Making a case for a "separates" approach to HD

It's no wonder HD fans have a high incidence of chronic upgrade-itis; it goes hand-in-hand with the forever forward march of technology. Most of us build our HT setups around an A/V receiver -- exotics aside, all the functionality in a receiver can provide good value. But when the upgrade fever strikes, replacing the bundled switching, decoding and amplifying tasks is a lot of "purchase inertia" to overcome. The system-building approach advocated by the linked article (written over a year ago) presents an interesting alternative to the receiver-based system: separate the video and audio chores. Admittedly we're into a fairly high price point here, probably in the $2k receiver range. But if that's how you roll, consider if the larger "up front" cost to a video processor and receiver fits with your view of "price vs. performance."

[(Unverified) Posted Dec 18th 2007 10:01AM]

I dunno. I guess my issue with this approach is that the really high-end receivers with all the inputs and fancy multi-zone come with excellent video processing anyways. I mean, just to take the article's example: the AVR-3808CI (which is the latest version of the author's receiver) only has issues with de-interlacing quality for 1080i material. But, in reality, this only going to really be an issue with 1080i/480i sources, which consist of legacy consoles (they'll look like trash anyways), portable AV devices (again, can't squeeze blood from the stone), old DVD players (buy a new one), VHS decks (who uses those?), and the HD-A3. And if you're tossing down $2000 on a receiver setup, you're going to be able to buy a slightly better HD-DVD player than the HD-A3.

If anything, I would probably use a video processor as a low-cost upgrade to an already-working HDMI receiver that lacks the appropriate upscaling. But I don't think I would necessarily go out and buy a video processor on a new setup.

[(Unverified) Posted Dec 18th 2007 10:01AM]

When I am ready for my basement theater with projector, I am getting the DVDO iScan VP50 or VP50 (Pro) to handle my scaling needs with the outstanding ABit chip.

I will gladly spend another $2,000 to help me achieve the best picture I can (with out spending even more obscene amount on the over priced products from Fardouja and others...).

Do I really need it, probably not. But when I know that this scaler will pass my display the best image and one that passes most if not all of the HQV tests. Then all my display has to do is take a source that is its native resolution and just display it.

The nice thing also, it will stick with me while displays will come and go.

[(Unverified) Posted Dec 18th 2007 10:23AM]

The big problem though, is cost and switching.

The reason I want a big receiver is to handle switching. I hate hitting source buttons. harmony remotes help, but they don't end it.

I also hate audio sync problems and adding delay doesn't help when playing games.

The only way to solve all of this is with a control scheme like putting an RS232 controller in every receiver, but no one (receiver, display, source) will fully implement the spec so it's not like that's ever going to work either.

We need a real standard based on TCP/IP.