Receiver up grade worth it

[Deerhunter]

In need of some help,
I currently have a older Denon 2105 that does not have HDMI, my TV and Blueray do have HDMI. Is it worth upgrading to a newer receiver for the HDMI? I have been looking at a few Marantz receivers on audiogone that also have more power too. Or just keep it and get more power if its not a real difference. I don't care about the networking stuff the newer ones have. Just a more of a yes its a big difference or just run more power.



I am running Paradigm monitor 11s with the matching mini's and the center. Once I am local then I am getting a new powersound sub.

 

[Haywood]

Yes, it is worth it because it is the only way to get support for advanced audio codecs and because it makes operation so much simpler. Keep in mind that all of the new stuff requires HDMI 2.0a to work, so upgrading to an HDMI 1.4 receiver will do you no good if you move to 4K at some point.

 

[Deerhunter]

Thank you my friend, the ones I have been looking at are of that grade. My wife has approved of that too, just may be a bit longer. We still need several things for our new house.

 

[Haywood]

I just got a great deal on a refurbished Marantz SR6010 from www.accessories4less.com. This was my third or fourth receiver from them. I could not say no to $699.

 

[Yesfan70]

Yes, it is worth it because it is the only way to get support for advanced audio codecs and because it makes operation so much simpler. Keep in mind that all of the new stuff requires HDMI 2.0a to work, so upgrading to an HDMI 1.4 receiver will do you no good if you move to 4K at some point.

I agree with Haywood. I have an Onkyo I got from Chris and Brian here. One HDMI per source vs 3+ RCA cables only makes it worth it, plus what Haywood posted about the codecs.


I did not know that about HDMI 1.4 and 4K. Thanks for sharing that!

 

[Haywood]

All the 4K stuff requires HDMI 2.0a and HDCP 2.2. Just a heads up though. HDCP 2.2 is a flaky piece of crap, even with compliant gear.

 

[Flint]

I personally found that with my 2.0 system in my apartment I could use the TV as the video switcher by plugging the BluRay player and Streaming Player directly into it, then taking the S/PDIF output to feed my stereo preamp. The cheap Samsung TV I was using did all the audio processing and could output either stereo or 5.1 via the optical cable.

It isn't a perfect arrangement, but it worked quite well for me.

The point being, if you are not taking advantage of the most modern audio formats, you could use your TV to handle all the 4K stuff.

 

[Haywood]

You can also use a $250 HDFury Integral with an HDMI 1.4 receiver to get Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD-MA as long as you only have one or two 4K sources. I would have gone that route myself had I not needed to send a feed to my kitchen.

There is something else you get with the newer receivers that I think is very worthwhile. Room correction. I got noticeably better results with Audessey than I did with manual calibration. It made a real difference.

 

[Towen7]

I personally found that with my 2.0 system in my apartment I could use the TV as the video switcher by plugging the BluRay player and Streaming Player directly into it, then taking the S/PDIF output to feed my stereo preamp. The cheap Samsung TV I was using did all the audio processing and could output either stereo or 5.1 via the optical cable.

It isn't a perfect arrangement, but it worked quite well for me.

The point being, if you are not taking advantage of the most modern audio formats, you could use your TV to handle all the 4K stuff.

That's what I do in my living room. I upgraded to a 4K TV with a Roku as 4K source but my older receiver can't handle the video. So now the
HDMI sources (Roku, U-verse, BluRay player) are connected to the TV's HDMI inputs and a toslink cable from the TV to the receiver. I lose the benefit of lossless audio from BDs but I don't miss it even a little. I can't hear a difference in my no-symmetrical non-acoustically treated room with a 3.1 speaker setup.

 

[Deerhunter]

I have been on accessories4less alot, I have found it hard to beat their prices. I have no problem with referb, plus it has a warranty too boot. At some point I am also going to upgrade to 4k. I have been looking at the one that Haywood just got.

(Haywood---by the way YOU SUCK)

But wife thinks we need a Washer and Dryer, front loading in red, bla bla bla lol. I offered to get her a wash board and a bucket, "I have forgotten how cold it gets in the desert during the winter." lol

 

[Yesfan70]

.......
But wife thinks we need a Washer and Dryer, front loading in red, bla bla bla lol. I offered to get her a wash board and a bucket, "I have forgotten how cold it gets in the desert during the winter." lol

Get a top load. I have a front load and hate it. Fucking thing sounds like my sub with the volume maxed when it's running.

 

[Barney]

I'm another fan of accessories4less. If you like Denon they carry them too. Last one I bougdt was a Marantz SR5009. I had to get a HDFury Integral for my setup with Samsung 4k.
The Marantz SR6011 will have refurbed which is 1 year newer than Haywood's.

 

[Haywood]

I'm another fan of accessories4less. If you like Denon they carry them too. Last one I bougdt was a Marantz SR5009. I had to get a HDFury Integral for my setup with Samsung 4k.
The Marantz SR6011 will have refurbed which is 1 year newer than Haywood's.

The only real difference is that the 6011 offers Atmos 7.2.4, while the 6010 only supports 7.2.2. Given the price difference and my room constraints, I was more than happy to live with that.

I use an HDFury Linker down-convert both HDCP and resolution on the second zone output to feed the 1080p set in my kitchen. Once I figured out how to set it up correctly (which was a bitch), it worked perfectly. There is no drama. It is invisible.

 

[Deerhunter]

My mom has a front loading, its quite. Ours is also upstairs, she is set on it. Odd that yours makes so much noise.

 

[Deerhunter]

I have enjoyed my Denon, I also have heard a few of the Marantz, so I figured I would try something new its hard to go wrong with either one.

 

[Flint]

My mom has a front loading, its quite. Ours is also upstairs, she is set on it. Odd that yours makes so much noise.

I am using my second front loading washing machine now, and both were the quietest washing machines I've ever owned. I've had two top loading and two front loading and there isn't a comparison in terms of noise or cleanliness of the clothes which come out of them. Barring any new designs coming out, I will always buy front loading going forward.

 

[Randy]

I loved my front loader and I got 16 good years out of it before it gave up the ghost.!

It was very quiet. A lot quieter than the fancy(ish) top loader I have now.

 

[Towen7]

I am using my second front loading washing machine now, and both were the quietest washing machines I've ever owned. I've had two top loading and two front loading and there isn't a comparison in terms of noise or cleanliness of the clothes which come out of them. Barring any new designs coming out, I will always buy front loading going forward.

We're getting way off the OP but I'm in the front-loading camp as well. But only if there's a pedestal. We had a pair without the pedestal and I resorted to building one because loading/unloading was a bit of a chore.

 

[Botch]

We had a pair without the pedestal and I resorted to building one because loading/unloading was a bit of a chore.

Oh oh oh I have a question for you Tom. So the pedestals are just a flat top, not some interlocking feature with the machine above? If/when I get new machines I want to build my own pedestal too (a tall one) but was never sure if they were specially-shaped...

 

[Zing]

@Botch The pedestals that are made for the washer and dryer do indeed interlock or are otherwise fastened (at least ours are that way) but, to your question, it is not a requirement. If they can sit on a flat floor without the pedestals, they can sit on anything you'd make to act as a riser.