This issue is driving me nuts! Please, can some one finally put this HDMI discussion to bed? At this moment, is HDMI connectivity important in an AVR? Especially since most of 'em only have switching capabilities and no processing and/or (up)converting capabilities. Is it worth the extra money?
Put in other words...if you were to buy a new AVR right now, would it have HDMI or not?
Not necessarily. I have an HDMI equipped processor. I don't use the connections and if I had an HDMI equipped TV, I still wouldn't use them since I would only have one HDMI source currently.
Eventually, it will become an issue since the high definition discs have much higher quality surround audio channels (TrueHD) which look to be truly worthwhile, but then you'll need a processor that can process those formats (there are two).
Depends on the equipment you currently own and on your future acquisition plans. At this moment, I do not need an HDMI equipped receiver. My tv has 3 HDMI inputs.
I recently bought a Arcam AVR-300. no HDMI but it has all the other goodies.
I figure if i have to use HDMI for something i just take it straight to the TV/projector and then take a coax for audio from the dvd player to the arcam. Same with eventually Dolby True HD and what not, just take it to the analog inputs for dvd-A on teh arcam and all is good.
HDMI is great, but visually i cant really tell the difference between that and component with some good cables.
With the current disarray of the format, I would not invest a dime, unless the scenario is such as Frank layed out. Video should always be seperate from audio, at least for me.