BDP-93 Dual HDMI Questions...

[PearlcorderS701]

With the announcement of OPPO's BDP-93 Blu-ray Disc player which will support 3D, offer dual HDMI outs and some other upgrades, I am beginning to wonder about the relevance of our current players which boast just one HDMI out for both audio and video...

I realize that OPPO's new player will allow for feeding two separate displays via the dual HDMI outputs, but my questions involve the other option for such a setup, which is separating audio from video feeds...which many enthusiasts and experienced hobbyists feel yields the best results, always.

Right now, many people like myself are running one single HDMI connection out of a source player and sending all audio and video over that one cable -- but the 1080p video must then be sent through a routing device, like an AV receiver, to be sent off to a display. Some question the fact that these receivers are not degrading the signal quality in some way, despite what the manufacturers claim, and that the only way to send signals from a source deck is to separate the audio from video.

Which brings me to OPPO's new player -- would this player be worth looking into for an end user such as myself that would configure the dual HDMI outs to have one send audio and the other video? Would this yield, in your opinions, more pristine, unaltered video as opposed to sending the video through a receiver (which I do now with my Onkyo 605) even though it's supposed to be going straight through the AVR with no degredation? Would there be a significant difference, do you think, between separating the audio and video streams from the player so video goes directly to the display, as compared to sending it all over one HDMI cable and letting a receiver split the video?

 

[gonk]

Actually, I think the main reason for the two HDMI outputs is to split audio and video, not to feed video to two displays. The idea is that an existing HDMI v1.3 receiver may not support passing 3D video through to an HDMI v1.4 3D display, forcing users to either (1) replace their receiver or (2) fall back to coaxial/optical or multichannel analog audio with HDMI directly connected to the TV. Having two HDMI outputs mean you can have the HDMI v1.4 devices connected directly (BDP-93 to display) and then run the other HDMI output to an HDMI v1.3 (or v1.1, for that matter) surround receiver. That is the biggest reason for two HDMI outputs on 3D BD players.

You don't have to be messing with 3D for the premise to work. You could do the same thing with the two HDMI outputs in a purely 2D HDMI setup.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Actually, I think the main reason for the two HDMI outputs is to split audio and video, not to feed video to two displays. The idea is that an existing HDMI v1.3 receiver may not support passing 3D video through to an HDMI v1.4 3D display, forcing users to either (1) replace their receiver or (2) fall back to coaxial/optical or multichannel analog audio with HDMI directly connected to the TV. Having two HDMI outputs mean you can have the HDMI v1.4 devices connected directly (BDP-93 to display) and then run the other HDMI output to an HDMI v1.3 (or v1.1, for that matter) surround receiver. That is the biggest reason for two HDMI outputs on 3D BD players.

You don't have to be messing with 3D for the premise to work. You could do the same thing with the two HDMI outputs in a purely 2D HDMI setup.

Right -- and that's what OPPO explained to me in an e-mail, that the idea is to send audio to an HDMI 1.3a receiver, while sending 3D video information direct to a 3D TV; I just mentioned the two display thing because that's how many of the expensive Denons and Marantzes that include two HDMI outs market their players, that it could actually feed two displays if someone wanted...

But what I am more concerned with is if getting a player with dual HDMI outs could benefit even someone who isn't getting into 3D, but would prefer their audio and video be separated so one goes to the receiver for audio, and the other to the display for 1080p video (without 3D capability), for the sheer purpose of the video being "more pure" because it's not passing through a receiver...

Here's a good example...my own! Right now, I have one HDMI cable going from my BDP-83 to an Onkyo 605, and then a second HDMI cable going from the 605 to my Sony rear projection HDTV. Using this method, ALL audio and video is transferred over one HDMI cable from the player, but the video must be "split" at the receiver so it can be sent off to the display -- I just worry that in doing this, the video is somehow being degraded because it isn't going straight to the TV (even though this AVR is supposed to be pure HDMI passthrough). And so, I am wondering if it would be more beneficial for someone like me to get a new player like the BDP-93 that offers two HDMI outs not because I am getting into 3D -- but because I too would like to separate audio from video for purity purposes...

I hope that made it clearer...

 

[gonk]

Well, there are some receivers that don't provide a clear pass-through - some that make it impossible to pass without some alteration, or that can't pass 24p, or that can't pass 1080p without changing to 1080i and back (although they are more and more rare these days). For receivers like that, the BDP-93's dual outputs could be very useful. I don't recall ever hearing that the Onkyo 605 was subject to any such limitations, though, so I don't know if you fall into that camp.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Well, there are some receivers that don't provide a clear pass-through - some that make it impossible to pass without some alteration, or that can't pass 24p, or that can't pass 1080p without changing to 1080i and back (although they are more and more rare these days). For receivers like that, the BDP-93's dual outputs could be very useful. I don't recall ever hearing that the Onkyo 605 was subject to any such limitations, though, so I don't know if you fall into that camp.

Indeed, and this has always been the question -- of whether or not a receiver is actually clipping any incoming video information; as you said, the 605 is supposedly supposed to send 1080p video straight through with no degredation and according to all reports it does, but I just wanted some input as to whether getting a new player that separates audio from video in the HDMI outputs would be beneficial as opposed to letting audio and video go over one cable, as my setup allows for now.

 

[bandphan]

With the announcement of OPPO's BDP-93 Blu-ray Disc player which will support 3D, offer dual HDMI outs and some other upgrades, I am beginning to wonder about the relevance of our current players which boast just one HDMI out for both audio and video...

I realize that OPPO's new player will allow for feeding two separate displays via the dual HDMI outputs, but my questions involve the other option for such a setup, which is separating audio from video feeds...which many enthusiasts and experienced hobbyists feel yields the best results, always.

Right now, many people like myself are running one single HDMI connection out of a source player and sending all audio and video over that one cable -- but the 1080p video must then be sent through a routing device, like an AV receiver, to be sent off to a display. Some question the fact that these receivers are not degrading the signal quality in some way, despite what the manufacturers claim, and that the only way to send signals from a source deck is to separate the audio from video.

Which brings me to OPPO's new player -- would this player be worth looking into for an end user such as myself that would configure the dual HDMI outs to have one send audio and the other video? Would this yield, in your opinions, more pristine, unaltered video as opposed to sending the video through a receiver (which I do now with my Onkyo 605) even though it's supposed to be going straight through the AVR with no degredation? Would there be a significant difference, do you think, between separating the audio and video streams from the player so video goes directly to the display, as compared to sending it all over one HDMI cable and letting a receiver split the video?

Get a new display first