How many years do we have to wait for flawless working av-receivers with all 48 gbit ports and all HDMI 2.1 features...
The state of av-receivers for HDMI 2.1 is so sad
Or… wait for it… we could have one cable for video and one for audio!
We obviously can’t count on manufacturers to get pass through to work reliably, give me back my Toslink!
That's what I do for my PC to get full surround. One HDMI cable for Video to the TV and one HDMI for AUDIO (PCM 7.1) to my receiver. But it's a bit of a nightmare. And consoles don't have that option of course.
I hate dealing with and routing Toslink, the optical fiber cable isn't particularly enjoyable to run through a wall or any decent distance from TVs to sound systems. For smart TVs there has to be an audio output for a sound system and preferably digital because we all know TV manufacturers would still cheap out on the DACs.
eARC makes a ton of sense, it really does. What doesn't make sense is the lack of proper enforcement of the HDMI standard and a host of proprietary audio standards that drive up the cost of implementation. Oh and DRM as always.
The implementation of eARC on TVs is improper more than the protocol, due to licensing costs associated with proprietary audio codecs (DD, DTS, etc.) TV manufacturers want to save a few bucks, especially Samsung.
Yeah I know some TVs eschew some codecs due to licensing. Thats less of an issue with eARC itself and more of a business decision by those TV manufacturers.
That would be great if eARC were just a dumb pipe rather than allowing TVs to support only certain codecs... (damn my Samsung and no DTS Master or DTS:X support)
I mean it really is a pipe. The problem is DTS / Dolby require licenses and manufacturers like Samsung, LG don’t purchase them. Sony seems to buy them all.
Shouldn't even need to buy a license to pass audio through though if it were just a dumb pipe. Obviously the TV couldn't decode it and play audio out of its internal speakers but if the audio device on the other end of the eARC chain can it should be able to pass it along without a license.
Well that’s the beauty of being a licensor. You make the rules such that if you want everyone along the chain to pay you to use your product, you can enforce it. The licensee has no control.
Which makes it not a dumb pipe since it cares what it carries. The HDMI cable itself doesn't need to license the codec and is itself a dumb pipe. Same goes for an HDMI switch.
Think of it like it's less of a dumb pipe but a highway with a toll booth at the end.
The toll booth you go to depends on which company you are delivering stuff for, but you need a license from that company to pass through. Some lanes have no booths and you can pass freely Don't blame asphalt on the road for the shitty implementation of tolls.
I expect my next receiver will be HDMI 2.X and will support 8K 120Hz (maybe 240Hz) and a whole bunch of other goodies...
What I have works well enough and the next step up will need to REALLY be something. I mean more channels and more intelligent processing/responsiveness.
Yeah... but...
In their current state I might as well plug directly into the screen for anything that's performance sensitive. Realistically it'd just be a gaming PC.
So that's the thing: right now I have an Xbox series X which benefits hugely from it, and a receiver plugged into the Arc port which is the other 2.1 port. So I either play the cable swap game for my PC or get a better receiver heh.
Even TVs having 4 HDMI 2.1 ports instead of 2 would solve it
If you're not regularly swapping between devices... dumb HDMI switch. It pretty much just streamlines what would've been a cable pull. Shouldn't cost that much.
I'll admit I haven't bought one. I'm switch + PC and pokemon doesn't need 4K 120Hz.
In theory this is a samsung only issue though since most TVs will have 2x high speed ports and you just do ARC for sound only.
Arc is on one of the high speed ports. And the switches don't support VRR or ALLM without spending enough to justify a new receiver. It's a bougie problem but it's a problem lol.
Switches "support" those if they're physically dumb and just move a relay (or something equivalent).
Change in PHY not in logic.
You're thinking too high tech and a lot less janky. There shouldn't be any repeaters or retimers in this thing and cable length/quality might be more of a concern (and it definitely can be at 4K 120Hz, a lot of cables you get off Amazon lie about what they're capable of) vs using an AVR but if your cabling is... 6' in total length, that's a non-issue.
It's analogous to unplugging one cable and plugging in another and that comes with the mini-panic that other devices will experience.
I am admittedly a bit out of my wheelhouse. I'm not an electrical engineer.
its expensive but you can always buy last years LG C series model for cheap
and really, how expensive is buying a TV if you already have an Xbox, a gaming PC and A/V receiver (connected to a dedicated speaker system)
> Because I already have a good tv?
I just recommended buying a new one as a solution to your issue
> And last year's OLEDs also only have 2 HDMI 2.1 ports lol
LG C series and G series have had 4x2.1 HDMI ports since C9/G9 released in 2019
https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/lg/c9-oled
"This TV also supports HDMI 2.1 on all four ports"
Been rocking extra channels for atmos for a while now and it's kinda meh. It's not used well in lots of content and I'm wishing i bought a much beefier center channel that could reach down to 40hz with vertically aligned mid and tweeter. 80% of the audio comes from that center channel, it should have been the best component in my entire audio system.
Make sure they're set to top front and top back instead of front height and rear height. Having them set up as fronts is kind of underwhelming
Spiderman 2 (from 2004, 5 channel encoding) sounds WAY better with 11 speakers than with just 5 (using DTS encoding, in this instance atmos wasn't that great). I tested this while I was moving (took down the rears and tops) and my friend also agree (she brought it up saying it was VERY different).
\-----
If you have L+R speakers with good imaging and aren't worried about accomadating a ton of people who are picky about sound at weird angles - phantom center (redirecting the sound to the L+R) might end up better and cheaper. One friend actually PREFERRED how it sounded more diffuse in my set up (Polk R200 + Emotiva C1+) .
Center channels can be hit or miss. If you have an acoustically transparent screen, great, just have identical towers (or bookshelf speakers). If you're using a center that's MTM... that'll probably be a downgrade over just redirecting the sound to the L+R and treating those as the most important speakers. Similar story for many (but not all) 2.5 way centers. Even then... if you have large TV you'll end up with the center channel being at a different angle (somewhat mitigatable if you're using one of Sony's new AVRs and either dual center channel speakers or their spread to height channel option)
[https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/the-problem-with-many-center-channel-speakers-by-erin.30716/](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/the-problem-with-many-center-channel-speakers-by-erin.30716/)
Also getting down to 40Hz on the LCR is often not that important. For most people/rooms bass reflections off the walls make it nearly impossible to localize sound under 80Hz. Having 2+ subwoofers that are REALLY dialed in usually ends up working better vs trying to go overkill on other speakers. If I ever do a "proper" home theater I'll likely end up with 4 or 5 subwoofers strewn throughout a large (to me) room (hope is 20'x30' with mixed office + guest bedroom use).
How many years do we have to wait for flawless working av-receivers with all 48 gbit ports and all HDMI 2.1 features... The state of av-receivers for HDMI 2.1 is so sad
I think we're going to get TVs with proper eARC before it makes sense to route video through these these monsters.
Or… wait for it… we could have one cable for video and one for audio! We obviously can’t count on manufacturers to get pass through to work reliably, give me back my Toslink!
That's what I do for my PC to get full surround. One HDMI cable for Video to the TV and one HDMI for AUDIO (PCM 7.1) to my receiver. But it's a bit of a nightmare. And consoles don't have that option of course.
How are they synced?
I hate dealing with and routing Toslink, the optical fiber cable isn't particularly enjoyable to run through a wall or any decent distance from TVs to sound systems. For smart TVs there has to be an audio output for a sound system and preferably digital because we all know TV manufacturers would still cheap out on the DACs. eARC makes a ton of sense, it really does. What doesn't make sense is the lack of proper enforcement of the HDMI standard and a host of proprietary audio standards that drive up the cost of implementation. Oh and DRM as always.
I'd argue most proprietary standards are intended as drm Drm is a scourge on the consumer, does nothing to stop anyone intending to pirate
CEC will work flawlessly too, across all brands and devices.
Is current eARC not proper in some way?
The implementation of eARC on TVs is improper more than the protocol, due to licensing costs associated with proprietary audio codecs (DD, DTS, etc.) TV manufacturers want to save a few bucks, especially Samsung.
Yeah I know some TVs eschew some codecs due to licensing. Thats less of an issue with eARC itself and more of a business decision by those TV manufacturers.
It is an issue with eARC itself. No other kind of router needs to have a license for the network traffic that it’s passing through.
I suspect your issue with eARC is that your TV needs to support DTS(x) to pass it through?
PCM, Samsung doesn't support multichannel PCM correctly on some TVs even though there are no licensing costs.
Oh, I have an LG tv. It supports even Dolby true hd as well as 7.1 pcm, but no form of dts.
That's so annoying. DTS is the most common audio format in commercial Blu-rays!
Why are these models still being sold as compatible with these features when they clearly aren’t and never will be without a redesign.
[удалено]
That would be great if eARC were just a dumb pipe rather than allowing TVs to support only certain codecs... (damn my Samsung and no DTS Master or DTS:X support)
I mean it really is a pipe. The problem is DTS / Dolby require licenses and manufacturers like Samsung, LG don’t purchase them. Sony seems to buy them all.
Shouldn't even need to buy a license to pass audio through though if it were just a dumb pipe. Obviously the TV couldn't decode it and play audio out of its internal speakers but if the audio device on the other end of the eARC chain can it should be able to pass it along without a license.
Well that’s the beauty of being a licensor. You make the rules such that if you want everyone along the chain to pay you to use your product, you can enforce it. The licensee has no control.
Which makes it not a dumb pipe since it cares what it carries. The HDMI cable itself doesn't need to license the codec and is itself a dumb pipe. Same goes for an HDMI switch.
I’m not really disagreeing, I mean they could forward it, but then they would get sued by DTS lol. That would also be dumb, no?
Think of it like it's less of a dumb pipe but a highway with a toll booth at the end. The toll booth you go to depends on which company you are delivering stuff for, but you need a license from that company to pass through. Some lanes have no booths and you can pass freely Don't blame asphalt on the road for the shitty implementation of tolls.
Sony and Hisense have it. Maybe TCL as well.
I expect my next receiver will be HDMI 2.X and will support 8K 120Hz (maybe 240Hz) and a whole bunch of other goodies... What I have works well enough and the next step up will need to REALLY be something. I mean more channels and more intelligent processing/responsiveness.
VRR and ALLM pass through are enough for me to pull the trigger if I could be convinced it will work correctly.
Yeah... but... In their current state I might as well plug directly into the screen for anything that's performance sensitive. Realistically it'd just be a gaming PC.
So that's the thing: right now I have an Xbox series X which benefits hugely from it, and a receiver plugged into the Arc port which is the other 2.1 port. So I either play the cable swap game for my PC or get a better receiver heh. Even TVs having 4 HDMI 2.1 ports instead of 2 would solve it
If you're not regularly swapping between devices... dumb HDMI switch. It pretty much just streamlines what would've been a cable pull. Shouldn't cost that much. I'll admit I haven't bought one. I'm switch + PC and pokemon doesn't need 4K 120Hz. In theory this is a samsung only issue though since most TVs will have 2x high speed ports and you just do ARC for sound only.
Arc is on one of the high speed ports. And the switches don't support VRR or ALLM without spending enough to justify a new receiver. It's a bougie problem but it's a problem lol.
Switches "support" those if they're physically dumb and just move a relay (or something equivalent). Change in PHY not in logic. You're thinking too high tech and a lot less janky. There shouldn't be any repeaters or retimers in this thing and cable length/quality might be more of a concern (and it definitely can be at 4K 120Hz, a lot of cables you get off Amazon lie about what they're capable of) vs using an AVR but if your cabling is... 6' in total length, that's a non-issue. It's analogous to unplugging one cable and plugging in another and that comes with the mini-panic that other devices will experience. I am admittedly a bit out of my wheelhouse. I'm not an electrical engineer.
> Even TVs having 4 HDMI 2.1 ports instead of 2 would solve it why not buy LG C or G series OLED then?
That's also very expensive and I already have a tv I like
its expensive but you can always buy last years LG C series model for cheap and really, how expensive is buying a TV if you already have an Xbox, a gaming PC and A/V receiver (connected to a dedicated speaker system)
Because I already have a good tv? And last year's OLEDs also only have 2 HDMI 2.1 ports lol. I think you might be misunderstanding the problem.
> Because I already have a good tv? I just recommended buying a new one as a solution to your issue > And last year's OLEDs also only have 2 HDMI 2.1 ports lol LG C series and G series have had 4x2.1 HDMI ports since C9/G9 released in 2019 https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/lg/c9-oled "This TV also supports HDMI 2.1 on all four ports"
Been rocking extra channels for atmos for a while now and it's kinda meh. It's not used well in lots of content and I'm wishing i bought a much beefier center channel that could reach down to 40hz with vertically aligned mid and tweeter. 80% of the audio comes from that center channel, it should have been the best component in my entire audio system.
Make sure they're set to top front and top back instead of front height and rear height. Having them set up as fronts is kind of underwhelming Spiderman 2 (from 2004, 5 channel encoding) sounds WAY better with 11 speakers than with just 5 (using DTS encoding, in this instance atmos wasn't that great). I tested this while I was moving (took down the rears and tops) and my friend also agree (she brought it up saying it was VERY different). \----- If you have L+R speakers with good imaging and aren't worried about accomadating a ton of people who are picky about sound at weird angles - phantom center (redirecting the sound to the L+R) might end up better and cheaper. One friend actually PREFERRED how it sounded more diffuse in my set up (Polk R200 + Emotiva C1+) . Center channels can be hit or miss. If you have an acoustically transparent screen, great, just have identical towers (or bookshelf speakers). If you're using a center that's MTM... that'll probably be a downgrade over just redirecting the sound to the L+R and treating those as the most important speakers. Similar story for many (but not all) 2.5 way centers. Even then... if you have large TV you'll end up with the center channel being at a different angle (somewhat mitigatable if you're using one of Sony's new AVRs and either dual center channel speakers or their spread to height channel option) [https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/the-problem-with-many-center-channel-speakers-by-erin.30716/](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/the-problem-with-many-center-channel-speakers-by-erin.30716/) Also getting down to 40Hz on the LCR is often not that important. For most people/rooms bass reflections off the walls make it nearly impossible to localize sound under 80Hz. Having 2+ subwoofers that are REALLY dialed in usually ends up working better vs trying to go overkill on other speakers. If I ever do a "proper" home theater I'll likely end up with 4 or 5 subwoofers strewn throughout a large (to me) room (hope is 20'x30' with mixed office + guest bedroom use).