Does Theta Digital's Failure to Have HDMI Impact Whether You Want to Buy??? [Text View]

Steve Bruzonsky

10-06-06, 10:30 AM

Steve;
I purchased a CBIII earlier this year. It is understandable that some people would not consider a new prepro without HDMI but it really depends on priorities.
I listen to far more music than watch movies (90%-10%) although my wife watches movies on the system constantly. My top priorities were sound and reliablility. The other finalists were the Lex (could get a great deal on one) and the Halcro. After listening to the Lex, to my ears, I knew it wasn't the right choice for me.
When I was looking the Halcro had just been released (I waited for it because I thought it was "the one") and the reported problems with the unit made me uneasy. I already own a great sounding DVD player (PMDT) that is both expensive and trouble-prone. I didn't want to repeat that experience.
The CBIII was much more stable than the earlier versions and the sound, again, to my ears, was excellent.
So I chose the CBIII. Do I wish they had HDMI? Perhaps. But I also decided that I wanted to keep video out of the pre-pro (is the advantage theoretical or practical) so there is no video card in my CB (I use a Faroudja NRS for video).
I also believe that HDMI is not truly standardized yet. Yes, there are standards released for HDMI 1 and they have been implemented in various products. But how often do we hear about incompatibility between HDMI 1 components? Too frequently for my comfort.
But I would prefer to have the option as the BlueRay vs. HD-DVD battle works itself out. Since that isn't imminent I guess I can wait a while for Theta to figure out how they will implement HDMI in the CB. Until then I am really enjoying the CBIII as is.
Next decision is to figure out if the 6 Shooter makes sense given the CB III's eventual HDMI capability.
BP

The Six Shooter retails for only 2 grand. Of course, if you use more than 5.1 channels out of the CB3, then you need two Six Shooters or it just doesn't work and sound like it should. If like me you have multiple subs with pass throughs, you can run just a .1 (one sub) from the CB3 and chain the subs. The Six Shooter is fantastic if you have a Universal CD/SACD/DVD-A multi-channel player - a MUST.
(And it works fantastic analogwise with HD DVD and the new audio formats, too.)
And of course who knows how long before Theta gets HDMI for the CB3, and even if they do, will you have a Universal player with compatible HDMI for SACD and DVD-A? I know, those formats are semi-dead, but I still like them.

I agree - I like to keep the video in my separate Lumagen VisionPro HDP. But most folks don't do that. Since HDMI 1.3 will carry both video and high resolution multi-channel audio, and we don't know if you can use HDMI 1.3 for video only and then use analog or digital audio from the player (depends on the player, odds are this will be a problem), I would think that Theta can design the CB so that it not only processes the audio from HDMI 1.3, but so that it has an extra
HDMI 1.3 output to run to a separate video processor.

sfogg

10-06-06, 10:35 AM

Steve,

"and even if they do, will you have a Universal player with compatible HDMI for SACD and DVD-A? I know, those formats are semi-dead, but I still like them."

Already exists, I use it with my MC-12HD.....

"Since HDMI 1.3 will carry both video and high resolution multi-channel audio, and we don't know if you can use HDMI 1.3 for video only and then use analog or digital audio from the player (depends on the player, odds are this will be a problem)"

No, you very likely will be able to use HDMI just for video and use existing S/PDIF digital for audio, that can be done today. Just that in doing that you can't get full resolution audio in this manor as it can't be spit out over S/PDIF. To get full resolution audio digitally requires HDMI.

"I would think that Theta can design the CB so that it not only processes the audio from HDMI 1.3, but so that it has an extra HDMI 1.3 output to run to a separate video processor. "

Of course they can, this is what every pre-pro and receiver that accepts HDMI does already....

Shawn

JHL

10-06-06, 10:43 AM

I have owned my Casablanca for 9 years and really like the fact that it has been possible to upgrade it. The only thing I don't like is the long periods between upgrades when there are features I want and I have to wait for them.

I considered purchasing the Six Shooter when I got interested in SACD and DVD-A. But as Steve noted, these technologies never really became mainstream so I decided to delay that purchase.

Now HD-DVD and BluRay are available and I am getting ready to start enjoying them. I was considering the Six Shooter as a compromise since it could also be used with the higher resolution audio formats. Unfortunately it looks like the analog outputs have been dropped from entry level second generation HD-DVD players so that is no longer an option.

There is still plenty of uncertainty about the next generation of DVDs too. Without either a single format or a universal player it is difficult to know what to do in this area either.

It would be great if Theta developed an HDMI option for the CB3. I would prefer something that kept it a single box because I don't have unlimited space in my equipment rack. But I think I can survive without that option for a little while longer. I am going to try and focus on enjoying all the music, DVDs (and new HD-DVDs) I have, and see how all these questions get answered over the next 6 months to a year.

John

audiman

10-06-06, 11:36 AM

The SS is a wonderfull piece of equipment. Can serve also as a 2 ch pre-amp that connects seamlessly to the CB3. HDMi would be great to eliminate all the analog cables that i must use between the compli and the HD-A1. I have a preoblem right now as i have 7.1 setup, but only 5.1 analog in.

As for MCH, what players can actually get SACD/DVD-A pcm out thru hdmi ? is the lexicon 12HD upgradable to hdmi 1.3 ?

Steve Bruzonsky

10-06-06, 11:37 AM

It would be great if Theta developed an HDMI option for the CB3. I would prefer something that kept it a single box because I don't have unlimited space in my equipment rack.
John

I think your point is important - for most folks, limited space, cabinets, a single box is important. Yea, I can get buy with multiple boxes, but I am the exception, not the rule, not the market.

The Casablanca is due for a nice redesign since its not 10 years later since it first came out. Here's some ideas for Theta to think about, I'm not saying they are all practical or cost effective:

1. No need for all the stereo analog inputs. Maybe two pairs of stereo analog inputs at most. And don't even need them if #2 below can be done.

2. How about incorporating the Six Shooter into the Casablanca, in one box?
And having say two of the analog stereo inputs work both digitally, analog direct, and analog matrix (meaning analog direct for front left and right and digital derived for other channels). Question can this be done with quality of Six Shooter sonics intact, thanks to shielding, etc.?

3. Excellent sounding DACs no longer need or should retail at $1,000 per channel like the Xtreme DACs. $500 per channel, like for the Superior 2 DACs, is probably reasonable. Bottom line is the Six Shooter and Toshiba HD DVD player proves how good those cheap DACs in the HD DVD player sound via the Six Shooter, so hard to justify spending $1,000 per DAC these days. Let folks who want the very best stereo sound buy the Gen VIII Dac from Theta.

4. Of course the video board should be reworked for HDMI, maybe offer a few different swappable video boards based on customer needs, and to keep use of space down some.

5. The digital audio board can be reworked. Don't need 6 coaxial inputs.
Don't need ATT digital or Single Mode. Need 3-4 toslink, 2-3 coaxial,
and of course HDMI.

6. Digital EQ, at last for the low end bass and subwoofer channel, with a microphone, and auto and manual setup for the EQ. See my review of the Velodyne SMS-1 in this thread - its a great piece and these days I would think that the upgraded CB could so something like this pretty easy without costing all that much.

Just my two cents. HDMI for the Casablanca is I assume a major undertaking - mebbe other stuff should be considered with it, too, all at once???

Lets face it. By far most of the Theta customers have the CB custom installed and setup. They don't have room or want a separate box - hence they don't buy the Six Shooter. Ease of use and the custom installer not having to come back are priorities. They don't want to read AVS Forum to figure out how to do it. They don't even want to read the manual. And yea they will love less cables. The custom installer who sells them the product wants something simple - so whether now or in a few years, HDMI will at some point be it. I'm sure some custom installers are already moving to the Halcro and Lexicon, due to HDMI,
over Theta both due to HDMI and price. And the Valis will be a partial answer for Theta once they equip it with HDMI - but its not on the spec sheet for the current upcoming product - but the Valis must run with its own Virtu PowerDac multi-channel amplifier, and many custom installers and customers will want different amplifiers, so its important that the updated Casablanca be a reasonable price range in comparison to competitors like the Lexicon MC-12 HD and Halcro. Of course it can cost several thousand more than them for its quality.

sfogg

10-06-06, 11:50 AM

"As for MCH, what players can actually get SACD/DVD-A pcm out thru hdmi ?"

Oppo 970 will spit out MC DVD-A and SACD (converted to PCM) over HDMI v1.1.

I run this to a MC-12HD. After the Lexicon gets the MC it can then run its full processing on the signal (L7 to expand it out to 7 channels), bass mangement, time alignment, room EQ for all 10 possible channels...etc..etc.

"is the lexicon 12HD upgradable to hdmi 1.3 ? "

No idea, Lexicon hasn't said anything about it either way. They tend to not say much about what 'might' occur in the future for worries about pissing off customers if/when those statements don't happen. Typically if Lexicon does make a statement about something it happens.

As far as HDMI v1.3 I really don't care about it in the Lexicon. It is a red herring for all the reasons that have been discussed numerous times before.

Shawn

sfogg

10-06-06, 12:05 PM

Steve,

"And the Valis will be a partial answer for Theta once they equip it with HDMI - but its not on the spec sheet for the current upcoming product - but the Valis must run with its own Virtu PowerDac multi-channel amplifier"

And that requirement of pairing it with the PowerDAC via S/PDIF cables is likely going to be what keeps the Valis from ever accepting audio over HDMI because in effect it would defeat the copy protection that is desired on high resolution MCH audio.

Look at Meridian. They only way they were approved to output high resolution audio from DVD-A over (3) S/PDIF connections in their players was to come up with their own encryption to 'protect' the data. Unless Theta does something similiar with the Valis, with the appropriate hardware to decrypt the data in the PowerDac, they may have licensing problems trying to implement audio over HDMI.

If Theta had put it all in one box, which would have made sense since they are required to be paired together anyway, this would not have been an issue.

Ditto MCH high resolution audio over HDMI into a CBx and the CBx then spitting it out over S/PDIF to something like a Gen VIII DAC. Not going to happen because of the piracy concerns.

Shawn

Steve Bruzonsky

10-06-06, 12:31 PM

Shawn, I know you keep up on some of this stuff as much as anyone.

Explain again what advanced coding is on HD DVDs and Blue Ray,
and how this may negate using the surround processor to do the HD audio decoding, as opposed to the player. Thanks.

sfogg

10-06-06, 12:51 PM

Steve,

"Explain again what advanced coding is on HD DVDs and Blue Ray,and how this may negate using the surround processor to do the HD audio decoding, as opposed to the player. Thanks. "

You have a HD-DVD player now... correct?

Have you noticed how if you are playing a movie you can bring up the movies setup menu and it overlays on top of the movie and the movie keeps playing? If so did you also notice that you can get menu sound effects which are mixed right into the audio of the movie itself when you interact with that overlaid menu?

In essense that is 'advanced content' on the disc. Another example would be a directors commentary being mixed into the movies soundtrack while it is playing instead of being a completely different audio track. Other things will offer advanced content as well.

To be able to do these sorts of features the player must be able to mix together multiple audio streams while the movie is playing. To be able to do this the audio must be in the LPCM format within the player. In other words the player must decode any encoded audio. Since the player decodes the audio automatically for any HD-DVD marked as using 'advanced content' (which I believe is literally all of them) even with HDMI v1.3 a player won't spit out bitstream (still encoded) audio. It can't do that and be able to perform the advanced content functions. The HDMI v1.3 player is going to decode the audio, do any advanced content mixing it needs to and spit out the decoded LPCM over HDMI.

So, in a nutshell.... even if one had a HDMI v1.3 player and a HDMI v1.3 compatible pre-pro (will full support for decoding DD+, DD THD...etc...etc.. internally) if you played a HD-DVD marked as 'advanced content' (which is all of the so far) in the player the *player* is going to automatically decode the audio within the player (to be able to handle advanced content) and spit it out as multi-channel LPCM.

In other words the reality is the audio transfered from the player to the pre-pro is going to be no different then what occurs today with HDMI v1.1.

That is why HDMI v1.3 for audio is a red herring.....

Shawn

Michael Grant

10-06-06, 02:44 PM

Peter,If you could put into the Lumagen support circuitry to enhance the quality of the digital HDMI audio signal before sending it on to the Theta, then you would really have somethingWhat exactly do you mean by this? I can tell you this, I don't want any video processor touching a single solitary bit of the audio data. Leave it the heck alone! HDMI chipsets may be horrible, but they're not altering the audio data they are given. They're horrible because of interoperability issues, dropouts, etc.

Steve Bruzonsky

10-06-06, 03:37 PM

Peter,What exactly do you mean by this? I can tell you this, I don't want any video processor touching a single solitary bit of the audio data. Leave it the heck alone! HDMI chipsets may be horrible, but they're not altering the audio data they are given. They're horrible because of interoperability issues, dropouts, etc.

I agree with Michael. E.G., connect the HD DVD player HDMI to the CB. The CB then plays the audio. The CB than has an HDMI output which connects to your external video processor or video display. Look how often Lumagen does firmware upgrades - no way Theta or any audio company will ever have the expertise or quickness on the video side that Lumagen does.

Steve Bruzonsky

10-06-06, 03:43 PM

sfogg

10-06-06, 04:00 PM

" When I watch a HD DVD, I could care less about the menu sound effects, so losing them by decoding in the surround processor is no big deal to me."

Except I don't think you will have a choice about this. If a HD-DVD is authored with Advanced Content the player is going to decode the audio internally.

"Lets say I want to listen to an alternate audio track. I won't be able to listen to that over HDMI."

Why not?

If you select a different audio track the player will simply spit that audio over the HDMI audio connection instead of the main track.

This is nothing like LDs which could have different tracks being output at the same time on different outputs. (Analog vs. digital) It is no different then a DVD. Whatever language/track you select is what is output on all available outputs.

" Shawn, can I use HDMI and bring up the menu/settings while the movie is playing"

Yes, works fine.

Shawn

Steve Bruzonsky

10-06-06, 05:38 PM

" Except I don't think you will have a choice about this. If a HD-DVD is authored with Advanced Content the player is going to decode the audio internally.

" Shawn, can I use HDMI and bring up the menu/settings while the movie is playing"

Yes, works fine.

Shawn

Shawn, I think these are the most important points. Are you are saying that assuming the disc is Advanced Content, then even HDMI 1.3 will not allow any audio decoding in the surround processor using the HDMI connection, that the audio decoding must be done in the player? If so, then what the heck good is HDMI except for video???

Steve Bruzonsky

10-06-06, 05:40 PM

A bit of clarification. I was talking with a contact at Theta. We discussed the upcoming Theta Valis surround processor. It was all designed for DVI. But as folks know, the market has quickly moved away from DVI, going to HDMI.
A new surround processor with DVI didn't make sense. Theta took DVI out, no sense doing it. But knowing that HDMI is coming more and more, Theta redesigned the Valis to have an open backplane and internal hooks for HDMI while keeping the rest of the design fixed. (Not that I, a non-engineer, understand some of these technical terms all that well, but that's what I was told.)

sfogg

10-06-06, 05:50 PM

Steve Bruzonsky

10-06-06, 05:54 PM

My recent talk with Theta indicates that they are interested in feedback from us here at AVS Forum regarding whether they should plunge ahead quicker with HDMI 1.1 or 1.2 rather than wait for HDMI 1.3. b Their engineers have been working with HDMI 1.1 and some 1.2 parts that have been available.

Here are some concerns and questions raised by Theta as they consider the HDMI issues:

1. When will HDMI 1.3 be here?

2. Are the final specs for HDMI done yet or are they still subject to revision?

3. Isn't the current HDMI 1.1 connector a pretty lousy one which is being redesigned for HDMI 1.3?

4. What benefit does HDMI 1.3 have for you as compared to the current HDMI 1.1, if any? (some discussion of this above re Advanced Coding).

5. If you own a Casablanca or are considering buying a Valis, do you want Theta to come out with HDMI now in its interim form? How much would you be willing to pay for this now, knowing it will later be superceded by HDMI 1.3 and a new connector? How many HDMI s would you want? Do you want scaling? Really good scaling, better than what's built into your projector or plasma? Are you willing to pay for it while its still 1.2? Or do you want to be frugal for now and settle for switching?

So folks who might seriously consider Theta, or currently have Theta, if you can give us your thoughts re the above, and if there is enough interest, maybe Theta will move to HDMI sooner than later!

Steve Bruzonsky

10-06-06, 05:58 PM

HDMI v1.3 vs. HDMI v1.1 WRT audio
Shawn

Shawn, help??? What does WRT mean?

Steve Bruzonsky

10-06-06, 06:02 PM

". Are you are saying that assuming the disc is Advanced Content, then even HDMI 1.3 will not allow any audio decoding in the surround processor using the HDMI connection, that the audio decoding must be done in the player?"

As I understand it, yes!

"If so, then what the heck good is HDMI except for video???"

Do you mean HDMI in general or HDMI v1.3 WRT audio?

HDMI in general.... to be able to transfer the full resolution multi-channel soundtrack to a pre-pro digitally so one doesn't have to rely on the processing, dacs and analog line stage in the player.

If you mean what good is HDMI v1.3 vs. HDMI v1.1 WRT audio... there isn't much of a point when one actually understands what is going to occur in the case of 'Advanced Content' on HD-DVD. That *is* one of the points those of us that have been saying HDMI v1.1 is all that is needed for MCH audio have been trying to make. Far too many people don't realize this....

Shawn

Shawn, you are confusing me. What does "WRT" mean?

Now you are saying that HDMI v1.1 will not allow Advanced Content discs to have audio decoding done anywhere but in the player, right? Assuming this is the case, then other than for video purposes, why would Theta even bother
to do HDMI v1.1? All discs so far are Advanced Content and we don't see this changing in the forseeable future.

Will HDMI v1.3 be any different in this regard? Will it allow Advanced Content discs to have audio decoding done in the player?

sfogg

10-06-06, 06:02 PM

Steve,

"Here are some concerns and questions raised by Theta as they consider the HDMI issues:"

They should know the answers to all of this if they actually have done any work with HDMI....

But doing their homework for them....

"1. When will HDMI 1.3 be here?"

The specs are done. Products shipping with some forms of HDMI v1.3 should be fairly soon. The G2 top of the line Toshiba is will have HDMI v1.3 in it, as will the PS3 if it ever ships.

"2. Are the final specs for HDMI done yet or are they still subject to revision?"

Specs for v1.3 are final. If anyone thinks there won't be later versions I think they are kidding themselves. If one is always waiting for the 'latest and greatest' before working with HDMI I tend to doubt they will ever end up working with HDMI.

"3. Isn't the current HDMI 1.1 connector a pretty lousy one which is being redesigned for HDMI 1.3?"

Same connector for HDMI v1.3 with an optional smaller connector for things like camcorders and such which don't have much connector real estate to spare.

Shawn

sfogg

10-06-06, 06:13 PM

Steve,

WRT = With Regard To....

"Now you are saying that HDMI v1.1 will not allow Advanced Content discs to have audio decoding done anywhere but in the player, right?"

With HDMI v1.1 the decoding of DD+ and Dolby THD must occur in the player anyway since HDMI v1.1 doesn't have the possibility of sending those formats bitstream. HDMI v1.3 has the capability of sending them bitstream but because of the 'Advanced Content' the players are more then likely going to be doing the decoding internally anyway.

"Assuming this is the case, then other than for video purposes, why would Theta even bother to do HDMI v1.1? "

You mean besides giving Theta owners the ability to actually use their very expensive surround processors and DACs to be able to listen to the latest surround formats (DD+, Dolby THD, etc) in full resolution, with the full processing and bass management functions of the CB3? Ditto doing the same thing thing with DVD-A and SACD?

Call me crazy but some might think that is worthwhile....

Shawn

PeterS

10-06-06, 06:19 PM

1. When will HDMI 1.3 be here?

November/December 2006!

2. Are the final specs for HDMI done yet or are they still subject to revision?

There will always be revisions. Now is the time to jump.

3. Isn't the current HDMI 1.1 connector a pretty lousy one which is being redesigned for HDMI 1.3?

There is no new HDMI 1.3 connector. There is only a camcorder option. Consider it like mini-usb.

4. What benefit does HDMI 1.3 have for you as compared to the current HDMI 1.1, if any? (some discussion of this above re Advanced Coding).

HDMI 1.3 will offer a few things (in addition to better compatibility and stability). It will pass the digital bitstream so it can be processed in the digital domain, and do everything HDMI 1.1 and 1.2 will do.

5. If you own a Casablanca or are considering buying a Valis, do you want Theta to come out with HDMI now in its interim form? How much would you be willing to pay for this now, knowing it will later be superceded by HDMI 1.3 and a new connector? How many HDMI s would you want? Do you want scaling? Really good scaling, better than what's built into your projector or plasma? Are you willing to pay for it while its still 1.2? Or do you want to be frugal for now and settle for switching?

I own the CB3 and would not consider a Valis. I would like Theta to come out with HDMI 1.3 sometime in the middle of 2007 for the CB3. I would pay $500 for a new input card. I would like them to team with someone like Lumagen so that I could move all of the switching out of the Theta and into an external processor (optional) and use the second HDMI output of the Lumagen to route audio to the Theta. Theta should stay out of the already crowded Video Scaling market and partner with someone who knows this market and serves it as well as they serve audio.

However, DIGITAL EQ IS A MUST UPGRADE FOR THE THETA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Steve Bruzonsky

10-06-06, 06:46 PM

"Now you are saying that HDMI v1.1 will not allow Advanced Content discs to have audio decoding done anywhere but in the player, right?"

With HDMI v1.1 the decoding of DD+ and Dolby THD must occur in the player anyway since HDMI v1.1 doesn't have the possibility of sending those formats bitstream. HDMI v1.3 has the capability of sending them bitstream but because of the 'Advanced Content' the players are more then likely going to be doing the decoding internally anyway.

"Assuming this is the case, then other than for video purposes, why would Theta even bother to do HDMI v1.1? "

You mean besides giving Theta owners the ability to actually use their very expensive surround processors and DACs to be able to listen to the latest surround formats (DD+, Dolby THD, etc) in full resolution, with the full processing and bass management functions of the CB3? Ditto doing the same thing thing with DVD-A and SACD?

Call me crazy but some might think that is worthwhile....

Shawn

Shawn, on the one hand, you state that with Advanced Content, only the player can decode the audio, even with HDMI v1.3 able to relay the bitstream for high end audio to the surround processor. Then at the end you state the opposite, that the surround processor over HDMI v1.3 can decode the audio. Which is it?

sfogg

10-06-06, 06:52 PM

Steve,

Just what I said.

HDMI v1.3 can transmit bitstream DD+, Dolby THD etc..etc. It can. That is something v1.1 can't do.

However, if a disc is authored in advanced content mode then to support that functionality the player is going to decode the audio formats internally and as such will not spit out audio in bitstream mode. All HD-DVDs so far have been authored as Advanced Content.

That second point is one that most HDMI v1.3 advocates don't understand.

Shawn

mdsmmfd

10-06-06, 08:22 PM

Sorry if I'm slow.....

Steve,

However, if a disc is authored in advanced content mode then to support that functionality the player is going to decode the audio formats internally and as such will not spit out audio in bitstream mode. All HD-DVDs so far have been authored as Advanced Content.

Are you saying that if it is authored for adv content, then it can't do it period or it can but only if user opts out of the adv content?

Thanks mike

sfogg

10-06-06, 08:52 PM

Michael Grant

10-06-06, 08:53 PM

That is a good question, Mike. But to be honest the fact that advanced content exists, and HD-DVD players have to support it, means that the decoding capability has to be there, even if you don't use it.

So why not use it? Look, Steve is raving about the analog sound quality of the Toshiba HD-DVD player piped through his system. This would not be possible if it were doing an imperfect job of decoding. So if Theta implements HDMI 1.1, he'll get even better results than the ones he is quite happy with now, if we reasonably assume that his Theta DACs are better than the Toshiba's. And HDMI 1.3 would not improve it further.

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 01:13 AM

Mike,

As far as I know if the disc is authored for advanced content the player is going to decode the audio internally and spit the audio out as MCH LPCM over HDMI. I don't think there is any sort of opting out available to the user.

Realistically this is no big deal. Decoding performed in the player vs. decoding in the pre-pro is not going to be different. Most pre-pros are just going to use off the shelf chips to do the decoding... just like what the players are going to do. And it wasn't mentioned in this thread but another advantage of decoding in the player and using LPCM over HDMI (like v1.1 gives you) is it is sort of forward compatible. If a new format comes out once a player comes out that supports it and decoded it interally you could plug that into your HDMI v1.1 pre-pro and get that format in full resolution without any sort of upgrade to the pre-pro.

Shawn

Ok. Now I get it. Assume all HD DVDs and Blue Ray ocntinue to have Advanced Content. The digital bitstream of Dolby Digital Plus or Dolby True HD will not work over HDMI to be decoded to LPCM in the surround processor. But the player
will decode, transmit the LPCM digitally over HDMI, and then the surround processor will apply digital parameters like crossovers, bass management, etc. and also convert to analog. COOL.

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 01:14 AM

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 01:15 AM

Below is an interesting post made at Secrets of Home Theater forum on
9-21-06 re HDMI:

In discussion with some industry engineers, I found that there are some problems popping up with the adaptation of the new HDMI standard. Here is what was discussed:

(1) Some cable TV boxes with HDMI out are not delivering any picture to displays with HDMI inputs.

(2) The current HDMI plug appears not to be as sturdy as anticipated, and there may be a change next year in the design of the plug, and the new plug would not fit in current HDMI sockets.

(3) If you have an HDMI source such as a DVD player, and connect it to your display via HDMI, you may not be able to get 5.1 digital bitstreams to come out of the coaxial or Toslink digital output of the player at the same time as digital video and audio out of the HDMI output.

(4) HDMI is a two-way digital communication, and some displays send a handshake signal to the DVD player that permanently messes up the player's ability to output digital video through its HDMI jack.

(5) HDMI v 1.1 is already hitting the shelves, with v 1.2 on the way, and v 1.3 in the next couple of years (v 1.3 will deliver higher res 5.1 digital audio). What will be the backward compatibility of these versions?

In my own situation, using a DirecTV satellite box with HDMI out to an LCD TV with HDMI in, when I turn off the TV, the satellite box crashes. I have to unplug the satellite box and then plug it back in. I have not solved this problem, except by switching to some other input besides HDMI before turning the TV off. Then, when I turn the TV back on, I switch to the HDMI input for viewing.

I will try and get some engineers to input possible answers to these problems here in the forum.

Editor

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by Admin : 09-21-2005 at 03:14 PM.

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 01:20 AM

Here's another interesting post made 9-19-06 on the Secrets website re HDMI:

This is likely to be my final post here for now, since most of the questions and arguments seem to be going around in circles. However I just wanted to clarify a few points. First though I'd like to qualify my answers by explaining that I am an extremely experienced video equipment design engineer with nearly 20 years experience of monitor, display, display electronics and image processing design, so hopefully I know what I'm on about!

- - - - -

What you guys should really be getting worked up about is the forthcoming requirement for you to all use HDMI due to the HMDI-HDCP encryption on Blu-ray and HD-DVD devices. This is far more serious as an industry issue since: the licensing rules mandate that HDMI-HDCP inputs only come out as HDMI-HDCP outputs.

Why is this so serious? Let me explain:

i) HMDI is only an 8-bit system whereas most video processors are 10-bit in and out (Vantage-HD is 16-bit internally to ensure rounding errors don't occur during data processing). So no analog outputs means loss of detail, quantization errors, inability to do very fine colour temperature correction (so user programmable colour correction becomes pointless), inability to do very fine gamma correction (so user programmable gamma correction also becomes pointless). Also, HDMI displays dictate the supported output mode to their driving device, so programmable output modes become irrelevant, they are also irrelevant because HDMI does not use H & V syncs anyway, it uses strictly defined modes with embedded data enable (blanking) signals so does not lend itself to user-programmability whatsoever.

ii) HDMI uses a poor quality connector with no positive locking mechanism and basic contacts which tend to make very bad contact with time, generating noise, data errors and loss of connection.

iii) Most seriously - HDMI rules mandate that the audio be passed through as HDMI too. But, they also mandate that the number of audio channels passed be dictated by the display device. Oops. Did someone screw up here? Perhaps - since connecting a plasma with 2 channel audio will, if the HDMI rules are adhered to, mandate that your new Blu-ray or HD-DVD player only outputs 2-channel audio. Yes, I know lots of you will say I am wrong, but go read the rules, I'm right, and I'm rightly worried about this.

iv) HDMI audio is presently limited to 96KHz whereas normal SPDIF or Toslink (optical) audio is 192KHz, so HDMI audio has to be more heavily compressed, or use fewer bits - hence lower audio quality.

v) There is NO option of using HDMI audio into a processor such as Vanatage-HD then using SPDIF/Toslink out since the HDMI/HDCP rules mandate that we can be fined up to $8M if we give you that very useful feature.

So really what I am trying to say is that you home theater guys have far more to worry about than whether Vantage-HD has BNCs or an SVGA connector since the people driving the rules behind all the new source equipment due to come to market are about to force you to use an interconnection system whose video and audio capabilities are a backwards step from where you are now. These are the people who you really need to campaign against since they are the ones who are about to destroy all flexibility within your home theater systems.

P.S. That's all I'm going to say on this, I won't enter into discussions since as an HDMI and HDCP licencee I am very limited by their terms as to what I can say.

TimBrooksbank

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 01:23 AM

From the above Secrets stuff, I am a bit confused and wonder why Theta would march into HDMI too soon. I'm sort of glad I've got the Six Shooter as it works great for me with no bugs at all.

Michael Grant

10-07-06, 10:46 AM

HDMI is only an 8-bit system whereas most video processors are 10-bit in and outActually, this is incorrect. HDMI is 8-bits only in 4:4:4 video mode. But most video material, including HD-DVD, has downsampled chroma (4:2:0 or 4:2:2), for which HDMI can provide up to 12 bits of resolution.

This is actually one of several errors and/or misconceptions in that post. I just took on the first because I don't have time for a longer post. Maybe Shawn can address the rest. Don't take anything in that post too seriously.

Michael Grant

10-07-06, 11:00 AM

OK, I have time to address another one:There is NO option of using HDMI audio into a processor such as Vanatage-HD then using SPDIF/Toslink out since the HDMI/HDCP rules mandate that we can be fined up to $8M if we give you that very useful feature.First of all, a source device is free to have SPDIF/Toslink outputs in parallel to HDMI. You all know this if you have HDMI-enabled source devices right now. In fact, I bought my folks an HDMI-out DVD player and ended up using the SPDIF output for audio.

But more importantly, this guy is confused about something rather critical: S/PDIF is incapable of carrying most of the high-resolution formats being used in HD-DVD now. In particular, there's no way it can carry uncompressed multichannel high-res PCM. S/PDIF goes up to 192kHz, but that's just two channel, not 8. You could do it with multiple ganged S/PDIF outputs I suppose.

So if HD-DVD and Blu-Ray were going to deliver high-resolution digital audio out, they were going to need a new transmission standard as it is. S/PDIF is simply can't do it. I suppose you could argue that they should have just developed S/PDIF++ and left the audio separate from the video; I certainly wouldn't have minded that. But you'd still be swapping out your processor either way.

sfogg

10-07-06, 11:03 AM

"So there is clearly a sonic advantage for Theta to implement HDMI sooner than later!!!"

Yes, you could then actually use your expensive pre-pro and DACs as something more then a glorified remote control for a $2k analog pre-amp then.

". But, they also mandate that the number of audio channels passed be dictated by the display device. Oops. Did someone screw up here?"

Yes, the author of this post. If a device is ahead of the display like a receiver or pre-pro it can alter the displays EDID with regards to the number of audio channels supported and then simply strip out the audio when it gets there.

"iv) HDMI audio is presently limited to 96KHz whereas normal SPDIF or Toslink (optical) audio is 192KHz, so HDMI audio has to be more heavily compressed, or use fewer bits - hence lower audio quality."

Again wrong. S/PDIF on coax can do two channels of 192kHz, last time I looked it couldn't on Toslink but perhaps that has changed. But then HDMI can also transmit two channels of 192/24. HDMI also supports multi-channel. HDMI v1.0 can transport 8 channels of 96/24 *uncompressed* audio. S/PDIF can't, the only way S/PDIF can transmit 6 channels of audio is using bitstream lossy compressed formats like DD/DTS. Advantage... HDMI.

"v) There is NO option of using HDMI audio into a processor such as Vanatage-HD then using SPDIF/Toslink out since the HDMI/HDCP rules mandate that we can be fined up to $8M if we give you that very useful feature."

Same answer as iv above. A single S/PDIF connector can't transmit all the audio that can be transmitted in a HDMI stream. So from a technological standpoint this couldn't be done anyway. But then there is also copy protection concerns on top of this. This is exactly why I said the Valis is never going to support MCH audio over HDMI. They won't be allowed to spit the audio out over multiple S/PDIF connectors to the PowerDac.

Michael already corrected the 8 bit error.

You need to check your sources of info better. Just about everything in those posts was wrong.

Shawn

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 11:17 AM

You need to check your sources of info better. Just about everything in those posts was wrong.
Shawn

Shawn and Michael, thanks for your help.However, as a lawyer in real life, and not having this expertise myself, may I suggest that how do I know that the information which you guys give is fully accurrate vs info given by others such as I posted from the Secrets forum who advise that they have excellent credentials and one could easily see what they say as knowledgable as well.k

Can you perhaps give us some web links for official info from HDMI manufacturing/industry itself discussing these issues? Thanks.

sfogg

10-07-06, 11:58 AM

"may I suggest that how do I know that the information which you guys give is fully accurrate vs info given by others such as I posted from the Secrets forum who advise that they have excellent credentials and one could easily see what they say as knowledgable as well.k"

Anyone can claim they have excellent credentials. That guy is wrong about most of his post. So much for credentials.

Stop just looking for any posts by anyone on the net that is supporting your position and then running with them and instead learn this stuff yourself.

Then you will know who is correct.

For example if you wanted to learn about S/PDIF check out this page:

http://www.cirrus.com/en/products/pro/detail/P1009.html

Read the AN022 document and the specs for that digital transmitter chip.

If you then want to compare that against what HDMI can carry WRT audio:

http://hdmi.org/

You will quickly find that the posts from some random guy with 'excellent credentials' is dead wrong about the audio capabilities of the two.

Shawn

Michael Grant

10-07-06, 12:47 PM

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 12:57 PM

Anyone can claim they have excellent credentials. That guy is wrong about most of his post. So much for credentials.

Stop just looking for any posts by anyone on the net that is supporting your position and then running with them and instead learn this stuff yourself.

Then you will know who is correct.

Shawn

Shawn, "supporting your postion" - I don't have any predetermined postion. I'm trying to learn about this.

I do appreciate your help. As you state, anyone can claim they have excellent credentials? What are your credentials? I am not asking this to impugn your integrity or knowledge, simply for my info as I try to assess what different folks say about HDMI. Thanks.

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 01:00 PM

Steve, I understand the dilemma. If you want to confirm independently just one thing, confirm this: that S/PDIF simply cannot carry the new advanced formats, which means you'll need a new digital connection of some sort to get the most out of them---whether it is HDMI or something new.

EDIT: One thing he said that I have heard independently is the displeasure with the HDMI connectors themselves. An installer at CES was complaining to the Marantz folks about it. I prefer the DVI connectors too. Yeah HDMI is easier to accidentally pull out, but it won't go anywhere on its own.

One thing I've long known is that coax and toslink do not have the bandwith to carry the new advanced formats. That's why my Toshiba HD-XA1 takes Dolby Digital Plus or Dolby True HD and digitally converts to DTS at 1.5 mbs, although these formats have higher capabilities than that. That is apparently why using the HD DVD player's multi-channel analog outputs via my Six Shooter sounds better than via toslink or coaxial. ;)

sdurani

10-07-06, 02:07 PM

One thing I've long known is that coax and toslink do not have the bandwith to carry the new advanced formats.Bandwidth is sometimes not the issue as much as permission. If S/PDIF can transmit 6.1 channels of DTS at 1.5Mbps, then it has the bandwidth to do the same with Dolby Digital Plus at 1.5Mbps or 640kbps (which are the bitrates used so far for DD+ soundtracks). The problem is that S/PDIF is not allowed to transmit those signals for copy protection reasons. Just wanted to make sure you are clear on capability vs permissibility.

Sanjay

sfogg

10-07-06, 02:15 PM

Steve,

"I do appreciate your help. As you state, anyone can claim they have excellent credentials? What are your credentials?"

Makes no difference what they are. What is important is if what I posted is accurate or not.

Comparing credentials is pointless. Comparing accurate info vs. inaccurate info is far more important.

"One thing I've long known is that coax and toslink do not have the bandwith to carry the new advanced formats."

And you also know HDMI can pass those formats in their decoded state with HDMI v1.1. The decoded bandwidth is much greater then when the formats were compressed, that is the whole point of why they are compressed in the first place, to save bandwidth/space. If HDMI can pass those advanced format in their uncompressed (large) state, and toslink/coax can't pass either even in their compressed (small) state.... what does this tell you?

It tells you that you know that HDMI has (much) more audio bandwidth then coax or toslink. Which further means you know the post above by the guy claiming coax/toslink has more audio bandwidth then HDMI is wrong.

Shawn

sfogg

10-07-06, 02:21 PM

Sanjay,

"Bandwidth is sometimes not the issue as much as permission. If S/PDIF can transmit 6.1 channels of DTS at 1.5Mbps, then it has the bandwidth to do the same with Dolby Digital Plus at 1.5Mbps or 640kbps (which are the bitrates used so far for DD+ soundtracks)."

True, I didn't want to further muddy the waters with that yet though. I think S/PDIF technically has enough bandwidth to handle DD+ at its max bandwidth too. But only with the latest 192kHz receivers/transmitters.

S/PDIF does not however have enough bandwidth to transmit 8 channels of 96/24 audio. HDMI does.

Shawn

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 02:47 PM

"One thing I've long known is that coax and toslink do not have the bandwith to carry the new advanced formats."

And you also know HDMI can pass those formats in their decoded state with HDMI v1.1. The decoded bandwidth is much greater then when the formats were compressed, that is the whole point of why they are compressed in the first place, to save bandwidth/space. If HDMI can pass those advanced format in their uncompressed (large) state, and toslink/coax can't pass either even in their compressed (small) state.... what does this tell you?

It tells you that you know that HDMI has (much) more audio bandwidth then coax or toslink. Which further means you know the post above by the guy claiming coax/toslink has more audio bandwidth then HDMI is wrong.

Shawn

I don't disagree with you re the above. I posted that other info simply for discussion here, not necessarily saying all of the info was correct. And I'm
not necessarily saying that I "know" that everything you or someone else says here is correct, either.

Now you have said that the HDMI connectors will be the same for HDMI v.1.3

Yet I've read a number of places, including here at AVS, that due to instable connectors that they connectors may be revised. Do I know? Not really.

sdurani

10-07-06, 02:54 PM

I didn't want to further muddy the waters with that yet though.Understood. I just raised it so that Steve and others understood that even if S/PDIF had enough bandwidth, permission would still be denied. Copy protection is the biggest thing right now for digital interfaces, and also the cause of most of the greif. I think S/PDIF technically has enough bandwidth to handle DD+ at its max bandwidth too.Wouldn't that be something like 6Mbps? S/PDIF does not however have enough bandwidth to transmit 8 channels of 96/24 audio.True, though there was a rumor being floated for a while that a typical 5.1-channel 48kHz movie soundtrack could be losslessly compressed using TrueHD and fit through a S/PDIF connection. Maybe they'd have to truncate it to 16 bits, but that's being done already with TrueHD soundtracks on HD-DVD and uncompressed PCM soundtracks on Blu-ray discs. Not that the movie studios will allow lossless transmission through S/PDIF, but the thought was nice while it lasted.

Sanjay

Michael Grant

10-07-06, 03:17 PM

Thanks for the info re: permissions, Sanjay...

sdurani

10-07-06, 04:30 PM

Yer welcome Michael.

BTW, just out of curiosity, does anyone know what max bandwidth S/PDIF is capable of, assuming the latest transmitters/receivers?

Sanjay

Michael Grant

10-07-06, 04:53 PM

No, I don't---in fact I was surprised to learn it could do 2 channels of 24/192. I thought it was limited to 2 channels of 24/96.

DaveN

10-07-06, 05:32 PM

One thing I've long known is that coax and toslink do not have the bandwith to carry the new advanced formats. That's why my Toshiba HD-XA1 takes Dolby Digital Plus or Dolby True HD and digitally converts to DTS at 1.5 mbs, although these formats have higher capabilities than that. That is apparently why using the HD DVD player's multi-channel analog outputs via my Six Shooter sounds better than via toslink or coaxial. ;)

Is this the case for all HD-DVDs or just the TrueHD encoded disks?

thebland

10-07-06, 05:40 PM

All HD DVDs. Most every disc I have played with DD+ shows up as DTS on my processor.

The cheaper HD-A1 does this as well.

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 05:41 PM

Is this the case for all HD-DVDs or just the TrueHD encoded disks?

I have found that all HD DVDs, even those Dolby Digital Plus, sound better for me using the HD DVD player to do the DA conversion, analog out to the Six Shooter.
I have compared this to using toslink from HD DVD to the CB3 and the former
sounds appreciably better. Just did this with the U-2 HD DVD the other day
and their was no doubt about this.

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 05:42 PM

All HD DVDs. Most every disc I have played with DD+ shows up as DTS on my processor.

The cheaper HD-A1 does this as well.

Both first generation Toshiba HD DVD players convert Dolby Digital Plus and Dolby True HD to DTS at 1.5 mbs to transmit over toslink or coaxial - its the player doing that.

sfogg

10-07-06, 05:46 PM

sfogg

10-07-06, 05:57 PM

Sanjay,

"Wouldn't that be something like 6Mbps?"

(192,000 * 24) * 2. 192kHz * 24 bits for two channels. And that is if they kept the S/PDIF format the same with 24 data bits per sample. S/PDIF actually is composed of 32 bits per sample, 24 is for audio data and 8 other bits is for preamble.

"True, though there was a rumor being floated for a while that a typical 5.1-channel 48kHz movie soundtrack could be losslessly compressed using TrueHD and fit through a S/PDIF connection."

From a bandwidth standpoint that might be possible. But just so this isn't read the wrong way that still is a lot lower bandwidth then 8 channels of 96/24 which HDMI can do.

I haven't really looked at S/PDIF transmitters in awhile but when I did a couple of years back the fastest was 192kHz. I'd assume that is current since Cirrus isn't showing anything faster. If there were faster units they would likely have one.

Shawn

sfogg

10-07-06, 05:59 PM

Michael,

"--in fact I was surprised to learn it could do 2 channels of 24/192. I thought it was limited to 2 channels of 24/96."

It was but they got a speed bump maybe 5 years ago. That was for coax only as at least at the time the existing toslink transceivers were not fast enough. That might have changed though.

Shawn

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 06:15 PM

Steve,

"Now you have said that the HDMI connectors will be the same for HDMI v.1.3

Yet I've read a number of places, including here at AVS, that due to instable connectors that they connectors may be revised."

Again... HDMI v1.3 uses the same connector with an optional smaller connector for camcorder type applications. You don't have to wonder who is right about this... look it up.

http://www.hdmi.org/about/faq.asp#q4_1

Shawn

Shawn, thanks for the info and weblink. It does appear that HDMI Org states that the HDMI v1.3 connector is not changing, as you stated. Thanks for helping correct some of the misinfo that turns up on the web (and which I in this case repeated. HA!)

Here's the Q & A from the above web link on this issue:

Q. My HDMI cable sometimes falls out of the HDMI connector. Is anything being done to address this problem?

The combination of vertically-oriented connectors and heavy, thick-gauge cables appears have the potential of causing the connector to fall out. In some cases, it is due to the usage of a cable with a non-compliant, large connector over-molding that prevents proper connector engagement. The HDMI Founders are actively investigating a locking connector option that would be backward compatible with existing Type A connectors.

We have seen a few connectors that are out of spec (e.g., not the right size, too much over-molding, etc.), which led to compatibility issues and, in some cases, connector damage. However, we have started a connector certification program to help ensure that all Adopters use compliant connectors.

Hilo Hairy

10-07-06, 06:42 PM

...... One thing he said that I have heard independently is the displeasure with the HDMI connectors themselves. An installer at CES was complaining to the Marantz folks about it. I prefer the DVI connectors too. Yeah HDMI is easier to accidentally pull out, but it won't go anywhere on its own.

On a friend's system with powerful subs, a loud explosion destabilizes his HDMI enough that the picture momentarily goes away. He's been able to mimimise the problem by surrounding the connector with putty.

Regarding a change to a better connector, The HDMI site says:

Q. My HDMI cable sometimes falls out of the HDMI connector. Is anything being done to address this problem?

The combination of vertically-oriented connectors and heavy, thick-gauge cables appears have the potential of causing the connector to fall out. In some cases, it is due to the usage of a cable with a non-compliant, large connector over-molding that prevents proper connector engagement. The HDMI Founders are actively investigating a locking connector option that would be backward compatible with existing Type A connectors.

http://www.hdmi.org/consumer/faq.asp#q7_3

My friends connections are not vertical and he has tried different cables.

While I haven't had this problem, my Scientific Atlanta cable box works fine in HDMI unless I also have an HDMI connection from a DVD player. Then the aspect ratio from the cable box goes unstable. Sometimes I get weird digital noise if I change it. Also a proper 4 by 3 from SD broadcast is near impossible.

In case someone from Theta is listening: like PeterS, I would like an HDMI switch card for my Casablanca and would pay about $500. I would like it to be 1.3 but if they can assure me that I won't be missing something major once 1.3 is out and that it will be more than just months till 1.3's availability, I might jump in sooner. To have me spend $1000 or more on anything HDMI, ALL the problems better be solved.

I'm concerned though. So much about HDMI doesn't quite work right yet when we hook up components from the big companies. Can a small specalist company make it all work? At least if my Casa is in the HDMI chain and the signal gets flakey, I can call Theta and get tech support from someone who speaks American and has actually used the equipment.

I am cheered that Theta is planning for HDMI and looking for the best solution. When I traded up to their larger processor last year there was controversy here about wether they could add it or not.

Regarding Valis, I might be interested in it for my plasma system. However, in combination with its mated amp, it better live up to their claims and be damn good to dissuade me from my God given right to choose my own amp. Then again, if it beats my Casa III / Dread II I may be angry enough to buy something else.

Re Steve's quoting the TimBrooksbank piece: Mr Brooksbank said something similar here about a year ago. It would be interesting to ask him to comment now. He is the designer of one of the most high end scalers and a HDMI licensee. He may have access to info that we don't have.

sdurani

10-07-06, 06:45 PM

I haven't really looked at S/PDIF transmitters in awhile but when I did a couple of years back the fastest was 192kHz.Maybe I'm using the wrong terminology. Apparently S/PDIF has the bandwidth pass at least 9.2Mbps, because that is the data rate of 2 channels of 192/24. I was curious whether this was near the limit of the S/PDIF bandwidth or if there was significantly more room.

Sanjay

sfogg

10-07-06, 06:54 PM

"In case someone from Theta is listening: like PeterS, I would like an HDMI switch card for my Casablanca and would pay about $500."

Are you looking for just HDMI switching at that price or do you also want it to be able to accept audio over the HDMI connection?

For it to support audio on v1.3 the pre-pro is going to need new decoder DSP(s) to be able to handle the additional bitstream formats that might get passed over HDMI. That means development work implementing that, licensing fees for the new decoding formats (that don't have to be paid with a v1.1 solution), either a complete gutting of the chassis to be able to handle native DSD or DSPs to convert DSD to PCM, testing,testing, testing...etc..etc. I doubt you would get all this for anywhere near $500.

Simple HDMI swithing at that price... perhaps. You could do it externally for less then that.

Shawn

sfogg

10-07-06, 07:00 PM

"Apparently S/PDIF has the bandwidth pass at least 9.2Mbps, because that is the data rate of 2 channels of 192/24. "

That is the audio data rate. The actual amount of data transmitted is higher. 192k x 32 x 2. 192k sampling rate, 32 bits per sample (24 for audio data, 8 for preamble), 2 channels.

"I was curious whether this was near the limit of the S/PDIF bandwidth or if there was significantly more room."

I think 192kHz is the speed of the fastest S/PDIF receivers/transmitters. So at least with current equipment that is the limit of bandwidth. If Cirrus comes out with faster chips at some later date then the max bandwidth will increase.

Shawn

sdurani

10-07-06, 07:03 PM

The actual amount of data transmitted is higher.Do you know what the highest data rate is that it can transmit?

Sanjay

sfogg

10-07-06, 07:11 PM

Sanjay,

As fast as the fastest chips that are available. AFAIK that is still 192kHz. So 192k * 32 * 2 is the max data rate (audio data + preamble) of current chips running at their highest support clock rate.

Shawn

sdurani

10-07-06, 07:14 PM

AFAIK that is still 192kHz. So 192k * 32 * 2 is the max data rate (audio data + preamble) of current chips running at their highest support clock rate.OK, I guess I didn't understand why you were limiting those numbers to only 2 channels.

Sanjay

sfogg

10-07-06, 07:26 PM

Sanjay,

Because the chips are limited to two channels of 192kHz PCM transmission/reception. As such that is part of what defines their max bandwidth.

Shawn

sdurani

10-07-06, 09:42 PM

Shawn,

So is converting to a bitstream the only way to transmit multi-channel through S/PDIF?

Sanjay

sfogg

10-07-06, 09:54 PM

"So is converting to a bitstream the only way to transmit multi-channel through S/PDIF?"

I think S/PDIF has/had some method of transferring 4 channels of data (designed in for Quad probably) but I don't think I have seen consumer use of it.

From a practical standpoint multi-channel over S/PDIF is of course by far the most common as DD/DTS bitstream.

If a company really wanted to do some sort of proprietary thing they could multiplex additional channels into a S/PDIF stream but it would take their proprietary equipment at both ends to make it work. They would need to do something like use the normal L/R clock signaling then use the pre-amp data to define which L/R channels it was for. If they did something like that the bandwidth would still be limited by the speed of existing transmitter/receiver chips. As such for multi-channel over S/PDIF it makes more sense to use multiple S/PDIF connectors like Meridian has done.

Or of course you could just use HDMI. ;)

Shawn

Hilo Hairy

10-07-06, 09:54 PM

"..... I would like an HDMI switch card for my Casablanca and would pay about $500."

Are you looking for just HDMI switching at that price or do you also want it to be able to accept audio over the HDMI connection?.....
Shawn

Shawn, Thanks for asking.

For now, HDMI video switching for three sources and a spare would make life a little easier. I don't expect a total audio and video solution for the money I'm quoting nor would I believe any company that claimed to have one at any price this early in the game. Not with the glitches I'm seeing with just HDMI video.

I don't mind spending serious money but only for things I keep a long time and get a lot of use out of. I find the thought of paying big buck to essentially be a beta tester offensive. I'm very unlikely to buy a BlueRay or HD player until there is some stability, ideally with one system KO'ed.

With this in mind, your Translator and the Geffen box your site mentions makes sense to me. However, in my cluttered racks, with my propensity to move components between rooms, a one box solution will be preferable if Theta can come out with a card like Peter and I are suggesting. Still, I'm glad to know you're there.

I do have a few questions but I don't want to high-jack this thread. I'll send them to your business e-mail.

sdurani

10-07-06, 10:29 PM

I think S/PDIF has/had some method of transferring 4 channels of data (designed in for Quad probably) but I don't think I have seen consumer use of it.What a coincidence. Redbood CD has always had the ability to deliver 4 discrete channels of data (designed in for Quad probably) but I don't think I have seen consumer use of it.

Sanjay

Steve Bruzonsky

10-07-06, 11:15 PM

Bulldogger

10-08-06, 02:32 AM

Theta needs a clear path and time table to HDMI. It has to impact anyone's buying decision. If I were buying right now, I would not buy the Casablanca because of this. I would buy a Halcro and an Emm Labs Switchman. Normally, I would just use a very good source and an analog pre-amp like the Six Shooter. I guess I am in the minority and do not believe that the sound out of the Toshiba HD-DVD player is that great. It is just better than dolby digital which is not exactly a high hurdle to cross. So, I want better sound. Since it seems unlikely that I would be able to purchase a high-end HD-DVD player with better sound any time soon, then I need to be able to send the signal to the CBIII to get better sound. My situation is different. I spent 15K on sound proofing and acoustical treatments for my room in 2005, 30K on new gear in 2006, and am buying the JVC HD-new DILA projector in 2007. Any mega buck upgrade to the CBIII would have to wait until 2008 anyway so it is not an issue for me. If it could be done for three grand or less,then I'm in in 07. More than that and the budget would just not allow it in 07.

Bulldogger

10-08-06, 02:41 AM

This situation reminds me of when I first purchased a Cal audio processor. Sales of the processor were basically stopped dead in their tracks when dolby ex became the rave because it could not be upgraded. If Theta does not take a clear stand and present a clear time table for an upgrade, sales of its processors are going to fall off the chart. This really is a business decision. Regardless of what anyone's personal needs are, Theta is going to have to come to the market ASAP or face significant financial loss. This will impact the company down the entire product range. Less revenue means less money for improvements and new development for all of their products.

sfogg

10-08-06, 10:15 AM

Steve Bruzonsky

10-08-06, 10:53 AM

"If Theta does not take a clear stand and present a clear time table for an upgrade, sales of its processors are going to fall off the chart."

People that buy from any company based on a simple timeline are setting themselves up for a fall. That is purchasing vaporware. Look back at some of the other promised pre-pro products over the years and you will see where people got burned based on vaporware products.

Citation 7.0 with the promised/annouced 7.5DD companion piece
Proceed PAV/PDSD
Krell A/V Standard
Casanova
etc...etc...etc...

To avoid setting themselves up to get burned one needs to purchased based on what the product actually does at the time of purchase. If it is upgraded later on then that is a bonus. If it isn't you bought the product based on what it could do out of the box anyway.

IOW, Theta needs to do more then just say they will implement HDMI. They need to deliver it. After all we all know how much time Theta takes between announcing a product and actually shipping it. Years for the Six Shooter, around a year for the surround card for the CBIII, the Valis was announced just about a year ago... still not available...etc...etc.

Shawn

I was one of those burned on the Citation 7.0 surround processor. As it wasn't upgradeable to tbe then new Dolby Digital format, I became a Theta customer with the then brand new Casablanca.

Shawn, I agree with you. Promises and schedule means diddly squat. What counts is having the product ready and working. The sooner Theta has HDMI working with the Casablanca, the more sales they will have of the product.
Due to concerns re niche market that will take time to grow re HD DVD (and little market re SACD and DVD-Audio), Theta shoujld see if they can quickly implement HDMI video switching, assuming that HDMI source devices still output toslink or coaxial digital when HDMI video is used (which my HD TIVO sure does). It will take longer to implement HDMI for multi-channel audio, but Theta should do this as quickly as they reasonably can using of course HDMI 1.3 for that.

sfogg

10-08-06, 12:00 PM

"As it wasn't upgradeable to tbe then new Dolby Digital format"

The announced Citation 7.5DD was to add DD to the Citation 7.0 seamlessly with an external box. It was annouced with press releases and MSRP and such but never shipped.

"It will take longer to implement HDMI for multi-channel audio, but Theta should do this as quickly as they reasonably can using of course HDMI 1.3 for that."

Theta could do it quicker, cheaper and easier and therefor quicker and less expensive to you if they did it with HDMI v1.1. Since all the decoding responsibilities fall to the source device, Theta wouldn't have to worry about them. Esp. since with Advanced Content the source device is going to be doing all the decoding anyway even with HDMI v1.3.

Shawn

Shawn

Steve Bruzonsky

10-08-06, 12:15 PM

"It will take longer to implement HDMI for multi-channel audio, but Theta should do this as quickly as they reasonably can using of course HDMI 1.3 for that."

Theta could do it quicker, cheaper and easier and therefor quicker and less expensive to you if they did it with HDMI v1.1. Since all the decoding responsibilities fall to the source device, Theta wouldn't have to worry about them. Esp. since with Advanced Content the source device is going to be doing all the decoding anyway even with HDMI v1.3.

Shawn

Shawn

Shawn, you are off on this one. Multi-channel high resolution audio LPCM via HDMI will require significant revision of the CB3 internals and no way it can be done in several months. That's why I'm saying HDMI v1.3 for audio because
as Theta gets the internal revisions for the CB3 done the HDMI v1.3 parts will already be available.

AndreYew

10-08-06, 12:27 PM

If a device is ahead of the display like a receiver or pre-pro it can alter the displays EDID with regards to the number of audio channels supported and then simply strip out the audio when it gets there.

I never knew this! Given my recent troubles with the VP50, Oppo, and Panny display, this sounds like a good feature for the MC-12HD to have. Editable EDID settings in the MC-12 would be better: perhaps an option to strip the audio or to specify the number of channels. I wonder how much of this is allowed under the licensing terms.

BTW, I've never had trouble with my HDMI cable connected either to the Panny HDMI blade or the DVI blade with the DVDO swivel adapter falling out. It's a pretty big cable, and it hangs vertically. The cable's from Blue Jeans. In fact, the fact that the cable is easier to remove is a great feature at this point in HDMI's life: it made it easier to unplug and reconfigure to find out which HDMI device was the culprit for the various problems we saw.

--Andre

AndreYew

10-08-06, 12:30 PM

Multi-channel high resolution audio LPCM via HDMI will require significant revision of the CB3 internals and no way it can be done in several months.

As has been mentioned before, this is one of the dangers of a card cage architecture: it still locks you into what the card cage designers thought of at the time they designed the architecture, and you pay more up front for what they think you might need, but may never use.

Card cage architecture is not a panacea for avoiding major hardware upgrades.

--Andre

sfogg

10-08-06, 12:38 PM

"Multi-channel high resolution audio LPCM via HDMI will require significant revision of the CB3 internals and no way it can be done in several months."

I never said a time frame. I simply said LPCM over HDMI is quicker/cheaper/easier for Theta to do via HDMI v1.1 vs. HDMI v1.3.

It is, no matter what Theta's internal architecture is like.

HDMI v1.3 requires far more work on the pre-pro side compared to HDMI v1.1, no getting around that.

HDMI v1.3 requires licenses and the DSP power for for DD+, Dolby THD decoding and so on, HDMI v1.1 does not. How long did it take Theta to add PLII and PLIIx to the CB3 compared to the rest of the industry? Adding DD+, Dolby THD to the Theta is basically about the same thing... swapping out their decoder card for a newer unit with more processing power and integrating that into the CB3. The big stumbling block that could occur is if Theta has no way of getting the data from a HDMI card to that decoder card because of design assumptions/issues in their backplane.

HDMI v1.3 is going to take more work at getting the HDMI/HDCP handshake working and debugged as there is more to deal with in HDMI v1.3. Working with v1.1 first will give a company valuable real world experience in this.

"That's why I'm saying HDMI v1.3 for audio because as Theta gets the internal revisions for the CB3 done the HDMI v1.3 parts will already be available."

But by then HDMI v23.2 parts might be available. ;)

Shawn

sfogg

10-08-06, 12:42 PM

Andre,

"this is one of the dangers of a card cage architecture: it still locks you into what the card cage designers thought of at the time they designed the architecture, and you pay more up front for what they think you might need, but may never use."

I think this is exactly what the 'major hardware' revision may end up being from in the CB. In another thread Steve mentioned Theta has a problem with the CB and HDMI because they never thought of a combined Audio/Video signal being a possibility. As such I'm guessing their backplane is built as sort of an audio section and a video section. To support HDMI they kind of need both combined which it might not be able to do.

Shawn

tpigeon2003

10-08-06, 12:43 PM

Shawn, you are off on this one. Multi-channel high resolution audio LPCM via HDMI will require significant revision of the CB3 internals and no way it can be done in several months. That's why I'm saying HDMI v1.3 for audio because
as Theta gets the internal revisions for the CB3 done the HDMI v1.3 parts will already be available.

If this is true, then theta really messed up when they designed the CB. You don't have to do anything extra with LPCM. It should be no big deal to take lpcm signals. The xtreme dacs should be able to handle 96/24 mc without a problem and you don't need to do any type of special decoding, so I see no problems there.

I think theta should come out with 1.1 audio only solution that does LPCM. Everyone will want it and then wait to see how 1.3 sorts itself out. No one wants to spend 10k+ on a prepro that does not do HD audio now. I bought a CBII 4 years ago and did not send the $2500 to upgrade precisely because I wanted to see what was going to happen with HD audio first. The longer theta waits, the worse the pain.

edit: I guess if audio and video has to be in the same box then this will be a problem, in that case I would hope for a quick and dirty 2 box solution. Or hope that the players in the future will have 2 hdmi outs, one for audio and one for video...

sfogg

10-08-06, 12:48 PM

Andre,

"I never knew this! Given my recent troubles with the VP50, Oppo, and Panny display, this sounds like a good feature for the MC-12HD to have."

I think the MC-12HD does this now. For example the connection beyond my HD is DVI. It supports 0 audio channels. But I get 6 channels of audio no problem, the MC-12HD is changing/altering the EDID to make this happen.

Bart more or less mentions this in the MC-12HD Q&A when talking about max number of channels and supported sampling rates.

Why this wasn't working for you I don't know. I still kind of think if you tried a DVI cable between the HD and the VP50 you might have been fine.

Shawn

sfogg

10-08-06, 12:52 PM

Steve Bruzonsky

10-08-06, 02:59 PM

I simply said LPCM over HDMI is quicker/cheaper/easier for Theta to do via HDMI v1.1 vs. HDMI v1.3.

It is, no matter what Theta's internal architecture is like.

HDMI v1.3 requires far more work on the pre-pro side compared to HDMI v1.1, no getting around that.

HDMI v1.3 requires licenses and the DSP power for for DD+, Dolby THD decoding and so on, HDMI v1.1 does not. How long did it take Theta to add PLII and PLIIx to the CB3 compared to the rest of the industry? Adding DD+, Dolby THD to the Theta is basically about the same thing... swapping out their decoder card for a newer unit with more processing power and integrating that into the CB3. The big stumbling block that could occur is if Theta has no way of getting the data from a HDMI card to that decoder card because of design assumptions/issues in their backplane.

HDMI v1.3 is going to take more work at getting the HDMI/HDCP handshake working and debugged as there is more to deal with in HDMI v1.3. Working with v1.1 first will give a company valuable real world experience in this.

Shawn

OK Shawn you have educated and sold me on this. We know that HD DVDs and Blue Ray DVDs have and probably will continue to have Advanced Coding,
so that even if the surround processor is capable and licensed to do Dolby Digital Plus, Dolby True HD, etc. via HDMI bitstream, that it won't be able to, anyway thanks to Advanced Coding. So why bother at least unless and until things change in this regard.

So Theta should do HDMI with multi-channel LPCM 96-24 as quick as possible at reasonable cost. After that, Theta can work on revising to the latest HDMI, v. 1.3 or later because the newer versions of HDMI will hopefully work better and have better video capability. But if I were Theta I wouldn't worry about Dolby Digital Plus, Dolby True HD, etc. unless and until new HD DVDs permit them to decode the bitstream in the surround processor, if ever.

Steve Bruzonsky

10-08-06, 03:03 PM

"then theta really messed up when they designed the CB. You don't have to do anything extra with LPCM. It should be no big deal to take lpcm signals. The xtreme dacs should be able to handle 96/24 mc without a problem and you don't need to do any type of special decoding, so I see no problems there."

Right, in a nutshell they would need to get the LPCM off the HDMI link and route it into their bass management/time alignment DSPs. From there it would go to the DACs, etc..etc.

That is assuming the Theta can actually process a 96/24 signal, which I thought they could.

The problem Theta may be having is simply how they would route the LPCM from their HDMI card into their DSPs.

Shawn

When Theta designed the Casablanca, Dolby Digital and DTS were in the pipeline.
No one had heard of 96-24 or Dolby Digital Plus, Dolby True HD, etc. Theta provided a product that has been upgradeable and lasted me now almost ten years. Pretty unheard of in the industry.

When Theta upgraded to the CB2, it could take a DAD 96-24 stereo disc and play it in Circle Surround 5.X (X being subwoofers) 96-24 sound. Pretty darn good!!!

But now its time for Theta to go the next step in evoluation as quick as possible, or to be left behind by Halcro, Lexicon and others to come.

PeterS

10-08-06, 03:09 PM

They need to move quickly. I am waiting to see what happens with the other processors out there. HDMI 1.1 is fine for now, as the upgrade to 1.3 will be MUCH more costly. If the price of the upgrade to HDMI 1.1 is $500 or less, then count me in, as I know it is a one-year stop-gap until 1.3, 1.4 or 1.5 becomes the standard.

For the moment, though I love my Theta, I am looking out the corner of my eye at the competition.

BTW: Theta also DESPERATELY needs an EQ solution as well!!!

Steve Bruzonsky

10-08-06, 03:28 PM

BTW: Theta also DESPERATELY needs an EQ solution as well!!!

I sure agree on that. My Velodyne SMS-1 really improves what I thought sounded great substantially better for sure on SACD and DVD-Audio multi-channel - and that's only EQing the sub output.

Theta should do digital EQ at least at the low end, say up to 360 Hz, like Rives Audio does with their Parc (2 channel) and Parc+ (4 channel add on for multi-channel 5.1 system) analog units. I imaging these days this wouldn't be all that difficult or too costly, at least to incorporate in the inboard digital processing. Maybe Theta could give you the option of using the DA conversion for the subwoofer output (within the CB) with the Six Shooter as seems benefits of EQ at bass outweight easily the DA conversion deteriments.

AndreYew

10-08-06, 04:33 PM

In another thread Steve mentioned Theta has a problem with the CB and HDMI because they never thought of a combined Audio/Video signal being a possibility.

I remember reading that, too, but I don't remember when he said it. A few months ago, I went into more detail on some of the issues Theta and other card cage architecture prepros might face with HDMI if anyone wants to wade through the very long post:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8025972&&#post8025972

--Andre

AndreYew

10-08-06, 04:39 PM

I think the MC-12HD does this now. For example the connection beyond my HD is DVI. It supports 0 audio channels. But I get 6 channels of audio no problem, the MC-12HD is changing/altering the EDID to make this happen.

Interesting. Perhaps it defaults to something sensible if it gets 0 channels, but if someone is telling it 2 channels, it believes it. 2 channels seems more sensible than 0 channels all things considered.

Good idea on the DVI cable. I either have to convince Philip to let me tear up his system again, or get an MC-12HD myself. At this point, I'm not sure which one is easier. :p

--Andre

John Kotches

10-08-06, 05:13 PM

I never said a time frame. I simply said LPCM over HDMI is quicker/cheaper/easier for Theta to do via HDMI v1.1 vs. HDMI v1.3.

It is, no matter what Theta's internal architecture is like.

Assuming internal processing is capable of operating at at least 96kHz. 192 would be better in theory to handle the within spec case of 192K content from Blu-ray. Personally I doubt we will ever actually see 192K content on a Blu-ray disc.

sfogg

10-08-06, 08:10 PM

Steve,

"So Theta should do HDMI with multi-channel LPCM 96-24 as quick as possible at reasonable cost. "

I certainly think so. Getting HDMI v1.1 to the level of what the MC-12HD could do would be a large jump for Theta owners. Even more so then MC-12 owners because MC-12 owners can still apply all processing to the multi-channel analog outputs of a HD-DVD player for L7, room EQ, bass management and so on. The MC-12HD just adds the ability to bypass the analog stages in the player and the A/D in the Lexicon to keep the signal all digital. The CBIII can't process the multi-channel analog outputs at all so gaining HDMI v1.1 would be a very large improvement for Theta owners.

"When Theta designed the Casablanca, Dolby Digital and DTS were in the pipeline.
No one had heard of 96-24 or Dolby Digital Plus, Dolby True HD, etc. Theta provided a product that has been upgradeable and lasted me now almost ten years. Pretty unheard of in the industry."

I understand, but you are again backing up what Andre said. Card cage designs are not the end all be all for upgradeability. If it was designed making certain assumptions (for example seperated audio and video signals) the card cage design becomes a hinderance to moving further.

"imaging these days this wouldn't be all that difficult or too costly, at least to incorporate in the inboard digital processing."

The EQ itself as long as the unit has the available DSP cycles is relatively easy. The far more difficult part is automating the measurement and setup phase of the EQ.

Shawn

Bulldogger

10-09-06, 09:01 AM

". As such I'm guessing their backplane is built as sort of an audio section and a video section. To support HDMI they kind of need both combined which it might not be able to do.

Shawn
That is exactly the problem as I understand it.

Bulldogger

10-09-06, 09:32 AM

I knew going in what Theta's track record on upgrades were. I bought it because it sounded better than the other processor I tried. I think analog pre-amps sound better with music than any pre-pro even with room correction and I have tried most of them. The Six Shooter served that need. I guess I am starting another fight because I voiced my personal preferences but so be it. Either you are a fool to buy a processor that does not have all of the latest feature or wise to buy what best serves your pesonal needs and what you think sounds best. Do I wish Theta could give me great sound and keep up with some of the other companies? Of course. Everything is a trade-off. I chose mine. I would advise anyone who really wants the fastest upgrades to chose another company.

Bulldogger

10-09-06, 09:35 AM

Assuming internal processing is capable of operating at at least 96kHz. 192 would be better in theory to handle the within spec case of 192K content from Blu-ray. Personally I doubt we will ever actually see 192K content on a Blu-ray disc.
I doubt we will see 192K either. It never took off with DVD-A.

tpigeon2003

10-09-06, 09:51 AM

sfogg

10-09-06, 09:51 AM

"That is exactly the problem as I understand it. "

If it is they actually *might* be able to get around that. Just build a HDMI card that fits into the audio side of the processor with HDMI inputs and a HDMI output all on the same card. Strip the audio off the HDMI link and get it into their processor and output the remaining video on the same card. They wouldn't be able to offer analog video transcoding to HDMI if they did it this way but they could do HDMI video switching and accepting HDMI audio on it.

That is assuming the 'audio' side of the processor is able to accept multi-channel digital audio from numerous card slots. Again, depending upon how they built their backplane it may or may not be able to do that.

Shawn

sfogg

10-09-06, 09:53 AM

"I bought it because it sounded better than the other processor I tried."

I did the same thing.

"I think analog pre-amps sound better with music than any pre-pro even with room correction and I have tried most of them. "

For me the exact opposite occurs, but then I love music in surround. Two channel just sounds far to artifical to me as compared to what I hear in a real hall.

Shawn

Bulldogger

10-09-06, 09:58 AM

sfogg

10-09-06, 10:02 AM

Bulldogger

10-09-06, 10:10 AM

I would disagree about the great 7 channel surround. You do not like Theta and did not buy their products. I do and did. Let's just leave it at that. Useless debating why we each like different approaches.

Steve Bruzonsky

10-09-06, 10:59 AM

Please folks, lets no more this company vs that company. Whatever works for each of us is fine. The purpose of this thread is to get good info re HDMI hoping to encourage Theta to better assess what and how quickly to implement HDMI. Theta does read web forums. Thanks.

John Kotches

10-09-06, 12:29 PM

Assuming Blu-Ray wins, why not concert videos?

This is a wonderful choice of a horrible example. The environment is so noisy that you are overkill @ 24/96K. 24/96K is more than enough.

24/192K for a concert video is necessary for specsmanship, that's it.

AndreYew

10-09-06, 12:43 PM

If anyone uses 192/24, I'll bet it will be an audiophile record label releasing audio-only content, essentially using BD as a hi-res audio carrier. It will be interesting to see when players can support this and how well it's tested.

BTW, I've been told that at least one of the major Hollywood production facilities is fully 192/24-capable stem-to-stern.

--Andre

sdurani

10-09-06, 01:22 PM

If anyone uses 192/24, I'll bet it will be an audiophile record label releasing audio-only content, essentially using BD as a hi-res audio carrier.Is there any gear that can produce the voltage swings necessary to reproduce the full dynamic range of a 24-bit signal? Or is is all specmanship at this point?

Sanjay

John Kotches

10-09-06, 05:50 PM

Sanjay:

On the playback end, the Burr-Brown PCM 1792s spec out at around 22-bits (132dB SNR). I'm not sure if anything can capture at that precision though. We're talking about < 1/1,000,000th of a volt.

Cheers,

sdurani

10-09-06, 06:02 PM

John,

In your experience, are there any analogue components (or analogue sections of pre-pros) capable of 132dB of dynamic range?

Sanjay

sfogg

10-09-06, 06:56 PM

John Kotches

10-09-06, 09:53 PM

Sanjay,

More importantly.... do you know many pairs of ears that could support 132dB of dynamic range? Particularly when you consider the noise floor in most rooms.... with a fairly quite room with a 40dB noise floor to fully utilize that 132dB of dynamic range means peaks of 172dB. One wouldn't get to listen to that sort of thing for long. ;)

The vast majority of systems (which include the room) don't even have the resolution/SNR of what CD is capable of.

Shawn

Shawn:

You need to redefine your criteria of "quiet room". 40dB is not a fairly quiet room. It's not much better than a typical room. If you want a quiet room, you want a noise floor NC30 or less.

I agree with you about dynamic range, but it isn't about dynamic range, it's about processing headroom.

Cheers,

sfogg

10-09-06, 11:44 PM

John,

"You need to redefine your criteria of "quiet room". 40dB is not a fairly quiet room. It's not much better than a typical room. "

That was my point. Typical rooms are worse then 40dB so the headroom requirements would be even greater.

That is why very few systems/rooms can even support CDs dynamic range.

Shawn

AndreYew

10-10-06, 03:00 AM

Is there any gear that can produce the voltage swings necessary to reproduce the full dynamic range of a 24-bit signal? Or is is all specmanship at this point?

I'm not sure what it is, but I'd guess that it's a product of convenience more than anything since adding 8 bits is a convenient increment for computers. I know of only one commercial audio-related device that has true 24-bit range, and that was a mic preamp which took heroic measures to actually get there.

BTW, a good, wide-range recording may have perhaps 40 dB of dynamic range.

--Andre

tpigeon2003

10-10-06, 09:41 AM

This is a wonderful choice of a horrible example. The environment is so noisy that you are overkill @ 24/96K. 24/96K is more than enough.

24/192K for a concert video is necessary for specsmanship, that's it.
Even the more quiet concerts such as gilmore, james taylor, etc?

Kal Rubinson

10-10-06, 10:42 AM

Even the more quiet concerts such as gilmore, james taylor, etc?Is there an audience? If so, yes.

Kal

John Kotches

10-10-06, 11:46 AM

I'm not sure what it is, but I'd guess that it's a product of convenience more than anything since adding 8 bits is a convenient increment for computers. I know of only one commercial audio-related device that has true 24-bit range, and that was a mic preamp which took heroic measures to actually get there.

BTW, a good, wide-range recording may have perhaps 40 dB of dynamic range.

--Andre

Andre:

Storage convenience and a few spare bits to ensure quality through the signal processing chain are the reasons I have been given from a number of people in both the recording industry and the consumer electronics industry.

If I had just been talking to folks in the CE industry I'd say it's a vested interest, but it's not just that side who have said this :)

Cheers,

Swampfox

10-10-06, 11:48 AM

"I listen to surround in 5.1. I am not talking about 2 channel at all."

I listen to all music in 7.2. (or .3 depending upon the source)

" The days of two channel are passing. 5.1 analog pre-amps are easy to find. "

Analog 5.1 pre-amps don't get it done for expanding my existing 2 channel material into great 7 channel surround though.

Shawn

:confused:
Most artists still record 2 channel CDs. It isn't the cost or availablity of media that drives artistic work, but rather the cost of production.
Most music is bought by the under 30 crowd, who listen to MP3s and dial tones on their phones and Ipods.

What dynamic range and freq response do you need for Hip-Hop?

High res, multi channel are niche markets.

John Kotches

10-10-06, 11:48 AM

Even the more quiet concerts such as gilmore, james taylor, etc?

Absolutely.

We haven't even discussed the usage of compressor/limiters that are commonplace in these types of concerts.

Add in equipment noise, audience noise etc and it isn't going to be a wide dynamic range recording.

Swampfox

10-10-06, 11:52 AM

Sanjay,

More importantly.... do you know many pairs of ears that could support 132dB of dynamic range? Particularly when you consider the noise floor in most rooms.... with a fairly quite room with a 40dB noise floor to fully utilize that 132dB of dynamic range means peaks of 172dB. One wouldn't get to listen to that sort of thing for long. ;)

The vast majority of systems (which include the room) don't even have the resolution/SNR of what CD is capable of.

Shawn

The dynamic range is the ratio of the loudest recordable sound / lowest recordable sound. The 40 db is just noise, you don't add it to the dynamic range.

John Kotches

10-10-06, 12:11 PM

The dynamic range is the ratio of the loudest recordable sound / lowest recordable sound. The 40 db is just noise, you don't add it to the dynamic range.

For argument's sake, let's say that we've set our system's volume on an orchestral recording such that 0dB FS plays back at 95dB SPL. That's not too ridiculous, right? We'll say that this isn't a truly "full dynamic range" recording of an orchestra and restrict the dynamic range to 70dB. Orchestra's can actually have a dynamic range between 90 and 100dB.

If 0dB SPL is at 95dB and our lowest recorded value is 70dB lower that's 25dB SPL which is 15dB lower than the noise floor of our room. That's a bit problematic to hear the lowest passages given the base noise level, don't you think?

Cheers,

sfogg

10-10-06, 12:12 PM

" The dynamic range is the ratio of the loudest recordable sound / lowest recordable sound. The 40 db is just noise, you don't add it to the dynamic range. "

If you want to be able to hear the lowest possible recorable sound it needs to be reproduced at or above the noise floor in your system/room. Hence, if your room has a noise floor of 40dB you need to playback above that level... that is why you add the 40dB.

Otherwise you loose possible resolution in the recording into the noise of your room. That is why very few systems (which includes the room) can even support CDs dynamic range. If one has a noise floor of 40dB in their room and setup their volume such that peaks are at 105dB (THX Reference level) their system has 65dB of dynamic range, just under 11 bits of resolution. To gain more resolution one needs to either setup peaks to be louder and/or decrease the noise floor in their room.

But like Andre pointed out few recordings have more then about 40dB of dynamic range to begin with.

Shawn

AcuraCL

10-10-06, 12:15 PM

" ...
But like Andre pointed out few recordings have more then about 40dB of dynamic range to begin with.

Shawn
Does that change when you consider DVD-Audio or SACD?

John Kotches

10-10-06, 12:19 PM

Does that change when you consider DVD-Audio or SACD?

The theoretically available dynamic range increases, what's delivered in practice
doesn't.

But dynamic range isn't the only measure of recording quality.

Cheers,

Swampfox

10-10-06, 12:21 PM

If 0dB SPL is at 95dB and our lowest recorded value is 70dB lower that's 25dB SPL which is 15dB lower than the noise floor of our room. That's a bit problematic to hear the lowest passages given the base noise level, don't you think?

Cheers,

That's why it's called noise. It's not the medias fault, the orchastra can't play louder to fix it. It is extranous noise and it lowers the dynamic range.
The only way to get rid of the obnoxius SOB two rows up is to call the usher!

I understand what your trying to say, but . . .

Swampfox

10-10-06, 12:24 PM

"

Otherwise you loose possible resolution in the recording into the noise of your room. That is why very few systems (which includes the room) can even support CDs dynamic range. If one has a noise floor of 40dB in their room and setup their volume such that peaks are at 105dB (THX Reference level) their system has 65dB of dynamic range, just under 11 bits of resolution. To gain more resolution one needs to either setup peaks to be louder and/or decrease the noise floor in their room.

I agree. My point is that the peak is defined by the media. Thus, the only real way to increase the dynamic rance is to lower the noise.

sfogg

10-10-06, 12:33 PM

Are you talking in the media itself or in the reproduction? I have been talking about the reproduction.

" Thus, the only real way to increase the dynamic rance is to lower the noise. "

If one has a noise floor of 40dB in their room and has 0dBfs peaks at 65dB their system has a dynamic range of 25dB.

If they then turn up their volume control such that the 0dBFS peaks are hitting 95dB the systems dynamic range has increased to 55dB.

You will of course hit a point where things are too loud during playback. At that point the only way to further increase dynamic range is to reduce the noise floor of the room itself.

Quiet rooms are a very good thing.... I use to know a guy online (E. Brad Meyer) who had a room with a single digit noise floor when his AC was off. He always said it was so quiet you could hear the blood rushing through your ears in it.

Shawn

Bulldogger

10-11-06, 06:39 PM

Sony Playstation 3 supporting Deep Color and with HDMI 1.3. Epson TW1000 capable of billions of colors, supports deep color. It would appear that if you want to switch video with your CBIII, 1.3 would be the way to go. http://www.aboutprojectors.com/Epson-EMP-TW1000-projector.html Compare the color of the older Epson non-Deep Color projectors at only 16.7 million colors supported like this one http://www.aboutprojectors.com/Epson-PowerLite-Cinema-500-projector.html. HDMI 1.1 is obsolete for video switching. So much for Deep Color not being relevant.

Michael Grant

10-11-06, 07:25 PM

Well, that makes a grand total of one source device that provides deep color output, and then only if the underlying software uses it, that doesn't sound too compelling to me. Among Blu-Ray, HD-DVD, SD-DVD, NTSC, ATSC, etc. etc., not one has deep color support. And adding such support to these formats is going to take considerable time, because it will involve not only an evolution of the standards (and you know how long Blu-Ray and HD-DVD 1.0 took!) but of workflows, software, cameras, etc.

Honestly, I don't think we're at the obsolescence point yet, and it seems to me it will be quite awhile before we will be. I mean, yes, by all means, go with 1.3 if you can, but I think it's reasonable to stick with 1.1 for a couple more years.

thebland

10-11-06, 07:39 PM

I don't know if you guys own game players but the ROM drives are very loud! My X-Box is the loudest component in my theater. I can't imagien using a game console as a movie player based on that alone.

sdurani

10-12-06, 10:53 AM

One game console + one projector + zero source material = the very definition of irrelevant.

Nice try, but better luck next time.

Sanjay

Bulldogger

10-12-06, 03:40 PM

Michael Grant

10-12-06, 04:39 PM

Well of course Sony is going to make it an issue, it's a distinguishing feature of PS3 versus Xbox360 and Wii. But we're talking video here, Bulldogger. And you'll have to excuse me if I remain skeptical about Sony's ability to predict and control that market. They certainly haven't demonstrated that ability during the HD-DVD/Blu-Ray fiasco---nor for that matter, SD-DVD, VHS, etc...

I'll certainly take you at your word as to what your source is saying, but until it comes from companies besides Sony I have to suspect that there's a bit of wishful thinking going on. I mean, the IEC standard wasn't published until January of this year (adopted in October).

Michael Grant

10-12-06, 04:50 PM

PeterS

10-13-06, 09:06 AM

I sure hope Theta does something soon.

Still waiting for Jeff's Full Halcro report.

Bulldogger

10-13-06, 01:09 PM

One more thing---HDMI 1.1 is actually 12 bits per channel if you go with 4:2:2 downsampled chroma. No video format available today is 4:4:4, and the xvYCC standard isn't going to change that. So in theory, HDMI 1.1 can handle 36-bit color. I wouldn't be surprised if people figure out how to do 36-bit deep color, then, in a manner back-compatible with HDMI 1.1. Though I admit that's a bit of wishful thinking just like I accused Bulldogger's Sony source of having :)
Well, Mike, we may disagree on things but this is an area where I have not seen you wrong. I do not know. Source is a very good one though. During my evacation from Hurricane Katrina, I decided that I could either be sad and sit around a hotel or get out and make the best of things. I was in hotels all across the South. See the thing was you never knew how long you were going to be forced to stay away from home as they could not decide when we could go back home. Hotels were booked for hundreds of miles in each direction because of the magnitude of the disaster. If you booked for a week and then a day or so before your reseveration was up decided to book another room, you could be out of luck and could find no open rooms in an entire city the size of Houston, TX. This forced me to move from San Antonio, Tx all the way to Atlanta while waiting for a decision. I think I visited every high-end dealer in the South:D. Except Brent Huskins in Dallas to hear the Halcro, I could not catch up with him when I was there.Many dealers were happy to let me hang out and take my mind off things. One such visit to a high-end dealer resulted in a chance meeting with the Sony guy who was just in from Asia. I can not get very specific answers but he does tease me along. Inspite of how I may come off here I make friends very easily. 10 years ago, I was on my first ski trip and the resort was packed! All ski instruction classes were full. I spent several hours chatting with an older gentleman. When my naive plan to get some of the ladies to teach me to ski failed because women have no interest in teaching a beginner to ski, he decided that he could not stand to see me sitting around. He then spent the next several hours teaching me on the side to ski as he said he had done with his sons. All he said was that he worked for Coke. At the end of the day, I discovered that this guy was a VP for Coke and in charge of the entire Southern region of the US. An ex-girlfriend is still working for Coke now ;).

Bulldogger

10-13-06, 01:16 PM

Another issue is Direct TV. Direct TV seems to have plans to employ Dolby Digital Plus? Where is this to be decoded? My source tells me that the decoding of the new formats will be widely availible over the next few years in AV receivers. Direct Tv likely will plan for what the mass market does and not for the high-end so that may mean that you will need on- board decoding. Of course, DVD is a mature tech and companies are looking to force you to buy into a new format because the market is saturated. My source says, "why stop there?" If new receivers come to market promising High Definition Sound, the catch phrase, then guess what buddy:D? Your receiver is obsolete and we need to sell you a new one of those too.

sfogg

10-13-06, 01:33 PM

"Direct Tv likely will plan for what the mass market does and not for the high-end so that may mean that you will need on- board decoding."

The real Joe six pack mass market uses analog outputs. Guess what you need to be able to have analog outputs?

Shawn

John Kotches

10-13-06, 01:39 PM

Bulldogger

10-15-06, 08:49 AM

I think I misunderstood my source. Video gaming is going to be where the Deep Color thing is going to be an issue in the near term. I do not game so it is not an issue for me. Thanks John Kotches for the Direct Tv info. That is what I was looking for.

Steve Bruzonsky

10-15-06, 09:51 AM

DirecTV and Dish will both be employing DD+ (for lower bit rates not higher bit rates) and the decode will be in the receivers.

Chers,

Interesting. A Dolby rep on this forum has been saying that DD+ sounds the same as DD when used at the lower bit rates that they currently broadcast.
John, is my assumption correct that the newer DD+ codecs will allow DirecTV and DISH to use less bandwith due to more efficient compression of audio while maintaining the same sound quality?

casualgolfer

10-24-06, 03:37 AM

I think the days of video switching in surround processors are over. Why do you want to pollute audio with video circuit in CBIII? I got my CBIII 7.2 with configured strictly for audio with output digi card tied to Generation VIII, extreme dac for center, rear channels and a sub, superior for sides and sub. Video swithcing and scaling is done with DVDO Iscan VP-50.

Michael Grant

10-24-06, 11:02 AM

Well, with HDMI, you're kind of stuck with that so-called pollution. I don't know of any solutions out there that can separate the audio and video streams and deliver only the audio to the CBIII. Besides, even if such things exist, it wouldn't make much difference. You're still sticking all of the HDMI RX circuitry and HDCP decoding circuitry in your CBIII, which is really the issue, electrically speaking---not the fact that those signals happen to carry video.

PeterS

10-24-06, 11:48 AM

Michael,

Most of the new Video Processors offer an audio out to go to the audio processor after switching the video. In fact, most offer two HDMI outs (mirrored) so that one can go to your projector and the other to the audio processor.

I agree that this is the way to go. I too am running a 7.2 system and would prefer not to have the video processing in my audio processor at all.

After looking into the Halcro for HDMI support, it seems that they are farther away from mult-channel than they are letting people believe. Though they should have something out before Theta, the time difference may not be so great. If Theta were to get going on HDMI 1.1 now, they should be able to have something by the middle of 2007 which would be spectacular!

This is what I am hoping for - multichannel audio support over HDMI! Soon!!!

Michael Grant

10-24-06, 02:47 PM

PeterS---yes, I'm not surprised by the mirrored HDMI outs, but that implies that you're still getting video signals along with your audio, whether you want them or not... do any of those processors strip out the video in order to send the audio only?

The fact is that there really is no audio-only mode for HDMI, as the audio information is sent in the blanking interval of the video stream. So even if you do strip out the video, you have to insert some sort of manufactured video stream back in. Sure, it could be blank and at a lower bandwidth than the original. But due to zero-DC signaling and HDCP, it will add plenty of electrical activity.

I doubt anyone would go through all that trouble. Mirroring seems like the right solution.

audiman

10-27-06, 01:05 PM

Best way to go would be to have an external switch box sending the audio signal to the CB3 and the mirrored HDMI to the PJ or processor.

I dont know if that can be done.

That would also mean the death of the six shooter/compli as they are no longer usefull in the chain.

sfogg

10-27-06, 01:21 PM

" Best way to go would be to have an external switch box sending the audio signal to the CB3 and the mirrored HDMI to the PJ or processor."

Why is that best? If one is thinking the above to be able to avoid 'video' equipment inside of an audio processor as Michael has already said this does not do that for you. You still need all the 'video' chips internal to be able to receive/decrypt the signal to be able to get at the audio signal.

And from a marketing/sales standpoint this is less likely to sell then if the product didn't need another specialized box (HDMI distribution amp or dual output scaler) ahead of the product in order to work at all.

Shawn

PeterS

10-27-06, 02:40 PM

It is my firm belief/hope that Theta will have an audio solution - only really need LDPCM HDMI 1.1 support, on the market in 2007 - possibly even before many of their competitors have multi-channel support working.

At least this is what I say at my bedside each night.

audiman

10-27-06, 03:10 PM

"the best" is, as you pointed, for a seperate box solution. They already did that for the six shooter.

Theta will surely have a solution, but i dont see why it would be before the competition. All companies are waiting for the final 1.3 specs/chips to be delivered.

I dont think we will see anything (1.3) before next fall, if not 2008.

Evelyn Sinclair

11-02-06, 05:45 PM

Dear AV Forum members,

There is a page on the topics of Theta and HDMI up on a part of Theta's site that is about to go public, though it is not yet linked to the rest of the site.

The URL for this page is http://www.thetadigital.com/faqhdmi.htm. We address topics we have been asked about by dealers and distributors as well as Theta owners and you folks:

* How is Theta Digital implementing the new HDMI standards?

* What is Theta doing to make the latest technology available to Casablanca owners?

* What will the new Virtu and Valis have in the way of HDMI connectivity?

* What is Theta doing to implement the latest Dolby and DTS formats?

A few days ago I sent private messages to just a few Casablanca owners on this thread. Yesterday I realized that there were messages responding to mine, which I hadn't seen. I am used to email, and since I had included my address, I had made an assumption that I would get replies that way. I forgot how attuned to the forum you guys are.

From what I learned from these messages, I have checked with engineering and made some changes to the piece, both for clarity and for completeness.

I would like to address here a few things that were brought up "behind the scenes" by more than one person so that the answers can benefit anyone else who may have similar concerns.

1. Can we make a less expensive 6 Shooter or can we allow Casablanca to input SACD digitally via HDMI?

If we made Six Shooter less expensive, or as one person asked, had a simplified version of it as a Casablanca board, it wouldn’t perform adequately to justify its existence. We know this because we tried both before building Six Shooter.

There is some hope that we will be able to stream digital SACD and DVD-A for that matter via HDMI. Its in the HDMI spec. However, we will be surprised if “the powers that be” fully implement this because the overall public response to both formats was so poor. When this issue is talked about within the industry, people say things like: “There was a war between SACD and DVD-A and MP3 won the war.” We waited several years for Sony to make available the FireWire interface for SACD they specified at the format’s launch.

2. Will you try and avoid obsoleting the less expensive DACs?

We are definitely trying to do so. This is always an overriding Theta goal.

I now know that unless there are more surprises, the Superior II DACs should work with the new formats. The older DAC cards, Standard and Superior I, that handle less than 24 bits do not look likely to be able to handle the full bit height of the new formats.

3. One of the guys who took us up on the Casa Nova to Casablanca Trade in last year, asked if they could trade in their Process and Standard Dac cards.

While some of the dealers may be take trade ins and be able to resell older DAC cards, it doesn’t really work for anyone if we get involved. When a manufacturer subsidizes a trade-in, these funds end up rolled into the cost of the new product. If you run a business, you will understand this.

The Casa Nova trade-in was a special case. We expected to be able to continue supporting this product and felt we needed to do something special.

4. Can we try to make the changes field upgradable? Many have experience changing out cards and drives in their PCs.

So noted. If we can do this with the assurance of full performance without the benefit of test equipment, we will. It would help us too.

I have not answered every question. It made the most sense to get this information to the forum quickly, and then go on from there.

Sincerely,

Evelyn Sinclair

audiman

11-03-06, 07:06 AM

Thx evelyn for taking time to repond.

As for SACD/DVD-A :

1- if the CB3 wont be able to decode these format, does the futur new HDMI card be able to handle LPCM over HDMI ?

2- Would it be possible to modify the compli to send the data thru an HDMI out and / or in LPCM format ?

Thx.

Evelyn Sinclair

11-10-06, 08:30 PM

Audiman,

Your Question #1 (Would it be possible to upgrade the compli to send the data from sacd/dvd-a VIA and hdmi out to the CB3 ?) breaks down into three questions:
Will the CB III be able to decode SACD and process DVD-a?
Will we be able to handle SACD by translating it into a PCM stream?
And will we be able to handle DVD-A (Already PCM) over HDMI?

The question that underlies all of them is – “Can a player pass these formats over HDMI?”.

The HDMI developers have specified that these encrypted formats will be allowed to be passed over HDMI 1.3. Since HDMI can maintain encryption, there should be no legal issues. However, SACD and DVD-A are of no interest to the world at large, only to audiophiles. Consider; everything to do with HDMI, BlueRay and HD-DVD is grievously late. We would not be surprised if the developers don’t take the time to implement this arcane aspect of the interface.

As to questions #2 (Will the six shooter still be usefull with HDMI 1.3 ? it would if no player can output digital SACD/DVD-A...) If they do implement this feature and do it such that it allows for good sound (a fairly big if), we will likely have an update for Compli to allow an HDMI output.

Evelyn Sinclair

11-10-06, 08:44 PM

I’m going to answer some questions that were asked privately, so that the answers may satisfy other people who may have had similar questions on their minds.

Also, I’m wondering if others have an answer for us.

Badbenzz askes”… I have 4 extreme dacs and 4 standard dacs for the rears. Once HDMI 1.3 is ready will I have to replace the standard dacs or will they work in the rears. Knowing the standard dacs are not compatible with the new formats for the front stage.”

The Standard DACs will not allow for 24 bit 96k operation, however, we may be able to step down the signal so that the DACs will accept it. It’s too early to tell if this will be practical.

Keeping in mind that the resolution of the secondary channels would be somewhat compromised, if it is feasible, would you be satisfied with this capability?

sfogg

11-10-06, 08:46 PM

"SACD and DVD-A are of no interest to the world at large, only to audiophiles. Consider; everything to do with HDMI, BlueRay and HD-DVD is grievously late. We would not be surprised if the developers don’t take the time to implement this arcane aspect of the interface."

There are players available today that can transmit the above over HDMI. There are numerous models which can do DVD-A and at least one that can do both DVD-A and SACD (DSD converted to PCM) over HDMI.

Shawn

Evelyn Sinclair

11-10-06, 08:52 PM

Audioman also asks:

“2- Will the six shooter still be usefull with HDMI 1.3 ? it would if no player can output digital SACD/DVD-A...”

Yes, for other analog signals as well as for future digital formats. (You think they’re going to stop now?)

“3- Does The future 1.2 switching card needs to be replaced after the 1.3 card becomes available ? Since i'm already using a 99$ external HDMI 1.1 switching box from monoprice, i really dont see the need for a 1.2 switching card, especially if it will need replacement for 1.3 card.”

You will probably want to replace it in order to have the added 1.3 features. That’s the way it is with new standards.

To others on the forum: How interested are you in this interim solution?

Are you willing to pay for a 1.2 switching card, knowing that it will only be a temporary fix?

Evelyn Sinclair

11-10-06, 09:18 PM

BP asks:

“2) How will the presence of video in HDMI impact the the audio side. Many of us have purposely not included the video card in our CBIII's (we use external video processors) because we believe it should be separated out to avoid any "pollution" of the sound. Is there evidence to support this position or is it all in our heads?”

Regarding the presence of a video card in the CB III – there are some issues involved with interleaving the audio on the video, and clocking the audio to the video clocks. However, all available signals will be on the HDMI line in any case. Thus processing the signals in different boxes doesn’t really give you a solution to that problem. The control signals are there also. All these intertwined signals travel together. The outputs from a Casablanca are HDMI. The destination component picks what it wants and ignores the others, but they’re all there, all the way from disc to display components.

The processing can be separated, but the stuff in the pipeline is intrinsically bonded – and that’s a real problem! Still, isolating video processing from audio processing may be good for the performance of both.

“3) Will the Six Shooter still be needed? Will HDMI be able to carry SACD and DVD-A signals? Does the SS have any benefits for straight 2 channel? I am considering buying the SS now but will I regret that down the road?”

Maybe the Six Shooter will still be needed; it depends upon the sound quality HDMI allows.

The Six Shooter has huge benefits for two channel. It is a very very clear analog preamp. Because it doesn’t have the costs of duplicating Casablanca’s front panel, controls, etc, you can have this quality at a bargain price.

“My CBIII has Superior II dacs up front and Superior dacs for the surrounds (2). Will I need to replace the Superior dacs with Superior II dacs to handle HDMI?”

(Please slightly earlier post, in reply to Badbenzz, on the possibility of stepping down the signal.)

Would you be satisfied having your surround channels be at a lower bit height?

And regarding your confusion about what Steve B might have been getting from an HD_DVD that might have sounded better than his Extreme DACs -- There are times when “more bits is more bits”. The output of some of these discs can be real 24 bit 96 k and even over cheaper DACs, that may be enough to give yuou a superior signal. No one’s heard this over good DACs. . . .

DaveN

11-11-06, 08:29 AM

The Standard DACs will not allow for 24 bit 96k operation, however, we may be able to step down the signal so that the DACs will accept it. It’s too early to tell if this will be practical.

Keeping in mind that the resolution of the secondary channels would be somewhat compromised, if it is feasible, would you be satisfied with this capability?

Evelyn,

Thank you for participating on this forum. I have an Extreme and Superior I DAC in use and I would be satisfied with lower resolution for the 2 surround channels in my 5.1 system. Considering the expense and down time to upgrade I suspect that many would support this option.

Dave

Rene-L

11-11-06, 11:38 AM

How about no cables...

"the technology will make its way into adapters for source devices like notebook PCs, digital video recorders, HD disc players, digital audio players and digital cameras. Because it does not compress the digital video, the experience will be the same as using a high-definition multimedia interface (HDMI) or digital video interface (DVI) cable"

Check out:
http://news.com.com/Wireless+HD+specification+due+in+2007/2100-1039_3-6130942.html

audiman

11-11-06, 12:19 PM

To others on the forum: How interested are you in this interim solution?

Are you willing to pay for a 1.2 switching card, knowing that it will only be a temporary fix?

Not interested if it is only a video switching card. Nobody needs an 1.3 card now. Only benefit would be for a DD+ signal sent by HDTV STB, but it's unlikely will see this in a near futur. Deep color needs also that the source is shooted ih that format and i dont think such a device exists.

I would love to have the compli modified to send sacd signal over HDMi in a LPCM format. No need for the CB3 to decode the signal from a native DSD signal.

So, would the temp. 1.2 card be a video device only ?

Michael Grant

11-11-06, 04:27 PM

Bulldogger

11-12-06, 05:26 AM

I would not be interested in a card that would only be used to switch HDMI. If that same card could be used to latter input HDMI into the CBIII and work with the new processor board for DD-HD and DTS-HD, then I would buy it. If I will need another card in a years time that would work with the new formats, I would just wait the year. Great time for me to buy some new dacs for my Dolby Ex channel to fully enjoy the new formats in the future and the current ones now. Anyone not running the at least the Superior II cards should consider upgrading. I think they are truly worth the money that it will cost to upgrade for the improvement that you get. Investing money to make the older dacs work and not get the full performance of the new formats would not be a wise investment from my point of view. The solutions for the new formats are a some time off which make NOW a good time to buy new dacs.

Paladin80N

11-12-06, 05:44 PM

Evelyn,

I also have a CBIII with Extreme/Superior I DACs and would like the option to retaining the use of the 2 surround channels in my 5.1 system at lower resolution until I am ready to move up.

I would not be willing to purchase a HDMI 1.2 switching card as a temporary fix, however I will acquire the 1.3 card when it is made available. In the interim, there are many other options available for simple HDMI 1.2 switching.

Thank you for the candid answers to our questions, I for one now feel much better about the investment I made in Theta. Aside from the sound quality, the upgradeable aspect was a very important factor in the decision to purchase a Casablanca.

Rene-L

11-13-06, 01:38 AM

Rene-L: I have to be honest, though I'm a total gadget geek and I've designed wireless communications algorithms and chips, I just don't get the effort to go wireless with interconnections. Obviously, wireless networking for a battery-powered device like a laptop makes sense. But if I already have to plug the device into the wall, adding another cable isn't going to kill me. Sure, the goal of consolidating video and multichannel audio onto HDMI was worthy, but going the next step and ditching the wire altogether doesn't seem so. If that makes me a Luddite, so be it...

Michael, as a non scientist the only thing I can design is the layout of my own a/v-room and so the length of the cables. Add to that the quality level I try to achieve resulting in expensive long interconnects. If at any time wireless interconnection come to market on hi-end gear, assuming they provide a quality levels as wired ICs does nowadays (incl EMI/RFI protection, aso), that would save me serious money and increase layout flexibility.
I even think that a company (like Theta) that incorporate this wireless technic into it's products will have a strong selling point because their gear become much cheaper in the comparison with competitors: gear+ICs. Couldn't that be what motivates Krell too to introduce their Cast-IC years ago?

Steve Bruzonsky

11-13-06, 08:13 AM

Michael, as a non scientist the only thing I can design is the layout of my own a/v-room and so the length of the cables. Add to that the quality level I try to achieve resulting in expensive long interconnects. If at any time wireless interconnection come to market on hi-end gear, assuming they provide a quality levels as wired ICs does nowadays (incl EMI/RFI protection, aso), that would save me serious money and increase layout flexibility.
I even think that a company (like Theta) that incorporate this wireless technic into it's products will have a strong selling point because their gear become much cheaper in the comparison with competitors: gear+ICs. Couldn't that be what motivates Krell too to introduce their Cast-IC years ago?

The wireless HD video standards aren't even out yet.

What cost are you willing to pay for adding say wireless audio which sounds nearly as good as wired? Is it even possible. Different folks will have interference and noise which degrades the sound and they'll complain - that's not what Theta is about.

Maybe someday, as technology progresses and cost decreases, wireless hi end
(not I-pod quality) audio will become a reality. We're not they're yet. And Theta's not about to spend all the money to invent the technology for high end audio,
putting all its $$$ chips in that sort of basket is too risky. Fornow, us Casablanca owners will be very happy with HDMI 1.3.

Michael Grant

11-13-06, 08:40 AM

Rene---convenience? Lower cost? That doesn't sound like a high-end audiophile at all! :) Seriously, though. I'm not so much "against" wireless interconnection as I am "not for" it. That is, I just don't see the merit myself, but if you do, that's great.

But I doubt that you're going to convince the high-end audiophile community to give up their precious, expensive, pseudo-science supported, digital interconnection technology. Steve has already hinted this in his post above. Let's be clear, high-end audio manufacturers are not going to be able to "tweak" wireless HD any more than they'll be able to "tweak" HDMI. In both cases they will be forced to use standard chipsets, the exact same chipsets the low-enders use. So the only place left to tweak is in the cable! Even if it's just a psychological benefit, it's still there for HDMI, and not for wireless HD.

11-13-06, 10:08 AM

Hi Evelyn;
In answer to your question about your response to Badbenzz about a "compromised" rear channel result from adapting existing DAC's to handle HDMI vs. the purchase of more Superior II or Extreme DAC's, I would say that since I am more than 80% music on my system that this is not a compromise I am willing to make.
I am about to buy another amp to bi-amp new surround speakers I am going to buy next year. I wouldn't go to all this trouble to then place a DAC restraint on the sound capabilities of my surrounds. So count me in as one who is willing to either wait or pay (hope you modify the cost for those of us who are current owners) to upgrade the Superior DAC's.
Thanks!
BP

BP asks:

“My CBIII has Superior II dacs up front and Superior dacs for the surrounds (2). Will I need to replace the Superior dacs with Superior II dacs to handle HDMI?”

(Please slightly earlier post, in reply to Badbenzz, on the possibility of stepping down the signal.)

Would you be satisfied having your surround channels be at a lower bit height?

And regarding your confusion about what Steve B might have been getting from an HD_DVD that might have sounded better than his Extreme DACs -- There are times when “more bits is more bits”. The output of some of these discs can be real 24 bit 96 k and even over cheaper DACs, that may be enough to give yuou a superior signal. No one’s heard this over good DACs. . . .

audiman

11-14-06, 10:37 AM

A more appealing approach would be to have an HDMI 1.2 card with LPCM decoding capabalities and available soon. I would go for that.

Evelyn Sinclair

11-18-06, 04:43 PM

Here are some quotations from two A V Forum threads, on the topic of HDMI implementation. The question is when should Theta implement HDMI, in which incarnation. Should Theta go with 1.2 sooner, or wait for the advances of1.3 and be a little later?

From: Does Theta Digital's Failure to Have HDMI Impact Whether You Want to Buy???

10-15-06
Bulldogger
Video gaming is going to be where the Deep Color thing is going to be an issue in the near term. I do not game so it is not an issue for me.

10-23-06,
casualgolfer
I think the days of video switching in surround processors are over. Why do you want to pollute audio with video circuit in CBIII?

10-24-06,
Michael Grant
Well, with HDMI, you're kind of stuck with that so-called pollution. I don't know of any solutions out there that can separate the audio and video streams and deliver only the audio to the CBIII.

PeterS
If Theta were to get going on HDMI 1.1 now, they should be able to have something by the middle of 2007 which would be spectacular!
This is what I am hoping for - multichannel audio support over HDMI! Soon!!!

10-27-06,
PeterS
It is my firm belief/hope that Theta will have an audio solution - only really need LDPCM HDMI 1.1 support, on the market in 2007 - possibly even before many of their competitors have multi-channel support working.

At least this is what I say at my bedside each night.

audiman
Theta will surely have a solution, but i dont see why it would be before the competition. All companies are waiting for the final 1.3 specs/chips to be delivered.

I dont think we will see anything (1.3) before next fall, if not 2008.

11-11-06
audiman
Not interested if it is only a video switching card. Nobody needs an 1.3 card now. Only benefit would be for a DD+ signal sent by HDTV STB, but it's unlikely will see this in a near futur. Deep color needs also that the source is shooted ih that format and i dont think such a device exists.

11-12-06
Bulldogger
I would not be interested in a card that would only be used to switch HDMI. If that same card could be used to latter input HDMI into the CBIII and work with the new processor board for DD-HD and DTS-HD, then I would buy it. If I will need another card in a years time that would work with the new formats, I would just wait the year.

Paladin80N
I would not be willing to purchase a HDMI 1.2 switching card as a temporary fix, however I will acquire the 1.3 card when it is made available. In the interim, there are many other options available for simple HDMI 1.2 switching.

11-14-06
audiman
A more appealing approach would be to have an HDMI 1.2 card with LPCM decoding capabalities and available soon. I would go for that.

From: CBIII vs. Halcro SS100

11-07-06
audiman
...do we need hdmi 1.3 ?

11-07-06
sfogg
...No, esp. not when you understand the ramifications of Advanced content on HD-DVDs.

Steve Bruzonsky
HDMI 1.1 and 1.2 both pass PCM over HDMI. The HD DVD or Blue Ray player will decode the digital bitstream to PCM and then that PCM passes over HDMI.
HDMI 1.1 and 1.2 do not pass the digital bitstream and therefore do not allow decoding of the digital bitstream in the processor/receiver.

HDMI 1.3 will permit passing the digital bitstream over HDMI, so that the surround processor/receiver can decode the digital bitstream to PCM.

Advanced Content HD DVDs or Blue Ray DVDs do not permit passing of the digital bitstream over HDMI, even HDMI 1.3, and require that the decoding to PCM be done in the player. All of the movie high definition discs so far are apparently Advanced Content.

Satelite and cable providers will at some point move over to embrace the new sonic formats of Dolby Digital Plus, Dolby True HD and DTS HD. Why? First and foremost, more efficient compression, why else would they do that, certainly not for better sound as they could care less. But they will do this, it will take perhaps a few years or more, and receivers/surround processors will want to be able to decode these formats, regardless whether high definition movie discs remain Advanced Content.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Long ago, Evelyn and I had a hi-end audio store. An ongoing problem for us was convincing young salesmen that they shouldn't project their own values onto the clients they worked with. A forty five year old architect should be able to have a better audio system than a twenty five year old salesman. Some decisions are of the “because we can” variety and are about having what you want, when you want it.

Our focus on frugality in bringing out an interim HDMI solution may be misguided similarly to our young employees who kept trying to offer efficiencies and economies to those not seeking them.

Maybe we’ve been too focused on the highest performance (for which we wait) combined with pricing that we can absolutely justify, in terms of what performance advantage we get for every dollar we ask our customers to spend. We could be forgetting that we’re in a “luxury” price range, and part of luxury is getting what you want, when you want it.

We can re-examine our thinking using guidance and feedback from the thoughtful posts quoted above -- and your further input.

Before reading your feedback, we felt that being able to switch video in sync with audio from a Casablanca would be attractive enough at a projected price of about $500 to interest many Casa users. Instead, you're telling us that the really cheap outboard switchers do this well enough and that the features available in 1.2 are enough for you to write a fairly hefty check now and worry about 1.3 later.

Many of you are telling us that our having the desired features soonest is the important thing.

I have to admit that I'm not very excited about an HDMI video switching either. I probably wouldn't add this card to my Casablanca. However, I am concerned that we may all want what 1.3 will give us. I'm hoping that you're interested enough to think about likely timetables and features and give us a little more input.

The 1.2 chips are available now. We estimate that the project to have full HDMI capability for Casablanca will take about nine months to reach fruition. If we don't wait for the 1.3 chips, we most likely could have this update in your hands before the end of summer. It would work with the new Dolby and DTS formats in the digital domain but would in all situations rely on the player to do the decoding.

The video from 1.1 can be stunning. We can expect the same from 1.2.

We all know that 1.1 has some puzzling uncertainties in connecting components. We hope these problems go away with 1.2 but we really don't know.

We are hearing that we should see the first 1.3 chips in January. From recent experience, I suggest we read this as February. If we start then, we should be able to give you the new processes in the fall. A 1.3 solution would have all of the above features plus it would allow us in some circumstances to do the audio decoding in the processor. At this time, I don't know if we will be able to do this at a higher quality level than the players and satellite receivers, but from past experience, I'll be surprised if we can't find a way to make these formats sound better. It’s not that we do this kind of thing so well but that the big companies tend to do the surrounding circuitry so poorly. Their engineers in China and India don't even know there are users with your standards.

Regarding video, we would have everything 1.1 and 1.2 gives us plus we would be able to support Deep Color, which none of us has seen and which will initially be used for video games, which few of us care about. I wasn't particularly interested in this feature until I read the following in an HDMI press release from two weeks ago:

"...Many filmmakers today digitally record and process motion pictures at greater color depths than consumer home theater equipment has been able to reproduce. Movie studios have had to reduce the color depth of their films for home distribution in order for them to play on consumer equipment. However, the advent of 10-bit digital displays and HDMI 1.3 paves the way for player devices and media that can deliver digital movie and game content in nearly lossless visual form, providing consumers with a level of visual acuity and realism never before available in their homes.

“Benefits of Deep Color support include the following:

“Allows HDTVs and other displays to go from millions of colors to billions of colors
Eliminates on-screen color banding, for smooth tonal transitions and subtle gradations between colors
Enables increased contrast ratio
Can represent many times more shades between any two colors, and many times more shades of gray between black and white. At 10-bit color depth, four times more shades would be the minimum, and the typical improvement would be eight times or more."

< http://www.hdmi.org/press/pr/pr_20061026.asp>

When we see a great video presentation, we call it film-like. Still, I've never seen digital video that really looked like the best that film can offer. From this description, Deep Color sounds like it has the potential to get us closer.

Every time there is a new format, Hollywood finds a way to sell us our old favorites once again. Once established, I suspect they will use Deep Color for the transfers from film of the classic movies we want for our libraries. Why wouldn't they?

Then there is the intriguing possibility that 1.3’s added bandwidth for higher refresh rates will result in motion pictures with higher frame rates.

Regarding connection integrity, just like 1.2, we can't be sure they will get it right in 1.3, but with 1.3 being the finished product we should be able to expect it to be bulletproof.

It is this issue of reliability that has kept me reticent about plunging in during HDMI's early stages. From experience, I know that when end users have difficulty making a Toshiba, Sony or Scientific Atlanta box work with a Theta component, it becomes our job to make it all work. Considering the resources available to the big companies and the fact that it is usually their cost-cutting that has created the problem, its pretty silly that the job falls in Theta's lap. However, because our components are expensive, and because you talk with our core people, who take part in the designs, rather than to operators in a third world tech support center, it does become our mandate. Now add to this the expectation we all share that a Theta component should bring joy for many years. To meet this expectation, we give long warranties on our electronics and endeavor to service them long after their warranty period. In order to do this, we need to be able to purchase the applicable parts. I will be very surprised if any chip company is interested in supplying HDMI 1.1 or 1.2 parts once these are supplanted by 1.3.

Connectivity problems in 1.1 are such that there is no “fix” – the problems are not solvable by us or anybody else. When they crop up, the available work-arounds involve things like re-booting.

I once owned a Maserati (which my Italian distributors thought was hilarious). That car taught me that luxury sometimes means “things that are beautiful, when they work…” How important is it -- to you -- that things work reliably?

To complete the picture, I should tell you that I expect that the complete Casablanca HDMI update will cost you around $1500 to $2000.

With the above facts (and suppositions) in mind regarding cost, long term usability and audio and video quality, do you want us to work with what's available now or should we wait the extra three months until we can work with 1.3?

In other words, am I projecting my own buying habits and being too frugal with your money?

While you are not the only people we listen to, your thoughts are important to our decision making.

Neil Sinclair

Steve Bruzonsky

11-18-06, 08:37 PM

Hi Neil.

Thanks for giving us good info on your thought processes in how Tbeta is considering and approaching HDMI.

My vote is wait and do HDMI 1.3 ASAP.

If you do HDMI 1.1 or 1.2, there could well be a part shortage as the industry moves into the newer HDMI 1.3. And Theta full well knows the problems of getting parts from suppliers holding up production and upgrades from CB2 to CB3. And since HDMI 1.3 parts are shortly becoming available, why take the chance?

Thats my five cents.

sfogg

11-18-06, 10:15 PM

Hi Neil,

"Then there is the intriguing possibility that 1.3’s added bandwidth for higher refresh rates will result in motion pictures with higher frame rates."

From those in the industry they have said that that is very unlikely. To go above 24hz film would basically require replacing all the projectors in all the theaters across the country. Not terribly likely to occur.

Even if they ever did go above 24hz film existing versions of HDMI could handle that. For example HDMI v1.0 supports 1080p @ 60hz which is well above where film frame rates.

"Connectivity problems in 1.1 are such that there is no “fix” – the problems are not solvable by us or anybody else."

The connectivity problems are not simply because of the HDMI version being 1.1. The connectivity problems are because some components that happen to be at v1.1 simply have lousy software in them. For example sources that don't support repeaters... that isn't a problem of v1.1 it is a problem of bad coding by the sources manufacturer who didn't take the time to fully support the specification. Later versions of HDMI aren't going to automatically fix things like this.

The HDMI v1.3 handshake is only going to be more complex (support internal decoding? support deep color? etc..etc...). Without more mandatory compliance testing IMO it is only going to get worse with later revisions, not better. If good compliance testing becomes mandatory (as it should have been all along) that can help improve the situation when used with tested equipment.

Shawn

mmiles

11-18-06, 11:28 PM

Neil,

Will the CB3 need to be returned to the factory for the 1.3 upgrade of $2K?

Regards,
Mike

Steve Bruzonsky

11-19-06, 12:39 AM

Neil,

Will the CB3 need to be returned to the factory for the 1.3 upgrade of $2K?

Regards,
Mike

I'll betcha that it will have to be done at the factory!!! Some years ago Theta tried having dealers do the upgrade from CB1 to CB2 in the field and they found it was just too problematic. If it was just a simple video card, that might be one thing. But HDMI will be audio and video and my bet is that would be too problematic in the field.

Ash Sharma

11-19-06, 10:32 AM

So if Theta waits and then goes to 1.3 - will the extreme dacs be used for processing? Or will the processing be handled by the player (source component - Blue Ray Player, HD DVD Player etc)!!

sfogg

11-19-06, 10:43 AM

"So if Theta waits and then goes to 1.3 - will the extreme dacs be used for processing? Or will the processing be handled by the player (source component - Blue Ray Player, HD DVD Player etc)!!"

DACs don't perform processing, they convert a digital signal to analog. If you had any version of HDMI and accepted audio over the connection (bitstream or LPCM) the Theta DACs would be used to convert from digital to analog.

The *potential* difference between HDMI v1.1 or v1.3 would be where the audio was decoded/uncompressed... either in the player and then passed as LPCM over the HDMI connection or passed in its encoded/compressed state over the HDMI connection to be decoded/uncompressed in the processor to LPCM. The reason is that is a potential difference is because if a disc is encoded with Advanced Content (like they all are) the player is going to decode the audio internally and pass it as LPCM even with HDMI v1.3.

Shawn

Steve Bruzonsky

11-19-06, 12:40 PM

So if Theta waits and then goes to 1.3 - will the extreme dacs be used for processing? Or will the processing be handled by the player (source component - Blue Ray Player, HD DVD Player etc)!!

As Shawn mentioned, processing is simplydecoding of the signal, from whatever it is, DTS, DD, etc. into LPCM, which is still digital data. The next step is conversion from digital to analog.

With HDMI 1.1 or later, the digital LPCM multi-channel data can be conveyed over the digital link. So the digital LPCM can be converted either by the DACs in the player, or by the DACs in the Casablanca so long as you have HDMI 1.1 or later.
The advantage of the conversion being done in the Casablanca is that they you can use the Casablanca's DACs as well as bass management.

Although the Casablanca can also do the decoding, to date and as far as we can predict, all of the HD DVD and Blue Ray discs use Advance Content, which requires that the decoding to LPCM be done in the player. But that's ok, as the digital LPCM data can still go over HDMI 1.1 or later to the Casablanca, as discussed above.

And someday digital satellite and cable providers will move to the new sonic formats used by HD DVD and Blue Ray and with HDMI 1.3 on the satellite or cable box and HDMI 1.3 on the Casablanca, then the Casablanca will be able to decode as well for those sources.

audiman

11-19-06, 12:41 PM

The display unit must 1.3 also, so everybody will have to replace them ?

How exactly can theta do a better job at decoding dd+ / dthd or dts-hd ?

sdurani

11-19-06, 12:42 PM

Neil, A 1.3 solution would have all of the above features plus it would allow us in some circumstances to do the audio decoding in the processor. At this time, I don't know if we will be able to do this at a higher quality level than the players and satellite receivers, but from past experience, I'll be surprised if we can't find a way to make these formats sound better.You can make the formats sound better, but not at the decoding step. When a compressed bitstream is unpacked and separated into individual channels, what will Theta do that others don't? If data is flagged for the left front channel, will you send it even more to the left than others do?

The decoding step (uncompressing/unpacking of the audio) will be the same whether done in the player or your pre-pro. It is everything you do after the decoding step that will determine the difference in sound from other pre-pros: i.e., Theta's unique bass management, your DACs, analogue stage, etc. I wasn't particularly interested in this feature until I read the following in an HDMI press release from two weeks ago:

"...the advent of 10-bit digital displays and HDMI 1.3 paves the way for player devices and media that can deliver digital movie and game content in nearly lossless visual form, providing consumers with a level of visual acuity and realism never before available in their homes."Keep in mind that hi-def delivery media (Blu-ray and HD DVD) are limited to 8-bit colour. A video processor could extrapolate greater bit depths, but it's not something that is in the source material itself. It's also something that will occur downstream of the pre-pro, just before the video signal is displayed. I know that when end users have difficulty making a Toshiba, Sony or Scientific Atlanta box work with a Theta component, it becomes our job to make it all work.You can't, because the problem isn't with your equipment. Some set top boxes with HDMI are configured to handshake only with displays, not with repeaters (such as pre-pros, scalers, switchers, etc). Unless your surround sound processor deliberately mis-identifies itself as a display, which is a violation of the HDMI licensing agreement (but done by the Anthem D2 anyway), those problematic set top boxes will not transmit the signal.

Sanjay

Steve Bruzonsky

11-19-06, 12:46 PM

The display unit must 1.3 also, so everybody will have to replace them ?

How exactly can theta do a better job at decoding dd+ / dthd or dts-hd ?

HDMI 1.3 is backwards compatible with prior HDMI versions.

Its not that the Casablanca will better decode. Its that it will decode, because satellite and cable boxes likely will not decode (they don't now for Dolby Digital, etc.).

sfogg

11-19-06, 01:53 PM

Michael Grant

11-19-06, 02:45 PM

I think it could work two ways. On one hand, the new cable boxes could all be given the ability to do full decoding of advaned audio codecs, eliminating the need to do decoding in the processor. That's the way I'd prefer it.

On the other hand, they could mandate that any channel encoded with an advanced codec must have a back-compatible DD track encoded alongside it. In that case, you'd need a 1.3-capable processor to extract the higher-quality audio.

The question is, what is going to be cheaper for them: a more advanced decoder chip in their hardware, or the additional bandwidth necessary to remain back-compatible? My guess is that they'll go with the chips. After all, if they move to H.264 or VC1 encoding on the video side, they'll need new chips there, too. New chips seem to be an expense they're willing to accept.

The again, the potential bandwidth savings for advanced video codecs is considerably larger than for audio. So maybe the cost/benefit analysis will work out differently for audio. It will be interesting to see...

Steve Bruzonsky

11-19-06, 08:08 PM

Steve,

"Its that it will decode, because satellite and cable boxes likely will not decode (they don't now for Dolby Digital, etc.)."

So if you have a channel with DD audio those satellite boxes won't/can't output 2 channel analog audio?

Shawn

Thanks. Shawn. I was discussing multi-channel decoding. Yes, satellite and cable boxes do have stereo outputs so they will decode to two channel only. At least the ones I've used do that.

sfogg

11-19-06, 10:12 PM

Steve,

"I was discussing multi-channel decoding. Yes, satellite and cable boxes do have stereo outputs so they will decode to two channel only. At least the ones I've used do that."

That still means they have a multi-channel decoder in them, just not the rest of the DACs and analog stages to output as multi-channel analog. You can't get a two channel analog output from a DD feed without a DD decoder onboard.

I doubt that is going to change with future boxes.

Look at the Toshiba HD-A2 for example. It doesn't have 5.1 analog outputs yet it still has the decoders onboard for the HDMI output.

Shawn

sfogg

11-19-06, 10:15 PM

"what is going to be cheaper for them: a more advanced decoder chip in their hardware, or the additional bandwidth necessary to remain back-compatible? My guess is that they'll go with the chips."

Almost certainly IMO. Esp. since the chips are only going to be more and more common as time goes by. Running dual soundtracks increases bandwidth needs, increases production costs, causes potential user problems...etc...etc.

Shawn

Rene-L

11-20-06, 02:47 AM

Question:

If a DAC can handle native DSD 2.8Mhz, is HDMI a good method of DSD-communication/connection between transport>processor>dac?

THETA's MEGALINQUE is a prommised technic to handle DSD, but.... zzzzzzzzz

I like the sound of GENERATION VIII and I wish THETA would implement a technic that handles the new formats as well as native DSD for absolute best SACD playback. It might result in buying (in 2007?) such CB3 plus three Gen8s...

Bulldogger

11-20-06, 07:54 AM

You absolutely have to wait for HDMI 1.3. The potential negatives for anything less, like parts availability for example are just too great. Often in the market place, having features like "Deep Color" support that are not even required at the time are selling points. Case in point, 24/96 dacs. When these first hit the market, your equipment was not considered first rate if you did not have these. There was no standard to transfer 26/96 at 5.1 channels. For many, it would have actually been easier and cheaper to just release a new processor than make the old one work if there was. Every processor on the market damn near has them on all channels. 24/96 dacs on all channels was more of a selling point as it surely was not need for DD or even CD. Additionally, the companies could not have implemented the new standard if it had come available. That did not stop companies from adding 24/96 dacs. Being able to support on-board processing REGARDLESS of if it is ever really needed is a "selling point" as well. All of the other companies who sell high-end AV pre-pros are going to have HDMI 1.3 and on-board decoding. Theta will find itself as the only company that does not perhaps just a year from now if Theta pursues 1.2 only.

Bulldogger

11-20-06, 08:06 AM

Read this, first televisions with Deep Color support expected in first half of 2007. http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/10-26-2006/0004460007&EDATE=

Bulldogger

11-20-06, 10:02 AM

"Connectivity problems in 1.1 are such that there is no “fix” – the problems are not solvable by us or anybody else."

The connectivity problems are not simply because of the HDMI version being 1.1. The connectivity problems are because some components that happen to be at v1.1 simply have lousy software in them. For example sources that don't support repeaters... that isn't a problem of v1.1 it is a problem of bad coding by the sources manufacturer who didn't take the time to fully support the specification. Later versions of HDMI aren't going to automatically fix things like this.
Shawn
Part of the HDMI 1.2a standard is more stringent testing and compliance standards. This will in fact reduce the problems that are prevelant with HDMI 1.1. http://www.hdmi.org/press/pr/pr_20051227.asp

sfogg

11-20-06, 11:11 AM

Like I said in the paragraph after the one you quoted (added emphasis).....

The HDMI v1.3 handshake is only going to be more complex (support internal decoding? support deep color? etc..etc...). Without more mandatory compliance testing IMO it is only going to get worse with later revisions, not better. If good compliance testing becomes mandatory (as it should have been all along) that can help improve the situation when used with tested equipment.

All that press release says is that the testing center was updated to handle testing v1.2. Nothing more.

They were equipped to handle testing v1.1 too. The problem is the same, not all companies go through the cost and hassles of having their equipment tested and certified. It is those devices that cause problems, not the specification itself. Until compliance testing becomes mandatory things aren't going to get better. And even when/if it becomes mandatory that still doesn't help those that have the existing devices with lousy software in them.

It is really no different then companies not wanted to spend the money getting 'THX' certified or trying to get the certification and failing to be able to.

Shawn

audiman

11-23-06, 09:25 PM

Interesting ...

http://www.quebecaudio.com/forums/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=1961

Seems like DTS-MA requires hdmi 1.3

sdurani

11-24-06, 12:25 PM

Seems like DTS-MA requires hdmi 1.3Only if you want to transmit the soundtrack in its native bitstream. If the player unpacks the data into multi-channel PCM, then HDMI 1.0 (and later) will be able to transmit the signal at full resolution.

Sanjay

audiman

11-24-06, 04:18 PM

If you want discrete 7.1, DTS-MA has to be transferred via hdmi 1.3

But will we ever live to see such soundtracks ?

sdurani

11-24-06, 04:28 PM

If you want discrete 7.1, DTS-MA has to be transferred via hdmi 1.3Nope.

The Panasonic BD player is due for a firmware upgrade that will allow for decoding of Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD MA (much like the Toshiba HD DVD player upgraded to multi-channel TrueHD).

Once these soundtracks are unpacked in the player, they can be transmitted (all channels, full resolution) as multi-channel PCM via HDMI 1.0, 1.1, 1.2a, etc.

No need whatsoever for HDMI 1.3, unless you want to transmit the signal in it's native bitstream (pointless unless you have a DTS-HD MA decoder in your pre-pro).

Sanjay

thebland

11-24-06, 05:08 PM

I own the Panny but my dealer says that DTS MA is not going to be available in the PANNY...Just DTS core audio. THe Panny will have TRUE HD 7.1, however.

audiman

11-24-06, 05:23 PM

Steve Bruzonsky

11-24-06, 05:26 PM

Is hdmi 1.1 or 1.2 enough for the bandwidth required for dts-ma ?

If it does, then 1.3 would be only required for deep color and futur HDTV sound requirements.

It would be simpler to develop an 1.2 card and then a 1.3 card that would be needed only in a few years, if ever.

As we've said before: Any HDMI version prior to HDMI 1.3 will not transmit the original digital bitstream for decoding in the receiver or CB. E.G. say Dolby Digital Plus or Dolby True HD, or DTS HD - they can't be decoded to digital LPCM in the receiver or CB. They can be decoded to digital LPCM in the player and then conveyed over HDMI 1.1 or 1.2 to the receiver or CB, which can then apply bass management and DA conversion.

audiman

11-24-06, 06:10 PM

My fear with 1.3 is the delay that could occur getting the chips.

Also, we would have to change the source and display to take advantage of deep colors.

sdurani

11-24-06, 06:20 PM

Is hdmi 1.1 or 1.2 enough for the bandwidth required for dts-ma ?Old HMDI 1.0 had enough bandwidth for DTS-HD MA.

Think of it this way: if HDMI has enough bandwidth to transmit an uncompressed PCM version of the soundtrack (as it does on Blu-ray), then it has more than enough bandwidth to transmit a compressed version of that soundtrack.

DTS-HD MA is lossless compression, like TrueHD, so it actually requires less bandwidth than an uncompressed version. Since HDMI can already handle 8 channels of uncompressed PCM at 192/24, a compressed version (like DTS-HD MA or TrueHD) will go through even more easily. Also, we would have to change the source and display to take advantage of deep colors.The sources in this case, Blu-ray and HD DVD, are not capable of Deep Colour as they are both limited to 8-bit video. Any greater bit depth will have to come through video D/A conversion or interpolation (either in the player or using an outboard video processor).

Sanjay

audiman

11-24-06, 06:40 PM

Theta should let us know the costs of developping an 1.2 solution for now and then an 1.3 solution much latter, since it wont probably be necessary for some years.

thebland

11-24-06, 09:21 PM

Frankly, for what folks pay for a THeta, a $2K to $3K interim solution seems like a good thing as it will keep its owners ahead of the crowd...

Evelyn Sinclair

11-29-06, 06:36 PM

Greetings once again.

We can't be as active as the regulars here, and I hope you'll be patient with us. It would be a bad idea for us to really try to keep on top of the forum on a daily basis, as, for one thing, it would keep us from getting other things done, most of which you want us to do.

A lot of what goes on here is speculative. We have very few advantages right now, in crystal ball terms, that you folks don't. There are internet resources galore, and anyone can go look at the standards that have been published. (Our "inside source" at one of the companies pivotal to this discussion, when we asked for the latest on exactly what their specifications and standards were going to be, so we could work with them asap, resulted in our receiving a handsome Power Point presentation on the history and virtues of that company.)

We know chip makers and we know our own engineers and suppliers, but that gives us less of an "edge" regarding direction than you might think. In short, we have to make what we call "guesses" about what is going to be important, what choices will turn out in hindsight to be "stupid."

There are no real consequences when regulars post predictions that don't come true, or speculate about anything from a product's likely life-span to the choices chip companies will make. When we speculate, it can be a problem. Recently, we mentioned a POSSIBLE price for something, and we can see it quoted a bit later as if it were a "done deal."

We're going to try to give a few answers, here, anyway.

----------------------------------

mmiles asks:

"Will the CB3 need to be returned to the factory for the 1.3 upgrade of $2K?"

It's too early to say regarding the establishment of a price. I shouldn't throw out guesses if they're going to 'gel' into firm expectations. Yes- it's most likely that this will have to be done at the factory. Because of a persuasive argument earlier in this thread we are willing to seriously consider the possibility of end users changing out their own boards. But in the end it comes down to our feeling certain that people can do this without specific test equipment and without great difficulty.
------------------------------

audiman asks:

"The display unit must 1.3 also, so everybody will have to replace them?"

I believe that's true but since the first 1.3 devices are just coming to market, I'm not certain.

"How exactly can theta do a better job at decoding dd+ / dthd or dts-hd?"

Its not that we can decode it any differently but there's been a long history of mass market DVD players and satellite /cable boxes handling signals in a sloppy manner thus hurting performance. some boxes are so bad that they do not even meet industry minimum specifications. When we have seen this we have spoken with the their makers but the conversations have been fruitless. The less we have them do the more likely we feel we can give good performance.

-----------------------------
Sdurani:

"You can make the formats sound better, but not at the decoding step. When a compressed bitstream is unpacked and separated into individual channels, what will Theta do that others don't? If data is flagged for the left front channel, will you send it even more to the left than others do?

"Quote:
'I know that when end users have difficulty making a Toshiba, Sony or Scientific Atlanta box work with a Theta component, it becomes our job to make it all work.'

"You can't, because the problem isn't with your equipment. Some set top boxes with HDMI are configured to handshake only with displays, not with repeaters (such as pre-pros, scalers, switchers, etc). Unless your surround sound processor deliberately mis-identifies itself as a display, which is a violation of the HDMI licensing agreement (but done by the Anthem D2 anyway), those problematic set top boxes will not transmit the signal."

Yes of course. But you guys are our most knowledgeable end users. Many of the others expect us to do miracles.

We even had a modification in the works for a Sony satellite receiver, at one time, to make it so there was at least SOMETHING that worked well. The Sony was picked because it was better than the other options, but we still felt we needed to do a serious modification to really be happy with its output.

---------------------------
Michael Grant (regarding cable and sat companies):

"…The question is, what is going to be cheaper for them:..."

This is always the problem.

The cable and satellite companies take whatever is the cheapest pathway, and we have to make it look and sound good.

I'm not really complaining. If they really cared about ultimate performance, we wouldn't have a reason to exist.

Rene-L asks:

"If a DAC can handle native DSD 2.8Mhz, is HDMI a good method of DSD-communication/connection between transport>processor>dac?

"THETA's MEGALINQUE is a prommised technic to handle DSD, but.... zzzzzzzzz

"I like the sound of GENERATION VIII and I wish THETA would implement a technic that handles the new formats as well as native DSD for absolute best SACD playback. It might result in buying (in 2007?) such CB3 plus three Gen8s..."

Yes its been a very long time. We've been steadily working on this for years. We may have some good news very soon.

I hope it will be OK if we start a thread here when we're ready.

-----------------------------

sfogg (post #189):

"…It is really no different then companies not wanted to spend the money getting 'THX' certified or trying to get the certification and failing to be able to."

Off topic but perhaps of interest: When we designed the original Casablanca, we expected to have it THX certified. When we contacted them and told them what we were doing, they informed us that we'd have to delete many of our crossover options and most of our playback filters -- just have their crossovers! Since THX is no longer owned by Lucasfilm, maybe the new company would accept our flexibility. However, we haven't been very interested as their standards are not our standards.

--------------------
Finally, there are these posts -

audiman:

"Is hdmi 1.1 or 1.2 enough for the bandwidth required for dts-ma ?

"If it does, then 1.3 would be only required for deep color and futur HDTV sound requirements.

"It would be simpler to develop an 1.2 card and then a 1.3 card that would be needed only in a few years, if ever."

--------------------------
"Theta should let us know the costs of developping an 1.2 solution for now and then an 1.3 solution much latter, since it wont probably be necessary for some years."

---------------------------------------
thebland:

"Frankly, for what folks pay for a THeta, a $2K to $3K interim solution seems like a good thing as it will keep its owners ahead of the crowd..."
---------------------------------------

I appears that Jeff -- the avowed non-Theta-owner has voted for people who ARE Theta owners to spend their money twice, but that actual Theta owners are not quite as eager.

Is there anyone who really wants us to focus on a bang-up 1.2 version and then ignore 1.3??? Or do they want it so bad now that they want it twice? Those really seem to be the choices. I think, Jeff, you are the only one I saw who wants to see the double whammy, and you bought Halcro, and are admirably helping them through their beta testing.

I trust that we are still talking about a time frame that says waiting for the finished version of the HDMI standard adds, from what we were told, approximately 3 months to the time-table.

We seriously don't want it to cost the whole 2- 3 thousand dollars Jeff is advocating. Then another 2-3 thousand for a "Final Solution" when we can work with what we think of as the finished HDMI product.

If we have to solve the problem twice it will double the R & D costs, in addition to slowing down the team from getting a finished (1.3) product to market.

In a year I don't think anybody's going to want to spend money on anything that's not 1.3, whether it is any better or not. It will be outdated. So we do have to do the 1.3 project, whether we stop and spend a lot of R&D time and money to bring you an interim solution.

Cheers,

Evelyn

thebland

11-30-06, 12:22 PM

Evelyn,

For some on the high end, wanting cutting edge performance that those with $1000 receivers are already enjoying isn't an unreasonable thing to ask from a high end company. Myself? I am quite shrewd about my audio expenditures. Despite your suggestion that I simply throw money around and like double whammy financial hits, you are wrong. I am value oriented. And I perceive value in having the best, most advanced equipment in my system. In fact, many at this level demand it - no more than demands we make on our stock brokers to perform.. At $15K for a processor, of course we ecxpect it to sound fantastic but we also expect that you not analyze our financial situations in determing whether we might drop another $2K or $3K to take the piece ot the next level in sound and video. You make the piece and let us decide to buy it or not. Perhaps you do not know your client as well as you might. Consider most have a minimum of $50K and much greater in their systems (look at Steve, for example). Do you really think a $2K add on is a big shake if the client can see the value of the HDMI interface in terms of audio and video enhancement.

When you consider that you are suggesting 15% of the cost of a loaded CB3 to experience a a big step up in digital lossless sound, HDMI switching, digitally inputted True HD, 5.1 LPCM and soon DTS MA together with all of Theta's digital post processing, I can't believe your core users who spent $10K - $15K on a CB3 wouldn't jump at it the chance to majorly upgrade their video handling and audio playback for such a relatively small price. Most here have HD DVD or Blu Ray (or both). I have both and the HDMI inputting I am getting is not only ergonomically useful but I have dropped about 20 piece of cabling. I have 5 HDMI sources now.. This is where it is at..at less than the price of a case of a moderate Bordeaux, An HDMI 1.2 upgrade, even if it can be replaced in a year, is a pretty good value.

I think the feedback you are getting from Theta owners on-line is not representative of your customers truly would like (or at least have the option to buy it)..... Moreover, I fail to see the big advantage of 1.3 at this point. Anyone in 'the know' can see that HDMI 1.2 will provide all of the audio and video benefits of HDMI 1.3. What's worth waiting for and moreover, let your customers decide what they can afford rather than farcing them to wait by not providing an option like Halcro, Anthem, and Lexicon hace...

HDMI 1.3 for you is at least a year away....that is too long to wait at what your customers paid for their 'cutting edge' product.

EDIT: RE: Beta testing the Halcro. I certainly wouldn't call it a Beta piece. It is here and very stable (There is a new firmware update). Certainly, it lacks more tweakable set up feautures found on the LExicon and Theta but nothing critical to the performance - just nice to haves.. The auto calibrate works great, it has HDMI switching, 1080P scaling (and LPCM coming in early '07) and RS-232 and excellent support. Can Theta boast a solid RS-232 control protocol, scaling or HDMI? THe sound is very, very smooth...which is what you'd expect from Halcro. Ergonomically, it is a bit behind but sonically, it is my best processor to date.

Steve Bruzonsky

11-30-06, 01:22 PM

Jeff, as Halcro promised you when you bought the processor that it would "shortly" be upgradeable to LPCM over HDMI, and it ain't there yet, and the promises keep on coming -
the question is, will Theta with HDMI 1.3 possibly beat Halcro with LPCM over HDMI. It could happen. And Jeff, you may well have to send your processor back to Halcro for the LPCM upgrade.

Believe me, I know plenty of Theta owners, and frankly, the concencus is get it right with HDMI 1.3. Besides, are you listening, HDMI 1.3 is just coming out, parts are becoming available, and if Theta goes with a prior HDMI version they are asking for a parts shortage.
Theta has had this type of problem and understands it well.

Oh and Jeff, I certainly wish you well with your Halcro, which I'm sure is an outstanding surround processor, and I'm comfortable that Halcro will get your HDMI LPCM upgrade done, whether in a few months or a year or more. Enjoy.

PeterS

11-30-06, 01:32 PM

sfogg

11-30-06, 01:42 PM

"Off topic but perhaps of interest: When we designed the original Casablanca, we expected to have it THX certified. When we contacted them and told them what we were doing, they informed us that we'd have to delete many of our crossover options and most of our playback filters -- just have their crossovers!"

That is interesting since Lexicon has had multiple crossover points in their processors for basically forever ('95) and they have all been THX certified.

Shawn

Steve Bruzonsky

11-30-06, 01:48 PM

What would be very worthwhile for Theta is to offer an upgrade path from the Six-Shooter to any HDMI upgrade. This would encourage users to purchase the currently available Six-Shooter now and use it until the HDMI upgrade is available. This way they could easily go to the HDMI 1.3 directly and not have to worry about anything in between.

As Evelyn stated, Theta is working out details of the HDMI 1.3 upgrade and doesn't have the final cost yet.

Of course, the Six Shooter upgrade is now available, as I've had it since March 2005, at retail of $2,000.

Peter, I suspect you are suggesting a deal where the price is lower if you get the Six Shooter now and then upgrade to HDMI 1.3 later. Problem with that is if you then want to return the Six Shooter, look at the time and cost involved, you can't expect Theta to just take it back for little or nothing. Frankly, I luv the Six Shooter and I'll still be using it for multi-channel SACD and DVD-Audio even if HDMI 1.3 sounds as good or better for HD DVD than the Six Shooter does.
And even if you keep the Six Shooter, where else can you get an analog multi-channel preamp/switcher at that sort of price - you can't. It would be unrealistic to think that Theta can afford to lower its retail Six Shooter price.

thebland

11-30-06, 03:26 PM

HEy,

Let me be clear... I certainly can't speak for all enthusiasts who bought Theta, but all things being equal having to choose to wait a year for an upgrade or getting an upgrade now that will provide 95% of the benefit is a bit unfair.

Most Theta owners have HD DVD or BD (or both) and to get the best sound and video, you need HDMI (particularly for digital projector owners). So..it would be nice to pick it up a quick HDMI 1.2 upgrade. As far as I know, processor manufacturers do not even have the HDMI 1.3 kits for the design process.

I have had the Halcro piece for a couple months and am very pleased with it. Yes, the LPCM has been pushed back from late November to early '07. I can wait another month or two (or so I say;).

And I appreciate your enthusiasm for me Steve RE: the Halcro. This is not about who's best at this point but getting the high end manufacturers to quickly embrace HDMI inputs and LPCM. We paid alot for our machines and the fact that they sound fabulous is a given..but keep us ahead of the receiver crowd please...If you want the best sound, you have to have HDMI inputs and LPCM capability.

So, to Evelyn, I say do HDMI 1.3 and 1.2 and let your customers decide what to buy.

PeterS

11-30-06, 04:31 PM

Bulldogger

11-30-06, 04:53 PM

My understanding is that if done right, the HDMI 1.3 spec would require a fair amount of changes within the existing Theta CBIII in order to process and decode the audio. This is a MUCH bigger issue than simply providing an HDMI input for multi-channel audio.

My quick suggestion is why not have an upgrade to the six-shooter with HDMI 1.2 and an upgrade board and system for the CBIII with HDMI 1.3?
The Six Shooter is just a simple analog pre-amp. It would require quite a bit of re-engineering. Also, one of the reason that the performance of the Six shooter is so good is that it is outside of the digital circuits of the CBIII. Putting an HDMI board could destroy that advantage?

thebland

11-30-06, 04:56 PM

Why 'upgrade' the 6 Shooter? It's a separate analog device... Not even I would expect Theta to spiff a 6 shooter buyer if he 'upgrades' to a HDMI 1.2 card.
At $2K-$3k...an HDMI card is not a bad deal....Lexicon owners paid, on average, $5000 for that upgrade... Moreover, they'll be first with HDMI 1.3.

Geez...and I thought the Theta crowd was historically the bigger spenders:).

Bulldogger

11-30-06, 04:56 PM

Greetings once again.
I appears that Jeff -- the avowed non-Theta-owner has voted for people who ARE Theta owners to spend their money twice, but that actual Theta owners are not quite as eager.
Evelyn
He is not the only avowed non-Theta owner on this thread. http://www.smr-forums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=6

Steve Bruzonsky

11-30-06, 04:59 PM

Bulldogger

11-30-06, 05:10 PM

Lexicon owners paid, on average, $5000 for that upgrade... Moreover, they'll be first with HDMI 1.3.
.
But why would they get it if they believe HDMI 1.1 is fine?

thebland

11-30-06, 05:20 PM

What's up with that??

Usually Steve and I are at odds debunking each other..? :D

thebland

11-30-06, 05:24 PM

But why would they get it if they believe HDMI 1.1 is fine?

That is up to the individual user...but at least they always have an option to get to the higher end...

Jim HTPC

11-30-06, 08:43 PM

As a New*er Casablanca III owner with Xtreme DACS (upgraded from Nova) my vote is for HDMI 1.3 as you can buy the new 2nd Gen Toshiba HD DVD player tonight.

This was my vote to John Baloff back when HDMI 1.1 was available. Especially considering how much time it takes to develop and release a product. If there was an earlier release, I believe everyone would be complaining that a $20K device is not working like one.

I for one prefer Theta to take more time to rework the surround formats to their standards. Forget THX certification. THX was a nice concept but that's all I ever gave it credit for; a concept. Use that money instead to help develop our product. Especially the DD formats. The Theta DD sounds better than other THX DD products. It's one of the major reasons I upgraded from the Nova to my CB3 and not the MC-12 Lexicon product. I even have dealer cost on the Lexicon. *** Yeah yeah my partner gives me grief every time he see's my CB3. But he's the first to say it is a nice piece. *** Actually they both are, but this topic is not a who is better than the other.

Back on track... I don't have mega money to upgrade, but if I'm going to spend it... it better be the best it can be.

What I'd like to see as options:

1) The Six Shooter added into the CB3.
2) 6-8 HDMI 1.3 inputs, and 2 HDMI 1.3 outputs
a) Sources to consider: Sat / Cable / Game Console / HTPC / Blu Ray / HD DVD
b) Video Sources (2): Projector and HDTV for those that utilize both

2* It would be nice to have an isolated video section, but if not, then have an external box to handle the functions via the six shooter. But again, I would prefer an ALL-IN-ONE package.

3) Web based HTML setup via TCP/IP ethernet.

4) 2-way control with feedback for home automation via TCP/IP server client inside CB3 as well as RS-232 for legacy customers.

5) Lastly, Auto Multi-Point Room Correction to analyze delays, levels, phase, freq response adjustments. Yes I have a professional room calibration device, but I'd rather make minor tweaks instead of going inside the menus via the front panel. Can I get a A-MEN?!?!

I would like to say to Theta: Thank you for making a Great product and paying attention to our wants and needs.

Whoops... I lied. I have one more request. Since we seem to be going the way of MP3's.... There are companies out there that have created products to re-create aka "interpret" what is missing from the analog to digital conversion. Having this feature would make listening to mp3's tolerable instead of showing every flaw with compressed music. I have to use 320kps now or else it sounds horrible. The lossless compressions like MP4 from Apple and FLAC just don't have the widespread acceptance. I had to choose something I could transfer to a universal player and that was 320kps mp3. This is the last of my concerns though. Just thought I'd throw it out there.

Hilo Hairy

12-02-06, 02:50 PM

Evelyn- Please. Do HDMI once and do it soon but take the time to do it right. Isn't this pretty much your company's manifesto? This seems so obvious that if I go on from here it will just look like I'm venting.

"Off topic but perhaps of interest: When we designed the original Casablanca, we expected to have it THX certified. When we contacted them and told them what we were doing, they informed us that we'd have to delete many of our crossover options and most of our playback filters -- just have their crossovers!"

That is interesting since Lexicon has had multiple crossover points in their processors for basically forever ('95) and they have all been THX certified.

Shawn

Shawn- Evelyn isn't talking about multiple crossover points and slopes. Doesn't every processor have these? Its that Casablanca gives you three different types of crossovers with choices of points and slopes within each type.

You can have different crossover setups on each input and you can mix crossover types by speaker pairs. I haven't much experimented with mixing them within a setup but normally use phase perfect for acoustic jazz and classical music. It doesn't have the punch necessary for action movies but sounds very pure. I use the others depending on type of source. A moody French film gets a completely different setup then a Hong Kong martial arts flick does. I usually only input a cable/dvr and a player but between music setups and movie setups I've got 8 active input buttons. This is why I wrote you about the black box you build. I can't see spending the money for a Crestron controller but I think it would be way cool to have lighting shift from movie settings to music settings by hitting the appropriate Casa input buttons.

You don't have to approve of my equipement for me to buy your unit ;) But, you being a control kind of guy I hope you have the opportunity to play around with a Casablanca some time.

I'm wondering if anyone here has gotten a Play Station 3? As its the first HDMI 1.3 component, knowing what it actually does beats conjecture.

sfogg

12-02-06, 03:22 PM

"Evelyn isn't talking about multiple crossover points and slopes. Doesn't every processor have these?"

While numerous units have multiple crossover points very few have multiple slopes. Off the top of my head I think Lexicon and Theta are the only ones that have them. And of the two Theta offers more slopes. Lexicon basically has THX spec. second order high pass at 80hz as an option then all its other high pass crossover points being fourth order.

Most other equipment that has multiple crossover points sticks with second order high pass and fourth order low pass which causes acoustic crossover issues if they aren't high passing a sealed main speaker at its f3 point.

"Its that Casablanca gives you three different types of crossovers with choices of points and slopes within each type. "

Maybe, but she said that THX said to just have their crossover which sounded to me like they were saying only allow THX spec crossovers. Others have offered more then just THX spec. crossover and been THX certified.

"You can have different crossover setups on each input and you can mix crossover types by speaker pairs. "

When you use different crossover setups on each input does the Theta allow you to do speaker balancing for each input as well? It would sort of need to to keep levels proper with differing crossover points on different inputs. That is the reason Lexicon has said they have never done different crossover setups by input (or mode) as it makes optimizing the setup for each crossover configuration much more difficult.

If Theta does ever add room correction that is going to add a big bunch of question marks regarding how they are going to calibrate that in a system that could have different crossover points depending upon which input you select. For example a system that is targeting room resonances will need different filters when L/Rs are run say full range (for music) vs. a system that is high passed at 80hz. Some of the filters needed in the full range scenario would be unneeded when high passed for example and might be better used elsewhere.

"I can't see spending the money for a Crestron controller but I think it would be way cool to have lighting shift from movie settings to music settings by hitting the appropriate Casa input buttons."

If you get a lighting system that is RS232 capable the box should work for you. I think I'd want to change the software slightly for a Theta though. Since the Thetas RS232 protocol has no formatting at all I would not want to just rely on getting 6 bytes (with 5 wildcards in the matching) every time. 99.999% of the time that would probably be OK but if the Theta ever sent something other then 6 bytes (or a byte got missed/dropped) it might throw off the box. Putting in a timeout for received bytes would take care of that.

Shawn

audiman

12-02-06, 06:15 PM

HDMi 1.2 or 1.3, nothing will be soon. At least 9 months for 1.2 and more then a year for 1.3

At least, they have the parts for 1.2 We could have a delay for 1.3 if the chips are not available soon. i dont want to wait years before the hdmi pugrade.

stacy11

12-11-06, 10:44 PM

Sorry if this has already been posted. The link is from Theta's site, and explains the hdmi challenges. I spoke with John Baloff last week about upgrading my CBII. After speaking to him, I'm gonna wait, and upgrade it to the CDIII at the same time the hdmi 1.3 becomes avavilable. Gonna be ahwile, I know, but I want to do everything at once.

http://thetadigital.com/faqhdmi.htm

kkohr1467

12-12-06, 09:37 PM

Steve Bruzonsky

12-12-06, 09:50 PM

Casanova is old news and was well discussed in another thread or two here at this forum.
No need to rehash it.

I've had the Casablanca close to ten years now, several upgrades at very reasonable cost, great sound quality, and I'm very pleased with the product.

stacy11

12-13-06, 10:51 AM

[QUOTE=
I've had the Casablanca close to ten years now, several upgrades at very reasonable cost, great sound quality, and I'm very pleased with the product.[/QUOTE]

Likewise, 'tho I've only owned mine for 6 years. I've yet to hear (with the possible exception of Meridian) anything close in sound qualify, and have always had GREAT dealings with the company. :D

Allen Fleener

12-13-06, 12:22 PM

kkohr1467

I can't help but reply to your post. If you or anyone truly believes that all Theta gear is up-gradable for eternity, boy do I have a bridge I would like to sell you.;)

No one, including Theta, can reliably foretell the future.

If you had it to do over again what other product could you have bought at the time you bought your Casanova that, for the same price or less, would have been eternally up-gradable and sounded as good as or better than your Casanova?

Your Casanova for it's cost is still a very nice piece and is capable of giving you an very good listening experience. Enjoy it.

Does it have the latest and greatest? No but many don't need these features.

Even now there are features that are talked about but are not available. This is the nature of consumer electronics.

You have every right to never buy Theta again but I doubt you will be happy with the other brands out there either.

Hope you find what your looking for. I think it will be a long search however.

Everyone else....

As for HDMI issues just go to the HD-DVD threads and look at all the folks who can't get a picture due to HDMI incompatibilities. These interfaces are very touchy and flaky. I fear we will be debugging them for years to come. HDMI 1.2 may be all that most will need for a while, thus Theta's offer to start there, and then work on 1.3 when it is solid.

As we all chose Theta for it's awesome sound quality, we also are willing to wait for them to get it right. In the mean time the HD-DVD player with the better sounding Dolby + and Dolby HD decoded internally and connected to the Six Shooter is a solid step up in my theater. Having HD movies for $20 or rented through Net Flix is also a joy.

I am looking forward with great anticipation to the release of the HDMI 1.2 up-grade to the CBIII.

audiman

12-13-06, 05:25 PM

Allan, i think the 1.2 upgrade was for video switching only, a job that can be done with a 99$ switchbox from monoprice.

Having an 1.2 audio/video solution would work for me.

Kishore

12-13-06, 08:13 PM

v1.2 biggest benefit is SACD/DSD support...

You are free to enjoy hdmi switcher :P

Cheers,
Kishore

Allen Fleener

12-18-06, 02:40 PM

audiman

Not sure what your are trying to say. I think you are saying that the Theta HDMI 1.2 addition is for video only. If so, this is not my understanding as of now. As I see it Theta is offering to add HDMI1.2 to the CBIII and the Valis to handle both audio and video switching and audio decoding. This I doubt can be handled well for $0.99, or even $99. ;)

I would not be happy for a cheap job here. I carry Theta not because it is cheap but rather extremely well built and high quality sound too.

sfogg

12-18-06, 03:05 PM

Allen,

Did you read Theta's web page about HDMI:

As with Valis, we will first bring out an HDMI 1.2 switching card with cable extending capabilities.

Once the parts are in place to receive HDMI 1.3 signals, we will make available an HDMI audio/video card, which will internally split out the audio and video signals and allow for processing of the advanced audio from DTS and Dolby.

From that it certainly sounds like they are just doing simple switching with v1.2 and won't be accepting audio over HDMI till later on.

Shawn

Esox50

12-18-06, 04:25 PM

I've read this whole thread and I really don't understand why anyone would continue to support Theta under any circumstances. This HDMI issue is such a small piece of the equation. I am a Theta owner of a Casanova..no longer supported but purchased with the promise that all Theta products will never be obsolete. I never heard of the offer to possibly upgrade to the CBIII but realistically what kind of option is that? That offer just pushes the Nova owner to spend double to triple the cost of the Nova. Not what I would call reasonable. At this time Theta has lost all credibility with the "never be obsolete" policy of which the Nova is proof. All CBIII owners should not feel comfortable that they are not next to be obsolete. The new direction with the Valis, I believe, is further proof that this Company is heading in a total different direction..... Fixed architecture, non upgradable. Bottom line with any Company is the profit making decisions. It's cheaper to develope fixed architecture products and not worry about retrofitting components to work with technology that hasn't been fully developed yet. It's also more profitable to have your customers purchase a new evolutionary piece of equipment than go to the expense of developing and installing upgrades as resources get stretched thin between upgrades and new ideas for new equipment. So much for the rant............as I'm hosed. Will Theta earn my hard earned dollars again? I think not.
Don't let people talk down to you. You are absolutely correct that the CasaNova was handled poorly. And in fact, I too complained about the "communication" aspect of it too. It was a total joke as some people didn't know about it, but it was quite interesting that they had the time to send a hard copy of the literature for their new DreadNaught, Enterprise, etc amps via snail mail.

As I have stated many times, Theta won't be getting anymore of my business either.

For those of you who patronize him with the "I can sell you a bridge if you believe that components are 'upgradeable'." That is COMPLETE nonsense. We did not get ANY upgrades for the Nova. I could understand if they had to pull the plug at some point in the future, but they gave us NOTHING. That is a fact.

Bottom line: Theta made a business decision. No use crying over split milk. But at the same time it is rather ridiculous for CasaBlanca owners and dealers to basically ridicule someone for thier bad experience with the Theta CasaNova, and anyone considering a Theta product should know the history. Enough said.