Big news coming from Sound United in 2023!

[Chromatischism]

Even then - once the resolution of the individual pixels is beyond what the eye can see, at the required viewing distance.... why go any further?

With static photos you'll see the difference, especially if you get up closer to look at the detail.

The pros/cons of LED vs OLED are still the same - if you need brightness (open plan living space with large windows and sunlight streaming in...) - you sacrifice contrast and go for brightness ie: LED. If you have a light controlled environment - ie: proper home theatre, no windows, artificial lighting only.... then go for low brightness and maximum contrast.... OLED is king.

I really really wanted to go OLED - but in my setup, it would be pointless, half the time you could not see the screen - it has to be bright enough to be visible.... so LED it is!

Current OLEDs get really bright. Way brighter than I would use in a calibrated system designed to not cause eye strain. Granted, I'm not in a beach house.

 

[Sancus]

If you calculate out the requirements based on your visual acuity, and the distance from the screen, in at least 75% of use cases, 1080p is already beyond your visual acuity - and 4K is therefore unnecessary.

Not true. SMTPE recommends a *minimum* screen size of 65" at ~9(8.8)ft which is indeed too far for 4K to matter... barely. But that's a minimum! They're saying your setup is trash if it's *any lower than that*. Their reference is higher and their maximum is 60 degree viewing angle.

THX recommended is 36 degrees which works out to about 80" at 9 feet, which is in the 4K is worth it range.

Not sure what you watch on at home, but personally I think optimal is probably around the 40-45 degree point for immersiveness, but this of course varies on personal preference. Unfortunately, OLED TVs are not big and cheap enough to get there yet

Anyway my point is that 4K is useful if you have good vision and are serious about properly immersive screen sizes. Most people have too-small TVs at overly long viewing distances, so yeah, in that case 4K is not useful.

 

[dlaloum]

With static photos you'll see the difference, especially if you get up closer to look at the detail.

Yep viewing distance is critical - if you are going to walk up to the screen for a closer look, then higher resolution is needed

Current OLEDs get really bright. Way brighter than I would use in a calibrated system designed to not cause eye strain. Granted, I'm not in a beach house.

Yeah - looked at that... floor to ceiling west facing windows - facing the setting sun... and another set of windows facing north (which for southern hemisphere, is where the mid-day sun streams in) - it is pretty much worst case.

But the key point I was trying to make, is that for standard movies / TV, 8K is pretty much completely redundant, and in most use cases so is 4K - so the 40gbps bandwidth of current HDMI ports, cover all the "real" use cases.

And there are savings that can be achieved if one opts for lower resolution - it implies lower load on the GPU's and CPU's throughout the system - TV, AVR, and source (in my case HTPC) - lower load = lower heat = longer life. (speaking as someone who had 2 AVR's let their smoke out, due to heat issues... - very happy indeed that my current one runs cool!)
Easier to find cables that work reliably too....

Life on the "bleeding edge" can be exciting.... but you can end up bearing the scars as a result.

 

[rvsixer]

Interesting numbers/comments being thrown around for THX/HDTV horizontal viewing angles, visual acuity, 4K has no advantage over 1080, etc.:
The MINIMUM recommended THX HDTV viewing angle is 40 deg horizontal (specific to 16:9 format):

WHERE AND HOW SHOULD I POSITION MY TV IN MY LIVING ROOM? - THX

For optimal viewing, you want your line of sight to be more or less aligned with the center of the screen. We suggest 15 degrees or less, above or below the center, as seen in the image below. For 4K or ultra-high definition (UHD) TV models, they have various layers of LCD enhancement that focus […]

www.thx.com

At this distance the difference between 1080 and 4K is READILY discernible. The visual acuity charts concur. And the view is glorious.

Don't put that set too far away, AND or above the fireplace mantle as most households do . Waste of money on the set and on chiropractor bills.

 

[dlaloum]

Interesting numbers/comments being thrown around for THX/HDTV horizontal viewing angles, visual acuity, 4K has no advantage over 1080, etc.:
The MINIMUM recommended THX HDTV viewing angle is 40 deg horizontal (specific to 16:9 format):

WHERE AND HOW SHOULD I POSITION MY TV IN MY LIVING ROOM? - THX

For optimal viewing, you want your line of sight to be more or less aligned with the center of the screen. We suggest 15 degrees or less, above or below the center, as seen in the image below. For 4K or ultra-high definition (UHD) TV models, they have various layers of LCD enhancement that focus […]

www.thx.com

At this distance the difference between 1080 and 4K is READILY discernible. The visual acuity charts concur. And the view is glorious.

Don't put that set too far away, AND or above the fireplace mantle as most households do . Waste of money on the set and on chiropractor bills.

Recommended viewing angles

20th century fox = 45
SMPTE = 43.5

SMPTE Closest acceptable = 61.8

THX furthest = 36

From:

Home theater viewing angles, distances and sightlines

Horizontal Viewing Angles The horizontal viewing angle is the angle subtended by a straight line from each side of the screen to the seating position. The main two standards in the commercial world are the SMPTE and THX specifications as summarized in the diagram below: 36 degrees from the last...

www.acousticfrontiers.com

to quote the juicy bit:

Visual acuity data give us useful information about when a person should be able to appreciate the full benefit of different resolutions.

• 480p – 4.1x width
• 720p – 2.7x width
• 1080p – 1.7x width (equivalent to 33 degrees viewing angle with a 2.35:1 screen)
• 4k – 0.8x width (over 60 degrees viewing angle with a 2.35:1 screen!)

Conclusion:

If you are at recommended viewing angles from THX, SMPTE or 20th Century Fox, you are right at the margin between 1080p and 4K, assuming your vision is 20:20 - if it is better you may tend towards needing higher res, if it is worse, then 1080p is likely to be more than enough.

I'm not talking about IMAX, as I don't have IMAX material - that is a whole different ball of wax.
We are talking standard TV and Cinema formats, and the standards for standard Cinemans (as published by SMPTE, THX and Fox)

Whicher way you look at it, even for a 62 degree viewing angle... you still don't need 8K !

Having said that, I do know people who have visual acuity substantially better than 20:20.... who can already read a sign by the roadside, when I can scarcely tell that there is a sign present.... - if you or one of your regular guest viewers are of the sightingly gifted persuasion - then 8K might absolutely be needed!

No one in my family has 20:20 without corrective lenses... and some family members are well below 20:20 even with glasses/contacts.

So, yes there are variables - but the base assumption that higher resolution is needed/required should be questioned, I think a lot of people are wasting time and money in a flawed search for a higher resolution that will bring them no benefit.

 

[rvsixer]

THX furthest = 36

I'll stick with the current and actual spec provided by the actual spec originator. I have old eyes and even not wearing glasses, the difference between 1080 and 4K is EASILY seen at the THX UHD spec of 40 degrees or closer to a 16:9 screen. Which is the overwhelming use case for the AVR's under discussion in this thread.

 

[Sancus]

to quote the juicy bit:

Visual acuity data give us useful information about when a person should be able to appreciate the full benefit of different resolutions.

• 480p – 4.1x width
• 720p – 2.7x width
• 1080p – 1.7x width (equivalent to 33 degrees viewing angle with a 2.35:1 screen)
• 4k – 0.8x width (over 60 degrees viewing angle with a 2.35:1 screen!)

The ratios given are viewing angles where you "appreciate the full benefit". What that source actually says is that you need more than 1080p at any viewing angle greater than 33 degrees.

 

[dlaloum]

I'll stick with the current and actual spec provided by the actual spec originator. I have old eyes and even not wearing glasses, the difference between 1080 and 4K is EASILY seen at the THX UHD spec of 40 degrees or closer to a 16:9 screen. Which is the overwhelming use case for the AVR's under discussion in this thread.

The key point I started out with - is that the 40gbps HDMI ports are plenty for almost all current and future needs, especially given the constraints of visual acuity...

Many setups are on the grey area between 1080p and 4k where most will go to 4K - but often the visible differences will be due to the wider colour gamut and contrast - and not the actual resolution. - However setting that aside, 8k is DEFINITELY beyond almost all viewers visual acuity.

Hence the 40gbps will cover all current and near future foreseeable needs - 48gbps really is only required if you are running 8k - and 8k is beyond our visual acuity capabilities at any normal viewing distances (and that is without even considering the availability of 8k material to view!).

Yes you CAN see the difference if you walk up to the screen... but that's not how we watch movies! (other than my 9YO... who regularly excitedly jumps up and rushes to the screen at dramatic moments...)

 

[Sancus]

I see higher bandwidth as a gaming feature primarily(higher refresh rates). 8K is silly. Nobody is going to want to produce real 8K masters for a very very long time. Even 4K is often not done.

 

[dlaloum]

I see higher bandwidth as a gaming feature primarily(higher refresh rates). 8K is silly. Nobody is going to want to produce real 8K masters for a very very long time. Even 4K is often not done.

Read a couple of research articles that pointed to 60Hz being maximum discernible rate for most people... (ie: no benefit for most people beyond that) - With exceptional people - fighter pilots - the max perceptible rate is up around 75Hz....

So even with the refresh rates, the current 48gbps standard is way over the top...
you can do 4k@60Hz with circa 18gbps.

We have had discussions elsewhere on this site about the audio margins of perceptibility, for levels of THD and such - but there has been little discussion of the levels of perceptibility for Video... and the parameters involved (sight...)

 

[Sancus]

Read a couple of research articles that pointed to 60Hz being maximum discernible rate for most people... (ie: no benefit for most people beyond that) - With exceptional people - fighter pilots - the max perceptible rate is up around 75Hz....

That's just horribly wrong. Where do you find this nonsense? Lol, you don't need research articles, all you have to do is go to Blur Busters and try to read the map at 60hz.

It's almost impossible on any sample and hold display(LCD/OLED) due to the extreme motion blur. A moving map should be equally readable as a stationary one. To reach that requires something like 500hz, I forget.

120hz is a basic standard, there is a reason why most flagship phones are 120 and why 60hz phones feel laggy/hard to read on scrolling for anyone used to 120. We actually need way more, I should be able to flick scroll Twitter and read it *in motion* but I can't due to motion blur caused by sample and hold.

It's honestly embarrassing that the industry even bothers to release 60hz displays for ANY use case in 2022. I can't even tolerate them for basic desktop use anymore, they're trash.

 

[dlaloum]

How many frames per second can the human eye really see?

30 fps? 60 fps? If you've ever debated framerates, the cognitive researchers we spoke to have some complex answers for you.

www.pcgamer.com

 

[KMO]

It's almost impossible on any sample and hold display(LCD/OLED) due to the extreme motion blur. A moving map should be equally readable as a stationary one. To reach that requires something like 500hz, I forget.

The two of you are kind of talking at cross purposes. Dlaloum and the research being described are assuming proper video displays that strobe, avoiding the sample-and-hold blur flaw.

If you're sampling-and-holding, you've injected a new problem, which needs higher frame rate (real or interpolated) just to get the hold time down. But that's a separate case.

Long (>10ms, say) hold times are a visible problem in a way that the same size gap between strobes are not.

 

[DutchJay]

Hi everyone,

I installed my new 3800 yesterday and coming from an old marantz sr6008 I am really satisfied. Like mentioned above the dialog is super crisp and clear plus the surround are better integrated by audyssey than before.

One question: I tried to bi amp my front speakers on the pre outs, but this seems impossible.

You can only bi amp when using the internal amps so it seems, as in bi amp setting only the pre outs of the fronts are active, not the ones labeled hights which are supposed to take part of the load.

Result is that I only got HF out of the fronts.

Does anyone know why this happens? On my marantz I could bi amp using the pre outs....

 

[ryanosaur]

Hi everyone,

I installed my new 3800 yesterday and coming from an old marantz sr6008 I am really satisfied. Like mentioned above the dialog is super crisp and clear plus the surround are better integrated by audyssey than before.

One question: I tried to bi amp my front speakers on the pre outs, but this seems impossible.

You can only bi amp when using the internal amps so it seems, as in bi amp setting only the pre outs of the fronts are active, not the ones labeled hights which are supposed to take part of the load.

Result is that I only got HF out of the fronts.

Does anyone know why this happens? On my marantz I could bi amp using the pre outs....

Regardless the merits, you should just be y-splitting your pre out to different external amp channels.
I am only guessing here, but it sounds like somehow you were using an on-board amp channel and an external amp?

 

[DutchJay]

Regardless the merits, you should just be y-splitting your pre out to different external amp channels.
I am only guessing here, but it sounds like somehow you were using an on-board amp channel and an external amp?

Yeah, that could be a good one. No I put the rca cables on the pre outs of the normal channels the manual says to use.

But found an old thread of a 3700 with similar issues and they found out that while the normal amp of the hight 2 can be repurposed for bi amping, the pre out cannot. So bi amping using the pre outs is not possible unless you indeed y split the channels.

 

[amper42]

Hi everyone,

I installed my new 3800 yesterday and coming from an old marantz sr6008 I am really satisfied. Like mentioned above the dialog is super crisp and clear plus the surround are better integrated by audyssey than before.

One question: I tried to bi amp my front speakers on the pre outs, but this seems impossible.

You can only bi amp when using the internal amps so it seems, as in bi amp setting only the pre outs of the fronts are active, not the ones labeled hights which are supposed to take part of the load.

Result is that I only got HF out of the fronts.

Does anyone know why this happens? On my marantz I could bi amp using the pre outs....

The Denon Pre-outs function only as labeled on the back with external amps. The Front L is only front left - same with front right. If you try to use amp assign features like bi-amp, dual fronts and such it won't work. If you try to run a Y off the Front to bi-amp then the volumes will not be properly adjusted in Audyssey. Bottom line - only expect the function labeled on the pre-out to work. Don't expect any of the various amp assign features that do more to function. According to Denon this is how they designed the receiver. If you want dual fronts or bi-amp functions then use the internal Denon amps.

After contacting Denon on this and understanding the limitations I use external amps just for the function in which the pre-out is labeled. It works well for me.

 

[peng]

Yeah, that could be a good one. No I put the rca cables on the pre outs of the normal channels the manual says to use.

But found an old thread of a 3700 with similar issues and they found out that while the normal amp of the hight 2 can be repurposed for bi amping, the pre out cannot. So bi amping using the pre outs is not possible unless you indeed y split the channels.

I am quite sure using y-split is the normal way for most if not all AVRs and AVPs.

The Denon Pre-outs function only as labeled on the back with external amps. The Front L is only front left - same with front right. If you try to use amp assign features like bi-amp, dual fronts and such it won't work. If you try to run a Y off the Front to bi-amp then the volumes will not be properly adjusted in Audyssey.

That is right but is not a problem though, unless one uses two external amps with different gains for the same speaker in bi-amp. In that case one would have to find another way. That is regardless of Audyssey, Dirac Live or whatever automatic room correction/EW systems.

 

[peng]

Hi everyone,

I installed my new 3800 yesterday and coming from an old marantz sr6008 I am really satisfied. Like mentioned above the dialog is super crisp and clear plus the surround are better integrated by audyssey than before.

The SR6008 does not have preamp mode. If you put the 3800 in normal mode, you should be able to do the same because the speaker binding posts and the pre out terminals will be both live. In preamp mode, they don't give you the assign function for bi-amping and I think this is a minor oversight. Not an issue but more of a convenience thing.

 

[amper42]

The SR6008 does not have preamp mode. If you put the 3800 in normal mode, you should be able to do the same because the speaker binding posts and the pre out terminals will be both live. In preamp mode, they don't give you the assign function for bi-amping and I think this is a minor oversight. Not an issue but more of a convenience thing.

@peng - Denon Amp Assign don't support bi-amp, A/B fronts or multi-room configurations when a pre-out RCA jack is used with external amps. Only the function listed on the pre-out port is supported. This is true whether the 3700/4700/6700/3800 is in Preamp mode or a non-preamp configuration. ONLY when the internal Denon amps are used will the Denon Amp assign features work for bi-amp, A/B fronts or multi-room.

If you want the special Denon amp assign configurations to work which are above and beyond the rear pre-out labeling simply use the internal amps. I tried using A/B fronts with external amps without preamp mode. It was a bust. The A speaker would work but the B speaker would not. That's when I contacted Denon and received an email that Amp Assign special features not listed on the pre-outs are not supported unless the internal amps are in use. I switched back to internal amps to test the advice and the A/B Fronts worked as per the manual. However, this bit of info is not in the Denon receiver manual.