Stereo setup used for media center

[ThxMAD]

Hello everyone,

First of all, I don't know much about audio/video installations. I always have been watching movies on my TV only and listening to music with my computer speakers.

I have recently bought a new stereo (speakers and receiver) for music listening. Since I don't have a surround sound, I would like to use this kit for my media center as well. I would like to know the best way to connect everything together to minimize audio/video lag while playing rhythm games like Rock Band, but also get the best audio quality I can get from the kit.

After some research, I was going to go this way:
- HD PVR and PS4 connected via HDMI to TV
- HD PVR and PS4 connected via optical cable to receiver

I could also connect everything to the TV via HDMI and connect the TV to the receiver with an optical cable.

The third option would be to simply exchange the stereo receiver for an A/V receiver, since the one I own doesn't have any HDMI inputs/outputs. I would connect everything via HDMI to the A/V receiver, then connect the TV to the A/V receiver via HDMI as well.

Components
- Speakers: 2 X Paradigm Monitor 11 v7
- Receiver: Yamaha R-N602
- TV: Samsung F8500
- PS4 (used for gaming and movies)
- Bell HD PVR

What do you guys think?

Thanks!
Marc-André

 

[jsmithepa]

The only thing I have to say is, if receiver doesn't have HDMI then you will have to rely on the TV to do the video switching, TV should have at least 2 HDMI ports if not 4, ideally with ARC. Receiver should have 2+ Toskink inputs.

 

[ThxMAD]

The only thing I have to say is, if receiver doesn't have HDMI then you will have to rely on the TV to do the video switching, TV should have at least 2 HDMI ports if not 4, ideally with ARC. Receiver should have 2+ Toskink inputs.

The TV has 4 HDMI inputs and receiver has 2 toslink inputs. But how is ARC going to help if the receiver doesn't have any HDMI input? If the receiver had an HDMI port, I would connect everything to the TV via HDMI (non-ARC) and then connect the HDMI ARC port to the receiver's HDMI ARC port right?

 

[americanaudiophile]

Your configuration of sending video to the TV via HDMI and audio to the receiver with digital optical is fine, You could go through the TV but that could only degrade the sound (or do nothing). You will need to switch both to get picture and sound but you would have the option of not using the stereo if you only wanted the TV speakers. An HDMI input selector with audio extraction would make switching twice unnecessary.
http/www.monoprice.com/Product?p_id=5557&kpid=105557&gclid=CPPY2sLnwcYCFYIXHwodhY0FTw

 

[ThxMAD]

Your configuration of sending video to the TV via HDMI and audio to the receiver with digital optical is fine, You could go through the TV but that could only degrade the sound (or do nothing). You will need to switch both to get picture and sound but you would have the option of not using the stereo if you only wanted the TV speakers. An HDMI input selector with audio extraction would make switching twice unnecessary.
http/www.monoprice.com/Product?p_id=5557&kpid=105557&gclid=CPPY2sLnwcYCFYIXHwodhY0FTw

Ha, that would be perfect for my situation and it even comes with a remote for my lazy ass! Thanks a lot for your help americanaudiophile!

 

[madmatt30]

Honestly I'd say your original idea of running hdmi audio+video to the TV & using tv optical out to receiver optical in for all sources is fine , its minimal effort & cabling & you get auto switching of audio sources that way.

Rock band & the like have a setting for audio lag anyway which works fine 100% of the time.

Can't see the point in swapping out for a surround receiver with HDMI inputs & arc if you're really only bothered with stereo audio.
Awful lot of expense for minimal benefit IMO.

 

[ThxMAD]

Your configuration of sending video to the TV via HDMI and audio to the receiver with digital optical is fine, You could go through the TV but that could only degrade the sound (or do nothing). You will need to switch both to get picture and sound but you would have the option of not using the stereo if you only wanted the TV speakers. An HDMI input selector with audio extraction would make switching twice unnecessary.
http/www.monoprice.com/Product?p_id=5557&kpid=105557&gclid=CPPY2sLnwcYCFYIXHwodhY0FTw

Would it be worth it to get the one with ARC? http/www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=7974

I guess it would be interesting for any sounds that would be emitted by the TV itself (when using Smart TV apps)?

 

[madmatt30]

Not really IMO at all.
All sources via HDMI to the TV, single optical cable from TV to receiver.

That's it IMO, by far the best setup - introducing extra boxes/adapters introduces a bigger chance of audio lag imo.

 

[madmatt30]

A single cable from optical output on the TV to receiver will pass whatever source audio is on the TV

Meaning you get auto switching with no extra boxes.

 

[ThxMAD]

Honestly I'd say your original idea of running hdmi audio+video to the TV & using tv optical out to receiver optical in for all sources is fine , its minimal effort & cabling & you get auto switching of audio sources that way.

Rock band & the like have a setting for audio lag anyway which works fine 100% of the time.

Can't see the point in swapping out for a surround receiver with HDMI inputs & arc if you're really only bothered with stereo audio.
Awful lot of expense for minimal benefit IMO.

A single cable from optical output on the TV to receiver will pass whatever source audio is on the TV

Meaning you get auto switching with no extra boxes.

I see, so lag wise it would be better to just route everything to the TV (and it would be more convenient) but wouldn't I lose audio quality with that setup?

 

[madmatt30]

Honestly I'd say your original idea of running hdmi audio+video to the TV & using tv optical out to receiver optical in for all sources is fine , its minimal effort & cabling & you get auto switching of audio sources that way.

Rock band & the like have a setting for audio lag anyway which works fine 100% of the time.

Can't see the point in swapping out for a surround receiver with HDMI inputs & arc if you're really only bothered with stereo audio.
Awful lot of expense for minimal benefit IMO.

A single cable from optical output on the TV to receiver will pass whatever source audio is on the TV

Meaning you get auto switching with no extra boxes.

I see, so lag wise it would be better to just route everything to the TV (and it would be more convenient) but wouldn't I lose audio quality with that setup?

Your TV will likely split a Dolby 2 signal to pcm out via optical (its been a few years since TV's output in Dolby due to licensing costs)
Audio lag/quality loss - at worst minimal, at best non-existant.

Certainly that $75 switcher would probably do a worse job than your TV at a lot more expense.

 

[ThxMAD]

Honestly I'd say your original idea of running hdmi audio+video to the TV & using tv optical out to receiver optical in for all sources is fine , its minimal effort & cabling & you get auto switching of audio sources that way.

Rock band & the like have a setting for audio lag anyway which works fine 100% of the time.

Can't see the point in swapping out for a surround receiver with HDMI inputs & arc if you're really only bothered with stereo audio.
Awful lot of expense for minimal benefit IMO.

A single cable from optical output on the TV to receiver will pass whatever source audio is on the TV

Meaning you get auto switching with no extra boxes.

I see, so lag wise it would be better to just route everything to the TV (and it would be more convenient) but wouldn't I lose audio quality with that setup?

Your TV will likely split a Dolby 2 signal to pcm out via optical (its been a few years since TV's output in Dolby due to licensing costs)
Audio lag/quality loss - at worst minimal, at best non-existant.

Certainly that $75 switcher would probably do a worse job than your TV at a lot more expense.

I guess I selected the answer too fast, I think I'm going to go this way instead! Thanks for the answer madmatt30!