HT bypass with Proceed PAV

Personally, honestly, I say it's time to DTB!!!
I say that Proceed is wwaaaaaaaaaay outdated...obsolete...archeic like, ya know...
Basically, you're holding onto the PAV for it's 2 channel prowes. And, honestly, there are a bout a million dedicated 2 channel preamp choices out there on the used market alone, which are far supperior overall to your PAV!
Now I'm not saying it's not a good sounding piece - just that it's not some special sounding 2 ch piece on it's own, that's some highly desired piece on the market, to be true...destroying all comers in the analog world, basically. I mean let's be realistic.
Yes, I say it's time to move on, move up, and clean out your equipment rack. After all, it's all for sale eventually. And that piece's time has come, I say. But hey, that's just me. That's the way of AV equipement. None of it lasts forever, nor was it designed to...
I say 21st century pre-pro for you, and darn near world class 2 ch analog dedicated pre for the stereo = logical way to go for you, plus best of both worlds.

Queefee,

I'm aware that although the PAV was A-rated much of the cost went into what was at the time SOTA video processing, and that as a preamp alone the PAV would be rated a high B. But, of course, it wasn't a preamp alone.

A strong argument for separates is that amp technology changes slowly if at all whereas processor technology changes rapidly. The same argument can be made for separating the preamp from the processor.

It would be more helpful to suggest "near world class" analog preamps with HT bypass than rant about the vintage PAV. The least expensive Stereophile A-rated preamp is the Parasound Halo JC at $4K, but no mention about HT bypass. Anyone know if it has HT bypass?

The guru at the local high-end shop tells me I have to step up to the Classe SSP 800 to match the sound of the PAV/PDSD if I want a modern processor, but I think a fine preamp coupled with something like an Anthem D2 might be a better solution for me.

db

Does varying input level over the range needed for volume control lead to distortion?

no distortion. You're simply using a different volume control.

Just to be clear, in the setup proposed by Bdgregory the PAV would drive the amps for the main LR speakers and the HT processor would drive the amps for the center and surround speakers. Is that correct? The Velodyne SMS-1 and HGS-15 could be driven by either.

that's correct, except for the sub. The PAV doesn't have an analog sub input, so use your pre/pro to drive the sub, use the PAV only for the Main L/R.

In my limited experience, you're not likely to find a SOTA 2 channel preamp that has remote control and will best the PAV without spending a good deal more than the worth of the PAV. I did use my PAV this way for a short time as an experiment because I like it so much for 2 channel. I ended up going back to the TAD 150 Signature I'm using now, but the TAD sells used for more than twice what a PAV sells for.

Dbphd, just to reinforce here, I am presuming here that you would like to stay all high/higher end gear, from your comments and suggestions? That said, maybe we can clarify a few points that were touched on.
First, it's all subjective, of course, and everyone goes differnt directions on this stuff. So there's no one answer for all, or we would all end up with the same systems! And it's certainly quite the opposite in my experience.
Ok, One, the PAV's Video cirquitry (although likely great years ago) is way outdated, and much much better can be had now for pennies on the dollar-even from cheapo av receivers on the market - from compared to what you're PAV cost! Am I right here? I'm pretty sure here. Two, the PAV being rated as Stereophile class A is going to be as a standalone AV process, compared to others at the time - best of class. That's about right for what it was. But as far as being "Class B" rated for analog preamp, I would stronly have to differ! My two decades in and around the high end av business suggests that that Proceed would not legitimately belong in Class B Stereophile's ranking, IMO. Great as an AV piece, with good refinement for what it is, but not as good as the dedicated analog stuff. I'm gunna take most any Class B rated Audio Research, Bel Canto, Krell, Pass Lab's, Copeland, Cary, whatever 2 channel pre rated Class B over your Proceed for 2 channel dubties, I'm quite cetain.
But really, honestly, putting so much legitimacy on ANY mag's ranking system has to be taken without much weight, really. I mean bottom line is they're all "selling soap"! Agenda's and incentives will dictate a lot of that. It's always been that way. Products get rated Class A, then drop to class B, down to C over time, and so on. I mean you can't tell me that the $250 dollar/pair of B&W Dm302's were a legit Class C Stereophile rated piece, nor did the any of the Bryston stuff deserve Class A, the Parasound stuff and Mirage speakers getting Class B, and so on! And to say the Halo piece deserves a legitimate A rating as a 2 channel pre?! I'm quite certain a $4500 CAT preamp will destroy a Parasound ANYTHING! I'm sorry, but someone paid someone here. That's all I'm going to say.
As for the use and integration of a "pass through" or direct in on a 2 channel pre, now that's a legitimate feature! But still, you can use auxilary or other in's and get great results by looping a dedicated AV pre/pro through the pre, sure. And, in you're case, I'm recommending just that - that you loop some av processor through a 2 channel analog preamp, and switch that way.
As for buying a very expensive Anthem D2? Well you can ofcourse go that route. You can even go Theta with Gen III DAC's for 10's of thousands if you like! But will you get the return for movies? I doubt it. I'd stay reasonable av pre with all the latest, and focus on your 2 channel pre quality, if it where me. The quality of the digital processing, and overall sound for what it does/offers is exceptional right now, for not much! You're only going direct digital, and processing all the digital in the outboard pre with these new tech's. Analog connections can be left to your 2 channel preamp connectivity.
Anyway, that's my 3 1/2 cents.
It's all good though...

Queefee,

1. Your point on video processing is well taken. I take the output of my HD-DVR and PS3-80 via HDMI to a DVDO Edge where video is split off and sent via HDMI to my projector in naive 1080p. Audio from those sources is sent via digital optical to the Proceed PDSD.

2. Regardless of its rating, the Proceed PAV/PDSD is part of a system that provides a sense of air, timbre detail, and soundstage that satisfies me, whether 2.1 or 5.1. I paid about 10% of their $10K MSRP, and have owned the units for years, so using them for audio is essentially free

3. I played 3 discs that I use as test cases on a system that included an Integra 80.1, then 15 minutes later played them again on my system. I cannot conclude that the much poorer timbre detail and soundstage of the test system was due to the 80.1 and not the associated equipment or his setup. If the sound had been equal to that of my system, I could have at least concluded that the 80.1 was not a impediment to achieving a level of sound quality with which I would be happy. But an 80.1 supplemented by my PAV as Bdgregory suggests may be all that's needed.

4. I've never heard of a CAT preamp; is CAT an acronym? Where's the list of "near world class" preamps, and do any have HT bypass? You suggest I can't trust the reviewers at Stereophile (nor I assume Absolute Sound), so whose judgement can I trust? I like to buy discounted used components from Audiogon listings; thus, listening before buying is rarely possible.

db