Why use the receiver to switch video inputs instead of the TV?

[Hanse18]

What defines a cheap receiver these days? I am in the same boat as Johnnythan here. My projector is 30' away from my AV rack, so I needed some sort of single cable solution. I got an open box Pioneer Elite Vsx-82TSX for $900. I thought that was a pretty good deal. In fact, I thought the receiver was downright cheap. Now everything is run to my projector through a single HDMI cable. I also ran a component cable, since the cost of building and running a component cable is minimal, but I only plan to use it if my HDMI fails for some reason. I also value video much more than audio. As long as it's loud and clear, I don't care too much. I think I might actually be sending a better signal to my projector by running everything through HDMI, since digital runs don't degrade, while analog signals will.

 

[MACCA350]

This should throw a spanner in the works. I use a bit of both

I have 7 video sources, DVD, PS2, HTPC, VCR, Cable TV, Digital PVR, Subwoofer.

I have 2 monitors, CRT TV(S-Video) and DLP Projector(Component)

I have both monitors able to display all sources(and yes I do use both monitors for displaying the different sources at different times)

Now you tell me whats the easiest way to set this up and operate?
If I didn't use the receiver to do most the video switching it would be a nightmare.

The only exceptions are
DVD player - this has a direct component connection to the Projector's dedicated Progressive input(the reason for this is because the proj has separate interlaced and progressive inputs and the receivers menu overlay is interlaced and causes the proj to loose the signal, the proj's interlaced component input is connected to the receiver for all interlaced signals) and a S-Video line to the receiver.

Cable TV - This has a component connection to the receiver(for proj viewing), also a S-Video connection to the receiver(for CRT TV viewing with audio through receiver) and another S-Video connection to the CRT TV(for all normal everyday TV viewing w/out the receiver on)

And thats just the Video. All audio is connected to the receiver with the cable TV also connected to the CRT TV(this is for all normal everyday TV viewing)


cheers

 

[videobruce]

I think it's better to have two 25' cables (one component, one HDMI) to my monitor instead of 5 (2 component, 2 HDMI, 1 S-video).Isn't that reason enough?

Yes, for you, but my equipment is on the same stand.

What defines a cheap receiver these days?

One less than $1k.

I have 7 video sources, DVD, PS2, HTPC, VCR, Cable TV, Digital PVR, Subwoofer.

A video subwoofer??

 

[Nick250]

I vote for a Harmony remote, it does anything you want with one push of the button with the exclusion of MACCA's setup. I am very pleased with mine.

Nick

 

[jonnythan]

Yes, for you, but my equipment is on the same stand.

Then you have no use whatsoever for video switching on your receiver.

Easy, huh?

 

[mike c]

A video subwoofer??

Velodyne Digital Drive Subwoofer with Onscreen parametric equalizer. and yes, you do use it every now and then, enough to warrant a permanent slot in the switching.

 

[mike c]

to all you other guys ... please just stop. it's like watching you guys try to convince a priest to convert to islam or something. its painful to watch. but i bet it hurts you more than it does me.

 

[sleeper]

One thing that I haven't heard anyone mention is latency.

I've read (because I personally haven't experienced this) that some people, when sending video straight to the display and bypassing the receiver, experience an audio lag. The sound and video are not in perfect sync. Kinda like watching an overdubbed movie. Running everything through the receiver takes care of this phenomenon.

If that doesn't happen with your setup, Videobruce, great, but it is another reason as to why someone would want to switch using the receiver vs. display.

sleeper.