Starting small home theater, need advice


First of all, let me apologize for my lack of knowledge. I have been reading on this site, and realize how much I don't know! So, from a newbie, my apologies.

Now for the question. I've been contemplating installing a VERY mild home theater in my small(ish) family room. (prob 15 x 20). The TV is about 10 ft from the couch, and the speakers would go alongside the TV. I'm looking at a 3.1 channel setup for now, run by a multichannel receiver, with the capability of expanding to 5.1 later. I'd like to spend around $1,000 on the setup as a whole. The primary use for the system would be TV sound (80%), movie (5%) and music (15%). In my opinion, the money is best spent on quality used equipment, rather than on a "system in a box".

My biggest question is: What brands of receiver/speakers/subwoofers should I be looking for, that combine good quality with affordability? I've been looking at the Denon/B&W range, but this may be out of my price range. I assume Denon/Harmon Kardon/Paradigm/Definitive Audio are all good. But honestly, I have little/no experience with these brands. Am I relegated to the big box stores with this price range?

I realize this is like asking a Ferrari mechanic on advice to do an oil change, but I come to you knowing the collective knowledge you all possess. Thanks in advance for all your advice.

Brian
bminchen
I think I would recommend a different approach with regards to the receiver. HDMI functionality adds cost to the receiver and is something I would sacrifice in exchange for better quality speakers. Especially if I was in your shoes starting out.

Run the HDMI from the source (one from the DirecTV and one from the Blu-Ray) directly to the TV. The purpose of this will be video (and audio too if you don't want to turn the receiver on). Then run a digital cable from the source to the receiver. The purpose of this will be to send the audio signal to the receiver. By setting up your system this way, I think you will experience a better sound quality and a better image quality on your TV.

I suggest an older model receiver without HDMI but with a decent amp (say a NAD or Rotel) over a current entry level receiver with HDMI. A HT receiver is a fairly versatile piece of equipment. When you do upgrade, the HT receiver makes an economical second system that sounds better than most.

I have my twelve year old NAD HT receiver in my office. I use it to listen to the radio, iTunes and play my CDs. It's hard to match that functionality for the price.
Running a blu ray movie's audio over digital cable instead
of HDMI, you will lose the high definition audio quality
that blu ray can deliver. high-def audio presents an easily
heard improvement that even non-audiophiles can easily
discern. Almost all of the receivers on this site are for
sale because the owners need/want HDMI, think carefully
before limiting your system in this way.
I agree that HDMI vs digital cable has little effect on TV
or over-the-air sound, but if you're a blu ray guy, you need
HDMI, or you're missing part of the experience.
My suggested alternative was based in part on the estimated use percentages originally given.

Also, I know that blu-ray and 1080p content is increasing, but isn't it still a small portion of the overall content?
I have to agree with pgawan, HDMI will offer little to nothing in the way of sound quality for 95% of your listening. For that 5% of disc based movie watching will be Blu-Ray based? If your area is anything like mine, every brick and mortar movie rental shop closed their doors in the last couple years. Meaning, if you're a Blu-Ray fan, you're buying movies.

HDMI's main benefit is thwarting piracy for content distributors. Like Blu-Ray, it won't be around forever. Save the money, by picking up a receiver with a good reputation and digital inputs. You'll lose nothing in the audio realm.
I'm a blu ray fan, and I don't have to buy them. blu ray is readily available at any number of mail-only outlets. high definition video and audio is here to stay, it isn't going anywhere. If you haven't gotten on the wagon, and don't intend to, well, OK.