HDMI or no HDMI, what do you think??

mr_concrete_1

I am in the market for a replacment reciever for my current unit. One feature that I am considering is whether or not the new unit should have HDMI inputs/output. I would have at least 2 or 3 HDMI inputs from various devices like digital cable, and blue-ray. I would then use the HDMI output to get signal to my 55" DLP. Is there any significant advantage other than convienece to use HDMI for these uses??

Any other thoughts would be appreciated.

kawizx9r

Depends on your bluray player...it could be cheaper to stick with HDMI.

Some people use older receivers/processors that aren't equipped with HDMI but rather 5.1+ analog inputs. Pair it with a bluray player that's capable of internally decoding the new formats and send it out via analog outs and you're set. Some would even prefer this method because they can use upgraded interconnects.

Choice is yours really.

I'd go with an older, higher-end processor and grab the new upcoming Oppo BDP-93 if it were me.

That or I'd purchase another Pioneer BDP-51FD, just sold mine but it was one hell of a player!

nguyendot

I'd go HDMI - the convenience is nice. My NR807 Onkyo is on the way....

Zeros

I agree, if you can go HDMI, do it (in my opinion, of course)

You wont be able to process the HD audio tracks without HDMI (DTS-HD, True-HD, etc.)

leroyjr1

HDMI all the way. HT audio is so much better over hdmi and you will get an outstanding picture as well. Don't know if your TV is 1080p or not but the only way to get that signal is over hdmi or if you have a avr that'll upconvert it.

kawizx9r

Zeros wrote: »

You wont be able to process the HD audio tracks without HDMI (DTS-HD, True-HD, etc.)

Not true at all, read what I said up above.

leroyjr1 wrote: »

HDMI all the way. HT audio is so much better over hdmi and you will get an outstanding picture as well. Don't know if your TV is 1080p or not but the only way to get that signal is over hdmi or if you have a avr that'll upconvert it.

True about the picture portion, forgot to mention that. If the OP would go with a non-hdmi receiver, he can still go from player to TV via HDMI for picture+sound. If he doesn't want to listen to the TV, mute the television and use the surround sound (that's hooked up via analog interconnects).

I like HDMI though for the convenience.

leroyjr1

The HD audio formats sound better thru hdmi vs analog. Night and day difference.

kawizx9r

leroyjr1 wrote: »

The HD audio formats sound better thru hdmi vs analog. Night and day difference.

Really?

I thought that'd depend on the components being used. Not all receivers+bdp's sound the same.

Great sounding player (internally decodes) and sends out to non-hdmi receiver = great sound if good cables are used?

Great sounding player (sends digital signal out) to HDMI equipped receiver (AVR now decodes it) = not as good sound cause the AVR doesn't have as good DACs?

I haven't owned many players to say which one sounds better or worse, same for receivers but I have messed with a few belonging to others and have noticed differences. Sometimes HDMI sounded better, other times the analog did.

WilliamM2

kawizx9r wrote: »

Really?

I thought that'd depend on the components being used. Not all receivers+bdp's sound the same.

Great sounding player (internally decodes) and sends out to non-hdmi receiver = great sound if good cables are used?

In general, receivers and pre/pros have much better bass management than players. Most players don't have many options, some have fixed crossover points, and they are almost always global settings.

pitdogg2

I would go HDMI less cables and much easier, that being said it seems that the manufactures have decided to dump HDMI and go with an RJ45 type of cable. The reason being is that most homes and Apt's are already filled with cat type of cable and it is much easier to move data longer distances with cat than HDMI and one other reason is that it seems that HDMI connections are the main repair of late. I read this in one of the many mags out there for HT. This may not happen for a few years but it's nice to see them looking ahead and to use something most houses are already wired with.

nguyendot

pitdogg2 wrote: »

I would go HDMI less cables and much easier, that being said it seems that the manufactures have decided to dump HDMI and go with an RJ45 type of cable. The reason being is that most homes and Apt's are already filled with cat type of cable and it is much easier to move data longer distances with cat than HDMI and one other reason is that it seems that HDMI connections are the main repair of late. I read this in one of the many mags out there for HT. This may not happen for a few years but it's nice to see them looking ahead and to use something most houses are already wired with.

Everything can be run over cat5/6 with a Balun, just about. HDMI, vga, you name it can be run over cat5 already.

It is doubtful they will move directly over to that connector though....

Zeros

kawizx9r wrote: »

Not true at all, read what I said up above.

I knew someone would bring up the analog thing. I just didn't feel like explaining it.

mr_concrete_1

Thank you for everyones input. It was valuable in my decision making process. I eneded up with one of the refurb HK 254's from the Harmon E-site with HDMI. I cant wait to get it and see what impact the HDMI makes.

Thanks again.

nguyendot

mr_concrete_1 wrote: »

Thank you for everyones input. It was valuable in my decision making process. I eneded up with one of the refurb HK 254's from the Harmon E-site with HDMI. I cant wait to get it and see what impact the HDMI makes.

Thanks again.

Sound quality wise that receiver is awesome. I like the on screen overlay menu.

It has HDMI handshake issues though. You'll see what I mean when you start to use it. Even a firmware update won't fix it (that is, if you can even get it done).

mr_concrete_1

I was hoping having gotten it from the Harmon Audio folks that the firmware issue would have been taken care of by them. Am I making a bad assumption??

nguyendot

mr_concrete_1 wrote: »

I was hoping having gotten it from the Harmon Audio folks that the firmware issue would have been taken care of by them. Am I making a bad assumption??

That is not an issue that can be corrected. The most they can do is update the firmware to latest.... It's a combination of the HDMI chip they use and the software. It's an old model, they aren't going to put any fixes out for it.

Google the AVR254. It's all over the avsforums (there is an entire thread for this receiver and the AVR354 as well).

I currently own this receiver, and have moved it to the bedroom. I didn't want it running my main rig anymore because of the HDMI issues.

All in all, I like it, but the handshake issues are abysmal.

mr_concrete_1

What happens with the HDMI handshake?? Is it slow or noisey or does it not work at all??

nguyendot

It won't sync, it'll go out of sync, it will give a blank screen, you'll get snow, you won't get any connection at all.

It's all random.

Seriously, google this model on the avsforums.

mr_concrete_1

I am currently using component video in / out's , If I were to continue to use component with the 254 as either in or out do you think the issues could be lessened??? If so, how much video quality will I sacrifice??

tonyb

Componant will give you 1080i, HDMI will give you the full 1080p. If you ever get a bluray player, hdmi is the way to go.

mr_concrete_1

I am giving my kids a PS3 for chirstmas. I read that there are known issues between the PS3 and my new HK 254. Should I consider a stand alone blue ray for movies rather than using the PS3 as I had planned??

tonyb

mr_concrete_1 wrote: »

I am giving my kids a PS3 for chirstmas. I read that there are known issues between the PS3 and my new HK 254. Should I consider a stand alone blue ray for movies rather than using the PS3 as I had planned??

Kinda defeats the purpose, no? Wouldn't it be more logical to get a different avr ?

Whats the point in getting bluray if you can't take advantage of the 1080p picture by using componant connections ? Or the audio for that matter.

mr_concrete_1

What I was getting at was getting a second blue ray that doesnt have the known compatabiliy issues with is AVR and hooking it up via HDMI in order to utilize all the features that I may not be able to with the PS3.

tonyb

mr_concrete_1 wrote: »

What I was getting at was getting a second blue ray that doesnt have the known compatabiliy issues with is AVR and hooking it up via HDMI in order to utilize all the features that I may not be able to with the PS3.

I understand, but I think the complaints were with the receiver,not the PS3.

Try it, basic bluray players are pretty cheap these days. Just seems like a waste since the PS3 is a pretty good bluray player on it's own.

ViperZ

Didn't read the whole thread, but I've never head any syncing problems between my Onkyo TX-SR805 and 360/ps3/ota receiver/toshiba hd-xa2 and a bunch of blu-rays players. Same goes for the output to TV (I think my old LG TV lost sync twice, but I hated that TV anyway; never had problems with Sony or Panasonic).
HDMI gives you the option of running uncompressed sound formats (the only other option to get this sound is through 6 analog cables, which makes a mess if you want to start switching using analog switch). Also, as already mentioned, you can have 1080p signal, and 1080p upconverted signal via HDMI.

ViperZ

tonyb wrote: »

Kinda defeats the purpose, no? Wouldn't it be more logical to get a different avr ?

Whats the point in getting bluray if you can't take advantage of the 1080p picture by using componant connections ? Or the audio for that matter.

IMHO, sell the HK. I was a big fan of HK, until my last HK died less than a month after warranty expired (1 year) and the repair was going to cost over $300.