Official Sony XBR2 (60" & 70") Owner's Thread - Page 13 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #361 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 06:24 PM
Member
 
Luvwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Please forgive me if this topic has been beaten to death, but I think I have narrowed down my decision making to a Sony XBR2 rear projection set. I went to Brandsmart today and saw them both on display. Still, in a store, watchin Blue Ray 5th Element, I am having trouble deciding which size would be better in my space. We will be sitting around 15 feet from the wall which, I suppose, means about 13 feet from the TV's screen. I guess I could move the chairs a smidgen closer, but then we block the fireplace and the SAF goes down considerably. Most of our viewing will be of HD broadcasts and DVD's (not Blue Ray/HD DVD yet, but will sometime). Any thoughts as to which size would be preferable? Room is about 16.5' X 22.5' and I need to have enough room to set up front speakers to either side of the TV (TV on center of smaller wall). Price wise, I obviously prefer the 60" but don't want to buy it and regret it. Neither do I want to spend the extra dough and wish I had bought smaller.....

Thanks for any help!

Best,

-Luvwine
Luvwine is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #362 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 06:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pbmpharmacist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luvwine View Post

Please forgive me if this topic has been beaten to death, but I think I have narrowed down my decision making to a Sony XBR2 rear projection set. I went to Brandsmart today and saw them both on display. Still, in a store, watchin Blue Ray 5th Element, I am having trouble deciding which size would be better in my space. We will be sitting around 15 feet from the wall which, I suppose, means about 13 feet from the TV's screen. I guess I could move the chairs a smidgen closer, but then we block the fireplace and the SAF goes down considerably. Most of our viewing will be of HD broadcasts and DVD's (not Blue Ray/HD DVD yet, but will sometime). Any thoughts as to which size would be preferable? Room is about 16.5' X 22.5' and I need to have enough room to set up front speakers to either side of the TV (TV on center of smaller wall). Price wise, I obviously prefer the 60" but don't want to buy it and regret it. Neither do I want to spend the extra dough and wish I had bought smaller.....

Thanks for any help!

Best,

-Luvwine

NO question, buy the 70. You'll regret a buying 60 later. I've never read a single poster say they wished they had gone smaller. Not once.
pbmpharmacist is offline  
post #363 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 06:35 PM
Member
 
rhlitt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Hartford, CT USA
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Has anyone ordered a large TV from an ebay store or online store and been satisfied ? If so, can you PM me the name of the store. Thnx!
rhlitt is offline  
post #364 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 07:08 PM
Member
 
Dresden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC CANADA
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhlitt View Post

Has anyone ordered a large TV from an ebay store or online store and been satisfied ? If so, can you PM me the name of the store. Thnx!

Personaly I would only buy from a B&M or a Costco/Sam's Club etc. I hear Crutchfield has a good reputation. However I would still read all the fine print...

As for Ebay, here is a good Thread for you to read. Then go get a beer (or glass of Shiraz) and read again. Then ask yourself: "Is the stress really worth it.?"


Dresden

Dresden
Dresden is offline  
post #365 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 08:18 PM
Member
 
BJBBJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 162
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Was wondering if anyone else saw this when setting up their HDMI...
I am trying to stop the 70 from displaying an audio warning message about HDMI audio from my Hi-def sat/OTA receiver.

I have the sat going to the Sony via HDMI and audio going direct to the receiver via optical. OTA local channels send the DD audio to the receiver via optical and it works fine, so I can only assume it is sending nothing over HDMI for those channels (or DD it does not like) as I am getting a warning in a box stating "unsupported audio signal. Check your device output." It eventually goes away but does anyone have an idea on how to just tell the set to ignore HDMI audio? Or maybe an adapter that would just strip it out.

I tested regular sat signals and I am getting analog out of the Sony into the reciever so I know the HDMI audio is working and no error message for non-OTA channels. Of course I will usually just use the optical audio out of the sat.

Any ideas appreciated.

BJBBJB
BJBBJB is offline  
post #366 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 09:17 PM
Member
 
pagentry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I just purchased a belkin pureAV PF60 power console (power filter, conditioner, surge protector, etc.) for all of my components (SA 8300HD cable box, Sony KDS-R70XBR2 TV, Pioneer VSX-84TXSi AV receiver, Sony DVP-CX875P CD/DVD jukebox, Definitive procinema 1000 home theater speaker system including a powered subwoofer, etc.) The PF60 supports a remote AC power operation where I can turn switched outlets on the PF60 on and off via my pioneer AV receiver. The PF60 allows you to individually configure 6 outlet banks (2 outlets per bank) as either unswitched or switched and if switched, with no delay or a 5, 10 or 15 second delay. Does anyone have a preferrred and/or recommended sequence for powering up switched components that would be controlled by the Pioneer AV receiver? All sound (no pun intended) advice is greatly appreciated!
pagentry is offline  
post #367 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 09:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Mr. Foo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Folks,

I ended up totally revising my prior post here regarding some deinterlace tests I had available to me to run on the 70" XBR2. I spent a lot more time this evening playing around with them and the TV's various DRC mode settings and have what I think are pretty positive objective results that we can reference and perhaps also a clue as to what might be optimal DRC palette settings.

Please review the information and pose any comments and/or questions that you might have.

Thanks.
Mr. Foo is offline  
post #368 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 10:20 PM
Member
 
russdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Gulf Shores/Fort Morgan, AL
Posts: 195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by BJBBJB View Post

Was wondering if anyone else saw this when setting up their HDMI...
I am trying to stop the 70 from displaying an audio warning message about HDMI audio from my Hi-def sat/OTA receiver.

I have the sat going to the Sony via HDMI and audio going direct to the receiver via optical. OTA local channels send the DD audio to the receiver via optical and it works fine, so I can only assume it is sending nothing over HDMI for those channels (or DD it does not like) as I am getting a warning in a box stating "unsupported audio signal. Check your device output." It eventually goes away but does anyone have an idea on how to just tell the set to ignore HDMI audio? Or maybe an adapter that would just strip it out.

I tested regular sat signals and I am getting analog out of the Sony into the reciever so I know the HDMI audio is working and no error message for non-OTA channels. Of course I will usually just use the optical audio out of the sat.

Any ideas appreciated.BJBBJB

This is just a guess, I don't really know, but here's what I'm wondering... You're sending DD audio and, while you are using an optical cable to send it to the receiver, it's still part of what HDMI is sending to the SXRD. If the Sony doesn't know what to do with DD (Does it? Not sure) then it makes sense that the Sony would tell you that. So, I'd look to see if there is some way to tell the receiver to *not* send audio to the TV, e.g., something like "disable HDMI audio" or something like that. That would permit you to ship DD to the receiver without confusing the TV by sending it there too. That's the only thing that comes to mind, anyway.
russdog is offline  
post #369 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 10:51 PM
Member
 
Johnny Dunn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: DC Metro
Posts: 64
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luvwine View Post

...I am having trouble deciding which size would be better in my space...I obviously prefer the 60" but don't want to buy it and regret it. Neither do I want to spend the extra dough and wish I had bought smaller.....

You may be in the same boat I was in 1 month ago - here (see heading for website) is the science behind viewing distances: See "How is viewing HDTV different?" and esp. "What types of sets are available?" The recommended distance is 3.5x the screen height to "immerse" youself and avoid seeing top and bottom of screen at less-than-full brightness.

As for me, I wouldn't go 70" since I need to plan on a little room for back surround speakers.

John
Johnny Dunn is offline  
post #370 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 11:20 PM
Advanced Member
 
KTTV Images's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 601
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Foo View Post

I took a longer look tonight at the 1080i deinterlace tests that I had at my disposal, specifically the Vertrez and the Vertrez motion tests. These tests can be found here, including a master file with all the tests that can be used to burn your own HD-DVD test disc.

I also went back and looked at an old post discussing these tests to ascertain what exactly to look for in these two tests and have the following results:

Vertrez (static pattern) deinterlace test:
-------------------------------------------------

What does the test look like?: Test video (static) contains blocks of alternating black and white lines of various thickness (e.g. each block has a set of lines of a given thickness). The area of interest is the topmost block of lines (1 pixel in height). HERE, you can reference a picture of the test screen that I took when I ran it on an A2000 set.

Want: alternating black and white lines in topmost block to be visibly distinct, which indicates that the TV is doing a proper weave deinterlace and preserving the full 1080 lines of resolution.

Results:

Mode 0: All lines visibly distinct.
Mode 1: Block will flicker fast or slow depending on pallette settings. Setting Reality to 25 and Clarity to 100, completely removes the flicker and all lines appear distinct.
Mode 2: Block will flicker fast or slow depending on pallette settings (though not as severe as with mode 1). Setting Reality to 1 and Clarity to 1, completely removes the flicker and all lines appear distinct.

So, in summary it appears that proper weave deinterlace is possible in all modes, depending on how you set the DRC palette. I would assume that the above results can be assumed to be the desired settings (this is where I think I will be leaving them). Another thing to note here that is nice is that it seems that the TV remembers your palette settings for the given mode. Like, if you have different palette settings for mode 1 and 2 (which appears to be very significant) and you switch from 1 to 2 and back to 1, it will remember what you had mode 1 set at. I'll assume that the TV saves settings per mode for each input, though I haven't tested this out yet.

Vertrez Motion test:
-------------------------------------------------

What does the test look like?: Same as the static Vertrez test, but also containing a rotating line/blade that rotates clockwise through the image (think airplane propeller)

Want: alternating black and white lines in topmost block to be remain distinct at all times and the line to be a single, solid image as it sweeps through the block. This would indicate a per pixel motion adaptive deinterlace

Results: Block of horizontal lines remain distinct if the aforementioned mode-specific palette setting are used. The picture shows a double image of the blade that are both solid in color, which, from what I read may indicate motion adaptive blending. Note the following regarding the color of the lines and the coloring around the lines, as noted per mode (keep in mind clockwise direction when reading terms such as preceding and trailing to help get a mental picture of what is going on):

Mode 0: Trailing line of the pair changes from white to black over the region sweeping through the topmost group of lines. The leading line remains white. There also appears to be a region of white in between the two lines and preceding the leading line when it sweeps through the topmost block.

Mode 1 and Mode 2: Trailing line of the pair also changes from white to black over the region sweeping through the topmost group of lines. The leading line also remains white. There again appears to be white in between the two lines, BUT there is a black region preceding the leading line when it sweeps through the topmost block.

My use of the term region above really almost appears as a shadow that traces the rotating lines and that which is only significantly present in the topmost 1-pixel width set of lines.

Jay Leno Test:
-------------------------------------------------

I also viewed the Tonight Show monologue in HD, per your suggestion earlier as another quick way to try and assess video deinterlacing capability. I didn't notice any changes at all in sharpness or resolution in any of the buildings or set background set as he was moving around on stage. Clear as a bell really.



So, to sum up - this all seems like good news to me, though I can't quite fully interpret what is going on exactly with the motion tests. Perhaps, its some kind of region adaptive blending going on that, after performing the Leno, may work out just fine.

Mr. Foo

You have run an outsanding series of tests and written a masterful test report. The best of any thing I have seen on the forums.
Clear, terms properly defined and results organised. Well worth waiting for.

Many thanks

One key finding is that there is a specific DRC pallette setting that achieves a good deinterlacing result. I would like to think a bit about why this might come about. A very unexpected result: So ,if you run the tests you describe and - "misset' the DRC pallette -you might come up with test results that show Bob deinterlacing, even with a still image (no bar sweeping through the image) and incorrectly conclude the XBR2 fails this test. Again, fascinating.

Here ia guess-hypothesis of what might be 'going on". It may be that the 1080i DRC has a vertical component of enhancement which also then means it uses information on the state of the pixel above and below the one being enhanced to develop a new enhanced set of pixels in a vertical array. Because of the involvement of pixels in one field preceding and one field after the field containing the enhanced pixel - it is possible the deinterlacing test might sometimes give us flashing -apparently bad behavior. But by changing the parameters of the DRC enhancement algorithm with the Pallette controls the bad behavior may be modified..and there may be one specific setting that looks like there is little modification..and the test appears to pass. Just a -kind of -educated attempt to explain your findings.

Possible 1080p24 Frame input capability?

---------------Inserted edit . I just found a thread where the originator of the test files found in checking the authoring behavior that his file ended up on the disk not as 24p but 29.75p. So the XBR2 test I report below is invalid. Ref this thread : post #36 here http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...=1#post8597958


I have tried to make myself a copy of the files you are referring to and used. and have only been able to play (Toshoba HD DVD player) a portion of them on my XBR1. One of these files comes up on the screen as 1920x1080 24P. I am not certain of this but it looks like this must be a 1080p signal at 24 frames per second rather than 30 or 60 frames per second. If this really is 1080 at 24p then it would possibly be really big deal if it plays on the XBR2. Could you look for this file--it is at about 5 or 6 minutes. into the disk . On my XBR2 the fine H lines in the upper block are present , but the image does not lock well and is somewhat unstable, so I do not think the XBR1 will play this track in an acceptable way.

But, If this is a legitimate test of 1080p at 24 frames per second and it plays in a stable way on the XBR2 it may mean the Sony XBR2 is way ahead of most other RP because it will properly display HD movies at 24 (or 48 or 72) frames per second (when future HD players have 1080 24p output capability).

Translated -- that mean movies without Judder.

Could you look for this file -play it, and see if it 1. locks up and plays well, and 2. let also know if you see the top block of horizontal lines properly displayed without flashing, and if the moving Bar behavior is similar to that for 1080i you have described .....(in other words it appears to pass the test)?

Thanks
KT
KTTV Images is offline  
post #371 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 11:30 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bfdtv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 13,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


The picture shows a double image of the blade that are both solid in color, which, from what I read may indicate motion adaptive blending. Note the following regarding the color of the lines and the coloring around the lines, as noted per mode (keep in mind clockwise direction when reading terms such as preceding and trailing to help get a mental picture of what is going on):

Mode 0: Trailing line of the pair changes from white to black over the region sweeping through the topmost group of lines. The leading line remains white. There also appears to be a region of white in between the two lines and preceding the leading line when it sweeps through the topmost block.

Mode 1 and Mode 2: Trailing line of the pair also changes from white to black over the region sweeping through the topmost group of lines. The leading line also remains white. There again appears to be white in between the two lines, BUT there is a black region preceding the leading line when it sweeps through the topmost block.

These results suggest motion-adaptive, region-based deinterlace. You would not see this blending with per-pixel based deinterlace.

I wonder why Sony didn't elect to use the same Genesis (Faroudja) FLI8668 per-pixel deinterlacer in the XBR2 that they put in the upcoming STR-DA5200ES home theater receiver. Perhaps the logic board design was finalized early this year?

I guess now the question is...how does the motion-adaptive, region-based deinterlace on the XBR2 compare to the region-based deinterlace on the A2000 and XBR1?
bfdtv is offline  
post #372 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 11:42 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bfdtv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 13,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
A question...

Does the XBR2 save settings by input, by resolution, or both?

For example...suppose you want 720p and 1080i signals displayed using mode1, but 480i and 480p signals displayed using mode2 (using native passthrough on your cable box). Is the XBR2 able to do that without reconfiguration? Can it be set to use mode2 upon detection of a SD signal, and mode1 upon detection of a HD signal through the same input?
bfdtv is offline  
post #373 of 12055 Old 10-05-2006, 11:54 PM
Member
 
russdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Gulf Shores/Fort Morgan, AL
Posts: 195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Dunn View Post

The recommended distance is 3.5x the screen height to "immerse" youself and avoid seeing top and bottom of screen at less-than-full brightness.

When I go to that site, it tells me:
Quote:


For a HDTV set displaying 1920x1080 pixels, the optimum viewing is 3 times the screen height.

If we use that rule of thumb, then for a 16:9 screen, we get more-or-less the following:
50" = ~24.5" ht * 3 = 73.5" = ~6'
55" = ~27.0" ht * 3 = 81.0" = ~7'
60" = ~29.5" ht * 3 = 88.5' = ~7.5'
70" = ~34.5" ht * 3 = 103.5" = ~9'

I've also heard that a rule of thumb is "twice the diagonal", which gives:
50" --> 100" = ~8'
55" --> 110' = ~9'
60" --> 120" = ~10'
70" --> 140" = ~12'

My 55" is almost exactly 9' from my eyeballs, and it seems right. When I move up to 7' to try out the 3*height rule, I think that would be great if you were just watching movies and wanting to be absorbed all the time. I don't think I'd like that all the time for general purpose use. It sure makes the SD look crappy. So, just judging for myself, the "2 times diagonal" rule seems more right (for me) than the "3 times screen height" rule.

If I was another 4 feet away from it, I'd sure want more than a 60" set. At the 13' distance being discussed here, I'd definetly vote for the 70", no doubt about it.

The 70" is not big enough for even the "2 times diagonal" rule, which at the 13' distance would call for a 78" screen. Using the 70" at 13' would be just like me using a 48" at 9'. There's no way I want my SXRD to shrink by 7" diagonal.

(Using the "3 times screen height rule", a 13' viewing distance would call for a 108" screen. Yikes!)

ps: Here's what it says about viewing distance for 16:9 widesreen TV's on the Sony website :
7' = 42" diagonal
8.5' = 51" diagonal
9.5' = 57" diagonal
11' = 65" diagonal
That looks exactly like the "2 times diagonal" rule to me. I'd say go ahead and get the 70" and don't look back. If you don't, I bet you'll end up wishing you had.
russdog is offline  
post #374 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 01:38 AM
Advanced Member
 
DVD Freaky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
If anyone has played XBOX 360 on any of their brand new XBR2's...please post back your experiences and some results. Game lag present? How does the picture look?
DVD Freaky is offline  
post #375 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 02:05 AM
Member
 
JerseyCardWorld's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hey guys
Iam on the Fence right now whether to keep my 60 a2000 of buy the 60xbr2 the difference in price is like 1300-1500 more but my question is really a great diffence in the TVs itself now that a few have the TVs what are your overall impressions and is it really exchanging the TV I have now for this one thanks.
JerseyCardWorld is offline  
post #376 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 04:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
scsiraid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Vero Beach, FL
Posts: 1,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luvwine View Post

Please forgive me if this topic has been beaten to death, but I think I have narrowed down my decision making to a Sony XBR2 rear projection set. I went to Brandsmart today and saw them both on display. Still, in a store, watchin Blue Ray 5th Element, I am having trouble deciding which size would be better in my space. We will be sitting around 15 feet from the wall which, I suppose, means about 13 feet from the TV's screen. I guess I could move the chairs a smidgen closer, but then we block the fireplace and the SAF goes down considerably. Most of our viewing will be of HD broadcasts and DVD's (not Blue Ray/HD DVD yet, but will sometime). Any thoughts as to which size would be preferable? Room is about 16.5' X 22.5' and I need to have enough room to set up front speakers to either side of the TV (TV on center of smaller wall). Price wise, I obviously prefer the 60" but don't want to buy it and regret it. Neither do I want to spend the extra dough and wish I had bought smaller.....

Thanks for any help!

Best,

-Luvwine

I would go with the 70 at a 13 foot viewing distance. I currently have a 61 at 8 feet and its great. At 13 feet... I would definitely want bigger.
scsiraid is offline  
post #377 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 05:52 AM
Member
 
Luvwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks very much for the responses to my viewing distance query. I was sort of afraid of the answer (70" by a large majority) for obvious financial reasons. Now, a second issue that I don't quite know how to handle is that of a stand. In my A/V setup I currently have a power conditioner, DVD player, HDDVR, stereo amp (mains), surround amp, and preamp processor. I guess I could get rid of the power conditioner and go to something that sits behind the TV in some fashion, but I am trying to problem solve the notion of a bigger (taller) TV and where does one put a center channel? I had considered using a Salamander Design "Triple" for the 60" and adding a shelf under the TV for a center channel. If I did that for a 70", I fear the TV would be too high and it would overhang a triple quite a bit. If I went for a quad, it is too wide (84" or so) and so I am a bit puzzled as to how to handle the components and center channel without building a shelf over the TV (which I would prefer not to do from an asthetic point of view). Any thoughts as to how to deal with this issue? I have read the stand topic and not found any clear solution there either.

Thanks very much for the replies and help for this noobie to the forum!

Best,

-Luvwine
Luvwine is offline  
post #378 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 06:00 AM
Advanced Member
 
RobbinMerritt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 599
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by BJBBJB View Post

Was wondering if anyone else saw this when setting up their HDMI...
I am trying to stop the 70 from displaying an audio warning message about HDMI audio from my Hi-def sat/OTA receiver.

I have the sat going to the Sony via HDMI and audio going direct to the receiver via optical. OTA local channels send the DD audio to the receiver via optical and it works fine, so I can only assume it is sending nothing over HDMI for those channels (or DD it does not like) as I am getting a warning in a box stating "unsupported audio signal. Check your device output." It eventually goes away but does anyone have an idea on how to just tell the set to ignore HDMI audio? Or maybe an adapter that would just strip it out.

I tested regular sat signals and I am getting analog out of the Sony into the reciever so I know the HDMI audio is working and no error message for non-OTA channels. Of course I will usually just use the optical audio out of the sat.

Any ideas appreciated.

BJBBJB

My HD-DVD player has separate options for sound output for optical and HDMI. I set HDMI to downmix to PCM. My Dishnetwork HD-DVR doesn't send sound of any kind over HDMI, so that hasn't been a problem for me. If your device doesn't have a setting for this, you could always use a DVI cable with two HDMI adapters -- that would remove the sound from the input.

Robbin
RobbinMerritt is offline  
post #379 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 06:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dsinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,690
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Luvwine:

You may want to consider the Salamander Quad 245 design. The top 2 center sections are used for a large center channel speaker. 84" is wide but I bought one in part for that reason. Tired of having to buy a new stand ever time I change TVs. At 84" I am hoping to keep it through several TV purchases.
dsinger is offline  
post #380 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 06:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nethomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Mexico, Missouri
Posts: 1,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I also am in need of a stand. My XBR2 will be here tomorrow and I will have to set it on two chairs for awhile. I think Sony would be smart enough to figure that most people with a TV this size would also have a center channel. However, the stand that is custom for this TV, has one shelf under it that is 9.75in tall. My center channel is 10in.!! Also, if you put the speaker under the TV, you will have to angle it up some toward the sitting area. Several of the stands I have looked at on line don't have adjustable shelves, and again the distance between shelves is less that 10in. I'll keep looking

gthomas
nethomas is offline  
post #381 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 06:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
strutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Statesville,NC
Posts: 1,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:


where does one put a center channel?

see 3GUN's post on page 11 (i think).
center channel speakers are definately a challenge with todays TV's and stands. stands that are the correct hight for viewing seem to be designed for only the smallest components. i like the idea of a shelf above the set for the center channel. or you could always build your own stand.

Let the awe and mystery of a journey unlike any other begin
SharpLC70LE735U,SonyKDSR60XBR2,KlipschSynergyIII,PanasonicDMPDT210,Oppo981,DenonAVR683,Harmony880,MDN v3.2.0-5

strutter is offline  
post #382 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 07:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pbmpharmacist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I bought the Wood-tech MGV63 stand for my 60" XBR2 specfically because it has two 8 1/4 inch shelves below the TV. I put my 8 inch high center speaker on the highest shelf UNDER the TV and I think it's great that way.

I didn't get the Salamander b/c it would still have a bar hanging in the middle of the center speaker, messing up the sound. The wood-tech stand is completely open.
pbmpharmacist is offline  
post #383 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 07:22 AM
Member
 
Suddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Keller...on the other side of the tracks
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by finetunes View Post

Yes, based on my experience. My Yamaha RX-V1600 is showing 5.1 from the XBR2.


But that is via a cable card, right? It may not pass 5.1 from a STB when connected via hdmi.
Suddy is offline  
post #384 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 07:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pbmpharmacist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddy View Post

But that is via a cable card, right? It may not pass 5.1 from a STB when connected via hdmi.

I don't think any TVs typically do this.
pbmpharmacist is offline  
post #385 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 07:32 AM
Newbie
 
jweyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Miamisburg, OH
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrg33 View Post

I just got back from Wilshire Home Theater (a high end Home Theater store in Thousand Oaks, California) and they had the 70" XBR2 right next to the Mits. There was no comparrison. They both had the same ESPN HD feed but there was a lot of distortion on the scrolling news on the bottom of the screen of the Mits and the facial features of the players were not as clear. It really did not look good next to the Sony and everyone in the store was commenting on it. The 70" XBR2 was right out of the box with no adjustments and looked incredible. I can't imagine how much better it would be with calibration.

I will be ordering mine for when my new multimedia addition is completed in four weeks!

I agree. I saw the samething you did. There is a local B&M store near me that had both the 70 XBR2 and the 73 Mits 831 right next to each other. Both were running ESPN HD. When text would scroll across the bottom of the screen, the XBR2 looked great and the 831 had distortion in most of the letters. They also had the Mits 57831 out (not next to the other two) and it had the same problem as as the 73. I was extremely disappointed given all the high praise the 831's were getting. I even tried to adjust some of the settings on the Mits but nothing worked. The only thing I liked about the Mits more was that I thought the picture was just a small bit brighter (I had both set to the brightest picture possible). But were talking a very small amount. Not enough of a difference to me.
jweyer is offline  
post #386 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 07:37 AM
Senior Member
 
phlydude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Newark/Glasgow, DE
Posts: 494
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BJBBJB View Post

Was wondering if anyone else saw this when setting up their HDMI...
I am trying to stop the 70 from displaying an audio warning message about HDMI audio from my Hi-def sat/OTA receiver.

I have the sat going to the Sony via HDMI and audio going direct to the receiver via optical. OTA local channels send the DD audio to the receiver via optical and it works fine, so I can only assume it is sending nothing over HDMI for those channels (or DD it does not like) as I am getting a warning in a box stating "unsupported audio signal. Check your device output." It eventually goes away but does anyone have an idea on how to just tell the set to ignore HDMI audio? Or maybe an adapter that would just strip it out.

I tested regular sat signals and I am getting analog out of the Sony into the reciever so I know the HDMI audio is working and no error message for non-OTA channels. Of course I will usually just use the optical audio out of the sat.

Any ideas appreciated.

BJBBJB

Don't know how this will affect the picture quality but could you take the HDMI into DVI and then back to HDMI? The DVI should strip the sound out but I'm not sure how much the picture quality could/would degrade as a result...

~Dennis
PS3 ID: phlydude
My 60GB PS3 died from over heating - I have a strong feeling Folding didn't help
phlydude is offline  
post #387 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 07:45 AM
Senior Member
 
phlydude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Newark/Glasgow, DE
Posts: 494
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
For those looking for a tv stand, I found this at a local furniture store.
Not sure if it would serve the purpose or not, espcially since the center channel would have to be slightly off-center but I thought I would share nonetheless...

Bassett

~Dennis
PS3 ID: phlydude
My 60GB PS3 died from over heating - I have a strong feeling Folding didn't help
phlydude is offline  
post #388 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 07:56 AM
Advanced Member
 
RobbinMerritt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 599
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by phlydude View Post

Don't know how this will affect the picture quality but could you take the HDMI into DVI and then back to HDMI? The DVI should strip the sound out but I'm not sure how much the picture quality could/would degrade as a result...

With good cables this kind of connection would be pass-through -- no conversion or loss. It will make for a bit of a clunkly looking connection.

Robbin
RobbinMerritt is offline  
post #389 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 07:58 AM
Senior Member
 
phlydude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Newark/Glasgow, DE
Posts: 494
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
clunky as it may be, it will still solve the "unsupported audio" message pop, correct?

~Dennis
PS3 ID: phlydude
My 60GB PS3 died from over heating - I have a strong feeling Folding didn't help
phlydude is offline  
post #390 of 12055 Old 10-06-2006, 08:47 AM
Member
 
russdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Gulf Shores/Fort Morgan, AL
Posts: 195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luvwine View Post

In my A/V setup I currently have a power conditioner, DVD player, HDDVR, stereo amp (mains), surround amp, and preamp processor. I guess I could get rid of the power conditioner and go to something that sits behind the TV in some fashion, but I am trying to problem solve the notion of a bigger (taller) TV and where does one put a center channel? I had considered using a Salamander Design "Triple" for the 60" and adding a shelf under the TV for a center channel. If I did that for a 70", I fear the TV would be too high...

For my 55A2000, I wanted a higher-than-standard TV platform to work. I spent part of a day at a BB, crawling around on the floor with a tape measure, noticing where my eyes were when the picture got dim, using the tape measure to see how high my eyes were vs. the TV, etc. The end result is that I decided that I could not put it more than 22" of the floor, even though that's not the answer I wanted. I could've put it higher *if* I was sure that viewers would always be on the couch and it would never be the case that somebody would sit on the floor (using the couch-front as a backrest) but I don't want that restriction. So, I tore up parts of some cabinetry and made a new TV-hole lower. Even with the 22" I used, I knew that it would still be dimmer for somebody sitting on the floor (and it is), the dimness is a matter of degree, so it comes down to "how dim is too dim?" I don't think you want it dim where you usually sit.

I'm not saying that a higher shelf won't work for you, but I think you need to do some Actual Homework and see if it will work for you. I think means going someplace that has one where you can see it from 13' away, and taking a tape measure with you.
russdog is offline  
Reply Rear Projection Units

Tags
Sony , Sony Bravia Xbr Series Kdl V32xbr2 32 Inch Lcd Hdtv , Lcd Hdtv , Displays
Gear in this thread - V32xbr2 by PriceGrabber.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off