If my DVD player does upscaling and HD audo decoding, do I need my AV Reciever to do so as well?

If you are using an HDMI cable to send both picture & sound (as required by the newest audio formats supported by Blu-Ray players), then if you want your audio receiver to receive and reproduce those newer audio formats then yes, the receiver has to offer the audio decoding for the newer formats. The good news is that most new receivers do. Dolby TrueHD, DTS Master Audio...

You don't necessarily need your receiver to 'upscale', which is a term used to discuss a variety of video processing but which generally means that a device is taking a lower resolution signal and processing it to a higher resolution output. Some devices do it well, some do it badly. It all depends. That's why other people here have mentioned separate (outboard) scalers. Companies like DVDO or Gefen make them. Will they improve your image? Often they will. For some people they will be worth it.

I've seen some "upconverting" DVD players where the images didn't seem that different or better on the TV screen when switched to different output resolutions (480i / 480p / 720p / 1080i). On the other hand, others did much better. I've also seen older but really high end 480p DVD players' images look better than newer, cheap "upconverting" players.

When people use terms like "upconvert" and "transcode" with regard to audio receivers, most of the time, though, they're talking about the receiver's ability to take an analog input (component video, s-video, composite video) and output it through a single HDMI cable.

HDTV's also have their own built-in 'upscaling', meaning that a 1080p TV will process a lower resolution to be shown on a 1080p screen.

Personally I'd like the option to be able to turn any video processing done by the receiver off or on in order to judge the difference on-screen. The most useful feature might be the ability to transcode any analog video to HDMI, but even if receivers have very good circuitry (Reon VX), I want to see which is actually better at processing the video, the receiver or the HDTV. You may not be able to judge simply from a list of equipment or features.

If it does what you need, it's a fantastic deal.

For those who like the Sony's, note that Sony sells its own factory recertified / refurbished products via its own official website, and fully warranted.

For example, the ES-series STR-DA3300ES, with 3 HDMI in, and upconverting to HDMI from analog video inputs, 100W x 7... In other words, lots of useful 'features' and to the ears of some some pretty nice sounding amps (I'm not crazy about them, Sony's almost always sound compressed to me, but hey) can be had for $699.

So, regular price $999, refurb via Sony's own website, $699.

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&productId=8198552921665194261&langId=-1

If you don't need or care for the upconversion from analog to HDMI or the ES-series line, you can get the STR-DG920 for $479.99 when it's normally $599.99.

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&productId=8198552921665366447&langId=-1

I have had fewer product failures from factory refurbished products than I have had with brand-new products, so I'm always fine with considering them for personal use. (Though I'd never deal twice with a company which sold me a refurb / recert without telling me first.)

Unfortunately, the 1909 only has 3 HDMI inputs. Some of the others in the same price range have more, so if the # of HDMI's in is a priority and 3 aren't enough, one of the others might be better. But remote-controlled HDMI switchers are fine and really, really cheap, $50 or so.

They're very good. I have an older Yamaha receiver too, and I still like it a great deal. Yamaha usually has among the coolest features. They were the first (I think) to offer processing specifically to make MP3 (etc) playing devices sound better, for example.

If you can't find a discounted or refurbished Denon AVR-2309CI or a special on the AVR-889 (the first is the 'pro' series, the 2nd is found in more stores), then I'd say the Denon AVR-1909 is a really good choice.

The amps on Denons always sound great, so "90" watts per channel is a lot more reliable predictor than the swelled estimates often used elsewhere. It up-converts (transcodes) analog signals to HDMI. Handles all the new high resolution audio formats for Blu-Ray -- Dolby TrueHD, Dolby Digital Plus, and DTS-HD Master Audio (via the HDMI cable). If you have an older Super Audio / DVD-Audio player, it has the 8 analog inputs.

The remote does a lot, but like most receiver remotes basically sucks, so they assume you're probably using a universal remote.

If you run 2nd zone audio for another room (or via a system of volume controls / speaker selectors for other rooms), mid-level Denons are great and very flexible. The built-in 'amp' for "2nd zone" just re-assigns 2 of the surround speakers, so if you want full 7.1, it's necessary to use a separate amp for zone 2 / 3.

It does have a full set of surround sound pre-outs, so if you want to use external amps for surround sound, then this isn't right for you, but usually in this price range that's not what people are looking for.

MSRP of $649, can be found for less.

http://usa.denon.com/ProductDetails/4241.asp

On the other hand, most receivers by the majors (Denon, Yamaha, Onkyo, Pioneer, Harmon-Kardon, Sony even) in this price range are pretty darn good and a lot of the differences often come down to preference. You can often hear differences, but some people find them much more differentiated than others.

They all do a phenomenal amount to make life & viewing easier for the whole family too, making switching sources very easy because all inputs go to the receiver and then just 1 HDMI (or component video set) has to go to the TV.

timgates2: I for one am not simply narrowing any blame to George W. Bush, nor the Republican Party. My comments indicated a multi-party, multi-administration and multi-sessional Congressional commitment to giving U.S. automakers the sorts of regulations they wanted, rather than spurring us to exceed foreign competitors. I think we as a general population fell for a bit too much of the 'har har we like our big SUV's and don't wanna drive no damn tiny Smart Car and all these standards are just some librul conspiracy' mood for our own good too.

The Other Bob:

Japan does indeed have fuel economy regulations, in addition to taxes on fuel and vehicles (via tax discounts). The previous emphasis was on taxing vehicles for weight and for engine displacement, which is a pretty good proxy for fuel efficiency overall (albeit imperfect).

http://www.japan-guide.com/e/e2206.html

In addition, Japan has moved on to other comprehensive fuel economy standards:

"The Japanese government has established a set of fuel economy standards for gasoline and diesel powered light-duty passenger and commercial vehicles, with fuel economy targets based on average vehicle fuel economy by weight class. The targets for gasoline vehicles are to be met by 2010, while 2005 is the target year for diesel vehicles. The regulations were revised in 2001 to allow automakers to accumulate credits in one weight class and use them in another weight class (although with many limitations)... Assuming no change in the vehicle mix, these targets imply a 23 percent improvement in 2010 in gasoline passenger vehicle fuel economy and a 14 percent improvement in diesel fuel economy compared with the 1995 fleet average of 14.6 km/L. According to the Japanese government, this improvement will result in an average fleet fuel economy of Japanese vehicles of 35.5 mpg21 by 2010. The regulations include penalties if the targets are not met, but these penalties are very small. Furthermore, the majority of vehicles sold in Japan in 2002 were already in compliance with the 2010 standards."

LINK: (Note: PDF report)
http://tinyurl.com/World-Car-Fuel-Stds

Incidentally it's not only U.S. companies which have begged for & received exemptions from U.S. CAFE standards -- VW did a while back, and Nissan more recently.

You know what would have been even cooler?

Not approving special tax breaks and write-offs for SUV's and pickups on the argument that they were 'work' vehicles, exempting them from the gas guzzler tax, giving small businesses $100K to buy 6500 lb free Hummers, and giving into Big 3 lobbying to keep our fuel economy standards lower than our foreign competitors.

Yeah -- about that -- how did keeping our standards lower than our foreign competitors work out?