|
Post by Gary Cook on Nov 19, 2017 16:03:10 GMT -5
I don't believe that I'm an early adopter, for example I've only had a 4K TV for around 4 months, friends of mine have had them for well over 2 years. Atmos/DTSX has been available in mainstream AVR's for over 3 years and even in cheap and nasty AVR's for almost as long. As a comparison I didn't jump on the 3D bandwagon, I waited for content, which I see as confirmation that a new format is gaining support. There's plenty of 4K HDR support these days, it's everywhere, getting harder to buy a non 4K TV.
To me the life of a video standard is determined by what I watch it on (the window) and that means HDMI 2.1 is going to have a slow path to acceptance. At least 5 years and probably closer to 10 years being the reasonably useful life of a TV. As a result I really don't care what Emotiva is doing about 2.1, I'm far more interested in solving my immediate problems with 4K and Atmos/DTSX/Auro.
Cheers Gary
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,958
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 20, 2017 9:55:17 GMT -5
There's a detail that nobody seems to have considered. The extra bandwidth specified for HDMI 2.1 is required for extra picture resolution or frame rate. So you will need that 48 gbps if you really want an 8k picture; or more than 4k / 60. However, to be fair, a lot of people don't even find 4k to be all that compelling, which casts serious doubt on how many people will want to buy a NEW 8k TV any time soon. Some of the other features that some people want, like the new version of ARC, don't really require that bandwidth. The new hardware, and the new connectors, are all required to support that extra bandwidth. My guess is that, in the interim, you'll see products that "support some features of HDMI 2.1" while still using the same hardware - or, at least, the same cables and connectors. (Remember when HDMI first came out - and there was all that stuff with DVI connectors that was "HDMI compatible"?) The vendors would LIKE to believe that the product life of a 4k TV is now about 5 years. But, in reality, I don't think people will be willing to replace them that soon unless there's a COMPELLING reason to do so. (Are you really planing to upgrade your Internet connection so you can watch Netflix 8k? I'm not.) 2.1 will happen and it will quickly be a huge issue when it does . Within an year , year and a half of models coming out. I doubt the xmc1 can accommodate the hardware
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,958
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 20, 2017 10:25:15 GMT -5
I sort of agree..... However, I suspect you may have the analogy with the cow backwards. When 4k came out, it didn't seem to get nearly the wide acceptance that was hoped. A lot of 4k TVs were sold, but it's impossible to know how many were bought because 4k itself was compelling, and how many because all the latest models were 4k. This happened at the same time that large panels were getting cheap, so a lot of those people may have simply bought "a new big TV", and ended up with 4k because it was the current model. However, some of us assume that HDR was scheduled to be "the next thing" after 4k.... But that HDR was brought out early because 4k, by itself, failed to live up to expectations.... (Note that 4k TVs are selling well, but 4k cable service has not become widely available, and 4k discs are off to a very slow start.) Remember that,. to someone like Netflix, or your local cable company, all that matters is how much MORE they can charge for 4k than they charge for their regular service. (With streaming, it's mostly a matter of software, but, with cable, that's a lot of cable boxes they're going to have to replace or upgrade.) 4k is just getting started. The manufacturers of equipment and content still have a long road of production and revenue stream with 4k. This cow must be milked before 8k becomes the norm in consumer video. IMO, it’s going to be many years before 8k makes any inroads.
|
|
|
Post by melm on Nov 20, 2017 11:18:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Casey Leedom on Nov 20, 2017 12:18:49 GMT -5
... The new hardware, and the new connectors, are all required to support that extra bandwidth. ... "New connectors"? I hadn't seen that. Are they hopefully Locking Connectors? Casey
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Nov 20, 2017 12:21:38 GMT -5
... The new hardware, and the new connectors, are all required to support that extra bandwidth. ... "New connectors"? I hadn't seen that. Are they hopefully Locking Connectors? Casey No. I think he's referring to the bandwidth of the cable (the connectors) needing to support 48gbps...
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Nov 20, 2017 12:23:12 GMT -5
There's a detail that nobody seems to have considered. The extra bandwidth specified for HDMI 2.1 is required for extra picture resolution or frame rate. So you will need that 48 gbps if you really want an 8k picture; or more than 4k / 60. However, to be fair, a lot of people don't even find 4k to be all that compelling, which casts serious doubt on how many people will want to buy a NEW 8k TV any time soon. Some of the other features that some people want, like the new version of ARC, don't really require that bandwidth. The new hardware, and the new connectors, are all required to support that extra bandwidth. My guess is that, in the interim, you'll see products that "support some features of HDMI 2.1" while still using the same hardware - or, at least, the same cables and connectors. (Remember when HDMI first came out - and there was all that stuff with DVI connectors that was "HDMI compatible"?) The vendors would LIKE to believe that the product life of a 4k TV is now about 5 years. But, in reality, I don't think people will be willing to replace them that soon unless there's a COMPELLING reason to do so. (Are you really planing to upgrade your Internet connection so you can watch Netflix 8k? I'm not.) 2.1 will happen and it will quickly be a huge issue when it does . Within an year , year and a half of models coming out. I doubt the xmc1 can accommodate the hardware For me, 4k and 8k is very compelling. Especially 8k. 4k when I get close I can still see the pixels. But 8k imo is what 4k was promised to be. 4k is actually 2160 p and doesn't even break the 4000 barrier on its top resolution 3840*2160 running at a 8 MP picture. While 1080p was Blu ray. 8k is 4320 P which imo can be more realistically called 4k running at a hugely impressive 33.2 MP picture. Currently support for 8k media is sparse with not a whole lot of cameras capable of i. However, for me, I think it's important that resolutions and color go up. I have important memories of my life and I want it recorded in ultra high resolutions. My loved ones will one day be gone. So being able to relive it is important for me. But those only become realistic when the standards of displays get that much. I am very dissapointed that 3d is out, because for me recording memories in 3d would have been surreal. But I'll take the next best thing. I am not interested in streaming 8k. I don't have the bandwith for 4k even. But I would be interested in physical media of an 8k disc.
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Nov 22, 2017 8:03:38 GMT -5
Its unfortunate that 4k marketing is exceeding what is filmed in 4k and what is upscaled 2k Just very good pro upscaling thankfully.. www.soundandvision.com/content/are-4k-ultra-hd-blu-rays-really-4kI am happy that imho the more important WCG and HDR is incorporated and that is handled by hdmi 2.0b I just don't sit close enough to make out the pixels on my dila projector but then again its pixel fill factor is better than most lcd types. btw Garbulky I too bemoan the decision not to integrate a 4k 3d specification as well . What we have with 3d/24 frame packed at least is 1080 resolution for each eye which with the right 4k tv can upscale to 4k active 3d [ not passive to lose resolution ] That pretty rare tv unlike all the other 4k ce's who have left the 3d market is the Panasonic 65EX780A with active 3d [aus version] ; I don't want to risk a chance of 3d disappearing with next years model
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Nov 22, 2017 17:53:51 GMT -5
Its unfortunate that 4k marketing is exceeding what is filmed in 4k and what is upscaled 2k Just very good pro upscaling thankfully.. www.soundandvision.com/content/are-4k-ultra-hd-blu-rays-really-4kI am happy that imho the more important WCG and HDR is incorporated and that is handled by hdmi 2.0b I just don't sit close enough to make out the pixels on my dila projector but then again its pixel fill factor is better than most lcd types. btw Garbulky I too bemoan the decision not to integrate a 4k 3d specification as well . What we have with 3d/24 frame packed at least is 1080 resolution for each eye which with the right 4k tv can upscale to 4k active 3d [ not passive to lose resolution ] That pretty rare tv unlike all the other 4k ce's who have left the 3d market is the Panasonic 65EX780A with active 3d [aus version] ; I don't want to risk a chance of 3d disappearing with next years model Nice catch! I never realized how important color was until I started seeing monitors with better color capability - and that's not even the better color formats - simply better color reproduction from streaming video and blu ray. It's stunning. Some of the slightly older 3d OLED models also have 3d and 4k with HDR10 - but not sure if they have HDMI 2.0b and dolby vision. Hopefully in a few years they'll figure out glasses free 3d -and then it may make a come back. I can't imagine giving up an entire dimension just when we had it in our grasp!
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Nov 22, 2017 18:13:40 GMT -5
..... Some of the slightly older 3d OLED models also have 3d and 4k with HDR10 - but not sure if they have HDMI 2.0b and dolby vision. Hopefully in a few years they'll figure out glasses free 3d -and then it may make a come back. I can't imagine giving up an entire dimension just when we had it in our grasp! The 2016 series LG OLEDs have full support for HDR-10, Dolby Vision and HLG. Except for the B6, they all support passive 3D. Unfortunately, for the 2017 series, they dropped support for 3D across the entire line. I will say that until you’ve seen 3D on one of these sets, you haven’t seen what 3D was capable of. Prior to purchasing mine, I had a Panasonic plasma which also supported 3D, but required “active” glasses. The difference between the two is astonishing. If 3D looked this good from the start, it may have stood a chance...
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Nov 22, 2017 18:20:32 GMT -5
..... Some of the slightly older 3d OLED models also have 3d and 4k with HDR10 - but not sure if they have HDMI 2.0b and dolby vision. Hopefully in a few years they'll figure out glasses free 3d -and then it may make a come back. I can't imagine giving up an entire dimension just when we had it in our grasp! The 2016 series LG OLEDs have full support for HDR-10, Dolby Vision and HLG. Except for the B6, they all support passive 3D. Unfortunately, for the 2017 series, they dropped support for 3D across the entire line. I will say that until you’ve seen 3D on one of these sets, you haven’t seen what 3D was capable of. Prior to purchasing mine, I had a Panasonic plasma which also supported 3D, but required “active” glasses. The difference between the two is astonishing. If 3D looked this good from the start, it may have stood a chance... Agreed. There are DEFINITELY different qualities of 3d reproduction. My set has slightly more headache inducing 3d with its active glasses but was definitely brighter than the first 3d tv's I've seen. Do you know if the 2016 OLED's have any non curved versions? Because if so, that's what I shall buy!
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Nov 22, 2017 18:53:05 GMT -5
..... Do you know if the 2016 OLED's have any non curved versions? Because if so, that's what I shall buy! They do. The E6 and G6. But let me say that the curve on my C6 is so slight, it goes unnoticed. You can’t tell unless you stand off to the side. Sadly though, it’s going to be extremely tough to find one and, if you do, it’s going to be much more expensive than what they sold for before being discontinued. As the retail supply went down, the prices went up due to the demand caused by those wanting 3D before they were gone forever. A word of advice, though, do not buy a demo unit. These OLED panels are susceptible to burn in and the panel is not covered under warranty if abused. When set up properly (not in the typical blowtorch “store mode”), they’re fine. I have over 3000 hours on the 55” in my living room and it shows no sign of IR or BI. Although the 2017 lineup doesn’t offer 3D, the current “Holiday” pricing is the lowest you’ll see until the “clearance” prices roll back around sometime in the middle of 2018...
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Nov 23, 2017 0:46:58 GMT -5
|
|
richb
Sensei
Oppo Beta Group - Audioholics Reviewer
Posts: 859
|
Post by richb on Nov 25, 2017 13:38:02 GMT -5
eARC is intriguing in that it may have less handshaking issues and support lossless sound from TV based apps. More importantly, Emotiva's answer to HDMI 2.1 should not be no-one needs these features anyway. Especially, since there is no shipping HDMI 2.0b boards or processors yet. With new hardware on the way, at least some HDMI 2.1 features should be considered. New products that are 2 years behind are harder to market. - Rich
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Nov 29, 2017 18:28:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Casey Leedom on Nov 29, 2017 18:35:58 GMT -5
I'm still struggling to see the need that this fills in Home Theater. But it may actually be aimed at professional video like movie theaters ...
Casey
|
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,498
|
Post by LCSeminole on Nov 29, 2017 19:10:06 GMT -5
The "Feature Support Table"(shown below)in the above link shows that "Dynamic HDR (HDR Dynamic metadata) is not supported by HDMI 2.0a/b. How is this true if the new AppleTV claims to be able to pass Dolby Vision and only has HDMI 2.0a support?
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Nov 29, 2017 19:11:36 GMT -5
The "Feature Table" at the bottom of the page in the above link shows that "Dynamic HDR (HDR Dynamic metadata) is not supported by HDMI 2.0a/b. How is this true if the new AppleTV claims to be able to pass Dolby Vision and only has HDMI 2.0a support? That table lumped together all the versions of HDMI 2 in one category when in reality there are significant differences.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,958
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 29, 2017 19:14:21 GMT -5
I think it's much simpler than that...... it's not like they can ever say " OK, we're done, you'll never have to buy new gear ever again" now is it? More pixels are nice, but the question isn't of whether you'd like them, but whether they can be delivered to you.... There aren't an awful lot of movies available on 4k discs (they're finally coming - but it's been a long wait). And many of those were actually filmed or processed in 2k - so they aren't even "really" 4k. And, while there's quiet a bit of streaming content at 4k, the quality isn't as good as the discs because the bandwidth isn't there. NetFlix 4k uses something like 1/4 the bandwidth you get on a 4k Blu-Ray disc.... and it uses the same CODEC, so the quality is worse - since they've got to compromise somewhere. Do you really think that everyone is going to throw away those expensive 4k cameras and replace them with 8k cameras? Or that your Internet service, which is barely able to deliver 4k at reasonable quality, is going to magically get 4x faster? And, with not that many movies being released in 4k, how many do you think will be released in 8k? While there seem to be a lot of things in HDMI 2.1 that are a little better than what we have now... I'm not seeing much of anything compelling. A lot of people now own a 4k TV, NOT because they desperately wanted 4k, but simply because big screens have gotten cheaper. (So they rushed out to buy a new and bigger screen when the prices dropped.... and the fact that their new TV is 4k is just icing on the cake.) It will be interesting to see how many people are willing to upgrade their current high-end 4k screen to a new 8k screen THE SAME SIZE just because it has a few extra features. A lot of the people I talk to are already experiencing "upgrade burnout" pretty badly........ they aren't especially eager to buy more new equipment in a few years.... so I guess we'll see....... Progress is usually a good thing, and it's nice that the new TV you buy in five years will have more features than your current one..... but is it compelling? (I gotta be honest..... my new 4k TV looks really great when I watch the occasional new movie..... but reruns of my favorite sitcom look about the same on it as on my last HD TV.) I'm still struggling to see the need that this fills in Home Theater. But it may actually be aimed at professional video like movie theaters ... Casey
|
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,498
|
Post by LCSeminole on Nov 29, 2017 19:15:30 GMT -5
The "Feature Table" at the bottom of the page in the above link shows that "Dynamic HDR (HDR Dynamic metadata) is not supported by HDMI 2.0a/b. How is this true if the new AppleTV claims to be able to pass Dolby Vision and only has HDMI 2.0a support? That table lumped together all the versions of HDMI 2 in one category when in reality there are significant differences. Lumped together or not, many other articles on HDMI 1.4b/2.0/2.0a/2.0b have stated that these versions are very much capable of passing dynamic metadata, namely Dolby Vision.
|
|