Why Do I Need “video” Part Of A/v Receiver For Home Theater?
I’m looking for a receiver for my home theater system. I understand why I need Audio receiver but I can only find A/V receiver and not audio alone. For video, I can connect my DVD player, VCR etc directly to the TV and use a universal remote control. What’s the benefit of having video receiver?
You don’t.
Your direct-hookup scenario will work fine and may actually provide better video quality (as the signal has gone through less cable and switches). Many current TVs also allow picture settings to be optimized per-input, so using a receiver to do the video switching also defeats this advantage.
The main advantages of using the receiver to do the switching are in cable management: you can have one set of cables rather than 2 or 3 going to your TV. This is especially important with a wall-mounted flatscreen where a jumble of cables going up to the TV is unsightly. If done right it can also result in simpler remote operation.
I would estimate of the moderate-level A/V installations I’ve seen less than half actually use the receiver to do video switching.
Home theater receivers still seem to be stuck in the pre-HD days. On a standard TV, it was easier to just connect all the audio and composite video signals from all your sources to your receiver, and then route one composite video to your TV to watch whatever source you had selected. This was convenient, as it allowed you to switch the audio and video sources with just one touch of a button.
However, in today’s HD world, composite video is practically useless. You won’t get your best picture unless you’re using HDMI or component video. And I have yet to see a home theater system that will accept multiple high-quality (HDMI or component) video signals and switch them to a common output to route to your TV.
You don’t “need” an Audio/Video receiver, but why wouldn’t you buy one? It’s not going to cost any more, plus it does offer some advantages.
Say you have a DVD player and a VHS player or a camera or all of these? You would have to have three separate video inputs on your television or unplug and reconnect cables every time you wanted to use one. Even if you had three television inputs (unlikely to be the same type), you’d have to switch the television mode. You’d also have to switch to the proper audio mode on the receiver.
With the A/V receiver, you connect all your video devices to it and the receiver routes the video to your television so you never need to switch the television’s inputs. You’re already switching the receiver’s audio mode anyway, so it’s more efficient because it will also do the video switching for you.
GREAT QUESTION!
The fact is, if you’re not planning to ever “do” surround sound, a good stereo receiver can go a long way, and you will STILL get great sound from most video entertainment.
A lot of “big box” retailers don’t ever show you (and in many cases don’t even carry) “regular” stereo receivers, there’s so little demand for them any more. But if you ask, they might rustle something up to sell you.
Needless to say, a major brand 2 channel (stereo) amp is likely going to cost less than a surround sound amp (or multi-channel receiver). But, don’t be misinformed by that statement either, because some of the world’s most expensive amplifiers are 2-channel (and even mono-block, that’s ONE channel!) These are manufactured by several more esoteric audiophile-grade companies.
MY ADVICE: I’m pretty sure I inderstand what you’re after, so do this: You can’t go wrong with stereo receivers from the following companies. . . these represent an excellent value and you’ll get great sound. Yamaha, Harmon Kardon and Denon are all leaders in surround sound receivers - they also all make at least one (or a couple of) 2-channel stereo receivers that do a great job of handling all the audio signal you can throw at them. And UNLIKE brands such as Pioneer, Sony, Technics, whose 2-channel receivers have corresponding low wattage (poopy sound output) the first brands I mentioned actually put out high power and more importantly, high capacitance sound to the speakers.
By the way, most surround sound receivers don’t offer a Phono input any more (to accommodate a turntable’s much lower level audio signal) - whereas the 2-channel models still do!
Last note and another part of the answer to your question: One big reason a lot of people go with a surround sound receiver is because many of them offer either component video and HDMI switching. If your TV is a couple of years old, it may only have one of each (or no HDMI at all!) Using a receiver gives you more input possibilities and act like a “video switcher” while only using one input on the TV.
Hope this helps and I’m glad you asked such a good question. Thanks!
Good luck and let me know how it goes.