![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
206.16.14.254
In Reply to: RE: I disagree - it's missing a key feature posted by racerguy on December 18, 2007 at 06:15:12
I bought an AVR with HDMI 1.3. It was only $400 and works fine for my needs. I now have DTS HD MA and Dolby True HD through bitstream.
There isn't an AVR on the planet that matches up to my gear, not even the $5000 Denon. Yes, I would gain the ability to bitstream advanced codecs from my HDM players, but the benefit I would gain from that is totally overshadowed by the sacrifices I would have to make.
BTW, Is Lexicon and/or their design teams still intact or has the expertise been spread to the winds in corporate restructuring ?
The price is a bit steep but I expect I'll get better results with the Denon and my current MC preamp than a $400 Samsung and $2000 HDMI 1.3-compliant AVR. Of course, there are other benefits as well (better upscaling, DACs etc), I doubt there are enough DTS HD MA movie releases to justify the expense just for the advanced decoding. I can already play TrueHD and PCM through the existing player's analog outputs.
Of course, CES 2008 might reveal tastier options to consider.
I'm supposed to replace a $3K amp with a $400 receiver just because some studio wants to use DTS MA the NO PLAYER actually decodes? I don't think so.
Jack
nt
Granted, the audio portion of my HT isn't up to my music system's standards (Its made from my stereo's discards), but I don't see the point of buying a receiver just because players don't decode DTS MA. That's just silly.
I'm not sure I see your point.
Jack
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: