Receiver upgrade

[kindredspirit]

Ok Ascend People... Need some recommendations.
I currently have the older 340s across the front and the older 170s for rear and a HSU 2 sub. I have been pushing all of them with a very old Onkyo TX-DS656 receiver that has and still serves its purpose extremely well. I'm currently looking at upgrading to something that might make my Ascends sound better (if that is possible). My budget cap is about $700 and I don't know if i'm interested in separates. I know everyone says that you need to listen to each receiver and see what you like, but I live in a very small town with absolutely no sound stores. So I want recommendations. Help me out.

Thanks in advance!

[BradJudy]

A lot of places are clearing out the Harman/Kardon AVR-635s for $500 or less in anticipation of new models. It's a very similar situation to when I bought my H/K AVR-520 a few years ago.

You can't get into separates for $700, unless you wanted to keep your receiver as a pre/pro and buy an amp. There are lots of two-channel amps for under $700 and you might find some used multichannel amps for that much (the Emotiva LPA-1 is the only new multichannel amp for $700 or less that comes to mind).

There are probably other good receiver deals out there, and I'm sure others will chime in. I can't say if either of these options will make a noticable improvement to the sound.

[BGHD]

Assuming HDMI isn't important to you, try the HK 435 or 635. I'd check Harmans ebay site for refurbs.

Others to consider: Pio 1015, used Pio 56txi.

To my ears, the HKs and Pio sound different, so you should try to listen and see what you like. Neither is necessarily better, just slightly different. The HKs really match well with the Ascend classics though.

[cyberbri]

I got an HK 330 factory refurb from Harmanaudio/ebay for $250 last year. It works great with my Ascends, which I just got about a month ago or so.

[Lee Bailey]

With HDMI 1.3 coming down the pipe, I'd put off getting a receiver now with only HDMI 1.1 or 1.2. HDMI 1.3 is going to double the transfer speed over what is presently in use, plus several other changes in video and audio.

[azanon]

I dont see the point of component/hdmi switching unless one's goal is to introduce an extra chance for signal degradation.

The TV HMDI/component goes straight into the Set-top box. The DVD HDMI/component goes straight into the TV. You're gonna have to use a remote to switch between the two anyway; why not just use the TVs? The TV remote has other features one uses anyway, so its already sitting out most likely.

Azanon

[BradJudy]

It depends on how long you are willing to wait. HDMI 1.3 was just finalized so we're a minimum of a year from products using it, probably two years before there are real choices.

azanon - There are two main reasons for caring about HDMI. First, it also carries audio and will eventually replace other cables for digital audio. Second, not everyone has a TV with enough inputs to handle all of their sources.

[Eddie]

6ave.com has the HK 635 for $550 shipped, original list was around $1300...very safe bet with the Ascends.

A slightly risky bet but worth it due to the massive savings if it works for you would be the Panasonic sa-xr55 ($250 shipped from amazon.com) or the newer xr57 ($300 shipped from bhphoto.com). Nice thing about amazon.com is very liberal return policy.

I have the xr55 running 340 classics across the front and have always been extremely happy with it, replaced a much more expensive Marantz 5400 and some NAD separates with it.

[azanon]

azanon - There are two main reasons for caring about HDMI. First, it also carries audio and will eventually replace other cables for digital audio. Second, not everyone has a TV with enough inputs to handle all of their sources.

On your first point, any decent receiver and HD Set-top box has either an optical or coaxial digital port for sound, whether it has HDMI or not. HDMI is not a superior sound jack to the others.

On your second point, I agree not everyone's TV has enough jacks, but its not as if there aren't other solutions. Take my TV for instance (new 40" Sony Bravia flat panel). It just has one HDMI port, and some of the newer HD DVD players (or blue-ray) only have HDMI, so let them use the HDMI, and then let your STB use the component digital. I compared the component to the HDMI on my STB, and i couldnt tell the difference.

Given a choice, I'd rather use component (supporting 720p and 1080i) but have a direct link, than to have 2 cables making a continuous link for the HDMI connection. One cable is always better than 2. Shorter cables are always better than unnecessarily long ones, etc.

Another point i didnt mention previously about component/hdmi switching, is that sometimes, some receivers will have the actual jacks, but might lack adequate bandwidth to pass the signal completely unaffected. So, again, my thought is if you want to increase your chances for a degraded signal, then by all means use your component/hdmi switching feature on your receiver.

[Jonnyozero3]

On your first point, any decent receiver and HD Set-top box has either an optical or coaxial digital port for sound, whether it has HDMI or not. HDMI is not a superior sound jack to the others.

What about high-resolution 6ch DVD-A and SACD? Optical and coaxial digital connections can't handle that kind of bandwidth. Also, HDMI 1.3 will be able to carry lossless Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD (natively rather than in PCM) with automatic lip synchronization. Plus, it's just one cable, rather than two. That has to be a plus right?

On your second point, I agree not everyone's TV has enough jacks, but its not as if there aren't other solutions. Take my TV for instance (new 40" Sony Bravia flat panel). It just has one HDMI port, and some of the newer HD DVD players (or blue-ray) only have HDMI, so let them use the HDMI, and then let your STB use the component digital. I compared the component to the HDMI on my STB, and i couldnt tell the difference.

Given a choice, I'd rather use component (supporting 720p and 1080i) but have a direct link, than to have 2 cables making a continuous link for the HDMI connection. One cable is always better than 2. Shorter cables are always better than unnecessarily long ones, etc.

I find it odd that you're all spun up about not switching a signal, but you don't have a problem using component and choose to miss out on the benefits of an all-digital signal path. It seems to me that the using component instead of HDMI would have a greater visual impact than that of a properly switched signal. I dunno.