constant connection to streaming device i.e. phone.  Smartspeaker are more stable because they get audio directly from the source, only needing the phone for instruction.

3a.  Sonos supports higher bitrate than AptX

3b.  Multi-zone expandability is unmatched

3c.  No running speakers wires from the receiver to the top of a kitchen cabinet....

 

Sonos isn't just glossy products for the Starbucks Becky crowd.  Their audio fidelity measures very well for the audiophile crowd. 

 

For OP, depending on the listening environment, either get a single Sonos Five, or a bunch of Sonos Ones and place them around the house.  Like a stereo pair in the main room, then single units elsewhere

 

 

[crash_davis 23,115]

I stand corrected, I read that Sonos reverse course and supported old speakers. Good for them.

With Sonos, you're trading convenience for SQ. Sonos speakers sound like shit. I have a buddy who have Sonos speakers through out his house. Yes it's cool to have music in every room but no they don't sound all that good. The SQ is basically what you get from larger BT speakers. Is it passable, yes. Do I want to have that as my may sound system? For me, fuck no because I know they don't compete against a good receiver and speakers. SQ is night and day.

But OP may not care. But since he already has speakers wired, just spend the $500 for a zoned receiver and a good pair of front speakers and he'll have better SQ than what Sonus can possibly deliver.

[Dbeasy 15,092]

Sonos isn’t a bad option but the audio quality is only so so. I went with a solid Yamaha receiver with Klipsch speakers but spent way more than $500.

[crash_davis 23,115]

2 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

Sonos isn’t a bad option but the audio quality is only so so. I went with a solid Yamaha receiver with Klipsch speakers but spent way more than $500.

like i said earlier, last year for my college daughter's apartment, on facebook marketplace i found a pristine set of paradigm monitor 7s for $200 and a 2015ish denon avr receiver for $50. dude got rid of it because he wanted a 4k receiver. brand new the speakers and receiver would've cost over $1200.

for sound quality that system will put to shame any sonos system. 

OP may have to pay a $150-200 for a pre-owned receiver with zones to hook up the outside and ceiling speakers. zone capable receivers usually cost $5-600+ brand new. that would be my suggestion.

[TwiceHorn 31,536]

I am toying with replacing my NAD receiver, which lacks a lot of modern connections, with a "streaming" receiver.  Stereo only.  Klipsch RB-61s.  Not currently messing with vinyl.

I appreciate decent sound, but am not really an audiophile.  Good DAC to make shitty digital sources sound decent-ish is something of a priority in addition to connectivity.

Onkyo appeals because Chromecast.  Yamaha appeals for good sound and build, but uses Music Cast, which apparently kind of sucks.

Denon/Marantz use HeOS.  Dunno nuffin bout it.

Could be convinced to go to components, but not real interested in device spread.

Any recos?

 

[Dbeasy 15,092]

HeOs has many limitations too, I discovered.

[TwiceHorn 31,536]

1 minute ago, Dbeasy said:

HeOs has many limitations too, I discovered.

Which Yamaha do you have?

[Dbeasy 15,092]

58 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Which Yamaha do you have?

I bought the new Yamaha Aventage RX-A780, primarily because 2019 models were out of stock and the 780 has excellent distortion characteristics vs the Denon.  I was going to go Denon but Heos had even more limitations than Musicast. Overall, I'm pretty happy with it. Sounds good, easy to setup. Remote is more logical that old Yamaha remotes, etc.

I have an older Yamaha HL-6090 that was a good receiver but didn't have wifi streaming and was not very user friendly.  So I upgraded and that unit is now gathering dust in my upstairs game room.

[TwiceHorn 31,536]

For some reason, I can't muster a single fuck about home theater.  Not one.

So no X.x for me, just 2-channel audio for music, please.

The NAD/Klispch combo is clear, and has great imaging and soundstage, and that's all I could care about.  Does nice for a movie, but I rarely turn it on.

Edited September 11, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Dbeasy 15,092]

17 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

For some reason, I can't muster a single fuck about home theater.  Not one.

So no X.x for me, just 2-channel audio for music, please.

The NAD/Klispch combo is clear, and has great imaging and soundstage, and that's all I could care about.  Does nice for a movie, but I rarely turn it on.

I didn't put in 5.1 or 7.1 because our main TV and stereo is in the family room, where back and overhead speaker placement would have been suboptimal. I went with a 3.1 setup, which has been perfect. Great for music. The Yamaha has a sound enhancement mode for compressed audio. I bought very expensive center channel Klipsch because we are old and losing our hearing. We needed that to hear the voices in shows and movies.  The subwoofer is okay but I've always been a little disappointed in subwoofer performance regardless of model or brand.  Overall, happy with the configuration.  Yamaha has built-in net streaming for local stations and internet radio stations which is nice. I can also play spotify through it via an amazon fire pad device, which is cool too. Could also stream from the iphone as well.

[crash_davis 23,115]

subs are pretty binary. either you fork a lot of money for svs or the other subs are really meh especially for music. if you only care about booming shit for movies, then svs' are overkill. most subs do not have the response to keep up with music. again svs is so highly recommended for a reason. 

if you have a decent set of towers, you *shouldn't* need subs for music. if you have bookshelfs, then subs are recommended. most bookshelves lack oomph, no matter what anyone says. it's just a limitation of physics. 

 

If your receiver has an hdmi in, then use Chromecast for streaming audio. With BT, no matter what version, there is transcoding and compression involved. Chromecast is sending the file as is, with no additional compression other than the compressed mp3.

[Dbeasy 15,092]

subs are pretty binary. either you fork a lot of money for svs or the other subs are really meh especially for music. if you only care about booming shit for movies, then svs' are overkill. most subs do not have the response to keep up with music. again svs is so highly recommended for a reason. 
if you have a decent set of towers, you *shouldn't* need subs for music. if you have bookshelfs, then subs are recommended. most bookshelves lack oomph, no matter what anyone says. it's just a limitation of physics. 
 
If your receiver has an hdmi in, then use Chromecast for streaming audio. With BT, no matter what version, there is transcoding and compression involved. Chromecast is sending the file as is, with no additional compression other than the compressed mp3.

This is an area I’m still confused about when it comes to Spotify off the fire pad. It seems like Spotify directs the stream over Wi-Fi to the Yamaha, rather than stream to the fire pad, which then streams via Bluetooth to the Yamaha. But I’m not sure and no one I ask can verify one way or another. I guess I could shut off Bluetooth on the fire pad and see what happens. I’m thinking it’s steaming Wi-Fi directly to the Yamaha and the fire pad is simply using the Spotify app for song selection, volume, play, etc. that way you get higher quality by not transcoding for BT.

[ChickenSandwich 9,853]

2 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

HeOs has many limitations too, I discovered.

what are the limitations you have discovered?  I have it, it is the exact same as SONOS, with the added feature of fully integrating into my 5.2.4 home theater.  Have a couple of "Play 1"s through the house and they work great.  Stream from phone, tidal, all major music sources etc.  Can add up to 30 independent speakers etc.

[TwiceHorn 31,536]

6 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

This is an area I’m still confused about when it comes to Spotify off the fire pad. It seems like Spotify directs the stream over Wi-Fi to the Yamaha, rather than stream to the fire pad, which then streams via Bluetooth to the Yamaha. But I’m not sure and no one I ask can verify one way or another. I guess I could shut off Bluetooth on the fire pad and see what happens. I’m thinking it’s steaming Wi-Fi directly to the Yamaha and the fire pad is simply using the Spotify app for song selection, volume, play, etc. that way you get higher quality by not transcoding for BT.

I don't know exactly how the Yamaha works, but typically, Spotify Connect works via Wifi, so you are getting more digital bandwidth than BT.  I use it with Chromecast, where it definitely works that way.  But I'm reasonably sure it works that way with all compatible streaming devices.

I guess with any of these receivers with more than one HDMI, I could put the Chromecast in it and stream direct to it, which I would be perfectly content to do.  And I think most of them would turn the HDMI back to the TV for conventional video use.

Right now, I have Chromecast in TV, optical out to receiver and stream my sources to the receiver that way.  Works alright, but I have to have the TV on and muted.

[Dbeasy 15,092]

11 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't know exactly how the Yamaha works, but typically, Spotify Connect works via Wifi, so you are getting more digital bandwidth than BT.  I use it with Chromecast, where it definitely works that way.  But I'm reasonably sure it works that way with all compatible streaming devices.

I guess with any of these receivers with more than one HDMI, I could put the Chromecast in it and stream direct to it, which I would be perfectly content to do.  And I think most of them would turn the HDMI back to the TV for conventional video use.

Right now, I have Chromecast in TV, optical out to receiver and stream my sources to the receiver that way.  Works alright, but I have to have the TV on and muted.

this is a good idea. My chromecast right now is on the TV but you're right it would be a bit better just running the chromecast into an open HDMI port. I'm going to change that today.

[TwiceHorn 31,536]

44 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

this is a good idea. My chromecast right now is on the TV but you're right it would be a bit better just running the chromecast into an open HDMI port. I'm going to change that today.

I'm sure you'd be fine with that, as your AV receiver can video-switch.  I'm not sure the stereo receivers can.  But why have multiple HDMI's if it can't.  It's not really an audio connection.

Also, it seems like Yamahas can "natively" take chromecast streams, from reviews, even though they don't say it's a feature.

I'm a bit wary of the "built-in" apps, as my experience with those on my TV has been mediocre.

[crash_davis 23,115]

You should connect your firetv, roku, chromecase to an IN HDMI port in your AV Receiver. That way all of the sound goes through the stereo speakers. 

[Bernard 879]

On 9/11/2020 at 11:33 AM, TwiceHorn said:

I am toying with replacing my NAD receiver, which lacks a lot of modern connections, with a "streaming" receiver. 

 

I plugged a Bluetooth adapter into my classic NAD 7240PE receiver and wa-la, instant streaming. Side benefit for this old non-remote-controlled receiver is that I can now adjust the volume via my phone or iPad. 

Bernard

[squib 1,125]

Anyone seeing a good black friday deal on a 2.0 system, self-powered (no separate amp). Just want two speakers with good sound to listen to music. No home theater. Must be able to connect to Bluetooth. 

[ChickenSandwich 9,853]

https://www.klipsch.com/products/the-sixes-r-12sw-12-subwoofer-2-1-powered-system
 

 

[squib 1,125]

thanks CS. That looks awesome but not sure I want to spend that much. 

Just wanting something to put in the kitchen for wife and I to listen to while making dinner/eating said dinner.

What about this? 

https://www.crutchfield.com/p_714R41PM/Klipsch-Reference-R-41PM.html?tp=72535

 

[TwiceHorn 31,536]

3 minutes ago, squib said:

thanks CS. That looks awesome but not sure I want to spend that much. 

Just wanting something to put in the kitchen for wife and I to listen to while making dinner/eating said dinner.

What about this? 

https://www.crutchfield.com/p_714R41PM/Klipsch-Reference-R-41PM.html?tp=72535

 

Interdasting.  I had no idea Klipsch was doing such a thing, but I guess it's not surprising.

Beware that the speakers on both of those have rear-firing ports, so probably need to be spaced from a wall a goodly distance or they'll sound weird.

Klipsch speaker designs are probably fairly good for that kind of thing, as their high sensitivity means you won't have to have a big amp or drive it very hard to drive the speakers.

Beware though, that the sound signature of Klipsch speakers is a bit bright or forward.  I'm a fan, although with certain types of music I can see why people do not want. YMMV.

[TwiceHorn 31,536]

30 minutes ago, squib said:

thanks CS. That looks awesome but not sure I want to spend that much. 

Just wanting something to put in the kitchen for wife and I to listen to while making dinner/eating said dinner.

What about this? 

https://www.crutchfield.com/p_714R41PM/Klipsch-Reference-R-41PM.html?tp=72535

 

Worth noting:  The model CS posted, and a lower version, "The Fives," have a DAC (digital-to-audio converter), which the powered speakers alone do not.

If you are connecting them to a digital source, such as a cable box, or TV, or a PC using a streaming service, or maybe some devices like satellite radios, via optical, USB, or HDMI, then it will take digital audio and process it to an analog audio signal at high quality.  This is different and higher quality than bluetooth and other modes of digital streaming.  All of these devices do a digital to analog conversion, but the quality of it can vary wildly.

A good, discrete DAC (meaning not part of a BT card, or a cheap sound card in a PC or TV or other device) can make some pretty shitty sources like MP3s (or MP3-quality streams) sound pretty damn decent, i.e. CD-quality audio.  Such DACs are kind of the heart of a modern amplifier for digital sources.

Probably not something you need for "kitchen audio," but a feature that others may be interested in as an alternative to a receiver or discrete amp combo.

Edited November 27, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Sam Lin 3,561]

For kitchen audio, buy one of the Audioengine bluetooth models. Not expensive even at normal price, great performance value. I use their a5 for garage audio.

[Buzzrock 14,941]

I bought a house that had speakers installed in the ceiling in a few different rooms. I bought some cheap Pyle receivers from Amazon to hook the speakers to and then plugged Amazon Echo Dots into each receiver. The Alexa app on my phone lets me set up groups and stream music all over the place. I’m pretty pleased with the outcome and each setup was about $60-$70. 

[squib 1,125]

So I checked out my ceiling-mounted speakers. Here is what I found. 

Phase Technology CI-40

They are all over my house. Two in living room, two in master bath, two In master bedroom, two in office, two in dining room, two on patio.

I would really want to connect only the ones in the living room.  I have located the wires behind a face plate by the fireplace. Can I just buy a receiver as Buzzrock mentions above and plug these in?  What about the circuitry on the backs of the speakers? 

[squib 1,125]

and if those speakers will work, can I plug them into this receiver and be ok?

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/sony-2-0-ch-stereo-receiver-with-bluetooth-black/6187501.p?skuId=6187501

I would like to be able to say "Hey Alexa (to my Alexa), connect to my Iphone and play Nickel Back" and then the sweet tunes come flowing out my ceiling. Doable?

[fattyflattie 4,638]

22 minutes ago, squib said:

and if those speakers will work, can I plug them into this receiver and be ok?

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/sony-2-0-ch-stereo-receiver-with-bluetooth-black/6187501.p?skuId=6187501

I would like to be able to say "Hey Alexa (to my Alexa), connect to my Iphone and play Nickel Back" and then the sweet tunes come flowing out my ceiling. Doable?

I can only see one problem with your idea, but it’s an insurmountable one. 

Edited November 30, 2020 by fattyflattie

[squib 1,125]

10 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I can only see one problem with your idea, but it’s an insurmountable one. 

Sorry, can't catch your drift. I never made it as a wise man. 

[Buzzrock 14,941]

I can’t speak to the circuitry question but yeah, any stereo amp/receiver ought to drive them. A quick Google shows that those might be some pretty decent speakers. I popped the covers on mine and they are Polk Audios  

If you have trouble figuring out which wires are which on the other end, you can touch the wires to a AA battery. If you hear a soft popping coming from the speaker you know you have the right pair.

[Sam Lin 3,561]

The circuitry on the back is the crossover that splits the signal between woofer and tweeter, leave it alone. All you need to do is connect your chosen receiver's speaker out + and -  to those red and black terminals at the top of your first photo.

Phase was a solid brand back in the day, almost high-end.

Nickelback is one word.

[52-80 19,246]

9 hours ago, Sam Lin said:

Nickelback is one word.

Nickelback is what all the concert goers asked the ticket office after seeing their performance

[Buzzrock 14,941]

These are the two amps I’ve used.  No issues with either one so far. 
 

Home Audio Power Amplifier System... https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003NVN1PY?ref=ppx_pop_mob_ap_share

 

Nobsound 100W Mini Bluetooth 5.0... https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07YJKSKJS?ref=ppx_pop_mob_ap_share
 

 

[ZB'Tejas 593]

To piggyback on some of the earlier discussions I have a nice receiver that wired to the inside installed speakers (center and L/R) and that works great for TV or music. I need to create 2 more zones (front year and back yard) and the receiver is capable of that however it does not have multiple DACs to support the type of music I would want playing there. I've only seen higher end receivers with two DACs so upgrading that would not solve.

I'm looking Sonance speakers for outside with the Sonos amp but that would not tie in with existing inside sound so at that point I might as well get rid of receiver and go all Sonos for ease of use. I normally cast music from Google Home to my receiver so with Sonos I would not have to add the other step of turning on my receiver. Is there an easier(cheaper) option here to add new zones?

[Sam Lin 3,561]

You want to add zones, but you want different music playing in each zone? All the music coming from the same single source (Google Home?)

[TwiceHorn 31,536]

12 minutes ago, Sam Lin said:

You want to add zones, but you want different music playing in each zone? All the music coming from the same single source (Google Home?)

Is that how "zones" typically work?  I had thought it was basically a fancier name for an a/b/a+b switch, with perhaps a, b, c, and d capability.

[Sam Lin 3,561]

That's sort of why I asked the questions. I'm a bit confused by what he's wanting/trying to achieve. Receiver 'zones' typically allow independent volume control but not different sources. Sources are usually single-source as well, meaning one Google Home unit is not going to be able to output 2 different signals even if you had separate receivers for each zone.

[ZB'Tejas 593]

You want to add zones, but you want different music playing in each zone? All the music coming from the same single source (Google Home?)

Can be the same music source... typically it’s Pandora combing from my google home.

But would want the ability to have varying volume as well as turning it off in unused zones. E.g not playing inside when using the backyard ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TwiceHorn 31,536]

24 minutes ago, ZB'Tejas said:

Can be the same music source... typically it’s Pandora combing from my google home.

But would want the ability to have varying volume as well as turning it off in unused zones. E.g not playing inside when using the backyard ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You'd only need multiple DACs for different digital sources.  And, I'm going to guess if that's what you want then multiple "amplifiers" are what you will need.

However, I am pretty ignorant of the powered-speaker wifi hifi set ups.  I would think that any such speakers that appear on your network could be selected as the output for any given source on the network (i.e. phone, tablet, PC, receiver/amp, etc.) and that each of them (the powered speakers) have their own DAC.  Which I guess brings up another potential audio quality issue with powered speakers. 

As mentioned, I have found that a high-quality DAC in a receiver or amplifier (as a "discrete" component, typically, meaning physically separable from other signal-handling circuitry), makes a world of difference with digital sources.  Powered speakers, like a lot of computer components, may be cutting corners with DACs to keep costs down.

A good DAC chip itself isn't all that expensive.  But I suppose requiring a circuit board for a discrete component and having to design the amp around it raises costs significantly compared to what must be "system on a chip" for the lower-end ones.

So, assuming any of the above is actually accurate, I might keep the receiver for your primary indoor hifi/ht setup, where it really matters, and use networked powered speakers for outdoors and places it doesn't matter that much.

Edited December 5, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[ZB'Tejas 593]

If I’m reading my receiver correctly the multiple zones are output through the different speaker outputs. The main 7.1; a stereo output for zone 2 and a mono for zone 3. So I’d be ok if I can map the input to the appropriate zone but I’m not sure if that works.

Also, the Sonos amp to sonance outdoor speakers works but I’d rather be able to control from one thing. And of course the receiver cannot he controlled from Google home or my phone which would be desirable.

Plus I feel like I need a fan in my cabinet for this receiver since it gets so hot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TwiceHorn 31,536]

15 minutes ago, ZB'Tejas said:

If I’m reading my receiver correctly the multiple zones are output through the different speaker outputs. The main 7.1; a stereo output for zone 2 and a mono for zone 3. So I’d be ok if I can map the input to the appropriate zone but I’m not sure if that works.

Also, the Sonos amp to sonance outdoor speakers works but I’d rather be able to control from one thing. And of course the receiver cannot he controlled from Google home or my phone which would be desirable.

Plus I feel like I need a fan in my cabinet for this receiver since it gets so hot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, I'm also ignorant of multichannel HT receivers.  Things on a wifi or ethernet network offer a lot of flexibility because all of the "signals" are always going to all of the devices, so the "wiring" is not an issue.  It's just turning switches to make the device decode that part of the "signal." 

But the problem is that each device is going to need some form of DAC to decode that signal, and the signal is likely to be missing some information, which a really good DAC can "fill in" accurately.

[Austinvines 318]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk