 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.152.116.69
In Reply to: Who cares about HDMI? posted by racerguy on February 25, 2006 at 08:41:34:
While I agree that most people use component connections for HD, I think if you asked most people they would prefer to run just one cable to their display rather than three separate cables. By the way, HDCP-compliant displays (starting with DVI-HDCP, then later HDMI) have been around for at least 3 years -- not just 6 - 8 months ago.As for delivering full resolution, many older displays can't handle it via their analog component connections -- even if the full resolution were delivered. And by "handle it", I mean more than just "accepting it". The analog component connections on displays purchased when HD displays first came out (and even a few years ago) were made with parts that weren't designed to actually handle all of that bandwidth (I'm not even talking about 1920x1080p here, but even less demanding 1920x1080i). They can't resolve all of the detail. Sorry, but that's the sad truth.
Not all studios will use ICT (Image Constraint Token) aka "the analog flag". Those that do will be required to label the outside of the package and actually tell you they'll be limiting the analog output resolution. If you don't have an HDCP-compliant display or don't want to get one of the HDCP work-arounds (little black boxes), don't buy movies from those studios. But don't stop there! I would further recommend that you make sure you send a complaint letter to that studio every time they release a movie you want with embedded ICT and also be sure to voice your opinion in every video forum re: ICT while referencing the studio that put out that movie. Furthermore, send complaint letters to all of the places of business where you purchase your movie software. Let them know that they are losing potential sales due to what certain software suppliers (the offending studios) are doing.
Follow Ups:
> > I think if you asked most people they would prefer to run just one cable to their display rather than three separate cables. < <Sure. There isn't always a choice though. For instance, in my area the only way to get HD via cable is to use component video cables - the cable company does not support DVI/HDMI on their HD cable boxes.
> > By the way, HDCP-compliant displays (starting with DVI-HDCP, then later HDMI) have been around for at least 3 years -- not just 6 - 8 months ago. < <
I have a HD-capable RPTV that I bought in 2001. The 2003 version of the same TV added a DVI conection. I don't know if it was HDCP-compliant though. It matters not - many people bought displays during the same timeframe I bought mine. They are all in the same artificially-created predicament.
> > As for delivering full resolution, many older displays can't handle it via their analog component connections < <
And that's true even today. It's even true for some new displays with digital connections. Many older displays and projectors _can_ handle it though - my RPTV can handle 1080i just fine.
The basic issue is that there are many HD-capable TVs and projectors sold prior to your 3-year mark that work perfectly well, and handle full HD without any problems. Quite a few of them (especially the projectors) were very expensive, and I am quite sure that most people, other than freakishly obsessive videophiles, will not be willing to toss that expensive, fully-functional display on the trash heap just because some idiot bean counter at a media company decides they should get an inferior down-rez because their display doesn't support HDCP. They'll simply skip the new disc technology until either a) the media companies see the light, or b) their current displays break and they need to buy a new one. If someone has a 720p or 1080i-capable TV, they'll expect to be able to view hi-rez video at the full resolution the TV can produce, not at some paranoid bean-counter's arbitrarily-chosen resolution.
So, unless the media companies come to this realization, HD-DVD/Blu-ray will be a mass market failure - a niche market at best, a marketing disaster at worst.
> > Furthermore, send complaint letters to all of the places of business where you purchase your movie software. Let them know that they are losing potential sales due to what certain software suppliers (the offending studios) are doing. < <
A waste of time, effort and money. Letters from a handful of cranky consumers don't go as far as they used to. If they did, SACD and DVD-A wouldn't be dying on the vine. I simply won't buy a hi-rez video player or software unless and until this issue is resolved. I prefer to vote with my wallet.
The issue seems to be with your cable company. Our Time Warner company has a waiting list for the Hi def boxes which now come with a DVI output. However, the same company's DVR boxes come with an HDMI output. All boxes come with component video feeds, as well as the standard feed via an F connector. Sounds very backwards compatible to me. Most DVD players with HDMI outputs offer similar options, so I do not see what your issue is.
Those with older sets like yours and simply using the component video feeds have reported tremendous increase in video quality. One acquaintance told me that he was watching movies he wouldn't normally even rent because the quality was so good.
As for full resolution, I believe Joe is referring to 1080p, and no set today has that capability. Still,760p or even 1080i offers markedly improved video resolution. When you can find DVD players with a choice of upsampling modes for under $100 and with a choice of video feeds, I really do not undertand what you are carping about.
The way I look at it is that the 1080p resolution offers a maximization of the Blu Ray disc capability. I prefer that. I have an option to upgrade the video display, but I need not, if do not want to. Even if both formats were available today, it would still take a year or so before there is enough software for me to be enticed to purchase one for myself. But having seen Hi Def, and the first machines were showing 5 years ago, I can say that the picture is absolutely stunning. I am not upset at purchasing a large screen set 3 yeears ago, even though the list on the set has dropped 40%. I have had 3 very good years of use on it, and that's all that counts.
Stu
Check out Dish Network satellite. All channels are digital signal at no extra charge and their box has HDMI output and they offer the most HiDef channels, including local channels (which must be received with UHF type roof antenna). They now offer free installation and equipment (receivers in up to 4 rooms and a free non-HiDef DVR w/100 hr. recording capacity) for about $75/mo. for their Silver mid-package(in So. Az.) Compared to Dish Network's features Cox cable is in the horse and buggy stage.Happy Viewing !
.
> > > As for full resolution, I believe Joe is referring to 1080p, and no set today has that capability. < < <
The new HPs will accept 1080p-I assume you are refering to inputs? Others like the new Sonys and JVCs that have a native display resolution of 1080p will take 1080i and deinterlace it to 1080p.
Jack
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
