Can anyone clarify if these new formats will work on the 990. I was under the impression that the 990 wouldn't be able to take advantage of these new formats. After reading a couple different threads I thought maybe I had it wrong. Can someone please help clarify this. Thanks.

This is a very fuzzy issue right now, and the launch of both formats hasn't shed a lot of light yet.

There are three new formats that will be supported by both Blu-ray and HD-DVD. The three are Dolby Digital Plus (DD+), DTS-HD, and Dolby TrueHD. All three are very high bandwidth data bitstreams (meaning they simply won't fit across an existing coaxial or optical digital audio cable). DTS-HD will allow for either lossy or lossless audio, while TrueHD is purely a lossless format (based on the MLP format used with DVD-Audio discs). All three support 7.1 discrete channels - DD+ actually allows for up to 13.1 channels in the format's structure, although they're only working with 7.1 for now. That's as far as we get before we enter the murky domain of HD-DVD, Blu-ray, and HDMI v1.x.

The only digital output channel allowed for these formats is HDMI. Firewire could probably carry the bitstream for at least DD+ and DTS-HD, but it's not going to be allowed to. Ever since v1.0, HDMI has supported up to eight channel PCM digital audio, but no current data path (including the latest HDMI, v1.2) is allowed to carry a raw bitstream of DD+, DTS-HD, or TrueHD. The plan is for HDMI v1.3 to support bitstreams of these three formats, but HDMI v1.3 has not been finalized yet (v1.2 actually just came out last August, and added support for digital transmission of SACD).

What all of this means is that the only ways to get a DD+, DTS-HD, or TrueHD signal out of a Blu-ray or HD-DVD player is as multichannel PCM over HDMI (which means the player has to decode the bitstream and all the processor does is bass management, time delay, channel trim, and D/A) or over 7.1 analog output from the player to the processor or receiver's 7.1 analog input (which means the player handles decoding, processing, and D/A). The 990 (and all but perhaps two processors currently available, both costing $5000) must rely on the latter approach.

If all that isn't murky enough, here are two more head-scratchers. Toshiba's two HD-DVD players only support TrueHD for two-channel playback (not multichannel), and they only offer 5.1 analog outputs...

Don't forget that Toshiba's 2 launch units also won't support 1080p output. For about $1000, how could anyone resist?

TrueHD, from what I've read, intends to use the extra 6 channels as "vertical" effects channels, to add height to the sound. I just knew they'd find some way to make us all buy more speakers...

I love that they're rushing the HD formats to market, without a care for whether or not it makes sense to do so. Launching BD and HD-DVD without the proper HDMI sound support is like launching DVD without optical or coax digital outputs. Why bother?

Rant over.

It really is a shame how this whole thing is panning out. The real looser is us the consumers. Especially us Home theater buffs. Instead of all these companies working together and putting out a great technology that everybody supports we are stuck with a mess. Nobody knows exactly how it is going to work. Nobody knows how long it is going to be before we are able to enjoy this technology. Nobody knows if there equipment is going to be compatable. Personally I'm sitting this one out. I will continue to watch DVDs and HD movies on DirecTv. I will buy a player when I can get a universal player that can actually do 1080p for $500.00, or when one format is the clear winner and I can get a 1080p player for $500.00.

I'm pretty much doing the same thing you are, John - I have no intention of buying into either format for the foreseeable future. Once one format or the other wins or we reach a stalemate similar to the DVD-A/SACD format war, I'll probably buy a player and some discs, but I intend to happily watch discs from my DVD library for a long time to come.

What I can't understand is the lack of vision on the part of the CE companies. I don't think there's ever been a technology launch for the HT market that gave so little reason for early adoption as the HD formats do. If you look at the proposed specs for either format, there's a lot of WOW factor there - but it's way too dependent on vaporware.

I am looking forward to these formats and I think they'll be a great move forward, but there are too many balls still in the air, and it annoys me that they are rushing these things to market, because it's only the consumer that loses in this situation.

You can pretty much blame the studios and content owners for this mess.

Since they keep insisting on putting DRM into everything and complicated DRM schemes at that, that still won't stop the people they are designed to stop from doing whatever they want with media, it greatly complicates everything.

Same thing happened to launch of DVD in mid 90s as well.

Someday the studios and other media/content owners will realize that all DRM does is hurt people who buy content and use it in accordance with legal and ethical principles. Once they realize that, they will stop with the nonsense once and for all, but until that day, we end up with crap like HDMI and the latest batch of HD DVD hardware.

Not possible. While the DD+, DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD codecs are capable of many more channels than current DD/DTS codecs, the BluRay Disc and HD-DVD delivery media are limited to 8 channels. No one is going to "make" you buy any more speakers ever again (except maybe those voices...)

Those aren't "voices", Sanjay, it's the government. And believe me, they will make you buy more speakers. And those extra channels will carry their orders to the chosen ones with full 13.1.

Count me in as one of those that won't be adopting early. And to echo Blogging - all this does is hurt the vast majority of consumers. Those that are going to violate copyright are going to figure out a way to get past any of their protection mechanisms. It's just like gun laws - punish the law abiding citizens, without really doing anything to stop the law breakers.

As long as they're civil about it:

Hello Greg, we're from Washington and we're here to "help" you with your HT. How do we sign up for the national "do not be chosen" list?

Seriously though, I wonder if HD-DVD and/or BluRay Disc will achieve anything more than the niche status of DVD-A and SACD. With all the lessons that can be learned from the past, I can't believe we're about to be subject to another format war.

I am waiting this one out. When the multiformat DVD players/recorders are "affordable" that's when I will get them. I am refure to replace 300 of my DVD movies just to get HD.

Great point, Sanjay.

Anyone remember DiVX or Nuon? Awesome!!

With the informed and cogent responses in this forum, it makes me wonder who did the market research for these folks. In my line of work, similar idiocies occur - consider that every flavor or coke and pepsi released in the last several years (lemon, lime, vanilla, cherry, vomit, etc) has died a quick and spectacularly expensive death, mostly because they rushed to be first out without fully determining the consumer need for it.

Don't forget that the discs will be $10-15 higher than DVD. Obviously didn't learn the lesson from DVD, where sales were spurred by keeping the prices as low as VHS (lower in some cases). Sadly, you're probably right about the DVD-A/SACD comparison.

I don't know. With the PS3 also being a BluRay player, there's a good chance that BluRay will do pretty good. Like most of you guys, I'm waiting it out.

Besides, I don't even have a HD set yet. I'm hoping that SED will actually debut next year (and live up to its promise) and then over the next year or so after that the prices on it will become affordable. That'll be about the time my girls will be big enough to leave the set alone. Then I can get my display, the winning HD format, and the new Outlaw processor to go with it all!

Yes, the fact that they priced all DVD disks to sell as opposed to VHS tapes sold more toward rental market at $70 to $90, made DVDs wildly popular in short order.

Also helped that unit prices came down pretty rapidly and now anyone can get a decent DVD player for $70 or so or less if they can stomach buying a Coby or other 3rd tier brand.

Either one of the new formats would likely find a decent market (in the absence of a format war) thanks to the growing HDTV market share - all those sets sitting around just eager to get fed HD resolution video. Even without a format war, however, the move from DVD to HD disc seems destined to not be the slam-dunk that DVD eventually became. Not only did DVD offer much better prices than VHS ever did for people wanting to build movie libraries, but there were also so many other clear benefits over its VHS predecessor. Less shelf space, a more durable format (no tape to break or degrade with repeat viewing), no need to rewind, direct access to a specific scene, multiple audio tracks, subtitle tracks that could be turned on and off, and bonus features - and that's without even factoring in the improved audio and video quality that could be enjoyed even with just a decent SD television set. A high-definition format can offer better picture quality (although you'll need an HDTV to see that improvement), better audio quality (although you'll need a pretty darn nice home theater setup and an understanding of just how to set it up properly to hear any benefit), and a few new special features (which may eventually be an improvement over what DVD had, but will likely be effectively identical to what DVD's been offering for a couple years until the studios figure out how to really make use of the new features). That's not nearly as compelling an argument to upgrade. The fact that there's a format war on top of those challenges leaves us with the mess that we're seeing now. Unless I decide to pick up a PS3, I'll stay with my DVD players until somebody offers an all-format player (preferably including DVD-A and SACD). In all likelihood, I'll pick up a PS3 to let me sample one of the formats while I wait for the first generation or two of all-format players to pass (so the prices can come down and the early bugs get hammered out).

Well said Gonk.

Posted by Sluggo:

TrueHD, from what I've read, intends to use the extra 6 channels as "vertical" effects channels, to add height to the sound. I just knew they'd find some way to make us all buy more speakers...

Finally a topic I think I can chime in on... As a physical therapist, I went through three different courses on human anatomy. What I do know about the human ear is that the ears are set on a level, which gives us the ability to hear stereo sound moving left to right on a horizontal plane (in front, in back, etc.). However, becuase of this setting of the ears, it makes it difficult to discern sound that moves on a vertical plane (up and down). That's not to say that we can't hear sounds above and below us, we just can't locate them as effectively. A good example is the owl. Their ears are slightly offset from one another vertically. This allows them to hear sounds above and below just as well as they do to the left and the right. Thus, why they can fly at night through trees and find their prey (good vision helps too).

Long story short: the extra 6 channels placed high for added "vertical" effects is a bit unnecesary. That's why most surround speakers are placed high up on the wall above the listening area. The bi-pole/di-pole effect, coupled with raising the listening stage above the ear, makes it difficult to locate the sound giving the sound stage that "open" effect so highly desired in surround formats. My advice, save the money on vertical effect speakers for 13.1 and use it for more Outlaw gear! HA! =P

I understand that Netflix will offer HD-DVD, and quite possibly BD at no extra charge.

Yep - I've heard that Netflix plans to offer both formats.

The macroblocking issue that I get from HD over sat is really sickening. Hey, I love my HD, I just hate when the "suspension of reality" has to end so abruptly when the screen breaks up into squares. This is something that a physical disk, and hopefully less compression is expexted to fix...
I expect even the common man with a cable or sat HD connection sees and notices. We call it, allong with reduced res: "HDlite"

Agreed. Moving from VHS to DVD was a paradigm shift in home video. Everything was different: quantity (extras), quality (digital sound & picture), convenience (everything we'd gotten used to with CDs), price (better than VHS and laserdisc), etc.

There is no such shift when moving to the HD formats; just incrementally better sound and picture (for folks that have the equipment to appreciate it).

Aside from the format war, there seem to be so many self-made problems that I wonder if folks will put up with them. Something as simple as listening to the audio means that two components have to hand-shake and exchange secret words for security. God forbid your receiver doesn't identify itself as a HDMI repeater, end of conversation and the player doesn't send any video and audio to you receiver. This is already happening with some set top boxes and HDMI equipped receivers.

Depending on which camp you listen to, the video signal may or may not be dumbed down to standard def for the component outputs. Too bad for HD sets without HDMI inputs. If you wait for HDMI 1.3 based gear, so you can transfer Dolby's codecs natively for decoding in the receiver, then you don't get the interactive features that come with decoding the bitstream in the player. However, DTS recently said that they don't want decoding done in the player. (Amazing how that company always manages to shoot itself in the foot.) One of the security measures BluRay proposed to the industry is to have the player connected via phone line.

I could go on but would end up popping a blood vessel. In any case, the whole approach is of treating the customer like the enemy. Much of this happened with the hi-rez audio formats: paranoia prevented a standardized interface from being adopted across the industry. If the industry is sooooo reluctant to give us high resolution video and audio, why do they bother in the first place. Lots of reasons to be pessimestic about the new formats. Personally, I'll wait for some of the dust to settle before investing.

I'm prepared to wait for years--if ever. If they don't get over it and give us user-friendly value, why buy it? Who really really needs it anyway? I see two customers: early adopters who always want the latest technology, and poor unsuspecting consumers who get taken to the cleaners by salesmen. The rest of us would be wise to sit this one out for a while.

no one ever said progress/advancement would be easy or perfect. naturally there are going to be lots of issues with a new technology and to adopt early would be silly. companies rush to develop new technologies and then work out the details later. once its out there, then it is easier to fix. or if it is garbage, then they can move on without having spent too much on fixing an inferior idea. ideas/advancements fall by the wayside all the time, particulary ones that consumers are confused about, are too expensive, or just suck.

my point is that we should embrace that companies are at least trying to put out better products instead of resting on their laurels.

The fact that we are here and not at a Bose forum speaks to the fact that we embrace companies that are trying to put out better products.

I don't think that companies are necessarily rushing to get HD DVD or Blueray out because they are better products. They are trying to regain the margins they get from first adopters who are willing to shell out big money for the latest and greatest, vs the rest of us who wait for technologies to develop to where the products that use them are commodities and thus much more affordable.

And certainly the studios and media owners, in general, are not embracing the idea of putting out better products, otherwise they wouldn't be insisting on sticking DRM everywhere they can to make consumers' lives harder but do nothing to stop piracy.

Then there's the fact that HDMI isn't a very good standard either. Then again it is based on DVI that apparently is a pretty crappy standard as well, but at least it has better connectors.

i was referring to the topic of this thread specifically - dolby and dts technology, not hardware.

The whole "HD war" is all so much hype anyway. The various players in the market are so fractured and focused on infighting that it is going to be years before any clear winner shakes out. In the meantime, the hardware manufacturers are tying to prime the pump by strong-arming the studios into releasing some content and by trying to keep consumers on the enddless upgrade train with equipment, much of which will end up being incompatible with eachother. Given that landscape, it's seems rather pointless to play the game at this juncture.

Personally, the only useful development to come out of all this is the order of magnitude increase in data storage on new DVD media. That will be a real boon to computer storage/backups, where you don't have to worry about replacing your entire computer system to take advantage of the increased storage capacity.

Cheers,

To return to the original topic of the thread, both the Dolby and DTS HD systems should be capable of producing awesome sound. I hope some media provider starts producing concerts and other listening content. The 990 has 7.1 analog inputs that should handle the players analog out quite well--at least I find analog out from my Denon 3910 is pretty much indistinguishable from the digital out with 990 processing. So there is hope for the new formats--it's just that I don't want to reward the industry by choosing a format in this war. You gotta wonder though with 90% of the world listening to down-rezed MP3 music if HD music will really sell.

Ditto, ditto, ditto, and more ditto! Being the proud (?) owner of the last generation of HDTV without DVI or HDMI, I will not be an early adopter in the near future. Until the new audio formats are on movie disks and are decodable by players, receivers and preamps, and the studios come to their senses about the copy-protection paranoia, all the HD movie disks and players that are sold in the next 1-2 years of either format will be transitional products. Early adopters will be buying both disks and players that will be obsolete (or at least odd) in some way in a couple of years one way or another. I agree with Sanjay that for an overwhelmingly large fraction of the market HD disks are an incremental improvement over current DVDs, pretty much like SACD and DVD-A are seen as not worth it by most. In the last few months it seems that locally DVD-As are disappearing from store shelves, but SACDs seem to still be hanging on. Anyone else notice this? Many stores are also mixing SACDs and DVD-As with CDs on the shelves, so it makes it difficult to browse for SACDs and DVD-As.

Exactly, your average "Joe Sixpack" seems to be perfectly happy with 128k AAC or MP3 stereo audio. People are lapping up the ipod.

Until there is some bona fide standards and interoperability, I suspect the HD game (if it ever really takes off at the consumer level) is going to be relegated to rather expensive higher end manufacturers catering to people with a lot of discretionary spending power. It's only when the mass production manufacturers start seeing real market opportunity that any affordable gear will be available. Until that time, your reliance on the analog inputs seems to be the safest haven.

The thing that drives me really crazy is that all of this copy protection crap doesn't inconvenience pirates in the slightest, but creates headaches for consumers who legitimately buy the content. When I was in Beijing a few weeks ago, you could buy currently running theater titles (including movies that had only opened in the week or two prior in the US) on the street for 10-20RMB, or about $1.25-$2.50. That included rather professional packaging. I doubt that will change anytime soon. And that was within blocks of Tiananmen Square and many of the government's official buildings. That's like being able to buy pirated movies across the street from the White House.

My .02,
I am wandering if the push to go all digital broadcast (TV) will help the movement.
Otherwise it looks like the HD-disk is all about the green-back($$$) and some bragging right.

Personally - i'm going to just watch from the side-lines. Enjoy the games.

Personally I think HD Disks are going to just be a bump in the road on our way to on demand delivery. Who needs those pesky disks when you will be able to punch a few buttons on your remote and stream HD content from your cable or telephone connection or have it beamed to you over the air? These HD Disks are not the paradigm shift but on demand delivery may be the thing that changes how we think and purchase TV shows and movies in the future.

Having said all that I could see picking up a HD player next holiday season because I'm a hobbyist/enthusiast. So many make this hobby sound like a birthright.

on demand is nice. but what about when you are on the move. i find it unlikely to get on demand in the car, on the plane, on a boat, on vacation, etc. itd be ok if you could burn it to a disc, but if not then you will have to endlessly pay for what you watch. cable companies would love it, consumers would watch less movies. on demand is cheaper than renting though and is a nice alternative.

I've seen a number of people suggest that delivery services will replace physical media, and there are certainly a number of different avenues in development or even in place already to allow it to work. I still like having an actual disc on the shelf that I can enjoy as long as I have a working player to put it in. Call me old-fashioned... And so long as the format war either has a clear victor early (which seems almost impossible at this point) or combo players arrive quickly, I think that physical media (including good ol' DVD) will be with us for a long time to come.

If we were witnessing an HD format launch that wasn't hobbled by iffy first-gen hardware (lacking support for some of the format's notable features), an output format that isn't finalized yet (HDMI), paranoid copy protection, and a format war, then I think the traditional delivery method of "buy it and put it on your shelf" media would have a good shot at remaining king for many years to come. Even in that utopian scenario, delivery services would be positioned to continue to grow and evolve, but I don't know that they'd be able to achieve dominance in the short term. With the messy format double-launch we've ended up with, the opportunity exists for delivery services to capitalize on the confusion.

Not trying to pick a fight here but what exactly don't you like about HDMI? It is the most advanced connection we have in the A/V world, do you have an alternative? I may be in the minority but I have had a hodge podge of HDMI/DVI gear and haven't had a problem with any of them and it definitely has some advantages over component. This is coming from an old analog CRT guy but the truth is most sources and displays now days are digital. It makes no sense to me to take a digital source to analog only to have the display turn it back to digital.

I find most people don't like HDMI because of HDCP, but that has nothing to do with the physical HDMI interface. Even HDCP isn't that evil as far as copy protection goes. The evil part of copy protection are all these DRM flags which technically aren't a part of HDCP but specific to the various playback formats.

Personally, annoying HDCP issues aside, I don't like HDMI because of the physical properties of the connector. It's just not very robust and prone to pulling out of the device once it's got a bit of cable weight tugging on it. The final spec should either have a latch/screw mechanism or should grip the connector more securely.

Cheers,

Re: On-Demand delivery. It will take a major paradigm shift. Like Gonk I'm old fashion and like to hold the disk in my hands, but there is a whole generation of IPod/MP3 kids coming who I think don't care. I envision these STB will have a flash slot so you can burn a cartridge for your portable player and for guys like Gonk and I who like to have something to hold in our hands.

On demand is certainly possible, but not at HD bitrates (at least for the forseable future). My company actually helps stream video over 3G mobile networks and customers are lining up to buy 320x240x15fps mp4/h.264 content. Would I pay for something like that? Hell no. But Joe Sixpack doesn't seem to mind.

Things get a little better once you're at home and have broadband, but I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine how long it takes to download a movie (4-8gigs), even at much lower DVD mpeg-2 bitrates. Now imagine that you want to download nearly 10 times that amount of data....

Cheers,

My biggest problem with HDMI is the ongoing revision process. New technology is inevitable, and if you can't at least accept that then you're going to be needlessly unhappy a lot of the time. But new technology is at its best when it is allowed to evolve to a "sweet spot" before coming to market such that there is not a compelling need to force a new version of the same brand new technology on consumers. HDMI has not done that. It's bad enough that many early HDMI devices not make effective use of the audio channel. Even worse is the ongoing revision process - then there have been two revisions already (v1.1 and v1.2) with at least one more on the way. It's too easy to find a device that offers an HDMI connector that doesn't support all of HDMI's features (including at least a couple surround processors that offer HDMI solely for video switching). The degree of consumer confusion that HDMI has created is pretty disappointing, and the HDMI group deserves much of the blame for that.

Better not tell my Cable Co that or they will take away my HD On-Demand Movie Channel.

What the cable company calls HD is often not even close. 8-)

My cable operator has "digital cable" with HD content and it just isn't worth writing home about. They compress the bejeezus out of the signal to the point that I can often notice macroblocking and other artifacts. You don't realize just how crappy it is until you get to work with a true HD source and see what it CAN look like.

Cheers,

ah my 1000th post has finally arrived on the outlaw forum. and while i may have wanted to save it for some important discussion, i wont.

my hd cable from time warner is pretty good. we do have the hd suite as well which adds espnHD and some movie channels. the major networks are usually the best though, with the exception of fox. not too long and everything will be broadcast in HD... what amazes me is how slow this transition is. i mean NO ONE can say they prefer analog over HD. it is about the money though.

i wonder what (if i get there) kind of excitement my next 1000 posts will make. hopefully by then outlaw will have released the 300wt amp i have been waiting for and i can comment specifically about some of their gear.

Yes, my biggest complaint with HDMI is the connector. Why they didn't standardize on BNC fiber, or interface similar to DVI is beyond me. They tried to make a cutesy USB/Firewire-like connector, without really thinking about the differences between how computers and Home Theater/Home Audio are set up and used.

Seems like HDMI is limited in max length vs component. 50' is probably fine for most of us, but that doesn't seem to be enough for anyone with a front projector in a large room where the cables are run in the wall.

Next problem is with the built in DRM. It's crap. Shouldn't be in any standard. Yeah, we have to live with it if we want HD DVD, but we shouldn't have to.

Also the fact that it's a moving target is also pretty crappy. This is where the whole thing really breaks down. They come up with an interim standard knowing that it will be updated. Equipment manufacturers put out equipment based on the interim standard knowing that it will be updated. Meanwhile consumers are left holding the bag wondering if what they buy today will work tomorrow or a year from now or 5 years from now.

Most of us that are spending $3000+ on a TV aren't going to be buying again in 2 years, but basically the whole industry from the content creators on down to the equipment manufacturers are turning their backs on the consumer by not promising backwards compatibility with today's standards.

Now, maybe this sort of thing is inevitable, but not now. Component video can handle 1080p just fine. And I'm sure that the geniuses at Sony, Toshiba or wherever could come up with a new Toslink standard that is A) compatible with existing standard and B) high enough bandwidth to be used for the foreseeable future.

HDMI might be fine for Joe Sixpack, but it ain't cutting the mustard with the *diophile communities.

Look at the problem in perspective: if the warnings are right about an approaching oil peak and a catastrophic decline afterwards in the infrastructure that supplies the services we've all come to think we need, in 10 years we'll be lucky to have books.

I HOPE I'm exaggerating.

Hmmmmm.....listen and you'll hear the sound of this thread gasping its last breath. Maybe, like THX, we should resuscitate this in another forum (not 990)?

At least the clock thread finally died, although its death was very much akin to Pee Wee Herman's death in the Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie.

But much like PeeWee, it was all bout the self stroking of the original poster....

1/2 :-)

Hey - just ignore my last message. I must have been reading too many gloomy prognostications. In this saloon one shouldn't serve that kind of drink. Sorry.

My cable company does not compress HD at all. They do remodulate it to QAM 256 but it is uncompressed. Sounds like your cable co needs to update their capacity. I've compared my cable HD with OTA and OTA may have a slight edge, but I blame that on the cable set top box not any recompression. I can't get HBO and about a half dozen other channels over OTA anyway.

Oh what the heck I'll keep the thread going.

I agree the connector could be better, but the whole interface was designed to make it easy for JSP. Part of the problem I've seen is us audio/videophiles are used to big fat cables with ferite coils and some of the HDMI cable makers accomodated that desire actually making it worse. For the record I have three HDMI sources and have never had a connector come loose.

Quote:

Seems like HDMI is limited in max length vs component. 50' is probably fine for most of us, but that doesn't seem to be enough for anyone with a front projector in a large room where the cables are run in the wall.

From my experience to my projector (30ft) the HDMI actually is better looking then the slight loss I get from my same length RGBVH cable. The nice thing about digital it is either there or it isn't. At 30ft I see no digital sparkle in my system. There are also HDMI optical solutions that can go hundreds of feet.

Quote:

Next problem is with the built in DRM. It's crap. Shouldn't be in any standard. Yeah, we have to live with it if we want HD DVD, but we shouldn't have to.

As I mentioned earlier DRM really has nothing to do with HDMI/HDCP it is specific to the format, blue ray, HD-DVD, Cable STB, or OTA receiver. If you look at the HDCP docs DRM is not part of it.

Quote:

Also the fact that it's a moving target is also pretty crappy. This is where the whole thing really breaks down. They come up with an interim standard knowing that it will be updated. Equipment manufacturers put out equipment based on the interim standard knowing that it will be updated. Meanwhile consumers are left holding the bag wondering if what they buy today will work tomorrow or a year from now or 5 years from now.

Agreed this could have been less painful but the interface has been pretty stable since version 1.1 and does pretty much everything 95% of consumers will want including high bandwidth multi-channel PCM audio of the upcoming HD DVDs. So unless you really need SACD or want to decode the new formats in your Pre/Pro then yes you will need upgrades but that has always been the case in the CE world.

Quote:

Most of us that are spending $3000+ on a TV aren't going to be buying again in 2 years, but basically the whole industry from the content creators on down to the equipment manufacturers are turning their backs on the consumer by not promising backwards compatibility with today's standards.

If you are talking component I agree, although I've seen some press relaeses recently that say the component "hole" will not be blocked on the new formats, at least initially. If you mean digtial or HDMI I disagree as it should be upward compatible.

Quote:

Now, maybe this sort of thing is inevitable, but not now. Component video can handle 1080p just fine. And I'm sure that the geniuses at Sony, Toshiba or wherever could come up with a new Toslink standard that is A) compatible with existing standard and B) high enough bandwidth to be used for the foreseeable future.

HDMI might be fine for Joe Sixpack, but it ain't cutting the mustard with the *diophile communities.

This is where I have a differing opinion. As good as component is I would have to say a digital (HDMI or other) signal is going to less prone to interference and transmission loss. Like I said earlier digital usually works 100% or not at all. More importantly though is I can't imagine why in todays world where the source is digital and the displays are digital one would want to do a D/A at the source then an A/D back at the display.

Actually, obie_fl, the AACS spec (adopted by both camps) allows setting of a digital flag that forces downconversion over component outs to 540p, and while it's an option for the content owners, it means that owners of component-only TVs will have to beware of every piece of software they buy. I doubt highly that such info will be clearly marked on the packaging, which makes this a big piece of suck for those folks. While the hole won't be closed, it won't be all the way open, either.

I'm well aware of the AACS spec and agree it is evil, but this has nothing to do with HDMI/HDCP. The press release I saw made it look like some of the studios are backpedalling on the flag. Fear of a class action lawsuit?
Here\'s a press release from Universal.

Obie's got a good point - HDMI itself doesn't automatically bring with it AACS. It does bring HDCP (as does DVI in most cases), which has been at the root of some problems caused by manufacturers not properly implementing it (leading to hardware that can't achieve the HDCP handshake consistently), but that's not so much HDCP's fault as it is the manufacturer's fault.

Of course, HDMI does suffer some guilt by association in many people's minds thanks to the flag - and many of us continue to be less than wholly reassured by the news that Sony and others are electing not to "flip the switch" with that flag for initial software releases. There's also some uncertainty about Warner's HD-DVD titles - all three of the first discs include some footnotes on the back about audio and video output that have been interpreted to mean that those titles will have the flag enabled when they ship in two weeks.

Say What?

Ritz is referring to the clever little scam - I mean clock - thread, not this thread. His comment wouldn't make much sense if you hadn't delved into the twilight zone that is the CLC thread .

Life! Do you hear me? Give my creation....LIIIIIIFE!!!

[This one's going to take a few pitchforks and buzzsaws before it goes down again.]

Not to go back a whole 24-hours on the thread, and perhaps inadvertantly resuscitate it, but, I think Gonk's on to something here.

First is the bitrate we all can, or are likely to get, from our service providers. Even between various regions of the same cable provider the quality differs. OnDemand HD might work as a more inexpensive alternative to BD or HDDVD for some who don't want or can't afford to adopt either, but there's no guarantee of quality (but as others have suggested, J6P doesn't care so much about quality anyway). But on the physical media, the bitrate will likely be no lower than the highest bitrate we'd ever get from a service provider. And who knows if the OnDemand provider would pass along the hi-res audio signals, or the standard signals?

Second is infrastructure. With OnDemand, if the feature isn't offered at all by your provider, then what do you do? At least with hardware purchases, anyone anywhere can upgrade as long as the hardware exists and the content is available *somewhere.* I have a friend that lives less than 5 miles from me, and his neighborhood has cable service of a whopping 20 channels, *none* of them digital. Yet in my neighborhood I could get the HD Locals from my cable provider (but I'm currently "enjoying" HD Lite from DirecTV instead)

Third is content availability. Until such a time comes that your OnDemand provider has a catalog as large (or larger than) Netflix's, we'll be limited to what they offer. So if I have a hankering to watch "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad World" in HD but Adelphia OnDemand doesn't offer it because "Harold and Kumar" is featured that week, at least I'll be able to turn to the disk in my CaseLogic disc-holder or Netflix it. This, of course, is assuming a down-the-road scenario when both services are up and running and there is plenty of available content on both. Don't know why I chose Mad Mad World... probably because I rented it last weekend.

In all likelihood, once I decide on a format I want to try, if/when OnDemand HD becomes available in my area, I'll treat it as I do now with my Netflix account vs. PPV-HD from D* vs. whimsical trips to the local Blockbuster. I'll participate in all three. "Madagascar" on D* PPV-HD? Hmm... ok, I'll Tivo that and remove it from my Netflix queue. My fiancee wants to watch "Must Love Dogs" tonight instead of "King Kong"? Ok let's head over to Blockbuster. etc., etc. I see myself seeing a program in the OnDemand library that I care less about a/v quality (like a throwaway romantic comedy), so for less $$$ I might get that. But for more critical viewing or to ensure the highest a/v quality by my subjective preferences, making sure I get the physical media either through rental or purchase.

Whew! Sorry I rambled on so long!

Rick

Neither did your original statement I responded to, regardless of the overall topic. No harm intended. The flag itself is there, and as long as it is those with older HDTVs are waiting for the other shoe to drop. Any studio can change their position at any time once the format launches.

I do agree with you on your position on HDMI, for that matter. While the standards aren't mature enough for the new formats, it's certainly not the fault of the HDMI founders that the HD format camps are launching their product before the delivery medium is ready for them. IMO, HDMI is the best thing to happen to the CE world, allowing full A/V communication with a single cable. The octopus is dying, folks. I wonder if Monster saw this coming...

HDMI should be a great trick once it quits being a moving target. Personally, I wouldn't have minded separate audio and video runs if each could be a single cable since it would allow folks to keep audio and video processing separate if they wanted to, but if we see a paradigm shift toward home theater gear like the Anthem D2 (which based on some AVS reports has finally started landing in dealers' hands and making its way to consumers) - where the processor is both an audio processor and a video processor - then a single-cable solution like HDMI would begin to make much more sense than I originally thought it would when I heard of it a few years ago.

Greg - I think we are in agreement.

gonk - It is the D2 that got me to thinking about all this again. Then there is the AVM-40 which I still haven't figured out if it just switches like the 990 or if it does in fact process HDMI audio. What it boils down to for me is do I sell my standalone video processor and get an all-in-one solution like the D2 or AVM-50 or wait for a Pre/Pro that processes just the audio and keep the VP. I have to admit the all-in-one solution is getting pretty attractive.

If the buzz about the Gennum video processing that the D2 and AVM-50 are using is the real deal, then it is very attractive - shame it's also way out of my budget. Of course, "trickle down economics" suggests that if the D2 can pack both audio and video processing into one chassis then we'll see other gear doing much the same thing for less in a few years. Who knows, maybe the 990's successor will include some form of video processing in a couple years' time (probably not at the same level as the D2, considering the disparity between pricing structures, but I don't know that I need that level for my little 32" HDTV anyway).

With HDMI v1.3 so close, I can't convince myself that the inclusion of HDMI v1.1 in a processor is enough to warrant investing in an upgrade - even if it does provide support for the audio side (which I'd thought the AVM-40 was supposed to do until I saw some folks questioning it recently).