|
New member Username: AnujitdPost Number: 8 Registered: Jan-07 | Hi Guys, I am quite new to the world of hometheaters, and hopefully you can help I have a sony HD ready 32" LCD ( 1366X768) My choices of AV receivers are - - Denon 2307 - which has HDMI uponversion - Denon 1907 If I go for the 2307, I am planning on using component connectors between my DVD ( not HD), and the receiver...and HDMI between the receiver and the TV If I go for the 1907, which does not have a HDMI in/out, I would probably connect the TV to the DVD directly using component cables. The 2307 is about $250 more expensive, and I was wondering if the HDMI would be to a great advantage considering I do not have a HD DVD. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_sColumbus, Ohio US Post Number: 1583 Registered: Feb-04 | The question here is whether you will ever own a blue laser HD player. If yes then maybe the 2307 would be worth the extra expense. Also with the 2307 you're buying a little more head room in the amp section. There's no reason to incorporate HDMI just for the sake of having it. There should not be any difference between the picture generated by your DVD player on the TV's HDMI input or its component input. |
|
New member Username: AnujitdPost Number: 9 Registered: Jan-07 | Hi John, sorry, havent been around for a while Yes the HD / Blu ray DVD is part of the next phase of the setup...Right now I am trying to make up my mind regarding the amp..and how it would all sit together. I dont think I really know what 'upconversion' really is..If it only is converting component signal to HDMI and have 0% signal loss, with no difference in the picture quality, would it be necessary to route the cabling thru the amp? Maybe I could connect the TV and the HD DVD thru one HDMI cable..thoughts? |
|
Gold Member Username: John_sColumbus, Ohio US Post Number: 1593 Registered: Feb-04 | anujit, here's two reasons why you would want to hook up HDMI cable(s) through your receiver. First is for source switching convenience. It will not be uncommon in the future to be using the HDMI outputs from multiple video sources like a satellite receiver or cable box, and a disc player like an "upconverting" DVD player or an HD blue laser machine. So switching between those sources via the receiver makes more sense than switching between inputs on the TV because the receiver will use the audio signal to run your speakers while passing the video signal on to the display. There would be need for only one HDMI cable to the TV. This is especially true if the receiver is "upconverting" the analog video signals like the composite output of a VCR or the component output of a DVD player. So you could play an old tape on the VCR, for example, and see the image on the TV on the same HDMI input you use for everything else. Note that in this context the word 'upconvert' does not imply 'improvement'. The receiver is simply converting analog video, be it composite, S-video or component, "up" to its HDMI output (presumably with no signal degradation). Yes you could run the video from these devices directly to the TV, but then you would also have to run separate audio cables into the receiver. Then you would have to switch inputs on both the TV and the receiver. The second reason to use HDMI through the receiver is to take advantage of whatever audio signal is on the HDMI bitstream, again negating the need to run a separate audio cable into the receiver. The new HDMI version 1.3 system allows much greater bandwidth for both video and audio. For example, if an HD disc has higher quality audio codecs on it like Dolby Digital Plus or Dolby TrueHD, the receiver will be able to take advantage of those higher quality bitstreams. But this means the receiver has to be HDMI 1.3 capable and the Denon 2307 is not. I wouldn't worry too much about these new audio codecs however, because I suspect they will never become mainstream. It will take some top level audio gear, not to mention good ears to hear the difference anyway. In fairness, I should add that I have not heard these better audio codecs, so maybe they are worth paying attention to. So far, the only soon to be available HDMI 1.3 capable receivers are Onkyo TX-SR 605, and the Onkyo TX-SR 805. |
|
New member Username: AnujitdPost Number: 10 Registered: Jan-07 | Thanks John, I am definitely more enlightened now. It does make sense to go for a HDMI receiver..and I am also checking out the 605. the speakers I am planning to buy are the 5.1 Polk Monitor series M50 front, M30 rear, CS2 ( center) and PSW10 sub. I hear the Denon 2307 drives these quite efficiently and also has a bi-amping facility ( wherin i can connect the 2 free rear suround outs and drive into the fronts)..will the 605 also have this feature, and will it be able to drive my speakers as well as the Denon...or better? |
|
Gold Member Username: John_sColumbus, Ohio US Post Number: 1596 Registered: Feb-04 | anujit, I do not do specific speaker/receiver combination recommendations, mostly because I just don't have time to drive around town and listen to them. I am confident that the Polk speakers you're considering are worthy and will function very well in all but the largest rooms where high volume levels are required. I am also confident that you would be happy with either the Denon or Onkyo in general. The Onkyo have a reputation for having weak power supplies, which is partially due to their current limiting protection circuitry. This limiter kicks in (in 2 or 3 seconds) when all channels are required to output anything over 55 watts continuously and simultaneously. This is not a real world happenstance and will be seen only on the test bench. So on paper, Onkyo always looks weak compared to other receivers in its price class. I do not think Onkyo has the bi-amp feature and that is, I think, a definite plus in Denon's favor. |
|
Bronze Member Username: AnujitdPost Number: 11 Registered: Jan-07 | Thanks for everything man! |