Though I guess it depends on your system right? I've had the same system
since 2000 when I got my Sony 36" XBR400 CRT which did 1080i back then and
I've had HD capability...but I have two video runs from the Receiever, one
with s-video for the non-HD stuff, and one with component for the HD
stuff...so the problem is that I also need to switch the TV input when I
select the receiver input, which the receiver remote doesn't really do; I
need a universal for that...
And as my friend was arguing with me, if I get a new TV with 3-4 HDMI etc
inputs and have a true universal (like Logitech Harmony 1 etc), then
wouldn't it be better to just run the video directly to the TV and eliminate
the middleman? What are you gaining by adding the receiver in the middle in
that case...?
BINO
-----Original Message-----
From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com
[mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Brian Weeden
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2009 12:23 PM
To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com
Cc: hardware@hardwaregroup.com
Subject: Re: [H] A/V Receivers
Only having to run one cable to the tv and single remote control for
everything greatly increases the spousal acceptance in my experience.
-------
Brian Weeden
Technical Consultant
Secure World Foundation
Sent from my iPhone
On 19-Jan-09, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Fisk <chr...@mhonline.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, mark.dodge wrote:
>
>> OK, now this brings up a question, why run the video thru the
>> receiver? Why
>> not just go straight from the component to the TV?
>
> Ease of use. The receiver remote is a programmable universal, so
> you click the button to choose your input and it switches over. No
> need to change the input on the TV.
>
> Also, the video and sound both run through the HDMI cable, so you
> kind of have to run through the receiver.
>
> I'll do a review on the Receiver shortly, I've got it in place and
> working.
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
