|
|
Post by creimes on Sept 11, 2018 23:52:38 GMT -5
In this video (40 seconds) Dan talked about the RMC-1 doing HDMI 2.0a with Dolby Vision. I was under the impression this is HDMI 2.0b ? How does one keep up with the constant new HDMI formats without going broke or insane for that matter, I have hit a point where I can no longer justify new equipment every 6 months to try and stay current  |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Sept 12, 2018 0:01:44 GMT -5
The Emotiva S15 sub looks promising. I’m thinking of giving the Monolith 15 a try first though. I read the subs output very tight bass which is what I’m looking for.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 12, 2018 1:29:35 GMT -5
In this video (40 seconds) Dan talked about the RMC-1 doing HDMI 2.0a with Dolby Vision. I was under the impression this is HDMI 2.0b ? How does one keep up with the constant new HDMI formats without going broke or insane for that matter, I have hit a point where I can no longer justify new equipment every 6 months to try and stay current At this point in my opinion it’s still too crazy. 8k TVs are on the horizon And if you thought the chip requirements were high with 4K it’s way higher with the next generation. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Sept 12, 2018 4:22:42 GMT -5
In this video (40 seconds) Dan talked about the RMC-1 doing HDMI 2.0a with Dolby Vision. I was under the impression this is HDMI 2.0b ? How does one keep up with the constant new HDMI formats without going broke or insane for that matter, I have hit a point where I can no longer justify new equipment every 6 months to try and stay current Fortunately we haven’t really had to, if you pick the right standard at the right time. The original XMC-1 came out in 2014 with HDMI 1.4b and the ability to pass 4K without HDCP 2.2 (I used a 2010 Model TV with that until a couple months ago). That worked for most of us until this last year when more 4K sources were released with updated specs (Oppo, Apple, Roku, Amazon). Granted this last year sounded painful for some waiting for the upgrade. But, waiting for 2.0b and HLG seems worthwhile, as it’s being used more and more. I’m not vaguely interested in 8K and HDMI 2.1 at this point, but maybe in a few years there will be some compelling reason for higher frame rates or bandwidth, and those with very large projection systems might want 8K. My point is the HDMI is stressful enough changing every few years, but it then does handle most of our needs for some time. There are plenty of people too who don’t care about 4K, my neighbor has a nice 2K 5.1 system that he’ll probably stick with until OLED’s cheaper. We talk about him trying 4K, 7.1, and Atmos, but no rush for him, and many would be happy with a system like his indefinitely. I think the pains of HDMI are teaching us to upgrade cautiously, and those who don’t upgrade avoid most of stress and angst. |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Sept 12, 2018 7:49:49 GMT -5
Yes 4K and the slightly better resolution imho was a waste of money. HDR does make a difference but it’s not worth running out to the store to buy either. The OLED is nice and I do enjoy the blacks on my 65C7P but I actually find cut scenes unnatural bc I’m used to the gray 😊.
Anyway, with the Apple TV4K and Sony 4K Blu-Ray I have a couple of sources that need HDMI 2.0. Otherwise, I’m good for a long while.
Definitely won’t get suckered into 8k or whatever until my TV is obsolete. And with everything going to streaming, the blu-Ray won’t matter after a couple more years.
But when I do upgrade, I sure will be happy knowing that I will just need to replace the hdmi video board on my RMC-2 😬.
|
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Sept 12, 2018 9:11:22 GMT -5
How does one keep up with the constant new HDMI formats without going broke or insane for that matter, I have hit a point where I can no longer justify new equipment every 6 months to try and stay current You just need to time your upgrades with source availability. It takes years for true source of the new format to become mainstream. |
|
|
|
Post by Hair Nick on Sept 12, 2018 10:28:37 GMT -5
I'm still running 5.1 in my theater with a 1080p 55" television. Will finally make the dive into 4K territory this winter.
|
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Sept 12, 2018 11:11:14 GMT -5
I'm still running 5.1 in my theater with a 1080p 55" television. Will finally make the dive into 4K territory this winter. I’m surprised Big Dan hasn’t hooked everyone up with state of the art surround sound systems for all of his valued employees. It’s great word of mouth advertising 😬 |
|
|
|
Post by Hair Nick on Sept 12, 2018 11:13:35 GMT -5
I'm still running 5.1 in my theater with a 1080p 55" television. Will finally make the dive into 4K territory this winter. I’m surprised Big Dan hasn’t hooked everyone up with state of the art surround sound systems for all of his valued employees. It’s great word of mouth advertising 😬 I mean we have a very sweet situation here as employees with the gear. I have a full active Emo theater with the XMC-1. I am always raving to customers about the XMC-1 and powered speakers. I just don't really need 4K right now or a larger theater system. |
|
|
|
Post by jiriza84641 on Sept 12, 2018 11:30:36 GMT -5
Ok all, now that what we on the horizon is the RMC1, RMC2 and XMC2 in retrospect. Since I am in the market for a new pre/pro my options have come down to Marantz and EMOTIVA (since I have the 11 and 2 ch amps). My set up contains 7.2.2 will be adding an additional 2 in ceiling for 7.2.4. I mainly do movies (blu ray,Amazon) and gaming, some TV with a 65" Panny Plasma. Currently do not want 4k 1080p looks good for now until TV goes caput. I also have 2 other TVS (bar and additional seating area) which are connected to a denon X4000 AVR. This is nice when I have a party or get together, which allows 3 different viewing locations in my basement. I also stream to my Z2 patio in the summer when working out or entertaining (not always).
Now lets help me decide, I know I can get a SONOS, PIONEER, or other streaming unit for zone 2, also get a HDMI Y splitter for the third TV. I plan to have a 7.2.4 system and not sure what to get pertaining to PRE/PRO. I like the Marantz for all the functionality and not having to buy additional pieces. I like EMOTIVA for its simplicity and higher end components and upgradability. I dont think that I will go past 7.2.4 ( maybe 7.3.4) in the future unless I get a bigger house. Again, not doing 4K until tv goes belly up ( but having the ability to process would be good).
So gents let me hear your recommendations, pros, cons, or just tell met decide for myself and shut up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Sept 12, 2018 12:22:09 GMT -5
Yes 4K and the slightly better resolution imho was a waste of money. HDR does make a difference but it’s not worth running out to the store to buy either. The OLED is nice and I do enjoy the blacks on my 65C7P but I actually find cut scenes unnatural bc I’m used to the gray 😊. Anyway, with the Apple TV4K and Sony 4K Blu-Ray I have a couple of sources that need HDMI 2.0. Otherwise, I’m good for a long while. Definitely won’t get suckered into 8k or whatever until my TV is obsolete. And with everything going to streaming, the blu-Ray won’t matter after a couple more years. But when I do upgrade, I sure will be happy knowing that I will just need to replace the hdmi video board on my RMC-2 😬. For me 4K had appeal because the 2K TV was over 12 years old and I wanted to move to a larger screen and at 2K res it didn't look as good. Going to 4K the res was acceptable again. HDR was a bonus that I didn't expect, it really makes a difference. I avoided Dolby Vision due to the problems many seem to have with it plus the limited source material. In my case and I suspect many others the driver (that started the whole 4K migration) was increased screen size which meant higher resolution to maintain the same (or slightly better) picture quality. Picture quality itself was never the driver. I've now reached the maximum screen size for the available space, so 8K doesn't have any appeal. As a result the only reason I'd even consider an 8K TV would be if the 4K one died and I needed a replacement, and 8K TV's were the only option. Which isn't going to happen for a long time. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by creimes on Sept 12, 2018 12:52:05 GMT -5
I'm still running 5.1 in my theater with a 1080p 55" television. Will finally make the dive into 4K territory this winter. Yeah my current setup is working just fine, I'm in no means wanting to or able to financially change everything up to 4k or Atmos for that matter, my room is fine with 5.2 and 1080p even though some think it's of ancient times haha. Chad |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Sept 12, 2018 13:47:00 GMT -5
Yes 4K and the slightly better resolution imho was a waste of money. HDR does make a difference but it’s not worth running out to the store to buy either. The OLED is nice and I do enjoy the blacks on my 65C7P but I actually find cut scenes unnatural bc I’m used to the gray 😊. Anyway, with the Apple TV4K and Sony 4K Blu-Ray I have a couple of sources that need HDMI 2.0. Otherwise, I’m good for a long while. Definitely won’t get suckered into 8k or whatever until my TV is obsolete. And with everything going to streaming, the blu-Ray won’t matter after a couple more years. But when I do upgrade, I sure will be happy knowing that I will just need to replace the hdmi video board on my RMC-2 😬. For me 4K had appeal because the 2K TV was over 12 years old and I wanted to move to a larger screen and at 2K res it didn't look as good. Going to 4K the res was acceptable again. HDR was a bonus that I didn't expect, it really makes a difference. I avoided Dolby Vision due to the problems many seem to have with it plus the limited source material. In my case and I suspect many others the driver (that started the whole 4K migration) was increased screen size which meant higher resolution to maintain the same (or slightly better) picture quality. Picture quality itself was never the driver. I've now reached the maximum screen size for the available space, so 8K doesn't have any appeal. As a result the only reason I'd even consider an 8K TV would be if the 4K one died and I needed a replacement, and 8K TV's were the only option. Which isn't going to happen for a long time. Cheers Gary Yes I your case I definitely see the appeal. I already had/have 3 LCD/LED TVs and had a 110” screen with the BenQ 1070 projector. I won’t be getting another TV for a LONG time. But I will get the RMC-2 right away. I’m even ready for a makeshift Atmos setup for minimal cost. I want the best surround sound possible with as little investment as possible 😎. So the height speakers won’t match the LCR but I don’t care enough to spend thousands to do it right 😊. |
|
|
|
Post by davidl81 on Sept 12, 2018 14:37:47 GMT -5
Yes 4K and the slightly better resolution imho was a waste of money. HDR does make a difference but it’s not worth running out to the store to buy either. The OLED is nice and I do enjoy the blacks on my 65C7P but I actually find cut scenes unnatural bc I’m used to the gray 😊. Anyway, with the Apple TV4K and Sony 4K Blu-Ray I have a couple of sources that need HDMI 2.0. Otherwise, I’m good for a long while. Definitely won’t get suckered into 8k or whatever until my TV is obsolete. And with everything going to streaming, the blu-Ray won’t matter after a couple more years. But when I do upgrade, I sure will be happy knowing that I will just need to replace the hdmi video board on my RMC-2 😬. For me 4K had appeal because the 2K TV was over 12 years old and I wanted to move to a larger screen and at 2K res it didn't look as good. Going to 4K the res was acceptable again. HDR was a bonus that I didn't expect, it really makes a difference. I avoided Dolby Vision due to the problems many seem to have with it plus the limited source material. In my case and I suspect many others the driver (that started the whole 4K migration) was increased screen size which meant higher resolution to maintain the same (or slightly better) picture quality. Picture quality itself was never the driver. I've now reached the maximum screen size for the available space, so 8K doesn't have any appeal. As a result the only reason I'd even consider an 8K TV would be if the 4K one died and I needed a replacement, and 8K TV's were the only option. Which isn't going to happen for a long time. Cheers Gary 8k TV's are going to have a long road before they catch on. 4K already has very limited availability (basically Netflix, UHD disc, and some iTunes movies) and I don't see any real plans for 8k transmissions within the next 5-10 years. It's mostly just a ploy for TV makers to be able to have something to upgrade to. I went form a 1080p to a 4k on my 103" projector and I can see the slightest bit of difference. There is no realistic was anyone is going to go from a 65" 4k to a 65"8k and see any difference. Or even go to a 85" 8k and see any difference. As is there is barely any real source material shot and mastered in true 4k (most is 2k upscaled), so before 8k ever can take off, 4k would need to be fully mainstream IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Sept 12, 2018 15:57:22 GMT -5
As is there is barely any real source material shot and mastered in true 4k (most is 2k upscaled), so before 8k ever can take off, 4k would need to be fully mainstream IMO. I actually watch quite a lot of 4K content, that is shot and edited on 4/5/6/8K cameras. For Netflix 4K content they actually provide a list of cameras that they approve (I posted the list a while back). We also have Stan here in Australia and they provide a decent amount of 4K programming. Last month our monopoly cable/satellite broadcaster released their 4K satellite box, with a number of 4K programs including live sport shot using 4K cameras. A year ago there wasn’t much 4K aside from BD’s, but it’s been growing so that I could go a full week now watching only 4K content, real 4K, not upscaled. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 13, 2018 11:08:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Sept 13, 2018 11:33:04 GMT -5
Very valid, I’m in that boat, I’m topped out at 6 Mbps (ISP says maybe faster this year), so no UHD streaming for me. It really limits 4K programming to UHD disks and Satellite (just switched to DTV). I wish Redbox would expand their UHD sites, I rent there regularly and disks look and sound best. I’d like 4K Netflix, though I have to say, Netflix produced shows in 2K and upscaled to 4K look better than anything I’ve seen in HD (short of a pristine Blu-ray). If the source quality is good 2K upscales well and looks excellent. At the same time poor quality HD looks better on an HD set. You’re right too about data caps, I’ve been holding out hope for rural 5G, but I worry the data caps could make it unattractive. |
|
|
|
Post by bblv on Sept 13, 2018 11:59:42 GMT -5
4K resolution doesn't mean $hit unless it's uncompressed 4K IMHO. I have UHD Bluray's that I've played back to back with iTunes and Netflix on a "4K" AppleTV and it's a joke to compare the two on my 86" 4K HDR LG. The picture quality doesn't even come close. It might as well be uncompressed 720p that they're streaming there are so many artifacts. I'm not plagued with debilitating OCD, I swear  |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 13, 2018 12:04:25 GMT -5
4K resolution doesn't mean $hit unless it's uncompressed 4K IMHO. I have UHD Bluray's that I've played back to back with iTunes and Netflix on a "4K" AppleTV and it's a joke to compare the two on my 86" 4K HDR LG. The picture quality doesn't even come close. It might as well be uncompressed 720p that they're streaming there are so many artifacts. I'm not plagued with debilitating OCD, I swear Technically UHD 4k is also compressed - but nowhere as much. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Sept 13, 2018 12:05:37 GMT -5
4K resolution doesn't mean $hit unless it's uncompressed 4K IMHO. I have UHD Bluray's that I've played back to back with iTunes and Netflix on a "4K" AppleTV and it's a joke to compare the two on my 86" 4K HDR LG. The picture quality doesn't even come close. It might as well be uncompressed 720p that they're streaming there are so many artifacts. I'm not plagued with debilitating OCD, I swear That’s not been my experience, I agree UHD disks are best, but as I said upscaled 2K Netflix looks much better than the same on an HD TV (of course the 4K TV is newer, has much more modern technology and a very good upscaling engine). |
|
