Hello. Never use one of these boards before. After 2 years of thought, about to begin HT setup in living room. Have 5.1 Bose (not perfect but sounds great for cost) speakers. About to purchase Panasonic 50HD8UK Plasma with HDMI port (unless someone here gives plausible reason why not, as seems best for price and expandability with no un-needed features like speakers or tuner for around $3,000). Last system (Sony XBR with Sony surround) issues were mainly to due with wife and friends not being able to work system, even with macro remote as it would sometimes switch certain things and not others and they would get very confused). So, want to do both video and audio switching at receiver so as not to have to swtich video inputs at monitor. Do not, of course, desire to lose much if any signal nor to "process" the signal (upconverting for instance) as want Monitor to use it's chips to work with a flat signal. OK, if you got this far, the issue is that I am on a somewhat tight budget (you know, champagne taste and beer pocket!). I have been led toward the Denon AVR3806 as it seems to support most any analog to HDMI as well as 2 hdmi inputs to hdmi out. At a 'best net price' of just over a thousand, it is 40% more than what I was planning to spend - and I will but wanted to be sure that it is my "best bet" and/or to know if there is something in my understanding about this setup that does not make sense. To be clear, the monitor will only be using the video signal as the audio will go directly to speakers from the receiver, but I did not notice a receiver with DVI converting so figure the best way is to just go ahead and use the HDMI and also hope that Panasonic has taken advantage of that to allow auto-scaling of picture size. Thoughts on the receiver type in this price range and the video conversion question? The sound quality and minimal background noise of the receiver is also crucial to me, I read on this board people saying that the Sony digital receivers had noticable humm and I am not interested in paying a grand for any sound other than that which I feed through it!@! Thanks!!
I went thru this thought process a few months ago. I decided the cost adder for HDMI switching in the receiver was just too high right now. I went with a separate HDMI switch box.
I also had concerns about control complexity, but I chose to address that with a Harmony remote. The advantage of this over a 'macro' remote is that the Harmony remembers what components it has already turned on or off and leaves them on or off as appropriate when switching between activities (example: in switching from 'watch DVD' to 'watch satellite', the remote leaves the TV and A/V receiver on, turns the DVD player off, satellite on, and switches the inputs). So far my tech-challenged wife is happy.
Dunno about the 50HD8UK, but my Pana th42px50u does NOT allow picture-size scaling of HD (720P or 1080i) input via HDMI. I use the zoom/aspect control on my Oppo DVD or Dishnet 942 DVR instead. You might want to investigate that carefully if it is important to you.
Thanks for your feedback Rick, very thoughtful and helpful to hear anothers process and experience. I will look into the Harmony remote, but I am not sure it will solve the 'technophobe problem' as for me the greatest issue has been with the remote sending the correct signal but one or another component not receiving it (either because there was something in the way or the remote was pointed at the persons head instead of the wall of components - it never ceases to amaze me how obstinate those otherwise intelligent people who "do not want to know" cause their desire to come true!). Anyhow, I take it you already had a surround receiver and did not want to purchase a new one. For me, as my Sony died, I must purchase a new one anyhow and anything worth its salt is going to cost me $600 anyhow, so going to $1,000 for HDMI switching (and other nice features) seems worthwhile if all else is equal...
Quite right, the 'blocked command syndrome' is still present.
My receiver selection (I am replacing the entire contents of my house, because the buyer of my prior home purchased all the contents as well)is a whole 'nother story. I ended up with a Panasonic SA-XR55 for one system, and a Yamaha RXV-657 (plus a Carver TFM-25 for my front speakers) for the 2nd system. So, your receiver price point is well above mine (unless you add the prices of the Yamaha and Carver... I needed the 200+ Watts for the front speakers I bought for music listening). At your price point I agree it makes sense to spend the extra $400 on the receiver rather than $250 for an external switchbox.
Paul98
Unregistered guest
Posted on
I would say that Denon is the way to go for what you are looking for. It will give you the switching you need. Now for the sound quality, you will never get good sound out of those bose speakers. That reciever would be overkill for those speakers. After spending that much on the tv, and you are planning on spending that much on a reciever. I would look at getting some good speakers to finish it off. Heck depending on the model bose speakers you have you might be able to sell those speakers and then buy something much better just from that money. No matter what model they are you will be able to sell them and get something that sounds better.
Thank you Paul. As there was a time I fancied myself as having quite a discerning ear, I was confused when I setup the Bose sytem (and it was only a thousand dollar non-powered sub. system when purchased some 5 years ago) and found the sound to be really good, bright and full ranged and not much lower qualilty even for music than my JBL Studio Monitors (now gone) or smaller advents (still have). I realized that maybe I had mellowed with age or my hearing fidelity has dropped. Still, I am VERY open to ideas and would like to know what in the lower price range for a 5.1 system you would reccomend that stands noticably above the Bose? It is true that I have to move the Bose from my Condo to my home and it is a hassle, and if I could purchase another set of speakers that would be much better and not spend too much I would do it in a hearbeat... so advise away!
Paul98
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Do you have a sub or not, and would you want to replace that also? how much money are you talking about?
The only sub. I have (besides my wire! ;-)) is the Bose which is not cross platform compatible nor is it powered so the answer is, effectively, no. As my budget will already be blown on the rest of the system, if I had to spend much more than $500 on a speaker set it would be more worthwhile for me to remove the Bose form the condo and use them in my home - and for 5 decent speakers I realize that $500 is not much money.
I do appreciate your taking time to answer, and so long as you are doing so wonder if you know anything about receivers. If you read my other post you will note that I had been thinking of blowing my budget on the Denon 3806, but the main reason is for hdmi video switching and I have now found that it does not deal with signal synchronoziation (nor converting analog to hdmi) so for me it would not be the receiver. Now considdering a Yamaha RX-V2600 or 2600 but have not heard anything - you? Of course, if this is not your interest area or you have no time, answer only the speaker question and I will be more than greatful!
500 isn't going to get you too much, I don't think you would notice a huge difference over bose for that much. But if you were to sell those bose on top of that 500 you would get to the point where you should have a decent budget for speakers. Then even more if you were able to find a reciever in the $600-800 range.
Now for the receiver, you should really check how good your TV is when inputing an analog source. As your tv may do just as well as your receiver of converting the signal. Or even if it's worse you might not notice any difference. Also do you have anything with an HDMI/DVI source now? That TV is 1080p isn't it? If so you would need to check that the receiver would output a 1080p signal after it's converted. Otherwise the tv is going to have to convert the picture to 1080p anyway. I am not exactly sure how each part would work. But I am not too sure what would give you a better picture.
You really should see if you can try out that video processing with your tv. But if I were you I would spend about 600 or so on a receiver. Sell those bose speakers, which would give you a good budget for some good speakers, and sub. Then in about 2 years or so years down the road when you see more HDMI, and 1080p sources then upgrade to a new receiver. which at that time I would guess would cost about 600 or so plus then you can sell the reciever you bought now.
I made sure to buy receivers with adjustable audio delay functions. IIRC, the Oppo DVD player also has an audio delay adjustement, so there may be other ways to get that done if the receiver you want doesn't.
BTW, I have not had to dial in ANY audio delay on either of my systems. I wonder if folks who have large video processing delays are using analog (composite, S-video or component) connections to their TV? These connections require (at a minimum!) an additional D to A conversion in the DVD player, and an A to D conversion in the TV compared to keeping the signal digital all the way from DVD disk to pixel (HDMI ir DVI). Configuring the output of the DVD to match the native resolution of the TV (as I've done) will also eliminate redundant scaling processing of the signal.
Good thoughts Rick. Really, with a beer pocket and an engineering mind I find it smazing if not absurd that these issues have not been addressed "automatically" in a reasonably priced receiver aimed at a discerning but not rich consumer who wants a good HT setup and does not want to have to figure this *bleep* out on their own! To rant a bit, first and foremost, to have to switch sources at more than one location (meaning, for instance, receiver for audio source and monitor for video source is simply ridiculous. As it is one of the easiest things a receiver can do (switching alone without actually processing a signal is nothing more than an adapter in most cases) it is unclear to me why low cost video switching recievers were not ALWAYS in the forefront of the market. Next comes the more 'ishy' isues regarding signal degredation. WHY ARE THERE FORUMS FULL OF PEOPLE SPECULATING WHAT THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE A VIDEO SIGNAL IS WHEN THERE ARE LITTERALLY BILLIONS OF DOLLARS BEING SPENT BY MAJOR CORPORATIONS ON ENGINEERING TO KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS AND YET I HAVE NOT L0CATED A SINGLE AUDIO/VIDEO MANUFACTURING COMPANY THAT HAS INFORMATION DETAILING THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS? They can build chips the size of a quarter that can process terabytes of information and they cannot make a receiver that has a simple choice of "pass through converting" or "processed converting" of a video signal and then give you some simple guidelines of how and when you would use each one? WHY ARE CONSUMERS HAVING TO FIGURE THIS *BLEEP* OUT ON OUR OWN? It is one thing to argue the fine points of which manufacturer makes a warmer sound but unless I am really missing something, the issues of signal handling are somewhat if not completely scientific factsgivens and not subjective. It is bad enough that the specifications of the recievers themselves do not clearly outline for the novice what issues they deal with and why, but the fact that these issues and how to deal with them are not published ANYWHERE BY THE MANUFACTURERS seems almost criminal. But who am I to say... I guess they are just making too much money to spend time on such folly as educating their consumers, much better to keep selling up the sizzle with more bells and whistles and let people find problems after they purchase, as this feeds the "upgrade" market, because all those complaints about service on forums are relatively meaningless compared with the potential loss of revenues if they alert customers that their $1,000+ receivers may be sub-par in crucial areas!
to answer that question it's due to not knowing what components are coming in and going out. Then also there are many different ways to process a signal, and depending on personal preferance one might look better or worse than another. Some people like the soft analog look, where are others like a sharper digital. Generally the video source is the one doing the processing, so the receivers don't do much processing. Plus good video processing usually comes in a more expensive package.
games back on got to go watch
Anonymous
Posted on
I am in the same as Peter Pan with a twist. I am looking at the 61" Pioneer plasma (Elite or regular model) and have not decided on an AV receiver, DVD player or front speakers. I have Polk rear in-wall and a Martin Logan sub. What would you suggest for the receiver, fronts/center and DVD? The Denon 3806 sounds good but is pricey. Any others? What about the other components/speakers? Any suggestions?
The new JVC RX-D402B (black) or RX-D401S (silver) fit all your requirements and are much cheaper than Denon or Yamaha alternatives (JVC = about $400 @ e-tronics.com). I just upgraded to one solely for the HDMI capabilities - it works flawlessly and implements HDMI 1.1 so all HDMI features actually work.
I second Kelly's comments. After much study I've decided the JVC RX-D402B is the best bang for the buck, and have just ordered one to use with my JVC 61" D-ILA TV. I too am tired of explaining to "she who must be obeyed" about having to turn on both the TV and receiver and coordinate the inputs.
Anonymous
Posted on
Tommy,
Perhaps you will have better luck with your RX-D402B than I have had with mine. I have a Samsung DVD-VR325 upconverting DVD recorder and have had significant issues with the receiver losing "lock" on the HDMI. Switching from movie back to disc menu usually results in a complete loss of audio and snow on the TV. After a call to JVC, I got a bs story about it only working with HDMI ver 1.1. I just got off the phone with Samsung who assured me they are HDMI Compliant. In that I had the same failure in the receiver simply changing channels on my DishDVR 942, I am definately suspecting the receiver.
Just thought I would share my frustration with the world at large...
I would suggest rearranging your budget to upgrade your speakers. The Denon is nice but a less expensive 5.1 solution would allow you to upgrade your speakers.
Paradigm, Polk, B&W, Klipsch, and others all make speakers that would your system complete. Video switching would be nice but I think speakers should be your priority. Receivers come and go as technology changes but quality speakers will be with you a long time. I suggest a 4 or 5:1 price ratio between speakers and the receiver.
I prefer front projection for the larger picture for less money per inch. Just mentioned it if you have not considered it.
