• Welcome to The Audio Annex! If you have any trouble logging in or signing up, please contact 'admin - at - theaudioannex.com'. Enjoy!
  • HTTPS (secure web browser connection) has been enabled - just add "https://" to the start of the URL in your address bar, e.g. "https://theaudioannex.com/forum/"
  • Congratulations! If you're seeing this notice, it means you're connected to the new server. Go ahead and post as usual, enjoy!
  • I've just upgraded the forum software to Xenforo 2.0. Please let me know if you have any problems with it. I'm still working on installing styles... coming soon.

4K TV is real... who's getting one first?

I am betting that someday I will be able to purchase upgrades for the movies in my UltraViolet library.
 
Haywood said:
I've been presuming an up-converted 1080p source, since there currently aren't any 4k sources and I doubt there will be for awhile. I suspect it will be five to ten years before there's a lot of native 4k programming. Thus my contention that it makes little difference.
Click to expand...

Agree with you completely there. I saw upconverted 1080p Blu-Ray...meh. No big deal.
 
Haywood said:
Rope said:
Why 4k TVs Are Stupid

Rope
Click to expand...

This goes to my earlier point that 4k does not make sense unless you have an enormous screen. Based on the math in this article anything 80" or under at ten feet or more is pointless.
Click to expand...

Yes, but how do you propose the hardware manufactures stay in business? I'm certain no one will be suckered by the 3D thingie again, although I could be wrong. While the 3D panels were being scarfed up the manufactures were setting around in their leather chairs laughing at the thought of people running around households bumping into walls with 3D glasses on waiting for the movie to begin.

Rope
 
Wait... Didn't we go through the "it only matters on a giant screen at close distance" stuff when 1080p was gaining popularity over 720p?

Wasn't it not THAT long ago that 42" screens in living rooms were considered "huge"?
 
There is a practical limit on screen size in most non-dedicated rooms and that limit is 60-80 inches.
 
The picture on the demo I saw stunning. I was sitting about 8 feet away and it was by far the sharpest picture I've ever seen. I've done no research on this at all but why are people suggesting content is so far out on the horizon?
 
AndySTL said:
The picture on the demo I saw stunning. I was sitting about 8 feet away and it was by far the sharpest picture I've ever seen. I've done no research on this at all but why are people suggesting content is so far out on the horizon?
Click to expand...

Because the bandwith necessary to send a 4K signal is enormous. At this point most channels aren't even in 1080p
and most providers compress their signal anyway. 4K is going to be a tough slog.
 
^^^
There currently exist -0- (Zero) broadcasts in 1080p, albeit some PPV events.

Rope
 
The original HD broadcast (and current terrestrial standard) used nearly 20Mbps bandwidth to deliver 1080i or 720p HD content encoded with MPEG3 compression. Nearly all IPTV and internet delivered video is 1080p using less than 5Mbps encoded with MPEG4.

I've seen 4K video delivered at data rates as low as 7Mbps which looks amazing.

I think this notion that there isn't enough bandwidth available for 4k is a false fear. There is plenty of bandwidth available. The content distribution innovators are increasing quality whike reducing bandwidth all the time. I have a customer who claims they can deliver 4K at 2Mbps which reviles the visual quakity of the raw cinematic source.
 
Bring it on, but until I have a place to put a bigger screen than my current 67" set, I probably won't bother.
 
Flint said:
The original HD broadcast (and current terrestrial standard) used nearly 20Mbps bandwidth to deliver 1080i or 720p HD content encoded with MPEG3 compression. Nearly all IPTV and internet delivered video is 1080p using less than 5Mbps encoded with MPEG4.

I've seen 4K video delivered at data rates as low as 7Mbps which looks amazing.

I think this notion that there isn't enough bandwidth available for 4k is a false fear. There is plenty of bandwidth available. The content distribution innovators are increasing quality whike reducing bandwidth all the time. I have a customer who claims they can deliver 4K at 2Mbps which reviles the visual quakity of the raw cinematic source.
Click to expand...

Is IPTV the general practice at this point? If not, how far away from it are we?
Will everything have to transfer to IP to be able to get those? Does Satellite and/or Cable use IP?
 
Cable TV and Satellite are zombie technologies. They are already dead. They just don't know it yet. We are not that far away from a world in which all content is delivered over the internet.
 
I predict that cable operators will start selling their stuff as content packages delivered over the internet. You will be able to subscribe to packages from companies like Comcast and Time Warner, but also from a variety of newer or smaller companies. Your choice of ISP provider will be completely independent of your choice of content provider. Content providers will also have to compete with the growing pool of on demand providers who are increasingly creating their own content as well. This will likely lead to greater consumer choice, if not to lower overall cost.
 
Yes, IPTV is very real and used today by nearly all for pay service providers. AT&T Uvers has been based on IPTV since day one and to introduce HDTV on their services Time Warner and Comcast use IPTV on the demand switched channels to free bandwidth on their networks.

Netflix, iTunes, Amazon, Hulu anr all of the internet delivered video services are based on IPTV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top