INTEGRA DHC-80.3 Surround Processor


I'm a 2-channel music guy, who is about to take the plunge into his first surround rig.

Based on the feature set and functionality that I desire, my local dealer has steered me toward Integra's 80.3 processor for the hub of this sytem.

I have no experience with surround processors or Integra and am looking for some general feedback.

Are Integra's processors reliable? Good Performers? Easy to use? Priced fairly?

I realize that the 80.3 is brand new, replacing the 80.2.

I'd love to hear from current or past owners of the 80.2, or any of Integra's processors/receivers.

In this $2500+/- price point, is the Integra processor a good investment?

If you've had problems or found other brands to be a ***significantly*** higher value, please chime in.

If owning an Integra processor or surround receiver has been a good experience, I'd love to hear that too.

Thank you.
barrelchief
why wouldnt you just run one hdmi from your cable/satellite box to the tv for normal viewing and then run another hdmi from your blu ray player to the processor to the tv. basically 2 seperate systems??
check out the Emotiva UMC-1. Does all the basics plus a clean pass thru for your 2 channel. For $500 it's a great deal. IMO has better audio sound than the integra 9.8.
For $500, it is the only "new" deal but that is all I can think of that makes it desirable.
I have the Integra DHC-40.2 which is very similar to the 80.x (minus balanced pre-out connectors and less channels). User features and flexibility is very good. Sound and video quality is also excellent. Mine is a recent purchase so I am still learning. The best feature is certainly Audyssey MultiEQ. I was not sure when I first read about it but now that I have calibrated my room with MultiEQ it is amazing. I can always switch to 2 channels of "untouched" source material from my Oppo BDP-93. For everything else, especially movies MultiEQ is always in use.
Hi Kal, do you feel that your highend choices match or beat the current hi value products in picture quality, flexibility etc or is it mainly audio quality that seperates them from hi value for money Onkyo,Denon etc. One can't help but get the impression that these "smaller" companies just don't have economies of scale that say Onkyo has and therefore one has to pay substantially more for the same technology in these high end products.
Thanks