HDCP 2.2 and HDMI 2.0 confusion

I wanted to start a thread about this since I believe this will cause some annoyance, irritation and confusion amongst us B&O owners when units really start to use these technologies. 

As we know, Avant 55/75/85 was released with HDMI 1.4 but soon got upgraded to the following:
•     HDMI socket 1: HDCP 2.2, HDMI 2.0 (UHD signal with up to 60 frames per second)
•     HDMI socket 2-5: HDCP 1.4, HDMI 2.0 (UHD signal with up to 60 frames per second)
•     HDMI socket 6: HDCP 1.4, HDMI 1.4 (FHD only)

This is a bit confusing to me. Why only support HDCP 2.2 on one single port? Is it a licensing fee issue perhaps? For now this is not a mayor issue but when Apple TV goes 4K, Gaming consoles and perhaps an extra unit uses it, what will users do then?

I suppose the quick answer would be to buy a matrix solution and connect everything through HDMI 1 and let the matrix switch do the rest (if this could work flawlessly with HDCP 2.2 and HDMI 2.0).

Anyone see this limitation (just one HDCP 2.2 port) as a problem? I suppose, if the main unit for streaming media is on HDMI 1 it might not be a big issue, but how does a 4K unit perform without HDCP 2.2 even when not streaming copy protected content? Hard to say. 

This again is evidence that the BeoSystem 4 MUST see a hardware revision this year! It makes no sense for anyone to be buying a BeoSystem 4 right now. I'm not interested in a screen with the processor built-in. I like having a connection box that can be hidden away.

beojeff:

This again is evidence that the BeoSystem 4 MUST see a hardware revision this year! It makes no sense for anyone to be buying a BeoSystem 4 right now. I'm not interested in a screen with the processor built-in. I like having a connection box that can be hidden away.

Hello BeoJeff,

Im thinking that the issue could also be resolved by using an external box that does the processing but the main issue I am thinking about here is if the problem is B&O and licensing fees. We see this also in which codecs our systems can decode. Only the cheaper codecs and not the HD editions (that I am sure cost a few dollars more per unit). I think it is quite weird actually that we instead are suggested to buy the most expensive bluray players to do the decoding instead.. I don't think the streaming devices of the future will do this, but instead rely on the TV/receiver etc. 

 

So true.

I can justify spending the premium price for B&O loudspeakers. However, it just doesn't make sense to pay what B&O asks for their TVs when they can't keep up with the technology which can be found in far, far better-priced screens. I would rather see B&O offer screens without the loudspeakers or processors and lower the price point. That way, we can upgrade as needed and upgrade more frequently.

I have B&O loudspeakers that are over 15 years old and they still perform brilliantly. I would not be able to say the same for a 15 year old tv. I have a BeoLab 10 that I would prefer to continue to use with whatever my next screen will be.

Michael:

 Is it a licensing fee issue perhaps? For now this is not a mayor issue but when Apple TV goes 4K, Gaming consoles and perhaps an extra unit uses it, what will users do then?

http://www.digital-cp.com/licensing

If they could upgrade the HDMI1 port, why shouldn't they be able to upgrade one (or more) of the other - when time comes?

Hardly anyone needs the upgraded HDMI1 at the moment.

This might change, when the UHD/Blu Ray player arrive - of which at time being only two (Samsung and Panasonic) were announced for later this year.

The bigger issue could be the missing internal HEVC-decoder (and the VP9 decoding) - at the moment it does not seem, that these can be easily added.

MM

beojeff:

I'm not interested in a screen with the processor built-in. I like having a connection box that can be hidden away.

Having two seperate units will hardly solve your/the problem.

The trouble is, that both the processor units AND the screens will see (and need) some upgrades in the next year or two.

And it is a fact, that most B&O buyers don't want a screen and a box to hide away - they want a tv!

MM

Millemissen:

beojeff:

I'm not interested in a screen with the processor built-in. I like having a connection box that can be hidden away.

Having two seperate units will hardly solve your/the problem.

The trouble is, that both the processor units AND the screens will see (and need) some upgrades in the next year or two.

And it is a fact, that most B&O buyers don't want a screen and a box to hide away - they want a tv!

MM

I respectfully disagree. I look at my BeoSystem 3 and see the massive mess of cables attached to it! I want the clean installation of having as few cables as possible connected to my wall-mounted screen. With screens as thin and closely mounted to the wall as possible, it becomes a nightmare trying to make connections after mounting. Not to mention the hassle of running the cables behind the wall! Also, should the processor need servicing, it would not be necessary to remove and ship the large and fragile screen.

Millemissen:

Hardly anyone needs the upgraded HDMI1 at the moment.

Totally agree. And Blu-Ray UHD is dead before its born - its the new laser disc. I'm sure some will say, why spend gazillions on B&O and then skimp on the external box. I buy B&O for the integration, simplicity and experience and in the case of the Avant, the movement that to me is iconic of the brand.

Honestly peeps; Don't worry and Don't panic. If you can find two boxes that really need 2.2 then you probably should have looked at an a/v cabinet and cinema system, not an Avant.

Keep calm and carry on.

 

beojeff:

I respectfully disagree. I look at my BeoSystem 3 and see the massive mess of cables attached to it! I want the clean installation of having as few cables as possible connected to my wall-mounted screen. With screens as thin and closely mounted to the wall as possible, it becomes a nightmare trying to make connections after mounting. Not to mention the hassle of running the cables behind the wall! Also, should the processor need servicing, it would not be necessary to remove and ship the large and fragile screen.

Personally I am a friend of a tv/screen including (!) the 'made-for-this-screen-speaker' and a box with all the electronics, the connected devices and the cable clutter.

I wrote 'most B&O buyers', because this is not, what most people want - they want a complete unit and (when the have them) wireless added speakers.

And they usually don't connect much to their tv - maybe an AppleTV or so.

MM

mawheele:

And Blu-Ray UHD is dead before its born - its the new laser disc. 

On that I disagree.

To you it might be dead already, but to me - and others - it for a while will be the only way to experience video and audio content in it's highest quality.

No streaming can match this and even if it will get near, it will be out of reach for people with low bandwith internet connections.

Surely the UHD/BluRay will not be for the mass market - but B&O isn't either.

In the end everybody will have to choose for himself - I am looking forward to the UHD/BluRay....when the matching BV's arrive.

MM

mawheele:

Honestly peeps; Don't worry and Don't panic. If you can find two boxes that really need 2.2 then you probably should have looked at an a/v cabinet and cinema system, not an Avant

Ehm, why? Avant has 6 HDMI inputs, five of which is HDMI 2.0 compliant. They shoudl of course also be HDCP 2.2 compliant as the first one is. If it is just a question of licensing fees (I am quite sure it is) then B&O should at least offer us to pay for additional licenses that can be unlocked through the Bsys4 system (as other features sometimes are locked on for example V1 units). 

It is _not_ hard to find units that require HDCP 2.2, it is a requirement for viewing copyright protected material in 4K. I wanted to add a Nvidia Shield TV to use as an addition to my HDMI1 connected Apple TV (that might be upgraded to 4K). Then just think about new gaming consoles and copyright protected 4k material on those units. Etc, etc.  

Michael:

If it is just a question of licensing fees (I am quite sure it is) then B&O should at least offer us to pay for additional licenses that can be unlocked through the Bsys4 system (as other features sometimes are locked on for example V1 units). 

Only someone in knowing from B&O can tell us, what this is about.

However, I am quite sure, that these licing fees would have to be paid for ALL tv's in that serie - all sold units.

A per one unit fee surely will not be possible.

 

By the way, which functions of the V1 are locked?

As for the ATV4 - I would not count on that being upgraded/updated with 4K support.

We probably will need a new ATV for that - and when will that be???

Maybe - when that is reality - the HDMI ports on the Avant are updated!

I guess you solved your 'problem' with your new 4K device through swapping the ATV to another HDMI port?

 

Which units available today requires HDCP 2.2?

And how often will a BV Avant user require more/several of these connected to his tv as of today?

I am with mawheele - 'Don't panic'.

 

MM

Very interesting thoughts here guys! Michael is right though, MM your new UHD Blurry needs 2.2 as will any future boxes that deliver new films with DRM - for example a 4K Apple TV. Here's what TECHRADAR had to say...

Previous versions of HDCP (2.1 and lower) protected content 1080p and below, but the newest revision, HDCP 2.2, is geared towards 4K copyright protection. 

What that means for you is that you'll need an HDCP 2.2 4K TV in order to use any HDCP 2.2-enabled device. If your 4K TV isn't on version 2.2, you'll need to buy a new 4K TV in order to use it with the latest home entertainment devices (like the latest HDCP 2.2 Ultra HD Blu-ray players). 

Cut to the chase

What is it? HDCP is content protection software that runs on TVs, receivers, gaming systems and video cards that stops users from stealing content
When is it out? HDCP 2.1 is the staple on most devices, but HDCP 2.2 is quickly becoming the new standard
Why is it bad? Older TVs with HDCP 2.1 may inadvertently block 4K signal from HDCP 2.2 devices like Blu-ray players, stereo receivers, soundbars and game consoles

Blu-Ray UHD probably won't be a dead duck because of one clever thing - every disc will include a download option of the film meaning the best of both worlds.

This is an excellent and simple read...

http://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/feature-buying-4k-tv-what-you-need-know-about-hdcp-22-hdmi-20-hevc-uhd

Millemissen:

The bigger issue could be the missing internal HEVC-decoder (and the VP9 decoding) - at the moment it does not seem, that these can be easily added.

That is not the bigger issue, the bigger issue is that HDCP is not upgraded on the other ports. (for example, if it was, then we could add the Google Android TV experience to current BeoVisions, instead of waiting for the next one, now it will work, but not for 4K material with copyright.)

On V1 several features are, and/or was locked previously. If you go into the product integration meny you can unlock support for HDMI Matrix (entering a licence key will open up that feature). Previously you also would have to pay for the smart tv feature but B&O later changed their mind and included it for free. I think there is something more but I can't remember right now.

Just having HDCP 2.2 on one HDMI 2.0 port is really an awkward solution. Yes, the problem is limited today, but not tomorrow. And as I said, a walk around is to use a matrix/splitter to use several sources on the first HDMI port, but B&O only supports HDMI matrix switches from altona, which is quite expensive. Not simple HDMI switches with IR-eyes. (this would be awesome!). 

Michael:

Millemissen:

The bigger issue could be the missing internal HEVC-decoder (and the VP9 decoding) - at the moment it does not seem, that these can be easily added.

That is not the bigger issue, the bigger issue is that HDCP is not upgraded on the other ports.

The HEVC/VP9 issue is for many people important, since they don't wan't to connect boxes in order to view Netflix/4K and 4K material from Youtube.

It was often discussed here, that these things ought to be 'internal features' - due to the missing support for these codecs they can't be.

Very soon we will need new tv-tuners - and I certainly don't want to be forced to use an external box for tv viewing.

In the end different users have different priorities - and we will all react differently in this matter.

Unfortunately you can't buy a futureproof tv nowadays - a B&O tv is no exception from this.

About the V1: you are right - the HDMI Matrix support isn't free. But I don't think many V1 users will miss that. The SmartTV function had to be unlocked at the beginning - long ago! My V1 came with free SmartTV - and I have had that for quite a while now.

MM

Millemissen:

The HEVC/VP9 issue is for many people important, since they don't wan't to connect boxes in order to view Netflix/4K and 4K material from Youtube.

It was often discussed here, that these things ought to be 'internal features' - due to the missing support for these codecs they can't be.

Very soon we will need new tv-tuners - and I certainly don't want to be forced to use an external box for tv viewing.

In the end different users have different priorities - and we will all react differently in this matter.

Unfortunately you can't buy a futureproof tv nowadays - a B&O tv is no exception from this.

About the V1: you are right - the HDMI Matrix support isn't free. But I don't think many V1 users will miss that. The SmartTV function had to be unlocked at the beginning - long ago! My V1 came with free SmartTV - and I have had that for quite a while now.

MM

Regarding the HEVC/VP9 - yes, it is a pity it is not a feature of the Avant BUT this thread is about the HDMI-ports and its capabilities. Using a box with HEVC/VP9 over HDMI will work, IF the port supports HDCP 2.2 (and this I want on all ports..).

Regarding tv-tuners I moved to a new city in december 2015 and I now have a small IP-TV box from Motorola (Vip1903) so I already need an external box. With its next revision, probably HDCP 2.2 and then its impossible to even add a Apple TV for future content, if I only have one single HDCP 2.2 enabled port, due to cheaping out on licensing (if that is why).

Yes, V1 comes with "smart tv" unlocked nowadays but the system for unlocking features is implemented in software and should be easy to use for unlocking more HDMI-ports with HDCP 2.2.  

 

Totally agree with the above comments. I have no data to prove this out, but I would estimate that 90% of smart tv usage comes from an external box rather than the onboard smart tv function. In years to come, the tv companies will wish they acquired roku and will see their investments in their own smart tv platforms has seen little ROI or adoption.

I'd far rather B&O invest in Blutooth integration and as everyone else is saying broadening the HDCP 2.2 ports. I'm not worried with 1, but 2 certainly would be more comfortable. 5 would be exceptional.

 

 

mawheele:

Totally agree with the above comments. I have no data to prove this out, but I would estimate that 90% of smart tv usage comes from an external box rather than the onboard smart tv function. In years to come, the tv companies will wish they acquired roku and will see their investments in their own smart tv platforms has seen little ROI or adoption.

I'd far rather B&O invest in Blutooth integration and as everyone else is saying broadening the HDCP 2.2 ports. I'm not worried with 1, but 2 certainly would be more comfortable. 5 would be exceptional.

I agree completely with you!