Before I consider even getting a universal remote, are there any advantages to wiring all components thru my monitor (Hitachi 43UWX10b) vs. my a/c processor (Pioneer D509S)? Some have suggested routing video signals to monitor only and sending audio to the receiver, while others have suggested wiring all thru the component that offers most capabilities/options. Any thoughts?

Advantage of going through receiver is the receiver will handle the source video switching for you and you will only have to worry about one video input on the monitor. However, going direct from source to monitor should give you a better signal as it will not go through fewer connectors & switches (perceptible? - test for yourself). Downside is you may have to select the video input on the tv depending on what source you are using, and depending on the number of video inputs your monitor has , make some decisions about which source gets which input - I have DVD gets component input, digital cable gets s-video, VCR gets composite input.

If you have Picture in Picture on your monitor there may be advantage to doing both. Connect your DVD, etc direct to the monitor as well as through the receiver (assuming you have enough outputs on your sources. It can make the PiP selection easier if the second signal always comes from the same "source" - receiver video out.

Universal remote can help a ton with all this switching. Searching throught the discrete codes on this site may help - you may be able to select the video input directly with the universal remote vs. toggling through the inputs (Sony is like this, I am not familiar with Hitachi)

Jimbo makes a good case. If the TV does not have discrete codes (or a work around) for it's inputs then you may want to put it all through the receiver to make your life easier. I have heard that it is better to plug directly into the TV (less but like Jimbo said try it and see if you can see a difference.

I say, why did you spend all that money on a AV switcher if your not going to use it. They make stand alone digital decoders that you could have saved a ton of money on and used your TV as the switcher.

Now if your running the sound through your Receiver or Pre and the video through your tv switch, things just get downright confusing...Use the receiver, that's what it was made for..

It all comes down to whether you prefer convenience or quality. If you can see and/or hear a difference when you route the video directly to the monitor and the audio directly to the receiver, you can set macros on your remote to change the video source and the audio source together as needed, which works fine and is transparent to your spouse. Having said that, there's no doubt that it would be simpler if you just wire everything through the receiver.

This message was edited by Bruce Burson on 11/26/01 00:56.08.

Some Recievers also give on-screen display if you route the monitor through the reciever. My yamaha does this, and its pretty cool.

Cheers, Cam

I just don't believe there is any loss in video quality through a simple receiver. I work in the video industry and you'd be surprised how many loop throughs are used everyday. Now talk about a loss of video quailty, and you thought tv studios were supposed to be good...lol

Maybe there won't be, but half the fun is fooling around, tweaking and testing the stuff! :-)

If you're in the industry, do you know how you could quantitatively test this?

For a real laugh and a 238-response thread, suggest that speaker cables don't make a difference!

I imagine you could use a waveform and vector scope on the outputs and look for any degredation as compared to the input signal...just how would a receiver switch or a tv switch differ? Both are a switch, and I'm sure the one in a dedicated receiver or Pre is built to a much higher spec than a televsion, where the main concern is the picture, not the quality of the switcher.

By the way, speaker cables don't matter to the extent that most people believe..LOL Go with a good low mid priced cable and your good. If you have a 10,000.00 amp you MIGHT be able to hear a difference. But for sure if your dog could talk he could tell you of the high frequency loss above 20k ; )

For all it's worth - whatever you do I would seriously look at using high quality component video cables

Well, I had the A/V receiver for some time before I got a TV that had multiple outputs, like the Hitachi I bought recently.

Anyway, for the time being I routed my DVD and Dish audio and video signals (component for the DVD, S-vid for Dish) directly to the TV (I don't use a VCR). My CD audio goes directly to the A/V, as I had before getting the new TV. I then run the TV's audio monitor-out to a monitor-in jack at the receiver. I avoid the need for multiple remotes with a Cinema 7+ to control every function I know of. I'll try this for a while. Nothing's permanent.

Thanks for all the tips!

Paul

PRNole47,
With all things audio and video, you hit the nail squarely on the head; "Nothing's permanent."

I think you made the correct decision in keeping the video paths a short as possible. No sense asking for trouble, it will eventually show up without being asked.

Does you new Hitachi have a built-in (i.e., itegrated) digital tuner? If not, you may want to consider a DTV tuner and an outdoor/attic antenna to receive over-the-air high definition (HD) broadcasts from the networks. (Note: NBC will be broadcasting the winter Olympics in HD!) This could force you to rearrange your video inputs and switching.

I, too, have the Cinema 7+ remote and think it is simply the best low cost remote made. Using the macro feature, you shouldn't have any trouble with switching. Enjoy you new TV.