ILoveC4 Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 So...although I’ve nearly done it a bunch of times, I’ve yet to upgrade my component video system to HDMI. For multiple reasons, I think now is the time. I’ve got (unshielded) CAT5e ran in good quantities to each TV, and I ran the wires so I know they don’t run parallel to power. I was thinking of getting this unit: https://www.snapav.com/shop/en/snapav/switchers/binary-trade%3B-hdbaset-6x42-matrix-switcher-with-%283%29-hdbaset-receivers-%28230%29-with-poc-kit-kit-520-6x42mx-3rx For those more knowledgeable than I, is this unit a bad idea? I don’t have any 4K displays nor do I have any 4K content. I realize that will likely change, but I’ve got really good gear and only plan to upgrade when forced to as I’m perfectly happy with what I have. I’ve got 11 years out of my existing matrix...I’d love to do that again. Any feedback on what i should get would be perfect. I’ve got 4 displays plus the theater which is powered by an AVR (currently uses local HDMI sources). I’ve got 6 inputs. The second question...I think I’m finally going to give in and buy my kids an Xbox One. Any reason why I can rack mount it in a central rack? None of the controllers would ever be more than about 50’ from the unit at any of the TVs the kids would play it on. I also assume this works like the old Xbox in that you can power it on from the controller? Thanks for the input guys. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILoveC4 Posted November 22, 2017 Author Share Posted November 22, 2017 Would this be a better option?https://www.snapav.com/shop/en/snapav/switchers/atlona-reg%3B-4k-uhd-hdmi-to-hdbaset-matrix-switcher-w--poe---6x6-at-uhd-pro3-66mSent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILoveC4 Posted November 22, 2017 Author Share Posted November 22, 2017 The Atlona piece will end up running me about 40% more than the Binary. If I went the route of JAP, that would be about 10% than the Atlona (about 50% more than the Binary for a 5 input 4 output system).Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eggzlot Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 why not look at Video Storm or JAP (Looks like you did look at JAP based on your last comment). You can do modular upgrades so you can add a 4k source or a 4k tv without changing out the entire matrix. I have VS and love it. Never heard a bad word about JAP either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lippavisual Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 Do you have any Sony Android TV's or FireTV/NVidia Shields?? That would extremely reduce your price if you went IP with Videostorm Netplay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adidaswood Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 I've used the 500 series 8x8 from snap for the past 3.5 years and it has been great. No real big issues to speak of occasionally I need reset the matrix and baluns. This usually happened if I fell asleep watching appletv and it timed out and went to sleep. Total mystery why that would be an issue, but I programmed a button early on to reset everything when i happened. When I figured out what was happening i changed the timeout settings on my appletv. One of the biggest issues I had was changing how I thought about video and sound delivery. For example how do I get the OSD for my AVRs on to the displays. What if I only want the sound on the TV and not the surround sounds, how do we wire that up. Dual outputs are your friend here. I'm sure there are other issues, but mine seemed more universal to the technology vs the brand I chose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zaphod Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 33 minutes ago, lippavisual said: Do you have any Sony Android TV's or FireTV/NVidia Shields?? That would extremely reduce your price if you went IP with Videostorm Netplay. Has anyone done a write-up on the pros and cons of centralized sources vs distributed sources? I have never understood why having it centralized with a matrix switch is so much better, maybe I am missing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyknight Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 Why is the ATV set to sleep? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILoveC4 Posted November 22, 2017 Author Share Posted November 22, 2017 Has anyone done a write-up on the pros and cons of centralized sources vs distributed sources? I have never understood why having it centralized with a matrix switch is so much better, maybe I am missing something.Dish Network boxes and what not are a big one. I also like the ability to have the same thing shown on multiple TV’s, or to be able to “move” what I’m watching from one display to another, etc...Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILoveC4 Posted November 22, 2017 Author Share Posted November 22, 2017 Do you have any Sony Android TV's or FireTV/NVidia Shields?? That would extremely reduce your price if you went IP with Videostorm Netplay.I’ve heard that VideoStorm has a delay which makes playing video games problematic. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyknight Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 1 minute ago, zaphod said: Has anyone done a write-up on the pros and cons of centralized sources vs distributed sources? I have never understood why having it centralized with a matrix switch is so much better, maybe I am missing something. I'm sure there have been a few - you can argue either way, but the biggest pros for going central are: -less clutter -ability to watch the same show at the same time (in sync, also DVR recordings (though some set-top setups do THAT centrally now), same DVD and so forth) and/or 'move' what you're watching where -Less devices needed in total (reducing the actual cost of going central by needing less hardware and/or reducing rental costs), especially if you have more TV locations than people in the house. -Specialty setups like video walls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic30101 Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 I prefer a distributed system just so all tvs have access to all sources and like @Cyknight mentioned in sync with eachother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zaphod Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 The only thing that I would agree with is the last item you mention for specialty setups. Modern streaming devices are so small (Roku, ATV, FireTV, Shield, Chromecast) that they can be mounted behind a TV so that you would never even see them - especially HDMI stick devices. Even a NUC PC could be mounted this way. So no clutter. I have been using a SageTV system for about a decade with SageTV extenders at my TVs. I can stop a show - either live TV, recorded TV or video file, at one extender and pick it up anywhere else in the house. That is also the case for Netflix, Plex, Kodi,etc. I am not Sure you need more devices but a matrix switch is not cheap and a matrix switch plus the cost of the additional wiring would make a centralized system WAY more expensive. The Shield is pretty much the most powerful streaming box nowadays and compare the cost of 8 Nvidia Shields ($1400) vs an 8x8 HDMI matrix switch plus the additional wiring required ($5000++). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic30101 Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 To each their own Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zaphod Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 True - I just wanted to understand what the benefits there are from going centralized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic30101 Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 Also a majority of people will have cable/sat boxes. So in an 8x8 system with 8 boxes plus 8 nvidia shields will cost you 5k in 3 years after rental fees are considered and then will continue to charge after that, and that is only 2 sources at each tv location not including added cabling/equipment to get the tv's audio back to the rack if there are speakers in the room compared to a matrix that downmixes. So in most aspects it will save money over the lifetime of the switch and give more sources/options at each tv. Not even taking expensive game systems costs as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lippavisual Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 56 minutes ago, zaphod said: The only thing that I would agree with is the last item you mention for specialty setups. Modern streaming devices are so small (Roku, ATV, FireTV, Shield, Chromecast) that they can be mounted behind a TV so that you would never even see them - especially HDMI stick devices. Even a NUC PC could be mounted this way. So no clutter. I have been using a SageTV system for about a decade with SageTV extenders at my TVs. I can stop a show - either live TV, recorded TV or video file, at one extender and pick it up anywhere else in the house. That is also the case for Netflix, Plex, Kodi,etc. I am not Sure you need more devices but a matrix switch is not cheap and a matrix switch plus the cost of the additional wiring would make a centralized system WAY more expensive. The Shield is pretty much the most powerful streaming box nowadays and compare the cost of 8 Nvidia Shields ($1400) vs an 8x8 HDMI matrix switch plus the additional wiring required ($5000++). Yes but Sage TV is dead technology. Cable boxes are king for most of my customers. What I always suggest for matrix systems, is 1 cable box per person. So Mom, Dad, Joey and Lucy each have their own box/dvr and can be accessed anywhere they are watching the tube. You can certainly keep the matrix system cost down by adding local ATV/Fire/Whatever. In order to do the above scenarios, a matrix system is required, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zaphod Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 I guess that's true but gaming systems would have been less likely to have been centralized until more recently as you would have usually wanted access for putting in discs, or peripherals that need access to the main console like Kinect, Wii bar, non-traditional controllers that need USB for Rock Band/Guitar Hero, fitness games, etc. Could you do central with the Playstation VR? VR and AR will probably be more prominent on future consoles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lippavisual Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 1 hour ago, ILoveC4 said: I’ve heard that VideoStorm has a delay which makes playing video games problematic. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Any HDMI to IP solution has an encoding/decoding delay. VS has theirs at about 400-500 ms. I'm not a gamer at all, so whether that is a big deal or not, I don't know, I'd assume so. But, you can always just hook that up locally. If you want to keep it in a rack and distribute without delay, there are many 1 In to 4/8 Output HDBaseT Distribution amps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zaphod Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 1 minute ago, lippavisual said: Yes but Sage TV is dead technology. Cable boxes are king for most of my customers. What I always suggest for matrix systems, is 1 cable box per person. So Mom, Dad, Joey and Lucy each have their own box/dvr and can be accessed anywhere they are watching the tube. You can certainly keep the matrix system cost down by adding local ATV/Fire/Whatever. In order to do the above scenarios, a matrix system is required, imo. SageTV is actually quite alive. It was semi-dead for years but Google OS'ed it a couple of years ago and development has picked up, including a client on Android TV that works very well on a Shield or MiBox. The preferred back-end server is now a Docker version running on unRAID. IMHO it is still the best way to go for recording TV. What you say about one cable box per person makes sense and reduces the cost savings on box rentals for a centralized solution. But Joey and Lucy, assuming that they are under 25, are unlikely to need cable boxes as they probably have little to no interest in watching traditional TV channels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lippavisual Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 Yes, but those are the things that get ironed out during system design. Plenty of parents have said to me that they don't watch TV separately, so they only need one box for the parents. Most of all the youngins I know watch plenty of TV. Cost plays a huge factor into this, so yes, it may not be for everyone. IMO, it is well worth it just to keep the clutter down in these local areas. All I want to see is the TV and speakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adidaswood Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 1 hour ago, lippavisual said: Cost plays a huge factor into this, so yes, it may not be for everyone. IMO, it is well worth it just to keep the clutter down in these local areas. All I want to see is the TV and speakers. Yep, This. People walk in my house and see nothing but the TV and or Speakers depending on the room. They always ask where's all your stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILoveC4 Posted November 22, 2017 Author Share Posted November 22, 2017 The only thing that I would agree with is the last item you mention for specialty setups. Modern streaming devices are so small (Roku, ATV, FireTV, Shield, Chromecast) that they can be mounted behind a TV so that you would never even see them - especially HDMI stick devices. Even a NUC PC could be mounted this way. So no clutter. I have been using a SageTV system for about a decade with SageTV extenders at my TVs. I can stop a show - either live TV, recorded TV or video file, at one extender and pick it up anywhere else in the house. That is also the case for Netflix, Plex, Kodi,etc. I am not Sure you need more devices but a matrix switch is not cheap and a matrix switch plus the cost of the additional wiring would make a centralized system WAY more expensive. The Shield is pretty much the most powerful streaming box nowadays and compare the cost of 8 Nvidia Shields ($1400) vs an 8x8 HDMI matrix switch plus the additional wiring required ($5000++).And while can make that work, with a distributed system my wife can hit the DVR button in the bedroom and instantly be watching what is on in the living. No menus to navigate or anything. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyknight Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 3 hours ago, zaphod said: The only thing that I would agree with is the last item you mention for specialty setups. Modern streaming devices are so small (Roku, ATV, FireTV, Shield, Chromecast) that they can be mounted behind a TV so that you would never even see them - especially HDMI stick devices. Even a NUC PC could be mounted this way. So no clutter. I have been using a SageTV system for about a decade with SageTV extenders at my TVs. I can stop a show - either live TV, recorded TV or video file, at one extender and pick it up anywhere else in the house. That is also the case for Netflix, Plex, Kodi,etc. I am not Sure you need more devices but a matrix switch is not cheap and a matrix switch plus the cost of the additional wiring would make a centralized system WAY more expensive. The Shield is pretty much the most powerful streaming box nowadays and compare the cost of 8 Nvidia Shields ($1400) vs an 8x8 HDMI matrix switch plus the additional wiring required ($5000++). Like I said, you can argue either way - but do you want a fireTV AND and APPLETV AND a Roku AND a dish hopper, AND a PC, AND a chrome AND..... SageTV is a poor example, in that it's an ALTERNATIVE scheme - and yes one you can argue for. What additional wiring though? To do it 'right' you'd still want a wired network....and you would need nothing more than a single CAT to do HSDBaseT distribution as well. Again, I'm not saying one is right, the other is wrong - but the arguments stand for the PRO part of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyknight Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 2 hours ago, zaphod said: But Joey and Lucy, assuming that they are under 25, are unlikely to need cable boxes as they probably have little to no interest in watching traditional TV channels. Are they? A lot do drop it, but in the past year I've actually been ADDING cable/similar setups for these people to add to if not replace streaming boxes. And for those even younger - YOU go tell my kids they'll lose their TV channels to wake up to in the morning After that you can explain it to my wife as well - try not to get killed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.