sz
Minor Hero
Posts: 54
|
Post by sz on Apr 24, 2014 10:33:45 GMT -5
I don't understand Emotiva's decision of not implementing HDMI 2.0 in XMC-1. With the release of UHD TVs, i.e., Samsung already has 55" and 65" under $3~4k, it is hard to rationalize this decision, when products they are directly competing against (for example Marantz AV7701) has HDMI 2.0 feature.
Even knowing that XMC-1 has a modular design to upgrade things in future, this creates unwanted tinkering with the board and added cost/time, when this could have been easily implemented from the beginning.
|
|
|
|
Post by Topend on Apr 24, 2014 10:59:51 GMT -5
It's not that they don't want HDMI 2.0. The HDMI board that they are using did seem to be 2.0 but when they looked closely at the specs they erred on the side of caution and only claim it to be 1.4b. In any case, it still passes 4k.
The discrepancy came down to bandwidth. Strictly speaking, it did not meet the 2.0 standard.
Dave.
|
|
|
|
Post by ÈlTwo on Apr 24, 2014 11:15:52 GMT -5
Where does anything say that the Marantz AV7701 is HDMI 2.0?
|
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on Apr 24, 2014 11:58:42 GMT -5
When Emotiva down graded their claim, did they downgrade their hardware? Or were they just being more truthful about their claim.
|
|
|
|
Post by chaosrv on Apr 24, 2014 12:27:13 GMT -5
When Emotiva down graded their claim, did they downgrade their hardware? Or were they just being more truthful about their claim. They did not downgrade their hardware. They were simply being more accurate in their statements |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Apr 24, 2014 13:16:42 GMT -5
I don't understand Emotiva's decision of not implementing HDMI 2.0 in XMC-1. There's a whole thread on this, have you read it? |
|
|
|
Post by ÈlTwo on Apr 24, 2014 15:44:52 GMT -5
I gather that's a rhetorical question.  |
|
|
|
Post by pop on Apr 24, 2014 16:58:07 GMT -5
Wait, what is 4k?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Apr 24, 2014 18:00:31 GMT -5
It's that thing that everybody is talking about but won't have for a few years. |
|
|
|
Post by pop on Apr 24, 2014 18:07:16 GMT -5
It's that thing that everybody is talking about but won't have for a few years. Oh cool, like hover boards? |
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on Apr 24, 2014 18:20:39 GMT -5
Instead of 1080p, it's 4000p. It's official name is Ultra High Definition, or UHD.
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Apr 24, 2014 18:30:46 GMT -5
Instead of 1080p, it's 4000p. It's official name is Ultra High Definition, or UHD. Actually 2160p (double 1080) ... |
|
|
|
Post by Cory Cooper on Apr 24, 2014 18:39:30 GMT -5
Yes, just for further clarification: 1080i/p Full HD1920 x 1080 DCI 2K Full HD2048 x 1080 Ultra HD3840 x 2160 DCI 4K Ultra HD4096 x 2160 Full Ultra HD7680 x 4320  C |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Apr 24, 2014 19:04:00 GMT -5
Yes, just for further clarification: 1080i/p Full HD1920 x 1080 Ultra HD3840 x 2160 DCI 4K Ultra HD4096 x 2160 Full Ultra HD7680 x 4320 C You forgot DCI 2k! 2048 x 1080 I can't remember why the difference between consumer and DCI resolutions. I thought it was something about the commercial DLP chip sizes. |
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on Apr 24, 2014 20:06:19 GMT -5
Oops. Thanks guys.
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,762
|
Post by klinemj on Apr 24, 2014 20:20:52 GMT -5
It is what more expensive multi-channel preamps cost. "duh!" Mark (PS - you don't have your hover board yet? Mine came with my Delorean.) |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Apr 24, 2014 20:21:08 GMT -5
I'd still take the Hover Board!  |
|
|
|
Post by Cory Cooper on Apr 25, 2014 1:54:18 GMT -5
You forgot DCI 2k! 2048 x 1080 I can't remember why the difference between consumer and DCI resolutions. I thought it was something about the commercial DLP chip sizes. Edited above..thanks Jim! DCI (Digital Cinema Initiatives) is a group formed by the motion picture studios/companies. They made "standards" for digital cinema. I think the differences between these and the consumer resolutions are indeed because of the capabilities/differences/limitations between commercial and consumer cinema equipment. But, I have been wrong before! Note: There are various other resolutions within these groups, depending on source material, how they are cropped, etc. C |
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Apr 25, 2014 6:41:07 GMT -5
I don't understand Emotiva's decision of not implementing HDMI 2.0 in XMC-1. With the release of UHD TVs, i.e., Samsung already has 55" and 65" under $3~4k, it is hard to rationalize this decision, when products they are directly competing against (for example Marantz AV7701) has HDMI 2.0 feature. Even knowing that XMC-1 has a modular design to upgrade things in future, this creates unwanted tinkering with the board and added cost/time, when this could have been easily implemented from the beginning. So besides a 2.0 enabled AVR or AVP what else in your sig are you going to replace to make the whole system 2.0? What display and what player? ...oh and what source materials? Remember upconverted doesn't count. ...BTW where is it mentioned here that the 7701 has 2.0?  |
|
sz
Minor Hero
Posts: 54
|
Post by sz on Apr 25, 2014 8:56:34 GMT -5
I think you guys are correct in that Marantz AV7701 spec does not actually say they are HDMI 2.0 but it does say that Marantz AV7701 is capable of passing through UHD video signal, which I am translating that as the bandwidth of the HDMI they are using is UHD capable. What I'm not clear about is, whether or not that means Marantz AV7701 is using HDMI 2.0. If XMC-1 is fully capable of passing through UHD signal at HDMI 1.4, what is the fuss about it not being HDMI 2.0? What do you gain in functionality by going HDMI 2.0 vs 1.4?
|
|
