Would I be a fool to by a Pioneer SClx87 without 2.2hdcp

[magmax]

Hello,

I have an aging denon 1910 amp which I am thinking of updating. The amp is connected to a none 4k tv and 5.1 kef 3005se speakers. All pretty old stuff but it does it's job in my man cave. I have been offered a pioneer sclx87 amp for around £550. Would I be a fool to buy it knowing that it is not HDCP 2.2 compatible. Or should a buy a cheaper amp which is hdcp 2.2 compatible. i spoke to a guy in a hifi shop and he made it sound like the world would be ending if I didn't get a hdcp 2.2 amp

 

[abacus]

The 87 is a TOTL model that will have a sound and general feature list way beyond any equivilent (£550) priced new receiver.

What you wont have access to is Dolby Atmos, so take this into consideration for the future.

Modern 4K TVs (That are any good) will already be HCDP 2.2 compatible, so you can plug any of these products into it, and use the ARC channel to plug into the 87.

Only you can decide if the lack of certain features will stunt your future system growth.

Hope this helps

Bill

 

[simonlewis]

If you intend to buy an amp now personally i wouldn't look at anything that pre-dates 2015, if you do it will not have HDCP 2.2, Dolby Atmos and DTS:X, you will soon find it is out of date very quickly, if you do intend to buy it then it maybe suitable for a kitchen or bedroom amp, me personally i wouldn't touch it.

 

[magmax]

Hello,

Thank you for taking the time out to reply. I have done a bit of looking around on the web and the 87 is a very good amp. I lmost bought it there and then when I was offered it I just thought I would do a bit of asking around first. I'd never heard of HDCP 2.2 nutil the I asked in the shop the other day. Whe nthe guy heard that I was thinking of buying this years model he talked me to death about me wasting my money etc and he never said anything about an ARC channel.

What I normally do if I want to buy something is do a bit of research first view /try then buy. After that I stop looking to avoid the disappointment of it being cheaper a month down the line or it's now been replace with a newer model etc. So I guess I have been out the lop for a while. Atmos would be nice (just looked that up on line) but the mrs wouldn't go for that.

so what your saying is that I should think about it first before I hand over my moeny.

 

[magmax]

Ah I see so he might of been telling the truth then. My origninal plan was two wait another two years to up date my main system in the front room (I have two very small children who like to interact with the TV screen and half the time I can't see whats happening on the screen through a hazze of little finger prints and cheesespread) and move that into my bolt hole but the denon is starting to show it's age. one of the HDMI ports has started to not work properly, the display at the front has start to dim in places so I thought i see whhat was out there as a replacement.

 

[abacus]

If the receiver upgrade is only temporary for 2 years (You will not be updating the rest of the system for 2 years or currently require Atmos), then the 87 is a no brainer as if you buy a new receiver now, it will be obsolete and need upgrading in 2 years time anyway, so you might as well have the better sound and feature set of the 87 in the meantime. (Particurlarly if you like your music)

You can add HDCP 2.2 to any receiver (Even those 10 or 15 years old) by using a seperate small add on box if you are really desperate. (Not forgetting that equipment that can make full use of HDCP 2,2 is thin on the ground, (4K HDR 60 fps content is the only thing that needs it a t the moment) and will be about 2 years before it is full swing.

The final decision is up to you, just think carefully about what you intend to do in the future, and what new features may be available by then. (Which your new receiver today will not be able to support)

Hope this helps

Bill

 

[Deleted member 2457]

I am not upgrading my amp, I am just going to buy a Blu-ray player with 2 HDMI outputs for 4K.

 

[magmax]

I'm getting some really good advice here thank you. so there will be walk around then that's great. At the moment you must be feeling like your trying to show your grandad how to set the video player.. you push what button. I think I know which way I am leaning towards

 

[buzz_lightclick]

£550 for an 87 is a great price, I would definitely buy it. You can't get anything better for that amount of money.

The guy in the shop will try and talk you into getting a newer model because he is a salesman!

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

I solved a similar quandary myself with an old Onkyo TX-NR717 that doesn't do 4K pass-through let alone HDCP 2.2, by using a two Bluray player with two HDMI outputs, with one HDMI going to the receiver and one to the TV. I can watch Blurays through the receiver in 1080p or directly from the Bluray in 4k, still with surround sound. Likewise my media PC (with only one 4K HDMI) is hooked directly to the TV with a fibre-optic cable providing digital audio to the receiver. I guess I could also have hooked up a second fibre optic from the Bluray to the receiver, which would probably have worked out cheaper than the $100-plus I paid for a 1 metre Audioquest "Chocolate" 4K HDMI cable (and yes, for 4K, they really do make a difference, sorry all you "buy one at Argos" guys) My TV and receiver also have Audio Return Channel (ARC) capabilities, so I'm not sure - and still playing with the setup - to see which works best - the ARC or the fibre optics.

Point is you can probably figure out a way to bypass your receiver's video limitations whilst still using it's surround sound features.

 

[abacus]

I solved a similar quandary myself with an old Onkyo TX-NR717 that doesn't do 4K pass-through let alone HDCP 2.2, by using a two Bluray player with two HDMI outputs, with one HDMI going to the receiver and one to the TV. I can watch Blurays through the receiver in 1080p or directly from the Bluray in 4k, still with surround sound. Likewise my media PC (with only one 4K HDMI) is hooked directly to the TV with a fibre-optic cable providing digital audio to the receiver. I guess I could also have hooked up a second fibre optic from the Bluray to the receiver, which would probably have worked out cheaper than the $100-plus I paid for a 1 metre Audioquest "Chocolate" 4K HDMI cable (and yes, for 4K, they really do make a difference, sorry all you "buy one at Argos" guys) My TV and receiver also have Audio Return Channel (ARC) capabilities, so I'm not sure - and still playing with the setup - to see which works best - the ARC or the fibre optics.

Point is you can probably figure out a way to bypass your receiver's video limitations whilst still using it's surround sound features.

Providing the HDMI cable meets the HDMI standard for 4K transmission, (And is of quality build) then it will not make any diffrence to picture or sound whether you spend £5 or £1000 on a cable. (If there is a diffrence than one of the cables is faulty)

Bill

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

I solved a similar quandary myself with an old Onkyo TX-NR717 that doesn't do 4K pass-through let alone HDCP 2.2, by using a two Bluray player with two HDMI outputs, with one HDMI going to the receiver and one to the TV. I can watch Blurays through the receiver in 1080p or directly from the Bluray in 4k, still with surround sound. Likewise my media PC (with only one 4K HDMI) is hooked directly to the TV with a fibre-optic cable providing digital audio to the receiver. I guess I could also have hooked up a second fibre optic from the Bluray to the receiver, which would probably have worked out cheaper than the $100-plus I paid for a 1 metre Audioquest "Chocolate" 4K HDMI cable (and yes, for 4K, they really do make a difference, sorry all you "buy one at Argos" guys) My TV and receiver also have Audio Return Channel (ARC) capabilities, so I'm not sure - and still playing with the setup - to see which works best - the ARC or the fibre optics.

Point is you can probably figure out a way to bypass your receiver's video limitations whilst still using it's surround sound features.

Providing the HDMI cable meets the HDMI standard for 4K transmission, (And is of quality build) then it will not make any diffrence to picture or sound whether you spend £5 or £1000 on a cable. (If there is a diffrence than one of the cables is faulty)

Bill

Must be the Target / Radioshack / GE brands at fault then. Tried and done both. I, with the emphasis on I, can tell a huge difference.

I have said it before and I'll say it again, it's as much to do with how the wires are terminated as it is to do with the strands of copper in between. The cable may (or may not) meet the HDMI standard, but if the wires are terminated with bicycle clips or paper clips or ... they won't work.

In best "Danger Will Robinson" "Robbie the Robot" voice:

Speaker cable vs doorbell wire debate alert!!!

Speaker cable ws doorbell wire debate alert!!!

 

[bigboss]

Are the HDMI manufacturers listed here?

http://www.hdmi.org/learningcenter/adopters_founders.aspx

If not, you cannot guarantee they meet specifications.

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

How the [ahem] is anoyone supposed to know that the el-cheapo HDMI cable ASSEMBLY they buy from Maplin or Currys (in the UK, for argument's sake) or Bestbuy or Target (in the USA, again afor argument's sake) is made using CABLE from any one of those cable manufacturers? My point stands. It's as much about the terminations / connectors as it is about the strands of copper in between. Don't believe me? Get one, any one, of your cables from "the list", chop the ends off and solder on some cheap and nasty terminations you find on the ninety ninth page of Fleabay and see for yourself.

Proof of the pudding is in the eating. El cheapo cables DID NOT work properly with my 4K setup, moderately more expensive ones from Audioquest (and Monster) did. The Audioquest cables are thinner, more flexible and slightly better than the ones from Monster, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION.

Therefore WGARA if Audioquest is or is not on "the list"? "The list" comprises far too many organizations to have ever had a part to play in drawing up the specifications in the first place, and most of the outfits on there probably paid handsomely to get on "the list".

 

[bigboss]

It's your choice what you want to buy, but fact is something else.

This is what HDMI licensing requires.

My experience is totally different to yours, and cheaper well made cables have served me very well over the years. Not a single one has failed on me, ever.

 

[abacus]

Cheap or expensive https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxfLXH6qe9w

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

It's your choice what you want to buy, but fact is something else.

FACT is that el cheapo HDMI cables produced a fuzzy, jittery image with my setup, switching to higher quality (and yes, more expensive ones) cured it.

You will, of course, note that there are actually TWO HDMI standards, one - HDMI Standard - for ordinary pictures, 720p or 1080i maximum, and a second - HDMI High Speed - for higher resolution pictures, 1080p and up. Perhaps my problem was that the el cheapo cables were "HDMI Standard" spec. and I needed "HDMI High Speed".

Can we get back to arguing about whether 10 cent a foot doorbell wire is just as effective with my $20K bespoke hifi speakers as $100 a foot 6n copper / silver / unobtainium alloy, heat treated in unicorn pee speaker cable please?

 

[magmax]

Just to update everyone I have bought the amp and so far I really like it. I was orignally going to put it in my man cave to replace an aging denon 1910 but I set it up in the front room and it sounded so good it is going to stay there now and I am going to move the amp in the front room which is a yamaha v3067 into my man cave.

The pioneer is really powerfull I always thought the yammy held my MA apex speakers in the front room back. The vocals from the centre speaker always seemed to get lost with the yammy when the action started and the sub never really seemed to do much.

The only thing that I can find wrong with it is the BD HDMI connector is broken and you can not put a hdmi cable into it. This took a while to work out as I could not get any play back from the player and the amp could not see it. When I put the cable in at first it would only go in half way so I gave it a good wiggle and it went in but bent all the pins inside the cable head. To get round this I just move the blu-ray player into another port and it works fine.

While testing out the amp I put a film on and was only going to watch five minutes but ended up watching the whole film. I will have to keep fiddling with the setting to find out what everything does.

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

Should be relatively easy to get your local "bloke with a shed" (like an ex girlfirend's dad used to be many many years aog fixing TVs when he wasn't doing he day job at the water works or as a part-time fireman - I think with a wife and three daughters he just wanted to get some estrogen-free air ) to replace the broken HDMI socket.

Otherwise you might find you can re-name the channels on the receiver's display - HDMI becomes "broken", HDMI becomes "Bluray" etc. etc.

Sounds like you got the result you hoped for, remember ost of these receivers are so darned versatile you can work around most connectivity and pass-through problems one way or another.

 

[Deleted member 2457]

£550 for an 87 is a great price, I would definitely buy it. You can't get anything better for that amount of money.

The guy in the shop will try and talk you into getting a newer model because he is a salesman!

Agreed.

 

[Deleted member 2457]

Just to update everyone I have bought the amp and so far I really like it. I was orignally going to put it in my man cave to replace an aging denon 1910 but I set it up in the front room and it sounded so good it is going to stay there now and I am going to move the amp in the front room which is a yamaha v3067 into my man cave.

The pioneer is really powerfull I always thought the yammy held my MA apex speakers in the front room back. The vocals from the centre speaker always seemed to get lost with the yammy when the action started and the sub never really seemed to do much.

The only thing that I can find wrong with it is the BD HDMI connector is broken and you can not put a hdmi cable into it. This took a while to work out as I could not get any play back from the player and the amp could not see it. When I put the cable in at first it would only go in half way so I gave it a good wiggle and it went in but bent all the pins inside the cable head. To get round this I just move the blu-ray player into another port and it works fine.

While testing out the amp I put a film on and was only going to watch five minutes but ended up watching the whole film. I will have to keep fiddling with the setting to find out what everything does.

Nice one.