" i was told there is a world of difference between that and a dedicated processor"
Not necessarily. There is much greater economy of scale in an AVR. You're planning on skipping any video processing anyway. You may get more input flexibility with a dedicated pre/pro, but it's debatable whether there will be a difference in audio using HDMI. |
I am currently using a pioneer elite 92txh for the same. i just use the preouts to my amp..... i was told there is a world of difference between that and a dedicated processor |
Baranowski, Oppo may have meant to use both HDMI outputs on the Oppo, one for video directly to your projector, the other to the processor for audio.
Another option would be to get an Anthem MRX300 AVR and just use it as a pre/pro, very cost effective @$1000. I went from separates to the MRX in conjunction with my existing 5 channel amp and it works great. You could use some of the amps in it for extra channels or even a second zone.
Anthem's ARC room processing is nice in that it comes with a calibrated mic and uses the power of an external computer to calculate the filters. |
As far as using the nad,,, i decided i wanted to make use of the xlr inputs on my amp... so the nad did not make the list. |
Since i am looking to upgrade my ps3 as my source to an oppo, it was brought to my attention that why would i want to buy a source that decodes and run it to a new processor that decodes as well.
i was speaking to oppo and they said why not use the hdmi out and run it straight to the projector for video, then run the audio separate to the processor to get my room correction....
i am just going off of what i was told. Did i miss something? |
@Nick_sr - that was a typo. I meant put as much money as possible into the processor. Thanks for catching that. |
Bill, I can't make any recommendation on the processors listed or any other for that matter as I have little to no experience with home theatre systems.
The little experience I have is in regards to the integration of my Cambridge bd751 and TV into to my 2 channel system, hence the comments on decoding.
@Mateored, why "put as much money as possible into the source"? If the decoding is being done by the processor then isn't the blu-ray or other digital source acting more as a transport? Bill's selection of the Oppo 103 seems like a better choice over the 105, given that extra dollars for the 105 are mostly for the Dac, a Dac which won't be used? |
I can't see any reason why it would be desirable to decode - re-encode - decode. Makes no sense. If you want to use room correction and bass management, the processor needs to work with a digital signal. Therefore, you are best off feeding it a digital signal (i.e., don't have the Oppo convert to analog). If you do that, the processor will need to convert analog back to digital so that it can run the room correction, and then convert it back to analog again. For that reason, if you need room correction, put as much money as possible into the source. I have an extremely difficult room, and for me the Anthem ARC works really well. But I've never tried any other room correction systems in my room. Kal is right that the Emotiva piece isn't out yet. It looks strong for the money, but I wouldn't buy an Emotiva processor until I saw that they have solved all of their bugs.
For that price, I'd give serious consideration also to the NAD T 175-HD. You can get a factory re-furb from Spearit Sound for that budget. I believe the NAD has Audyssey MultEQ XT (not sure how that compares to the Integra's system) and an upgradeable architecture to help prevent it from becoming obsolete. |
Bill please disregard my first post (if it actually shows up before this one), I wasn't thinking correctly.
If you connect your OPPO to the processor via RCA/coax, then you cannot use the OPPO for decoding multichannel HD audio, which must be done by the processor.
If you connect with HDMI, then the OPPO can do the sound decoding and send the PCM signal to the processor for room correction. However, I cannot think why this would be advantageous to just having the processor do the decoding as well.
So as Kr4 already answered, the Integra 80.3 (or 80.2) with Audyssey with multieq XT32 would seem to offer you the best room correction (I still am using an older Integra 9.9, and want to move up to XT32 as well). |
Bill, if this is not yet clear, should you wish to use one of those processors for room correction, then you cannot use the OPPO for decoding/processing. Similarly, if you want to connect to the processor with HDMI or RCA, then you also cannot use the OPPO for decoding/processing.
Out of curiosity, why do you want to do audio processing with the source, rather than with the pre/pro? |
I wouldn't want to double decode if it was possible that is why i wrote what i wrote.... |
|
You can decode twice if, in between, you re-encode. This is rare in multichannel but is possible. |
I don't think you can decode or process twice. If the oppo decodes then it will send an analog signal to the pre/processor. If you use the hdmi out for audio then the processor will decode and the Dac in the oppo will not be used. |
Since you are most interested in room correction (sound
differences, via HDMI, are tiny by comparison), the Integra
would seem to be the best bet, especially as you can up grade
to AudysseyPro if you wish. The Anthem comes next. The
Marantz lacks XT32 and the Emotiva, afaik, does not yet exist. |
wow almost 24 hours for my post to post. at least it is here.... |
