AV matrix recommendations (AVoverIP vs HdbaseT)

[Repliak]

Hi all! I am looking for an 4k AV matrix compatible with C4 for 4 sources and 7 TVs. I am looking at both AVoverIP and HdbaseT as my idea is to install everything on a rack in the basement. I find that hdbaset are cheaper than avoverip so I would like to know if it worth the money to go for avoverip? I am looking for a good price/quality product? Thanks!

[OceanDad]

Here's a good go-to if you are on a budget.  Others will have different recommendations, but probably not at this price.  They have 8x8, 8x16, 16x16 in a variety of configurations.  Free Control4 driver.

https://www.amazon.com/SWITCHER-Receivers-Audio-CONTROL4-Automation/dp/B077L31X7N/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=hdbaset+av+matrix&qid=1597894080&sr=8-3

Reviewed by another member here :

 

 

[Köhler Medientechnik]

What material do you want to send over? 1080p? Or up to 4K@60? (EDIT: opps, just saw it - you want 4K)

Are you aware that HDBaseT and AVoverIP are totally different concepts? The first needs 1:1 cabling from the matrix to the display, whereas the latter uses an existing IP network (has a lot of pitfalls, though).
You should take that into account for your decision which way to go.

[Repliak]

8 hours ago, Köhler Medientechnik said:

What material do you want to send over? 1080p? Or up to 4K@60? (EDIT: opps, just saw it - you want 4K)

Are you aware that HDBaseT and AVoverIP are totally different concepts? The first needs 1:1 cabling from the matrix to the display, whereas the latter uses an existing IP network (has a lot of pitfalls, though).
You should take that into account for your decision which way to go.

Yes, I know the difference between the concepts. I just want to know because AV over IP is more expensive than hdbaseT in small applications and if the quality and performance is the same? I am doing a new building so I can make any wiring so can I choose between both alternatives. THanks!

[Repliak]

12 hours ago, OceanDad said:

Here's a good go-to if you are on a budget.  Others will have different recommendations, but probably not at this price.  They have 8x8, 8x16, 16x16 in a variety of configurations.  Free Control4 driver.

https://www.amazon.com/SWITCHER-Receivers-Audio-CONTROL4-Automation/dp/B077L31X7N/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=hdbaset+av+matrix&qid=1597894080&sr=8-3

Reviewed by another member here :

 

@OceanDad are using the hdbaseT matrix? Do you recommend it?

Thanks!

 

[Köhler Medientechnik]

2 hours ago, Repliak said:

Yes, I know the difference between the concepts. I just want to know because AV over IP is more expensive than hdbaseT in small applications and if the quality and performance is the same? I am doing a new building so I can make any wiring so can I choose between both alternatives. THanks!

If you really want 4K in it´s full beauty (up to 60Hz HDR), i´d suggest not to distribute at all. We´re trying to place sources local to display/projectors and connecting via HDMI if picture quality is a concern. For the remaining displays (bathroom, kitchen, etc.) in most cases HD is totally fine which can easily be distributed either way.

Both HDBaseT and AVoverIP can transmit up to 10Gbps. 4K60 with 4:2:0 requires 9Gbps, so that fits, 4K60 with 4:4:4 or RGB requires 18Gpbs, so that will be compressed. How the compression takes place is up to the manufacturer, some just reduce the color space (4:4:4 => 4:2:0) so it fits into the 10Gbps pipe but you lose HDR.
AVoverIP is traveling via IP, so it´s usually sharing the infrastructure with other devices and there´s protocol overhead. So compression with AVoverIP kicks in earlier and it´s more demanding in terms of switch configuration and quality of the infrastructure.

So if your wiring options are open, then i´d go with HDBaseT (end-to-end wiring). If you want to change that over time you can convert that to IP just by patching it to an IP switch.
But as said before, my recommendation would be to avoid distributing 4K in the first place. 

[Cyknight]

HDbaseT is very reliable and easy to use, IP solutions (and not all setups 'just tie in' to existing networking mind you, the biggest player is Just Add Power, and their (default) drivers require a stand-alone managed network switch, meaning still needing point to point wires, though also means no interference with your regular network) are great for large scale setups and 'odd' number setups (ie LOTS of sources to fewer TVs or the other way around) as they are scaleable.

A/V quality between the two is essentially similar, as far as the tech is concerned) though different brands may have different quality.

HDBaseT is a full standard, part of the HDMI alliance, whereas IP distribution is not (always) a standard and is created (in some cases) by the individual manufacturer.

Biggest drawback on IP distribution over HDBaseT (in technical terms) is that most have a significant delay, which needs to be addressed if you're feeding audio from sources to a stereo speaker distribution. Nothing that can't be done, but it adds to the cost.

 

There is no 'better or worse' between the two techs as such - only which one fits the desired result better.

[OceanDad]

3 hours ago, Repliak said:

@OceanDad are using the hdbaseT matrix? Do you recommend it?

Thanks!

I'm not.  But I sure wish I'd tried the $2k solution before I splashed out on the $10k version.  It's had great reviews, and HDBaseT is a strong standard.  Don't let anyone try to convince you that theirs can pass 4K/60 4:4:4 w/Dolby Vision HDR10, while the cheap one can't.  The truth is neither of them can.  They are both limited by compression to what they can squeeze into a certain bandwidth - they do that via an established standard.  I have the $10k Control 4 matrix, and the cheaper one does everything it does (subject to a conversation about audio and video down mixing).

If you want the very best video, with 8K future-proofing, then go with fiber HDMI and local sources.  If you want easy, no frills 4K in a variety of places in the house, go with a matrix.

[Repliak]

6 hours ago, Köhler Medientechnik said:

If you really want 4K in it´s full beauty (up to 60Hz HDR), i´d suggest not to distribute at all. We´re trying to place sources local to display/projectors and connecting via HDMI if picture quality is a concern. For the remaining displays (bathroom, kitchen, etc.) in most cases HD is totally fine which can easily be distributed either way.

Both HDBaseT and AVoverIP can transmit up to 10Gbps. 4K60 with 4:2:0 requires 9Gbps, so that fits, 4K60 with 4:4:4 or RGB requires 18Gpbs, so that will be compressed. How the compression takes place is up to the manufacturer, some just reduce the color space (4:4:4 => 4:2:0) so it fits into the 10Gbps pipe but you lose HDR.
AVoverIP is traveling via IP, so it´s usually sharing the infrastructure with other devices and there´s protocol overhead. So compression with AVoverIP kicks in earlier and it´s more demanding in terms of switch configuration and quality of the infrastructure.

So if your wiring options are open, then i´d go with HDBaseT (end-to-end wiring). If you want to change that over time you can convert that to IP just by patching it to an IP switch.
But as said before, my recommendation would be to avoid distributing 4K in the first place. 

Thank you very much for the clear explanation. I will try to do a hybrid hdbaseT and local installation. 

[Repliak]

6 hours ago, Cyknight said:

HDbaseT is very reliable and easy to use, IP solutions (and not all setups 'just tie in' to existing networking mind you, the biggest player is Just Add Power, and their (default) drivers require a stand-alone managed network switch, meaning still needing point to point wires, though also means no interference with your regular network) are great for large scale setups and 'odd' number setups (ie LOTS of sources to fewer TVs or the other way around) as they are scaleable.

A/V quality between the two is essentially similar, as far as the tech is concerned) though different brands may have different quality.

HDBaseT is a full standard, part of the HDMI alliance, whereas IP distribution is not (always) a standard and is created (in some cases) by the individual manufacturer.

Biggest drawback on IP distribution over HDBaseT (in technical terms) is that most have a significant delay, which needs to be addressed if you're feeding audio from sources to a stereo speaker distribution. Nothing that can't be done, but it adds to the cost.

 

There is no 'better or worse' between the two techs as such - only which one fits the desired result better.

Very clear too. Thanks!

[lippavisual]

Everything is compressed, your streaming apps, your cable boxes, etc.  Don't get stuck on what the latest video numbers are either. ie:4K/8K/HDR.  You play right into what the marketing departments want you to do.

Unless you have a dedicated theater with a giant screen, it's all hog wash.

[Köhler Medientechnik]

HDR has nothing to do with the size of the screen. 

[lippavisual]

On 8/21/2020 at 11:35 AM, Köhler Medientechnik said:

HDR has nothing to do with the size of the screen. 

Umm... ok.  Who said it did? Not me.

[Köhler Medientechnik]

3 hours ago, lippavisual said:

Umm... ok.  Who said it did? Not me.

Well, you mentioned 4K/8K/HDR and that it´s all "hog wash" unless you have a giant screen.

While i tend to agree on the first two (our core competency are home cinemas with large screens ), i don´t agree on the last one, since you don´t need a big screen to benefit from the difference between HDR and SDR.

However, might be that that i just misinterpreted your statement.