Do I Need A New AV Receiver

Please Help:
I intend to buy an HDTV (Samsung LN46B750) and Blu-ray player (Panasonic DMP BD60), but I am wondering if I need to replace my old Kenwood VR-6060 AV Receiver (probably with the Onkyo TX-SR607).
I am currently very happy with my Kenwood, but it only has the previous generation CODECs (DD-EX and DTS-ES), and of course it has no HDMI connections. Since my only HD source will be the Blu-ray player, however, I plan to connect it directly to the HDTV via HDMI. So far so good (right?)
My questions are these:
1. Since the Blu-ray player has Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio onboard, is it possible to connect it in a way that will allow me to hear those new CODECs on my 6.1 audio system while still using my Kenwood, or must I have a contemporary AV Receiver with the new CODECs onboard?
2. If it will require a new receiver, in the opinion of those of you who have experience with the new CODECs versus the previous generation, are Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio a significant-enough improvement over DD-EX and DTS-ES to justify a new receiver? I vaguely remember reading in S&V magazine that they aren't that much of an improvement, if at all.

Thank you in advance for your help, and God bless.

Thanks Michael, but I need some clarification on terms:
Am I correct that lossless is Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD, and that by DD and DTS you are referring to DD-EX and DTS-ES?
Is the higher quality DD and DTS of Blu-ray attributable to the players, the Blu-ray discs, or both?
I understanding you to be saying that I wouldn't hear much of a difference, so I likely do not need a new receiver? Correct?

BTW, the Kenwood does have multi-channel analog inputs, although I have never utilized them.

So ... your sister and brother in law felt the HK AVR 520 was a big improvement over the Onkyo 607, or vice versa?
BTW, great quote by Sir Winston.

To tell you true, in addition to the Kenwood 6060, my 6.1 HT system consists of five BIC DV52si speakers with a BIC DV52CSI center, and a Hsu VTF-3 MK3 sub, and I honestly don't know how it could sound better - much less significantly better. It puts the best movie theater experience I have ever had to shame. Some of you may have difficulty believing that, but I only wish you could be here so I could prove it.

In short, that old Kenwood is a GREAT receiver!

No offense, but I think that, for a variety of reasons, we audio and videophiles often tend to get caught up in hype, in marketing, in brands, and in thinking that owning the latest equipment is a must.

My sincere thanks to all of you, and especially to Easyaspie, for your input. I have decided to keep the Kenwood.

I couldn't agree more. I only wish there weren't so many Neville Chamberlains around today. I very much fear they will be the death of us all! But that's politics, and this is not the venue, so 'nuff said.

Good point, Defcon. I guess hope springs eternal, eh? However, there are some, like Michael and Easyaspie, who have indicated that the difference in sound offered by the new codecs will be minimal.

I hear you Knucklehead, loud and clear. See my post on 9-25.

My sincere thanks again to all of you who took the time and trouble to respond.

Whether or not you know electronics I cannot say, but your knowledge of history is sorely lacking. Hitler was the warmonger, Chamberlain and the rest of his liberal ilk encouraged and emboldened him with their weakness, and Churchill was one of the primary war-enders.

"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." George Santayana

Anyone who looks at the inconclusive way this country is waging the war against Islamic extremism, and reacting to Iran and Ahdaminejad, can clearly see that history is being repeated. Anyone who doubts that is either blind, or living in La-La-Land.