Need help picking a reciever

[DezNutz]

I have my TV (Panasonic 58" 800u, 1080p HDMI 1.3 capable), and I have a 5.1 speaker setup, I also have a PS3, HDMI cable box, and wii.

I need help selecting a receiver to put them all together. The receiver I had, I am not moving into my new house, as it did not have any HD audio formats, or HDMI 1.3 input/outputs.

I am looking for the least expensive, most reliable receiver with at least 3 HDMI 1.3 input. I would like the receiver to output all inputs through one HDMI 1.3 connection (I am running this through the wall). What is your recommendations?

[callas01]

Originally Posted by DezNutz

I have my TV (Panasonic 58" 800u, 1080p HDMI 1.3 capable), and I have a 5.1 speaker setup, I also have a PS3, HDMI cable box, and wii.

I need help selecting a receiver to put them all together. The receiver I had, I am not moving into my new house, as it did not have any HD audio formats, or HDMI 1.3 input/outputs.

I am looking for the least expensive, most reliable receiver with at least 3 HDMI 1.3 input. I would like the receiver to output all inputs through one HDMI 1.3 connection (I am running this through the wall). What is your recommendations?

1. What speakers do you have?

2. What is your budget?

[DezNutz]

1. Cheap speakers, good enough for living room use.

2. What are my options given all the requirments? I don't think I really have a top line, as all I need is basic capablalities, I think around 300 - 600 will get enough.

[callas01]

Marantz 5003 would be the best I could recommend, they have refurb ones at accessories4less.com for a low as $350-450, or new ones you may be able to find for about $600

Yamaha 863 was on sale at 6ave.com for like $450 or something.

See what you can get a Pioneer Elite VSX-21 for, those are nice too.

In the lower category, newegg.com has the Sony DN-1000 for $299, you can also see about the Yamaha 665, or Onkyo 607.

That is in the order of which I would be looking to buy them too,.... basically.

[DezNutz]

Just a quick question, why do you recommend in that order? I am looking at the Marantz you suggest, and since I am moving into a new house with a new setup, I would rather go with a new one than a refurb, so it is near top of my market, but I do not mind paying for quality if that is what it is.

A quick questions it says the Marantz has HDMI 1.3a repeating but not switching, do you know what that means?

[solarrdadd]

my friend has this and it sounds great. 7.2 audio, all lossless formats onboard, 6 HDMI inputs including one in the front, universal port and it's under $380.00 and includes free shipping and it's NEW! the only potential downside is this has no pre-outs. which means if you wanted to add an amp down the road you can't. however, if your someone who is not interested in seperates (like my friend who lives in an apartment) then this is the receiver for you. imo

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...pk=onkyo%20607

best of luck, please keep us posted!

[ak_ka]

Originally Posted by DezNutz

Just a quick question, why do you recommend in that order? I am looking at the Marantz you suggest, and since I am moving into a new house with a new setup, I would rather go with a new one than a refurb, so it is near top of my market, but I do not mind paying for quality if that is what it is.

A quick questions it says the Marantz has HDMI 1.3a repeating but not switching, do you know what that means?

I'm guessing its because of Marantz's rep for delivering clean, crisp sound for music as well as movies. Also, the power ratings on it are truthful, besides having pre-outs in case you want to add an amp.
And since u mention that you're looking to move into a new house with a new setup, you'd want to get the most flexible solution, which costs least in the long run.

[HiDefRev]

I'll second the Onkyo 607 that Solarrdadd mentioned. It has all the inputs you need, and is a 7.2 receiver. It will decode all of the lossless audio formats ( Dolby TrueHD and DTS MasterAudio ), as well as all of the older formats.

[solarrdadd]

Originally Posted by HiDefRev

I'll second the Onkyo 607 that Solarrdadd mentioned. It has all the inputs you need, and is a 7.2 receiver. It will decode all of the lossless audio formats ( Dolby TrueHD and DTS MasterAudio ), as well as all of the older formats.

thanks rev!

[callas01]

Marantz makes a receiver that delivers excellent reproduction on music an movies. Like it was said before, they are truthfull about their power output, it has all the features that you are looking for, it also adds Pre-outs.

The onkyo mentioned is nice, but IMO the Marantz outclasses it. They also are known for making high-end audio products. I don't think you could go wrong with this receiver.

If you can find a good deal for a new one, excellent. But the refurbs do come with a warranty also. And are more affordable. It was just another option. Goodluck.

Oh, and there is no such thing as 7.2, if you do want to run 2 subs, just get a Y-splitter.

[Fors]

I personally would go for this if you dont get the marantz.
Denon AVR-1910, Use coupon code 'RECEIVERSALE" to take 25% off, making the final price $399 and some change.

http://www.electronics-expo.com/make...AVR1910/1.html

[solarrdadd]

Originally Posted by callas01

Marantz makes a receiver that delivers excellent reproduction on music an movies. Like it was said before, they are truthfull about their power output, it has all the features that you are looking for, it also adds Pre-outs.

The onkyo mentioned is nice, but IMO the Marantz outclasses it. They also are known for making high-end audio products. I don't think you could go wrong with this receiver.

If you can find a good deal for a new one, excellent. But the refurbs do come with a warranty also. And are more affordable. It was just another option. Goodluck.

Oh, and there is no such thing as 7.2, if you do want to run 2 subs, just get a Y-splitter.

the .2 refers to 2 subs, all newer receivers & pre-pro's make it simple by adding 2 or more ports on the unit for multiple subs. they, (companies who make these things) the powers that be, and the industry as a whole accept the term ".2 or .howver many ports for subs are on your unit) so there is such a thing as 5, 7 and even 9.1,2 or 4

the second you added that splitter, and incorporated more than one sub in the system it became .more than 1! not arguing just saying...or perhaps all the makers of these receivers & pre-amps are lying and scaming us all, like everyone says about monster! that's my .2 cents!

[Fors*]

Originally Posted by solarrdadd

the .2 refers to 2 subs, all newer receivers & pre-pro's make it simple by adding 2 or more ports on the unit for multiple subs. they, (companies who make these things) the powers that be, and the industry as a whole accept the term ".2 or .howver many ports for subs are on your unit) so there is such a thing as 5, 7 and even 9.1,2 or 4

the second you added that splitter, and incorporated more than one sub in the system it became .more than 1! not arguing just saying...or perhaps all the makers of these receivers & pre-amps are lying and scaming us all, like everyone says about monster! that's my .2 cents!

I think we had the conversation before, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I always thought the .1 simply referred to the LFE....thus you could never have more than .1 because there is simply only one LFE signal....is this technically not the correct way to look at it?

[JasonR]

7.2 is a fallacy. If I added 4 more surround speakers (bypassing the surround back channels), I would still be listening to the mix. Which depending on the movie can be many things, 5.1 for example. Those 4 extra surround channels will still be playing a 5.1 mix, not 9.1. It would just be dispersing the same sound over more speakers, they would not be independent channels.

I think 7.2 is misleading, they need to say 7.1 with and extra sub out.

[solarrdadd]

Originally Posted by forsberg21

I think we had the conversation before, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I always thought the .1 simply referred to the LFE....thus you could never have more than .1 because there is simply only one LFE signal....is this technically not the correct way to look at it?

the .1 refers to the channel other than the 5,7 or 9 (sub) that delivers that LFE only. you could set your channels as full range/large and send everything to your speakers (and select no sub in the setup) then what do you call them or that system? I'm saying that .2 seen on modern receivers or pre-amps means that they "built in" that splitter into 2 or more ports so you won't have to buy that y splitter. do you know how many times i've seen (before they started making them) folks on this site wising the makers of these products would put more than one sub port on the units, now that they do it's being said that there is no such thing.

what is a 2.1 system, two speakers & one subwoofer. 5.1 is five speakers and one subwoofer, 7.2 is seven speakers and two subwoofers.

[solarrdadd]

Originally Posted by JasonR

7.2 is a fallacy. If added 4 more surround speakers, I would still be listening to the mix. Which depending on the movie can be many things, 5.1 for example. Those 4 extra surround channels will still be playing a 5.1 mix, not 9.1. It would just be dispersing the same sound over more speakers, they would not be independent channels.

I think 7.2 is misleading, they need to say 7.1 with and extra sub out.

i don't think it's misleading, i think it's meant to say that there is more than one connection port on the receiver/pre-amp (i'd also like to think everyone understands that) for you to connect more than one sub to, that's it. i don't think there is any industry wide scam going on. this sounds like folks who don't like the idea of 7 channels vs 5 now that almost all modern receivers/pre-amps coming out offer 9.2 this thing should start all over again

[JasonR]

I think once there are two independent subwoofer tracks, 7.2 makes sense. Until then, it is just marketing. I don't have anything against 7.1 setups and I love the idea of dual subwoofers, but call it like it is....an extra sub output. I could add speakers and amps to my setup all day long, and what is it going to be in the end? A 7.1 setup at most. Theaters have speakers lining the walls, and it is still commonly known as 5.1 there.

[Fors*]

Originally Posted by solarrdadd

i don't think it's misleading, i think it's meant to say that there is more than one connection port on the receiver/pre-amp (i'd also like to think everyone understands that) for you to connect more than one sub to, that's it. i don't think there is any industry wide scam going on. this sounds like folks who don't like the idea of 7 channels vs 5 now that almost all modern receivers/pre-amps coming out offer 9.2 this thing should start all over again

I'll agree it is misleading.....it is "assumed" that .2 refers to 2 sub outs on the receiver to me......

[callas01]

as stated, movies are made with 1 Low Frequency Effect channel in mind, so Technically speaking there is only a .1. However, it is widely accepted that people use the .2, .3, .4 or whatever to describe their setup. Which I am ok with. My reason for stating that there is not a real thing called .2 is because I didn't want the OP to get the wrong idea that he would be missing or gaining something that is not technically correct when he made his receiver purchase. Therefore by adding a Y-splitter he could still have 2 subswoofers operating

Heck, you could even take the first y-splitter and add 2 more Y-splitters to the original y-splitter you can get 4 subwoofers coming off the original .1 LFE channel. Or just run from the .1 out of the reciever to the input on the sub, then then output on the sub to the next sub in a "chain" and have as many subs as you feel you need to get smooth, even bass in your listening area.

[Fors*]

Originally Posted by callas01

as stated, movies are made with 1 Low Frequency Effect channel in mind, so Technically speaking there is only a .1. However, it is widely accepted that people use the .2, .3, .4 or whatever to describe their setup. Which I am ok with. My reason for stating that there is not a real thing called .2 is because I didn't want the OP to get the wrong idea that he would be missing or gaining something that is not technically correct when he made his receiver purchase. Therefore by adding a Y-splitter he could still have 2 subswoofers operating

Heck, you could even take the first y-splitter and add 2 more Y-splitters to the original y-splitter you can get 4 subwoofers coming off the original .1 LFE channel. Or just run from the .1 out of the reciever to the input on the sub, then then output on the sub to the next sub in a "chain" and have as many subs as you feel you need to get smooth, even bass in your listening area.

I have 2 y-splitters running out of the sub out on my receiver callas. They feed my 2 subs and the 3rd goes to my Buttkicker amp.......so you sure can use multiple Y-splitters.....