Need a receiver recomendation

[orlzx6r]

I'm looking to upgrade my old JVC receiver with something that supports HDMI.

The only requirement is I need a HDMI pass through (maybe not the correct terminology) to allow the HDMI signal to get to the TV without using the receiver as I don't always want surround sound and just be able to use the built in TV speakers.

I'm undecided on how much to spend but will most likely not use it much.

Current speaker setup is a passive sub with speaker level inputs with built in crossover to the front left and right speakers, a center channel and two surround speakers. Not looking to upgrade the speakers now, may later.

Any recommendations?

 

[Rand]

my solution was to use the TV out to pass sound back to the receiver.. no reason you need hdmi pass through.

most newer tv's support toslink(fiber optic)

It also simplifies matters when you have 3-4 input devices they all goto tv.. tv passes sound to receiver = win.

 

[Bluestream]

I have a Pioneer Elite, and recommend them. Avoid the cheap made i China/Singapore units

 

[wander2039]

We have a Denon AVR-590 with basically the same setup speaker wise as you. Can't remember what we paid for it thought it was less that $200 but must of been closer to $350. No complaints even with the old Phillips speakers. Sounds good with enough bass to vibrate the sofa. It does the hdmi pass-through without issue.

 

[JavierG]

Depends on your price range. Top name brand manufacturers that are readily available everywhere include Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer. I currently use a Yamaha that I bought 3 years ago. In other words, it was obsolete 6 months later.

My next receiver will probably be an NAD or one from Cambridge Audio.

 

[orlzx6r]

Thanks for the input, forgot about using a toslink cable for audio.

I'm looking at the Denon AVR-1712 or the Yamaha RX-V471.

Any feedback on those units?

 

[MrHorspwer]

Originally Posted By: Rand
my solution was to use the TV out to pass sound back to the receiver.. no reason you need hdmi pass through.

most newer tv's support toslink(fiber optic)

It also simplifies matters when you have 3-4 input devices they all goto tv.. tv passes sound to receiver = win.


Unfortunately, televisions strip any Dolby encoding out of the audio when used in a pass-thru function. It will pass as a PCM stream, but it will only be two-channel stereo.

This is an intentional limitation of HDCP and the HDMI protocols because the television is not the audio *source* in cases where it is only playing pass-thru on audio.

I suppose this is an acceptable solution if you're only concerned about 2-channel audio or a simulated surround effect based on a 2-channel signal (like Dolby Pro Logic IIx). If you want a true 5.1 stream, you need to go straight from the source to the receiver for processing.

As for the OP, I may be mistaken, but HDMI switching in receivers is active switching, not passive, and requires the receiver to be ON for switching to function. If the receiver is already powered up, why would you ever want to listen to audio through the television instead of the theater system?

 

[JHZR2]

I like my yamaha stuff.

Is HDMI really better picture than component? I've heard so many bad things about its intentional limitations, not sure I'd want use it if I could get same/better quality the old fashioned way.

HDMI makes it easy for people to connect stuff, but if it castrates the connectivity, then what's the point?

 

[MrHorspwer]

The "intentional limitations" are not unique to HDMI. It is a function of HDCP. DVI and DisplayPort also support HDCP and it's "limitations".

HDCP was implementated to reduce piracy by preventing people from "recording" content while it is being played, like you could do with a VCR and an analog recordings. Pretty much all digital video has some type of DRM, usually in the form of some type of encryption like CSS. Per the DMCA, it is illegal to circumvent copyright protection to copy a work.

To circumvent the DRM, another way of copying a work is to intercept the signal when it's being passed between two devices. A so-called "man in the middle" approach. HDCP seeks to prevent this by requiring a type of handshake between legitimate devices. Without the handshake, audio and video doesn't change hands. Things get messy when you start passing signals.

HDMI switching is easy. The source (a BRD player) and the receiver are both HDCP compliant devices. The receiver and the television are also both HDCP compliant devices. Everybody is happy. When you change formats, HDMI into television and toslink out, you lose your HDCP protection because toslink doesn't support HDCP. Instead of just eliminating the signal, the pass-thru is allowed, but at a reduced function. In this case, two channel stereo.

It all works fine when you're using devices that were designed to work together. If you're trying to intercept and steal the signal to circumvent copyright, it causes a problem. If you're trying to legally work outside the realm of HDCP, which is becoming less and less common since nearly everything recent is using HDMI, you have to accept some limitations.

Is HDMI better than component? Yes and no. Component video has the bandwidth to pass a 1080p signal. Unfortunately, many BRD players downconvert the signal to 720p/1080i when using component video. Component video is also an analog signal and is much more prone to interference. Obviously, component video is only a video signal, so audio requires a separate connector. None of the commercially available S/PDIF interconnects will handle the highest lossless audio from Dolby and DTS. So, yes, it can technically produce a comparable picture but it can't match HDMI in it's overall package.

 

[Malo83]

Originally Posted By: Bluestream
I have a Pioneer Elite, and recommend them. Avoid the cheap made i China/Singapore units

X2 on the Pioneer Elite.

 

[doitmyself]

Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
As for the OP, I may be mistaken, but HDMI switching in receivers is active switching, not passive, and requires the receiver to be ON for switching to function. If the receiver is already powered up, why would you ever want to listen to audio through the television instead of the theater system?


I just bought a Denon 1612 ($125 open box return, day after Christmas at Best Buy) and according to my info (not tried yet), the Denons have HDMI pass through described as such:

" HDMI Standby Passthrough: This feature allows you to pass HDMI connected sources only through the AVR (when in Standby) to the TV. Set HDMI Control to ON (factory default is OFF) and set the Standby Source to either LAST (default) or to a specific HDMI jack # (eg. that the cable/sat box is connected to)."

An example would be if he wanted to watch a news channel via his satellite box just with the TV speakers, the signal would pass through his AVR in off/standby mode and show up on the TV.

OP, The AVS forum has some great Denon support. Here's some links:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1334369#E9
http://batpigworld.com/

The 1712 is a great unit and was on my wish list, but I couldn't turn down the 1612 deal and I can make it work for my modest home theater setup.

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2


Is HDMI really better picture than component?


Yes, from what I can tell, it really is the better choice. My 65inch Sharp LCD gives a very good picture. I can hook up both HDMI and Component from my higher end Samsung BRD player. Then switch inputs.

Interestingly enough, there is a significant accuracy difference. Especially easy to notice at the corners of the screen. But, clearly, text is considerably sharper and more accurate.

I'm not saying component is junk. Just that HDMI is visually better.

 

[2Fast4U]

Yamaha makes some great recievers.