HDMI 2.0 - worth waiting for?

[alberta98]

I've been mulling over a complete upgrade of my home cinema system but I'm a bit concerned that I might be buying into some redundant tech. So I was hoping that I might be able to get some thoughts and opinions from my fellow forum members.

Specifically I'm talking about HDMI 1.4 and the new HDMI 2.0 standard. From what I've read regarding the new standard, the following seems to be true.

(1) HDMI 2.0 will be needed for all future UHD broadcasting and video either streamed or on physical media. Whilst HDMI 1.4 can be used to run 4K at a lesser FPS, that seems to be a stop-gap in my view.

(2) the upgrade from HDMI 1.4 to 2.0 will on the whole need to be more then just a firmware upgrade. Although some TVs manufacturers will just require only a software release, this seems to be the minority from the current set of press releases. AV Receivers especially I'd imagine will need native HDMI 2.0 support.

So on the basis that the above is in the right ball park then would it be a bad idea (in your opinion) to go ahead now and invest in a new HDMI 1.4 only home cinema system, which would surely need to be replaced in 2-3 years. If I'm going to outlay circa £5k on the upgraded system then a 24-36 month lifespan seems like a poor return to me.

Any and all thoughts would be appreciated.

 

[bigboss]

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/hdmi-2-0-explained/

CES is kicking off next week. Things are likely to become more clear there.

 

[Hi-FiOutlaw]

Last week i've bought a Yamaha RX-V775 on Pixmania (just about to be delivered) my AV had 10 year, a Yamaha RX-V750 (no hdmi).

In last 3 year i've been waiting for the perfect AV to arrive to the market, or it was the airplay, or the ipad remote possibility, or the 4k pass through, or all of the abouve...

I think the tecnoligy will not stop, and what took in the past 5/6/7 years to arrive to mass markets is now faster!

Here i was completly happy with my purchase and you through me this curved ball... I don't care, 4k tecnology will be taking a few years, bluray market is growing as we speak, 4k bluray movies will take some time!

My new Yamaha has 4k pass through, i'll be needing more hdmi cables and will buy 4k ready as well, i thing l'll be updated for the next 8 years (I hope...)

 

[Paul.]

Everyone (film makers and watchers alike) seem to throw their collective toys out of the pram whenever some one dares shoot a film above 24fps, so don't think HDMI 2 will be all that necessary for movies. TV is another (much less interesting) matter.

 

[alberta98]

So CES has come and gone, but are we any clearer regarding when HDMI 2.0 will arrive across the board? I was planning to pick up a Pioneer LX57 in the January sales but decided that now perhaps wasn't the right time as it feels like there's currently 'a changing of the guard' from a technology perspective. Should I expect the Pioneer LX58 or Yamaha A4010 to have HDMI 2.0 support? It would seem highly likely but I won't hold my breath.

On a related topic, I was looking at the capabilities of HDMI 2.0 and I was shocked to see that it will struggle to support anything above 4K. As many of the major film production companies are already filming in 8K as standard and 16K is being seen as a future direction, does that mean we will need HDMI 3.0, 4.0? It seems that the hype is very much getting ahead of what's technically possible at the moment and what the industry can realistically deliver to the mass market. Don't get me wrong, I'd love an 8K and 22.2 surround sound system. I just think that we'll have driverless cars and drone-based amazon deliveries before that arrives

 

[Paul.]

On a related topic, I was looking at the capabilities of HDMI 2.0 and I was shocked to see that it will struggle to support anything above 4K. As many of the major film production companies are already filming in 8K as standard and 16K is being seen as a future direction, does that mean we will need HDMI 3.0, 4.0? It seems that the hype is very much getting ahead of what's technically possible at the moment and what the industry can realistically deliver to the mass market. Don't get me wrong, I'd love an 8K and 22.2 surround sound system. I just think that we'll have driverless cars and drone-based amazon deliveries before that arrives

I don't believe they are. This whole "Japan is skipping 4k and going straight to 8k" rumour seems to stem from NKG, who are using cameras which don't get the best out of 8k, I think they are playing marketing by numbers. For one thing, the cameras are not recording 4:4:4 colour, they are a bayer filter design. They will be using a 16mp sensor with 50% green, 25% red and 25% blue. A true cinema quality 8k camera would require around 49 megapixel resolution to achieve 4:4:4 colour. A true 4k camera will have a resolution of 26.4 megapixels, but will output in to 8.8. Although the output resolution on the NKG 8k camera is higher, the image quality on these cameras will not be better than what hollywood is currently achieving with 4k.

 

[Paul.]

With regards to your amp conundrum, buy an amp sooner rather than waiting, waiting is bad as there will always be something new on the horizon. If you need to, you can buy a bluray with dual HDMI output whenever you upgrade your TV to 4k (or whatever else should come along).

 

[professorhat]

I honestly think we're getting to the stage now where it will be irrelevant in the home. Unless you're planning to turn an entire wall of your house into a screen, most people are going to struggle to see the difference between 4K and 8K on a TV / standard home cinema screen at normal viewing distances (let alone 16K). Yes, 8K and 16K will be important in cinemas and other venues with huge screens, but it's not really a home technology in my view, apart from in some of the grandest home cinema installations.

 

[alberta98]

Some very good points indeed!

If we assume that the average person would not typically opt for a screen larger than 55" (ignoring projectors) then the case for 4K (let alone 8K or 16K) is indeed diminished as mentioned above. So on that basis the average home will never need to look towards HDMI 2.0+. I think I might still hold fire on any purchase so that I can get HDMI 2.0, and therefore lock in any future need to support 4K with 12-bit color and 60 FPS, but that's it. Especially as a house move is looking likely.

Seems like it might be time for some to get out of the TV business seeing as curved TVs, 3D and 4K are going to be hard to push onto the mass market.

 

[theflyingwasp]

Professorhat hit the nail on the head.many of us may upgrade to 4k but beyond that I doubt it .

 

[bigboss]

If we assume that the average person would not typically opt for a screen larger than 55" (ignoring projectors) then the case for 4K (let alone 8K or 16K) is indeed diminished as mentioned above.

How do you know if 55 inches is going to be enough in the future? There was a time when 32 inches was the norm, then 40-42, then 50, and now 55-65 is becoming increasingly common.

There's still a lot to cover to fill your visual field, and TVs are getting cheaper with improving resolutions. So you can actually have bigger screens at shorter viewing distances. I suspect 75-85 inches will become the norm when 4K gets cheaper.

 

[alberta98]

75-85 inches? really? You'd definitely need a bigger boat. Plus you'd have to have a very understanding other half to get that through the door.

My comment about most consumers opting for a max of 55" (ok perhaps I can see some going for 65") is that you get to a point where the A/V benefits start to outweigh the aesthetic impact. I'd identify myself as a tech-head but I don't think I'd go for anything 65" even if I had the opportunity. If there is indeed such a glass ceiling for screen size that the average consumer would be willing to accept, then that would also bring in a level of screen resolution beyond which the consumer would not be able to see any visible difference. This comes back to my previous point that this could remove any future need, within the home, for standards greater than HDMI 2.0 IMHO. The real changes in this area I think will be in the mass adoption of streamed TV as opposed to any eventual take up of 8K, 16K ... but then that's for another post!

 

[bigboss]

75-85 inches? really? You'd definitely need a bigger boat. Plus you'd have to have a very understanding other half to get that through the door.

When most TVs on the shop floor are 75-85 inches, it won't be that hard to convince!

I think TVs will eventually replace window panes, so it won't affect the aesthetics one bit.