Conceptual help on HT component configuration requested

[cgarai]

Hi,

Looking to add some decent sound to my HDTV, with an emphasis on good 2.1 audio. I'm curious about the configuration options. Here is what I have and want to do:

I have:

1. TV w/3 HDMI inputs and digital audio out (Samsung LN40C630)

Want to have as HDMI inputs:

1. HD Cable
2. Blueray
3. Media PC
4. DVR
5. Game console.

I'm interested in starting out with "good" 2 channel sound then adding a subwoofer, center channel and rear channels, in that order.

Considering a NAD T748 av receiver. It only has 4 HDMI inputs, but I believe that I could use 2 of the TV HDMI inputs for the game console and feed the digital audio back to the receiver. If this idea works it will make the selection of inputs more of a kluge, but my son is the gamer and very capable of of figuring out how to turn things on and my wife will never game.

My questions:
1. Are there any other "must have" sources that I have forgotten? Someday I might want to hook up a turntable and power some good speakers with a slightly exotic amp, but I think the NAD has enough inputs to handle that.

2. Am I right about the digital out? The TV manual says that the digital out will do 5.1.

3. What do you think of the NAD receiver?

4. If you like the NAD, what speakers would you recommend? I'm thinking in the $1000 +/- range. Towers would be OK.

5. Should I only consider towers if I have the space? Or are there better speakers for the main 2? Space and aesthetics aside and given the budget constraint.

6. The subwoofer is for audio fidelity, not for shock and awe gaming. What sort of price range am I looking at? Yes that is rather vague, but any hints on getting started would help.


Thanks!!

Chris

 

[jliedeka]

First, I would suggest that you use the cable box to the TV in your kludge since you probably won't lose anything in terms of resolution.

1. I think you have everything covered as far as sources you will probably want. There may be new appliances in the future that you may want but nothing on the immediate horizon.

2. You will probably get basic Dolby Digital from the TV digital out. I don't think the cable box gives you any more than that, hence my earlier suggestion. Does your TV support Audio Return Channel over HDMI? That would be another possibility.

3. NAD makes decent stuff, conservatively rated wattage. They aren't the bang for buck leader that they were years ago. I have an older NAD receiver in a secondary system that I am happy with.

4. I wouldn't overspend on the speakers if you are planning on adding a sub soon. Spend for quality, not size. It depends on the room you are trying to fill and desired playback level but I recommend larger monitors or smallish towers crossed over at 80Hz to the sub. The NAD should not have any trouble driving most speakers. You should have several decent choices in the $1000/pair range.

5. See #4

6. The really good subs start at $500-$700. You can certainly spend more. Check out Hsu/SVS/Outlaw for some good quality bang for buck subs.

Jim

 

[j_garcia]

HD Cable and DVR should be the same thing? Most of them offer this, so unless you are using Tivo, that should be in one box.

NAD of today is not what it used to be and we've seen a number of people complain about their quality in recent years, and specifically the AVRs, not so much their other gear. That does not mean they are not good, but throwing that out there.

Agreed on the sub; since it is quality over quantity, I wouldn't be spending less than about $500 there - but that will depend greatly on the size of the room.

 

[cgarai]

I don't have a DVR at the moment and it does bring up another question about provider DVR versus aftermarket DVRs like Tivo. Other than one vs. two inputs to the A/VR, what are the pros & cons?

 

[j_garcia]

The pro would be one box doing the job same job as two. I've never had Tivo because the Dish DVR did everything I needed it to just fine. IIRC, you'd still only have one connection, because there would be little reason to have a feed from both a separate DVR AND the cable box.

Unless you need some special feature Tivo offers (streaming from the web?), I don't think they have big advantages over what the providers offer these days. If you look at the Tivo site their claims of the features that many of the providers lack are about 100% false.

 

[jostenmeat]

Tivo IS the cable box. The main reason to get one is that it actually works, because lots of cable boxes out there barely do, particularly those from TW. Whether the DVR is essentially faulty, or that it lacks HDCP repeaters, etc. The UI is very nice, the remote is nice, streams lots of goodies, is remote programmable.

You don't pay a monthly fee to the cable company, so given enough time to make back the large initial outlay, you will be in the black at a certain point, probably will take a few years though. It will probably have OTA input, and I don't know that cable boxes ever have that. Though your TV prolly already has one.

So if your provider offers a box that works reasonably well, is not too expensive to rent, and that you don't care for streaming and/or already have other devices that do that for you, stick with what they give you. Tivo costs a lot at first. Even if it's a nicer rig than any other cable box I've ever played with, not even close.

edit: btw, at first glance, you seem to be too focused on the AVR/NAD. Personally, as a NAD amp owner, I'd shy away from their processing side. REGARDLESS, you need to consider speaker choices first and foremost, and after that personally I'd look at some of the recent open box and/or refurb Denon deals at this point. If you don't care for Audyssey (and I really do), I might consider Yamaha instead for their excellent track record. I have two Onkyos right now, myself, and unlike a lot of the FUD that is given out here, mine keep on chugging, I just recently opened up both to clean them, though they apparently didn't need to be. Main HT Onkyo was refurbed, close to half a decade right now already?

 

[cgarai]

I had no idea that TiVo replaced the set top box. It doesn't need some security info to decode the signals? I have to admit my perception of NAD comes from years ago when I had a room mate with one that sounded great, but that was just a stereo integrated amp.

So it seems that if NAD doesn't bring noticeably better 2.1 to the table then it sounds like Yamaha, denon,Onkyo and presumably Marantz will do. I was hoping to get something a little less main stream focusing more on quality sound rather than quantity of features. Even at a small premium.

Thanks
Chris