[GEH]

My brother had his HT set up by a "consultant" who just ran everything into his Denon HT receiver with only one component cable running to the monitor. This seems like a pretty easy way of doing things. Can you guys enlighten me or point me to some threads where this has been discussed? My brother's system consists of DVD, HD cable box, VCR and a Denon 2805(?) home theater system. He also has a Phillips pronto programmed to control everything. Thanks


GEH

 

[Marissadad]

I did the same thing with my Yamaha and I tried the signal with and without the receiver and saw no difference in PQ. It sure simplifies matters doing it this way.

 

[dusty144]

I think it depends on the set. Depending on the inputs you use the color settings, digital processing, deinterlacing, presets, etc vary.


For some it can be a good solution for others not so good.

 

[buellwinkle]

If you did it that way and the VCR only worked through Composite for example, would it still output to through the Component cable? I ask because the component is HD, at least 480P and VCR is not, don't even know if the TV can handle the difference, I know my RPTV has seperate HD component from SD component.

 

[lacv75]

Handling composites through components depend on the HT receiver more than any other thing...the TV has to do some work to decode and show the image, that's true, but the real catch here is finding a good A/V receiver that really handles flawlessly the upconversion from composite and S-video to component cables...


The AV receivers are findable, however they are ussually more expensive than others so you really have to balance if it is convenient for you to pay a premium for a nice receiver with a decent upconverter and use one cable or if it's better to run individual cables to your display (and the cables have their costs too...) and get a cheaper receiver.


Good luck!

 

[jcpzero]

Quote:

Originally posted by GEH My brother had his HT set up by a "consultant" who just ran everything into his Denon HT receiver with only one component cable running to the monitor.

Most likely the Denon has upscaling capability, so for that receiver it is definitely a viable option. I would compare the picture quality runing everything individually vs through the receiver as a sanity check.


The only downside I see to running everything through the receiver is each source may require different picture settings. Most TVs remember settings based on video input. When using a receiver you only have the one video input. So does one picture setting work for all the devices? A fellow avs member pointed out that some TVs have additonal settings that can be saved for a single input: Standard, Dynamic, Theater, Video game (choices depend on brand of TV). So if you TV supports this, it is a nifty trick to help out if you use the receiver for switching.


The other school of thought is to run each device video directly to the TV and only use the audio output to the receiver.


JCPZero

 

[bgbem]

To say that the Denon upscales or upconverts the composite signal wouldn't be quite accurate. It transcodes the signal. The quality of the signal would still be the quality of the composite signal. It just allows it to be carried over a component cable to simplify your hookup.

 

[optivity]

I own a middle of the road Onkyo 6 channel receiver and determined the picture quality (especially color rendering) was better when I ran the component cables directly from the STB to the TV, rather than through the HT receiver. I guess as the other posters on this thread assert, it depends on the quality of your receiver. I would try both connections to see if there is any noticeable difference.

 

[billd]

This kind of setup appeals to me as I'm trying to minimalize the amount of wires going through the wall.


I've been giving a lot of thought to installation recently and would rather purchase a new receiver (which I have to do anyway) than a blade with extensive behind the wall wiring (which isn't easy to hook add'l stuff up to)


Does anybody have a recommendation for a specific HT receiver which would work with the Panny HD 7UY and three component connections?

 

[R Harkness]

Yes, HT recievers can make life more convenient.


I use mine to "transcode" my S-Video signal to component so that it can be sent to my component input. (That's from my cable box).


In theory you should be able to find a receiver that passes a video signal with no visible degradation. In practice, it can be hit or miss.


I own the Pioneer 49TX Ultra 2 THX receiver. It was their flagship receiver two years ago and boasted "transparent video switching" for all component signals - DVD and Hi-Def. It met the THX standards for passing such signals supposedly without visible degradation.


However, in practice I do see a mild softening of the DVD and Hi-Def signals when passed through the receiver. Others who own it have seen the same (while still others are perfectly happy with video signals through the receiver). Because I'm so picky I went with a high-bandwidth video switcher for my progressive DVD images and Hi-Def. I can not see any degradation with this switcher (Inday.com)

 

[mdt178]

In theory, a pure digital connection is superior to another that has a D/A conversion (done by your typical HT receiver, unless you get a pure digital receiver). For devices with DVI/HDMI output such as DVD players and HD receivers, preserving the digital path throughout WILL offer superior PQ.

If you still want to route everything through your receiver, then I'd suggest one with Faroudja's DCDi Processing, such as an HK 7300 (I had a chance to demo this, and it was awesome) or a Yamaha Z9 or Denon 5805. They are all flagships for their respective companies, so one can expect top performance and high premium.

All modern midrange HT receiver will offer at least 3 component inputs. Video performance will not be noticable. The difference between them will be in audio: some have more features, some will work with your speakers better than the others,...

Check out the Audio/Receiver forum. I'm sure someone there will suggest that you go separates

 

[Greywall]

In attempting to get the best possible PQ from my DirecTivo SD over s-video, I determined a direct connect yeilded more detail than one through my Yamaha receiver.


I saw more shadow tansition gradients on direct connect. When signal was routed through the reciever, I would lose subtle grayscale steps in the shadow (hope I'm using the right terms to describe this, still quite a newbie).


For sanity check, I had my wife do a comparison and went with what she considered the better PQ. Turned out to be direct connect.


This is unfortunate, I wanted to use the reciever to switch between DirecTivo and a PS2. The search continues...

 

[billd]

I'm looking to run three component inputs into the receiver and connect a single component output to the monitor.


since there is no change from input/output, would i be in a better position with regards to PQ?


I have posted a similar question to the Receiver forum and we'll see what kind of responses I get. I am looking for mid-range receiver, not flagship, and am uncertain what that does to the PQ. I need three component inputs.


The Onkyo TS SR602 and Denon AVR 2105, 1905, and 1705 all seem to offer the video inputs I'm looking for. HK receivers only have 2 component inputs (in my price range) and same with NAD. I'm not looking for lots of gimmicky features (which I have now) like sound fields and extensive DSP.

 

[sleeks]

I purchased a Zektor component video/digital audio switch to reduce my in-wall wiring.


My Xbox, DVD player and STB go into the Zektor and one output from the zektor to the TV keeps wiring to a minimum.


I am using my receiver to switch composite video (VCR, CD PLAYER on screen display, and receiver on-screen display).


Therefore, I only have four video wires total running through the walls.


If you are happy with your current receiver this may be a good route. Depends on your budget, etc.

 

[vman41]

Quote:

Originally posted by bgbem To say that the Denon upscales or upconverts the composite signal wouldn't be quite accurate. It transcodes the signal. The quality of the signal would still be the quality of the composite signal. It just allows it to be carried over a component cable to simplify your hookup.

The 'transcode' requires a separation filter and the TV may well have a more elaborate and/or better quality filter (e.g. 3D adaptive) than the receiver. In that case, I'd rather feed the composite signal to the TV.