4K passthrough.....most pointless feature since DVD-RAM?

[13Gigatons]

I love when "features" are completely useless but advertised on cheap AV gear. How long until 4K tv's reach a price point that it will be sold to someone buying a $180 AVR ?

Sigh...I still waiting for DVD-RAM!?!?!?!!!???!!??! :whiste:

 

[drebo]

I love when people don't know how to properly use apostrophes.

 

[13Gigatons]

I love when people don't know how to properly use apostrophes.

I fixed it for you.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Screw a 4k TV, I want a 4k computer monitor dammit! Resolutions have stagnated so much since widescreen came in the picture. (no pun intended). Then again, when I make a 800*600 rectangle in an image program and see the small space it occupies I realize we did come a long way... since the 2000's

 

[Gunslinger08]

Screw a 4k TV, I want a 4k computer monitor dammit! Resolutions have stagnated so much since widescreen came in the picture. (no pun intended). Then again, when I make a 800*600 rectangle in an image program and see the small space it occupies I realize we did come a long way... since the 2000's

http://www.ebay.com/itm/CROSSOVER-2...QHD-DVI-D-Dual-S-IPS-27-Monitor-/110867210291

I didn't buy from that seller, but I've had my 27Q for several months and I love it. 2560x1440 is awesome.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Holy crap, did not realize they actually went that high, guess you have to look further than NCIX/Tigerdirect to find them. So.....tempting.... but I really need to stop spending so much money on stuff.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/CROSSOVER-2...QHD-DVI-D-Dual-S-IPS-27-Monitor-/110867210291

I didn't buy from that seller, but I've had my 27Q for several months and I love it. 2560x1440 is awesome.

Psssh, only a paltry 2.5k.

LG (?) has a 30" 4k coming out. Other 4096x monitors run what, like $10k? Hopefully will be cheaper

 

[Sasqui]

OLED... screw 4k

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

OLED... screw 4k

Yeah, manual transmissions all the way, screw bench seats

 

[mugs]

I love when "features" are completely useless but advertised on cheap AV gear. How long until 4K tv's reach a price point that it will be sold to someone buying a $180 AVR ?

Sigh...I still waiting for DVD-RAM!?!?!?!!!???!!??! :whiste:

This is why I don't buy Onkyo. Their sub-$500 AVRs all have features that are pointless in that price range but look nice on stickers. 8 HDMI ports and 4K are two of these features. Comparable receivers from other companies have Audyssey MultiEQ or MultiEQ XT, but Onkyos have crappy 2EQ.

 

[Eug]

Heh, I had a DVD-RAM recorder for TV -PVR - for quite some time back before they finally started including hard drives on entry level models. It was great.

This is why I don't buy Onkyo. Their sub-$500 AVRs all have features that are pointless in that price range but look nice on stickers. 8 HDMI ports and 4K are two of these features. Comparable receivers from other companies have Audyssey MultiEQ or MultiEQ XT, but Onkyos have crappy 2EQ.

I'd take the unit with more HDMI ports myself. Maybe not eight but 6 would be nice.

 

[gorb]

This is why I don't buy Onkyo. Their sub-$500 AVRs all have features that are pointless in that price range but look nice on stickers. 8 HDMI ports and 4K are two of these features. Comparable receivers from other companies have Audyssey MultiEQ or MultiEQ XT, but Onkyos have crappy 2EQ.

The NR818 is the cheapest AVR with XT32 as far as I know

 

[brainhulk]

4k passthrough is gonna be funny if they change to a new hdmi cable requirement for 4k

 

[Red Squirrel]

4k passthrough is gonna be funny if they change to a new hdmi cable requirement for 4k

I can totally see that happening actually. :awe:

Also we're due for a new optical disc format. Bluray XL. Double the capacity! Everybody will need to buy new players again.

 

[Aikouka]

4k passthrough is gonna be funny if they change to a new hdmi cable requirement for 4k

HDMI 1.4 supports 4K transmission at 24Hz.

 

[Eug]

HDMI 1.4 supports 4K transmission at 24Hz.

Yes, but that doesn't guarantee that consumer 4K will be using HDMI as the standard.

Anyways, as far as I'm concerned, consumer 4K is unlikely to get huge adoption anyway, so with that and not knowing the interface standard for it, I wouldn't waste my time with trying to future proof for it.

 

[Fallen Kell]

Screw a 4k TV, I want a 4k computer monitor dammit! Resolutions have stagnated so much since widescreen came in the picture. (no pun intended). Then again, when I make a 800*600 rectangle in an image program and see the small space it occupies I realize we did come a long way... since the 2000's

Not really... The 21" CRT I was using from ~1998-2003 supported 1880 x 1440 with a refresh rate of 170Hz.... There is yet to be a LCD monitor that can even do 120Hz properly at any resolution, and that 1880 x 1440 resolution is about the same pixel density as current monitors as well. From a purely graphical analysis, the CRT was much better technology, supporting much higher frame rates, better/more accurate color space, infinitely blacker blacks, non-existent image ghosting, uniform pixel color change times, color change times that are still 20-50 times faster than current monitors....

The trade-off is that those weighed 50lbs and used 5-10x the power, and took up a lot more desk space. To be honest, 15 years of "new" technology hasn't even caught up to the image/screen quality as the old technology it replaced....

 

[Fallen Kell]

Yes, but that doesn't guarantee that consumer 4K will be using HDMI as the standard.

Anyways, as far as I'm concerned, consumer 4K is unlikely to get huge adoption anyway, so with that and not knowing the interface standard for it, I wouldn't waste my time with trying to future proof for it.

The interface standard is known, and it is called HDMI 2.0.

 

[bearxor]

To be honest, 15 years of "new" technology hasn't even caught up to the image/screen quality as the old technology it replaced....

I'll quote this for truth. CRT monitors still produce a superior picture. But the trade offs are well worth it at this point.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

I'll quote this for truth. CRT monitors still produce a superior picture. But the trade offs are well worth it at this point.

I hear this a lot, that LCDs haven't matched CRTs. And I agree, at the consumer level anyway. But what about production? Do the Sony flat panels out there stand up to their old CRT counterparts?

Not their $2k CAD monitors, but the $20k+ broadcast/production monitors.

 

[Eug]

The interface standard is known, and it is called HDMI 2.0.

1) The standard doesn't even officially exist yet.
2) There is no guarantee yet that 4K will be using it in the long run.

 

[Anteaus]

1) The standard doesn't even officially exist yet.
2) There is no guarantee yet that 4K will be using it in the long run.

Might not be "officially" released yet, but there is enough documentation out there to not only confirm that it is near release but also that 4K is being specifically addressed. No one can speak for 8 years from now, but for the forseeable future HDMI 2.X is going to be the defacto standard for 4K.

I know there is a push for HDBaseT, but so far they have yet to gain any traction with it, whereas HDMI 2.0 devices will be backwards compatible with 1.X devices which will help with adoption. Also, HDBaseT won't offer anything that HDMI 2.X won't already provide. My guess if it does finally come out, it will be provided alongside HDMI, and not as a replacement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI

Version 2.0
The HDMI Forum is working on the HDMI 2.0 specification.In a 2012 CES press release HDMI Licensing, LLC stated that the expected release date for the next version of HDMI was the second half of 2012 and that important improvements needed for HDMI include increased bandwidth to allow for higher resolutions and broader video timing support. Longer term goals for HDMI include better support for mobile devices and improved control functions.
On January 8, 2013, HDMI Licensing, LLC announced that the next HDMI version is being worked on by the 83 members of the HDMI Forum and that it is expected to be released in the first half of 2013.Based on HDMI Forum meetings it is expected that HDMI 2.0 will increase the maximum TMDS per channel throughput from 3.4 Gbit/s to 6 Gbit/s which would allow a maximum total TMDS throughput of 18 Gbit/s. This will allow HDMI 2.0 to support 4K resolution at 60 frames per second (fps). Other features that are expected for HDMI 2.0 include support for 4:2:0 chroma subsampling, support for 25 fps 3D formats, improved 3D capability, support for more than 8 channels of audio, support for the HE-AAC and DRA audio standards, dynamic auto lip-sync, and additional CEC functions.[

 

[Eug]

Might not be "officially" released yet, but there is enough documentation out there to not only confirm that it is near release but also that 4K is being specifically addressed. No one can speak for 8 years from now, but for the forseeable future HDMI 2.X is going to be the defacto standard for 4K.

Well, I guess the other unsaid point (which I've made in other threads) is that I do not see truly significant 4K adoption in the consumer market in the near to mid-term, meaning in the next 5 years.

Yeah, 4K will be available in TVs, but nobody will care.

And 5 years is not that far off from 8 years.

 

[Anteaus]

Well, I guess the other unsaid point (which I've made in other threads) is that I do not see truly significant 4K adoption in the consumer market in the near to mid-term, meaning in the next 5 years.

Yeah, 4K will be available in TVs, but nobody will care.

And 5 years is not that far off from 8 years.

Fair enough. I've have a more comprehensive response to your statement in other threads, but all I'd like to say is that consider that the market contains all sorts of people and while you might not see the significance, that doesn't necessarily mean demand won't be there. 1080P took awhile to saturate because content was expensive and HD broadcasting didn't appear until later. Films had to be scanned into the new medium and cable/sat infrastructure had to be updated.

Virtually every film that was scanned for HD was scanned at 4K minimum with later releases at 8k for future proofing. As soon as a delivery medium is developed tons of content will be ready to go. Also, streaming compression has greatly improved and its a short jump to 4K for those that have the bandwidth.

Of course none of this means 4K tvs will sell well and you may be right, but my point is 4K is far more market ready than 1080P was at release (720P was a distraction) and as soon as they are standardized and prices become reasonable the question won't be if you want a 4K, it will be why wouldn't you. Naturally I'm talking 2 years from now. Mainstream 4K is still a ways off.

 

[13Gigatons]

We still haven't seen any 1440p TV's in the market. They will be first before 4K ever shows up for consumers.