• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Possibly getting a new receiver. Would I need HDMI switching?

J

jtvang125

Diamond Member
My hdtv has 2 hdmi inputs on Video 6 and 7. My DVD changer is hooked via component straight to the tv (video 4) because my current receiver does not do component switching. I also have a media player that plays dvd iso's, divx and hidef movie files, and music hooked up to one of the hdmi on the tv. I am planning on selling the changer and get a hd-dvd player and hook that up to the remaining hdmi. I don't have cable at the moment but that could be an option later on.

Can someone tell me why or why I shouldn't need a receiver with hdmi switching?
 
Originally posted by: jtvang125
My hdtv has 2 hdmi inputs on Video 6 and 7. My DVD changer is hooked via component straight to the tv (video 4) because my current receiver does not do component switching. I also have a media player that plays dvd iso's, divx and hidef movie files, and music hooked up to one of the hdmi on the tv. I am planning on selling the changer and get a hd-dvd player and hook that up to the remaining hdmi. I don't have cable at the moment but that could be an option later on.

Can someone tell me why or why I shouldn't need a receiver with hdmi switching?
Click to expand...

one hdmi cable running to the tv from your receiver carrying both digital audio and HD video? you don't need it but it's certainly convenient. No need to switch inputs on the TV.
 
Originally posted by: DBL
Originally posted by: jtvang125
My hdtv has 2 hdmi inputs on Video 6 and 7. My DVD changer is hooked via component straight to the tv (video 4) because my current receiver does not do component switching. I also have a media player that plays dvd iso's, divx and hidef movie files, and music hooked up to one of the hdmi on the tv. I am planning on selling the changer and get a hd-dvd player and hook that up to the remaining hdmi. I don't have cable at the moment but that could be an option later on.

Can someone tell me why or why I shouldn't need a receiver with hdmi switching?
Click to expand...

one hdmi cable running to the tv from your receiver carrying both digital audio and HD video? you don't need it but it's certainly convenient. No need to switch inputs on the TV.
Click to expand...

Most receivers I've seen only do pass through so no audio through hdmi. I'll still need either coax or optical for audio.
 
Originally posted by: jtvang125
Most receivers I've seen only do pass through so no audio through hdmi. I'll still need either coax or optical for audio.
Click to expand...

I guess. But what is the reason for passing audio to the tv? Your receiver should be handling that anyway. Panasonic and JVC have good affordable digital receivers with HDMI switching.

 
It only gives you 1 extra HDMI port (all I've seen is 2-input switching), but is probably worth paying a little extra for.

Most $300+ receivers now include HDMI switching, and if you will have a bunch of 5.1 sources you'll need a midrange receiver to have enough optical/coax inputs anyway.
 
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
It only gives you 1 extra HDMI port (all I've seen is 2-input switching), but is probably worth paying a little extra for.

Most $300+ receivers now include HDMI switching, and if you will have a bunch of 5.1 sources you'll need a midrange receiver to have enough optical/coax inputs anyway.
Click to expand...

True but a receiver like the JVC will also let you switch component (and non-hd sources also), to HDMI , so you can have 2 (or 3?) comp and 2 HDMI sources. That's at least 4 HD sources all outputting through 1 hdmi cable. Currently, you need to step up closer to the 1K range to get more HDMI inputs. That should hopefully be changing soon.


 
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Right, check the specs of a receiver to see if it does "upconversion" of other sources to HDMI, some do and some don't.
Click to expand...

Isn't the proper term "switching"? Personally, I find that to be more important than converting a 480i feed to 1080p. Although, I'm am genuinely curious how well a high-end receiver performs "upconversion". If you think about it, the TV is upconverting anyway. Perhaps it does a bad job but in theory, the tv should be able to do a better job than a receiver since the upconversion routine needs to only be specific to the TV.

 
Originally posted by: Ameesh
its only handy for convience and simplicty of wiring, if thats important to you then make sure and get it
Click to expand...

Yup, and technically you may see some degradation of the signal if you send it through your receiver, but you might not notice it at all. For the highest picture quality you'll want to send it directly from the source to your tv.
 
I definitely think you should be getting HDMI switching simply because the market is at a point where not getting it would actually be more trouble. It's like asking if you should get an LCD monitor with DVI or only VGA. I mean why wouldn't you? HDMI is one big reason I want to upgrade my receiver and plasma. Eventually everything will be HDMI and I won't have any use for these component connections.
 
I dont bother with video switching at all... No point in spending the $ on the cables, and then possibly degrading the strength by adding 2x the cable that is required.

I run the video right into my TV, at all times, and the receiver does the audio.

Only time video switching really is beneficial is if you have a lot of devices and not enough of the same type of input on your TV itself.
 
Originally posted by: benchiu
Originally posted by: Ameesh
its only handy for convience and simplicty of wiring, if thats important to you then make sure and get it
Click to expand...

Yup, and technically you may see some degradation of the signal if you send it through your receiver, but you might not notice it at all. For the highest picture quality you'll want to send it directly from the source to your tv.
Click to expand...

Why? We are talking digital here. I could see this possibly with the component --> hdmi switching but not really with an all digital connection. Buying an HDMI witching receiver and not using features which make things a whole lot simpler is pretty silly, IMO.

 
Originally posted by: CraigRT
I dont bother with video switching at all... No point in spending the $ on the cables, and then possibly degrading the strength by adding 2x the cable that is required.

I run the video right into my TV, at all times, and the receiver does the audio.

Only time video switching really is beneficial is if you have a lot of devices and not enough of the same type of input on your TV itself.
Click to expand...

Uh, It's 1 extra HDMI cable. It's definitely the future, especially considering the popularity of mounting LCD and Plasmas on the wall with as little cable clutter as possible.

 
Originally posted by: DBL
Originally posted by: benchiu
Originally posted by: Ameesh
its only handy for convience and simplicty of wiring, if thats important to you then make sure and get it
Click to expand...

Yup, and technically you may see some degradation of the signal if you send it through your receiver, but you might not notice it at all. For the highest picture quality you'll want to send it directly from the source to your tv.
Click to expand...

Why? We are talking digital here. I could see this possibly with the component --> hdmi switching but not really with an all digital connection. Buying an HDMI witching receiver and not using features which make things a whole lot simpler is pretty silly, IMO.
Click to expand...

It's another place for the signal to fail, or to induce interference. Just because it's digital doesn't mean it can't be subject to some signal failure. Now, you may not notice a difference at all, and if you are running out of HDMI inputs on your TV, then it may be a necessity, but in general, I like to hook up source equipment directly to the TV wherever possible, unless there is some upconversion that might be beneficial. Give it a shot, if you don't notice a difference then it doesn't really matter. I'm just saying that it's just another place in the chain to fail or cause issues.
 
Get HDMI switching. Its worth. Make sure it is HDMI 1.3. The reciever will strip the audio from the HDMI and send the video to the TV. Most High end recievers will also do component -> HDMI and RCA/coax -> to HDMI also. so you might not even need to switch inputs on the TV at all. here is a good one from denon. It will take all video sources and convert to HDMI and it will aslo 1080p and has an optional ipod attachement

Text
 
I have the Pioneer Elite receiver and the audio is carried through the HDMI cable..the output on my receiver is attached to the input of my projector, the input on my receiver goes to my HDMI player
 
Originally posted by: benchiu
It's another place for the signal to fail, or to induce interference. Just because it's digital doesn't mean it can't be subject to some signal failure. Now, you may not notice a difference at all, and if you are running out of HDMI inputs on your TV, then it may be a necessity, but in general, I like to hook up source equipment directly to the TV wherever possible, unless there is some upconversion that might be beneficial. Give it a shot, if you don't notice a difference then it doesn't really matter. I'm just saying that it's just another place in the chain to fail or cause issues.
Click to expand...

I suppose. While we are at it, we might as well stop using patch panels, more than 1 hard drive and component cables (composite only uses 1 wire) and this is just a start. This way we reduce the places our signal can fail.

Rather than speculating can you tell me if you see a difference or are you just assuming that in theory, there could be a difference?
 
Originally posted by: TheSiege
Get HDMI switching. Its worth. Make sure it is HDMI 1.3. The reciever will strip the audio from the HDMI and send the video to the TV. Most High end recievers will also do component -> HDMI and RCA/coax -> to HDMI also. so you might not even need to switch inputs on the TV at all. here is a good one from denon. It will take all video sources and convert to HDMI and it will aslo 1080p and has an optional ipod attachement

Text
Click to expand...

So when a receiver says "pass through only", does that mean that it is not taking the audio portion from the hdmi connection and amplifying it? Thus you would have to connect the audio via coaxial or optical seperately?
 
(Not an expert at this but my $0.02)

Some receivers are known to have pretty great video-processing - which means you can connect any el cheapo video source and the receiver will upconvert/process the image to look better than it would just running straight to the TV. Some might even cause degradation of the image so it depends on the model - in this case, it's better to just run video straight to TV.

Either way, HDMI inputs in the receiver is a forward-looking technology so I would be looking for it - even if I had no immediate use for it.
 

Originally posted by: jtvang125
Originally posted by: TheSiege
Get HDMI switching. Its worth. Make sure it is HDMI 1.3. The reciever will strip the audio from the HDMI and send the video to the TV. Most High end recievers will also do component -> HDMI and RCA/coax -> to HDMI also. so you might not even need to switch inputs on the TV at all. here is a good one from denon. It will take all video sources and convert to HDMI and it will aslo 1080p and has an optional ipod attachement

Text
Click to expand...

So when a receiver says "pass through only", does that mean that it is not taking the audio portion from the hdmi connection and amplifying it? Thus you would have to connect the audio via coaxial or optical seperately?
Click to expand...


I'm pretty sure "pass through" means that the receiver passes the HMDI signal from the receivers HDMI input to the receivers HDMI output w/o modifying it (although it's a good bet that the audio in many receivers will not get passed, not that it would make any sense to do that anyway). Any decent receiver will accept audio through the HDMI input. It will then play through the speakers connected to your receiver.

What receiver are you looking at specifically?


 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top