3D home theatre questions.

Forums › Home Theatre (including HTPC and EPG Collector) › 3D home theatre questions.

rossmnz

507 posts

Ultimate Geek

#76248 31-Jan-2011 12:07

Hey guys,

Have purchased a new LG 3D tv the other day and have a few questions.

1. I have connected it to MySkyHDi and whilst i am happy with performance a lot of the stuff doesnt seem in full 1080p, maybe more like 720p.
Are Sky planning to update this and show more HD content shortly? What about 3D content? If so id like to futureproof and connect a 1.4 cable now given that Ill be ripping the wall open again.

2. Channel 9 in Aussie broadcasts 3D content ie State of Origin etc etc. Does that mean when it is re broadcast here it will also be in 3D?

3. Im looking at buying a 3D bluray with one particular offering from LG also catching the eye. The problem is it only has one HDMI output. It is my understanding that any audio system I look at adding to this will need to be HDMI capable ie 1.4 for the TV to get the 3D.

Should i be looking at a 3D bluray with 2x HDMI outputs so that I can run the 1.4 to the TV and the 1.3 to the sound system?

4. 1.4 HDMI cables seem to retail from $150 down to $40 or so. They are still more expensive than the normal HDMI. Is it worth me splurging $150 per cable or just get the cheaper ones? Will i notice a difference?

Im a bit of a home theatre noob so any help would be appreciated!

Cheers

Ross

The force is strong with this one!

langi27

675 posts

Ultimate Geek

#433165 31-Jan-2011 12:28

From what I've read and can figure out, the only difference between HDMI 1.3b and 1.4a cable is that some of the pairs are shielded where as before they were not. If your HDMI length is over 10meters then buy a 1.4 spec'd cable if its only a couple of meters then a good quality 1.3b cable with do the job. The spec actually refers to bandwidth throughput, the other thing to think about is your installation permanent and how easy is it to upgrade in the future, money spent now may save you in the future.

I used the 1.5meter HDMI cable that came with my PS3 and the 3D movies I've watched look as good as they ever will on a 1.4A spec'd cable.

From what I've read, sky and Freeview have no immediate plans to broadcast 3D in NZ it could be 3-5 years away, and that?s if it ever takes off. sales in 3D sets have been rubbish and its widely known the big TV makers aren't happy about it.

A good place to start with HDMI cable choice is here
http://www.rapalloav.co.nz/

In theory if a cable meets the HDMI spec, it shouldn't matter if it costs $5 or $500, its whole argument in its self, and maybe take some time to read some of the other forum discussions, but needless to say the build quality of the cable is what your paying for not the performance of the cable.

I'd not bother about looking for 3D Blu ray player with dual HDMI out's, instead look for a decent 7 channel amp that gives you dual HDMI out, this will give you greater flexibility if your using other devices like an old VCR, DVD, IPOD, etc.

JonnyCam

643 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#433174 31-Jan-2011 12:48

I have connected it to MySkyHDi and whilst i am happy with performance a lot of the stuff doesnt seem in full 1080p, maybe more like 720p.

Check the output of the MySky Box under setup, system setting, video output (something like that)

You can have the mysky set to either a fixed output up to 1080i or have it change dependng on the resolution of the program being watched.
Nobody broadcasts in 1080p - and 720p I believe looks better than 1080i - for sports anyway.

I don't think we will have many more channels in HD anytime soon, and only things marked as HD in the guide are actally HD - even if the box is outputting the SD as 720 / 1080.

Dunnersfella

4086 posts

Uber Geek

#433401 31-Jan-2011 21:16

1: There are a lot of threads that cover this off in the Sky section, but it's fair to say...
Only Sky know the answer to this.

2: Nope.
They have two broadcasts, one in 2D, one in 3D... meaning they will typcically only sell one broadcast to a NZ broadcaster. Of course, it's not beyond the realm of possibility for Sky to broadcast 3D Origin.

3: You seem a little confused re: audio systems.
They work like this...

BluRay HDMI cable runs into the amplifier (into HDMI input #1 for instance).
HDMI cable runs out of the amplifier to the TV (from the 'HDMI' out into the TV's)

If you want to add more HDMI devices to your amplifier - go nuts. Most new ones have at least 4 HDMI inputs now.

NOTE - this doesn't necessarily run true for home theatre in the box, just 'proper' home theatre amps. A 3D capable amp can run you for under $800... but the more you spend, the better it'll sound + be able to improve on the picture if you need.

4: I doubt you'll notice the difference - but if you're putting a cable in the wall, don't go overly cheap. Something with a thicker external sheath will mean it's less likely to get kinked / damaged etc.

rossmnz

507 posts

Ultimate Geek

#434144 2-Feb-2011 10:35

Thanks for the help team.

So on the basis that the HDMI cable will go from bluray to TV via the amp, will i need to get an amp thats HDMI 1.4 compatible for the 3D to work?

Or should it just pass through any HDMI port fine?

The force is strong with this one!

corksta

2397 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#434150 2-Feb-2011 10:53

rossmnz: Thanks for the help team.

So on the basis that the HDMI cable will go from bluray to TV via the amp, will i need to get an amp thats HDMI 1.4 compatible for the 3D to work?

Or should it just pass through any HDMI port fine?

Correct. Although you probably won't find many amps that are advertised as being '1.4 ready/compliant' as such. Just read all the features of any models you're interested in and if it says it is '3D ready' or words to that effect then it means it supports the HDMI 1.4 spec.

langi27

675 posts

Ultimate Geek

#434153 2-Feb-2011 10:59

If your going to buy a new 3D amp, check to see if it supports ARC (audio return channel). The ARC lets your TV feed the audio back into the amp which will save you running a separate audio cable.

julianz

118 posts

Master Geek

#434175 2-Feb-2011 11:32

I've never quite understood the ARC stuff - is that only for when your TV is acting as a source? (e.g. it has a built in Freeview tuner or something). Assuming the TV is only a final destination for audio/video then ARC is not required, correct?

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

clevedon

1059 posts

Uber Geek

#434216 2-Feb-2011 12:21

julianz: I've never quite understood the ARC stuff - is that only for when your TV is acting as a source? (e.g. it has a built in Freeview tuner or something). Assuming the TV is only a final destination for audio/video then ARC is not required, correct?

That's what I would of thought as well. Everything runs into the receiver and then only video to the TV from the receiver via one HDMI cable.

Jaxson

8041 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#434230 2-Feb-2011 12:36

Yeah in a lot of cases it really is honestly not that much extra work to bring another cable back for the TV's optical/digital coax out. It all kind off seems like one of those extra features that won't change anything from the results we're already achieving in a slightly different way.

That said it would be cool if the ARC concept worked easily and reliably.

3D wise it's probably worth mentioning that the cable going between the TV and the Receiver needs to be hdmi V1.4 rated as well as the cable betewen the bluray source player and the receiver. So that means you need 2 cables at that specification. The others from say a CD or DVD or PS3(?) etc do not need to be the more expensive/newer version as they won't gain anything from this.

rossmnz

507 posts

Ultimate Geek

#434265 2-Feb-2011 13:40

this is good.

Im getting somewhere with plans!

The force is strong with this one!

Dunnersfella

4086 posts

Uber Geek

#434468 2-Feb-2011 20:30

Remember, not all amplifiers that are '3D ready' are 1.4 spec'd. They can just pass through the signal.
Also, PS3's can work quite well as 3D playback devices.

Oh yeah, ARC is a mess for me, as alluded to earlier, it simply doesn't perform how it should all the time...

minimoke

750 posts

Ultimate Geek

#434650 3-Feb-2011 08:49

Rather than asking "3D Home Theatre Questions" we shoudl be asking "3d?".

Below is parts of a letter recently written by Walter Murch (google him) which looks at teh value of 3D. He basically says it can't be done!

Hello Roger,

...

The biggest problem with 3D, though, is the "convergence/focus" issue. A couple of the other issues -- darkness and "smallness" -- are at least theoretically solvable. But the deeper problem is that the audience must focus their eyes at the plane of the screen -- say it is 80 feet away. This is constant no matter what.

But their eyes must converge at perhaps 10 feet away, then 60 feet, then 120 feet, and so on, depending on what the illusion is. So 3D films require us to focus at one distance and converge at another. And 600 million years of evolution has never presented this problem before. All living things with eyes have always focussed and converged at the same point.

If we look at the salt shaker on the table, close to us, we focus at six feet and our eyeballs converge (tilt in) at six feet. Imagine the base of a triangle between your eyes and the apex of the triangle resting on the thing you are looking at. But then look out the window and you focus at sixty feet and converge also at sixty feet. That imaginary triangle has now "opened up" so that your lines of sight are almost -- almost -- parallel to each other.

We can do this. 3D films would not work if we couldn't. But it is like tapping your head and rubbing your stomach at the same time, difficult. So the "CPU" of our perceptual brain has to work extra hard, which is why after 20 minutes or so many people get headaches. They are doing something that 600 million years of evolution never prepared them for. This is a deep problem, which no amount of technical tweaking can fix. Nothing will fix it short of producing true "holographic" images.

....

And lastly, the question of immersion. 3D films remind the audience that they are in a certain "perspective" relationship to the image. It is almost a Brechtian trick. Whereas if the film story has really gripped an audience they are "in" the picture in a kind of dreamlike "spaceless" space. So a good story will give you more dimensionality than you can ever cope with.

So: dark, small, stroby, headache inducing, alienating. And expensive. The question is: how long will it take people to realize and get fed up?

All best wishes,

Walter Murch