AV help

[davbrucas]

Yup. It's a POS Samsung all in one. I finally got it to work using the optical input and HDMI cables. Thanks for the help.

[Geor!]

Yup. It's a POS Samsung all in one. I finally got it to work using the optical input and HDMI cables. Thanks for the help.

[LS1Goat]

If the receiver doesn't have HDMI in, it belongs in the trash.

x2

[Chili]

My surround is the HTIB without HDMI but it is better than the TV's audio

I have HDMI from the Dish receiver to the TV, and from the PS3 to the TV, and optical from the Dish reciver to the Surround receiver, and optical from the PS3 to the Surround receiver. For my budget I can live with having to use different controllers.

[fordracing19]

If the receiver doesn't have HDMI in, it belongs in the trash.

I have a Denon 3308 thats not hdmi. I will be buying a Denon 3312 for the media room in our new house but still going to use the 3308 in the living room. It does have component switching.

[ram57ta]

I bought one of those HTIB's from Toshiba a couple years ago for my mother. What a pile of garbage. Within 6 months the DVD player quit reading discs, and shortly afterward it quit turning on from standby.

[2K2 LS1]

If the receiver doesn't have HDMI in, it belongs in the trash.

Your advice should be taken with a grain of salt.Telling someone any receiver without HDMI switching belongs in the trash is plain stupid. Most receivers used in larger scale home automation don't even switch the video. They simply are used to provide source audio and you then use a video switcher/matrix to not only split but also switch the video sources. So telling someone that if they can't switch their video through a receiver it must be trash is silly. Why do you think most tv's come with multiple HDMI inputs and both coaxial and optical(toslink) digital audio out???

[jluv]

Your advice should be taken with a grain of salt.Telling someone any receiver without HDMI switching belongs in the trash is plain stupid. Most receivers used in larger scale home automation don't even switch the video. They simply are used to provide source audio and you then use a video switcher/matrix to not only split but also switch the video sources. So telling someone that if they can't switch their video through a receiver it must be trash is silly. Why do you think most tv's come with multiple HDMI inputs and both coaxial and optical(toslink) digital audio out???

First of all, this thread is about the challenges this guy is facing with a cheap all-in-one unit because it doesn't have HDMI inputs. Where do you get off comparing what I said to home automation?

Secondly, your assumption that I put importance on an HDMI input because of the need for video switching is incorrect and out of left field. An HDMI input is important so the receiver can receive today's better formats like DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD. If you only have optical input on your receiver and no HDMI, you can't even get all the features out of Blurays. Lame.

[2K2 LS1]

First of all, this thread is about the challenges this guy is facing with a cheap all-in-one unit because it doesn't have HDMI inputs. Where do you get off comparing what I said to home automation?

Secondly, your assumption that I put importance on an HDMI input because of the need for video switching is incorrect and out of left field. An HDMI input is important so the receiver can receive today's better formats like DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD. If you only have optical input on your receiver and no HDMI, you can't even get all the features out of Blurays. Lame.

Did the OP say anything about being concerned about receiving DTS or Dolby TrueHD? No he was having more of an issue with not being able to hook up more than one video source to the receiver.

Did you state the only reason that you would rule out a receiver that doesn't switch HDMI was because the receiver can't handle those types of audio feeds? No out of context in the thread and your post; it was taken that they were junk because they couldn't switch HDMI video. I simply stated that he could work around that and keep the receiver because of the fact he could switch video via most modern TV's and output the audio from the TV back to the cheap surround receiver via either coaxial or toslink.

[jluv]

Did the OP say anything about being concerned about receiving DTS or Dolby TrueHD? No he was having more of an issue with not being able to hook up more than one video source to the receiver.

Did you state the only reason that you would rule out a receiver that doesn't switch HDMI was because the receiver can't handle those types of audio feeds? No out of context in the thread and your post; it was taken that they were junk because they couldn't switch HDMI video. I simply stated that he could work around that and keep the receiver because of the fact he could switch video via most modern TV's and output the audio from the TV back to the cheap surround receiver via either coaxial or toslink.

So... you made an incorrect assumption, put words in my mouth, and then called those words stupid and silly, even though they were not my words.

Interesting.

If you'll look closer in this very thread, you'll actually see where I suggested that he use the TV as his video switching source.

I'm fairly certain you've been active in some of the threads where the Onkyo handshake issue comes up, so surely you've seen where I've suggested the optical cable workaround, even stating that the result is a loss of ability to carry the newer formats. That's why I (and some others) are so pissed at our Onkyos. Did you think it was based on video switching?

I can see where you would get confused, and I'm really not trying to be a dick. But, you're the one who went out of your way to comment on a post I made a week ago.




P.S.: TV's over the fireplace lick balls and speakers mounted in the ceiling cause the AIDS.

[Geor!]

2K2 LS1, call jluv a "dumbass". Do it. Just do it.

[Chili]

P.S.: TV's over the fireplace lick balls and speakers mounted in the ceiling cause the AIDS.

Lulz.