"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
. ..
:
: "Harry Lavo" wrote in message
: . ..
:
: "trs80" wrote in message
: news
nkQg.2824$rg1.2462@dukeread01...
: What is the benefit of using a reciever that takes
HDMI?
: I see lots of discussion and concern about this.
:
: But I not clear on the benefits a receiver provides
that has HDMI?
:
: Im my case my TV already has two HDMI inputs for DVD
and DVR.
: I would plan on sending coax or fiber digital to the
receiver for audio.
: In that case its still only a single cable to the
reciever as it would be
: with HDMI.
:
: Any ideas on what the fuss is about?
:
: thanks in advance.
:
: If you have a high def cable box, then it can feed video
and five channels
: of sound into the receiver. Ditto an upconverting DVD
player. Ditto a
: BluRay or DVD-HD player. One cable, many channels. And
then a HDMI cable
: "out" of the receiver to the input of the TV. Maximum
picture quality (in
: theory) and maximum simplicity, with sources switched
"all-at-once".
:
: I forgot to mention that a goodly number of these
HDMI-equipped receivers
: also upconvert convention inputs such as S-Video,
Component Video, even a
: VCR's composite video output.
:
Are you referring to the "simplicity" of HDMI ver.1, 1.2 or
the new 1.3 with the different plug sizes that makes all the
others obsolete? Oh and that's assuming *ALL* connected
components (including leads) meet the 1.3 standard so the
high def. signal does actually make it through. And that's
this week and it will probably all change again in the near
future ;-)
Here's my prediction "HD-DVD & BluRay" are dead ducks! I
can't see too many people here changing all their gear to
gain some dubious quality improvement. I would suggest to
the OP to keep with component and buy a good up-scaler.
Regards TT