22 December 2006

Receivers Are Stupid

Lots of people buy video game consoles. Lots of people buy component cables for them. Lots of people buy receivers. So you'd think that receivers would have more than the hd cable and dvd component inputs. But no, receivers are stupid. Specifically, the one about 10 feet in front of me, waving its lack of hi-def in my face. Oh sure, it's got some component inputs. Just not enough. The evil bastard. So exactly one console gets to use component. Since I'm not going to buy the PS2 component cable any time soon, it's out of the running. Which leaves the great Xbox v Wii war. There is already an Xbox component cable in our possession, but not a Wii one. However, at this point in time, the Wii gets by far the most use, with the PS2 coming in second. Therefore, the choice is relatively easy. And, Mr. Xbox, you have Pioneer to blame for your decrease in graphical quality come Tuesday evening.

And somehow, there must be a way to run all sound through the receiver for 5.1 surround sound goodness. It'll happen. It might require 12 more cables, but it will happen.

14 comments:

slackwench said...

HDMI?

cagexxx said...

I have no receiver (I have no sound system, just a really nice TV), but I am also running into a problem where I lack component inputs. My TV has two component inputs, but it shares one with the HDMI input, which I intend to hook up to my computer video card at some point. So I will have my PS2, my Gamecube, Angel's XBox (semi-permanently here), and Austin's Wii (here fairly often) vying for a single component input.

The answer seems to be a component switch box, but they're, like, all expensive. I dunno. If you end up looking at component switch boxes and decide on one, let me know!

cagexxx said...

Holy Jesus! Monoprice now sells a component switch box!

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=101&cp_id=10112&cs_id=1011201&p_id=3027

No reviews, but everything monoprice sells (short of some obviously-cheap adapters) is really good. I must consider this!

Also, when I said "they're all expensive," what I meant was that either they're expensive or they look crappy.

osmodion said...

No. It is evil, and doesn't apply to video game consoles. Nor does it apply to Panasonic tvs made 3 years ago. Same for dvd players from the same era. And eeeewwwww.

osmodion said...

We were considering finding a similar solution, but found the same definition of "they're all expensive." Considering how much Matt spent on home theater equipment three years ago, the idea of buying another something else is less than appealing. However, $33.50 is not less than appealing. I'll let you know what the ultimate decision is, though you might have just suggested it.

farniks said...

why are these devices stil called receivers? People don't buy these things for the radios inside them.

captaincrax0rz said...

a) Wii only goes up to 480p. Is it worth the component cable?
b) GameStop sells component switchers for $20. Works pretty well, even though it feels like cheap plastic. You gotta walk up to it to hit the switches, though. If you think about it, really, there's not more than $5 of crap in those. You can build your own pretty easy with a project box and 20 DPST switches.

Just my 53 kopecks.

--Leo

osmodion said...

They still receive, just not primarily radio waves.

osmodion said...

It is worth it, since Matt already ordered the component cable. He has a high-end system, so it makes sense to get the best possible picture out of the Wii. Along the same lines, it seems a bit silly to plug $75 cables into a $20 switch, which is why he didn't get the switch suggested above. Ultimately, a trip to Magnolia yesterday afternoon resulted in a Pro-ject auto-detecting 4 port switch (with digital and optical sound inputs/outputs).

Can I have your 53 kopecks?

farniks said...

I guess the name is okay, for historical reasons. Captain crackerjack's idea seems okay in principle, but you'd have to be very careful, or buy something of reasonably high quality. Video signals operate at a few MHz of bandwidth, and I'd be worried about interrupting the ground shielding to wire the switches, resulting in crosstalk and interference. Distributed effects could also be a problem.

osmodion said...

That's why Matt ultimately ended up buying the one he did. Basically, after spending the day searching, it came down to cheap ones that probably would degrade the signal for less than $50, or high end ones that were awesome for significantly more. Despite a not wanting to spend the extra money, it seemed silly not to in the end.

By the way, have you heard of Pro-ject before? It's the brand for the switch he bought, and apparently it's a quality high-end brand, but I've never heard of it.

farniks said...

DPST? I would use a ganged rotary switch.

farniks said...

Naw, haven't heard of it. Sounds good though if it's meant for high end use. You don't want to cripple a monster system with a cheap-o input selector box.

farniks said...

actually, I take that back. I would use electronic switching with FETs on a microchip.