or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Industry Area › HDMI Q&A - The One Connector World › Just Add Power introduces HDMI over IP using standard Ethernet LAN
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Just Add Power introduces HDMI over IP using standard Ethernet LAN - Page 2

post #31 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by nded View Post

Hi Josh,

We've tried to make the HDMI over IP solution as simple as possible to manage, and as low cost as possible. Therefore, we have not put any "smarts" into the transmitters or receivers. Instead, we are relying upon the capabilites of the switch. All of the transmitters are on the same IP address, and all of the receivers only have one function - listen to that IP address.

The channel changing function is realized by switching the port that is attached to the receiver to the desired VLAN. Every source is put on a different VLAN. Because it is a multi-cast, we are able to deliver seamless instant switching between sources.

I know you said that you wanted to make the receivers as simple as possible but it would be awesome to have a groups of multicast addresses that were able to be configured as "channels" and then with a remote at the receiver or even front panel buttons have the ability to change channels, multicast addresses, on the fly. This would eliminate the need for changing vlans on the switch!
post #32 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightowl2k2 View Post

I know you said that you wanted to make the receivers as simple as possible but it would be awesome to have a groups of multicast addresses that were able to be configured as "channels" and then with a remote at the receiver or even front panel buttons have the ability to change channels, multicast addresses, on the fly. This would eliminate the need for changing vlans on the switch!

But you can already do this for less with consumer level componentry.

I don't see how adding extra complexity is a benefit. It just blurs the distinction between this product and products that offer even more features for less money. Keep it single purpose, and sell it based on rock solid pro-level robustness. Otherwise it would just get drowned out by all the other network based media options.

-Suntan
post #33 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suntan View Post

But you can already do this for less with consumer level componentry.

I don't see how adding extra complexity is a benefit. It just blurs the distinction between this product and products that offer even more features for less money. Keep it single purpose, and sell it based on rock solid pro-level robustness. Otherwise it would just get drowned out by all the other network based media options.

-Suntan

All this would be a configuration change to the software on the device. The addition of a controller to change the configuration on a switch is much more complex Some simple logic to change a value, a few buttons, and maybe an IR receiver should not cost much. That is all that would be needed to add this functionality. Oh, and if there are products that offer more functionality for less money please share!


This would make the product much more user friendly and IMO more appealing. I was ready to jump all over this if it was not for the necessity to make configurations to a switch. That IMO is a deal killer. I do not want to have to connect into a switch and make a change if I want to change a source. For me to create an automation system, while possible, is also more cost and work. Also, a Crestron is out of the question as well.

Edit: When I said having multicast addresses available, I envisioned the addresses preconfigured and not able to be changed. This requires all of the transmitters and receivers on a single VLAN and would not require any configuration from the user other than selecting the channel. It could be something as simple as:

Channel 1 = 239.0.0.1
Channel 2 = 239.0.0.2
...
Channel 10 = 239.0.0.10
post #34 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightowl2k2 View Post

Oh, and if there are products that offer more functionality for less money please share!

Well, in the example of the bar owner that wants to be able to show 10 ball games on up to 30 screens costing $10,490 plus the switch. Theoretically, you could do something similar with a SageTV server running on a PC, with the HD feed from the 10 satellite/cable boxes being recorded by way of HDPVR 1212's and then get 30 Sage HD200 extenders for the TVs.

In this scenario, you would have independent control of what you watch on each TV by way of the remote controlling the HD200 box attached to the TV, as an added benefit, because the Sage Server is actually recording each cable/sat feed to the HDD before serving it out to the extenders, you can pause/rewind the game at any of the 30 TV screens. Heck, you could even have the ability to stop the game you are watching, switch over to the Vikings game and back it up enough to see the video of Farve making that amazing last second TD pass that the guys at the booth across the pub are cheering about, then switch back to your game and pick it back up where you left off.

Overall system maintenance/channel recording setup would be accessed through any of the 30 extenders at any of the TVs in the Pub.

10 x HDPVR 1212's would run about $2050

30 x HD200 extenders and a Sage server license: $5445


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16815116030

http://store.sagetv.com/mm5/merchant...tegory_Code=HD


-Suntan
post #35 of 85
Thread Starter 
The family friendly interfaces for HDMI over IP are starting to come forward. Here is a demonstration of a Control4 system using HDMI over IP to switch between 2 DTV DVR's

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_uTX3t4VLg

We also have Crestron and Pakedge drivers done, and the AMX driver is supposed to be finished this week. We are working with other automation solutions and will gladly share the drivers with interested parties.
post #36 of 85
I know this thread is half a month old, but this hdmi over ip is really interesting. I'm wondering if the price could come down in the near future?

I'm working on a system called linuxmce (www.linuxmce.org) it's an opensource project for complete home automation, it does it all from security to phone system to media delivery, this last portion is where your system could deliver especially if the ir control is possbile over your boxes.

Another idea for your company is to make boxes that can handle more than 1 input at the same time, kinda like 2 or 4 boxes in compacted to one, that way you only have to connect 1 box at your media stack and 1 box at the tv/projector.

Question i have is: wouldn't a gigabit network be better for this system to allow full stream at all times?

Keep up the great work,

Richard
post #37 of 85
Thread Starter 
Hi Richard,

I noticed you also sent an email to Just Add Power. We'll send you the RS232 commands used to control the system. Let us know if you need anything else for your www.linuxmce.org project.

We currently send a RETURN IR signal from the Receiver back to the HDMI source. Several systems integrators have told us we got this backwards. We also want to make sure that you understand that this is not a full spectrum IR channel. We also understand the importance of trying to reverse this channel, or even better, provide bi-directional RS232 support at both ends. The Return IR Control function in this product is best suited for a Point-To-Point application, and is of limited value in a Point-To-Many environment. For installations in a Many-To-Many environment it is necessary to use a third party home automation solution to provide distributed remote control functionality. Some of the more creative installers have observed that these "A" series HDMI over IP devices only use 2 pair (orange/green) of the CAT5 cable, leaving the blue and brown pairs free for implementing a remote control solution.

Support for 1000BT is one of the most common suggestions we have received.
post #38 of 85
I am curious why you guys seem to be pushing the non Custom CE crowds. This is without a doubt a cool solution but I have seen you post in a couple of the threads regarding doing HDMI over cat 6 on the cheap an I'm curious whether this is an option you see people purchasing direct as opposed to through a high end custom ce installer. I would love to have this in my home but i am trying to figure out the cost benefit breakdown. As i do out the math I am beginning to see that perhaps the sports bar is the more logical scenario as outlined before. As i add up the cost for 3 rooms in my house to each to have its own xbox 360 as a media center extender I see the following.

3 starter kits at 550 a piece =$1650 (this kind of setup really punishes you for having more than on device since you have to spend 350 for every transmitter)

regarding the switch required to run this whole house system the just add power site says that a cheap switch can be had but the cheapest switch i could find that had both 802.1Q and IGMP was this
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000FNCRPS for $300 which to me is not cheap.

putting even the true starter cost at around $850 for one room with one device.

Cool as it may be i think this is not a solution that should be compared to HDMI over cat 5 balun solutions that flawed as they are start at 60 bucks for one room one device. I hope to see the cost come down on this item but sadly i really think that as it stands right now this is set up to be a sports bar solution only.

I wish i could even justify hooking an avr receiver into this system but with a high end receivers supporting at most 5 receivers i don't think most people can fit all of their avr devices into one ir controlled avr receiver. Even if an hdmi switch was used you still run into an issue of of everybody in the house being forced to watch what has been selected on the hdmi switch. Just my thoughts but let me know if anybody saw a more cost effective way to make this solution work.
post #39 of 85
Thread Starter 
To date the most economical Managed Ethernet switch that has been demonstrated to work well with HDMI over IP is the Dell 3524.
post #40 of 85
Hi everyone,

I have a client who wants a whole home systems and the just add power system sounds interesting. My only question is, what about whole home sound? Obviously sound could be run from a PC to all the TV's, but what out sound in bathrooms and other rooms without screens. Could these rooms be set up as zones on this system? And how could it be controlled from these rooms? In these cases they would have to be run through a zone amp...right?
post #41 of 85
Thread Starter 
Today we posted the specifications for the HDMI over IP Rackmount Transmitter. Here is a picture of the new device:



This 1RU device has 3 HDMI inputs and 3 Ethernet outputs. It is compatible with the original HDMI over IP Receivers and can be mixed/matched with the original HDMI over IP Transmitters.
post #42 of 85
This is exactly what I've been looking for! Can't wait to see some real world reviews about quality and longevity before I make the jump as I'm one of those early adopters that have been burned a few times in the past.
post #43 of 85
The project I spec'd these for has been working flawlessly for about 6 months. This was a single transmitter to 5 receiver (via a switch) system. I have heard nothing but great reviews.
post #44 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by nded View Post

Today we posted the specifications for the HDMI over IP Rackmount Transmitter. Here is a picture of the new device:



This 1RU device has 3 HDMI inputs and 3 Ethernet outputs. It is compatible with the original HDMI over IP Receivers and can be mixed/matched with the original HDMI over IP Transmitters.

Could you explain the difference between this device vs. using 3 of the individual transmitters?
post #45 of 85
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TajHill View Post

Could you explain the difference between this device vs. using 3 of the individual transmitters?

From an HDMI over IP functional perspective they are identical. The Rackmount Transmitter is for professional installations where they want the benefits of a rackmount form factor such as:

- Secure installation (great for airplanes, yachts, commercial installations, and even homes where you don't want them to accidentally knock over or unplug the transmitter)
- Single electrical outlet with a commercial grade universal switching power supply (works with all global voltages and uses an IEC320-C13 power cord) vs. needing 3 outlets and a regional AC adapter (aka wall wart)
- Better appearance - you can use this with the rack oriented cable management features that are available from several sources

Yes, it is more expensive to implement the Rackmount Transmitter vs multiple stand alone transmitters. The same is true for practically any device that is offered in both form factors (for example, try comparing prices for rackmount vs. stand alone Blu-Ray players). It comes down to the priorites of the customer and installer.
post #46 of 85
Looks like an interesting solution - I dropped a note on the web site but noone has replied.

1. I too have concerns about the video compression. My understanding was that HDMI could hit much higher bitrates.
Our network isn't the bottleneck as we're upgrading to 10G. If compression introduces artifacts, I'd rather see a 1 Gbps port on the unit and lossless transmission.

2. The next, probably biggest concern is the fixed 192.168.x.x IP addresses. Maybe this was needed to ship the product out the door, but I'd rather see separate, unique, user settable IP addresses and multicast group addresses on the transmitter, and multicast group address/UDP ports and IGMP on the receivers. That way I don't need to hack things with separate VLANs, and it's more scalable.

3. Needs SNMP for monitoring and web/telnet for setting above options, firmware etc.

Not too worried about sound, as this is all video, no sound!
post #47 of 85
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpmvan View Post

Looks like an interesting solution - I dropped a note on the web site but noone has replied.

I sent you a PM on this - I'm guessing our reply somehow got dropped in your SPAM box.
Quote:


1. I too have concerns about the video compression. My understanding was that HDMI could hit much higher bitrates.
Our network isn't the bottleneck as we're upgrading to 10G. If compression introduces artifacts, I'd rather see a 1 Gbps port on the unit and lossless transmission.

2. The next, probably biggest concern is the fixed 192.168.x.x IP addresses. Maybe this was needed to ship the product out the door, but I'd rather see separate, unique, user settable IP addresses and multicast group addresses on the transmitter, and multicast group address/UDP ports and IGMP on the receivers. That way I don't need to hack things with separate VLANs, and it's more scalable.

3. Needs SNMP for monitoring and web/telnet for setting above options, firmware etc.

Thank you for the suggestions, it's always helpful to get input from somebody not "inside" the development team
Quote:



Not too worried about sound, as this is all video, no sound!

The HDMI over IP solution does also distribute video.
post #48 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpmvan View Post

Looks like an interesting solution - I dropped a note on the web site but noone has replied.

1. I too have concerns about the video compression. My understanding was that HDMI could hit much higher bitrates.
Our network isn't the bottleneck as we're upgrading to 10G. If compression introduces artifacts, I'd rather see a 1 Gbps port on the unit and lossless transmission.

2. The next, probably biggest concern is the fixed 192.168.x.x IP addresses. Maybe this was needed to ship the product out the door, but I'd rather see separate, unique, user settable IP addresses and multicast group addresses on the transmitter, and multicast group address/UDP ports and IGMP on the receivers. That way I don't need to hack things with separate VLANs, and it's more scalable.

3. Needs SNMP for monitoring and web/telnet for setting above options, firmware etc.

Not too worried about sound, as this is all video, no sound!

It's either use separate VLANs, or you need to do a bunch of QoS settings to prioritize the HDMI bandwidth. VLANing it off is typically easier. I wouldn't want my HDMI stream fighting for priority and bandwidth every time a new DHCP user joins the network and the entire subnet gets spammed with broadcast traffic, or little joey wants to watch the latest Disney video online, and gets inundated with UDP packets. The only scalability you will lack with VLANs is the ability to traverse a Layer 3 device such as a Router... and unless you are spending big bucks for some major bandwidth, I doubt you want to send HDMI over your WAN link anyway.
post #49 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3Z3VH View Post

It's either use separate VLANs, or you need to do a bunch of QoS settings to prioritize the HDMI bandwidth. VLANing it off is typically easier. I wouldn't want my HDMI stream fighting for priority and bandwidth every time a new DHCP user joins the network and the entire subnet gets spammed with broadcast traffic, or little joey wants to watch the latest Disney video online, and gets inundated with UDP packets. The only scalability you will lack with VLANs is the ability to traverse a Layer 3 device such as a Router... and unless you are spending big bucks for some major bandwidth, I doubt you want to send HDMI over your WAN link anyway.

We use a combination of VLANs for separating traffic and Layer 3 unicast and multicast routing (PIM)
We need Layer 3, and IP multicast is exactly what is needed to do this over LAN/WAN. For Joe's basement, maybe VLANs are good enough, but for even midsize commercial I would use IP multicast because it scales better.

My current use is just one to one replacement of DVI. Still, I would rather do this in one VLAN but with separate group addresses.

But I could see this easily used for large scale video distribution - mall/airport etc, as long as the devices use multicast and can be managed with SNMP/web. Just setup all your transmitters on unique multicast addresses and stream to the network. Program each receiver to joint the multicast group it is supposed to display. Changing streams/channels is just changing the multicast group address on the receiver - no messing with the network. An IP enabled TV is the ideal thing for this, but those are just starting to take off.

Could you do this with vlans? Sort of, but it wouldn't scale well, especially if the transmitters use broadcast MAC addresses instead of IP multicast.
post #50 of 85
What sort of WAN/MAN links would have the bandwidth to do HDMI video ? I seriously don't see this being used over a WAN/MAN.

If you are talking about inside a large building, such as an airport, why is there a need to route between the different Comm Closets ? You can keep everything on the same VLAN, even in those situations. The only reason to route on a LAN would be to connect multiple subnets, and since all of these HDMI devices would be on a single subnet, there is no need to route. In fact, since it is running traffic that you never need visibility of on your servers or workstations, you don't even need to route between these devices and your network. It is a totally segregated VLAN. In large buildings such as an airport or office building, everything is designed with Layer3 switching until you get to your WAN link anyway, so there is nothing preventing a design that allows you to push the HDMI VLAN to every corner of the building. I am just having a very difficult time trying to figure any solution that would require this HDMI network to traverse a WAN/MAN link, and who would pay for such a beast, since they would need a HUGE pipe leaving their building.

Even in the case of a campus sized layout, it is easier to run HDMI over fiber between buildings, then HDMI over IP systems inside each building, since in a campus network, you have the ability to run your own fiber lines from building to building.
post #51 of 85
Not surprisingly, a source for the Dell 3524 manged switch is: Dell at $265.

The stupid forum program won't let me post a link to it.

Best rgds,
oldhacker
post #52 of 85
So has anyone bought one of these?

I can't seem to reach anyone at their web site.
post #53 of 85
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JasGot View Post

So has anyone bought one of these?

Yes, thousands have been bought.
Quote:


I can't seem to reach anyone at their web site.

I'm sorry you are having a difficult time reaching us.

Did you try calling the Just Add Power 800-615-0206 number?

Did you try sending an email to sales@justaddpower.com? There is a contact link on the website that does this.

Did you try sending an email to support@justaddpower.com? There is a contact link on the website that does this.

Did you try sending me a Private Message here on AVSForum?
post #54 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by nded View Post

Yes, thousands have been bought.

I'm sorry you are having a difficult time reaching us.

Did you try calling the Just Add Power 800-615-0206 number?

Did you try sending an email to sales@justaddpower.com? There is a contact link on the website that does this.

Did you try sending an email to support@justaddpower.com? There is a contact link on the website that does this.

Did you try sending me a Private Message here on AVSForum?

I sent a message to you. ed AT justaddpower dot com
post #55 of 85
Thread Starter 
Found the email from yesterday afternoon - it was flagged as SPAM (sorry). For other reseller candidates who might be lurking, the closest HDMI over IP distributor to his location was www.tecnec.com in New York. If you're on the West coast, www.blackwiredesigns.com stocks HDMI over IP for reseller purchasing.
post #56 of 85
Hello Nded,
I am quite confused looking at the HDMI over IP unit it has a chipset sayings its HDMI 1.2 and Max resolution is UXVA.




Note Chipset on the bottom saying EP932E

Specs from the Chipset Manufacture state its HDMI 1.2 and Max resolution is UXVA.

Looking forward to work with you.
post #57 of 85
Thread Starter 
HDMIHEAD,

You persist in asking Just Add Power and it's business partners around the globe to help you with the problems you are having with a disappointing product produced by a company trying to copy our solution. The answer here in the USA is the same as you have received in the threads over on AVFORUMS in the UK. We will not explain to you the custom firmware and chipsets we have licensed from our business partners. It is not our job to help you understand the failing products you purchased in an effort to to undermine our business. I do hope you will accept our invitation to come visit us at the CEDIA UK tradeshow in June. I'll be there all week, and I'd welcome the opportunity to address you face to face. I know Chris and Jamie from HDCable in the UK have extended the same invitation to you.

Best wishes,
post #58 of 85
Hello nded,
Please note i am not trying to undermine your product, this is the information we have received and merely clarifying it. One simple document from a reputable hdmi certification lab can clarify that. I myself was confused when our labs received the units in our hand and after studying that unit we were mislead by the manufacture. I am not saying that might be the case with you but it would be nice for us to see some kind of evidence that would satisfy the confusion this unit has created. Clarify will only add more clients to your list. I hope you understand.
post #59 of 85
Hello Nded,
This confuses me as your reseller confirmed that the unit in the picture was a unit they sold, so this means its not a copy as you complained. This gets more confusing second by second. It would be nice to see some kind of documentation stating the unit is 1.3??
post #60 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by nded View Post

HDMIHEAD,

You persist in asking Just Add Power and it's business partners around the globe to help you with the problems you are having with a disappointing product produced by a company trying to copy our solution. The answer here in the USA is the same as you have received in the threads over on AVFORUMS in the UK. We will not explain to you the custom firmware and chipsets we have licensed from our business partners. It is not our job to help you understand the failing products you purchased in an effort to to undermine our business. I do hope you will accept our invitation to come visit us at the CEDIA UK tradeshow in June. I'll be there all week, and I'd welcome the opportunity to address you face to face. I know Chris and Jamie from HDCable in the UK have extended the same invitation to you.

Best wishes,

Hello Ned,
Firstly i would like contest your statement the first part is not true, we have not copied but simply purchased the units from a firm who claim to be the producers. A simple search on alibaba.com with the term hdmi over ip will result in quite a few fruitful results. Secondly it saddens me that you have taken upon yourself a liability without understanding the outcomes. In your statement you do state that it is our solution meaning that full responsibility lies with you. International law does also specify that the importer bears all responsibility of the items, your product clearly negates and challenges the work that the HDMI and DCP have put in the last decade. Simple port forwarding on a router can route the HDMI Content virtually all over the world. Our findings extremely disappointed us in the technology as it uses VGA quality to be broadcasted and then delivered on a HD Output duping the screen in thinking the content to be 1080p. Being honest with our clients we withdrew the unit and we will not sell a hdmi 1.2 as a 1.3. According to your partner in UK the unit has been changed and upgraded, i hope that is true and honest clients have not been duped. Please note our prices were pigeon feed to what you charge, this is to show we took an ethical stand rather than a commercial to withdraw the units. I hope you can prove me wrong.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Industry Area › HDMI Q&A - The One Connector World › Just Add Power introduces HDMI over IP using standard Ethernet LAN