Does Theta Digital's Failure to Have HDMI Impact Whether You Want to Buy??? - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 620 Old 11-19-2006, 11:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Michael Grant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 10,239
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
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...

Michael
Michael Grant is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 620 Old 11-19-2006, 05:08 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Steve Bruzonsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 17,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfogg View Post

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.

"Doug Winsor" used to troll at some AV Forums as "Steve Bruzonsky"! My home theater at:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1158431
Steve Bruzonsky is offline  
post #183 of 620 Old 11-19-2006, 07:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sfogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ma, USA
Posts: 5,614
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
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 is offline  
post #184 of 620 Old 11-19-2006, 07:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sfogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ma, USA
Posts: 5,614
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
"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
sfogg is offline  
post #185 of 620 Old 11-19-2006, 11:47 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Rene-L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 234
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
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...
Rene-L is offline  
post #186 of 620 Old 11-20-2006, 04:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Bulldogger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Clinton,MS
Posts: 6,647
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 20
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.

Never become so involved with something that it blinds you.
Bulldogger is offline  
post #187 of 620 Old 11-20-2006, 05:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Bulldogger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Clinton,MS
Posts: 6,647
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Read this, first televisions with Deep Color support expected in first half of 2007. http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/st...4460007&EDATE=

Never become so involved with something that it blinds you.
Bulldogger is offline  
post #188 of 620 Old 11-20-2006, 07:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Bulldogger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Clinton,MS
Posts: 6,647
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfogg View Post


"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

Never become so involved with something that it blinds you.
Bulldogger is offline  
post #189 of 620 Old 11-20-2006, 08:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sfogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ma, USA
Posts: 5,614
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
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
sfogg is offline  
post #190 of 620 Old 11-23-2006, 06:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audiman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Montreal region, Canada
Posts: 1,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Interesting ...



Seems like DTS-MA requires hdmi 1.3
audiman is offline  
post #191 of 620 Old 11-24-2006, 09:25 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,785
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 518 Post(s)
Liked: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiman View Post

Seems like DTS-MA requires hdmi 1.3

Only 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

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #192 of 620 Old 11-24-2006, 01:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audiman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Montreal region, Canada
Posts: 1,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
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 ?
audiman is offline  
post #193 of 620 Old 11-24-2006, 01:28 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,785
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 518 Post(s)
Liked: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiman View Post

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

Nope.

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

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #194 of 620 Old 11-24-2006, 02:08 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
thebland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Detroit, Michigan USA
Posts: 23,624
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 89
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.

There are more than a handful of [op amps] that sound so good that most designers want to be using them as opposed to discreet transistors. Dave Reich, Theta 2009
thebland is online now  
post #195 of 620 Old 11-24-2006, 02:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audiman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Montreal region, Canada
Posts: 1,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
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.
audiman is offline  
post #196 of 620 Old 11-24-2006, 02:26 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Steve Bruzonsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 17,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiman View Post

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.

"Doug Winsor" used to troll at some AV Forums as "Steve Bruzonsky"! My home theater at:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1158431
Steve Bruzonsky is offline  
post #197 of 620 Old 11-24-2006, 03:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audiman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Montreal region, Canada
Posts: 1,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
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.
audiman is offline  
post #198 of 620 Old 11-24-2006, 03:20 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,785
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 518 Post(s)
Liked: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiman View Post

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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiman View Post

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

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #199 of 620 Old 11-24-2006, 03:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audiman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Montreal region, Canada
Posts: 1,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
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.
audiman is offline  
post #200 of 620 Old 11-24-2006, 06:21 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
thebland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Detroit, Michigan USA
Posts: 23,624
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 89
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...

There are more than a handful of [op amps] that sound so good that most designers want to be using them as opposed to discreet transistors. Dave Reich, Theta 2009
thebland is online now  
post #201 of 620 Old 11-29-2006, 03:36 PM
Member
 
Evelyn Sinclair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 70
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
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
Evelyn Sinclair is offline  
post #202 of 620 Old 11-30-2006, 09:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
thebland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Detroit, Michigan USA
Posts: 23,624
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 89
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.

There are more than a handful of [op amps] that sound so good that most designers want to be using them as opposed to discreet transistors. Dave Reich, Theta 2009
thebland is online now  
post #203 of 620 Old 11-30-2006, 10:22 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Steve Bruzonsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 17,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 20
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.

"Doug Winsor" used to troll at some AV Forums as "Steve Bruzonsky"! My home theater at:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1158431
Steve Bruzonsky is offline  
post #204 of 620 Old 11-30-2006, 10:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PeterS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 2,332
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 25
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.

"Read Less, More TV." - Dr. Gregory House

"That which can not be questioned, can not be trusted." - Me

The Metropolis Home Theater

Blue Smoke Entertainment Systems - Affiliated
PeterS is offline  
post #205 of 620 Old 11-30-2006, 10:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sfogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ma, USA
Posts: 5,614
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
"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
sfogg is offline  
post #206 of 620 Old 11-30-2006, 10:48 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Steve Bruzonsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 17,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterS View Post

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.

"Doug Winsor" used to troll at some AV Forums as "Steve Bruzonsky"! My home theater at:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1158431
Steve Bruzonsky is offline  
post #207 of 620 Old 11-30-2006, 12:26 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
thebland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Detroit, Michigan USA
Posts: 23,624
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 89
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.

There are more than a handful of [op amps] that sound so good that most designers want to be using them as opposed to discreet transistors. Dave Reich, Theta 2009
thebland is online now  
post #208 of 620 Old 11-30-2006, 01:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PeterS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 2,332
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 25
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?

"Read Less, More TV." - Dr. Gregory House

"That which can not be questioned, can not be trusted." - Me

The Metropolis Home Theater

Blue Smoke Entertainment Systems - Affiliated
PeterS is offline  
post #209 of 620 Old 11-30-2006, 01:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Bulldogger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Clinton,MS
Posts: 6,647
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterS View Post

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?

Never become so involved with something that it blinds you.
Bulldogger is offline  
post #210 of 620 Old 11-30-2006, 01:56 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
thebland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Detroit, Michigan USA
Posts: 23,624
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 89
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.

There are more than a handful of [op amps] that sound so good that most designers want to be using them as opposed to discreet transistors. Dave Reich, Theta 2009
thebland is online now  
Closed Thread Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

User Tag List

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