Is HDMI worth It in term of sound quality?

I love lossless codecs. Dolby Digital sounds flat and lifeless now. My system is geared towards High-Def movie playback though. Hdmi is the easiest way to get what I want.Willland makes a good point, with the right gear you can get the same results. It will cost you more money and time to achieve it though.

"Willland makes a good point, with the right gear you can get the same results. It will cost you more money and time to achieve it though."

My point was that you could get a 5 or 6 year old non HDMI flagship receiver or pre/pro for a fraction of the cost of a newer top tier HDMI piece. I paid $350.00 for a "like new" 6 year old flagship NAD T773 receiver($1799.00 new) and $100.00 for a "well cared for" B&K Reference 4430(200w/ch) 3-channel amp($1700.00 new). I also picked up my Oppo BDP-83 for $200.00. Each individually good examples of performance/cost ratio. All together, great bang for the buck to take advantage of the new HD codecs with overall very good sound quality and picture quality.

Bill

What do you as which is a better receiver - Pioneer SC35 or Arcam AVR350?

If I was going to go old school with no hdmi, I would grab a Anthem. Full bass management over analog inputs. Can grab one around $300-$600(20 or 30)

The B&K gears good too.

I wouldnt go the receiver route, but thats just me

I have a Pioneer Elite 59 DVI (DVD_a, SACD, no Blu Ray). It has an i link. I just bought a Pioneer receiver that accepts i-link (NO HDMI connections). The sound is great.
firewire will beat HDMI or any digital or analog connection everytime. I would go
that route and not worry about whether you need a receiver, seperates, etc.