"Arny Krueger" wrote

If a receiver is what everyman knows and recognizes, why not call it a
receiver and not an amplifier?

Because it's the amplifier part that is relevant to this discussion. (sigh!)
The term "AV amplifier" will cover an "AV receiver" because a receiver is
simply an amplifier with a tuner (which many people don't want and won't
use) in it.

Talking about sales volumes, have you noticed that
virtually all AV amplifiers (receivers!) are one-box
efforts?

Of course.

If you want to keep the power amps physically
separate to make the whole thing more manageable you are
limited to a tiny number of models at silly prices.

Putting everything into one box cuts costs and reduces the skill level
required to make it work.

The economics of receivers that don't have amplifiers built-in is such
that it can make economic sense to buy a reciever that has separate preamp
outs and amp ins and just don't use the on-premesis amps, as opposed to
doing something stupid like buy a signal processor that lacks amps.


Unwanted power amps (and their power supply) add *considerable* unnecessary
size and weight to the unit. I can't see why you think it "stupid" to want
to buy a small, light unit that does what you want, rather than a large,
heavy thing that does a load of things that you don't want, don't need, and
just add size, weight and complexity.

David.