Streaming devices. [Archive]

Random

September 10th, 2014, 07:27 PM

We're cutting the cord or, in our case, satellite connection. Just shut off our DirecTV ($100/mo savings) and picked up a Roku Streaming Stick ($50). I think, based on our general viewing patterns, we'll be fine with Amazon/Hulu+/Netflix + discs. Only sticky point may be local baseball games that aren't on OTA television (most of them)--maybe I can persuade my f-i-l to get a slingbox for his house, and we'll stream the games from there. :D

I went with the Roku instead of a Chromecast because it's standalone. Having to use a casting device with a 7-yr-old seemed like a recipe for disaster and/or 7-yr-old watching pr0nz.

I'm in the middle of setting it up, so no impressions so far other than a vague disappointment that it needs power, either from a wall wart or powered USB connection. I'm going to try running it through my receiver, which will mean no additional wires to the teev.

thesameguy

September 10th, 2014, 07:44 PM

Good for you! I've managed with only Netflix/discs for a decade and never once regretted it (nor the ten+ grand I've saved on service). My sports TV consumption is nil, though, so I guess that's a component. If your FIL has DTV, you could always use the DTV streaming service - one of my coworkers does that quite successfully, though I don't know for what content, maybe not sports or not local sports. But, really, if that programming is no longer an option, you can always just invest the saved time in replacing that MTX75. :p

Random

September 10th, 2014, 09:38 PM

Ended up running into the teev...the wifi signal kept dropping when the stick was buried behind the receiver.

thesameguy

September 10th, 2014, 10:07 PM

That is one reason, I guess, to look at the box-style devices rather than the dongle-style devices... bigger antennas, better reception.

Random

September 10th, 2014, 10:14 PM

Moving the receiver onto the top of the cabinet would probably help. I think the only functional difference is that you need one less remote if I run the stick through the receiver? Depends whether one wants big stereo sound for Peppa the Pig, I guess.

thesameguy

September 10th, 2014, 10:19 PM

The remote issue would depend on the host and its capabilities, so no inherent rule there. The sound issue could be cured by connecting the audio out from the TV into the receiver, or maybe use ARC to cure the sound issue. I use that trick frequently when people connect new things to old systems... run all the HDMI stuff directly into the TV, then the TV audio out back to ye olde analog-only receiver. Works fine, works great if you've got optical or coaxial digital out.

Random

September 11th, 2014, 09:04 PM

First hitch in the plan: NCIS not streamed except from CBS's website. Grr.

Got Community on Hulu+, though.

thesameguy

September 11th, 2014, 09:36 PM

Not uncommon. In time, you will learn to live your life one season out. Makes everything easier, and encourages binge watching. ;)

21Kid

September 15th, 2014, 11:47 AM

Hook laptop up via HDMI and watch it thru computer --> TV

Random

September 15th, 2014, 12:05 PM

Yeah, or I'll bookmark CBS on my tablet.

thesameguy

September 15th, 2014, 01:13 PM

I keep thinking about investing in one of the Miracast thingies just for those oddball things that need a real PC web browser.

Random

September 19th, 2014, 08:13 PM

Wireless connection was a little too flaky, so we returned the stick and picked up a Roku 3 instead. :)

Kchrpm

October 16th, 2014, 10:32 AM

Nexus Player - http://www.google.com/nexus/player/
$99; Chromecast + 10 foot UI + gaming support

http://www.google.com/nexus/new/images/player/player-entertainment-1024.jpg

http://www.google.com/nexus/new/images/player/player-gaming3-1024.jpg

thesameguy

October 16th, 2014, 11:17 AM

So... it's an Ouya with a remote control and no touchpad... ?

Kchrpm

October 16th, 2014, 12:18 PM

Hardware wise, basically. Partner-support wise, no.

thesameguy

October 16th, 2014, 01:35 PM

I'm not sure I follow... it looks like it's just an Android device with the Google Play store for loading services... did I miss something?

Kchrpm

October 16th, 2014, 02:34 PM

I thought the Ouya didn't have Google Play store access, am I misremembering?

thesameguy

October 16th, 2014, 03:04 PM

It doesn't come with the app, but you can install it (or any other apk) in a couple minutes.

Selling this device with the "play Android games!" sounds good, but as the Ouya people know and/or found out, cell phone games take a lot of work to translate to the big-screen and a controller instead of a touchscreen... which is why Ouya versions tend to be better to play than "native" cell versions in the environment. In the same vein, playing cell phone Netflix or Hulu on the big screen tends to suck, as resolutions aren't optimized for 1080p, whereas when you're using dedicated apps on a specific device you get properly scaled content.

Seems like the Nexus Player is not unlike the FireTV - a device that occupies the no man's land between Android Gaming Device (Ouya) and Black Box Media Player (Roku or AppleTV). You'll get a much better gaming experience or a much better video experience making a choice between them. If gaming is even part of the discussion, I'd go Ouya any day. Granted, getting an apk onto a device is decidedly more technical than selecting the Play icon, but you win a totally open system and lose only the few minutes it takes to install dropbox, etc.

That's just my opinion, though. ;)

Kchrpm

October 16th, 2014, 07:09 PM

Actually I just think of it as a black box media player and don't really take the gaming very seriously.

Kchrpm

October 16th, 2014, 07:43 PM

Actually, with so much stuff being handled by Play Services nowadays, is it still easy/reliable to just side load stuff that would have been on the Play Store? I mean, if you're going to go full on custom ROM/root whatever, but as a consumer friendly device is the Ouya anything more than an emulator+ROMs box?

thesameguy

October 17th, 2014, 09:18 AM

I'm not sure I understand what you wrote, but assuming I do that right there is the reason to do Ouya IMHO... Most of the consumer Android devices obfuscate or eliminate the Android-ness of themselves and sort of become black box devices. That's an issue with the FireTV, for example - it's somewhere between difficult and impossible to mod and do anything other than what Amazon wants you to do. Since the Ouya only comes in one flavor, half the UI is for users and the other half is for developers so it still fully supports and encourages side-loading. So you can side-load Play and do all the Play Services stuff without impacting the core device or its capabilities - which is a pretty sizeable library of games both specifically written for and "ported" to Ouya. It also means you can throw on XBMC or Plex and gain access to those ecologies, which is not something you can do with any black box media device right now. Of course its flexibility comes with a price of complexity, and that certainly isn't for everyone. ;)

But -IMHO - if you're going to buy a set top box and all you care about is media, I just can't see any reason to do anything other than Roku or AppleTV. Those two have got to have some huge portion of the market between them and they - especially Roku - are incentivized to deliver the best media experience possible. Seems like a small box running generic Android and turning you loose on Play is going to result in an entirely sub-optimal experience - just like it is on Ouya.

This is a subject that I (unfortunately) extremely passionate about right now, as I have an army of professional dinosaurs here just discovering streaming services. I field a lot of questions and install/instruct on a lot devices & services. When people realize they can pause Breaking Bad in their Lake Tahoe cabin and then resume in their San Francisco condo they lose their minds.

Kchrpm

October 17th, 2014, 10:10 AM

Random

October 17th, 2014, 10:17 AM

It's very similar to the Nexus Player (well...the other way around) in function. The Nexus does some things that the Roku doesn't, like sync across devices and the chromecast casting stuff.

Given that CBS doesn't stream their stuff through any of the services currently on the Roku, I'm going to keep an eye on the Nexus. Mapper needs her NCIS fix.

Kchrpm

October 17th, 2014, 10:31 AM

I'm just holding out hope for some light multitasking on the Nexus Player, I want to have a slideshow and music at the same time, dammit!

thesameguy

October 17th, 2014, 10:45 AM

I did not know that you could get Play Services and the Play Store (two separate things, Play Services handles a lot of login and syncing for apps that use your Google account) up and running on the OUYA. If you can, and it doesn't get some weird blocks based on the device, then that erases an issue I had with it.

I'm not aware of any current problems associated with running any Android doodad on Ouya. Many of them end up having to be sideloaded, but since Ouya's Android is still Android, running the Play daemon ("Services") is BTDT. Now that Android is a lot less fractured than it was a few years ago, a lot of stuff is a lot easier. :up:

My experience with AppleTV is limited (watching my uncle use it and having discussions with Jason), and it seems like the obvious choice if you're in the iTunes/iOS ecosystem, but I know almost nothing about Roku. How/why is it better/different than Chromecast and what the Nexus Player is currently presented as? If you don't mind summarizing, that is, I assume you would be more succinct than if I Googled reviews of the different models.

Exactly that on AppleTV - great solution if you're in the ecosystem, but otherwise I'd go Roku. I think what Roku is missing right now - that both AppleTV and Nexus offer - is a local screen sharing/mirroring/streaming solution. You can cast to a Google device or AirPlay to an Apple device, but Roku is limited to what's in the box. I don't think it's a forever thing as this concept is gaining ground quickly, but right now Roku lags in this area. I don't particularly care as I can count on one hand the number of times I've had something on a portable device that *had* to be streamed to the home theater (versus getting the same media locally on the HT)... but that's a legitimate concern for some people, I get it. I think with Chromecast, AirPlay, PlayFi, new DLNA extensions, Miracast, WiDi, etc. there has to be some coming together of technology soon, and I'm not in a hurry. I'm happy to wait until it settles out.

In all of these devices there are app limitations. AppleTV can't do Amazon Prime, Roku can't do many of the network streams, Nexus doesn't do many of the cable streams, etc. I've yet to find one that does them all and satisfies everyone. In my experience, the Roku hits *most* of the big bulletpoint items - Prime, Netflix, Vudu, Hulu+, and cable streams. And really, Prime/Netflix/Hulu+ is (IMHO) the magic list for most people I deal with, with the cable streams (HBO, SHO, etc.) coming in right behind. Roku delivers that. As I mentioned, these boxes are Roku's entire business and IME they are the most aggressive in ensuring compatibility and good user experiences. Everyone else - Apple, Google, Amazon - all have their own content to push and aren't shy about excluding competitors from their devices.

Obviously with the stream to device solutions ('casts, etc.) you can work around lack of apps with web browsers, but IME a) most people don't want to leave their phone plugged in so they can binge watch TV, and b) most people spend a fair amount of time dicking with their phone while watching TV and having it tied up making the TV go is a downer. To that end, for most, the solution is a dedicated self-contained box to do as much as possible, and the Roku continually fits that bill.

Kchrpm

October 17th, 2014, 11:09 AM

:up:

FWIW screen-mirroring from your Android device is still very rare, they're getting more phones on-board but it's very slow going (they explained in a recent AMA that they're focusing on quality over quantity for now). I honestly wouldn't count that as a real Chromecast feature yet, though mirroring from a laptop works relatively well and simply.

thesameguy

October 19th, 2014, 07:43 PM

New twist....

Had some rewards thingies at Best Buy that were expiring this week and was on the verge of buying an AppleTV - the girl frequently streams Youtube and Pandora and while it's a few seconds to do either on a variety of existing hardware, it's just easier to do it via her phone and AirPlay would facilitate that for her. No worries.

I did one last-ditch search to see if there was a good solution for streaming on both Windows Phone and iOS - ha, yeah right - and it turns out there is. The current beta of Roku's Play To app supports Windows Phone! I guess Roku steps ahead in terms of the Do All streaming device. Went out and got a Roku 3.

I have not yet tried the Play To beta as I am temporarily irked by the fact Roku now requires a credit card to activate their devices. Although that doesn't affect me now, it's going to affect me next time I set one of these things up for someone. Used to be you could skip it, now you can't. Very annoying. Grrr...

Random

October 19th, 2014, 08:19 PM

Neat! If the Surfaceseseses can do it, I assume the Venue Pro will too. :up:

Random

November 24th, 2014, 08:20 PM

The Venue Pro sees the Roku, but doesn't connect successfully. Bummer. Only in beta though!

However, Naomi's Galaxy S3 connected nicely, so she's happily watching "Elementary" streamed to her phone and then 'cast to the teev via the Roku. We live in the future! :D

thesameguy

November 24th, 2014, 08:27 PM

I haven't tried it yet, only with my Windows Phone which does work.

I am thinking I may take the Roku down south this week. I am delivering my 37" Vizio (replaced with a 47" LG) and a Panasonic home theater system (traded it for a video card for no good reason) to replace a - shit you not - 32" Magnavox tube. We may live in the future, but the girl's mom lives in the '90s. I can't take it anymore.

I do have a preorder on an Amazon Fire stick, which has already been hacked nine ways from Sunday and you can sideload all sorts of stuff on it, including XBMC and its forks. Been very happen with SPMC on the Ouya, so this should be a fun experiment. I have liked the Roku 3 a lot, though, so I may end up with another one. Since I don't need it, though, it's going with my c2010 setup and we can share Netflix accounts.

thesameguy

November 26th, 2014, 11:23 AM

Getting ready to pack up some "old" AV stuff to take to SoCal, and thinking I am not quite ready to give up the Roku 3 (though I'm not sure exactly yet why) and am debating between picking up a Roku Stick or an Amazon Fire Stick. I pay for Netflix on two screens so I can get HD content, but there is just never a situation where I'd use it on two... so one is going to waste. I think I am going to bequeath that second screen to the gf's mom, and that'd be the entire purpose of the streaming device. She will never sign up for a service nor go exploring free stuff, so anything outside of Netflix is moot. I've read that the Roku app is superior (non-quantified) to the Fire app, but that the Fire device boots/loads/runs much faster than the Roku. The Roku is $50, the Fire is $25.

The alternative would be to pick up a Samsung smart bluray player for $50... The drive would never get used, but I've had good experiences with the Samsung app. It's really a matter of my bent for academically technically superior solutions and not much else. Hmmm... that's probably my hangup about taking the Roku 3 - it has mounts of functionality that would go to waste being down there.

The only variable I can come up with here is the Play To Roku app - I'd like to think she'll stream from her iPhone to the system, but I'm not sure that'd ever happen. There are apps for the Fire to do AirPlay - hell, there are apps for the Fire and not for the Roku.

I think I'm going to grab that Fire.

thesameguy

November 30th, 2014, 07:09 PM

Fire Stick is pretty awesome. It's clearly optimized to deliver Amazon stuff, and indeed the only thing it does out of the box is Amazon stuff. But I downloaded apps for Pandora, Youtube, and Netflix through the apps interface and they work great. I also downloaded an AirPlay daemon, so now it will handle but Airplay and Miracast streaming. The AirPlay daemon isn't perfect (eg, can't play via the iPhone Youtube app) but it's $5 and gets photos and Pandora from iPhone to Fire, so that's cool. Easy to use, very responsive, and $24... what's not to like?

thesameguy

December 1st, 2014, 09:08 AM

I should mention - the Fire Stick is Android based just like all the Fire devices, so you can sideload Android APKs to it - like Plex or XBMC(+forks).

OldTimer

December 1st, 2014, 10:25 PM

Recently bought a Chromecast. There aren't too many alternatives (like Roku) available here in Oz. Trying to mend my ways and stop downloading stuff I shouldn't.
I have a Boxee which I've used for some time to transfer content to the TV but it is a bit clumsy and the remote is stuffed. I currently use an app on my mobile (Android) to manipulate the Boxee from the lounge chair.
The Chromecast works okay from our iPad or Android phone although I am having some issues with it disconnecting intermittently. I am blaming this on the vagaries of RF networking as I do have a burgeoning collection of Wifi devices. Not sure if there is anything I can do to improve this.
I also have internet disconnect issues through the router, usually during the first 10 to 15 minutes of the movie and then it settles down and tends to be trouble free (after I have reconnected). My internet connection sucks like a Hoover and I am currently going through the complaints procedure with my ISP. I struggle to get 3mbps downloads which is the lowest limit for the streaming content provider (Presto/Foxtel). I also use the Chromecast for Crackle and Youtube but that is the limit of my reach so far.
I have the Chromecast powered by the USB port on the TV. I am clueless as to whether the performance would be improved if I connected it to the power point (egads another double adapter!).
I would appreciate any tips people may be able to offer regarding the operation of the Chromecast.

TheBenior

December 1st, 2014, 10:51 PM

This probably won't be much help, but the wife and I have two Chromecasts. We've been pretty satisfied when mostly streaming YouTube, Netflix, HBO Go, and Amazon Prime video. I can't remember the 3rd party program we used to stream, ahem, downloaded files, but it did result in lower quality video in general and some artifacting.

We powered both through the AC adapters; one is connected to a stereo receiver, the other is connected directly to a TV. We also have fairly fast cable internet for the US. Even upstairs far from the wireless router, we get over 30Mb/s

thesameguy

December 2nd, 2014, 09:01 AM

OldTimer

December 28th, 2014, 03:50 PM

Thanks for the feedback TheBenior. I'm warming to the Chromecast. I switched the power source to a power board (instead of USB) and find that has stopped an annoying flickering we were experiencing. I have also been experimenting with different wifi channels to find something away from all the neighbour's units. Overall, it is now working pretty well and I think is fairly good value for what it is. I have completed the complaints procedure with my ISP but any significant improvement in our transfer speeds seems out of the question for now. I have however, upgraded our modem, and that has eliminated the constant dropouts we were experiencing. I have been trying some different sources for movies. Did you know you can get free movies from Google and iTunes? Some of the free sites aren't much chop as their servers seem to be a bit slow but the service from the more commercial sites is quite good even on our crappy connection.
TSG the operation of the Chromecast is pretty simple, after all, if I can make it work then anybody can. ;) I would recommend the Chromecast as a cheap streaming device.

Freude am Fahren

December 29th, 2014, 08:13 AM

So my mom sent me a Slingbox for Christmas. Completely dead after one day (of basically no use BTW), even the hard reset on the back doesn't do anything. All it does is pass through the signal and the power LED works. Other than that, nothing. So I'm about to send it back to Amazon, but I also just found out my apartment complex is switching to a DishTV based provider that has Sling built in. So, yeah... convenient I guess.

Also I have a Chromecast on both my TV's, I do love them.

The non-self-contained nature of the Chromecast is what puts me off about it - you need a phone, tablet or computer to make it do stuff. That's fine for a lot of people, but not the technically, er, challenged. ;)

Kinda did for me at first too, but when you think about it, how many people are buying something to stream content to a TV that don't already have the ability to do it to their phone? Plus the price compared to all the rest.

I got myself a Chromcast on Cyber Monday for about $25. With it came two months of Hulu+, $20 credit on Google Play, an some more streaming stuff. Actually kinda made money on the deal.

Blerpa

December 29th, 2014, 09:21 AM

The non-self-contained nature of the Chromecast is what puts me off about it - you need a phone, tablet or computer to make it do stuff. That's fine for a lot of people, but not the technically, er, challenged.

Kinda did for me at first too, but when you think about it, how many people are buying something to stream content to a TV that don't already have the ability to do it to their phone? Plus the price compared to all the rest.

I've a Chromecast and a Western Digital TV HD media player.
The Chromecast is worth those 35€ I paid for it, and not a cent more. Maybe even less, like 29€.

Frankly it cannot compete with my old media player in any area, beside indeed the streaming of youtube and Google Movies or stuff through Plex: video sucks, audio sucks and not much else you can do with it. Sarcastically I'd say the real plus is the mirroring of your mobile device.

Next buy? Another Western Digital media player.
With a GODDAMN remote for it (to having to use a mobile device for the Chromecast is one of the most retarded and annoying things) and offline capabilities. The Chromecast without wi-fi is just a piece of plastic stuck in your tv. Zero use at all.
Glad I've one, probably not going to buy another one ever.

So YMMV and your needs may be different.

thesameguy

December 29th, 2014, 10:03 AM

Kinda did for me at first too, but when you think about it, how many people are buying something to stream content to a TV that don't already have the ability to do it to their phone?

It's not that their phone can't do it, it's a matter of why use your phone to do it in the first place? I like the screen mirroring aspect of the device for other things (viewing pictures, for example), but the rest of it seems like liability - drain your battery, limit quality, and prevent your phone from doing other things while you watch TV? Nah.

Plus the price compared to all the rest.

It's not that cheap, though. The Fire Stick is like $5 more, the Roku Stick like $15 more and those are both totally self-contained devices with remotes. If Chromecast was *really* cheap - like $5 or $10 I'd say surewhynot, but it's $5 or $15 more to get a device that can work totally independently and potentially do other things (eg Plex on Fire) while not occupying your phone. Just the fact that you have to hand your phone to someone else to use TV seems like a poor design element (unless, I guess, you always watch TV solo). Fire even has Miracast, so you can use it like a Chromecast if you need/want to. I have a really hard time with non-self-contained devices that don't make up for their lack of completeness with a cost benefit, and I don't see it with the Chromecast. Just my $0.02.

Kchrpm

December 29th, 2014, 02:19 PM

Pushing things from your Chromecast doesn't necessarily take over your phone or drain your battery. As long as the OS doesn't decide you're low on RAM and kill the program (and in some cases even if it does), the Chromecast will keep chugging along while you leave your phone's screen off, or if you want to do something else.

That's if you're doing the normal Cast function, not screen mirroring.

Kchrpm

December 29th, 2014, 02:24 PM

And to me, the convenience of the Chromecast is that I can see and control in detail what's going on from my phone without having to deal with on screen menus that require covering up what's playing and being in the same room.

I like being able to search for and pick the next song(s) from a different room.

I like being able to add to and edit the YouTube queue while a video is playing.

tigeraid

January 7th, 2015, 11:29 AM

Do any of you stream videos from a PC to this device?

I currently have a Sony "Smart" Blu-Ray. The youtube service isn't bad, netflix isn't bad, the rest is kinda awful, but I got it mainly to stream videos from my PC. But I have a fair bit of compatibility issues, glitches during watching, etc etc...

We're planning on cutting the cable this month too, but was hoping to find maybe a better streaming device, at least for compatibility...

thesameguy

January 7th, 2015, 11:42 AM

You should be able to do that easily with Plex. That's how I'd approach it. Chromecast or Amazon Fire can do it.

Kchrpm

January 7th, 2015, 12:09 PM

Plex is something that should and does work, but in my experience (and potentially because of networked storage) can be unreliable, so I just ended up getting a 10 foot HDMI cable from Monoprice rather than constantly troubleshooting.

tigeraid

January 8th, 2015, 08:39 AM

errrrr.... But isn't Plex the Media Server on the PC side? I was thinking my problem was the Smart Blu-Ray player in the first place... I'm using Universal Media Server right now...

thesameguy

January 8th, 2015, 10:09 AM

Plex is a media server on the PC side, but it's also a remote control on the mobile device side and a client on the streaming device side.

tigeraid

January 9th, 2015, 08:44 AM

iiiiinteresting... So, it's a client I INSTALL on the blu-ray player?

EDIT: ah, looks like it, though they don't specifically mention a Sony BD... Guess I'll try this out when I get home. :)

thesameguy

January 9th, 2015, 09:05 AM

Not on a bluray player - it needs be some sort of computing device. You won't be able to run it on an appliance like a BD player.

21Kid

January 9th, 2015, 10:30 AM

Are they even going to make TVs that aren't connected, going forward? How long are these sand-alone streaming devices going to be relevant?

thesameguy

January 9th, 2015, 10:57 AM

For the reasons touched on previously in this thread, I think a long time. Smart TVs are great, but their relevance is entirely dependent on the manufacturer stuffing them with enough horsepower to stay current, and enough ongoing support to keep apps relevant. Component manufacturers are typically not very good at these things - even reasonably modern TVs and bluray players have demonstrably insufficient processing power and lackadaisical support even for known issues, much less new, needed features. I don't see that changing any time soon. Folks like Roku earn their living through their apps, and falling behind is losing cash so they tend not to. Even if they do, replacing a $75 Roku semi-annually is a lot more palatable than replacing your $1000 TV every other year. You can't even get all the streaming services in one place yet due to non-technical reasons, so even assuming your smart TV covers 99% of your ongoing need, most folks are going to need some sort of streaming device to augment their smart TV.

21Kid

January 9th, 2015, 11:40 AM

Hmmm... Okay. I still haven't seen a need for one. Between Netflix, Amazon, YouTube, Hulu Plus, Pandora being available on my TV. And HBOGO, crackle, TED, Skype, Twitch, NFL network, are on the Xbox One. I guess I don't see what else I'd need it for. :? Am I missing a big part of why people use these?

I mostly just use Netflix anyway. Are there other apps that people are using regularly?

thesameguy

January 9th, 2015, 11:59 AM

... but you've got $400 into an xbox one. A lot of people - maybe *most* people - want streaming services and have no interest or use for a $400 gaming console.

I use them because I have three TVs and I'm sure as hell not gonna buy $1200 worth of Xboxes!

tigeraid

January 9th, 2015, 12:06 PM

:mad:

21Kid

January 9th, 2015, 12:59 PM

I have 3 TVs also. But the other two still have Netflix, HULU, Amazon, Youtube, and Pandora built in. :| Maybe I just filtered non-wifi ones out when I was looking for TVs? :?

I guess I'm wondering what I could be missing on those other two. Because you said that they are most likely insufficient. What am I missing? :toast:

thesameguy

January 9th, 2015, 01:00 PM

Do the other two TVs have HBOGO, crackle, TED, Skype, Twitch, and NFL network?

21Kid

January 9th, 2015, 01:09 PM

I haven't looked to be honest. Probably not. But, neither does Roku.

tigeraid

February 19th, 2015, 06:56 AM

Cutting the cord soon. Got a Roku set up, running Plex and streaming all my goodies to it.

Roku in Canada kinda sucks right now though, we basically have Netflix, youtube and some sports channels, and that's it. No Hulu, no HBO Go, and our Netflix is crappy in comparison. Here's hoping that picks up in the near future. Until then I'll have to be content streaming shit from my PC.

George

March 3rd, 2015, 08:09 AM

I'm seriously considering a Roku 3 box, having just become aware of what they do. I'm in the US. Any comments, pushes over the cliff, warnings of you'll be SORRRR-reeeeeee!, etc.?

Random

March 3rd, 2015, 08:45 AM

Only small issue we've run into is a lack of parental controls, so you'll have to actually supervise the kids if/when they are using it (the horror!).

Lou's (almost 8 now) favorite channel? The NASA Channel. :D They have a ton of short clips about pretty much everything they do available for streaming, in addition to the usual NASA TV feed. :up:

thesameguy

March 3rd, 2015, 08:56 AM

I would consider what you want it to do before investing - not because the Roku 3 has issues (it's great!), but because there may be cheaper options to get done what you need to. :)

George

March 3rd, 2015, 09:20 AM

Good to know about the parental controls. I suppose as they get older if that becomes a concern, we can simply remove the box.

What else should we consider, TSG? I know I don't spend much on cars or bicycles compared to most, but I don't buy only by price. Sometimes it's fun to go buy the best, especially if it's only a hundred bucks for something that appears to be as incredibly capable as a Roku. Bear in mind I've just learned what they are, so I'm in a state of awe and desire similar to the time I walked into a Best Buy and saw Gran Turismo on display in the late '90s.

We received a HDTV from my parents as a Christmas present and I'm starting to shop around for TV providers, as we still have the standard-definition cable box and a coaxial cable plugged into the HDTV. I hate the idea of having to pay Comcast another ten bucks a month (a guesstimate based on outdated hearsay) just to get a sharper picture than we have already.

We pay too much per month for cable already. I'm thinking an antenna, a Roku box, and whatever subscriptions my wife wants to pay for (Netflix, etc.) would be a lot cheaper - and smarter - than paying for cable every month. I'm willing to buy the antenna and Roku (or similar) box in the hopes that we both will see that we really don't need cable. I'm happy to upgrade hardware every few years...err, decades. It's the ongoing fees to use them that I resist!

Roku just looks awesome. I think the whole family would like it. I especially like the headphone jack on the remote control! That's a super-genius invention, like a Wile E. Coyote scheme to catch a meal.

thesameguy

March 3rd, 2015, 06:18 PM

There are a zillion of these types of devices - I think the three big players would be considered to be Chromecast (the device, not the technology), Roku, and Amazon FireTV. But these are just the fancy new ones - Netgear, Western Digital, Patriot, and a bunch of others have been in this space. It's also worth recognizing consoles - especially Xbox but also Playstation and of course Ouya - and "smart" bluray players

There is not a single one of the devices that literally does literally everything, so you really need to figure out what it is you want and choose the device accordingly. Narrowing to the big streaming services - which I'd consider to be Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, and maybe Vudu* - means most of the devices will suit you, though there are holes, and you're probably safe buying entirely on price. It's when you get into the niche channels that things get dicey and some planning pays off.

In broad terms, I'd consider all these streaming devices to either be Roku, closed, or Android. Choosing a "closed" device (like an XBox) means you get what they give you, and there is nothing more. Android means that one way or another if a thing can be done on Android there is a good chance you can get it to work on whatever Android device you choose. I'd use the example of Plex on FireTV. Amazon doesn't offer Plex, but you can load the app onto FireTV with essentially no trouble. That gives you options for some degree of futureproofing. I put Roku in a class of its own, because there is an API and there is some end-user customization possible that gives you access to content that Roku may not have thought of yet. It isn't perfect, but it's better than nothing.

I think the two cheapest options are Chromecast and FireTV - either one costs under $40. Then you have most of the options between $40 and $100. Roku's highest offering, the 3, sits there along with a couple others. At $100 you have the option of a previously owned X360 or PS3 from Gamestop or a new Ouya staring you in the face, and they're worth considering as they add significant functionality. Smart bluray players start at about $60 and run to infinity (and beyond) - but you'd be hard pressed to spend more than $120 without just being silly.

IMHO, if the goal is merely "cutting the cord" I would strongly look at Amazon FireTV Stick because it does most everything out of the box with no fuss and it's cheap. If you happen to be an Amazon Prime member (which you should be, not having it is insane!) it's absolutely the way I'd go. If you are looking for more niche channels, I think it'd be a big tossup between the Roku 3 and a used console. I'd personally lean towards the console, because who doesn't want more Xboxes? I think in the balance is new vs. used reliability, and maybe you don't want a game console in the house. That's fair. ;) The final thing to consider is a bluray player. You can buy a damn decent smart bluray player for less than a Roku 3 these days (like, <$75 at Costco) and while it won't have the full flexibility that the Roku (or Fire, etc.) will have, it will hit the big bullet points (Netflix, Hulu, etc.) and give you somewhere to play blurays for those time the net hoses you, and you need to rely on Redbox. (You could obviously accomplish the same with a PS3!)

I'll finish with this thought: For cord cutting, and no other desires on the table, I'd spend as little as possible. You'll never say "Gosh, we have too many streaming devices." Make a short list of the services you must have, and see what the cheapest device is that will do those things. IME, the $40 FireTV can get your feet wet without breaking the bank, and if you find you want/need more content, move it to a less-used TV (I know you have more than one!) and throw an X360 or a Roku in the main room.

* I am ignoring streaming audio services, like Pandora or Spotify, but those could be important to you!

George

March 4th, 2015, 07:48 AM

Thanks for all that info. Much appreciated. I'll dig into the things you mentioned, including why I need to join Amazon Prime. I've ordered a couple things from them over the years but I'm hardly a regular Amazon customer.

We already own an Xbox 360. I think I've seen a Netflix icon in the menus, but as I'm not a member I haven't clicked on it. I'll have to turn it on and see what else is in there. I don't think I've used it since I got my wife Tetris - her longtime favorite video game - for Christmas. We played it some that day and I don't think I've been back to the Xbox since. My kids play Minecraft on it on weekends and they have been hitting me up for another so they can play in the same world together on different machines. I try not to give them the "Why, back in my day..." speech too often, as I want them to be excited and informed about new technology - and they are!

And, I confess I'd forgotten about what would happen to our other two TVs if we cancelled cable. But I still think buying some hardware one time is a better deal than paying monthly fees for cable. I don't know if my wife agrees as she really likes the few shows she watches on cable, but I think I'd be okay without it if there's other interesting stuff available on a device I can buy rather than rent.

Either way, I'll eventually buy a streaming device of some kind while trying to standardize and modernize our home audio & video. Right now it's a strange mix of new and old and now we have some stuff that won't work with other stuff, like this new HDTV that doesn't have analog audio outputs. That was a shock to me. I have all kinds of audio stuff to plug a tinny-sounding TV into...or so I thought. Turns out, I have nothing compatible, so now I'm looking at soundbars and subwoofers. That's how I stumbled over the Roku device and my eyes popped open like a guy dumped out of a time machine from thirty years ago. I'm like Marty McFly seeing his first Mr. Fusion machine.

thesameguy

March 4th, 2015, 09:10 AM

If you have an Xbox, there is no reason to invest in anything else. If there's an incentive to get a second, go for it! :) I think you'd have to try and find a streaming service that wasn't available on xbox.

I am trying to get my parents to cut the cord as well. My mom just retired, now it's 100% fixed income and they are spending $960 annually on TV service. $120 annually to Netflix, $100 annually to Amazon (they use Prime anyway), and $96 to Hulu Plus gets more content than anyone needs. With Netflix and Amazon ramping up original content I think most people really have no reason to want legacy network/cable shows. I dunno, I'm out of touch on this. But I did plow through Amazon's Bosch and even though I don't like police dramas found it very good. Point is, I think $300 annually covers *anyone* to gross excess. Throw on an HD antenna for OTA HDTV and there is nothing to complain about. The $660 they could be saving buys plane tickets, and travelling is what retirees should be doing.

Most of these services have free trials, so I'd recommend a little planning and then setting up the xbox to audit these services and see what works for you. Even cutting your cable back to the absolute minimum and throwing the difference at a month or two subscription to these services would serve you well. Unlike cable, there is no install and there is no commitment. There is no pain in setting it up, and if it doesn't work out, you can cancel any or all of them and go begging back to your cable company. ;)

George

March 4th, 2015, 12:40 PM

Random

March 4th, 2015, 12:54 PM

George

March 4th, 2015, 12:59 PM

I get this loud and clear, however, and it's exactly the way I'm thinking:

Point is, I think $300 annually covers *anyone* to gross excess. Throw on an HD antenna for OTA HDTV and there is nothing to complain about.

Yep. I figured we'd use the antenna for local channels for local news, which is a necessary evil if one wants local weather. And we'd get Bronco games on local channels - FOX or CBS - and my wife's favorite, Downton Abbey, on PBS. Then I figure Roku and/or similar devices could replace cable for kids shows, science and history and other interests, new and old TV series, classic movies, even not-so-classic movies like Red Dawn that I caught part of this weekend on some cable channel (it's not that bad). It doesn't take much to entertain me when I'm folding a mountain of laundry on a Saturday afternoon. It looks like Roku, Fire, etc. provide most of that for free, even before paying for anything like Netflix, etc.

Another neat thing I read about Roku is it will mirror the display of an iPhone or iPad. My wife has an iPhone and we have two iPads. It would be nice to surf the web on an iPad, see a video on YouTube, and then blow it up to full screen on the TV. I can do that now with my wife's Win8 laptop and the long HDMI cable we bought specifically for that purpose, but do to it wirelessly from the couch would be an impressive display of technological gluttony.

George

March 4th, 2015, 01:02 PM

...we plunked down $30-ish for a season pass of Elementary. Not bad for 16 episodes or whatever it is. :) And still way less than the $100+/mo we were paying for DirecTV.

Yes! It seems like the day we've all wished for is finally here, when we can pay for what we want to watch instead of choosing Package Number 5 from a list of bundles.

Random

March 4th, 2015, 01:06 PM

The PBS Roku channel is very good, BTW (we watch This Old House pretty religiously), and they have a separate PBS Kids channel. :up:

The screen mirroring has been a little hit-or-miss for us, but still a cool feature. There's also a YT channel, though not having a keyboard interface kinda blows.

George

March 4th, 2015, 01:24 PM

Random

March 4th, 2015, 01:31 PM

Yeah, k/b support seems like a very low priority for Roku. You can do some stuff with their Android/Windows app.

thesameguy

March 4th, 2015, 02:29 PM

Okay, so we can pay for services like Netflix through the Xbox, but there's no free channels in there, I assume. Tons of free channels make a Roku pretty tempting. I found this list of free channels for Roku yesterday - this is seriously impressive for a one-time fee of $99, plus all the batteries the remote can burn through.

Roku doesn't make any content, they just provide an interface to watch it on TV. Nothing that's free on Roku costs anything anywhere else. Nothing that's on Roku is exclusive to Roku. Roku just calls www.nasa.gov the "NASA channel" and clubbingtv.com the "Clubbing TV HD channel." I've oversimplified, but that's the core of it. All the stuff on Roku's free list is accessible, freely, in other ways - some more painfully than others, no doubt, and that's worth keeping in mind. What sort of separates Roku is that, kinda like a hybrid of Youtube and playlists, Roku users can link content together and make their own channel. You get what you pay for, of course, and the signal to noise ratio with these free channels is terrible. I doubt you spend much time on clubbingtv.com. I'm not suggesting this stuff is all worthless, because it's not, but only that IME "Roku Free Channels" would not be an actual selling point. They look great in the ads, though.

The stuff most folks people use are going to be pay-for services. Roku calls these channels too - the Netflix channel, the Hulu channel, etc. In most other venues, these channels are called apps - the Netflix app, the Hulu app, etc.

Just remember that Roku doesn't make or even license content. A Roku 3 is nothing more than a specialized web browser - just like an Xbox, PS3, FireTV, etc. These guys all sell the same core device - what you're shopping (in the end) is channel/app allegiances, interface, and to some degree hardware capability. Roku probably has the widest app allegiance, but not necessarily the best app performance or UI. To some degree, Roku is a jack of all trades and master of none, but in real terms will that affect you? Probably not. :)

I imagine this increasingly sounds like I am anti-Roku - I am most solidly not. I've recommended and installed Rokus for a lot of people, including my parents. I'm just trying to be sure the facts are all in the light and you don't end up with a Roku when an AppleTV (which I have *totally* failed to mention) is actually the right choice. This stuff is all pretty new, and I know lots of people have spent money on the wrong device only to end up disappointed. :)

thesameguy

March 4th, 2015, 02:30 PM

I was at Best Buy yesterday at lunch looking at soundbars (and almost buying a Roku box) and I saw a wireless keyboard with a laptop-like touchpad where the 10-key normally goes on a computer keyboard. It was on display with all the other TV stuff and labeled as something like a "Family Keyboard" or "Living Room Keyboard" or something like that. I don't know if those work with Roku or not but I thought it was a handy idea. I also can't find it on BB's website right now or I'd show it to you. I'm looking in TV & Home Theatre Accessories with no luck.

Oh well, that wouldn't be the first time I've seen something in a store that's not on their website or vice-versa.

Was it this?

http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/aplus/detail-page/B005DKZTMG_K400_FOB_US_lg.jpg

I use one in the RV! :)

Edit: For soundbars, I'd check out Crutchfield or Amazon or maybe Onecall. Best Buy's selection is criminal. You might also check out HTIBs unless space is at a premium. A good HTIB costs way less than a half-decent sound bar IMHO. Something like this:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0077V88V8/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_dp_ss_1?pf_rd_p=1944687722&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B007R8U5RG&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0BXCZHS8QV1BVJ9DDZQE

Is cheaper than even a cheap sound bar and will blow it away. Maybe a good reason to get that Amazon Prime subscription? ;)

Random

March 4th, 2015, 02:32 PM

Was it this?

http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/aplus/detail-page/B005DKZTMG_K400_FOB_US_lg.jpg

I use one in the RV for driving! :)

:eek: :eek:

thesameguy

March 4th, 2015, 02:40 PM

Nonono.

I use this for driving:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81dMVG-3tIL._SY355_.jpg

PEW PEW!

George

March 4th, 2015, 03:22 PM

Too funny!

Yes, I saw a keyboard somewhat (if not exactly) like that one. It seems like a good idea as TV and computers are starting to merge into being the same thing.

I didn't see any joysticks at the store, but then again I didn't go into the automotive department.

Best Buy's selection is criminal. You might also check out HTIBs unless space is at a premium.

I'm no fan of BB, but they're close enough for me to go look on a lunch break to get an idea of what's available...or at least some of what's available. It was a good thing to do because I learned a little about soundbars, such as they vary in number and type of inputs and outputs. I still like looking at stuff in brick & mortar stores vs. just looking at pics and reading reviews. And MicroCenter sells soundbars, too, but they don't have any set up to demo. They're on shelves in boxes for those who know exactly what they're buying, I guess. I'm not going to bother with Wal-Mart, Target, or Radio Shack. I'm a little more serious about audio than that.

We have a rectangular basement that's carpeted and drywalled and even pre-wired behind the drywall for surround sound. It's our "someday" home theatre, and we will definitely put a HTIB down there when the time is right. In fact, I have been saving a nice Onkyo surround-sound receiver to be the heart of that system. It used to be my parents' back when they had a larger home and a nice TV room. Of course, it doesn't have any digital sound inputs, so now it's just doorstop, I guess. :smh:

The HDTV my parents gave us for Christmas is sized to fit in a built-in shelving area in our main floor family room, and that room isn't ideal for a home theatre. There's a fireplace and chimney right where you'd want the TV to be, so the TV is in a corner next to the fireplace on one of the short walls of a rectangular room. There aren't any good mounting areas for rear speakers either. Well, maybe one, but the other would be in the middle of a tall wall, just sticking out all by itself, and it would positively have to be wireless. I guess wireless speakers aren't uncommon these days, but it's just not the right room for a home theatre.

Also, our second floor is sort of a half-floor, kind of like how an upstairs loft opens over a main room below with a high ceiling. All three bedrooms upstairs open into a balcony overlooking the room with the TV. That's why the Roku remote control with a headphone jack appeals to me - I can have Schwarzenegger yelling "Get to da choppa!" at 3:00 AM and not wake the family...and this from the guy who's asleep every night by 10:00. It's not that I would; just knowing that I could would be the reward! On the other hand, down in the basement I could enjoy nice sound and not have to worry about flickering light from the TV bothering anyone at night, or early on weekend mornings before anyone else is awake, which is more my style than late night, these days.

Back to the room on the main floor, there's a shelf under the TV tall enough for an old-school VCR, and wide enough for the VCR, the cable box, and another component too, like an Xbox and probably a Roku box also.

I figure I will install another shelf below that for a soundbar and there's room below that for a subwoofer to be on the lowest shelf in the corner.

TSG's link again: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0077V88V8/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_dp_ss_1?pf_rd_p=1944687722&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B007R8U5RG&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0BXCZHS8QV1BVJ9DDZQE

I would definitely consider something like that for the basement when it's time to build a nice setup down there. In fact, that price is about the minimum I'm planning to spend on a soundbar and subwoofer for the main floor. I'm not going to (knowingly) buy cheap crap.

If, from my typically verbose description of the room, you still think I'm making a mistake with just a soundbar & sub, please tell me.

Again, I'm grateful for all the help!

thesameguy

March 4th, 2015, 04:49 PM

I wouldn't do the sound bar. I've installed some very expensive ($1000+) sound bars and even with subs they are disappointments. Based on your description of the main room, I would buy a cheap, er, inexpensive HTIB system and just discard the two rear speakers. You can run 3.1 stereo and have a fine, fine system. Two hung on the wall flanking the TV (or on stands, if you prefer), one in front, sub wherever you like it. The only time I'd ever buy a sound bar is if I had to mount my TV on a wall and nothing else could be anywhere nearby. If you have the physical space to place even two speakers, do it. The biggest sound bars have like 3.5" drivers which are just not enough for anything useful except saving space. Most of them have sub 3" drivers. They are better than most TV speakers simply because they tend to backed by bigger amps, but they're all ridiculous IMHO. The amp from the HTIB also gives you a headphone port you can use for a set of wireless headphones if you like. (The "flaw" with the Roku setup is that the headphone jack only works with stuff coming from the Roku. You can't use it if you're watching a bluray, OTA HDTV, or you've got a USB drive plugged into your TV. Nice for some stuff, but a broader headphone setup would probably serve you better... and sound better. My $0.02)

(I would also dump that Onkyo receiver you have been saving unless you expect to build an actual stereo around it. Without HDMI switching it's nearly useless today. It will be useless in two years. If you're not planning on putting a radio somewhere, it'll just sit around collecting dust forever. :) )

thesameguy

March 4th, 2015, 04:50 PM

This:

http://www.staticwhich.co.uk/media/images/taster/taster-image-new---surround-sound-247012.jpg

Just in the corner. :)

thesameguy

March 5th, 2015, 12:24 AM

Tangentially related, Best Buy is trying to get me to shop there again and sent me $5 off. I will never set foot in another BB again, so if you wanna go get something there, feel free to use it. If not, maybe someone else will. It's only valid in store and only for a couple weeks. PM me.

Yw-slayer

March 5th, 2015, 02:23 AM

Yeah, I have that Logitech keyboard/trackpad combo and use it for our bedroom HTPC.

thesameguy

March 5th, 2015, 02:35 AM

I think you mentioned it once and that's how I ended up with it. :D

For the HTPCs, I keep a wireless keyboard accessible, but 99% of the of time I use this:

http://www.gyration.com/products/air-mouse-mobile

They are priced ridiculously, but years ago buy.com had them for $25 and I bought four. :lol:

I went to the trouble of programming my Harmony remote to control the HTPC, but that stupid little air mouse is the bomb beezy for most things.

George

March 5th, 2015, 08:10 AM

TSG, thanks for all the advice. I tend to believe what you say as you've kept me out of trouble with lots of things, like computers and snow tires and who knows what else over the years.

As I mentioned, I'm sold on a HTIB for the basement, and frankly I'm stunned at how relatively inexpensive they are. I figured we'd have to spend thousands, as my parents did when they built a home theatre in the 1990s. And I know a place on the shady side of the street up in the city that sells out-of-the-box HDTVs on the cheap. They claim they're Amazon returns and sold at 30% below Amazon prices. I dunno, but it looks like for under a grand we could have an awesome audio & video system in the basement, even if we buy from a more reputable source. :lol:

My problem in the room on the main floor is wiring. As I'm, uh, temporarily embarrased in the digital camera and cell phone department, a diagram made in Excel will have to suffice.

If you're standing in the center of room, to your left are stairs going up, just like this picture. There's a couch there instead of the TV setup.

http://www.staticwhich.co.uk/media/images/taster/taster-image-new---surround-sound-247012.jpg

To your right is a wall of windows.

Straight ahead is this. The top of the shelves is about eight feet off the ground, approximately.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a284/craigslistuser/wall_zpsn99deiaf.jpg

The reason a soundbar and subwoofer appeals to me is I can keep all the wires behind the shelves on one side of the fireplace and chimney. We used to have a stereo on the right side opposite the TV before we removed it when the kids were in their terrible twos and terrifying threes. For whatever reason, we never put it back. I would love to have a nice receiver there like the Onkyo you linked to, to replace our old one, and other components too. There are plenty of power outlets and room for speakers all over the wall o' shelves, but the problem is how to wire everything together without having wires running across the chimney.

I guess I could have the HTIB stacked up all on the right side with a TV, and put our standalone stereo back on the left side, but it would be nice to get one receiver doing double duty and everything hooked into everything else - HDTV, dual cassette deck, turntable, VCR, Xbox360, the Sony Playstation 1 running the original Gran Turismo and GT2, Ubuntu PC with HDMI output and wireless RV keyboard, speakers all over the place, and happiness and joy for all.

Kchrpm

March 5th, 2015, 08:44 AM

If no one wants TSG's in-store BB coupon, I'll take it.

thesameguy

March 5th, 2015, 02:42 PM

It's kind of hard for me to visualize the limitations of that room, but you know it and I don't. :) I would just make every possible effort to fit real speakers and a real amp in there. I wish I could email you the output from a $700 JBL sound bar I was forced to install last month, it's a travesty. It's better than the built-in speakers, but it doesn't even approach what I get out of an old Denon receiver with a pair of ancient Pinnacle PN2s and 8" Infinity in our exercise (/junk) room. There is just only so much you can do with fist-sized drivers. :( Someone makes a passive sound bar that is built like a real speaker, maybe it'd be worth looking at. Oh, nevermind, it's $1100. Heh.

thesameguy

March 5th, 2015, 02:42 PM

If no one wants TSG's in-store BB coupon, I'll take it.

I'll PM it to you. :)

George

March 7th, 2015, 07:39 AM

There is just only so much you can do with fist-sized drivers.

Yeah, it's like the saying about "no replacement for displacement" with engines. I know a little about guitar and bass amps, PA systems, power amps and preamps, and speaker impedance and power ratings, so I don't feel like a total newb here, but I just don't know what my options are for home audio these days, despite my best attempts at searching online.

I think wireless is the key to our needs. I see where some soundbars have wireless subs and some HTIBs have wireless rear speakers, but I need at least the left front speaker to be wireless, too, just to keep things looking good. If I were a bachelor, I would have strung the wires across the chimney already. :up:

I'm going to visit this store sometime this weekend and probably be astonished at prices, but maybe I'll learn more than I seem to be able to do with an internet seach engine and helpful online friends: http://www.listenup.com/

thesameguy

March 7th, 2015, 09:52 AM

Not that it matters, but I am still hung up on why you can't have discrete speakers right next to the TV, either flanking it or tucked above or underneath its horizontal edges. Obviously the stereo effect is diminished if they're too close together, but it's not like it's any better with a sound bar.

If the room is carpeted, you can run speaker wire under the edge of the carpet, even where it meets the fireplace. That's what I've done with the RCA cable for my sub (which I like right by the couch ;) ). If you have bare wallspace, there is also super-thin "paint in" speaker cable, which is exactly what it sounds like. For a single pair of speakers, you could also always use paintable wire molding across the fireplace (down low, obviously) and paint it to match the brick as best you can. Lots of options.

Is there literally just enough room for the TV and nothing more where it has to go? Can you post a picture? I just hate to see someone chuck hundreds of dollars at a poor solution. :(

George

March 7th, 2015, 01:36 PM

Can you post a picture? I just hate to see someone chuck hundreds of dollars at a poor solution. :(

Yes, I will as soon as I can. I lost the proprietary charging/USB cable for my weird old cell phone a while back, and I'm SURE it's in the house - I remember bringing it in the house on a Friday night after work and it's been missing ever since. And our kids had a friend over around the same time who managed to break our digital camera. I've been in a similar period of indecision as I am with this TV audio stuff about what to do with the phone - go with a smart phone and $$$$ per month in fees, vs. $10 per month for my current phone, or get a cheap flip-phone and a digital camera too, and/or take a chance with a used cable for my own phone from eBay. The easiest solution has been to stop carrying the cell phone altogether. I have phones and computers at home and at work, so I can easily live without one in between. My wife's iPhone can take pics but I haven't figured out how to use that yet and this hasn't been important enough for me to borrow her phone.

Today my son and I went to the Denver store of the website I linked above and saw $8000 TVs and McIntosh amps with no price tags and whole rooms built to look like movie theatres. We have the perfect setup for one that in our basement, but this main-floor room is a headache.

On the one hand, all my wife and I have ever known from TVs is "adequate" sound, and this new HDTV sounds terrible as is. I understand why. A soundbar may well be "adequate", but I think we're both ready to have a stereo in that room again so we can listen to music at dinner like we did before having kids and it just makes sense to incorporate the TV and the Xbox360 and whatever else we have (like maybe a Roku box) into one setup.

We also went to Best Buy today and a guy showed me paintable wire molding, which might be the way to go here. I'd like to have a full component stereo system on the left side, at the same height as the TV, and then speakers to the left and the right of the fireplace, and a sub, and the center speaker in there somewhere too. We have TONS of room for speakers on those shelves. Running the wires is the primary problem here.

The good news is I know lots more today than I did a week ago, my wife is all for me building a wall o' sound, AND I get my bonus next week and have a week of vacation (my first since 2008!) a week after that, so I should be able to rig up something fairly decent within two week's time.

The interior facade of the fireplace is textured drywall, not brick, and that makes the molding to conceal the wires more of a believable possibility than if we had bare brick on the interior side of the chimney. I wish I had an X-ray view of what the chimney looks like behind the drywall. I can imagine it's a pipe like a dryer vent going up with tons of dead space around it behind the drywall. All my problems would be solved if I could drill holes at the back of the chimney and run wires through what I assume is dead space around the actual chimney pipe, but I'm not about to start drilling holes. I may, however, stop in at the local fireplace store (yeah, we have one nearby) and ask. I live in a cookie-cutter suburban house in a sea of rooftops and I know we aren't the only people with this same fireplace and shelf setup.

Is there literally just enough room for the TV and nothing more where it has to go?

Yeah, it's jammed in pretty tight. My father measured it and got the biggest one that would fit. I think a TV the next size smaller (a 42", maybe?) would have made things easier, but I suppose we can suffer through with what I think is a 47" tv,

thesameguy

March 7th, 2015, 03:03 PM

Ah, now everything makes sense. Here is something you could consider that helped me: Pick up some bar metal (aluminum is preferable) from a Home Depot or whatever and attach it to the same wall mount bracket that hangs the TV. Let it extend beyond the TV long enough to support a speaker on each side. That way, you don't have to drill into the wall at all to hang a speaker. You can bend the metal as necessary to clear an angle. I used this approach to hang the computer off the back of the upstairs TV and it worked great - reasonable size HT speakers (like 5.25" or 2x5.25" drivers should be fine. You could use angle stock to give some rigidity, it just creates a minor bending challenge (nothing a Dremel can't solve) and requires a little extra wall clearance. But it would reduce or eliminate the possibility of sound vibrating the mount. :up:

George

March 7th, 2015, 11:32 PM

Can you post a picture?

They're old, but these pics should tell the tale.

Here's the room. This was in 2009, and I had removed the lower shelves so the kids wouldn't destroy whatever was on them. That TV is a 36" CRT, and today that space is positively crammed full with a 47" HDTV - so much so that a person sitting on the couch to the left can't quite see it all. There are a couple inches of TV screen on the left that is hidden by the chimney, as viewed by a person on the couch on the left side of the room. I need to shift the TV a couple inches to the right, somehow. I have a couple of ideas about how to do that that I haven't talked about here yet. That zig-zag wood pattern on the right is a 4' x 8' sheet of lattice wood from Home Depot, to keep the monkeys from climbing the bookshelf it's in front of. I tell ya, for a while, our house was more like a fort than anything else. Twin babies can do a lot of damage. :eek:

x

This pic was taken much later than the one above. My son has grown a bit, we've carefully and optimistically put a lamp back in the room, and I've reinstalled the lower shelf here...

x

...and here, over on the right side of the fireplace. I thought I'd add another shelf above this one for a soundbar, or maybe for the center speaker of a HTIB.

x

Hey boy, you got that fire going yet? :lol:

And here's why I don't think rear speakers will work. Let's say you're in the center of this room, and you turn around 180 degrees. Here's my much-older-than-the-last-picture daughter hiding in the chair. The room sort of fades right into the kitchen without much of a rear wall to mount speakers on.

x

And then, while looking into the kitchen, if you took several steps to your right, you can see how I could perhaps mount a right rear speaker above the bookshelf, but the left rear speaker would have to be just sticking out of a wall, all by itself. Not so good, methinks. This is why I assume we can live without rear speakers in this room. I've never had them anyway. I'm used to a full-frontal assault of noise.

x

And while I was searching old USB sticks for pics of my humble abode, I also found pics of our basement, which a previous owner finished and wired for surround sound. I took this picture almost ten years ago. This room will be EASY to make into a home theatre, compared to upstairs. I just need to go by a bigger HDTV and a HTIB like the one TSG linked and be done with it!

x

Here's the current basement setup - an old pic, but it hasn't changed too much. That's a 32" CRT with my PS1. Both still work just fine. I don't know whatever happened to my Dex Drive, but I still have my GT and GT2 garages saved on memory cards. Under the TV is a late-'80s 2-head RCA VCR, made in Japan, I imagine, and yes, it still works too!

x

thesameguy

March 8th, 2015, 12:38 PM

WRT to the living room TV, homie, you got this.

You need a $40 articulating mount from monoprice.com which will pull the TV away from the wall and give you the angle you need (want!). You need a receiver on a shelf below the TV. run an RCA cable down to the floor and under the edge of the carpet to put a sub over by the couch. You could either hang a speaker above the chimney picture and above the shutters aimed down at the sitting area, or depending on the TV mount you get you could use molding or paint-in speaker wire to put a speakers more at TV level aimed straight out. Putting the TV on a mount should clear plenty of room for a center channel, although sitting at an angle it'd look slightly odd. But whatever. Really, your obstacle here is the shutters, not the chimney. If you can hang a picture, you can hang a speaker. I've seen way worse than this turn out awesome. :up:

thesameguy

March 8th, 2015, 01:40 PM

$40.16

http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=109&cp_id=10828&cs_id=1082821&p_id=10458&seq=1&format=2

Kchrpm

March 9th, 2015, 06:17 AM

http://deals.kinja.com/if-youve-been-on-the-fence-about-roku-todays-a-good-da-1690265290

If You've Been on the Fence About Roku, Today's a Good Day to Get One

Down to $77 at Amazon

thesameguy

March 9th, 2015, 08:59 AM

That's a good deal! I think the lowest I've ever seen them is $70 at Best Buy, but that was a year ago and I've not seen anyone approach the price since.

George

March 9th, 2015, 09:30 AM

$40.16

http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=109&cp_id=10828&cs_id=1082821&p_id=10458&seq=1&format=2

TSG, you are unbelievably helpful. Thank you. I've been thinking something like that is what I need to move the screen over a bit.

According to the Best Buy flyer that came our Sunday paper yesterday, Roku 3 boxes are on sale this week for $70, at least in my area. I was pretty sure it said $70.00, but on their website I see it's listed at $79.99. Link: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/roku-3-streaming-player-black/8364078.p?id=1218873336148&skuId=8364078

Whether $70 or $80, I intend to by one. Heck, why not? Even if it doesn't make us want to ditch cable, I think it will be a fun thing to have. And, if it's in HD, all the better. I'm getting so I'd like to see an HD signal on this new TV instead of the perfectly fine but not stunning standard signal from a coaxial cable we have now.

thesameguy

March 9th, 2015, 10:01 AM

You can get BB to price match Amazon if you ask. It's only $4, but it's $4. :)

Monoprice is awesome for HT stuff. In fact, they have some reasonably rated speaker sets:

http://www.monoprice.com/Category?c_id=109&cp_id=10906

They can also hook you up with any cables or wires you end up needing. Much cheaper than just about anywhere else for totally reasonable prices. Get an order together an pay shipping (and no tax ;) ) once. :)

George

March 9th, 2015, 12:11 PM

Nice. And I guess I'll need to get some newer cables, too. That's a shame, as I have a ton of RCA stereo cables.

Gents, I asked my wife about the Best Buy flyer and she confirmed their advertised price in yesterday's newspaper was $79.99, not $70.00 as I thought I saw.

I guess that's exactly why they do the $9.99 thing in the first place.

Me, looking at $19.99 price tag: "Hey, this is only ten bucks!" :smh:

thesameguy

March 9th, 2015, 12:32 PM

There are indeed very few places you'd use RCA cables anymore. Fortunately, with monoprice good digital cables are not out of reach. $25 will cable most HT setups (a couple HDMI, a couple toslink, some speaker wire) so it's not like it's a big cost. Unlike the glory days of analog, there is zero incentive to buy fancy Monster cables... digital is digital, and if it'll carry the signal in the first place one cable is the same as the next. It's really nice not having to fork over huge money for stupid cables to BB and the like.

JoshInKC

March 9th, 2015, 01:57 PM

There are indeed very few places you'd use RCA cables anymore.
God knows that's true.
Someday, I'm going to get really motivated and attack the 2 rather large boxes of random cables in my basement with the intention of getting rid of anything I won't ever use again.
When that happens, does anyone want dibs on probably 15-20 pc power cords, like 150' of random lengths of rca cables, 20ish S-video cables, and I'm sure a large amount of various cabling for video game systems from the last century?

Kchrpm

March 9th, 2015, 02:28 PM

Whenever you get rid of or stop carrying cable, you're tasked with jerry-rigging some setup that requires everything you just got rid of.

thesameguy

March 9th, 2015, 03:23 PM

I took all mine to an e-waste place, at least hoping the copper etc. could be reclaimed. I've thrown a freakish amount of analog stuff away over the past two years. The last major purge I did I put a banker's box full of cables up in the free section of CL and got exactly zero responses. Thus, I am positive there is no use for them whatsoever. Now I'm down to a few long ones I'll someday use for a car amp and a small pile of digital stuff (HDMI, toslink, etc.) It's clear the analog train left the station a long time ago.

George

March 9th, 2015, 03:33 PM

I took three desktop PC boxes to a computer recycling place on Friday. It felt good to get rid of them! They take them for free if there's no hard drive, so I removed them. Wow, was that ever easy! I had never wrenched on the innards of a PC before. Now I see why people assemble their own, if it's just a matter of plugging stuff together and turning a screwdriver.

thesameguy

March 9th, 2015, 04:12 PM

It used to be there were hardware settings through jumpers and dip switches and the price of failure was something getting fried. Now everything is polarized and automatic. It's not much more than expensive legos. About the worst likely failure scenario is a RAM incompatibility. It's hard to mess up a DIY PC these days.

Kchrpm

March 10th, 2015, 05:10 AM

I was at a friend's house the other day, where he was playing music via FM radio because he had no other source to plug into his combo DVD/surround sound kit. If I had my 3.5mm to stereo RCA cable, we would have been set!

George

March 11th, 2015, 08:17 AM

I just learned a lot about Roku from poking around at this site:

www.rokuguide.com

It looks like they regularly update lists of public and private channels as well as have information to educate new users.

George

March 13th, 2015, 08:48 AM

I installed a Roku 3 box last night. It only took around ten attempts for it to recognize the Wi-Fi password, and gosh, is that a tedious affair without a QWERTY keyboard. But, finally, after saying the password was incorrect over and over (it wasn't), it finally connected. Any concerns I had about not having fast enough internet for quality hi-res streaming were unfounded. It works GREAT. I also installed the Roku app on one of our iPads, but didn't have time to try the two together. I'm looking forward to messing with it more this weekend and installing some of the channels I read about at www.rokuguide.com the other day.

thesameguy

March 13th, 2015, 09:40 AM

TOASTER!

drew

March 21st, 2015, 01:42 PM

I'm now looking at this as well.

I've ditched the HTPC idea (was fun, but I'm giving the HTPC machine to my brother in law).

The only real thing I need to stream are MKV and FLAC. In fact, those are the only things I need to stream.

Looking at teh WD TV thing, but, dunno.

thesameguy

March 23rd, 2015, 09:35 AM

I think the WD one is the only one with explicit support for those two file formats, but my info could be out of date. Streaming a local library sort of knocks you out of the common solutions and into more specialty devices.

Yw-slayer

March 24th, 2015, 02:55 AM

Yeah, I passed my wasted 3TB Barracuda to my messenger the other day. God knows what he's going to do with it, but the drive is pretty much dead, and only had family photos on it, so whatever.

Random

March 26th, 2015, 01:17 PM

Roku claims to support mkv and flac: http://support.roku.com/entries/423946-What-media-file-types-does-the-Roku-Media-Player-channel-support-

thesameguy

March 26th, 2015, 03:18 PM

True, but unless you can put all your media on a USB drive you then need a DLNA-compatible server. At least we live in a time of 6tb hard drives so there's a reasonable chance you could in fact have all your media on a drive connected to Roku via USB!

Random

March 26th, 2015, 03:40 PM

Ours streams fine off of the desktop computer via Ye Olde Ethernet.

edit: I guess the point was to eliminate the desktop box aspect. Do the new wireless routers include a DNLA server?

Kchrpm

March 26th, 2015, 04:54 PM

Mine does.

thesameguy

March 27th, 2015, 09:56 AM

Yeah, a lot of them do. But then you run into the bandwidth issue... not enough USB port bandwidth, not enough wireless bandwidth, etc. We tried many ways to get my parents Linksys to serve DLNA but it was incredibly laggy. That may be solved with newer devices, I've got no firsthand experience. "Digital content stored on a hard drive with a router serving DLNA to a Roku" is WAY beyond what anyone I deal with would ever do. Plus, I hate DLNA. :D

Random

March 27th, 2015, 10:05 AM

The $ledgehammer approach would be to buy one of the new AV receivers that will natively stream both those formats. My Yamaha does FLAC, but not MKV, for example.

George

March 28th, 2015, 05:38 AM

Lou's (almost 8 now) favorite channel? The NASA Channel. :D They have a ton of short clips about pretty much everything they do available for streaming, in addition to the usual NASA TV feed. :up:

I've been checking www.rokuguide.com every week or so looking for new channels. This morning I found a new channel and thought Lou might like it. I hope my kids will too, but their current passion is Minecraft videos on YouTube and it's hard to get them interested in anything else on Roku since they found those.

www.rokuguide.com/articles/new-roku-channels-march-27-2015

"TMRO (pronounced Tomorrow) is a live weekly webcast all about human settlement of the cosmos."

http://www.tmro.tv/

In other Roku news, we had some fun watching the '60s Pink Panther cartoons on one of the kids' channels recently. I had forgotten the Pink Panther smoked cigarettes! He used a long black cigarette holder like FDR. In one episode, he even walks over to a trash can and empties his ashtray! In another, a drunk sees the Pink Panther, assumes he is hallucinating, and decides to swear off alcohol. He calls his AA sponsor, who comes over to his house and helps him clean out all the liquor bottles with XXX printed on the labels from inside the chandelier and other clever hiding places. My kids were asking, "Daddy, what are those bottles for?" Times sure have changed, and I remembered that Pink Panther cartoons weren't originally from a Saturday morning kids' TV show.

One of my favorites:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41aGCrXM20E

George

April 5th, 2015, 05:18 AM

A couple new Roku channels may interest some here:

http://www.rokuguide.com/channels/powerblocktv

"PowerBlock TV is a must-have Roku channel for car enthusiasts of all ages. The channel is comprised of seven different car and truck customization shows."

And, just for grins:

http://www.rokuguide.com/channels/derby-girl

"Derby Girls brings you Vintage roller derby action from the days when Roller derby was one of the leading sports on television, it's a combination of wrestling, roller skating and good old play acting... "

thesameguy

April 6th, 2015, 08:21 AM

I have a friend who does roller derby... I wonder if she has a Roku?

George

May 24th, 2015, 08:25 AM

There's a Roku Private Channel called Hub Kids (http://www.rokuguide.com/private-channels/hub-kids) that shows some old cartoons the kids and I have been enjoying. The content only changes one per month, but right now they have a Looney Tunes movie from 1979 that is a whole bunch of original LT cartoons spliced together with Bugs Bunny narrating a story, as if they are all flashbacks. It's well done and is a great way to have classic Looney Tunes on TV on a rainy Saturday morning for a couple of hours (don't remember exact running time), as those old cartoons are something our whole family can enjoy. Just thought I'd mention it in case anyone else likes that stuff.

And this month they have something else that I figured (well, I hoped) I might find on this kind of channel - Jonny Quest! I remember seeing those very rarely as a kid but liking them. I don't think we got that show or network at home (rural antenna TV back then) but I probably saw it on Saturday morning at my grandparents' house, or something like that. I remember my grandparents had the best TV channels (they lived just outside NYC) and they had a COLOR TV - I mean that itself was amazing, so of course I watched Saturday morning cartoons there when we would go visit over a weekend or for Christmas, etc.

I don't think I've seen an episode of Jonny Quest since I was very young, until yesterday. There's just one episode available right now on Hub Kids, but where there's one now, there may be more later. Dig this action-packed opening sequence and kickass James Bond-style music. My wife said she had never heard of Jonny Quest, but I told her to ask her older brother. This was a cartoon for boys! :up:

Finally, this is a total coincidence, but I just realized something. Yesterday was a rainy Saturday and while the TV upstairs had Looney Tunes or whatever else on, at one point I came down to the basement with some stuff to do and flipped on the TV. "The Dirty Dozen" was on AMC, and that's one of those movies that I've seen many times but I like having on in the background while I work around the house.

Race Bannon - the white-haired tough guy you'll see in the video below - was Lee Marvin! It all makes sense now. :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shh3teASy3Y

Edited to add: Freeze the video above at 0:27, and then open spoiler tag. Coincidence? I think not.

http://www.cinemaretro.com/uploads/dirty-dozen-lee-marvin.jpg

Kchrpm

May 28th, 2015, 11:53 AM

Nvidia's powerhouse (4K/60fps capable) Android TV device, with their Netflix-for-games style service, now available:

http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/28/8677125/nvidia-shield-4k-android-tv-game-price-availability

The $199 standard model comes with 16GB storage, while the $299 "Pro" version comes with 500GB and a copy of Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel — both include a game controller and can expand their storage via MicroSD and USB 3.0. You can buy a slimmer remote for $49.99, a stand to prop the Shield vertically for $29.99, and additional game controllers for $59.99.

thesameguy

May 28th, 2015, 12:04 PM

That's pretty rad. At three bills I'd be really tempted to buy another xbone, but of course that doesn't help for 4k at all. :(

Kchrpm

May 28th, 2015, 12:07 PM

Here's a review: he makes it clear at the very outset that he likes the console, and hopes enough people buy it that developers support it.

http://gizmodo.com/nvidia-shield-review-do-you-want-an-android-tv-game-co-1707444941

There are several others coming out in the last hour, as well.

thesameguy

May 28th, 2015, 12:11 PM

It'd be interesting to see Android take over console gaming like Android took over the cell phone market. I wonder how Android figures into tablet sales? I'm not sure anyone can unseat Microsoft/Sony in this market though, and Nvidia is trying to wedge this stuff right in between PC gaming and console gaming, like an alternative Steambox. Given what a failure that's been, I wonder what the opportunity for this Shield device actually is. Lacking a 4k TV but having a xbone and a PC, the Shield makes about zero sense for me. I wonder how many people have a 4k TV but no PC and want 4k games.

Kchrpm

May 28th, 2015, 12:27 PM

Even if Android tablets sell well, they're likely the bargain basement ones that you can't do anything past an endless runner or Angry Birds on.

*checks*

http://techcrunch.com/2014/11/25/idc-ipad-sees-first-ever-decline-as-overall-tablet-shipment-growth-drops-7-2-in-2014-to-235-7m-units/

Looks like they extended their lead on a declining iPad sales figure in November of last year. 159.5 million in 2014 vs 64.9 for iOS and 10.9 for Windows.

So tons of volume, but I still have my doubts on how much of that volume is ready (and willing) to play (and pay for) console quality games. I see most Android tablet sales being like most Windows laptop sales. The only gaming they're capable of or intended for is closer to PS1 than XBox One.

thesameguy

May 28th, 2015, 12:39 PM

Probably true. I'm sure mountains of people see $79 tablets at Best Buy and think they're getting a great deal on a life-changing device. Although, could be a lot of them are things like Galaxys or Gpads being subsidized by carriers. It'd be interesting if those statistics could be broken down.

There's also platforms like Ouya and Amazon Fire which are set-top gaming-capable devices. But I do think this is symptomatic of the greater issue with Android - a grotesquely fractured market.

Freude am Fahren

May 28th, 2015, 02:09 PM

You can buy a slimmer remote for $49.99, a stand to prop the Shield vertically for $29.99, and additional game controllers for $59.99.

Yikes, those accessory prices are outrageous. Should come with at least the stand, probably the small remote too. At least the prices for all of those are twice what they should be.

Kchrpm

September 29th, 2015, 10:13 AM

Chromecast updated (https://store.google.com/product/chromecast_2015) with 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz dual-band support (original only had 2.4), longer HDMI cable and, for some reason, different colors. They also announced some new software features, but I don't know if they're exclusive to the new one or what. $35

https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/mLSd4o6bK_nElAHRRiPS7lkASck=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4105338/Hi_Res_Chromecast_Family.0.jpg

What I'm more excited about is Chromecast Audio (https://store.google.com/product/chromecast_audio). Instead of having to spend hundreds of dollars each on WiFi speakers, just buy this $35 dongle and stream to the speakers you already have via 3.5 mm, RCA cables or optical. It even does multiroom sync! Or at least will later this year when a software update rolls out.

http://d35lb3dl296zwu.cloudfront.net/uploads/photo/image/21499/google-nexus-5x-6p-_0480.jpg

Kchrpm

September 29th, 2015, 10:32 AM

The Chromecast app is adding universal search, so you can look for something in the Chromecast app and it will give you results that link you directly to the media in all the compatible apps.

http://www.androidcentral.com/new-chromecast-app-android-and-ios-puts-focus-content-discovery

http://images.scribblelive.com/2015/9/29/70b90da1-de34-41d1-b5d9-982b89eb7c9b_800.jpg

And, instead of screen mirroring, for games you can now have different things displayed on your phone and the TV, and control it with the phone. I'm looking forward to some couch multiplayer.

thesameguy

September 29th, 2015, 10:57 AM

There we go! I will definitely give one of them a try.

I think I am also going to pick up one of the new Fire TV devices - they now have Echo built-in, which makes me happy I did not buy another Echo for upstairs! I still love our little tube.

Kchrpm

October 9th, 2015, 11:53 AM

Chromecast 2 and Chromecast Audio purchased and hooked up. The Audio is in the bedroom hooked up to an old JVC receiver, the 2 goes through the receiver and the 1 is now in the back of the TV. Now I can finally listen to a Google Play music playlist while playing a slideshow! So silly that Google's streaming/smart TV solutions after GoogleTV can't do this natively (and, with my atrophying phone, still can't do it well).

21Kid

December 14th, 2015, 06:21 AM

[Google Chromecast, $30 at Best Buy and Walmart. $20 Google Play credit applied after activation.]

Kchrpm

December 14th, 2015, 08:46 AM

Buy two and you get them for $55 total. I'm thinking of getting a Chromecast as a gift for my dad and Chromecast Audio for myself to try out the synced audio.

thesameguy

March 22nd, 2016, 09:34 AM

Probably not exactly the right place for this, but maybe not the wrong place:

I picked up that Alienware Alpha to replace a custom-built HTPC I've been using for a long time. The HTPC was built originally on a 2nd gen i5 but made its way to an i5-4590k with an R9-270 - overpowered because I occasionally like to play games on the big screen. That hasn't happened in a really long time - I just don't have a living room setup that is conducive to PC gaming - so after years of a monstrosity sitting there doing nothing I decided to replace it with a really tiny computer... the Alpha.

It's running Windows 10, which puts a crimp in the HTPC task because MS killed Media Center. There are hacks to get Windows 8 Media Center running on 10, but I just didn't have it in me to start messing with things. Media Center hasn't changed much over the years, which means in 2012 it was lagging behind, and in 2016 it's kind of a dinosaur. Plus, I almost never used Media Center stuff - most of my use was a plug-in called Media Browser, which is (was?) an XBMC-esque front end for file system stuff.

My initial thought was to install Plex or maybe XMC/Kodi, but having had good luck with Media Browser I opted to go for Emby, which is its successor (Emby... MB... Media Browser... get it?). Emby works like Plex - there is a server which does the indexing and a client that does the playing. Emby can either do direct play or it can transcode on the fly, and it can play to its client or to any DLNA client. I put Emby Server on the Win7 Pentium G-something server, and Emby Client on the Win10 Alpha and it seems to work great. I think I noticed some weird audio artifacts on one file, but the girl says I'm nuts and it never happened. Everything else I tried worked great. I also pointed the Xbone's Media Player at the Emby Server and it was able to stream everything I asked it to, so the DLNA/transcoder does appear to be working. I'm going to try the Fire, Roku, and Ouya this week, but I don't expect any issues.

Pretty happy with this combo. The server is free, so you can connect your DLNA devices to a Windows server for $0. The clients cost money - the Win10 client was $5. There are clients for most environments - including the Xbone. That's tempting, because playing through Xbox Media Player sucks hairy balls. However, you can't just buy the client - it's available only as part of a subscription to Emby, which IIRC runs from $40/year to $100/life. I believe the subscription entitles you to other features, like clients as well as remote access to your server so you can stream to your cell phone or somesuch nonsense. I'm happy with my $5 commitment right now, but if it turns out that this environment is stable, I may just cough up the $100. I got nearly six or eight very good years from free Media Browser, so I feel like spending $100 to get the Xbone client is plenty fair.

Feels weird moving on from 7/Media Center/Media Browser, but 10 has proven to be pretty solid. Time to embrace the inevitable. ;)

Edit:

I'm going to try the Fire, Roku, and Ouya this week, but I don't expect any issues.

And then get rid of a couple of them!

Kchrpm

November 18th, 2016, 11:39 AM

This is the first battery-powered Cast-ready speaker I've ever seen: https://www.vizio.com/sp50d5.html

I wants.

*reads more*

Hmm, Vizio might be having some struggles with software.

thesameguy

November 19th, 2016, 06:21 PM

Problems actually don't surprise me - picked up one of their SmartCast TVs a couple weeks ago and, frankly, it doesn't work very well at all. Not miffed, I have no use for that technology, but if I did I wouldn't buy Vizio's implementation at this time.

Jason

November 19th, 2016, 07:42 PM

Updated to a AppleTV 4th gen today as part of my home theater upgrade (do we have a home theater thread?).

It's basically a nicer version of the previous generation AppleTV, which has it's pluses and minuses. It's simple enough, it works well, it's stable. The App store is nice, but not a whole lot going on with it. I'm not really into the remote, but I'm getting into it. I think physical buttons are good for certain things, replacing things with touch just to do it is kinda silly. I haven't seen much of a real use for the touch capabilities on the remote. It has Siri, which I guess you can use to search for movies or whatever, but I don't really use the iTunes store and it didn't pull up results from my network stuff. The interface is nice, and I like that you start with very little on the home screen by default compared to previous generations. Probably the least exciting $130 I've ever spent honestly... but I wanted AirPlay and my photogallery screensaver, and 1080p, so 'had' to do it.

Freude am Fahren

November 19th, 2016, 08:57 PM

I've had two Vizio TV's (1 1080p LCD, 1 4k SmartTV), and have had 0 problems. I also have a BT 2.1 soundbar. I love Vizio at this point.

As for battery powered streaming audio devices, I don't quite see the need. I have a wireless BT speaker that I can stream from my phone, and then there's wired Amazon's Echo/Alexa, which I don't have, but I see the value (my dad has one).

Kchrpm

November 20th, 2016, 06:33 AM

Portable multiroom audio and streaming without notifications. And if it's of similar sound and build quality to Bluetooth only speakers in that price range, why not?*

*Bad firmware/software, if it makes none of it work, would be why not

thesameguy

November 20th, 2016, 08:33 AM

Their smart technology isn't the issue, it's their casting technology which is.

I agree - a portable speaker that supports multiroom is a great idea - but if you can't get the sound to it reliably well, that's an issue. :)

Freude am Fahren

November 30th, 2016, 11:25 AM

Netflix now allows some downloading to watch offline :up:

(It's of course going to be very limited. iOS or Android app only. Probably mostly only original titles.)

21Kid

December 1st, 2016, 11:09 AM

Yup! :up:

CudaMan

December 4th, 2016, 04:48 PM

I'm really not up to date on most of this tech, so maybe you all can point me in the right direction. Chromecast Audio, Bluetooth audio receiver, or something else?

I stopped buying CDs some years ago and everything is on my iPod Touch 4 now. Since the YouTube app on my Vizio P55-UI2 has become quite recalcitrant, I need a way to get music piped through my home theater speakers. Not willing to shell out for a new receiver at this point.

Sound quality is important to me and I'm thinking Chromecast Audio uses WiFi which I imagine should be lossless. BT sound quality seems to vary from what I've read, but the AmazonBasics BT audio receiver seems to be highly regarded and the price is totally right.

Jason

December 4th, 2016, 05:14 PM

Some soundbars include Google Cast ability, for example, my new Vizio soundbar system does.

Kchrpm

December 4th, 2016, 06:52 PM

Chromecast Audio is designed to stream from internet sources (there are apps to stream files on your device, I believe it creates a private/local web server or some such solution), but if you're used to using YouTube for music it should be equivalent (there is even a YouTube Music app). It's the cheapest way to get audio from the web onto sound systems of various ages (mine is hooked up to a ~15-20 year old stereo receiver in my bedroom via a 3.5mm to stereo RCA cable I had lying around), and allows for multiroom audio with multiple devices.

thesameguy

December 4th, 2016, 09:27 PM

One point of confusion: Are you trying to replicate the Vizio's function (a youtube app) or are you looking for a way to stream content from a portable to device to the home theater?

CudaMan

December 4th, 2016, 10:16 PM

Primarily the latter. My main music library is on my iPod Touch. I have been using the smart TV to stream music as a stopgap measure (plus it's kind of fun to see where YouTube autoplay takes you... sometimes). But sound quality and song selection are not always up to scratch. I've also apparently been living under a huge tech rock and didn't realize there are very inexpensive devices out there designed to be a link between a wireless device and an old school audio interface.

Doing a bit of research, it seems like Chromecast Audio has a lot of cool features except for the fact Apple doesn't play ball. One workaround I've heard is you can copy your library to Google Music and access it that way with Chromecast. Not ideal to sync a library to another location (be it a device or a cloud) but maybe not too horrible if the software is straightforward.

Edit - I have long dreamed of having a tablet to act essentially as a music server, whether the source be from the cloud or from a memory card. I've also wanted a MS Surface Pro but didn't think the software or app ecosystem would support that since I'm committed (reluctantly) to iTunes for music purchases and library organization. So I never looked into this stuff. Always seemed like a far off wish. Perhaps doing the Google Music thing and getting an inexpensive Android tablet would be an appropriate solution for home use. Keep the iPod for traveling. And just sync to both the iPod and GMusic, if that's not too difficult.

thesameguy

December 4th, 2016, 10:55 PM

I am gathering that you use Apple devices, yeah? If so, buy an Apple TV. It's easy button - Chromecast is a lot cheaper, but Apple TV is a good device and will fit nicely into your ecosystem. An alternative would be an Amazon Fire TV (or stick) as you can download an app that allows it to play audio via AirPlay. That's how we do, and we're satisfied with the results.

Kchrpm

December 5th, 2016, 03:47 AM

I am gathering that you use Apple devices, yeah? If so, buy an Apple TV. It's easy button

What he said. If YouTube was only used because you couldn't get to iTunes, then the iTunes compatible solution is best.

Jason

December 5th, 2016, 07:41 AM

I regularly use my iPad Mini 2 to airplay Spotify to my AppleTV while my 5000 picture gallery plays on my TV. That's a pricy setup for playing music though. There's plenty of cheap smart tvs out there that have various music apps.

CudaMan

December 5th, 2016, 09:21 AM

Let's get this out of the way first thing: I'm weird. :lol:

I'm not into the Apple ecosystem. I don't really like it. I have an iPod because when I first started traveling, newer cars were starting to come with USB ports and could natively play music from iPods. Everything was Apple at the time. Android compatibility was hit and miss. So I made the decision to go iPod for my music needs. I figured it'd be the most future-proof and most compatible device. Perhaps not realizing Apple does their best to tie you to their ecosystem above all else.

My iPod is the only Apple device I own. For an OS I'm more of an Android fan and I've had nothing but Android phones for many years. Now that you can get an iPhone with a big enough screen I won't rule one out when I need a new phone, but in general I've not been impressed with using iTunes and I'm not sure I want to inve$t in Apple. I'm too cheap. :p

I'm also stuck in old ways sometimes when it comes to things like this. It took me a long time to make the decision to stop buying CDs (I still buy every Dream Theater album on CD but that's it). And today I'm reluctant to go to the cloud or some streaming service for music. I like to own what I pay for. I really like good sound quality and have a system that will reveal shortcomings in a recording or a file. iTunes-purchased MP3/AAC files seemed like the best solution for portability and good sound quality in one library.

I just want our brave new digital world to be simple. Everything should work with everything these days. /soapbox

I'll look into the Amazon Fire Stick. I have an Amazon Prime app in the TV so all my Grand Tour needs are already met. ;)

Kchrpm

December 5th, 2016, 09:32 AM

I just want our brave new digital world to be simple. Everything should work with everything these days. /soapbox
That's adorable.

Following along the weird pathline, I would try to find a way to plug in/dock the iPod and get direct digital output to the sound system. Will you have remote control of the music? No. Will it be weird and high quality? Yes!

CudaMan

December 5th, 2016, 10:07 AM

Thought about that too. Docks are expensive. And I'm lazy and want a remote (be it the iPod, my phone, or a tablet). :)

thesameguy

December 5th, 2016, 10:19 AM

x2

Tots adorbs.

I also like the idea of getting a dock if you want the quality and don't care about the lack of portability. Had I known this was going to come up, I wouldn't have recycled my Denon iPod dock over the summer! :(

If you want the intersection of easy and quality, you really do need to buy into an ecosystem where all the parts are tested and known to work together. When you get a technology hodge-podge, you are on the hook for integration and interoperability and that can be a real bummer. Spending a bunch of time getting $50 and $100 devices to talk to each other just wears you down, especially when you know just buying a different $50 or $100 device means it all works. IMHO, when it comes to tech you need to have a plan. I don't really care for Google's products, but Krunch is doing the right thing with a Google house. His stuff works and works well because it's a real integrated ecosystem. Despite what you'd like, nothing works with anything because you have value, and companies want to own you. They are not going to do anything that makes it easier for their competitors to poach you. So Apple works with Apple, Google with Google, and Windows with nothing.

I hate iTunes so much I'd have voted for Trump if he'd vowed to ban it, but the Apple TV is a very good device and Airplay works *so well* and is so flexible it's almost worth buying into Apple to get those things. And I'm not just saying that - Airplay is the reason I got my girl an iPhone all those years ago! Apple TV lets you stream directly from your iTunes library, which means you don't even need the iPod around the house. It does not fix the remote control issue, though, since the source would be bound to your computer.

However, I am now getting the sense you have an old iPod, so maybe Airplay doesn't help you - unless you want that iTunes desktop streaming capability.

If your phone is Android, then maybe a Chromecast device makes more sense, since you could stream from your phone to the Chromecast or use Youtube etc. natively on the Chromecast. Unfortunately, there isn't any good way to get music out of iTunes to a non-Apple device, though you can play non-DRM music through a Chrome browser on the PC to a Chromecast. IME that can be annoying since sorting DRM'ed music from non-DRM'ed music is rough.

You could also evaluate that Fire TV/stick idea - with YouMap and AirPlay/DLNA Receiver apps ($13 for both) you can both Chromecast AND Airplay to a FireTV, though audio only. This is my solution because FireTV is one of very few products that is broadly compatible and works with my Windows tablet, her cell phone, and both my cell phones. EDIT: I realized I neglected to mention these apps are an 80% solution. They work 80% as well as native Airplay and Chromecast. They are not perfectly reliable. It's a price I'm willing to pay, but maybe not for everyone.

You can always fall back to Bluetooth, which is widely interoperable, but Bluetooth is low power and low bandwidth and will just never sound as good as Airplay or Chromecast, even with aptx etc. However, if you want to try it there are several $30 and $40 aptx-supporting BT modules you can connect to your receiver via headphone jack or optical cable. I have an old Monoprice one that I use upstairs. I think the Amazon Dot supports aptx, and that'd be a very interesting approach since you get what you want for $40, plus you get Dot who can stream Pandora, Spotify, iHeartRadio, etc.

CudaMan

December 5th, 2016, 08:57 PM

That's adorable.
x2

Tots adorbs.
Ha. I don't think some of you know the depths of my cheapness at times. :) We have industry standards like USB, MP3, etc, but this idea seems to have limits in the industry. Anti-choice digital ecosystem fiefdoms are silly.

But anyway, I think I've settled on a solution that will get me where I want to go without too much extra effort.

Chromecast Audio.

1. It has optical out so SQ should be quite good, "serving" my music directly and losslessly to my receiver's built-in DAC.

2. With Google Play Music I can 'jailbreak' my iTunes library (up to 50k songs - I think that should be enough for a long while) and even have it automatically update my Google Music library when I get new music into iTunes. I can then use the Google Play app with Chromecast to access all my music. My library management shouldn't get much more complex at all.

3. I can then use any Android device as a remote, or even a Chrome browser window.

I wonder if a regular Chromecast would be better. I'd have to have my TV on to use it even for audio, but an HDMI in and Optical out should still be a 'pure' path for the audio. It would allow me to cast YouTube stuff from my laptop or phone, bypassing the fussy Vizio YouTube app (currently I can cast to the TV but it goes through that buggy YT app and only works when it wants to). I don't know if I'd ever use the other pay TV services Chromecast gives you access to. Just Amazon Prime (bought that mainly for the fast shipping back in the day).

Kchrpm

December 6th, 2016, 05:01 AM

Ha. I don't think some of you know the depths of my cheapness at times. :)
Commenting purely on the state of the market. We all want a fully open, DRM-free world with local, network and cloud support.

I'm glad you've identified all of the qualities of the Google ecosystem, hope it works out well for you.

My main Chromecast is hooked directly into my receiver, so I don't need the TV on to play audio. Other than that, the biggest limitation for a regular Chromecast vs Audio is that you can't include it in a Group for multiroom audio. Only Audio, Cast speakers and the Google Home can do that.

CudaMan

December 6th, 2016, 03:28 PM

My receiver [Denon 2105] is too old to have HDMI, but as my TV has plenty of HDMI inputs and will do TOSLINK output to the receiver I should think this path with a Chromecast 2 would be equal in SQ to a Chromecast Audio straight to the receiver via TOSLINK. I don't see any compelling reason to go with Chromecast Audio, then, as I don't intend to use the built-in DAC and I don't have a need for its multi-room features right now. When I'm working in the garage I plug my iPod into the old school boombox (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yvEYKRF5IA) with old school RCA/3.5mm cable. Or use FM radio. So hip.

Chromecast it is.

Thanks for the enlightenment y'all.

drew

December 8th, 2016, 08:56 AM

Can you apply at Mercedes with Chrome? :D

(DO IT MAN) I'm going to troll the fuck out of you about this. :)

CudaMan

December 8th, 2016, 04:50 PM

Troll away, Mercedes is just being funny with their ad. :)

-

I'm still dithering on Chromecast or Chromecast Audio, actually. Part of me wants to be able to play music without turning the TV on. So I'm thinking about something like this which in theory should allow me to do that with a regular Chromecast and still retain visual streaming capabilities: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00KBHX072?pldnSite=1

That's almost as much as getting one each of the Chromecast models though, too...

Kchrpm

December 8th, 2016, 05:45 PM

The nice thing of having two Chromecasts on the same setup is the ability to have music playing on one and a slideshow on the other. There's no simple way to do that (with Google Play Music) on just one Chromecast.

thesameguy

December 8th, 2016, 09:07 PM

I hate to suggest this* but have you considered just biting the bullet and replacing the receiver with something that has HDMI *and* natively support Bluetooth, docks, Airplay, or whatever? I know $300 is more than $20, but it would also solve the HDMI issue. This time of year their tend to be good deals on refurb Onkyo and Denon receivers - I've had great luck with both. My $120 refurb Onkyo is eight years old now!

These aren't even a refurb:

http://www.frys.com/product/8471838?site=sr%3ASEARCH%3AMAIN_RSLT_PG

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00YAO43YG?ref=emc_b_5_t

https://www.amazon.com/Yamaha-RX-V679BL-7-2-Channel-MusicCast-Bluetooth/dp/B00VIRG3GO/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1481265014&sr=8-2&keywords=yamaha+receiver+bluetooth

* No, I don't hate to suggest it. Even a little.

CudaMan

December 8th, 2016, 10:16 PM

Either they've come down in price a lot since I bought my receiver 12 years ago (fuck I'm old) for $650, or those receivers you linked cut corners somewhere. Probably the former is true. Thing is there's nothing wrong with my receiver other than lacking those modern tech features. It's got a solid amp and DAC and does everything well. If I was feeling flush with cash it would be fun to get a new up to date receiver, see if the sound can match or beat my old one. Alas I'm not, so this feels more like a $50 problem than a $300 problem. :)

drew

December 9th, 2016, 03:48 AM

I just got a Yamaha RX-A760 (http://usa.yamaha.com/products/audio-visual/aventage/rx-a760_u/?mode=model) for $600 (local store, apparently, they still have those!?) to replace my 10 year old 2500 that I paid $1300 for. New one has HDMI switching and 4k upscaling. Old one didn't even have HDMI inputs. I'm digging the Tablet app for it, especially for playing music (stuck on a USB drive plugged into it).

Kchrpm

December 9th, 2016, 07:09 AM

Chromecast on sale for $25 (instead of $35) at Office Depot: http://www.officedepot.com/a/products/641726/Google-Chromecast-Streaming-Media-Device/

thesameguy

December 9th, 2016, 08:45 AM

All technology is cheaper these days. What typically separates ~$300 receivers from ~$600 receivers today is features, not quality. I have an X3100W at home which was originally like $1000 but was a "last year's model" on clearance for $600. What separated it from the X1100W was some wattage, Zone 2 HDMI support, and few other bits and bobs. Guts? All the same. IME, receivers are like society - the 99% all bunched together and the 1% separated by a great distance. Nobody needs a 1% receiver.

I do understand the $35 vs. $300 problem, but I'd also take a hard look at what you win in the process. If you want simple, less devices and less cable and more capability in one device accomplishes that. :)

drew

December 9th, 2016, 09:26 AM

The receiver I got has a ton more shit on it than I'll ever need. A couple multi-zones (meaningless in an apartment), to name one big "feature".

I got it, because I'm a Yamawhore fanboy, and this is the 4th-5th one I've had since the mid-90s. I backed off of the flagship model for the first time in the last two purchases. Budget and significant other... I couldn't justify $3000.

Not that the latter would really matter at all. I bought this one, and swapped it out while she was at the grocery store, and she never noticed. That was 5 months ago.

Jason

December 9th, 2016, 10:20 AM

Speaking of receivers, I was genuinely surprised at the lack of real wireless solutions for receiver based home audio systems when I was looking. Ended up with a system based around a soundbar instead (pretty happy with the quality).

thesameguy

December 9th, 2016, 10:38 AM

There are a few, but most people who are spending a chunk of change on a central receiver wouldn't be satisfied with current-tech wireless solutions. The "casual user" category has been usurped by sound bars, so that's where the wireless features get added. If you have a nice receiver but want wireless speakers, I think the intention is to buy a wireless speaker adapter and plug it into the low-level outputs on the receiver. IMHO, that makes more sense anyway since that divorces the speaker from the receiver, giving you more freedom and more choice... your speakers aren't married to your receiver.

Kchrpm

December 9th, 2016, 10:39 AM

To be clear, Jason was looking for wireless transmission to the speakers, not wireless sources for the receivers. There are plenty of receivers with WiFi and Bluetooth, but wireless transmission of their output (for surrounds) has become rare/expensive. Multiroom audio is a different, more expensive (thank you, SONOS) beast.

Kchrpm

December 9th, 2016, 10:40 AM

thesameguy

December 9th, 2016, 10:56 AM

Receiver + wireless + speakers is expensive - like so expensive it almost costs less to hire someone to run speaker wire through the walls.

CudaMan

December 9th, 2016, 10:57 AM

I have another problem - I've been priveleged enough to hear great sound on a few occasions and it's addicting. I like the 1% setups. The trick for me is getting as close as I can to that on a 99% budget. :) Indeed these new tech features (HDMI, 4K, etc) in receivers should be dirt cheap to manufacture these days. I would think it's the more old school major components that separate receivers not only in price but in quality and sound. Power supply, engineering of circuitry, amplification, the DAC and so on. That's where I don't want to skimp. I'm sure in 12 years there have been advancements made there as well, if the manufacturers have chosen to take advantage of it in the 99% price realm.

I'm just not spending $300-900 on this right now. Maybe sometime in the not too distant future depending on how things go.

Chromecast on sale for $25 (instead of $35) at Office Depot: http://www.officedepot.com/a/products/641726/Google-Chromecast-Streaming-Media-Device/
Orsum. :up: I was just looking last night to see if there were any deals. I suck. :)

Kchrpm

December 9th, 2016, 10:58 AM

Receiver + wireless + speakers is expensive - like so expensive it almost costs less to hire someone to run speaker wire through the walls.
Add $100 to your choice of receiver and speakers: https://www.rocketfishproducts.com/pdp/RF-WHTIB/8275528

thesameguy

December 9th, 2016, 11:18 AM

The rocketfish thing is a 30w amp... granted surround speakers generally don't do much, but 30w in back vs. 90-110w up front is pretty unbalanced. :(

Kchrpm

December 9th, 2016, 11:31 AM

But Jason's a puss, he won't ever get over 10w anyway.

thesameguy

December 9th, 2016, 11:57 AM

:lol:

I'm all about the bass. And the treble. And bewbs.

drew

December 9th, 2016, 02:17 PM

I've always dreamed of having a mini-theater in a house. Complete with actual JBL theater equipment. Like these: http://www.jblpro.com/www/products/cinema-market/high-power-screen-array/5742#.WEs-an0pAm4

...and the subs.....

The theater room would double as a bomb shelter, out of necessity for structural reasons.

CudaMan

December 9th, 2016, 04:38 PM

Not many Office Depots in town with $25 CCAudios left, so I booked it to one of them and then went down the street to Walmart for some groceries and a $30 Chromecast2. Now I'll have all the functionality I need and still cheaper than the Ultra (I honestly can't tell 4K from 1080p for the most part, as far away as I am from the TV). Well almost all the right functionality - I need to get a mini-TOSLINK adapter. Currently using a vintage $2 3.5mm to RCA thin black cable for the CCAudio. :hard:

That means using the DAC built into the CCAudio. At first things sounded a little thin. I later realized my sub wasn't playing (it turns on when it detects enough signal being sent from the receiver). It didn't appear to be getting any signal. Checked the cables again, all was good. Checked the receiver settings for this new input I was using. Cycled the power. Hmmm. Oh! In my rummaging through bags of cables I had tripped the surge protector switch to the off position (the sub is way off to the side of the room and on a separate outlet from the rest of the gear).

So simple even an idiot can do it.

Doing some album discovery on my 30 day free trial of Google Music. :up:

Jason

December 10th, 2016, 03:48 AM

Add $100 to your choice of receiver and speakers: https://www.rocketfishproducts.com/pdp/RF-WHTIB/8275528

Well, remember also, the reviews for that, and similar were very... mixed. And there were only a couple choices.

Just surprises me that it's not a more commonly requested thing.

thesameguy

December 10th, 2016, 07:53 AM

I'm sure it's commonly requested, but wireless audio is really hard to implement. People are very sensitive to audio delays, and sending high quality sound through public spectrum reliably without losing timing is *really* hard. Things like Sonos and, to a lesser degree, Chromecast Audio do it by putting brains into the mix - they can buffer, etc. When you are trying to match timing with a video source *and* other wired speakers it's a whole different game. Offering that kind of tech at a price point consumers are willing to pay really isn't possible yet. Obviously, 'cause when you do people aren't impressed. ;)

Kchrpm

December 10th, 2016, 09:30 AM

Related: CC Audio has a setting to let you add a delay to specific devices to adjust for latency in the system (haven't had to use it myself). To really cover yourself you'd need to add that functionality to the receiver for the video and audio, and you'd have issues when it came to gaming.

thesameguy

December 10th, 2016, 01:04 PM

Someday they will work it out - now that WiGig is starting to be a thing we may be able to leverage that signaling for straight audio, but that would still be putting brains into the transmitter & receiver, including enough computing power to handle the signaling in complete realtime. If something like that existed right now I think you'd conservatively be talking about a $300 device including a modest amp. At $300, you should hire an electrician to run speaker wire through your ceiling & walls. (Exactly what I hope to do in '17! :) )

21Kid

December 13th, 2016, 10:04 AM

They've been cheap for awhile now. My 7.1 Onkyo was $230 5 years ago. (I probably got it on sale.) I'll probably wait until I need something that does 4k switching. Since mine is only HDMI 1.3a.

Speaking of receivers, I was genuinely surprised at the lack of real wireless solutions for receiver based home audio systems when I was looking. Ended up with a system based around a soundbar instead (pretty happy with the quality).The soundbar's with wireless surrounds/subwoofer are a good compromise. Especially if you are renting and not looking to drill holes in walls/floors. I was thinking of getting one for our next place. I am surprised that there aren't more options for these yet.

21Kid

December 13th, 2016, 12:18 PM

I thought most recent systems could add a delay to certain channels? A lot of them come with microphones to auto-adjust settings too. That should also work for wireless set-ups.

This just popped up (http://deals.kinja.com/upgrade-to-true-surround-sound-with-this-300-onkyo-bun-1790053958).

Upgrade to True Surround Sound With This $300 Onkyo Bundle
Everything you need to upgrade to true 5.1 surround sound is on sale for just $300 today. That gets you five speakers, a subwoofer, and a receiver from Onkyo to power them all. Also has: HDMI 2.0 for Ultra HD, and Built-In Bluetooth

Kchrpm

December 13th, 2016, 12:21 PM

If you slow down the audio for everything, then it won't be in-sync with the video. It depends how much delay there is, and I guess there could be a difference in sensitivity to A/V sync issues as well. Good luck playing Rock Band, though!

thesameguy

December 13th, 2016, 03:07 PM

I thought most recent systems could add a delay to certain channels? A lot of them come with microphones to auto-adjust settings too. That should also work for wireless set-ups.

The delay is milliseconds, usually 1-40, and is designed to make up for wired speakers that aren't equi-distant from the listener. *Most* people end up configuring their speakers so the fronts are 8-10' away (normal viewing distance) but the rears are right behind or right above, like 1-4'. Adding a slight delay to the rear channels ensures all 5 or 7 speakers make sound that arrives in your ear at about the same time. The delay is typically not applicable to the front speakers - you can't slow them down to make up for lag to the rears. The technology's goal is for the opposite scenario. As Keith pointed out, slowing down the fronts would cause video sync issues. Rear channel delay is especially important when using a decoder like Pro-Logic, where you get leakage between channels (since channels are "made up" by the receiver) that can cause a very disturbing listening experience. Google Haas Effect.

This just popped up (http://deals.kinja.com/upgrade-to-true-surround-sound-with-this-300-onkyo-bun-1790053958)

I bought a similar setup which I use for the computer upstairs, got my parents a similar Denon package for their main TV. These aren't "great," but they're a great value and sound output from either system is light years ahead of what even some pretty expensive sound bars make. I have set up a couple JBL, several Vizio, and one LG sound bar and there really isn't a comparison. Of course, with sound bars you aren't running & tripping over wires, so it's a very fair trade off.