 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
60.231.35.49
In Reply to: RE: Can an AV receiver be used for 2 channel and... posted by HiOnFi on October 07, 2010 at 13:46:10
1) Yes, it can be used for 2.0 or 2.1 channel setups only.
2) Quality of sound may actually be better in 2.0 or in 2.1 because you aren't using as many channels and aren't driving the receiver's power supply as hard as you would when using it for a surround setup. You may also be able to use two of the unused channels to biamp your speakers using their internal crossovers if the speakers have biwire connections (whether you can do this depends on the features of the receiver you use—not all receivers offer this). In addition some receivers offer automated setup and room EQ functions that may also be useful to you in 2.0 or 2.1 setups.
Whether the results will "sound good" to you will depend on the quality of the receiver and your own views of what sounds good but I've had very enjoyable results using an AVR for 2.0 and 2.1 sound in a system for HT purposes. Pick the right receiver and speakers and you may be very happy with the result. Pick the wrong ones and you won't. In principle there's no reason not to go this way.
You would probably get better results for the same money using a 2 channel receiver or integrated amp for the same price because you're buying fewer channels of amplification and less features and the cost of those extra channels and features can be used to deliver better quality results in a 2 channel device. Still, having said that, the room EQ functions in some receivers may actually help you get better results than you would with a stereo amp if your room and listening setup have some problems the EQ can correct. The question about value for money in using a multi-channel AVR for 2 channel setups with or without a sub is a different one to the question about whether it will sound good. If you've got the AVR or have access to a reasonable one at a good price, there's no reason not to consider it as an option.
David Aiken
Follow Ups:
Thanks for the detailed reply!
I am definitely after bang for the buck sonically
I am replacing a $3500 integrated that got fried from bad transformer fuse out on the street. I don't really need anything that exotic or expensive. My audio system does that.
I was under the impression that HDMI was beneficial
in every way, not just simplicity of connection. I thought the new version of HDMI solved the sonics issues. No?
HDMI is a cable connection and I think it works reasonably well. It carries a digital signal which needs to be converted to analog at some point. The quality of the conversion depends on the quality of the DAC you use to do the conversion. You either need to use the receiver's DACs to convert that to analog or find a DAC that accepts HDMI, feed the Oppo's signal to that via HDMI, and then feed the DAC's output to the receiver via analog i/c. Alternatively, as jbufka2 said, you can use the Oppo's analog outputs and feed that to the receiver. I suspect there will be some differences depending on which of those ways you go. Which way is best is likely to depend on the quality of the different DACs involved with each of those approaches.
If you're setting up a 2 channel HT system and you're going to be feeding video as well as audio from the Oppo to the AVR, and if you have any other source components which also have HDMI outputs, and your AVR has enough HDMI inputs, then HDMI is definitely a good way to go because it simplifies your cabling arrangements immensely, even if it doesn't necessarily give the best sound quality. There are times when simplicity and convenience can be worth the cost.
Even if you're only using one source, the Oppo, and you're feeding video through the AVR as well as audio, if your AVR has some setup and/or EQ functions that you're going to use and those functions are handled in the digital domain, I'd probably prefer to go with HDMI for the sake of cabling simplicity. I'd prefer not to feed an analog audio signal to the AVR, have it redigitise the analog signal in order to do the EQ and/or whatever other functions it's going to do in the digital domain, and then convert the signal back to analog. My preference if you're going to be doing some digital processing in the AVR would be to keep the signal digital from Oppo to receiver and only do a D/A conversion after the processing.
There's no "wrong" way here but there are a variety of options, each of which has different strengths and weaknesses. You need to work out what you're doing, what things are important to you in how you do what you want to do, and then run with the option that's best for achieving that outcome.
David Aiken
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
