What is lost if AV Receiver doesn't have HDMI?

[JLT]

I just bought a new HDTV Plasma TV as well as a new DirecTv HD DVR. I want to hook both units up using HDMI. I have a B&K AVR507 that does not have HDMI capabilities.

My old DVR would not pick up new HD channels and my old HDTV did not have enough HDMI capability (extras like for my XBOX).

If the TV and DVR are connected directly using HDMI but my digital audio for the DVR is connected to the B&K wouldn't I be getting pretty much the same thing as if my head unit (say an Anthem AVM 50) had HDMI capabilities?

I absolutely love my B&K - althought I wish they would get off their a** and put out some products with HDMI - but have considered switching over to Anthem since they have HDMI capabilities. It seems the configuration would be easier and I may get more overall performance (but a loss in musical ability). So what am I losing by not having head unit HDMI capability with my configuration?

thanks!

JL

[gman086]

You don't lose a lot (tho I prefer the sound of HDMI cables over optical or coaxial digital or analog when I went thru my comparisons) UNTIL you get into HD DVD or Blu-ray players that can actually output HD audio. Then you need the extra transfer capabilities of HDMI ver. 1.3 to make it work and a receiver that can decode it. All of that is in the beginning stages but is now available and does sound better. I have an HD audio capable Blu-ray player that sends lossless HD audio that my reciever downscales to 7.1 lossless and it does sound better than standard digital connects or analog PCM. Definitely in the transition phase right now so I imagine B&K may be just waiting until it all shakes out.

Have FUN!

G

PS - Musical ability is enhanced with HDMI if you ask me because more data can be transferred at MUCH faster rates and you get seemless digital conversions whereas really good analog beat digital in the past for pure musical ability IMHO.

[L.J.]

If the TV and DVR are connected directly using HDMI but my digital audio for the DVR is connected to the B&K wouldn't I be getting pretty much the same thing as if my head unit (say an Anthem AVM 50) had HDMI capabilities?

JL


No, your not losing anything. In this case, you would want to run your video directly to your display.

Also, as long as your AVR has 5.1 or 7.1 analog inputs(EXT. in), you just simply need to purchase a Bluray or HD DVD player that has analog outs. The HD audio formats will be decoded by the player and output over the analog connection. No need to buy a new AVR.

[JLT]

Sorry to be such an idiot, but I have a folow up question: when it comes to DirecTV and my DVR, as long as my TV is connected to my DVR with HDMI cables, then I will be getting 1080i HD? If I have an optical digital cable running from my B&K to my DVR then I will have HD audio? I was thinking what is the purpose of buying a new TV and DVR if it the video signal is being downgraded.

As soon as I receive my new TV and DVR I will be disconnecting the old and connecting the new and this feedback will help me understand the new configuration.

thx!!

JL

[L.J.]

Sorry to be such an idiot, but I have a folow up question: when it comes to DirecTV and my DVR, as long as my TV is connected to my DVR with HDMI cables, then I will be getting 1080i HD? If I have an optical digital cable running from my B&K to my DVR then I will have HD audio? I was thinking what is the purpose of buying a new TV and DVR if it the video signal is being downgraded.

As soon as I receive my new TV and DVR I will be disconnecting the old and connecting the new and this feedback will help me understand the new configuration.

thx!!

JL

Yeah you should be fine. You may have to adjust your DVR to output 1080i though. Also, the audio is gonna be good ol' Dolby Digital. The new HD audio formats are only available via Bluray or HD DVD.

[Mr Peabody]

LJ tells you right.

Avoid running HDMI into your receiver. According to Dolby's website and other sources it's not likely that HD disc players will even be able to output a digital HD signal via HDMI.because it has to be encoded into the disc to allow it to bypass the internal decoder and this isn't likely to happen. If you are happy with the B&K, which is a good receiver, then keep it, there is NO reason to upgrade for HDMI. It would be a waste to upgrade just for HDMI. HDMI marketing is a scam. Sure some manufacturer's have it on there but it's various versions, some are limited as to the capability, some would even decode HD digital BUT will it ever see it. And, as LJ said, the HD disc players decode from the disc and send out a multichannel uncompressed analog signal that by all reports is incredible.

Unless DirecTV has something new it will only output 1080i at best and there is no HD audio. Satelite is only Dolby Digital and you'd be surprised at how many shows aren't even 5.1. Most modern movies in HD are though.

So if you run HDMI from the satelite receiver to your TV and the digital out to your A/V receiver you will be fine.

[gman086]

>>And, as LJ said, the HD disc players decode from the disc and send out a multichannel uncompressed analog signal that by all reports is incredible.<<

That's incorrect - HD disc players CAN decode HD audio but will send it COMPRESSED via analog and you lose the whole point if you ask me. Does it sound good? Sure! But the ONLY way to get TRUE HD audio is via HDMI ver. 1.3a which is now available. My new Sony S500 Blu-ray DOES output true uncompressed HD DTS and Dolby (one of the first players to do so) and the ONLY way to get the full benefit is to connect it via HDMI to a AV receiver that has the capability to decode it (and those are also just now available). So much for the "no need for HDMI 1.3 because no compatible formats" eh? It's here, it's NOW and the difference is amazing - go hear for yourself!

Have FUN!

G

[L.J.]

>>And, as LJ said, the HD disc players decode from the disc and send out a multichannel uncompressed analog signal that by all reports is incredible.<<

That's incorrect - HD disc players CAN decode HD audio but will send it COMPRESSED via analog and you lose the whole point if you ask me. Does it sound good? Sure! But the ONLY way to get TRUE HD audio is via HDMI ver. 1.3a which is now available. My new Sony S500 Blu-ray DOES output true uncompressed HD DTS and Dolby (one of the first players to do so) and the ONLY way to get the full benefit is to connect it via HDMI to a AV receiver that has the capability to decode it (and those are also just now available). So much for the "no need for HDMI 1.3 because no compatible formats" eh? It's here, it's NOW and the difference is amazing - go hear for yourself!

Have FUN!

G

I would suggest you go back and read more info on TrueHD. TrueHD can be decoded in the player and sent via MC analog or HDMI as PCM. I'm using a PS3 which decodes the TrueHD and sends it via HDMI to my AVR which is v1.2. I've been enjoying it for awhile now, thank you very much. Personally, I'd perfer uncompressed PCM. BTW, TrueHD & DTSMA are lossless but they are not uncompressed.

From Dolby regarding the player outputting decoded TrueHD via MC analog outputs or HDMI:
Multichannel Analog Connection
"A next-generation optical player may also include line-level audio outputs derived from the multichannel mixed PCM signal passed through digital-to-analog converters. The advent of SACD and DVD-Audio in recent years has led to the incorporation of 5.1 and even 7.1 external inputs on many A/V receivers. If your A/V receiver is equipped with 5.1 or 7.1 external audio inputs, the selection of an optical player equipped with 5.1- or 7.1-channel line-level outputs will provide full-bandwidth reproduction of the audio signal originating from your HD player. A connection through either of these existing interfaces will let you experience the full potential of the high-resolution audio delivered on next-generation optical formats."

From Doldy regarding TrueHD & AVR's:
Dolby TrueHD and Dolby Digital Plus in A/V Receivers
"Eventually, A/V receivers will have direct access to Dolby® Digital Plus or Dolby TrueHD bitstreams. We are working with the IEC and HDMI organizations to update data protocols to enable future versions of these high-bandwidth interfaces to carry these bitstreams.

To decode these bitstreams, the A/V decoder will need to support the updated data protocols, as well as incorporate these new decoding algorithms. In addition, it will be necessary to select HD discs in which the content maker has permitted the core 5.1 or 7.1 audio bitstreams to bypass the player’s mixing process and be sent directly to the digital outputs of the player. We expect that certain HD discs will permit this, but they may represent a minority of titles. In the end, the sound quality will be essentially the same as that of audio decoded within the player as PCM signals and transported through a current-generation HDMI connection to the A/V receiver."

http://www.dolby.com/consumer/technology/trueHD/AVRs/trueHD_avrs_1.html


From Highdefdigest:

"Dolby TrueHD
What it is: Dolby TrueHD is a "lossless" compression codec. Although it is compressed to take up less disc space than a PCM track, once decoded it is bit-for-bit identical to the studio master (at either 16-bit or 24-bit resolution, at the discretion of the studio). It may help to think of it like a ZIP file that holds a PCM track. Once you unZIP the file, you get a 100% identical copy of the original PCM, without compromising any sound quality.

How to get it:

HDMI - If the player does not support TrueHD, it will revert to the standard Dolby Digital track. Some players may decode the TrueHD to PCM and transmit it over any version of HDMI. Other players will instead transmit the TrueHD bitstream to a receiver for decoding (HDMI 1.3 required).
Multi-channel analog - Either the Blu-ray player will decode the standard Dolby Digital track, or (on some models) will decode the TrueHD and convert it to analog."

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/1064

[Mr Peabody]

Thanks LJ you beat me to the punch and saved me some leg work, or finger work in this case.

G have you even tried your multichannel analog outputs? The Blu-ray discs contain the core DD/DTS and even this sounds better than a standard DVD. So I'm wondering if you aren't just noticing that improvement. From everything I've researched it's highly unlikely you are experiencing HD digital that would compare to the analog sound quality.

[Mr Peabody]

G, how do you have your s500 connected? Your Yamaha that is listed doesn't have HDMI connections. Not trying to be mean, just want to be sure we are all on the same page.

[gman086]

Hmmm, you guys are confusing me even more!

Mr. P - I now have a Marantz SR8001 and have the S500 connected to it using HDMI and then HDMI to the HDTV. The SR8001 has HDMI 1.2 inputs while the S500 supports 1.3 output.

Now am I to understand that ALL true HD audio is compressed and "should" make no difference if sent via PCM or bitstream? I thought the whole purpose of HDMI 1.3 was to have the bandwidth to send uncompressed bistream and avoid the compression issues? Also I have "auto" or PCM options for my HDMI audio on the Blu-ray player. So what you're saying is that I should select PCM so the player decodes the HD signal? When I do that I'm not so sure it sounds as good and I notice the receiver is just showing 7.1 multi-channel out to the speakers (when playing true HD DTS). If I set the Blu-ray to auto then I believe it just outputs the bitstream and I see that the receiver does show it's in DTS mode and sounds better but supposedly my receiver isn't HD audio compatible. So what is it doing - just reading the DTS core signal and processing it in standard DTS? Shouldn't it sound better in PCM mode then if what you're saying is true? And I find it funny that the Dolby article was written before there were HDMI 1.3 receivers available yet they have an opinion that there will be no audible difference even tho 1.3 allows far more data and speed of transmission. Kind of like those electrical engineers that told us there's no difference in what power cord you use... riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight???!!!

Keep the comments coming, this is good!

G

[musicman1999]

The 5.1 pcm track from a bluray disc sent via 5.1 analog outputs is uncompressed.With your reciever you should try sending the audio this way, if you want to use HDMI, just send the video direct to the tv.I think the guys are right, all you are getting is full bitrate dts.Do you have any discs with a 5.1 pcm track? If so hook up the 5.1 analog select the 5.1 pcm track and give it a listen.That is how my s-300 player is hooked up and the results can be outstanding.

bill

[pixelthis]

This is one of my pet peeves.
Video switching as a concept is OK, but in the real world is useless.
Had a receiver that had great SVHS switching, then came componet.
Now I have a receiver with pretty good amps and componet switching,
and here comes HDMI!
The main reason for video switching in a receiver is over, mainly conveinence.
NEW REMOTES CAN CHANGE INPUTS on a TV as they change inputs on a receiver,
elimating the primary rationalization for "video switching"
Send the video to your TV, send the audio through your receiver where it belongs.
Receiver cant handle the "new" formats? Get a player that does.
and keep your beloved receiver
One bonus, if you want sound without turning on your system, it will come thru your HDMI,
just turn up the vollume on your TV:1:

[GMichael]

I think I may have just developed an identity crisis.

[kexodusc]

Now am I to understand that ALL true HD audio is compressed and "should" make no difference if sent via PCM or bitstream? I thought the whole purpose of HDMI 1.3 was to have the bandwidth to send uncompressed bistream and avoid the compression issues?

Gman, I'm not an expert in HD video anything, but I can say that not all HD audio is compressed, and more importantly, not all compressed audio is inferior to uncompressed audio.

You can have lossy compression that loses audio quality (think mp3's, Dobly Digital and DTS) and lossless compression that remains sonically perfect but is just a more compact and efficient way of storing the audio information (think FLAC, Dolby TrueHD, etc). Some audio formats on the HD discs are lossy (which can still be incredible if the lost data is stuff the human ear doesn't pick up on well anyway), some formats are lossless which allows less disc space to be used while retaining all of the original audio track, and some formats are uncompressed altogether, which is basically PCM. The uncompressed files won't sound better necessarily unless they were created with superior techniques to begin with. They'll just be bigger file sizes. Whether the uncompressed audio files on the HD formats have some sort of original advantage, I can't say for sure - I was under the impression that the lossless formats were just smaller file size equivalents of the uncompressed PCM, but I'd refer that one back to LJ.

I like to think of lossless compression as the ZIP files of music - IMO they should be the standard anyway but then we start introducing new encoder/decoder requirements in already complicated HT market.

[L.J.]

Hmmm, you guys are confusing me even more!

Mr. P - I now have a Marantz SR8001 and have the S500 connected to it using HDMI and then HDMI to the HDTV. The SR8001 has HDMI 1.2 inputs while the S500 supports 1.3 output.

Now am I to understand that ALL true HD audio is compressed and "should" make no difference if sent via PCM or bitstream? I thought the whole purpose of HDMI 1.3 was to have the bandwidth to send uncompressed bistream and avoid the compression issues? Also I have "auto" or PCM options for my HDMI audio on the Blu-ray player. So what you're saying is that I should select PCM so the player decodes the HD signal? When I do that I'm not so sure it sounds as good and I notice the receiver is just showing 7.1 multi-channel out to the speakers (when playing true HD DTS). If I set the Blu-ray to auto then I believe it just outputs the bitstream and I see that the receiver does show it's in DTS mode and sounds better but supposedly my receiver isn't HD audio compatible. So what is it doing - just reading the DTS core signal and processing it in standard DTS? Shouldn't it sound better in PCM mode then if what you're saying is true? And I find it funny that the Dolby article was written before there were HDMI 1.3 receivers available yet they have an opinion that there will be no audible difference even tho 1.3 allows far more data and speed of transmission. Kind of like those electrical engineers that told us there's no difference in what power cord you use... riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight???!!!

Keep the comments coming, this is good!

G

Dude, that's alot of questions :)

Remember, HDMI is able to handle up to 8 channels of uncompressed PCM. If the player decodes these new formats and outputs via HDMI or mc analog, why is there a need for compression?

TrueHD & DTSMA are lossless, but there is compression. I'm assuming to reserve space on the disc for extra matl and stuff like that, but you still get a 100% identical copy of the original PCM.

" Dolby TrueHD is a "lossless" compression codec. Although it is compressed to take up less disc space than a PCM track, once decoded it is bit-for-bit identical to the studio master (at either 16-bit or 24-bit resolution, at the discretion of the studio). It may help to think of it like a ZIP file that holds a PCM track. Once you unZIP the file, you get a 100% identical copy of the original PCM, without compromising any sound quality."

"DTS-HD Master Audio is another lossless audio codec similar to Dolby TrueHD. The difference between the two is that DTS-HD MA is built in a core+extension configuration (just like DTS-HD HR). Although a DTS-HD MA track takes up more disc space than a TrueHD track, it does not require a secondary standard track for backwards compatibility. Since both DTS-HD MA and TrueHD are lossless, they are both 100% identical in quality to the studio master, and hence identical in quality to each other."

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/1064

If your using the 8001, your player should be set to PCM. You will be able to enjoy uncompressed PCM & TrueHD decoded by your player and these can be output via HDMI v1.1 & up or over 5.1/7.1 analog outputs. Your AVR will read "multi-channel in" or something like that. DTSMA is the only format that won't be supported going this route, since I don't think any players are capable of decoding it yet. In this case HDMI 1.3 would be useful since BR players are starting to pop up that will send the bitsream signal out to be decoded.

http://www.dtsonline.com/dts-hd/dtshd-master-audio-with-new-receiver.php

I'm not saying HDMI 1.3 is useless, but I'm surely not gonna encourage someone to go out and purchase a new AVR when their old one can be used with mc analog connection. DTSMA may not be worth the extra $$$ to some, very few players support bitstream output of DTSMA and only a handful of BR disc support it. I own about 43 BR discs and of that, 2 have a DTSMA track.

Bottom line is you don't need HDMI 1.3 to enjoy uncompressed pcm, DD+ or Dolby TrueHD. There is no evidence to support that decoding done by the AVR will give you any better sound than decoding done in the player. HDMI 1.3 is currently the only way to get DTSMA but may not be worth it.

[Mr Peabody]

LJ, the Dolby article says the disc itself would have to be encoded to allow the HD signal to bypass the internal decoder in the player. Any idea if movie companies are going to cooperate to allow this. Even though the equipment will allow it still doesn't mean it's happening.

All parties involved need to get their act together because if we are confused about it, the average consumer doesn't have a chance. Especially as most of them get their information from hourly wage earning students working at the mass merchants.

[L.J.]

LJ, the Dolby article says the disc itself would have to be encoded to allow the HD signal to bypass the internal decoder in the player. Any idea if movie companies are going to cooperate to allow this. Even though the equipment will allow it still doesn't mean it's happening.

All parties involved need to get their act together because if we are confused about it, the average consumer doesn't have a chance. Especially as most of them get their information from hourly wage earning students working at the mass merchants.

Apparantly, both BR & HD DVD have players that are able to output raw bitstream data via HDMI 1.3 for decoding and is able to bypass the advanced authoring. This article was updated on Nov. 14th.

"Since this article was first written, Toshiba has implemented a firmware upgrade to their HD-XA2 and HD-A35 HD DVD player models that adds a feature called "Direct Digital Audio Mode." This function serves as a workaround for the Advanced mode bitstream limitation. When activated, the player will transmit the raw audio bitstreams for any of the new high-resolution sound formats to a receiver for decoding, even on Advanced discs. However, it will only transmit the movie soundtrack itself, not any additional content such as menu beeps or Picture-in-Picture audio. The upcoming Onkyo DV-HD805 HD DVD player will presumably also offer this function. Some recent Blu-ray players such as the Samsung BD-P1400 and the Panasonic DMP-BD30 have a similar feature."

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Joshua_Zyber/High-Def_FAQ/High-Def_FAQ:_Is_HDMI_1.3_Really_Necessary/853

This article was updated in October, so maybe it's not completely accurate concerning HD DVD.

"When this thread was first created, there was no need for HDMI 1.3. The situation is changing slightly. Due to the slow adoption of DTS-HD Master Audio decoding in players, and the recent release of players which can output bistream DTS-HD Master Audio and HDMI 1.3 receivers with DTS-HD Master Audio decoders, it may be desirable in certain situations to get an HDMI 1.3 receiver with the newer audio decoders onboard.

It should be noted, though, that just because a player supports bitstream output doesn't mean it will be able to output bitstream. In the HD DVD world, there's an advanced content flag which, according to what I have read, can't be ignored. The advanced content (interactive audio,) must be mixed by the player. To send bitstream audio, the player would have to encode the audio, after mixing, to something like TrueHD which seems like an unlikely feature in the near future.

It seems Blu-ray will allow for bypassing audio mixing, so Blu-ray owners are more likely to be interested in receivers with decoders, especially if DTS-HD Master Audio becomes more common for soundtracks, and decoding is not being implemented in Blu-ray players."


http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=789994

[Mr Peabody]

I guess a person would have to weigh the info for themselves to reach their decision but I still wouldn't upgrade just for HDMI. I believe for now MC analog would be the safest bet and still be a big improvement over SD audio. DTS was never used as much as I'd like on SD and i don't expect they will be on enough movies to make an upgrade worth while just to receive MA.

[gman086]

>>If your using the 8001, your player should be set to PCM. You will be able to enjoy uncompressed PCM & TrueHD decoded by your player and these can be output via HDMI v1.1 & up or over 5.1/7.1 analog outputs. Your AVR will read "multi-channel in" or something like that.<<

Thanks L.J.! That IS what I see on the receiver when I set the player to PCM. And I don't need all the 7.1 analog cables, just the HDMI cable for that, correct? I'll have to critically listen to see if I can hear any difference. Every blu-ray I've played lately tho has a different audio format just adding to the confusion not to mention I can kick the 7.1 multi-channel over to THX mode in the receiver as well on the Dolby tracks just adding to the confusion. Too many options and the owners manuals don't exactly explain any of this!!!

Best,

G

[musicman1999]

I have the same option with my Anthem but when you use this you add an extra analog-digital-analog conversion which may adversely affect the sound.Try it both ways and see which one you like best, i have and run my 5.1 pcm tracks pure and unaltered.

bill

[L.J.]

Thanks L.J.! That IS what I see on the receiver when I set the player to PCM. And I don't need all the 7.1 analog cables, just the HDMI cable for that, correct? I'll have to critically listen to see if I can hear any difference. Every blu-ray I've played lately tho has a different audio format just adding to the confusion not to mention I can kick the 7.1 multi-channel over to THX mode in the receiver as well on the Dolby tracks just adding to the confusion. Too many options and the owners manuals don't exactly explain any of this!!!

Best,

G

Yes, this means the player is doing the decoding of the HD audio. In your case, this is the correct settings. The decoded audio can be output over the analog outputs or HDMI. Now, I don't really know if one offers any advantage over the other, as far as SQ is concerned, so I will suggest you try both ways and decide for yourself. Someone may have more info on that.

A couple of things to note is that if you go the 7.1 analog route, you will have to set your speaker levels and distances in the player, since the player will be handling the bass management. Going with HDMI, the bass management will be handled by your AVR, and this may give you some surround processing options like THX, DPLII and stuff like that.

[snodog]

Oh my god this is confusing! I have a Marantz sr6200 that I like alot but it only has two digital optical inputs and is a pain in the ass for me to keep changing in the back for multiple items. I have a new ps3 which to me has great sound and was thinking about updating my receiver with the HDMI.
What then would I do if I was to purchase a new 7.1 cd player? Does that use the direct seven seperate cables or do I want to use digital?

[L.J.]

7.1 CD player? Are you refering to SACD?

[snodog]

Yes, sorry that is what I meant. Is that a whole different thing than true HD? I am confused

[musicman1999]

Oh my god this is confusing! I have a Marantz sr6200 that I like alot but it only has two digital optical inputs and is a pain in the ass for me to keep changing in the back for multiple items. I have a new ps3 which to me has great sound and was thinking about updating my receiver with the HDMI.
What then would I do if I was to purchase a new 7.1 cd player? Does that use the direct seven seperate cables or do I want to use digital?

You could also use your coax digital inputs.

bill

[L.J.]

Well a quick search of google well give you all kinds of info on each.

Your PS3 can playback SACDs so your already OK. You will need to purchase a new AVR with at least HDMI 1.1 or up though.

Give the Onkyo 605 a try. Hard to beat for a little over $400.

[snodog]

Damn that is a nice looking piece for the price! I think its time to update. Thanks alot I was hoping to get some direction on a new unit to buy.

[motts]

I’d like to ask a couple of questions.

JLT have you hooked up your new Plasma and HD DVR to your B&K AVR507 yet? If so how did you decide to hook it up and what did you use? How is it and what would you do different if anything?

L.J. I’m in a similar situation; I will be upgrading my video system to the Panasonic TH-50PZ700U Plasma, DMP-BD30K Blu-Ray and HD DVR from Time Warner Cable. I will be using HDMI cables between the Plasma and HD DVR and the Plasma and Blue-Ray. I will use a Digital Optical between the Plasma and my B&K AVR202. In your opinion, is this the best way to hook these units up? Thanks for all the info.

[Mr Peabody]

Motts, that would work. The audio would remain digital until reaching your receiver so it should be fine.

If you receiver has multi-channel analog input you might want to use the DMP-30's multi-channel output to take advantage of the HD audio formats on Blu-ray.

It's interesting how HDMI is turning the whole industry around, the push used to be decoding in the receiver, now it's decoding in the disc player. Our receiver used to be the switcher, now it could become the TV.

[mtbg]

I am looking at buying at B&K AVR507 s2 for $395. Does this seem reasonable for this receiver? I know that it doesn't have HDMI but I can work around that. I haven't been able to see any prices for a AVR507 s2.
Does anyone know if you can send this to B&K and get it upgraded to have HDMI. I know that B&K was bought in 2010 by ATI.
Thanks

[Mr Peabody]

B&K is a bit better than your average HT receiver, however, that still seems a bit high to me, for that or a bit more you can get a fully featured current model HT receiver. I'm sure the B&K could not be upgraded as that would practically be rebuilding it. I would forget the B&K and look for a current model, even if you weren't interested in 3D, streaming or 4k there are still good buys on HDMI capable receivers.

[blackraven]

Unfortunately, B&K went out of business about 3 years ago. I believe ATI was going to take them over and try and keep the B&K brand going. Check BKcomp.com

[Worf101]

Holy Thread Revival Batman!!!! I was halfway through this before I realized the original post was from 2007! I didn't know HDMI'd been around THAT long!!!

Worf

[topspeed]

Holy Thread Revival Batman!!!! I was halfway through this before I realized the original post was from 2007! I didn't know HDMI'd been around THAT long!!!

WorfLOL, I did the same thing! How times have changed in, er...6 years!

@mtbg, I agree with everyone else that you'd be far better served by a modern avr that can handle the current (and future) formats such as DTS Master & 4K. I picked up a Marantz SR5008 on ebay, NIB w/ extended warranty for $650. It plays all of my BD's in DTS Master/Dolby HD and was incredibly easy to set up. Because video processing is advancing at breakneck speed and almost everything outputs via HDMI now, older avr's simply aren't as viable for HT service.