Integra DHC-80.3 - Page 22

Hehe. I like to keep up with things. I remember people telling me HD was "just a gimmick" too. And Blu-ray. And 5.1.

If it is marketing on Onkyo's behalf, it isn't working is it? Do you know *anyone* with a 5508/80.2 who thought it worthwhile upgrading specifically to get the new features on the new models?

I'd agree with your assessment there, Theresa. But today's elite gear is tomorrow's run of the mill. Soon 4k will be the norm and it will be inexpensive (comparatively). I remember buying my first Panasonic 42 inch flat panel plasma screen a few years back. It cost me close on $10,000. Today you can get a far superior screen for less than $1,000. One of the good things about this hobby is that it's the only one I know of where performance keeps on going up while costs keep on going down.

And then there's OLED... I see that LG and Samsung are exhibiting 55 inch OLEDs at CEDIA this year... in a couple of years they'll be affordable for everyone.

HD displays became important to me when HD source material became available. For me, it will be the same with 4k.

Well, I just got this Panny plasma a few months ago and intend to keep it for three years, as I did the Sony before it. My pre-pro is also new, as is the universal BD player and hopefully they'll last a long time too. I don't see having much money for the foreseeable future so that rules out upgrades. I agree completely that todays elite is tomorrow's enthusiast consumer.

Fair comment. Depends how well it upscales 1080p content I guess. Apparently, the 4HD does it better than true 4k because of the vastly simpler math involved in a straight 4x multiplication. I've not seen either on demo so have no idea from personal experience. Yet

Isn’t what you say a bit like saying "I’ll only consider 7.1 when the movies are mixed in 7.1"?

I've never setup 7.2 and for 3D all I'd need to do is add glasses and get some content but neither interests me much at all.

I've set up 7.2 and when my new sub arrives from Norway, I will be doing it again, but 3D just leaves me totally uninterested. Currently my screen can't do it and neither can my BD player and, unusually for me who can seize on the smallest thing as an upgrade 'justification', I am just not interested. I suspect that for movies, my main interest, 3D will be the passing fad it has been every time it has gained a small foothold before. ICBW because the difference between now and then is that this is the first and only time we've been able to have 3D at home. I am told by my pals who are into sport in a big way that 3D makes a real and useful difference to their enjoyment of the game, so maybe it will be here to stay because of that.

No new picture detail is being created. Interpolation will create the additional pixels and that will smooth the image. But if the display didn't have all those "extra" pixels, there would be a need to synthesize a signal for them. This could be important if you have a very large display and/or sit very close. But even then, only 4k material will make much of a difference.


I don't think so. THX and Dolby got very good at deriving rear signals from existing five channels so that effects coming off the screen go past your ears and into the back of the room. A closer analogy with speakers would be if more were added in the front between existing left and right speakers. And above LCR as well as "outside" L & R. Oh wait, someone has already done that and *it's* taking the world by storm.

Jeff

Yes indeed. But upscaled content can be very good indeed. Look at SD DVDs when seen on a 1080p screen. With decent VP the results can be excellent. Obviously not as good as original 1080p content, but nonetheless better than watching the SD source in its original, non-upscaled form. On some recent SD source material via DVD, I find the PQ staggeringly good when properly upscaled (through my VP) or when upscaled by my Oppo player.


Yes, I was teasing to some extent there But what you're saying is that 'synthesised' content can be worthwhile if it is done well (as in the examples you mention). That can also just as easily apply to image quality as it can to sound quality - if the job is done well, the results can be highly acceptable. And that may be the case with good 4HD upscaling. I can't say with any authority because, so far, I haven't seen any myself. But the reports I have read have been encouraging.

Its true, VP can make a good DVD look much better than SD. It even helps a great deal with sub-SD Netflix.

The driving force behind upscaling SD was the increasingly larger "hi-def" displays that were being sold. Simply feeding a 480i image to a larger 1920 x 1080 display causes blockiness and scaling to the additional pixels restores diagonals and non-straight lines to what they should be. Before the displays went to higher resolution, they just went bigger. Remember the first rear projection TVs and how they were much worse from standard TV viewing distances?


Before we had speakers behind us, placing some there was a no-brainer. Most rooms have four walls, and the rear wall was speaker-less. And once the bullet/arrow/hand phaser goes past our noggins, we are already focusing on the next one to be fired. This goes to the crux of DSX and other "additional" front speakers; they are up front where our angular discrimination is more precise.

Theresa touched on it up the page - display size. Apple's "retina display" feature is based on pixel density at the limit of the human eye's ability to see more information. At the present size, more pixels simply would not be seen. In our theaters, we are already maxed out on screen size; they are not going to double from here. So twice as many pixels ... even with 4k source content ... will not be seen.

From markus767's sig - "In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole, the "industry" will exert themselves mightily to make this a matter of believing because if they let it be decided by science .. the "eyes" have it or more correctly, don't have it .. no one but those with very, very large theaters would buy 4k.

Jeff

Yes, I went from 40" to 50" and cannot imagine wanting a larger screen in my space. Unless I sat very close to the screen I don't think I would notice a difference with 4K.

How much of music is "real" or "unmolested" after Audessey does it's black box processing? I don't see many people having an issue with that. It solves a problem and you accept whatever technical and philosophical tradeoffs that come with it.

For SD upscaling, I saw the difference on smaller displays, (50" at 10 feet). Not really sure why upscaling is presented as "bad" in a lot of circles. Of course it can be done poorly, but when it's done well it's a clear improvement and worth doing. Yes, it's interpolated information but if it works, as I can see it does, then it's a useful technology. To my needs, depending on the particular movie, even a SD netflix looks passable with good processing on a 100" screen from about 10 feet. Then again, I'd rather watch a movie than skip it if there is no HD option. For a while I only watched bluray movies but that gets limiting very quickly.

Viewing sizes will only get larger with new technologies so 4k will find a place with most of us here - given a little help on price. My screen is about as large as I'm going to fit in my room; however, I am also sitting pretty close, 1x diagonal, so I'm waiting for the 4k train.

I'm not really sure what point you’re making, Jeff. Of course it is necessary to upscale a SD 480i image to get it to fill a 1080p screen, or one would have to watch a small image window-boxed in the centre of the screen. Once you have a 4k screen this will also be true of your BD 1080p image and you will need to upscale it to make the most of the new screen or PJ. That is when you will swap your 5508 for a 5509 or whatever is current at the time. I agree that you don't need 4k upscaling right now as there are no 4k screens or sources available yet - but they are coming fast. There is already much 4k content and many new movies are now being shot in 4k and indeed shown in commercial theatres in 4k. Once 4k screens have come down in price and become the new 'standard' for replacement screens (much like 3D is now the new standard whether you want it or not) then all it will take for full adoption is a new player and for the content to be whacked onto blu-ray discs in 4k form. The moment that happens you will need to upscale all your old 'legacy' Blu-ray discs, and this is what Onkyo have catered for in their far-sighted move in adding 4k upscaling to their new units.


Totally agreed.


That is not correct, Jeff. The Digital Cinema Initiative (DCI) was set up in 2002 with the aim of mapping out the future of cinema for movie distribution and exhibition. Part of their aim was to establish common standards. Their initial specification introduced in 2005 dictated a primary minimum resolution of 2k. However, since then cinemas have started to change - no longer are new cinemas long and thin where the audience sits in the long part looking at a screen across the short part. They are evolving into spaces where the screen is on the wide part and the audience sits across the long part to face it. IOW, the conventional space turned sideways if you follow me. The point of this was to faciliate the move to larger screen sizes. This move, coupled with the human eye's ability to resolve a certain level of detail, assuming 20/20 vision, has led the DCI to to now advocate a full doubling of pixels in both horizontal and vertical planes - i.e. 4k. The benefits of this doubling of pixels (over the former standard of 2k) are immediately apparent on a 20 foot or greater screen as used in theatres. Thus the DCI specification was amended and is now 4k. In the home, the benefits of 4k will be apparent to anyone with a large screen who sits close to it and who can currently see pixel structure and/or stair-stepping. With 4k it will simply disappear - there is no need for a larger screen to achieve this improvement. Currently, in the USA (not here yet) studios are scanning many, if not most, new films into 4k or even better. Back catalogue material is also being rescanned and restored at 4k. More and more movies are being shot taking advantage of the new generation of 4k cameras such as the Red Digital. The penetration of 4k projection into theatres has been accelerated by a, for once, intelligent move on the part of the studios where they are bringing in special 'lease to own' purchase deals for the theatres to enable them to more easily make the move to 4k projection. In the USA today there are currently about 40,000 movie screens and of those about 60% have been converted to digital. At least 30% of those 24,000 represent Sony;s market share and they are ALL 4k systems. Additionally, most movies that are now being remastered are being remastered in 4k. All current movies are being mastered in 4k and some are being mastered in 8k (the upcoming BD release of Lawrence of Arabia, for example). Authoritative reports of the new 4k masters, when seen on a 1080p screen, are saying things like "gobs of additional fine detail...". It is rapidly becoming a 4k world - far faster than anyone could have envisaged and it is being driven by the studios themselves when making their movies and then via the theatres when showing them on increasingly 4k digital equipment. This is bound to filter down into home cinemas soon and the benefits are NOT confined solely to bigger screens.


I'm sorry, Jeff, but you are just plain wrong on this. As I have briefly shown above, I hope, the trend is for ALL theatres to move to 4k projection with a substantial number already having done so and with the rest moving rapidly towards it. Not to mention the benefits for home theatres. You can't ignore 4k and pretend it won’t happen just because your prepro can’t upscale to it! Once the 4k PJs have come down to a sensible price, I know you will buy one.

How close do you sit? The THX standard for viewing distance is the screen width in inches divided by 8.76 for the seating distance in feet. If you prefer the SMPTE standard, then divide the screen width in inches by 6.42 for the seating distance in feet. Generally, if people are sitting further back from their screen that that, it is because they are witnessing undesirable artefacts such as pixel structure or stair-stepping. 4k will eliminate that and permit either larger screens or the same size screens as one currently has, but with the viewer sitting at the recommended distance.

I am 8 ft. from the screen, just measured it. There are limits to size because of aesthetic reasons IMHO especially when one's media room is also the living room.

Jeff,


Question ?
Do you mean sitting right beside each other in the Front & Rear?
Or do you mean they are sitting across from each other in the Front & Rear?
(Meaning, across the room from one another) ?

I run 4-Mirage BPS400 subs.
In my case they are in the 4-corners of the HT (Home Theater).

I am a Movie person 99% of the time.
I like Music but only when viewed from a DVD or BD where you See & Hear it.

Thanks,
Terry

Keith,

My point is that most of us won't see increased resolution even after content is 4K. Most of us already have as big a display as can be used ... physically and/or aesthetically .. in our spaces. And our seating is in place, partly with consideration of how close we can sit and not see pixel structure, but probably in most cases if we sit any closer, we will need to turn our heads to see the limits of the display.

So, given that we won't be 1) moving to larger displays, 2) sitting closer to the size we have now, and 3) our eyes can't see any more picture detail ... at display sizes and viewing distances ... most of us won't see increased resolution even after content is 4K.

Jeff

I agree on the commercial theaters, but that hasn't been part of our discussion. And I don't see the benefits for home theaters ... at least not for home theater owners. I see lots of benefits for manufacturers and content providers. Fifth Element for the fifth time anyone?

But I don't know that commercial cinemas going 4k is related in the slightest to home theaters. Our HTs have been digital since day one and commercial cinemas are transitioning from film to digital. At those screen sizes and viewing distances, 4k is required to equal film.

Jeff

Collocated as in two subs sitting an inch apart - a pair in front and a pair in the rear.

Jeff

Plus ^^^^1

Terry

Close to the SMPTE recommendations then, which would be about 7 feet I think. And about 6 feet for THX. Agree about the aesthetic angle.

All that is true, Jeff. Personally I think the best viewing distance is that recommended by THX or SMPTE guidelines (as mentioned to Theresa) and I believe too many people sit too far away from their screens thus spoiling the cinematic presentation of the movie. But there are other benefits of 4k and every single reviewer or industry commentator that I have read, who has seen 4k for themselves, has remarked that it is a substantial and clear improvement over 2k. This is assuming 20/20 (or better) vision, which fortunately I am blessed with (although only as a result of the surgeon and his laser).


But most of us, Jeff, including you, will eventually have a 4k screen/PJ and source. I'm even willing to bet you 10 bucks on it

Everything in your HT started in a cinema. Cinemas showed movies originally in Academy Framing and B&W and TVs followed suit. Cinemas went to colour and TVs followed. Cinemas went to widescreen and TVs followed. Cinemas went to surround sound and TVs followed. Cinemas went 3D and TVs followed. Cinemas are going 4k and TVs will follow.

You can't fight this, Jeff. Repeat after me: you are becoming drowsy, your eyelids are heavy, 4k is the future, 4k is the future, 4k is the future....

Thanks Jeff,

I did look the word (Collocated) up and it did state side by side.
Before I ask the question.

I was just curious as why side by side versus across from one another.
Just seems like it would be more coverage in the 4-corners.

No I am in no way an expert just really trying to see why you did the side by side, oops I mean (Collocated).

Terry

I currently have the Integra Research RDC-7 Processor.
That is why I have read all 20 plus pages on this Thread.
Just purchased the Runco VX-11d to replace my older Runco VX5000ci.
So looking to up date the now older Integra RDC-7.

The reason I would consider up dating to the 80.3 Integra is this.
The new audio formats.
Especially the 7.1 which would be great.
In my case I suppose that would be 7.4 since I have 4-subs.

Any of the Pros here care to comment on the surround steering abilities of the 80.3.
That is what I really am interested in.
Sound in a movie that is switched to each individual speaker.
If any of you can enlighten me on that with this unit it would be greatly appreciate.

Terry

4K is the new future, it's just the way it is. Weather or not you think you'll see a difference doesn't matter, it's coming. I for 1 will be getting another projector as soon as they are under 7K, though I can't see that being the case at first.

Yeah - Jeff is just pi$$ed that his prepro doesn't handle 4k upscaling He's in denial.... LOL.







(Only kidding, Jeff....).

There is additional gain from collocating the subs. +6dB I think. Mid-wall placement front-and-back (or side/side) produces the smoothest LF response possible with "two" subs. So, four subs set up like I have it produces better performance than one in each of the four corners.

Jeff

I can see the increased detail on Baraka which was scanned in 8k and down res'd to 1080p. I'd like to see what a true 4k source would look like on a 4k display before passing judgement.