anyone else waiting for hdmi 2.0?

[saywhat]

I see there may be some info released sept 12 of this year finally on hdmi 2.0.
Ive been putting off any major purchase of a new preamp and bluray player until the new spec comes out and starts showing up in actual on the shelf inventory. Is anyone else that is looking to buy waiting till the new spec comes out?
Just curious I hate to throw down several thousand dollars only to find out my new multi thousand dollar preamp and bluray player cant be upgraded via firmware and to get the new spec i must buy another multi thousand dollar preamp and bluray player.

 

[jinjuku]

I'm actually waiting (hopefully not too long) for HDBaseT to make more inroads in the consumer space.

 

[cpp]

Clint did a rewrite earlier this year
HDMI 2.0 Specification and 4K UHD (2160p) Resolutions | Audioholics


To bad there is no specification to make all HDMI connectors lock into place.

 

[j_garcia]

I've had an HDMI cable come loose maybe once or twice, so I don't really see locking as an issue. I'd rather have the cable unplug rather than pull the monitor down too (though it isn't coming off my mount any time soon )

 

[saywhat]

As for HDBaseT I would like that as well but I dont see it happening any time soon. I think we're stuck with hdmi for quite some time.
And as for hdmi cables pulling out Ive never had that problem either on several of my installs so I would say its a non issue for me (until the time comes they do slip out).
I'm hoping 2.0 will be firmware upgradeable or just buy a new cable like we did with some of the other updates to hdmi like hdmi 2.1 or 2.2 etc in the future.

 

[cpp]

I've had an HDMI cable come loose maybe once or twice, so I don't really see locking as an issue. I'd rather have the cable unplug rather than pull the monitor down too (though it isn't coming off my mount any time soon )

Never had an issue with a monitor it's that worthless cable box that always seem to be somewhat loose when something is not right in TV land. New cable old cable, new cable box it doesn't make any difference.

 

[Rickster71]

Some info, hope it's not a repeat.

HDMI 2.0 officially announced: 18Gbps bandwidth, 60fps 4K, 32 channel audio
18Gbps bandwidth, 60fps 4K, 32 channel audio

 

[greatdavide]

I wasn't clear if that was lossless audio on 32 channels. Anyone know if there is heavy compression going on there?

 

[avengineer]

32 channels of 24/96 uncompressed would be 74Mbps. With 18Gbps available, and 2160p video taking around 8Gbps, there's plenty of room for high rate, high bit depth audio. Since we don't NEED 32 channels of 24/96, and will likely never use more than 12 at 16/48, looks like they finally future-proofed the audio part of HDMI.

Just to add $.02 on the connector...it's terrible. No, a single user won't usually see a problem with it not locking, but installers do all the time. It's a mess. Horribly fragile too. 26ga HDMI cables are hose-like and can snap a connector off the circuit board in an AVR without any trouble, and pull connectors out easily. You home guys just don't see enough of it to know how bad it is, not to mention how touchy and difficult complex runs can be. Every other cable in custom install can be pulled, cut to length, and field terminated. Not HDMI! So, even for modest runs, if you want to be neat you're quickly into HDMI over CAT5. Can't wait to see what 2.0 Cat5 drivers cost.

HDMI 2.0 is following the same path that cell phones do when they upgrade. Add more features nobody needs, wants, or uses, and ignore the fact that the phone itself is terrible. HDMI 2.0 is doing the same thing. Sure, we need 2160p, and a few more channels of audio might be nice. And a more forward-thinking over-design is a nice change for the Consortium...out of character, thankfully. But they have not solved any of the big issues with HDMI: fragile, non-locking connectors, unreliable in long runs, HDCP and EDID stumbles, and your choice of unwieldy thick cables or thin fragile active ones.

I see no need to hold out for 2.0 to make a purchase unless you are planning for a huge 2160p display with 11.2 surround or greater. That's about 0.001% of us. And there's no content for any of that, and won't be for quite some time. And by the time there is, we'll all have to upgrade to HDMI 2.1a/b/c/d/whatever.

Holding off an investment to wait for future developments only reduces the time we have to enjoy it.


Sorry, not an HDMI fan yet. Now, if you want to talk Display Port....

 

[BMXTRIX]

I have as much love for Display Port as I do for HDMI.

HD-Base-T is a true hero in my book. Forget everything else! 1080p straight to some Panasonic projectors and a unified Cat distribution standard which is used by dozens of companies ranging from Monoprice to Crestron. Field terminatable connections using cheap cable and a reliable connection.

EDID and HDCP aren't a HDMI issue as that has been implemented across a variety of digital connections starting with DVI, so I certainly won't yell at HDMI about that absurdity which will likely be around for years if not decades to come.

But, a ultra lightweight non-active HDMI cable to a HD-Base-T extender, 300' out to a display, with either a direct HD-Base-T connection or a local box fed with power over HD-Base-T is really cool.

I would love to see HD-Base-T get commoditized and show up as a secondary output of HD on more and more consumer devices.

I'm really hopeful that HDMI 2.0 can utilize two of those audio channels to carry stereo audio along with the surround sound mix so that a multi-zone A/V receiver can actually use a single audio connection to feed the other zones from a digital source.

 

[avengineer]

I have as much love for Display Port as I do for HDMI.

HD-Base-T is a true hero in my book. Forget everything else! 1080p straight to some Panasonic projectors and a unified Cat distribution standard which is used by dozens of companies ranging from Monoprice to Crestron. Field terminatable connections using cheap cable and a reliable connection.

EDID and HDCP aren't a HDMI issue as that has been implemented across a variety of digital connections starting with DVI, so I certainly won't yell at HDMI about that absurdity which will likely be around for years if not decades to come.

But, a ultra lightweight non-active HDMI cable to a HD-Base-T extender, 300' out to a display, with either a direct HD-Base-T connection or a local box fed with power over HD-Base-T is really cool.

I would love to see HD-Base-T get commoditized and show up as a secondary output of HD on more and more consumer devices.

I'm really hopeful that HDMI 2.0 can utilize two of those audio channels to carry stereo audio along with the surround sound mix so that a multi-zone A/V receiver can actually use a single audio connection to feed the other zones from a digital source.

I agree on the EDID/HDCP issues, it just seems that products with DVI that use those have had more attention paid to implementation. Could just be a perception.

We don't need HDMI 2.0 to get simultaneous stereo and surround, that's a downmix issue and could be handled in the AVR. If you are deriving zones from HDMI source distribution, what we need is a receiver that fakes its audio capabilities back to the source, says it's 5.1 capable, and doesn't dumb down the whole thing to stereo just because one sink is stereo, then does the downmix within itself. It's just that AVR manufacturers are clueless about what multi-zone really means. They put a Zone 2 and 3 output and they're done, ignoring all sorts of practical use matters. They're just starting to get it right, now that some AVRs will do the extra zones from digital sources rather than analog only.

 

[markw]

Well. here[/u] ya go.

Now, all you have to wait for now is for it to be implemented into the new gear. With this hobby, if you insist on waiting for the next develpoment, you'll never buy anything.

 

[saywhat]

HDMI 2.0 Explained | Everything You Should Know | Digital Trends

Looks like hdmi2.0 is just a firmware upgrade YEAH!!!!!!