Any issues with HDMI 1.3 Reciever on modern equipment? (1 Viewer)

I have an Onkyo Tx- SR605 that has been working great for me. but I just bought a new PJ and will probably be getting a Roku box. I have been running Component wires but may need to switch to HDMI as the new Roku and a New 3d BluRay player(not purchased yet) will probably want HDMI.



I have already seen that my 7.1 receiver cannot decode Atmos signals.... That sucks. But am I going to HDMI issues as well?

How is something going on 9 years old supposed to decode Atmos?

What else didn't exist 9 years ago...hhhmmm...

Oh yeah. Home 3D. So hopefully you weren't expecting 3D on your projector.

By the way, you don't need a brand new AVR for 3D.

You only need 1.4 HDMI. Those debuted 3 years after 1.3. They had a 5 year run. But no, there is no "Atmos 1.4" AVR either, cause well...Atmos didn't exist 2 years ago when 1.4 gave way to "half-baked" 2.0.

This is year 1 of "fully baked" 2.0.

Atmos is not as much a benefit to us the end user as it is to the sound engineer making the track. It allows one 3d "globe" soundtrack be decoded by individual setups(theaters, Home theaters, sound bars, cellphones ) thus eliminating the sound engineer from having to break it into 5.1, 7.1 etc himself( and adding the "height" channels as well of course).


It is something that could have been solved with a simple software update on most receivers... And receivers that don't have the processing power i'm sure it would not have been difficult to offer a "decoding box" that learns the particular environment it is installed in and does the downmix to something the receiver understands. The fact that they offer products that last ten+ year but are obsoleted by codecs in a year or two angers me about the electronics industry in general I have a blueray player that is "obsolete" streaming wise just because they stopped pushing software updates to it. Nothing is wrong with the player, but it becomes more trash in our junk yards because of lack of software support. The only reason they do it is because they get to sell more amps. The difference between an "Atmos" decoding receiver and a non atmos reciever is about 3% of whats under that skin. it just needs to break that 3d globe of tracks into the 5.1.4 downmix... Probably not a difficult task and something a Raspberry Pi could do with the right codec...


So no.... I was not expecting it to work. But It doesn't change that I'm disappointing that it doesn't and there so far does not appear to be a workaround.



I don't understand why the need for the "your a dumb ass" attitude. I am simply trying to understand what limitations the older equipment is going to have and decide what components are reusable and which ones need replaced.



I was unaware that HDMI 1.3 cant carry the full 3d HD signal either. May have to bypass the Receiver completely and run the sound in a parallel system. Dont really want to replace the amp part of the receiver yet until things are fully 4k compliant. I doubt 4k is going away in the future.

Since you haven't purchased the BluRay player yet you can get a 3D one that has dual HDMI outputs. Probably at a much higher price of course.


I don't do 3D or streaming or Atmos yet so both my circa 2009 1.3 receivers work just fine for me. In fact, the best sounding equipment I've had so far wasn't even HDMI for audio. An old Harman Kardon 7200 avr, Oppo 83SE BR player (multi channel outputs to the H/K, HDMI to the display) and AudioControl Rialto EQ I had about 4-5 years ago. I should have kept them but I wanted both my rooms to have the same equipment (and the same remote controls) for ease of use so Pioneer Elite all the way around. Form over function? Blimey!

I've never used the HDMI yet for sound either. I went co axle and optical when I could. I was really pissed that they were pushing HDMI on as as what I saw to be a move for copy protection. And I had a really nice 50' video component cable


The sony does have component inputs... Maby i'll stick with analog for now. forget about the fancy Digital wires.



The Roku XDS is still around and pushes analogue signals( AND optical Audio).... Hmm

Wait, by coaxial, do you mean multichannel analog interconnects? That is, one cable for each channel or do you mean a single digital coaxial cable? If the latter, then you've never heard true lossless audio?

Wow - when I made the switch to Blu-ray, the biggest improvement that I noticed was with the audio. HDMI is not only about copy protection - it's about being able to deliver the best quality signal. Sadly, the days of "analog is better than digital" are for all intents and purposes gone.

Yes, HDMI has its faults, but it's a fact of life that you'll have to embrace at some point or another - you may as well embrace all the positives if you have to put up with its faults, too.

Ah crap, sounds like i'm running my audio incorrectly as well? Yeah single digital coax, And to top it off I needed an optical audio to coaxial audio converter because I didn't have a cable long enough to reach the amps in the front of the room. Luckily in the new location all the equipment will be in the same rack. So no 20ft gap to bridge. (Possibly part of my hard to understand voices in loud booming action movies?).


I wonder if I can sell my TX-SR605. Or maby I'll just re-purpose it as whole house audio.


So right now, the goal would be to find an HDMI 2.0 reciever with Atmos. Luckily I have a small room so its not hard to fill with sound (11X14)

Onkyo X05 and Integra X.8(the first year of 1.3) tend to have better resale than X06/7 and X.9/.1 even though they only have 2 or 3 HDMI.

The 705/805/875/905/5.8/6.8/7.8 still command $400-$600...mainly for people with external amps and use MCH for SACD/DVD-A. MCH was gone by the X07. So that is a 2 year window for lossless audio and MCH.

The 605 gets around $175(mainly from loss of preouts), if...it is complete.

(505 and 506 had HDMI passthrough, so those two are worthless)

complete like the little setup mic, or box and all?

If Atmos was designed to really run with 4 top speakers why are alot of the recievers only pushing 5.1.2? shouldn't they aim for 5.1.4 at least?

Elfmaze said:

complete like the little setup mic, or box and all?

Click to expand...

Box would be nice. But remote/manual/mic is considered "complete".

Elfmaze said:

If Atmos was designed to really run with 4 top speakers why are alot of the recievers only pushing 5.1.2? shouldn't they aim for 5.1.4 at least?

Click to expand...

Cause 80% of AVR sold are 7 channels. 5+2=7.

As yet, nobody has a 7 channel AVR that utilizes preouts for 9 active channels.


However, some 9 channel AVR can use the preouts to create 11 active...as Onkyo was the the only one to do an 11 channel AVR(the 3030).

As an aside...

Nobody I have seen is doing /4 unless they already had a base 7 anyway. Most common are 5/1/2, 7/1/2 and 7/1/4. I have not, personally, seen 5/1/4.

I was glancing at the TX-NR636 It does share the namesake of one of my favorite street bikes....



BUT in addition it rocks Atmos (only two height channels though). AND a second subwoofer out for my ButtKicker! I have a splitter in the LFE line currently.


Adding the two speakers overhead should be easy.

Elfmaze said:

I was glancing at the TX-NR636 It does share the namesake of one of my favorite street bikes....


BUT in addition it rocks Atmos (only two height channels though). AND a second subwoofer out for my ButtKicker! I have a splitter in the LFE line currently.

Adding the two speakers overhead should be easy.

Click to expand...

The 636 is...

7 channels. 5+2=7. Every single 7 channel Atmos AVR can "only do" 5/1/2. Cause...5+2=7.

Half-baked HDMI 2.0.

Ok, so this is the Half baked 2.0 you speak of. How does one know if its a fully compliant 2.0? Look for a 9 channel AVR?

Elfmaze said:

AND a second subwoofer out for my ButtKicker! I have a splitter in the LFE line currently.

Click to expand...

For all but the priciest top-of-the-line AVRs, the multiple subwoofer outs are achieved by simply adding a splitter internally. The two outputs are not independently adjustable, so this feature alone would not warrant an upgrade - it's essentially the same as what you have now, only cleaner looking.