3D Obsolescence

I'm thinking about getting a Samsung UN46D7000 with my tax return this year. That means I'll have to upgrade my A/V receiver and HDMI cables, plus I plan to get a 3D Blu-ray player since the PS3 doesn't do 3D Blu-ray as well as a dedicated player.

The thing is, all this gear is made for 1080p at 24 frames per second, but filmmakers like James Cameron and Peter Jackson are talking about 48 and 60fps. If I buy now, am I just going to have to buy a new system again next year, or will the standard stay viable at least long enough to get some value out of the current generation of gear?


I think the standard will remain viable for quite some time, so I'd go ahead and make the investment. Blu-ray can support 1080p 2D and 3D at 24fps as well as 1080i at 25 (European) and 30fps, but I don't know if it can do 3D with those specs. I do know it cannot support 1080p at 48 or 60fps in 2D, so it sure can't do 3D at those speeds. The entire Blu-ray specification would have to be significantly updated to allow this, which ain't gonna happen any time soon. If Cameron and/or Jackson do shoot 3D at 48 or 60fps, it will have to be "downconverted" to 24fps for Blu-ray. For this reason, I hope they choose 48, which is much easier to convert to 24 than 60 is.

If you have an A/V question, please send it to askscottwilkinson@gmail.com.

Share | |
javanp's picture

Agreed. There's no reason to hold off on getting 3d because of any "possible" upgrades in the future since the only upgrades are speculative ones. At this stage, getting a 3d tv is still considered early adoption--if you're going to hold off for the next greatest thing, you're always going to be waiting for the next greatest thing.

However, since he is already planning on upgrading his player, he could avoid upgrading his receiver by getting a player with dual hdmi outputs. One will send audio to the receiver and the other will send video to the TV. The new Samsung TVs automatically switch inputs based on the newest signal so he wouldn't even have to manually change the input (in most cases, anyways--it's not a perfect system.)

Another thing... he mentions HDMI cables like they're a significant investment. I hope he knows he can get them on Amazon for just a couple of bucks.

Scott Wilkinson's picture
Great idea to get a player with two HDMI outputs! And I totally agree that HDMI cables needn't be a significant investment. Thanks for the input!
uavTheJoBoo's picture

Spending a couple of bucks on an HDMI cable from Amazon? The first piece of advice about a dual output player is spot on, but cheap is cheap is cheap. Spoil yourself a bit and demo some better cables. Would you buy an expensive painting and then sneeze all over it? How many pixels per frame are you willing to sacrifice just to save a few dollars? If I'm making that kind of an investment, I'm not giving up one stinking dot. I want them all!

DELTAprime's picture

I'm glad to get your answer on this question. Thanks.

As for the HDMI cables, I know there not a huge investment, but I have a 10m cable run going through a wall to my display. That makes it more of a pain to change a cable, not something I want to do regularly.

Thanks again Scott for answering my question.

Scott Wilkinson's picture
For a 10m HDMI cable, I do recommend going somewhat upscale...that's at the outside boundary of HDMI cable length, so a higher-quality cable will be more likely to work well than a cheapie.
javanp's picture

I have Monster Cable and Rocketfish HDMI cables in addition to my several no-name Amazonian, cheap-o HMDI cables. I can't tell the difference. Of course, mine don't extend beyond 6 feet in length.

gunhed's picture

All current equipment supports 1080p/60 including blu ray players. You don't need to buy another set. For those of you with video processors, set the output to this resolution and frame rate to 1080p/60 to prove it to yourself.

uavTheJoBoo's picture

Using the most basic products we had around the office: Samsung LN22A450, Panasonic DMP-BD30, Disney WOW Optimization Blu-ray Disc

I first optimized the TV using the advanced patterns while connected with a dirt cheap 6' HDMI cable that was included with a DirecTV receiver. I, then, changed to a 4 meter Tributaries Series 9 HDMI cable, which is twice as long as the el cheapo, and optimized again. From the settings of the cheap cable, the brightness had to be lowered by 2 on a scale of 100, the contrast had to be raised by 3. The color needed to be brought down by 2 while the tint strangely did not change. (Color and tint are in a bound relationship of sorts.) Could I see a difference? On the provided clip of The Prestige skin tones were muted and video noise was more pronounced with the cheap cable even on this small TV. Would I recommend that someone with such low end equipment rush out to spend over $200 on an HDMI cable? Nope. It's like spreading caviar on a McDonalds hamburger.

This is definitely something you should try if you have performance gear. (And I don't work for or invest in Disney. The disc is very easy to use and understand.) And if great HDMI cables make a bit of difference for you, try replacing your power cables with something racy. Prepare to have your mind blown!

javanp's picture

that higher-priced HDMI cables improve performance, I'd be glad to hear it. I personally haven't seen or noticed a difference between my $80 Monster HDMI cable and my $2 no-name cable. Nor have I heard of any professional review or study that even suggests that there is a noticeable difference... at least not one severe enough to justify the exponential increase in price.

uavAVTheaterGuy's picture

In my system I currently have

1 x Monster M-1000HD grade HDMI (connecting my AV receiver to the TV)

1 x Monster 1000HD grade HDMI (connecting the Cable box to the TV directly)

2 x Monster 700HD series HDMI (connecting the PS-3 and HD-DVD player to the receiver direct)

1 x BlueJeans BJC-F2 Belden Bonded HDMI (connecting my DVD-Recorder to the TV directly)

I also have in my spare cable bag, a couple MonoPrice cables, a couple Time Warner supplied HDMIs, and some "Cheap" monster 1000 grade online only cables (supposedly they're monster, although the packaging leads me to believe otherwise, it looked fake, although the connection housing didn't look knock-off).

I have short runs for all of my gear (6 foot or under). I have performed resolution tests, HDMI handshaking tests, CEC control tests, and I've put every wire with all of the gear in pretty much every configuration available...


I NOTICE AND HEAR ZERO DIFFERENCE. My buddy has a Bose Lifestyle V35 (I'm not endorsing BOSE just giving an example), and he bought a cable online and it was DOA, so I lent him two of my cables (the M1000, and the Blue-Jeans) and told him that whichever one he liked better i'd order it for him and he could pay me back (the money didn't matter to him). After his blind test (and me telling him NOTHING about the two cables other than the obvious cosmetic differences) he said that he noticed no difference and heard no difference based on his system. (Oppo Blu-Ray going into BOSE).

I dunno if this helps anyone with their HDMI decisions, but in general I recommend Blue Jeans for pretty much all cabling related needs. If you're going over longer distances (above 50 feet), do an HDMI over Ethernet BALUN anyways, forget the single cable, and get two short HDMI cables from the BALON recepticles. Properly installed BALUNS will beat a long run HDMI every time. I like the Atlona Product personally.



uavTheJoBoo's picture

Rocketfish is a CHEAP Best Buy private label cable. Regardless of what they're charging for it, it is a cheap cable. Monster makes OK cables. Find a local performance A/V dealer and ask to demo some cables from companies like Nordost, Transparent, Tributaries or AudioQuest. (I can't vouch for AQ HDMI cables, but past experience with their other cables has been quite favorable.) Try the better lines offered by manufacturers. For instance, with Tributaries, try their Series 9 rather than the Series 5.

Strange that A/V enthusiasts have settled in such a mindset. Amazingly, I have yet to hear a group of car enthusiasts denounce a Ferrari or classic Camaro as not worth the money or explain that a current model Kia is of equal value. I don't blame do-it-yourself people or even the A/V press. Publicly traded big box retailers and deep discount internet resellers who traffic merely in sales volume are the main culprits. Big low-voltage distributors who enable security and high-voltage tradesmen to represent themselves as A/V dealers are just as at fault. Although, many A/V dealers who sell from their own pockets or lack solid demonstrations can take some of the credit as well. Where is the enthusiasm for high performance, even on a budget?

Enter your Sound & Vision username.
Enter the password that accompanies your username.