Originally Posted by bonfigleo
From reading the specs on this
I was under the impression that what you say I need already exists.
I'm glad I stumbled on this thread or would have just bought them thinking my plan was flawless.
Can you please explain why these won't work? They both claim to be "fully hdcp" compliant.
It's possible to make these work as a matrix distribution system. There are a couple of hurdles;
The 1x8 DA needs to have one device on to provide handshaking (see the note about output 1 being the main display). If this doesn't happen, no signal will exit the DA. One of the switches need to provide the handshake so the signal is always passed. You need to make sure that handshaking is provided so signal is always passed. So beyond just HDCP compliance, you need to make sure that signal will always be passed; handshaking is one of the most difficult issues with HDMI, and one of the challenges of matrix distribution.
To control the various 4x1's, you'll need either a 232 circuit or a segregated IR emitter/system for each 4x1. This can be difficult and time consuming to program, and really difficult for a DIYer with IR.
Parts for these components are $900 for each source and $400 for each display. Depending on design, this could be as much if not more than a component distribution system. It better work flawlessly. For this kind of money, you're almost into a brand new Extron switch, which does work flawlessly and will be much easier to control than multiple switches.
Native resolution issues; all displays need to have the same resolution, otherwise you'll have some displays not present an image. With component video, just about every display can auto adjust to a presented resolution. With HDMI, all displays must have the same native resolution to work; if you mix and match displays, you're likely to have problems.
From the link;With due respect to the common analog transmission technologies (VGA, XGA, SVGA, UXGA), DVI is generally considered to be the better transmitter primarily because analog is sensitive to the phase changes of cable.
Whats a 'phase change of a cable?' Remember, even thought it's a digital signal, it's an analog carrier. Both HDMI and component will have issues with length. Currently, component is much easier and cheaper to run long distances.
The same goes for component video, another analog format that is limited to a bandwidth that transmits resolutions up to 480P.
That's absolutely untrue. Component video can transmit any resolution that HDMI can. Who wrote this stuff? I'd check up anything that is promised with a phone call and verification.But with solid soldering techniques, using low capacitance, thicker DVI cables and fiber optic interface technologies, the distance of DVI transmission is not limited and can extend as far
as 500-meters from the source to the display.
The language here is interesting. The only way to run far is with fiber optic ($$$). But, note the language; 'distance is not limited AND can run up to 500 meters.' Anybody ever hear of a 100 meter HDMI cable? Running these distances means powered devices and connections, and higher cost; you can run component 250ft without amplification, especially at lower res.
- supports bi-directional communication between devices, allowing the DTV to communicate its preferred audio/video formats to the set-top box, and the set-top box to communicate what video format it is providing to the display. This enables the DTV to make intelligent decisions on how to render any given image in the format designated by the original film providers.
Again, interesting language. Please note that this is what we all want the stuff to do, but this never really happens. This is like 'Plug n Play' software that still takes a bunch of set up time.
Hate to nitpick, but it's going to take some work to get all this stuff put together. This is the difference between 'cutting edge' and the 'bleeding edge'... this is the bleeding edge.