What is the Current Guidance on Stereo and AV Configurations

Respectfully disagree. Maybe you got lucky, maybe you’re just BS’ing. But either way, I hope the OP doesn’t fall into a booby trap.

@cundare2 You can respectfully disagree all you want but you’re wrong, and the only booby trap is the one you set in your own brain.  All that needs to be done is to properly set the channel balance for all speakers with the AVR (as you’d normally do) at a known fixed reference point on the integrated’s volume control and you’re done.  So to switch from stereo to HT you just switch to the correct input (as you would with a HT bypass) and set the integrated’s volume to the predetermined reference point and that’s it.  Done.  There is no need to continually have to reset multiple volume levels as you said, and the only additional step versus having a HT bypass is having to have the integrated’s volume at the reference level for HT and everything remains in balance unless the channel balance is again changed on the AVR.  Very simple.

So you’re basically confirming what I said and arguing with things I didn’t say.

Typical for @soix in trolling mode. Someone more interested in arguing than in actually reading other people's postings.

To quote a great man who doesn’t know his own limitations, "What are you even doing here?"

Without HT bypass, the two go out of sync every time you change either one. This gets even more complicated when the FL/FR receiver/speaker combination responds differently to numeric volume-dial changes than do the other channels. That is, you usually can’t simply turn up the integrated’s volume by 5 clicks in order to compensate for increasing the receiver volume by 5. Even setting default start-up volume levels on both components does not resolve this issue.

@cundare2 Virtually nothing you said here is correct as to how this actually works in practice and shows you continue to not understand the concept at all. I’m not going to explain why you’re so off base any further because, frankly, I don’t care that you don’t get it as long as the OP gets it if he even needs it. Sharp as a bowling ball you are.

Folks... decorum, please. This is a beautiful hobby that should bring enjoyment.

You have all provided me with a shedload of information about which I had no idea. For that, thank you! 🤩

Now it's off for the next phase... more research and listening!

Again, thank you all for your guidance and your feedback.

OP, for those new here, @soix has a history of trolling those who bruise his ego and, when backed into a corner, tends to retreat with "my time is too valuable to waste explaining things to my inferiors." Case in point. Sorry to pollute your thread, but this one time, I just couldn’t let it lie.

In this case, with postings that are simply getting louder, not smarter, it was hard to even identify soix’s specific point of disagreement. If I had to guess, it was an asertion that being forced to manually rebalance the volume level of a front-ch amp every time you change the volume of a multichannel processor is no big deal.

Well, that may be true for some people. But my point was that you can’t blindly make that assertion across-the-board. For most audiophiles, it’s important to take the time to correctly -- even "perfectly" -- balance front/center/surround levels every time you adjust the AV receiver volume. And, worse, for non-audiophile family members who just want to watch a movie, an extra step that likely requires an additional remote can be a dealbreaker. I can just imagine my husband’s reaction if I told that he’d have to continually rebalance front-channel volume levels unless he was willing to always watch Netflix at a single "reference" volume.

Soix, if you still feel an urgency to argue, focus on that issue. Generalized ranting about how "nothing is correct" in my explanation gets you nowhere if you don’t even try to point out and "correct" a specific statement in my message. But an even better resolution would be to just rest on what’s already been said. I know that not getting the last word may be a proglem, but I sense that this argument has started to grate on other members.

This is apparently, as those in the legal profession are fond of saying, "an issue upon which reasonable minds can differ." The grown-ups in the room should be able to agree on that.

Bottom line: OP, maybe you can live without HT Bypass. Maybe not. But I wanted to at least give you the opportunity to make an informed decision by more objectively describing the problem that HTB was designed to solve.  When you cut through the noise, I hope I was at least a little bit helpful.