Well the 4306 and above do get the highest marks for video. If your setting the video for pass through it could never be better than if you were going in straight to your display. I mena with the Yamaha did you never compare this?
-
Get an exclusive sneak peek into our new project. >>> Click Here
-
Our native mobile app has a new name: Fora Communities. Learn more.
Wasn't expecting that at all
I just unboxed and hooked up my new Denon 5805mk2 two days ago and am flabergasted as the increase in video detail. I have a panny 42px600, dvd1920 (soon to be upgraded to 3930ci), Hughs hr10250, and all blue jeans HDMI. I replaced a Yamaha RXV2600 which I always thought looked and sounded great, and was expecting an audio upgrade (which was ample), but was shocked at the difference in video.
Even with everything set to through on the big guy, the difference in video noise, color saturation, and fringing was immediately apparent. Even my 11 yo step daughter noticed and commented on the difference. This was a direct swap out, nothing else changed.
I thought video on the 2600 was good, I was wrong. Just passing it along.
BTW. Before I get the "why spend $7000 on a receiver" bit, I got it free. I'm also using all 10 channels running Kef 201's up front tri amped, 202 center biamped and surrounds normal wired with 2 supercube 3's. All in all, it sounds pretty darn good. Looks pretty cool too.
Even with everything set to through on the big guy, the difference in video noise, color saturation, and fringing was immediately apparent. Even my 11 yo step daughter noticed and commented on the difference. This was a direct swap out, nothing else changed.
I thought video on the 2600 was good, I was wrong. Just passing it along.
BTW. Before I get the "why spend $7000 on a receiver" bit, I got it free. I'm also using all 10 channels running Kef 201's up front tri amped, 202 center biamped and surrounds normal wired with 2 supercube 3's. All in all, it sounds pretty darn good. Looks pretty cool too.
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Nope, always switched through the Yamaha, I have all the gear mounted 30+ feet away in a closet. It's not like the Yamaha was glaringly bad, I've seen dozens hooked up to many different display types. But the difference was unbelievable.
What supprised me was the 2600 always got top marks for its handling of video too.
What supprised me was the 2600 always got top marks for its handling of video too.
Not really, if you're talking about deinterlacing.
From the audioholics review of the 2600:
"We were a little surprised by the results of the HQV Benchmark scores, but not terribly so. Yamaha is not utilizing a reference quality scaler or deinterlacing chip in the RX-V2600, so it's meager score of 28 shows what happens if you can't have your cake and eat it too (provide upconversion and simultaneous switching, etc). While it's easy to chastise this performance, I do not believe that Yamaha could have done much better and continued to provide their current level of features (upconversion, scaling and deinterlacing with simultaneous outputs) without significantly increasing the cost of this product.
What you'll want to do with the Yamaha RX-V2600 is feed it progressive scan input, or better yet HDMI from a good upconverting DVD player, and allow it to deinterlace and upconvert/scale 480i inputs from sources like VHS players and legacy gaming systems. "
The 4306 does MUCH better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hastur /forum/post/0
What supprised me was the 2600 always got top marks for its handling of video too.
Not really, if you're talking about deinterlacing.
From the audioholics review of the 2600:
"We were a little surprised by the results of the HQV Benchmark scores, but not terribly so. Yamaha is not utilizing a reference quality scaler or deinterlacing chip in the RX-V2600, so it's meager score of 28 shows what happens if you can't have your cake and eat it too (provide upconversion and simultaneous switching, etc). While it's easy to chastise this performance, I do not believe that Yamaha could have done much better and continued to provide their current level of features (upconversion, scaling and deinterlacing with simultaneous outputs) without significantly increasing the cost of this product.
What you'll want to do with the Yamaha RX-V2600 is feed it progressive scan input, or better yet HDMI from a good upconverting DVD player, and allow it to deinterlace and upconvert/scale 480i inputs from sources like VHS players and legacy gaming systems. "
The 4306 does MUCH better.
Nope, no deinterlacing. The Yamaha wasn't scaling in my systeme either, just switching. The 1920 was outputing 1080i or 720p and so was the HR10250. Same as it is now with the 5805. No scaling or other functions being applied. It did scale when I hooked up a PS2 occationally for the kids though.
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
AVS Forum
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
WilliamR
940 Replies
BASSAHOLIC
514 Replies
bass addict
401 Replies
Recommended Communities
