|
Silver Member Username: RlschneckPost Number: 127 Registered: Apr-04 | Hello Everyone, I am currently shopping for a wedding gift for a college buddy, and I think I am going to get him a receiver. I would like to get him an HDMI receiver, but I also don't want to spend too much (my definition of too much? well, i would like to be in the neighborhood of $400, but that is flexible). Does anyone have any ideas for an HDMI receiver that is a good compromise between price and quality? (Also, if I am crazy and such an animal does not exist, then by all means, we can open the floor to other suggestions, i.e. non-HDMI receivers) some other guidelines: (1) dolby and dts decoding, (2) 5.1 or 7.1 channels (the price difference seems to be getting more and more negligible these days) (3) hmmm... can't think of anything else. perhaps the JVC RX-D401S will come down to $400 in a month? anyway, thanks for any advice/suggestions! |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 104 Registered: Apr-05 | There are receivers with HDMI input and output mostly as a pass through, and there are some in your price range (Panasonic has one if I remember correctly). However you want to worry about what you will do with the HDMI. If you want to use HDMI with your A/V you need to have the HDMI TV or DVD players etc that actually use HDMI to produce 1080 resolution in digital. These tend to be more expensive (moving on to LCD and Plasma and high Def TV's and projection units). So the reciever in essense allows you to pass through HDMI signal like any other analog or digital signal (S-video, component, digital audio etc.) so you can centralize the control of your sound and video through the amp no matter where the signal is coming or going. You can then for instance turn your TV into a dumb terminal and allow all connections from DVD, Cable, Satelite, VCR etc to route through the amp and control everything from your Amp remote. The high end receivers will also "upconvert" the signals so supposedly you can watch your VCR tape in high def. The resolution and quality of these upconvert chips is debatable. Now back to your original question IMO the main purpose of a good reciever should be to generate good quality sound. If you were to buy a non HDMI receiver, your friend could still decide whether or not to buy an HDMI TV and DVD and projector and get high def all the way around and still use a good amp. So in essense your $400 could either buy better sound or be spent on HDMI connector. I doubt you are going to get both at that price. You need to make a decision and perhaps talk to your friend and see what is more important to him/her. Sorry for the long lecture. I hope it made some sense |
|
Silver Member Username: RlschneckPost Number: 129 Registered: Apr-04 | stof, thank you for your reply. i agree with everything you said. i actually own hdmi components and a non-hdmi receiver. now that i think about it, my friend does listen to a lot of music... so perhaps my priorities were a bit out of whack. in that case, what would you (or anyone else) recommend in that price range for a non-hdmi receiver. it's been a while since i purchased one myself, so any advice would be greatly appreciated. my friend is no audiophile, and would probably listen to music using an emulator... so just a quality amp with accurate reproduction would be good... thanks everyone! |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 115 Registered: Apr-05 | This sounds like a good deal, if you (your friend) don't mind refurbished. http://www.ecost.com/ecost/shop/detail.asp?dpno=757327&store=ecost&source=ECOSTD EAL&adcampaign=email,ECOSTDEAL |
|
Bronze Member Username: XsoundMyrtle Beach, SC United States Post Number: 85 Registered: Sep-04 | Fro $400 it's hard to beat the Pioneer vsx-1015tx for sound and features. It doens't have HDMI inputs though. The Panasonic SA-XR70 does have HDMI and has received good reviews. It does have HDMI. If you do the check prices search on both of these units, you should be able find them for around $400. |
|
Silver Member Username: RlschneckPost Number: 132 Registered: Apr-04 | hmmmm... panasonic is a pretty respectable brand... but i've never heard anything about their receivers. what do you guys think about the H/K AVR235? any improvements/detriments since their last line of receivers? thanks |
|
Silver Member Username: Virus5877West Lafayette, Indiana USA Post Number: 135 Registered: Apr-05 | HK is as solid as it's ever been. they invented the stereo receiver for crying out loud, they ought to know how to make a quality one. I would take the HK over the panasonic and the pio any day of the week. it doesn't have HDMI inputs/outputs, but honestly, component video + coaxial audio is almost as good (if you don't mind the extra wires...) |
|
Bronze Member Username: XsoundMyrtle Beach, SC United States Post Number: 87 Registered: Sep-04 | HK is as solid as it's ever been. they invented the stereo receiver for crying out loud, they ought to know how to make a quality one. Of course Cyrus drives a Ford! LOL HK makes good stuff. Some of their receivers HAD (don't know if they still do) a problem with dropping the first notes of songs played on Cds. Some sort of protection stuff that sent the receiver to a silent mode if it wasn't receiving a signal. Don't know if they have corrected it or not. I used to sell HK. Right now, I would buy the Pioneer. |
|
Silver Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 783 Registered: Feb-05 | Can I ask a question? Why do you need an HDMI receiver? This assumes that video switching will be done through the receiver rather than just connected directly from the source to the monitor which is by far the better way to go. Just wondering out loud. |
|
Silver Member Username: RlschneckPost Number: 133 Registered: Apr-04 | art kyle, while i agree with you, and currently have my own system set up as you have prescribed... i just thought that it would be convenient to have all signals passing through the receiver. talk about a user-friendly set-up. my own system is very user-friendly, but at the cost of a HTM MX700 remote control. my friend is not the type to spend the time or money on something like that, so i was thinking that an HDMI receiver might be the ticket. anyway, i am now considering both avenues, but i greatly appreciate and respect the advice that you guys have to offer. thanks, ryan |
|
Silver Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 794 Registered: Feb-05 | Thank you answering. Now I "get it". |