Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1


    Video processing by receiver

    I am in process of setting up a new home cinema system. I have the TV (LG Oled55E6V) and a Blu-Ray player (Panasonic DMP-UB900) and am now looking for a suitable receiver. I read your reviews of the latest releases and have a general question that has been nagging me for some time. Given that both the TV and the player have about as good quality video processing capabilities as are around at present, what is the point of having the receiver do the video processing? It is unlikely to surpass or even equal what the TV can do as the manufacturer will have configured it specifically for that make and model. Isn't it more likely that a generic receiver will do worse? The primary function of a receiver is to process audio and drive the speakers. All that is required of it as far as video is concerned is that it can pass through video signals to the TV unmolested. To be compatible with my TV and player, that means having UHD/HDR/3D pass-through capability which requires that it be HDMI 2.0a and HDCP 2.2 compliant. Incorporating a lot of video processing only means that the audio processing will get less spent on it than if video were only passed through to the TV. If it does more than that with video, either the price of the receiver will be higher or the quality of the audio will be lower, neither of which is of benefit to the user, only the manufacturer.
    So there's the question. What's the answer? When can we expect to see a receiver with up-to-date video pass-through capability but concentrates processing on achieving the best audio.

  2. #2
    Senior Member David Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Northern, CA
    Posts
    13,863


    3 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    It's best just to let the AVR or pre/pro just pass through the video with no processing applied. That's one thing I like about the AVM60...it doesn't do any video processing at all. It's redundant and unneeded.
    David Vaughn
    Technical Writer/Blu-ray Reviewer
    Sound and Vision Magazine

  3. #3
    Administrator Tracy Rainwater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    17,939


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by David Vaughn View Post
    It's best just to let the AVR or pre/pro just pass through the video with no processing applied. That's one thing I like about the AVM60...it doesn't do any video processing at all. It's redundant and unneeded.
    Thanks for jumping in, David. I know you see a ton of equipment in a year's time so I value your opinion here.

    That's pretty much how I feel too. There are times when a certain component has a better video processor, but I find that mainly in older equipment. These days, there is way too much redundancy, especially in video processing and apps.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Lefisc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,226


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Ihave had two LG sets, the Oled 55ec and now the LGoled65c7. Both were connected through the Marantz 7011. I had the Oppo 93 now the 205.
    I certainly have not had the great experience David has but I can tell you my experience. The picture always look best when it went to the TV without any additional processing from the receiver. I have since connected the Blu-ray player directly to the TV and have a separate output that connects the audio to the Marantz unit. Let me also say that when I connected to the Marantz and did not allow for any processing the image seem to be identical to the direct connection. So why do I use the direct connection? Because the instruction booklet to the Marantz suggest that's the best way to go. Of course they are talking about a great many of their customers who may not have the same set up I do.
    Barry
    Surround Pre-Amp
    : Krell 707 3D; Amp: (center) Krell 400e; Amp Fronts Krell 600e; SACD: Krell Cipher; FM: Day Sequerra FM Reference; Blu-Ray: Oppo BDP 205; Speakers: Revel Ultima Salon 2; Center: Revel Voice 2; Rear/Back: Thiel Powerplanes/Krell S1500 amp; Subs: 2 SVS SB-13 Ultra; Turntable: VPI 19 Mk 4 w/Tonearm SME 309 & Audioquest 401i; HDTV: Verizon; Projector: JVC DLA-RS66U; Screen: Vue Tech 108; Internet Radio: Sonos; Remote: MX850; Pioneer Elite LDS-2 Laser Disc

  5. #5
    Senior Member David Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Northern, CA
    Posts
    13,863


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Barry, the good thing about the Marantz is that it doesn't corrupt the video signal, so you should not see any difference at all in the picture whether you go through the AVR or direct.
    David Vaughn
    Technical Writer/Blu-ray Reviewer
    Sound and Vision Magazine

  6. #6


    Quote Originally Posted by David Vaughn View Post
    It's best just to let the AVR or pre/pro just pass through the video with no processing applied. That's one thing I like about the AVM60...it doesn't do any video processing at all. It's redundant and unneeded.
    Thanks for confirming my surmise. The problem remains that even if we don't us the receiver's video processing we are still paying for it, which means that less of what we pay for the receiver goes on audio processing.

  7. #7


    I like the sound of your setup. Not as yet having a receiver, I have the Blu-ray player connected directly to the TV and the video looks great. I suppose there is some justification in having a dedicated Blu-ray player process Blu-ray discs but I can't say I've noticed any difference when it's the TV that does the processing.

    I have a completely separate stereo hifi setup for music and I can't imagine a receiver would perform as well as my Marantz amp. Except maybe for concerts, I can't see the advantage of surround sound for listening to music. I don't fancy staring at a blank TV screen while listening to Beethoven or the Beatles.
    Last edited by whatdoyouknow; 06-03-2017 at 04:29 AM.

  8. #8
    Administrator Tracy Rainwater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    17,939


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by whatdoyouknow View Post
    Thanks for confirming my surmise. The problem remains that even if we don't us the receiver's video processing we are still paying for it, which means that less of what we pay for the receiver goes on audio processing.
    As David pointed out, not every manufacturer had in-board video processing. However, the ones that don't do tend to be more pricey.

    If a unit doesn't do everything, I find that it usually does one thing really well. I like that my Anthem preamp (the same one that David owns) does not handle video processing. I want it to do basic video switching and handle audio processing.

    There are a lot of people who were wondering why the new 4K Oppo Blu-ray didn't have all the integrated apps like the earlier models. To me, it's the same principle. Do one thing and do it really well.

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1


    Quote Originally Posted by David Vaughn View Post
    Barry, the good thing about the Marantz is that it doesn't corrupt the video signal, so you should not see any difference at all in the picture whether you go through the AVR or direct.
    David, I have a quick question, maybe it's redundant but i just want to be sure. I recently purchased the LG OLED 55C7 that I had hooked up through my antique Marantz SR5007 (4 years old) via HDMI (cable to Marantz to 55C7). The picture quality was terrible so I did a direct connect via HDMI (Cable to 55C7) then optical out from 55C7 to Marantz). Picture quality was a little better but still had issues especially when watching sports. Football would be translucent when thrown and forget about following a puck when watching hockey. So I took the 55C7 back and exchanged it for the Sony 65X930E that is supposed to get delivered today. Do you think that I will have the same problems with picture quality if I hook up cable to Marantz to 65X930E? Is it time for a new receiver? Is there a way to disable to the video processing on the Marantz? Appreciate your help and response. The HDMI wires I am using are all Wirelogic Sapphire which state they support 4k and Ultra HD.

  10. #10
    Administrator Tracy Rainwater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    17,939


    I've never experienced the video issues that you are describing. However, I have found that displays that I have bought in the last few years needed to have one or more motion settings switched off for it to look right. This may be especially true if you are using one of the display manufacturer's presets.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Luxury Publishing Group Inc.
15332 Antioch Street | Pacific Palisades, CA 90272 | 310.860.9988
©2011 Luxury Publishing Group. All Rights Reserved
For our Privacy Poliicy, ad specs and contact
info please click here