HDMI 2.0 / 4K UHD (2160p) Resolutions and new HDTVs

[admin]

The HDMI 2.0 specification is about to be released. What does this mean for existing HDTV's, AV Receivers and Blu-ray players you're buying today? Quite possibly you will be buying replacements to them if you care about next generation HD video as well as supporting Dolby ATMOS.

The board of the HDMI Forum has already officially announced HDMI 2.0, so we're now simply waiting for the details to firm up when it is released in the first half of 2013.

Discuss "HDMI 2.0 Specification and 4K UHD (2160p) Resolutions" here. HDMI 2.0.

 

[GlocksRock]

Seeing as how I just bought a new tv and receiver, I doubt I'll be upgrading again anytime soon. But I am excited to see what new features are included with HDMI 2.0.

 

[nickboros]

This article just confirms that it does not pay to be an early adopter. There have already been 4k televisions sold, yet there isn't an hdmi standard to even get any 4k content to that tv. Also, it seems that there may be a better solution than hdmi (which I'm sure is not on 4k televisions being sold at this point either). Most manufacturers have gotten to the point of releasing a new product that hasn't been fully tested for everything working as expected, in terms of software. They expect the consumers to be the beta testers and then just fix it with a firmware update. The new 4k tvs just push things even further. Some manufacturers may give you a way of updating the hardware so that it will properly display the at the 4k resolution, which was the entire reason for buying the overly priced tv in the first place! This is almost like if you were going to buy a new sports car, say a Corvette. When they sold you the car they weren't quite finished with the development of the engine yet, so they just throw in a v6 they were using in the Impalas. Then a year or two down the line you have the option of having the proper engine put in, at your cost.

 

[dingus48]

Meh. HDMI in any of its forms were DOA technologically, having been crippled with a parallel form of communciation that is at the heart of its difficulty or inability to be used over distances needed in many homes. HDMI would be wise to switch to a serial communication method to essentially eliminate its transmission difficulty. Maintaining its legacy DVI heritage with its parallel method is of value only to those with .... well, I actually have no idea what value DVI compatibility has at this point.

Thunderbolt looked interesting to me as the "one connector" I could potentially use across many devices and distances, but I never looked into the details to see if it had what major A/V equipment manufacturers wanted. Is Thunderbolt a more reasonable and practical connector for current and upcoming A/V content, or at least better than HDMI or other parallel method?

 

[internetmin]

Ditto with DisplayPort

The promise of HDMI has been like a carrot on a stick. The promise is there but you never get it all. I've personally had great experiences with display port and would prefer to see that--or even better, HD-BaseT, as the new standard. HD-BaseT would give bandwidth, power, cheap, and tremendous flexibility to homes with existing structured wiring.

I've had nothing but issues over time with several HDMI handshaking issues and the connector falling out if I move a component in my rack. I don't see much changing in the proposed 2.0 spec. I'd really like to see HDMI go into the sunset and be replaced by another standard--either displayport or HD-BaseT with my preference being HD-BaseT.

 

[avliner]

IMHO, if they'd have done the right thing since day one, all current HDMI cables were to be made with fiber optics instead, which has a zillion times more bandwidth than analogue ones, though.

 

[mlknez]

What is so sad, is that we are still not talking about audio working well with the new standard. Audio signals over HDMI suffer from jitter and are timed and tied to a video frame. We need a standard that does not tie the audio and video to the same bad performance.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

what's exactly what I need a new HDMI standard, gosh, finally. Can't wait to change all my equipment. update all these adapters, baluns, cables and extenders.
I know no one will ever confuse hdmi 1.2 and hdmi 2.0
This is how do things right !


/s

 

[Adam]

Honestly, I like HDMI. Sure, I might have been happier with some other universal audio/video connection, but being able to run everything that I want through one cable was a huge improvement over the stuff before it. I know some people have, but I've never had HDMI connectors come out, break off, or whatever. The new Redmere cables are awesome, IMO. So easy to use and route through my system.

 

[avliner]

Adam,

I'm with you on that one though. BTW, I just got a 40ft Redmere from Monoprice yesterday and it's a pretty awesome cable indeed!

 

[Cygnus]

Honestly, I like HDMI. Sure, I might have been happier with some other universal audio/video connection, but being able to run everything that I want through one cable was a huge improvement over the stuff before it. I know some people have, but I've never had HDMI connectors come out, break off, or whatever. The new Redmere cables are awesome, IMO. So easy to use and route through my system.

Yeah, the only problems I've had with HDMI so far are when a cable fails, and even that doesn't seem to be too often. I'm glad I haven't upgraded anything yet, and I'll be waiting for a bit, 'till there's new equipment out, to take advantage of the new spec

 

[BMXTRIX]

HDMI is an awesome tech, and DisplayPort is nothing more than the bastard solution to a problem which never existed. Nobody needs DisplayPort at all, so I'm perfectly fine with that never walking anywhere at all. HD-Base-T though... is ... a.w.e.s.o.m.e.

Panasonic has a native HD-Base-T connection on a couple of their projectors now and it's great...

But, all of this is pointless and stupid. What matters is not the connector, it is the capability, and HDMI has been so focused on UHD that they have completely blown audio. As mentioned above, there are inherent flaws which have not been corrected at all. ARC is extremely poorly implemented in almost all A/V receivers and devices as well. Does your receiver have a button on the remote which says "ARC"? No, it REQUIRES CEC, which is another item which has been one of the most poorly implemented items in the history of A/V it's amazing.

Then we get the one-cable solution which just flat out doesn't work in ANY receiver in the world.

Zone 2 audio.

To get audio to a second zone a full set of DSPs needs to be in place along with HDMI matrixing within a receiver - and no receiver in the world does that right now. What is needed is an available set of audio channels to provide 2 channel PCM audio for stereo audio extraction native in A/V receivers and to actually be able to deliver on the one-cable promise.

Now, hopefully HD-Base-T will keep up with HDMI 2.0, but it is currently based upon an incomplete version of HDMI 1.4. It's amazing, but pricey, we shall see.

HDMI.org is barely keeping up with what is required, and failing to inspire things which are already well past being needed. But, it is the standard and people should not be demanding DisplayPort or Fiber - they should demand that the standard which is in place, meet the requirements which are actually necessary.

 

[internetmin]

HDMI is an awesome tech, and DisplayPort is nothing more than the bastard solution to a problem which never existed. Nobody needs DisplayPort at all, so I'm perfectly fine with that never walking anywhere at all. HD-Base-T though... is ... a.w.e.s.o.m.e.

Panasonic has a native HD-Base-T connection on a couple of their projectors now and it's great...

But, all of this is pointless and stupid. What matters is not the connector, it is the capability, and HDMI has been so focused on UHD that they have completely blown audio. As mentioned above, there are inherent flaws which have not been corrected at all. ARC is extremely poorly implemented in almost all A/V receivers and devices as well. Does your receiver have a button on the remote which says "ARC"? No, it REQUIRES CEC, which is another item which has been one of the most poorly implemented items in the history of A/V it's amazing.

Then we get the one-cable solution which just flat out doesn't work in ANY receiver in the world.

Zone 2 audio.

To get audio to a second zone a full set of DSPs needs to be in place along with HDMI matrixing within a receiver - and no receiver in the world does that right now. What is needed is an available set of audio channels to provide 2 channel PCM audio for stereo audio extraction native in A/V receivers and to actually be able to deliver on the one-cable promise.

Now, hopefully HD-Base-T will keep up with HDMI 2.0, but it is currently based upon an incomplete version of HDMI 1.4. It's amazing, but pricey, we shall see.

HDMI.org is barely keeping up with what is required, and failing to inspire things which are already well past being needed. But, it is the standard and people should not be demanding DisplayPort or Fiber - they should demand that the standard which is in place, meet the requirements which are actually necessary.

Preach on!!!

 

[internetmin]

Honestly, I like HDMI. Sure, I might have been happier with some other universal audio/video connection, but being able to run everything that I want through one cable was a huge improvement over the stuff before it. I know some people have, but I've never had HDMI connectors come out, break off, or whatever. The new Redmere cables are awesome, IMO. So easy to use and route through my system.

I do admit that the Redmere cables are better and also thinner. I have no problem with a directional technology as long as it works. What I personally perceive happening is advancing needs and technologies seem to be like bandaids being put on the HDMI standard.

 

[palmharbor]

"Your 4 k televison?"

I would guess no more than one person owns one of these sets who reads this. 95% of people are satisfied with 1920 x 1080. 4K is like a 12 cylinder engine...yeah, Audi and Mercedes can make them but what for...there is no demand.

Sony has had multiple failures in the market and this will be another. Perhaps for commercial purposes it might be a success but that's it.

 

[BMXTRIX]

I would guess no more than one person owns one of these sets who reads this. 95% of people are satisfied with 1920 x 1080. 4K is like a 12 cylinder engine...yeah, Audi and Mercedes can make them but what for...there is no demand.

Sony has had multiple failures in the market and this will be another. Perhaps for commercial purposes it might be a success but that's it.

I won't call you clueless on this... But, well, yes I will. (in good nature of course)

UHD is the future. Just as 1080p was the future.

1920x1080 was not in demand except for front projection. A 720p 50" TV when viewed from 10' away (typical family room) does not look any better or worse than a 1080p display from the same distance. Visual acuity of the typical human eye does not resolve pixel density beyond what a 720p display can offer from that distance. Similarly, jumping to UHD won't offer one bit of improvement...

But, that has nothing to do with the price of tea in China.

The marketing behind higher resolution displays has struck a chord with consumers. Manufacturers know that 'newer' and higher resolution sell televisions, whether or not the public needs or wants it. They WILL pay a premium for higher resolution displays. This is why you see every single major consumer electronics manufacturer getting on this bandwagon. Samsung and Sony are the big guns, but we've already seen lower priced deliveries from other manufacturers. There is a race on this one to deliver UHD displays to consumers as quickly as possible, and you better believe, there are tons of people who are genuinely excited about this one.

Do I think UHD is stupid? For the most part, I really do. I have much higher expectations of what I want from a display (better colors, better black levels, OLED anyone?) but those features don't sell displays. The BETTER image from plasma displays has not been enough to push more manufactures into making them. They build what sells, and in the next five years, that will be UHD... until it is the standard.

As for Sony... They generally put more on the line in terms of new product than almost any other manufacturer, but they do so because they have amazing success with products that consumers often think 'fail'. Even silly products like "Memory Stick" sell millions of units a year and make them a great deal of money. But, this isn't a Sony product, it's a display resolution and it will become the standard which everything will move towards whether or not it is necessary.

There's not even a competitor on this one. It's not Sony vs. other technology. It's industry vs. the world, and the world is demanding UHD even though they don't need it. They will buy it and the industry will deliver. Kind of silly I know.

 

[avengineer]

Honestly, I like HDMI. Sure, I might have been happier with some other universal audio/video connection, but being able to run everything that I want through one cable was a huge improvement over the stuff before it. I know some people have, but I've never had HDMI connectors come out, break off, or whatever. The new Redmere cables are awesome, IMO. So easy to use and route through my system.

Adam,

I'm with you on that one though. BTW, I just got a 40ft Redmere from Monoprice yesterday and it's a pretty awesome cable indeed!

To fully realize how hobbled HDMI is you have to deal with a larger number of installations. HDMI is one of the most trouble-prone, time-consuming bits of technology installers face. It's actually more usual to have at least some kind of HDMI issue than not. But, installers deal with different types of installations than most consumers face. Things like longer cable runs, multiple displays with EDID issues, just to name a few.

Redmere is a blessing, true, but also has its limits. I really like that I don't have a cable the size of a automotive jumper cable torquing a little connector on the back of the AVR. I've had several clients break the HDMI connector in the AVR by not watching how the cable is dressed behind the AVR.

 

[allargon]

4k=720p

However, it's 720p without the flat panel (vs tube TV) revolution or the switch to digital from analog.

Yawn..wake me up when 8K arrives.

 

[panteragstk]

I won't call you clueless on this... But, well, yes I will. (in good nature of course)

UHD is the future. Just as 1080p was the future.

1920x1080 was not in demand except for front projection. A 720p 50" TV when viewed from 10' away (typical family room) does not look any better or worse than a 1080p display from the same distance. Visual acuity of the typical human eye does not resolve pixel density beyond what a 720p display can offer from that distance. Similarly, jumping to UHD won't offer one bit of improvement...

But, that has nothing to do with the price of tea in China.

The marketing behind higher resolution displays has struck a chord with consumers. Manufacturers know that 'newer' and higher resolution sell televisions, whether or not the public needs or wants it. They WILL pay a premium for higher resolution displays. This is why you see every single major consumer electronics manufacturer getting on this bandwagon. Samsung and Sony are the big guns, but we've already seen lower priced deliveries from other manufacturers. There is a race on this one to deliver UHD displays to consumers as quickly as possible, and you better believe, there are tons of people who are genuinely excited about this one.

Do I think UHD is stupid? For the most part, I really do. I have much higher expectations of what I want from a display (better colors, better black levels, OLED anyone?) but those features don't sell displays. The BETTER image from plasma displays has not been enough to push more manufactures into making them. They build what sells, and in the next five years, that will be UHD... until it is the standard.

As for Sony... They generally put more on the line in terms of new product than almost any other manufacturer, but they do so because they have amazing success with products that consumers often think 'fail'. Even silly products like "Memory Stick" sell millions of units a year and make them a great deal of money. But, this isn't a Sony product, it's a display resolution and it will become the standard which everything will move towards whether or not it is necessary.

There's not even a competitor on this one. It's not Sony vs. other technology. It's industry vs. the world, and the world is demanding UHD even though they don't need it. They will buy it and the industry will deliver. Kind of silly I know.

Very well said. 4k is the next evolution in resolution, but the manufacturers don't care about that part (they do, but not as much as profit). 3D was the previous "reason" to buy a new TV, but it didn't catch on like everyone thought (another discussion). I sold TV's when the "full HD" craze came about and everyone had to have 1080p. Even if they sat 30' from their 46" TV it had to be full HD. So if 1080p was "full HD" what is 4k? Oh yeah, ultra HD. 8K? Mega ultra HD or MUHD (pronounced "mud"). I can hear it now "your TV doesn't have MUHD?"

It'd be nice if there was some sort of regulatory agency responsible for making sure all these "standards" were above the current requirement so we didn't have to constantly upgrade to keep with the "current" standards. Oh wait, that would cut into profits. Oh well.

 

[Kerosene]

HDMI 2.0 and 1080p frame sequential 3D @ 120HZ?

Very interesting article!

It isn't stated in the article or the presumed specs, but I'm wondering whether we can expect HDMI 2.0 to be capable of delivering 1080p frame sequential 3D @ 120HZ? If so, would it be reasonable to expect the arrival of commodity projectors capable of this standard in the not too far future?

This would close a (in my opinion) very big gap for the utilisation of projectors for full HD/3D PC gaming.

Thanks in advance for comments/opinions!