|
|
Post by wizardofoz on Mar 21, 2010 0:53:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by moe on Mar 21, 2010 8:19:23 GMT -5
4D and 1.5 next month? I will give em' credit,they ain't afraid to make a new avr and it does put pressure on Denon etc...If they put as much effort into the sound as new formats they would rule.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2010 8:40:16 GMT -5
2010 ..... 3D - HDMI 1.4 ..... DerbyAnd They're Off! 
|
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator 
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,864
|
Post by LCSeminole on Mar 21, 2010 9:44:07 GMT -5
As one of those that won't be jumping on board the 3D train anytime soon, I have only found the audio return channel as the lone useful feature of HDMI 1.4. I'm sure others will make use of the list of features but this is the only feature I could make use of at this time. As technology moves on, I guess so does the world of home theater.  |
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Mar 21, 2010 10:51:09 GMT -5
They need to hire a better voice-over person.  EmoTV/lounge-casts are far more professional! |
|
|
|
Post by thomasd92 on Mar 21, 2010 13:32:30 GMT -5
My understanding is that your processor does not have to be hdmi 1.4 for 3D because most of the blu-ray 3D players will have dual hdmi outputs one to the 3D display and one to be audio to the processor. For 3D you will only need to upgrade the display and player.
|
|
|
|
Post by honk on Mar 21, 2010 13:35:02 GMT -5
As one of those that won't be jumping on board the 3D train anytime soon, I have only found the audio return channel as the lone useful feature of HDMI 1.4. I'm sure others will make use of the list of features but this is the only feature I could make use of at this time. As technology moves on, I guess so does the world of home theater. I don't care for 3d, but what is the audio return thing? |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Mar 21, 2010 14:33:34 GMT -5
My understanding is that your processor does not have to be hdmi 1.4 for 3D because most of the blu-ray 3D players will have dual hdmi outputs one to the 3D display and one to be audio to the processor. For 3D you will only need to upgrade the display and player. See my thoughts in this thread as to why I don't think this will be the most accepted solution: emotivalounge.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=preamps&action=display&thread=10331 |
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,864
|
Post by LCSeminole on Mar 21, 2010 14:49:12 GMT -5
As one of those that won't be jumping on board the 3D train anytime soon, I have only found the audio return channel as the lone useful feature of HDMI 1.4. I'm sure others will make use of the list of features but this is the only feature I could make use of at this time. As technology moves on, I guess so does the world of home theater. I don't care for 3d, but what is the audio return thing? Straight from the HDMI website, here is the lowdown on v1.4 www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/index.aspxMore specifically "audio return channel" www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/arc.aspx |
|
|
|
Post by 2muchht on Mar 21, 2010 16:46:56 GMT -5
My understanding is that your processor does not have to be hdmi 1.4 for 3D because most of the blu-ray 3D players will have dual hdmi outputs one to the 3D display and one to be audio to the processor. For 3D you will only need to upgrade the display and player. Unfortunately, not. Samsung's 3D Blu ray players have a single HDMI (1.4) output only, though Panasonic's does. Clearly, the forthcoming 3.2 SW for PS3 will be unique in that wil will update the Tx formatting to 1.4, but there will only one jack there, too. No word yet on the LG or other 3D players. |
|
|
|
Post by thomasd92 on Mar 22, 2010 6:13:42 GMT -5
If I go 3D in the future I will buy a blu-ray player with dual HDMI outputs . All blu-ray player manufacturers will be smart to include dual HDMI outputs.
|
|
price3
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 9
|
Post by price3 on Mar 22, 2010 15:27:17 GMT -5
I also read that 1.4 included a network (cat5 type) signal also, so it would replace another cable.
|
|
|
|
Post by oscartheclimber on Mar 22, 2010 21:54:11 GMT -5
^^ It is optional. Both connected devices must support it, and the special HDMI with Ethernet cable must be used.
Unfortunately the one cable system seems to be taking on a life of it's own:
Standard HDMI
Standard with Ethernet
Automotive Standard HDMI
High Speed HDMI
High Speed with Ethernet
|
|
|
|
Post by darien87 on Mar 23, 2010 13:35:42 GMT -5
Sorry, but I don't get the point of the audio return channel. Why would I want to send audio from my TV to my processor? Is it for those people that don't use a cable box?
|
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Mar 23, 2010 13:44:04 GMT -5
Sorry, but I don't get the point of the audio return channel. Why would I want to send audio from my TV to my processor? Is it for those people that don't use a cable box? There could be many uses, but YES. I do not subscribe to cable, but a certain amount is provided within my building. I plug in my Samsung and get lots of channels, including ESPN and many HD channels, as well. Wouldn't it be nice to run my audio through my Emotiva amp? But, alas, no. Now, the TV COULD have been built to support this, so this isn't just an HDMI thing, but if it were inherent in the spec and I could just "have" it, wouldn't it be nice? Sure would be nice. |
|
|
|
Post by darien87 on Mar 23, 2010 14:03:44 GMT -5
Sorry, but I don't get the point of the audio return channel. Why would I want to send audio from my TV to my processor? Is it for those people that don't use a cable box? There could be many uses, but YES. I do not subscribe to cable, but a certain amount is provided within my building. I plug in my Samsung and get lots of channels, including ESPN and many HD channels, as well. Wouldn't it be nice to run my audio through my Emotiva amp? But, alas, no. Now, the TV COULD have been built to support this, so this isn't just an HDMI thing, but if it were inherent in the spec and I could just "have" it, wouldn't it be nice? Sure would be nice. Gotcha. But I get my audio from my cable box, so the audio return channel is pretty much pointless to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Ben on Mar 23, 2010 15:08:18 GMT -5
Sorry, but I don't get the point of the audio return channel. Why would I want to send audio from my TV to my processor? Is it for those people that don't use a cable box? There could be many uses, but YES. I do not subscribe to cable, but a certain amount is provided within my building. I plug in my Samsung and get lots of channels, including ESPN and many HD channels, as well. Wouldn't it be nice to run my audio through my Emotiva amp? But, alas, no. Now, the TV COULD have been built to support this, so this isn't just an HDMI thing, but if it were inherent in the spec and I could just "have" it, wouldn't it be nice? Sure would be nice. I don't have cable, I use a rooftop antenna. So I use the tuner in my TV to pick up most of what I watch. Happily, my TV has an optical audio output, which I send into the receiver. This works great, especially since broadcast TV doesn't need more than dolby-digital bandwidth, so I'm not missing out on anything. So I suppose with HDMI 1.4 I would save one cable, but this doesn't seem like much of an advantage to me. |
|
