New product: Arvus H1-D

[David4545]

It deserves its own thread, don’t you all think?

Arvus H1-D

H1-D

www.arvus.com

 

[Littletycoon]

I do hope it will have other ip control opportunities, not just Crestron, Crestron is way too expensive. Adding cec support to control volume would be a game changer (really no option to leave it out with an earc hdmi port). Cec to support Hdmi switching (aggregate multiple hdmi inputs before the arvus) would also be an use case. Also hope Dirac support is still in as mentioned in another thread, no mention anymore on the webpage. I would strongly prefer this above a jbl sdp, if volume control would be less barebones as it now seems to be.

 

[David4545]

Dirac would be nice. I don’t recall anything mentioned in the other thread though.

 

[Positivevibrations]

Looks like he switched from Dante to Merging’s implementation of Ravenna over ADI SHARC after I had a Skype call with him.

 

[Positivevibrations]

I do hope it will have other ip control opportunities, not just Crestron, Crestron is way too expensive. Adding cec support to control volume would be a game changer (really no option to leave it out with an earc hdmi port). Cec to support Hdmi switching (aggregate multiple hdmi inputs before the arvus) would also be a use case. Also hope Dirac support is still in as mentioned in another thread, no mention anymore on the webpage. I would strongly prefer this above a jbl sdp, if volume control would be less barebones as it now seems to be.

The target market for this box is studios that produce spatial audio recordings. It will be pretty bare bones for home theatre use.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Looks like he switched from Dante to Merging’s implementation of Ravenna over ADI SHARC after I had a Skype call with him.

You aren't the only one.

 

[Littletycoon]

Well, then the h24d article in stereophile seems little value added, target audience there is not so much studios

 

[Positivevibrations]

Well, then the h24d article in stereophile seems little value added, target audience there is not so much studios

Matthew has loads of studios on-board. He decided to make this box based on demand from studios, not the home theatre market. That being said it can work as a bare bones theatre solution.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Well, then the h24d article in stereophile seems little value added, target audience there is not so much studios

?? It is for anyone interested.

 

[David4545]

?? It is for anyone interested.

It was interesting. Too bad you didn’t get to test it with Dante.

 

[David4545]

It would be nice if Matthew could chime in.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

It was interesting. Too bad you didn’t get to test it with Dante.

I was not prepared to do so at that time. I am now.
We had breakfast together when he was in NY and this was one of the topics we discussed.

 

[Positivevibrations]

I was not prepared to do so at that time. I am now.
We had breakfast together when he was in NY and this was one of the topics we discussed.

Was the breakfast before or after the switch from Dante to Ravenna?

One of the advantages Merging‘s Ravenna implementation has over Dante is, Dante needs to run at a single fixed sample rate. Where Ravenna can be set to follow the sample rate of the incoming stream, and auto-switch on the fly. This was a hurtle I was asking how he would overcome with Dante when we spoke. There’s also other limitations when it comes to the Linux based Dante IP core he was planning to use before. It can’t become clock master of the network. Only a hardware based implementation of Dante can be assigned grandmaster or “leader clock“ as Dante calls It. Not the case with Ravenna.

This is very important when you must sync the system clock with the incoming HDMI to the AES67 stream. As this clock must be assigned grandmaster, otherwise everything downstream won’t be in sync.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Was the breakfast before or after the switch from Dante to Ravenna?

I can't say what was in his mind but I questioned his choice of Dante. Could that have been before or after your discussion, I don't know. We were both on the right side.

This is very important when you must sync the system clock with the incoming HDMI to the AES67 stream. As this clock must be assigned grandmaster, otherwise everything downstream won’t be in sync.

Yup.

 

[Chrispy]

FWIW the arvus site made my security software block stuff....altho not sure what use case this unit would have otoh.

 

[Positivevibrations]

FWIW the arvus site made my security software block stuff....altho not sure what use case this unit would have otoh.

It’s for people who simply want to decode all the spatial sound bitstreams from HDMI, and have AES67 compatible dacs downstream from the device. Could be standalone dacs, digital input amps, or active speakers with AES67.

 

[Chrispy]

It’s for people who simply want to decode all the spatial sound bitstreams from HDMI, and have AES67 compatible dacs downstream from the device. Could be standalone dacs, digital input amps, or active speakers with AES67.

So what is at the other end of the hdmi particularly? (just trying to imagine what a typical system using such might be....the downstream part is kind of a why?, too)

 

[Positivevibrations]

So what is at the other end of the hdmi particularly?

You may need to plug the connected TV or monitor into that output in order for the incoming HDMI to sync with the outgoing. Because there’s likely some sort of async that goes on to reclock the incoming HDMI clock to the AES67 clock. This would cause some latency, also there’s likely some latency from the bitstream decoding as well. So reclocking everything would bring the timing altogether.

So HDMI in from source, and then the audio and video are split sending the decoded bitstream out via AES67, and the video out via the HDMI out port.

 

[Chrispy]

You may need to plug the connected TV or monitor into that output in order for the incoming HDMI to sync with the outgoing. Because there’s likely some sort of async that goes on to reclock the incoming HDMI clock to the AES67 clock. This would cause some latency, also there’s likely some latency from the bitstream decoding as well. So reclocking everything would bring the timing altogether.

So HDMI in from source, and then the audio and video are split sending the decoded bitstream out via AES67, and the video out via the HDMI out port.

A tv as source wouldn't have occurred to me, I just use them as monitors. Or ?

 

[Positivevibrations]

A tv as source wouldn't have occurred to me, I just use them as monitors. Or ?

The TV would connect to the output. And source like an Apple TV, Amazon fire cube, bluray player, PlayStation etc would be the source.

In an ideal world the input would be HDMI eARC, and you would connect it to the eARC output of the TV in order to decode the audio from the TV. This would allow to use the multiple HDMI input ports on the TV as a multi-port switch, and use the TV remote to switch between them. Also in an ideal world CEC volume control commands would pass from the TV into the unit to control the volume in the unit. But it might be wishful thinking to expect these ideal features.