Sony CT-150 vs Vizio VHT210 vs JVC TH-BA1,,,and others,, my at home shoot-out's - Page 2

i have a similar setup to this - cable box, standalone bluray, and a PS3. i want the simplest setup possible, with the least amount of remote switching. given that Sony has a HDMI repeater, it would probably be better in terms of connecting all components and getting full sound. however, ive read from your review that the sony remote and menu system is cluttered. is JVC really the best bet? i would connect BR and Cable Box via optical to JVC, and use your suggestion to keep PS3 via hdmi to tv, and then use RCA to connect TV to JVC.

if you don't mind spending alittle more .. yamaha s400 might be it

What was the model of the yamaha that you reviewed?

Perhaps I should have said model number"s". You have answered my question. Thanks.

The HT-CT150 sounds great. Once I return it, I may test out the VHT210 when it becomes available. The HT-CT150 seems like it'll be hard to beat.

My Blu-Ray player has Dolby Digital DTS-HDMA lit up. Whether or not this is being sent to the Sony HT-CT150 and being decoded is beyond me.

The HT-CT350 costs only little more, has an additonal driver for the center and more power which should equal less distortion even at low volume levels. That might be my purchsae. I did the math and the JVC has a 4.95 inch surface area while the Sony's surround drivers each has a 4.34 inch surface area. A 14% difference which isn't too bad. I literally have no clue if this makes a difference though, lol.

With lights you can't turn off, clunkier look and inability to test out, the JVC might not be an option.

Picture I found in Google image search:




Anyways, thanks for all the info davyo!

Do you think you'll be testing it out any time soon?

Ok thanks

Does anyone plan on testing/reviewing this unit?

I would like too but the price is what's keeping me away

After looking at the sony units, my mind has turned away from Sony and onto other options. The remote on the sony is just too much, and the receiver is in the Sub, so I can't hide it. The Yamaha is built in too, but it's no where near as bulky as the Sony sub and I'd be able to fit in on my entertainment stand.
The Yamaha seems like the only other HDMI option.
This is a serious question, will I notice any sound different in using Optical cables into the JVC, or will the sound be superior with a different HDMI unit. Is the JVC a good enough unit to not notice a difference?

I know Davyo raves on the JVC and it only has optical.

I have 1 week to make up my mind since I have a family member going to Buffalo hext weekend. It's between the JVC and the untested Yamaha.
Optical vs HDMI. $300 US plus whatever crossing the border charges (loss of cross border warranty), vs $600 Canadian at costco (yamaha) and can return it and have a warranty which I can use.

I'm so bad a making decisions.

The digital output, whether HDMI, optical, coax (does anyone still do coax) should be exactly the same. The 1's and 0's will not know the difference.

The only place I see HDMI being a plus is if you were looking for the simulated surround from the source output of multiple devices and using the soundbar for switching devices.

Being the lazy sort, I prefer to connect all of my devices to the TV and let the TV act as my switcher. I prefer to be able to customize the video options for each input as opposed to having my video the same for all inputs (ex. THX for Blu-Ray and DVD / Custom for Cable and OTA / Game for video games). Of course using the TV as a switcher means that the output to the soundbar will be Dolby Digital 2.1. Since all of the powered soundbars I have owned or encountered do simulated surround, this has never made a great deal of difference.

I did a test over the weekend with my current unit, Vizio VBS200 - last year's model, connecting my blu-ray player via optical to see if I could hear any difference via this setup vs. my normal setup directly through the TV and if there were differences, the results were so miniscule as to be hard to pin down. I have performed this same test in the past with Yamaha Sound Projectors and the Sony CT-100 with similar results. Since I don't have a true way to double-blind test this, I will not vouch for my personal results, but typically the results are skewed in the opposite direction when you know the state of the equipment you are testing.

I'm kind of used to having 2 switchers (1 on the tv and 2nd on the audio receiver). So basically if I run 2 wires from each device 1) via HDMI into the tv (for video), 2) via optical into the JVC I will get the same sound quality as running all the devices via HDMI into the Yamaha? That's assuming the units are similar quality.

I guess that way I can't lose video quality by running it into one system and then again into the tv. But I'll have many extra wires with the JVC, and less with the Yamaha.

I just wish someone tested that unit so my mind can be set at ease. hahaha

Davyo,

What is your recommendation for a soundbar with HDMI? I see Sony CT-350 was one of them, is there anything other than Sony you can recommend?

Thanks.

Davyo, have you hear the Samsung 450? I know it says 2.1 for that one and 4.1 for the JVC. Where is the extra 2.

Hey Big O!!
well hopefully you will make up your mind if you haven't yet read this....
http://www.avforums.com/forums/speak...-soundbar.html

See ya later

Bandwidth is the huge difference , i posted differences

Thanks,
I wish one of the people reviewing it actually tried other ones. But I have not read anything negative about it. The whole air surround makes me think it actually gives off a better surround then other units.

Y S400 - 250W total (50W x3, 6 ohms) per speaker, 100 W (3 ohms) sub.
JVC BA1 - 220W total (30W x3, 4 ohms) per speaker, 100 W (3 ohms) sub

In not tech guru, Is that a noticable difference? Would it give off better surround feel?

Also, to the JVC people, does it have a similar technology of Univolume as the Yamaha? Where if a commercial comes on at a higher volume it will do some sort of adjustments where the commercial won't blast as loud.

Since I have not heard the new Yamaha, I really could not comment on air-surround. I did own a Yamaha Digital Sound Projector, their upper end entries, for about three years. I was never totally satisfied with Yamaha's simulated surround modes and kept the unit as stereo 2.1 the majority of the time.

The power and impedence numbers from the two units mean absolutely zero. All home theater manufacturers post whatever numbers they are thinking about at the time. I am sure if someone could remove and measure the amplification units the true power would be somewhere between about two and five watts per channel. And that is absolutely enough power, if the speakers are efficient enough, and they are, to drive your neighbors insane. Because of the physical limitations of cabinet size and driver surface area, magnet, surround, driver construction etc., you are not going to be able to hear a battle scene at 110db volume as would be possible in a movie theater.

For all of you youngsters, remember before there were multi-plex theaters, there were these giant opera house style movie theaters in almost every large downtown in the country. These places were ornate and beautiful and had screens that would dwarf most of the larger theaters from today. And most of these theaters had sound that came from one loudspeaker placed behind the theater screen. This was usually a very large folded horn loudspeaker from Electro-Voice or Altec Lansing using a monstrous 18" to 30" woofer and a compression tweeter. This single speaker could produce enough sound to fill the auditorium and make you jump when you heard cannon fire in a movie like "Patton". And the beautiful little vacum tube amplifier that brought all of this sound to the audience would be rated at somewhere between 5 and 15 watts by todays standards.

All of this is to say, the only way to know which one of these units will sound best in your home, is to try the unit there. My former Yamaha YSP sounds much better in my son's smaller living room with walls in close proximity than it ever did in my home. He loves it and patiently (?) waits for dad to buy something else new so he can claim the hand-me-downs.

After more usage of the HT-CT150, I have to agree with davyo about the detail of the sound.

My TV speakers, which aren't the best, pick up sounds the soundbar just doesn't have. With baseball games it will miss a lot of the ambience noises like clanking and fans. It just doesn't have detail.



I'm very interested in the VHT210 as the cosmetics would have an OK fit with my setup.



Davyo, you said you liked the looks of the JVC TH-BA1, right?

Doesn't it stick out like a sore thumb?

daveyo, man, these bars don't decode hd audio so normally it is impossible to recommand setting the player to bitstream !!!!!!!!

i would agree however to do so if the audio tracks are SD versions. As these bars would probably decode them much better than inside the players....

i know you said bitstream was better in your case...but do you agree that it is not logical?

Actually, I was refering to TV listening. I really noticed it when watching a baseball game. With the TV, you could hear a lot more of the crowd and people making dinking noises with something metal, but with the soundbar, you couldn't.

I have it hooked up via optical, but do you think HDMI would help it any?

I haven't done much listening with the Blu-Ray player. Right away I thought it sounded really good, but I think that was mainly because it was easier on my ears.

The soundbar definetly sound less harsh than the TV which was a huge plus.

I see in the BA1 thread that, according to JVC, it has been discontinued...