2. home-theater
  3. 1200951509

HDMI 1.3 Audio Signal - Good Enough, or no?

I own an Arcam AVR350. As many know, this AVR, among a few others, eschews the HDMI connection for audio (providing switching for video only), citing it as a path largely inferior to other alternatives for truly quality audio reporoduction. Even with the introduction of HDMI 1.3, Arcam stands by the decision they made with respect to HDMI 1.1 and appears to have no plans to accommodate the HDMI audio path in the near future.

My question is whether most folks think that audio quality considerations in a home theater environment are important enough such that the HDMI 1.3 audio route would be "good enough" for HDTV and HD/Blue-Ray DVD. Or, is it really only a factor if you are using the AVR with both an HD cable/satellite receiver AND a high-quality audio source like SACD or DVD-A?
4yanx

Showing 1 response by jerrym303

jerrym303
54 posts
 
It depends on your needs. My HT stuff is totally separate from my 2-channel (to avoid pollution from noise or unauthorized users), so full HDMI convenience/codecs for movies is more important than the purest sound.

I have an AVR100 in a second system and I agree that the Arcam sound is hard to beat if you want it for pure 2-channel or multi-channel listening. I think that Arcam made a mistake in not supporting full HDMI. What would it really hurt to let the consumer decide? I probably would have stepped up for the AVR350 if they had included full HDMI.

Maybe it was a cost decision due to the fact that they don't turn out the volume of units that the mid-fi companies do.

So, if the system is for movies, I would go with a cheaper alternative that has hdmi 1.3.
More to discover