AVS Forum banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I posted this also in the Audio forum, as I suspect that the answer may depend on whether audio or video is more important.


I have a Satellite box, a Blu-Ray and an Apple TV.


I'm currently of the mind set that it's better to take each device's HDMI to the TV set, and then route audio back to the receiver. My thinking is that the video will be better from each of these if there is nothing in between the source device and the TV. I do know that many A/V receivers these days have video processing, but can they actually improve video quality over the source? Pioneer uses the Marvell QDeo, and Yamaha also boasts video upscaling, etc. But in truth, do these things really help or hurt the video?


Another post I came across stated that on the TV, a person will want different calibration settings for Sat and Blu-Ray, for example. If all signals are routed through an AV receiver, with only one output going to the TV, this is not possible.


On the other hand, I'm from the old school where we used to route everything through the receiver (well, often not the TV itself, but the CD player, the turntable, the cassette machine, etc).


I have purchased a Sony HX850 (a tremendous set) and want to make sure I'm getting the most out of all this great equipment.


Any comments or thoughts will be greatly appreciated!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,227 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyvn  /t/1469137/is-it-better-to-route-de...er-or-directly-to-the-tv-itself#post_23225704


I posted this also in the Audio forum, as I suspect that the answer may depend on whether audio or video is more important.


I have a Satellite box, a Blu-Ray and an Apple TV.


I'm currently of the mind set that it's better to take each device's HDMI to the TV set, and then route audio back to the receiver. My thinking is that the video will be better from each of these if there is nothing in between the source device and the TV. I do know that many A/V receivers these days have video processing, but can they actually improve video quality over the source? Pioneer uses the Marvell QDeo, and Yamaha also boasts video upscaling, etc. But in truth, do these things really help or hurt the video?


Another post I came across stated that on the TV, a person will want different calibration settings for Sat and Blu-Ray, for example. If all signals are routed through an AV receiver, with only one output going to the TV, this is not possible.


On the other hand, I'm from the old school where we used to route everything through the receiver (well, often not the TV itself, but the CD player, the turntable, the cassette machine, etc).


I have purchased a Sony HX850 (a tremendous set) and want to make sure I'm getting the most out of all this great equipment.


Any comments or thoughts will be greatly appreciated!

If you take output from your devices to the TV then, back to the receiver, your blu-ray player will not pass Dolby TrueHD or DTS Master Audio to your receiver from your television. Don't know if that is important to you or not. Plus, there are a boatload of cables in that configuration. A cleaner installation takes all cables to the receiver, then one cable to your television. Better receivers just pass the signal from your devices through without stepping on the picture quality.


Upscaling is usually applied to low-def sources like VHS or standard def DVD, if you don't have an upconverting DVD player.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,701 Posts
I have all my devices routed through the AVR and there is no degradation in picture quality. It also makes switching between sources much easier. I believe that's why they are called Audio Video Receivers since that's what they are meant to be used for. As far as different picture mode calibrations are concerned, if your set is calibrated properly, except maybe for gaming, you'll probably get the best results in the movie or cinema mode with most sources. Also, most BD players have their own picture controls if you feel you need to do some tweaking when playing replicated formats as opposed to broadcasts.




Ian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,232 Posts
I don't quite agree. I've had my display pro calibrated and was very happy with the image. I later added a decent AVR and routed everything through it. After a few months I felt my display just didn't look as good as I recalled. Turned off ALL processing in my AVR and the picture was back to stunning. Stuff is still routed through the AVR but no onscreen display or video adjustments. The difference is subtle but there for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,701 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt L  /t/1469137/is-it-better-to-route-de...-directly-to-the-tv-itself/0_50#post_23227469


I don't quite agree. I've had my display pro calibrated and was very happy with the image. I later added a decent AVR and routed everything through it. After a few months I felt my display just didn't look as good as I recalled. Turned off ALL processing in my AVR and the picture was back to stunning. Stuff is still routed through the AVR but no onscreen display or video adjustments. The difference is subtle but there for me.

I agree. My reference was to using the AVR for switching and the cinema/movie mode on the TV. My AVR just does pass through. No processing.




Ian
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top