Kaleidescape Owners' Forum   Kaleidescape, Inc. Kaleidescape, Inc.

Go Back   Kaleidescape Owners' Forum > Hardware & Setup Threads > Kaleidescape Hardware & Setup

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old Mar 2nd, 2016
Kicker Kicker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 73
Default

I'm anxiously awaiting proven results. I'll be connecting to a Sony VPL-VW665ES and it would really suck if the cable was the one thing holding me back!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old Mar 2nd, 2016
MikeKobb MikeKobb is offline
Kaleidescape, Inc.
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 726
Default

My recommendation at this point is if you do decide to acquire a cable to try it out, be sure to buy one that is returnable. 18 Gbps is a brand new technology, and we're tested several cables that were claimed to work at that speed, but did not.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old Mar 2nd, 2016
RAV RAV is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 128
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrolicBeast View Post
Is relocation of video equipment an option for you? Just looking for a shoulder to cry on here.
My setup is in our living room, which is being fully converted into a home theater. So my equipment relocation option...would be out the front window and into our front yard!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old Mar 3rd, 2016
dnanian dnanian is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 38
Default

I don't mean to ask a stupid question, so forgive me if this seems dumb.

Given the networks we're using are likely to be gigabit-or-slower, the bandwidth requirements of the codec have to be a fraction of that. Even at full gigabit speeds, that would imply an 18-to-1 data rate compression, which seems really high.

It looks like the Atlona solution for this only supports 2.2 and a 10Gbps data rate (http://atlona.com/product/at-uhd-ex-100cea-kit/), but it's doing that over regular Gig-E too.

So...how do you push 18Gbps (or even 10Gbps, since the Atlona is at the HDMI level, post-CODEC) over 1Gbps?

Like I said...sorry if this is dumb.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old Mar 3rd, 2016
MikeKobb MikeKobb is offline
Kaleidescape, Inc.
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 726
Default

The key is that they're not pushing 10 Gbps over Ethernet. They're pushing it over an 8-wire cable of a type that also gets used for Ethernet. They have the advantage of not having to support equal bandwidth in both directions (since the enormous majority of the data is flowing from the source to the display), and they can choose different modulation schemes and so on.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old Mar 3rd, 2016
HiFiGuy1 HiFiGuy1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: LA (Lower Alabama)
Posts: 303
Default

For everyone's general knowledge, Zektor is about to release a lineup of several full 18G matrix switchers called Palladia IV starting near the first of June 2016. They will have HDMI 2.0a and HDCP 2.2, so they'll be capable of passing HDR10 and, I've been told, even Dolby Vision. If you have to use the parallel HDBaseT outputs you will get UHD without HDR for now, but they are also going to have a fiber transmission solution in the near future, and this will be able to carry full UltraHD Premium. The Palladia IV units in the field will be upgrade-able with field-replaceable modules to bring them to the new spec. There will be 4x4x8, 6x6x8, 8x8x16, and 16x16x32, referring to HDMI in x HDMI out x audio in/out.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old Mar 3rd, 2016
djb_rh's Avatar
djb_rh djb_rh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 301
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeKobb View Post
The key is that they're not pushing 10 Gbps over Ethernet. They're pushing it over an 8-wire cable of a type that also gets used for Ethernet. They have the advantage of not having to support equal bandwidth in both directions (since the enormous majority of the data is flowing from the source to the display), and they can choose different modulation schemes and so on.
The question is more about how it needs to be 18Gbs at all. If the content is getting from a server to a player, it's got to do it over a 1Gbs-ish network, which means it must be something less than 1Gbs. But even if it's exactly that, that would mean it was an 18-to-1 compression ratio, which he's saying seems way too high. But is it? Either it isn't, or there's some other reason why you need near 18Gbs of transfer rate.


--Donnie
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old Mar 3rd, 2016
MikeKobb MikeKobb is offline
Kaleidescape, Inc.
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 726
Default

Keep in mind that HDMI is completely uncompressed. Every pixel in the black bars of a 2.35 movie is using exactly as much bandwidth on the HDMI link as the pixels in the active area, and every pixel in the frame is sent every single time, whether it changed or not.

Compare this with a highly efficient codec like HEVC, which will burn almost no bandwidth on those letterboxed areas, and will also very efficiently compress parts of the image that don't change from frame to frame, and you can get very high compression while still maintaining excellent image quality. It's not uncommon for HEVC to compress more than 100:1 compared to fully uncompressed video.

Stepping back to a broader question: When do you really need an 18 Gbps link, versus a 10.2 Gbps link?

At the present time, all of our 4K Ultra HD content on the Movie Store is 2160p/24, 10-bit color, 4:2:0 sampling. That format fits just fine on a 10.2 Gbps HDMI link.

But, perhaps you prefer for your player to output 60fps all the time, so there's no mode switch between the onscreen display and content. We can't carry 2160p/60, 10-bit, 4:2:0 in 10.2 Gbps, so you have to step up to an 18 Gbps connection, or we have to down-sample the color in the movie to 8-bit color.

If you don't mind the mode switch, then you are losing nothing by running on a 10.2 Gbps HDMI link, except that the onscreen display will be output in 4:2:0 color sampling rather than its native 4:4:4.

If and when we get true 60fps 4K Ultra HD content in the Movie Store, though, you will really want to have that 18 Gbps link to see it at its best.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old Mar 4th, 2016
dnanian dnanian is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 38
Default

Ah, I didn't realize that HDMI is sending totally uncompressed video (not even lossless), so the bandwidth makes sense. And -- indeed -- they're not actually running as "ethernet" but rather "over ethernet cables", which is different.

Honestly, for all the "niceness" of a single-cable solution, HDMI is kind of a consumer nightmare. It's kind of amazing that I can't even use an HDMI switch with HDCP 2.2, because there basically aren't any.

If I ever tear down this house and rebuild it, I'm clearly going to have to run 10 runs of ethernet to every socket to "future proof" it. (And even that probably won't be sufficient!)
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old Mar 4th, 2016
Funky Weasel Funky Weasel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dnanian View Post
Honestly, for all the "niceness" of a single-cable solution, HDMI is kind of a consumer nightmare.
Try running a business around it
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
4k, cable, hdmi, strato, uhd

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ?2006 - KscapeOwners.com.
THIS SITE IS NOT OWNED BY, OPERATED BY, OR AFFILIATED IN ANY WAY WITH KALEIDESCAPE INC.
"Kaleidescape" is a trademark of Kaleidescape, Inc.; it is registered in some jurisdictions.