Surround Sound for the PS3

  • 54 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Sedin44
Sedin44

1171

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1 Sedin44
Member since 2007 • 1171 Posts

Can some of you guys tell me the type and model surround sounds you guys use for system and how well it works with the system.  Also how important is it to get one with an hdmi in and out?

Avatar image for squirrelgrrrl84
squirrelgrrrl84

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 squirrelgrrrl84
Member since 2004 • 298 Posts
i'm curious about the same thing, also i'm curious if there are any reasonably priced yet worthwhile solutions with 1080p hdmi passthrough...
Avatar image for flainsoul
flainsoul

516

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 flainsoul
Member since 2006 • 516 Posts

ballin

Avatar image for flainsoul
flainsoul

516

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 flainsoul
Member since 2006 • 516 Posts
it has an optical out which is what u should use if ur gonna hool up a surround system, 5.1 is a LOT better then anything a normal tv speaker can do.
Avatar image for mugwuffin
mugwuffin

151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 mugwuffin
Member since 2006 • 151 Posts
I have an sony dream system 2 acoustimass 2.1 and works good cause my room is enclosed. if you your gonna have a wide open room you prbly gonna need a 5.1 or 7.1  but what do i know huh.
Avatar image for BIGDEE06
BIGDEE06

2322

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 BIGDEE06
Member since 2006 • 2322 Posts
I have a 7.1 Onkyo surround system and it works like a charm.  It doesn't have any HDMI inputs, but I run all of my video inputs to my HDTV.  I have 2 optical toslink cables and 1 digital coaxial cable connected to my receiver.
Avatar image for BroweChisox
BroweChisox

1104

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 BroweChisox
Member since 2003 • 1104 Posts
If you are buying a new setup, there is no reason to not get HDMI in. The increase in sound quality via HDMI blows anything you can send through optical away. It is totally foolish to invest in a non HDMI system now. For a receiver, I would recommend the Denon AVR887 or AVR-2307ci, both are steals at their price. Speaker wise, you can go anywhere from 100 per pair to $30,000 per pair. Hard to give a suggestion without knowing room dimensions or price range.
Avatar image for mugwuffin
mugwuffin

151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 mugwuffin
Member since 2006 • 151 Posts
If you are buying a new setup, there is no reason to not get HDMI in. The increase in sound quality via HDMI blows anything you can send through optical away. It is totally foolish to invest in a non HDMI system now. For a receiver, I would recommend the Denon AVR887 or AVR-2307ci, both are steals at their price. Speaker wise, you can go anywhere from 100 per pair to $30,000 per pair. Hard to give a suggestion without knowing room dimensions or price range.BroweChisox
man you know your stuff. wish id had you at best buy when i bought my system.
Avatar image for danneswegman
danneswegman

12937

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 danneswegman
Member since 2005 • 12937 Posts
If you are buying a new setup, there is no reason to not get HDMI in. The increase in sound quality via HDMI blows anything you can send through optical away. It is totally foolish to invest in a non HDMI system now. For a receiver, I would recommend the Denon AVR887 or AVR-2307ci, both are steals at their price. Speaker wise, you can go anywhere from 100 per pair to $30,000 per pair. Hard to give a suggestion without knowing room dimensions or price range.BroweChisox
optical out is just as good. it's not like YOU will hear a difference.
Avatar image for BroweChisox
BroweChisox

1104

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 BroweChisox
Member since 2003 • 1104 Posts
[QUOTE="BroweChisox"]If you are buying a new setup, there is no reason to not get HDMI in. The increase in sound quality via HDMI blows anything you can send through optical away. It is totally foolish to invest in a non HDMI system now. For a receiver, I would recommend the Denon AVR887 or AVR-2307ci, both are steals at their price. Speaker wise, you can go anywhere from 100 per pair to $30,000 per pair. Hard to give a suggestion without knowing room dimensions or price range.danneswegman
optical out is just as good. it's not like YOU will hear a difference.

What are you talking about? Do you not have a clue? The difference between uncompressed sound via HDMI is 10 times better than compressed DD or DTS through optical. How could you not notice an uncompressed 7 channel track when compared against a lossy 5.1 track? HDMI also allows players to decode DTSHD or DolbyHD and send that uncompressed signal directly to the receiver. I pray to God that you will not argue that you can not hear the difference between DTSHD and compressed DTS.
Avatar image for danneswegman
danneswegman

12937

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 danneswegman
Member since 2005 • 12937 Posts
[QUOTE="danneswegman"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"]If you are buying a new setup, there is no reason to not get HDMI in. The increase in sound quality via HDMI blows anything you can send through optical away. It is totally foolish to invest in a non HDMI system now. For a receiver, I would recommend the Denon AVR887 or AVR-2307ci, both are steals at their price. Speaker wise, you can go anywhere from 100 per pair to $30,000 per pair. Hard to give a suggestion without knowing room dimensions or price range.BroweChisox
optical out is just as good. it's not like YOU will hear a difference.

What are you talking about? Do you not have a clue? The difference between uncompressed sound via HDMI is 10 times better than compressed DD or DTS through optical. How could you not notice an uncompressed 7 channel track when compared against a lossy 5.1 track? HDMI also allows players to decode DTSHD or DolbyHD and send that uncompressed signal directly to the receiver. I pray to God that you will not argue that you can not hear the difference between DTSHD and compressed DTS.

not ten times... we can't tell, you neither. Those differences are measured, but not with human ears.... and not all audio trough HDMI is uncompressed.
Avatar image for BroweChisox
BroweChisox

1104

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 BroweChisox
Member since 2003 • 1104 Posts
[QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="danneswegman"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"]If you are buying a new setup, there is no reason to not get HDMI in. The increase in sound quality via HDMI blows anything you can send through optical away. It is totally foolish to invest in a non HDMI system now. For a receiver, I would recommend the Denon AVR887 or AVR-2307ci, both are steals at their price. Speaker wise, you can go anywhere from 100 per pair to $30,000 per pair. Hard to give a suggestion without knowing room dimensions or price range.danneswegman
optical out is just as good. it's not like YOU will hear a difference.

What are you talking about? Do you not have a clue? The difference between uncompressed sound via HDMI is 10 times better than compressed DD or DTS through optical. How could you not notice an uncompressed 7 channel track when compared against a lossy 5.1 track? HDMI also allows players to decode DTSHD or DolbyHD and send that uncompressed signal directly to the receiver. I pray to God that you will not argue that you can not hear the difference between DTSHD and compressed DTS.

not ten times... we can't tell, you neither. Those differences are measured, but not with human ears.... and not all audio trough HDMI is uncompressed.

It is clear you do not know what you are talking about. I am not sure why you are arguing this point... maybe you are bitter about recently purchasing a non-HDMI receiver? The difference between an uncompressed track or a DTSHD/DolbyHD track is enough that my wife easily noticed the difference and made a comment without me even letting her in on what was going on. If you have never used/experienced HDMI audio, maybe you should just stop posting before you embarrass yourself even more.
Avatar image for Sedin44
Sedin44

1171

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#13 Sedin44
Member since 2007 • 1171 Posts
I have a 7.1 Onkyo surround system and it works like a charm. It doesn't have any HDMI inputs, but I run all of my video inputs to my HDTV. I have 2 optical toslink cables and 1 digital coaxial cable connected to my receiver.BIGDEE06
Hey is that the one around $600? How is that one? I was thinking of buying that one.
Avatar image for wiebs
wiebs

1221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 wiebs
Member since 2003 • 1221 Posts
i have a HDMI equipped Denon and it is awesome with ucompressed PCM sound from the ps3. even if your tv does not support HDMI, but your reciever does, buy an HDMI cord just for the sound. The ps3 can use both HDMI, for sound, and component for video.
Avatar image for bruce-leroy
bruce-leroy

1325

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 bruce-leroy
Member since 2006 • 1325 Posts
[QUOTE="BroweChisox"]If you are buying a new setup, there is no reason to not get HDMI in. The increase in sound quality via HDMI blows anything you can send through optical away. It is totally foolish to invest in a non HDMI system now. For a receiver, I would recommend the Denon AVR887 or AVR-2307ci, both are steals at their price. Speaker wise, you can go anywhere from 100 per pair to $30,000 per pair. Hard to give a suggestion without knowing room dimensions or price range.danneswegman
optical out is just as good. it's not like YOU will hear a difference.

the difference is like night and day! i'm guessing that you have never actually got the chance to listen to a real sound system. uncompressed sound even in 2.1 stereo sound 10 times better. please dont misslead the masses
Avatar image for thenewcraze
thenewcraze

389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 thenewcraze
Member since 2006 • 389 Posts
I have to say that we are discussing a subjective matter. Everyone's ears are different. You would be super surprised that many people can't hear a noticeable difference, even with blind testing. I'm ISF certified and working on my THX-HTT2 cert and consider myself to be "blessed" with being able to comprehend audio/video technology. Why do you think great studio engineers in the music and film industry are so few and paid so well? They have the "ear" (or eyes) for it. Not a whole lot can be learned. Hell, I buy esoteric wiring for my setup - spending well over $150 per foot for speaker wire and interconnects. Why? Fifteen thousand dollar speakers can hone a discernable difference going from even the top-of-the-line crap like Monster to my WireWorld speaker wires. The fact of the matter is, on paper, the differences in technology is extremely cut and dry. It's like comparing horsepower-to-horsepower on two different vehicles and debating which one is faster. On a lighter note, the fact that your wife can hear the difference is mind-boggling. My fiance couldn't tell the difference in picture quality going from a 720P DVD to 1080P HD-DVD. As for the topic, stick with a budget and some research. Most companies/retailers have 30 day return policies. Do your research on respected audiophile websites (there are tons) before you purchase. You also have to consider dimensions and dynamics of the room you are working on as they tend to be the most important variable in choosing a setup.
Avatar image for jdang307
jdang307

1512

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 jdang307
Member since 2006 • 1512 Posts
If you are buying a new setup, there is no reason to not get HDMI in. The increase in sound quality via HDMI blows anything you can send through optical away. It is totally foolish to invest in a non HDMI system now. For a receiver, I would recommend the Denon AVR887 or AVR-2307ci, both are steals at their price. Speaker wise, you can go anywhere from 100 per pair to $30,000 per pair. Hard to give a suggestion without knowing room dimensions or price range.BroweChisox
I'd have to wager a bitstream system with good speakers will sound better then either of those receivers and 100/pair speakers. My advice is always to get as much speaker as you can afford (price doesn't always equal performance though, audition as much as possible). I'd rather get more expensive speakers and a slightly cheaper receiver then vice versa. For receivers, the cheapest entries into multi-channel PCM would be the Panasonic XR-57 or the Onkyo 604. Those are just 5.1 PCM, but are quite affordable if you don't want to spend $700+ for a receiver.
Avatar image for jdang307
jdang307

1512

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 jdang307
Member since 2006 • 1512 Posts
You'll probably want to replace your receiver every once in a while, features pop up all the time. For example, no display or receiver has HDMI 1.3 right now. The PS3 does. If any "deep color" sources come out you'll want HDMI 1.3. But, according to this: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=738511&page=1&pp=30&highlight=887 The latest HDMI Denons will be "future proof" for 7.1 PCM and other HD Audio formats. But my advice still stands, a good set of speakers can last you a very long time, all the while you're switching receivers.
Avatar image for danneswegman
danneswegman

12937

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 danneswegman
Member since 2005 • 12937 Posts
[QUOTE="danneswegman"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="danneswegman"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"]If you are buying a new setup, there is no reason to not get HDMI in. The increase in sound quality via HDMI blows anything you can send through optical away. It is totally foolish to invest in a non HDMI system now. For a receiver, I would recommend the Denon AVR887 or AVR-2307ci, both are steals at their price. Speaker wise, you can go anywhere from 100 per pair to $30,000 per pair. Hard to give a suggestion without knowing room dimensions or price range.BroweChisox
optical out is just as good. it's not like YOU will hear a difference.

What are you talking about? Do you not have a clue? The difference between uncompressed sound via HDMI is 10 times better than compressed DD or DTS through optical. How could you not notice an uncompressed 7 channel track when compared against a lossy 5.1 track? HDMI also allows players to decode DTSHD or DolbyHD and send that uncompressed signal directly to the receiver. I pray to God that you will not argue that you can not hear the difference between DTSHD and compressed DTS.

not ten times... we can't tell, you neither. Those differences are measured, but not with human ears.... and not all audio trough HDMI is uncompressed.

It is clear you do not know what you are talking about. I am not sure why you are arguing this point... maybe you are bitter about recently purchasing a non-HDMI receiver? The difference between an uncompressed track or a DTSHD/DolbyHD track is enough that my wife easily noticed the difference and made a comment without me even letting her in on what was going on. If you have never used/experienced HDMI audio, maybe you should just stop posting before you embarrass yourself even more.

it's true i don't have a receiver that has a HDMI input (though i didn't purchase one recently). So, fair enough, in the store where i listened to it didn't seem a giant leap from DTS-HD. And DTS-HD has different formats. DTS-HD Master Audio is capable of delivering audio that is a bit-for-bit identical to the studio master. DTS-HD Master Audio delivers audio at super high variable bit rates -24.5 mega-bits per second (Mbps) on Blu-ray discs and 18.0 Mbps on HD-DVD - that are significantly higher than standard DVDs . This bit stream is so "fast" and the transfer rate is so "high" that it can deliver the Holy Grail of audio: 7.1 audio channels at 96k sampling frequency/24 bit depths that are identical to the original. With DTS-HD Master Audio, you will be able to experience movies and music, exactly as the artist intended: clear, pure, and uncompromised. if you say the difference is TEN times with DTS-HD Master Audio , i'll take your word for it.....
Avatar image for Tedsteriscool
Tedsteriscool

1322

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#20 Tedsteriscool
Member since 2003 • 1322 Posts
I have a hard time distinguishing the diffrence between compressed and losless audio myself. MAYBE there will be some parts of a movie, game, etc that sound better, but I really have to listen for it to tell. Plus when youre immersed in something and are enjoying it, who really cares? I say use optical and save an HDMI input on your TV for something else.
Avatar image for hellscovern
hellscovern

2872

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#21 hellscovern
Member since 2003 • 2872 Posts
Tedsteriscool : just what were you hearing it with the difference if done well is very noticeable did you use HDMI through an amp that allows uncompressed audio and is not just a straight through Connection
Avatar image for m3Boarder32
m3Boarder32

9526

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 m3Boarder32
Member since 2002 • 9526 Posts

my PS3 is connected via HDMI to a Onkyo TXSR604,  it retails for a little over $500,  but can be had for around $350 with shipping included.   The Onkyo is also connected to the HDTV via HDMI.  I have Klipsch Subwoofer and speakers that retail for $900, but i got at half price on Black Friday last year.  I have no complaint's,  movies like Black Hawk Down, Kung Fu Hustle, and The Descent have sounded spectacular with uncompressed PCM audio

Avatar image for tonyandsteff
tonyandsteff

407

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 tonyandsteff
Member since 2007 • 407 Posts

if you dont understand home theater, PCM compressed or uncompressed audio, I advise you to go here

http://www.whydoesmyhometheatersuck.com/home.html

all your questions will be answered...

Avatar image for jdang307
jdang307

1512

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 jdang307
Member since 2006 • 1512 Posts
[QUOTE="danneswegman"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="danneswegman"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"]If you are buying a new setup, there is no reason to not get HDMI in. The increase in sound quality via HDMI blows anything you can send through optical away. It is totally foolish to invest in a non HDMI system now. For a receiver, I would recommend the Denon AVR887 or AVR-2307ci, both are steals at their price. Speaker wise, you can go anywhere from 100 per pair to $30,000 per pair. Hard to give a suggestion without knowing room dimensions or price range.BroweChisox
optical out is just as good. it's not like YOU will hear a difference.

What are you talking about? Do you not have a clue? The difference between uncompressed sound via HDMI is 10 times better than compressed DD or DTS through optical. How could you not notice an uncompressed 7 channel track when compared against a lossy 5.1 track? HDMI also allows players to decode DTSHD or DolbyHD and send that uncompressed signal directly to the receiver. I pray to God that you will not argue that you can not hear the difference between DTSHD and compressed DTS.

not ten times... we can't tell, you neither. Those differences are measured, but not with human ears.... and not all audio trough HDMI is uncompressed.

It is clear you do not know what you are talking about. I am not sure why you are arguing this point... maybe you are bitter about recently purchasing a non-HDMI receiver? The difference between an uncompressed track or a DTSHD/DolbyHD track is enough that my wife easily noticed the difference and made a comment without me even letting her in on what was going on. If you have never used/experienced HDMI audio, maybe you should just stop posting before you embarrass yourself even more.

You should not be able to easily distinguish between Dolby TrueHD/DTS HD and multi-channel PCM. These both utilize lossless codecs, i.e. post-HDMI processing in theory should make them identical to uncompressed tracks. Not sure how your wife can tell the difference. And you got it wrong, HDMI does not allow players to decode DTS-HD or Dolby TrueHD and send an uncompressed signal to the receiver. The player sends that DTS-HD or Dolby TrueHD signal to the receiver via HDMI, where the receiver decodes it. It's called post-HDMI processing.
Avatar image for BroweChisox
BroweChisox

1104

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 BroweChisox
Member since 2003 • 1104 Posts
I was saying that the difference between any of the uncompressed formats and compressed sound through optical is very easy to tell the difference between. Also, players can decode DolbyHD or DTSHD and send this lossless signal to receivers, it is a known fact since a few available players can do this.
Avatar image for danneswegman
danneswegman

12937

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 danneswegman
Member since 2005 • 12937 Posts
no, you were talking about HDMI being 10 times better than DTS-HD
Avatar image for jdang307
jdang307

1512

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 jdang307
Member since 2006 • 1512 Posts

I was saying that the difference between any of the uncompressed formats and compressed sound through optical is very easy to tell the difference between. Also, players can decode DolbyHD or DTSHD and send this lossless signal to receivers, it is a known fact since a few available players can do this.BroweChisox
Ok that I can agree with. But you said:

The difference between an uncompressed track or a DTSHD/DolbyHD track is enough that my wife easily noticed the difference and made a comment without me even letting her in on what was going

What players can decode the DolbyHD or DTSHD and send by HDMI to the receiver? Maybe by analog outputs? Either way, I'd rather get a receiver that will do the post-HDMI processing to cover all bases.

Avatar image for BroweChisox
BroweChisox

1104

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 BroweChisox
Member since 2003 • 1104 Posts

[QUOTE="BroweChisox"]I was saying that the difference between any of the uncompressed formats and compressed sound through optical is very easy to tell the difference between. Also, players can decode DolbyHD or DTSHD and send this lossless signal to receivers, it is a known fact since a few available players can do this.jdang307

Ok that I can agree with. But you said:

The difference between an uncompressed track or a DTSHD/DolbyHD track is enough that my wife easily noticed the difference and made a comment without me even letting her in on what was going

What players can decode the DolbyHD or DTSHD and send by HDMI to the receiver? Maybe by analog outputs? Either way, I'd rather get a receiver that will do the post-HDMI processing to cover all bases.

Yeah that first part was purely a typo. I am pretty sure most players decode DTSHD at least, and I know the ps3 can send one of the two via HDMI as well. Receivers that support post processing should be arriving within the year. I would certainly have one if they were available.
Avatar image for dru26
dru26

5505

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 dru26
Member since 2005 • 5505 Posts
You do not need HDMI for your reciever to output DTS. I use optical, on my Kenwood 5.1. Alot of people are also getting suckered into buying HDMI recievers that only have an HDMI passthrough. A true HDMI reciever is well over $1000.
Avatar image for dubbleduecer
dubbleduecer

498

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#31 dubbleduecer
Member since 2007 • 498 Posts
Im deff. So I have 2 friends stand behind me and two freinds stand in front of me and do sign language. then I have my fat friends squat under my TV and do the tootsie roll to the bass.. thats true surround sound aint it?
Avatar image for BroweChisox
BroweChisox

1104

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 BroweChisox
Member since 2003 • 1104 Posts
You do not need HDMI for your reciever to output DTS. I use optical, on my Kenwood 5.1. Alot of people are also getting suckered into buying HDMI recievers that only have an HDMI passthrough. A true HDMI reciever is well over $1000.dru26
You are wrong. There are plenty of cheap options such as the Denon AVR-887, widely accepted as the best 'future proof' cheap receiver.  We were not arguing about hearing regular compressed DTS like you are hearing, but uncompressed lossless audio, which you are NOT hearing.  You would be astounded at the difference... probably even more since you are stuck listening to a Kenwood receiver...yuck.  You must have had some tight budget constraints at the time huh?
Avatar image for dru26
dru26

5505

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 dru26
Member since 2005 • 5505 Posts
[QUOTE="dru26"]You do not need HDMI for your reciever to output DTS. I use optical, on my Kenwood 5.1. Alot of people are also getting suckered into buying HDMI recievers that only have an HDMI passthrough. A true HDMI reciever is well over $1000.BroweChisox
You are wrong. There are plenty of cheap options such as the Denon AVR-887, widely accepted as the best 'future proof' cheap receiver.  We were not arguing about hearing regular compressed DTS like you are hearing, but uncompressed lossless audio, which you are NOT hearing.  You would be astounded at the difference... probably even more since you are stuck listening to a Kenwood receiver...yuck.  You must have had some tight budget constraints at the time huh?

My surround sound unit was only $400, and was bought for a small to mid sized room, it is currently doing the job in a larger living room now. Compared to Sony units of the same price range it was much better. I am in the market for an Onkyo or Polk unit now but most true HDMI sets were pretty expensive, as compared to cheaper passthrough recievers.
Avatar image for m3Boarder32
m3Boarder32

9526

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 m3Boarder32
Member since 2002 • 9526 Posts

[QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="danneswegman"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="danneswegman"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"]If you are buying a new setup, there is no reason to not get HDMI in. The increase in sound quality via HDMI blows anything you can send through optical away. It is totally foolish to invest in a non HDMI system now. For a receiver, I would recommend the Denon AVR887 or AVR-2307ci, both are steals at their price. Speaker wise, you can go anywhere from 100 per pair to $30,000 per pair. Hard to give a suggestion without knowing room dimensions or price range.jdang307
optical out is just as good. it's not like YOU will hear a difference.

What are you talking about? Do you not have a clue? The difference between uncompressed sound via HDMI is 10 times better than compressed DD or DTS through optical. How could you not notice an uncompressed 7 channel track when compared against a lossy 5.1 track? HDMI also allows players to decode DTSHD or DolbyHD and send that uncompressed signal directly to the receiver. I pray to God that you will not argue that you can not hear the difference between DTSHD and compressed DTS.

not ten times... we can't tell, you neither. Those differences are measured, but not with human ears.... and not all audio trough HDMI is uncompressed.

It is clear you do not know what you are talking about. I am not sure why you are arguing this point... maybe you are bitter about recently purchasing a non-HDMI receiver? The difference between an uncompressed track or a DTSHD/DolbyHD track is enough that my wife easily noticed the difference and made a comment without me even letting her in on what was going on. If you have never used/experienced HDMI audio, maybe you should just stop posting before you embarrass yourself even more.

You should not be able to easily distinguish between Dolby TrueHD/DTS HD and multi-channel PCM. These both utilize lossless codecs, i.e. post-HDMI processing in theory should make them identical to uncompressed tracks. Not sure how your wife can tell the difference. And you got it wrong, HDMI does not allow players to decode DTS-HD or Dolby TrueHD and send an uncompressed signal to the receiver. The player sends that DTS-HD or Dolby TrueHD signal to the receiver via HDMI, where the receiver decodes it. It's called post-HDMI processing.

Toshiba's HDA2 HD-DVD player cost $350 and it decodes DTS-HD and TrueHD

Avatar image for BroweChisox
BroweChisox

1104

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 BroweChisox
Member since 2003 • 1104 Posts
[QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="dru26"]You do not need HDMI for your reciever to output DTS. I use optical, on my Kenwood 5.1. Alot of people are also getting suckered into buying HDMI recievers that only have an HDMI passthrough. A true HDMI reciever is well over $1000.dru26
You are wrong. There are plenty of cheap options such as the Denon AVR-887, widely accepted as the best 'future proof' cheap receiver. We were not arguing about hearing regular compressed DTS like you are hearing, but uncompressed lossless audio, which you are NOT hearing. You would be astounded at the difference... probably even more since you are stuck listening to a Kenwood receiver...yuck. You must have had some tight budget constraints at the time huh?

My surround sound unit was only $400, and was bought for a small to mid sized room, it is currently doing the job in a larger living room now. Compared to Sony units of the same price range it was much better. I am in the market for an Onkyo or Polk unit now but most true HDMI sets were pretty expensive, as compared to cheaper passthrough recievers.

You should not be looking at Sony units, all but one are really not worth buying. Onkyo is a good reliable brand for novices, so that is a good starting point. Polk does not make receivers, and they make some decent speakers. Not sure where you are doing your research, but I hope you didn't believe that Polk made receivers or amps.
Avatar image for m3Boarder32
m3Boarder32

9526

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 m3Boarder32
Member since 2002 • 9526 Posts
[QUOTE="dru26"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="dru26"]You do not need HDMI for your reciever to output DTS. I use optical, on my Kenwood 5.1. Alot of people are also getting suckered into buying HDMI recievers that only have an HDMI passthrough. A true HDMI reciever is well over $1000.BroweChisox
You are wrong. There are plenty of cheap options such as the Denon AVR-887, widely accepted as the best 'future proof' cheap receiver. We were not arguing about hearing regular compressed DTS like you are hearing, but uncompressed lossless audio, which you are NOT hearing. You would be astounded at the difference... probably even more since you are stuck listening to a Kenwood receiver...yuck. You must have had some tight budget constraints at the time huh?

My surround sound unit was only $400, and was bought for a small to mid sized room, it is currently doing the job in a larger living room now. Compared to Sony units of the same price range it was much better. I am in the market for an Onkyo or Polk unit now but most true HDMI sets were pretty expensive, as compared to cheaper passthrough recievers.

You should not be looking at Sony units, all but one are really not worth buying. Onkyo is a good reliable brand for novices, so that is a good starting point. Polk does not make receivers, and they make some decent speakers. Not sure where you are doing your research, but I hope you didn't believe that Polk made receivers or amps.



All your recommended "bargain" receivers are around $700..
Avatar image for aero4444
aero4444

2047

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 aero4444
Member since 2005 • 2047 Posts
[QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="dru26"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="dru26"]You do not need HDMI for your reciever to output DTS. I use optical, on my Kenwood 5.1. Alot of people are also getting suckered into buying HDMI recievers that only have an HDMI passthrough. A true HDMI reciever is well over $1000.m3Boarder32
You are wrong. There are plenty of cheap options such as the Denon AVR-887, widely accepted as the best 'future proof' cheap receiver. We were not arguing about hearing regular compressed DTS like you are hearing, but uncompressed lossless audio, which you are NOT hearing. You would be astounded at the difference... probably even more since you are stuck listening to a Kenwood receiver...yuck. You must have had some tight budget constraints at the time huh?

My surround sound unit was only $400, and was bought for a small to mid sized room, it is currently doing the job in a larger living room now. Compared to Sony units of the same price range it was much better. I am in the market for an Onkyo or Polk unit now but most true HDMI sets were pretty expensive, as compared to cheaper passthrough recievers.

You should not be looking at Sony units, all but one are really not worth buying. Onkyo is a good reliable brand for novices, so that is a good starting point. Polk does not make receivers, and they make some decent speakers. Not sure where you are doing your research, but I hope you didn't believe that Polk made receivers or amps.



All your recommended "bargain" receivers are around $700..



true ROFL
Avatar image for squirrelgrrrl84
squirrelgrrrl84

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 squirrelgrrrl84
Member since 2004 • 298 Posts
[QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="dru26"]You do not need HDMI for your reciever to output DTS. I use optical, on my Kenwood 5.1. Alot of people are also getting suckered into buying HDMI recievers that only have an HDMI passthrough. A true HDMI reciever is well over $1000.dru26
You are wrong. There are plenty of cheap options such as the Denon AVR-887, widely accepted as the best 'future proof' cheap receiver.  We were not arguing about hearing regular compressed DTS like you are hearing, but uncompressed lossless audio, which you are NOT hearing.  You would be astounded at the difference... probably even more since you are stuck listening to a Kenwood receiver...yuck.  You must have had some tight budget constraints at the time huh?

My surround sound unit was only $400, and was bought for a small to mid sized room, it is currently doing the job in a larger living room now. Compared to Sony units of the same price range it was much better. I am in the market for an Onkyo or Polk unit now but most true HDMI sets were pretty expensive, as compared to cheaper passthrough recievers.

isn't the only thing a reciever can do is passthrough an hdmi signal? i mean, they use the audio and pass through the video signal... or is there something i'm missing there?
Avatar image for bondps3
bondps3

512

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#39 bondps3
Member since 2007 • 512 Posts
i use a sony 7.1 dolby digital II. i use an optical cable. works great.
Avatar image for Sedin44
Sedin44

1171

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#40 Sedin44
Member since 2007 • 1171 Posts
Im deff. So I have 2 friends stand behind me and two freinds stand in front of me and do sign language. then I have my fat friends squat under my TV and do the tootsie roll to the bass.. thats true surround sound aint it?dubbleduecer
lol
Avatar image for urazn13
urazn13

178

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#41 urazn13
Member since 2007 • 178 Posts
I have a optical 5.1 surround sound system in my basement hooked up to a 60" Sony projection TV - lemme tell ya, Resistance looks and sounds AMAZING on it. It kind of gives you an unfair advantage in online play, too, because the way Resistance works (and, I assume, most nearly every other PS3 game) is that it moves the sound across the speakers as you move the player. So, if an explosion happenned to your left, you could hear where it came from, and that way you could spot the enemy quicker. It's like that for many other games, I'm sure, so if anyone out there has the money for it - it would be a much better addition to your home theater system than a HD-DVD player, which would cost you about the same :P

Like m3boarder32, I also have the Onkyo TXSR604. My PS3 is set to "Video 3" by the way...
Avatar image for m3Boarder32
m3Boarder32

9526

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 m3Boarder32
Member since 2002 • 9526 Posts
I have a optical 5.1 surround sound system in my basement hooked up to a 60" Sony projection TV - lemme tell ya, Resistance looks and sounds AMAZING on it. It kind of gives you an unfair advantage in online play, too, because the way Resistance works (and, I assume, most nearly every other PS3 game) is that it moves the sound across the speakers as you move the player. So, if an explosion happenned to your left, you could hear where it came from, and that way you could spot the enemy quicker. It's like that for many other games, I'm sure, so if anyone out there has the money for it - it would be a much better addition to your home theater system than a HD-DVD player, which would cost you about the same :P

Like m3boarder32, I also have the Onkyo TXSR604. My PS3 is set to "Video 3" by the way...
urazn13


So your using HDMI for audio?  Your first sentance makes it sound like your using optical only?  Anyway,  yeah Resistance sounds amazing thru HDMI,  it has uncompressed audio up to 7.1 i believe.
Avatar image for Symphonycometh
Symphonycometh

9592

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 34

User Lists: 0

#43 Symphonycometh
Member since 2006 • 9592 Posts
@Everyone: :(

Pray for me for I have a:
-SDTV *Its too dark to see smit in caves...at its brightest...
-5.1 surround sound. With the good ole red, white and yellow cords...
-A PS3 that can't see the greater graphics due to TV...:(:(

Can't wait for my summer job. Then I'm a gonna ask the lot of yous about Tvs, speakers, misc. stuff all over again!:D

Till then...:( *I'm really starting to hate my sdtv...I guess I still should be greateful...

Avatar image for Some_One_Plays
Some_One_Plays

880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 Some_One_Plays
Member since 2006 • 880 Posts

Can some of you guys tell me the type and model surround sounds you guys use for system and how well it works with the system.  Also how important is it to get one with an hdmi in and out?

Sedin44

I would say the "Pherex XBOX 5.1 Surround Sound System" even though it has XBOX all over it, it is capable with anything. I haven't used it yet to don't have personal experience with the technology yet.

If you're looking into wireless than you can maybe try the "Logitech Z-5450 Wireless 5.1 THX Speakers" with a high price.

Avatar image for urazn13
urazn13

178

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 urazn13
Member since 2007 • 178 Posts
I know this thread is about sound, but let me add to the concept. If someone's getting an HDTV soon, I suggest you definitely get a 1080p or a 1080i instead of a 720i, because you will definitely see a vast difference in quality, even though both are HD.
Avatar image for Symphonycometh
Symphonycometh

9592

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 34

User Lists: 0

#46 Symphonycometh
Member since 2006 • 9592 Posts
I know this thread is about sound, but let me add to the concept. If someone's getting an HDTV soon, I suggest you definitely get a 1080p or a 1080i instead of a 720i, because you will definitely see a vast difference in quality, even though both are HD.urazn13


Sorry. 720 for me because this 17 year old can't affort those 1080s!@__@
Avatar image for urazn13
urazn13

178

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 urazn13
Member since 2007 • 178 Posts
[QUOTE="urazn13"]I know this thread is about sound, but let me add to the concept. If someone's getting an HDTV soon, I suggest you definitely get a 1080p or a 1080i instead of a 720i, because you will definitely see a vast difference in quality, even though both are HD.Symphonycometh


Sorry. 720 for me because this 17 year old can't affort those 1080s!@__@

My family has to live poor to afford whatever nice things we get - we buy wholesale food to save for stuff like this. I guess my folks are good at budgeting :$ But I'm very lucky to enjoy the things we save up for, they're definitely worth it. Speaking of which - if you're thinking of saving up for surround sound, I would definitely recommend you do, it's worth every penny.
Avatar image for Symphonycometh
Symphonycometh

9592

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 34

User Lists: 0

#48 Symphonycometh
Member since 2006 • 9592 Posts
Will updating my 5.1 surround sound to 7.1 be just as great as switching from my current sdtv to my future hdtv?:D
Avatar image for BroweChisox
BroweChisox

1104

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 BroweChisox
Member since 2003 • 1104 Posts
[QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="dru26"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="dru26"]You do not need HDMI for your reciever to output DTS. I use optical, on my Kenwood 5.1. Alot of people are also getting suckered into buying HDMI recievers that only have an HDMI passthrough. A true HDMI reciever is well over $1000.m3Boarder32
You are wrong. There are plenty of cheap options such as the Denon AVR-887, widely accepted as the best 'future proof' cheap receiver. We were not arguing about hearing regular compressed DTS like you are hearing, but uncompressed lossless audio, which you are NOT hearing. You would be astounded at the difference... probably even more since you are stuck listening to a Kenwood receiver...yuck. You must have had some tight budget constraints at the time huh?

My surround sound unit was only $400, and was bought for a small to mid sized room, it is currently doing the job in a larger living room now. Compared to Sony units of the same price range it was much better. I am in the market for an Onkyo or Polk unit now but most true HDMI sets were pretty expensive, as compared to cheaper passthrough recievers.

You should not be looking at Sony units, all but one are really not worth buying. Onkyo is a good reliable brand for novices, so that is a good starting point. Polk does not make receivers, and they make some decent speakers. Not sure where you are doing your research, but I hope you didn't believe that Polk made receivers or amps.



All your recommended "bargain" receivers are around $700..

$700 is not that much for something that should last 10+ years for a lot of people. Many people spend $3000+ on a receiver, and then you can add in the amps and processors and all that. $600-$700 is not a great deal of money for a receiver.
Avatar image for dru26
dru26

5505

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#50 dru26
Member since 2005 • 5505 Posts
[QUOTE="dru26"][QUOTE="BroweChisox"][QUOTE="dru26"]You do not need HDMI for your reciever to output DTS. I use optical, on my Kenwood 5.1. Alot of people are also getting suckered into buying HDMI recievers that only have an HDMI passthrough. A true HDMI reciever is well over $1000.BroweChisox
You are wrong. There are plenty of cheap options such as the Denon AVR-887, widely accepted as the best 'future proof' cheap receiver. We were not arguing about hearing regular compressed DTS like you are hearing, but uncompressed lossless audio, which you are NOT hearing. You would be astounded at the difference... probably even more since you are stuck listening to a Kenwood receiver...yuck. You must have had some tight budget constraints at the time huh?

My surround sound unit was only $400, and was bought for a small to mid sized room, it is currently doing the job in a larger living room now. Compared to Sony units of the same price range it was much better. I am in the market for an Onkyo or Polk unit now but most true HDMI sets were pretty expensive, as compared to cheaper passthrough recievers.

You should not be looking at Sony units, all but one are really not worth buying. Onkyo is a good reliable brand for novices, so that is a good starting point. Polk does not make receivers, and they make some decent speakers. Not sure where you are doing your research, but I hope you didn't believe that Polk made receivers or amps.

Polk makes amps mainly for cars, but your right they don't make recievers. I was looking for a Harmon Kardon reciever, but mainly my sights were on Onkyo.