NEWS: Denon and Marantz issue hardware fix for AVR 4K/120 and 8K issue

Again, would be interested on an expert's opinion of this - would retailers do this? Replace with a new model 6+ months down the line because of this fault, if Denon have provided a solution - regardless of whether people like the solution - this could end up expensive
I think anyone trying to obtain a refund or a replacement based on this one 2.1 issue is going to have an extremely tough battle on their hands. I can see some retailers being willing to go to court if they have to.
 
I think anyone trying to obtain a refund or a replacement based on this one 2.1 issue is going to have an extremely tough battle on their hands. I can see some retailers being willing to go to court if they have to.

I guess some might be more open than others - the one I bought from has an excellent reputation and provides excellent customer care, but the costs of doing this for everyone are massive. I don't plan to myself, as I have said, it doesn't really affect me, but will be interesting to see how they deal with it.

With warnings in product descriptions and a solution on offer, they may well play more hard ball?

LIke I said, I am no expert so just spitballng really... its an interesting situation.
 
I guess some might be more open than others - the one I bought from has an excellent reputation and provides excellent customer care, but the costs of doing this for everyone are massive. I don't plan to myself, as I have said, it doesn't really affect me, but will be interesting to see how they deal with it.

With warnings in product descriptions and a solution on offer, they may well play more hard ball?

LIke I said, I am no expert so just spitballng really... its an interesting situation.
Yes, they are some excellent retailers out there who will bend over backwards to give good service and accept returns etc- we regularly hear on her about RS and JL as just two examples. But there is a big difference between replacing the odd shonky unit, to admitting liability on an item that has sold in it's thousands. If they replace one, they have to replace them all if asked.
 
Yes, they are some excellent retailers out there who will bend over backwards to give good service and accept returns etc- we regularly hear on her about RS and JL as just two examples. But there is a big difference between replacing the odd shonky unit, to admitting liability on an item that has sold in it's thousands. If they replace one, they have to replace them all if asked.

Yeah, definitely, that's why it's going to be interesting to see how it pans out. I can't see the retailers having to deal with this. If it was replacements across the board then it should be the manufacturers and Denon have come up with a solution..wonder what Yamaha will come up with?
 
Another not yet mentioned issue is you are introducing another repeater into your system and as of HDCP2.0 I think we are only allowed 4 repeaters in a signal path total ?

'Repeaters are devices authorized to receive and re-transmit HDCP content'

If you are using switchers , splitters and extenders this could be an issue for you. OFC if you have a repeater on the XBOX side then you could replace that with this little box.

Personally I think they need to work with resellers/authorised repair centres to replace the boards in the AMP.

rOb
 
Yeah, definitely, that's why it's going to be interesting to see how it pans out. I can't see the retailers having to deal with this. If it was replacements across the board then it should be the manufacturers and Denon have come up with a solution..wonder what Yamaha will come up with?
Denon will have probably already agreed an approach to resolving this issue with its distributors/retailers but ultimately it's Denon's cheque book that's on the line here, not the retailer's.

UK statute gives consumers protection by providing recourse against business sellers that supply defective products, in this case the AV retailers. Those retailers will have full legal recourse against their own supplier (i.e. Denon) for supplying defective items under the terms of their supply contract as governed by UK Common Law. In short, if they pay then Denon pays.

If not given an adequate resolution, a consumer has the option of taking the retailer (not Denon) to the Small Claims Court to enforce their rights. I would expect that any notice of a legal action served on a retailer would immediately be forwarded to Denon who would cover the retailer's position on either going to Court or refunding the consumer.

Unless there's a clear legal precedent on something like this in Denon's favour, I would expect that Denon will never allow a such claim to go to Court because if it lost it would open the flood gates to other claimants and tarnish the brand in the process. To minimise Court costs, claimants could probably join together provided they purchased their AVRs from the same retailer.

Ultimately, I would expect that every consumer that threatens legal action will be refunded by the supplying retailer and this cost will be fully covered by Denon.

Denon may of course have recourse to the "dodgy chip" supplier to covers its own losses if it didn't develop the part in-house.
 
As part of trying to understand more about the actual issue, does anyone know

1. Why the PS5 works and XSX does not? Is it that the PS5 has made the same mistake/interpretation on something in the HDMI specs as the AVR chips? Closest thing to an explanation I can find is here PS5 HDMI 2.1 Bandwidth Is Limited to 32GB/s, Unlike Xbox Series X's 40GB/s
2. What's the situation with the latest PC graphics cards - do they work?

I guess that the fact Denon is shipping the free dongle box means that it's the AVR that's getting something wrong, although they've been careful to word it in such a way that they don't actually say that. If the XSX was the issue they would more than likely just point the finger over there.
 
As part of trying to understand more about the actual issue, does anyone know

1. Why the PS5 works and XSX does not? Is it that the PS5 has made the same mistake/interpretation on something in the HDMI specs as the AVR chips? Closest thing to an explanation I can find is here PS5 HDMI 2.1 Bandwidth Is Limited to 32GB/s, Unlike Xbox Series X's 40GB/s
2. What's the situation with the latest PC graphics cards - do they work?

I guess that the fact Denon is shipping the free dongle box means that it's the AVR that's getting something wrong, although they've been careful to word it in such a way that they don't actually say that. If the XSX was the issue they would more than likely just point the finger over there.
Check out my post #92 there's a link to a you tube video where Vincent from HDTV test HDTVTest explains what he thinks the problem is and it looks to be with compressed HDMI data (DSC) as the xbox uses this but the PS5 doesn't and neither do the nvidia drivers currently.

HDMI 2.1 introduced support for Display Stream Compression (DSC) 1.2a, a visually lossless compression algorithm with a compression ratio of up to 3:1. VESA DSC 1.2a can be used for HDMI 2.1 applications to achieve display resolutions beyond 8K60/4:2:0/10-bit color, such as 8K60 RGB, 8K120, and even 10K120

So it looks like the chipset in the Amp is not HDMI 2.1 compliant, hence Denon releasing this box. Of course the Amps are advertised as HDMI 2.1 so this is false advertising, albeit unintentionally. As HDMI 2.1 devices become more mainstream this issue may start affecting a lot more devices than just the xbox sadly. If you plan on keeping the Amp then make sure you get one of the boxes, you may need it in the future.

rOb
 
As part of trying to understand more about the actual issue, does anyone know

1. Why the PS5 works and XSX does not? Is it that the PS5 has made the same mistake/interpretation on something in the HDMI specs as the AVR chips? Closest thing to an explanation I can find is here PS5 HDMI 2.1 Bandwidth Is Limited to 32GB/s, Unlike Xbox Series X's 40GB/s
2. What's the situation with the latest PC graphics cards - do they work?

I guess that the fact Denon is shipping the free dongle box means that it's the AVR that's getting something wrong, although they've been careful to word it in such a way that they don't actually say that. If the XSX was the issue they would more than likely just point the finger over there.
It's explained here

 
Cheers, top quality vid, so it's about lack of DSC support.

I wonder why Microsoft went with DSC even on video modes that don't require it. Maybe they just blanket turned it on as a default. It's part of the spec so it's a reasonable thing to do.
 
Denon will have probably already agreed an approach to resolving this issue with its distributors/retailers but ultimately it's Denon's cheque book that's on the line here, not the retailer's.

UK statute gives consumers protection by providing recourse against business sellers that supply defective products, in this case the AV retailers. Those retailers will have full legal recourse against their own supplier (i.e. Denon) for supplying defective items under the terms of their supply contract as governed by UK Common Law. In short, if they pay then Denon pays.

If not given an adequate resolution, a consumer has the option of taking the retailer (not Denon) to the Small Claims Court to enforce their rights. I would expect that any notice of a legal action served on a retailer would immediately be forwarded to Denon who would cover the retailer's position on either going to Court or refunding the consumer.

Unless there's a clear legal precedent on something like this in Denon's favour, I would expect that Denon will never allow a such claim to go to Court because if it lost it would open the flood gates to other claimants and tarnish the brand in the process. To minimise Court costs, claimants could probably join together provided they purchased their AVRs from the same retailer.

Ultimately, I would expect that every consumer that threatens legal action will be refunded by the supplying retailer and this cost will be fully covered by Denon.

Denon may of course have recourse to the "dodgy chip" supplier to covers its own losses if it didn't develop the part in-house.

Thanks, interesting read.

And who makes the decision as to whether the solution is adequate, is that down to the consumer? The solution here is adequate, it just might not be acceptable?
 
Thanks, interesting read.

And who makes the decision as to whether the solution is adequate, is that down to the consumer? The solution here is adequate, it just might not be acceptable?
At the end of the day this
 
I would argue that this is not fixing the fault as the amplifier will still not be HDMI 2.1 compliant as advertised. They really need to let people know what this box is doing. If it restores full HDMI2.1 functionality by just changing the signalling / EDID or whatever to trick the Amp into working then that's not so bad, it makes it an HDMI 2.1 compliant system.
If it decompresses the stream then it's shot in the paddock :/ If they decompress and recompress then we all know the image will be worse as the compression is lossy. If it decompresses and sends an uncompressed stream then you have just lost access to the very high bit depth, frame rate, resolution combinations that may come in the future, like 8K 60, uncompressed they will not fit in the 48Gbps of HDMI2.1 . I'm not sure 4K/120 12bit will fit should xbox or Nvidia add that.

Hopefully Denon will post more technical information soon.

rOb
 
Cheers, top quality vid, so it's about lack of DSC support.

I wonder why Microsoft went with DSC even on video modes that don't require it. Maybe they just blanket turned it on as a default. It's part of the spec so it's a reasonable thing to do.
I guess why not use it, like you said, also gives them access to 8K 60 in the future, even if it has to render it internally checker-board style :)

I'm presuming that if the PS5 wants output 8k 60 it will use DSC too, so PS5 owners should probably make sure they get the box too.

rOb
 
Last edited:
And who makes the decision as to whether the solution is adequate, is that down to the consumer? The solution here is adequate, it just might not be acceptable?
That decision would fall to the Judge after hearing both sides of the argument.

The consumer would have to successfully argue that it is not adequate, possibly on the basis that they only wanted a receiver that functioned as represented by Denon, not a receiver and a separate box. They would therefore have to argue that, had Denon offered a receiver and a box at the outset, they would not have bought it. If the box has its own performance issues (e.g. lag, drop-outs) then that would further strengthen the consumer’s case.

These AVRs were evidently launched without being properly tested and the only reason Denon are not offering to re-chip or replace them will down to cost. Neither of these are the fault of the consumer.
 
That decision would fall to the Judge after hearing both sides of the argument.

The consumer would have to successfully argue that it is not adequate, prossibly on the basis that they only wanted a receiver that functioned as represented by Denon, not a receiver and a separate box. They would therefore have to argue that, had Denon offered a receiver and a box at the outset, they would not have bought it. If the box has its own performance issues (e.g. lag, drop-outs) then that would strengthen the consumer’s case.

These AVRs were evidently launched without being properly tested and the only reason Denon are offering to re-chip or replace them will down to cost. Neither of these are the fault of the consumer.

Was the HDMI 2.1 standard fully standardised when these amps were launched?

I remember many years ago buying a Panasonic (I think, possibly Phillips) TV that had one of the first implementations of HDMI and it turned out to be useless because it was done before the standard was certified
 
Was the HDMI 2.1 standard fully standardised when these amps were launched?
I would have thought so on the basis that, according to the HDMI organisation, the 2.1 compliance test specification was first released in August 2018.

 
You're going in the wrong direction. HDMI version 2.1 has never been mentioned anywhere within Sound United's publicity. HDMI org don't allow manufacturers to mention what version of HDMI is implemented and only sanction the manufacturer listing the HDMI capabilities.

The issue at hand is that the AV receiver couldn't perform one of the abilities that was listed as a capability of said device. HDMI version 2.1 and or and abilities commonly associated with it are neither here nor there. There is no requirement for a manufacturer to actually incorporate or facilitate all the possible capabilities drt out by HDMI org for HDMI version 2.1. The issue is which of those capabilities did Sound United advertise and then fail to provide?

Further more, unlike Yamaha, Sound United never differentiated betweem 4K/120Hz and 8K compressed or uncompressed within their published specifications or publicity literatur. The issue is associated with the compressed signal you'd get via the XBox. Did Denon actually guarantee you any support for a 4K/120Hz signal from an XBox or in association with the compressed nature of such a signal?

The AV receivers effected will actually pass 4K/120Hz as long as it is eminating from an XBox and is the type of signal the chipset has the issues with. Why would a small claims court priorities support for the XBox series X if the manufacturer has specifically specifically advertised a device for use with that source? Do Sound UNited advertise that the XBox series A and its 4K/120Hz xapabiliries are specifically supported by the effected AV receivers? Sound UNited would simply need to demonstrate that the AV receivers can passthrough 4K/120Hz by hooking up a PS5 to them and passing through such video.
 
Last edited:
LG list HDMI 2.1 on their latest TV’s
 
A lot of comments mention being happy with 4k60 and not needing HDMI 2.1. To my understanding if you want 4k60 4:4:4 10bit (hdr) then you cant use your bog standard HDMI 2.0b. Does the 2020 x600 denon series have suped up 2.0b 40Mbit ports like the 2019 q90r samsungs? if not you're stuck with non hdr or 4:2:0, so the comments on this are largely I'll informed or are not put in context. The current models do this, with or without the bug.

Would take a discounted 3700h at the drop of a hat given the criminal prices we have to pay in Australia due to 3rd party importer exclusivity.

I run a pc media server for music movies tv and games so full rgb is a requirement.
 
A lot of comments mention being happy with 4k60 and not needing HDMI 2.1. To my understanding if you want 4k60 4:4:4 10bit (hdr) then you cant use your bog standard HDMI 2.0b. Does the 2020 x600 denon series have suped up 2.0b 40Mbit ports like the 2019 q90r samsungs? if not you're stuck with non hdr or 4:2:0, so the comments on this are largely I'll informed or are not put in context. The current models do this, with or without the bug.

Would take a discounted 3700h at the drop of a hat given the criminal prices we have to pay in Australia due to 3rd party importer exclusivity.

I run a pc media server for music movies tv and games so full rgb is a requirement.

It depends on what content you are intending to watch

4k UHD blu ray movies are mastered using yuv 4:2:0 HDR and run at 24p which fits fine within hdmi 2.0b.

So you don't need 4k/60 4:4:4 and should really be switching PC to output in this mode or 4k/120 to get a better pull up conversion as otherwise you will be doing 3:2 pull up to fit 60p.

It's been pointed out that yes it could affect any resolution that uses FRL DSC. Currently that appears to be the Xbox series X using 4k/120 even with just 8bit. Switch off enhanced 8k on the Denon and the Xbox switches to outputting 4k/120 8bit yuv 4:2:0 using hdmi 2.0b TMDS i.e. it's possible to get the Xbox working but only 4k/120 SDR with chroma subsampling. As to 4k/60 10bit it would appear the Xbox doesn't output RGB as it switches to using hdmi 2.0b and chroma subsampling which I guess is why it's not been an issue displaying 4k/60 content so far. If the Xbox were to show 40k/60 4:4:4 needing more than hdmi 2.0b TMDS can handle then I guess the Xbox would use FRL DSC like it does for 4k/120 and would become an issue too.

As to the rest
Nvidia send uncompressed 4k/60 10bit 4:4:4 over FRL.
PS5 sends uncompressed data.
I don't know what Radeon drivers do.
 
Last edited:
You're going in the wrong direction. HDMI version 2.1 has never been mentioned anywhere within Sound United's publicity. HDMI org don't allow manufacturers to mention what version of HDMI is implemented and only sanction the manufacturer listing the HDMI capabilities.

The issue at hand is that the AV receiver couldn't perform one of the abilities that was listed as a capability of said device. HDMI version 2.1 and or and abilities commonly associated with it are neither here nor there. There is no requirement for a manufacturer to actually incorporate or facilitate all the possible capabilities drt out by HDMI org for HDMI version 2.1. The issue is which of those capabilities did Sound United advertise and then fail to provide?

Further more, unlike Yamaha, Sound United never differentiated betweem 4K/120Hz and 8K compressed or uncompressed within their published specifications or publicity literatur. The issue is associated with the compressed signal you'd get via the XBox. Did Denon actually guarantee you any support for a 4K/120Hz signal from an XBox or in association with the compressed nature of such a signal?

The AV receivers effected will actually pass 4K/120Hz as long as it is eminating from an XBox and is the type of signal the chipset has the issues with. Why would a small claims court priorities support for the XBox series X if the manufacturer has specifically specifically advertised a device for use with that source? Do Sound UNited advertise that the XBox series A and its 4K/120Hz xapabiliries are specifically supported by the effected AV receivers? Sound UNited would simply need to demonstrate that the AV receivers can passthrough 4K/120Hz by hooking up a PS5 to them and passing through such video.

'That’s why, in January 2017, the HDMI Organisation announced a new standard called HDMI 2.1 which includes enhancements for better video, better audio but also for better user experience and better gaming. The enhancements cover so many areas that it should take until mid of 2020 for the first AV Receivers like the Denon AVC-X4700H to be launched with all the key features of the new HDMI version.'


'Full 8K/60Hz and 4K/120Hz support With the latest HDMI support, enjoy 8K quality video from your 8K source devices. One 8K input and 2 outputs allow for 8K/60Hz and 4K/120Hz pass-through. 8K upscaling is available on all 8 HDMI inputs'

rOb
 
Last edited:

'That’s why, in January 2017, the HDMI Organisation announced a new standard called HDMI 2.1 which includes enhancements for better video, better audio but also for better user experience and better gaming. The enhancements cover so many areas that it should take until mid of 2020 for the first AV Receivers like the Denon AVC-X4700H to be launched with all the key features of the new HDMI version.'


'Full 8K/60Hz and 4K/120Hz support With the latest HDMI support, enjoy 8K quality video from your 8K source devices. One 8K input and 2 outputs allow for 8K/60Hz and 4K/120Hz pass-through. 8K upscaling is available on all 8 HDMI inputs'

rOb

My opinion is they covered themselves with the inclusion of one word in that first paragraph. Key.

Had it said all the features of the new HDMI version that would have been different. By adding the word key they are saying we can decide what we think they are.

It's frustrating that hdmi standards are largely optional and up to the Mfr to decide which ones to implement and yet still be allowed to say they are hdmi 2.1 devices. I.e. you don't even need to have 48Gbs ports as supporting FRL and 24Gbs port appears to be sufficient to use the hdmi 2.1 reference.

The hdmi 2.1 spec that Mr wolf linked to earlier even mentions that The specification supports both uncompressed and compressed modes. Manufacturers can implement either or both modes.


As to hdmi 2.1 again in that link it's not allowed to be applied to cables

It only applies to source / output devices and whilst they can refer to hdmi 2.1 they have to also say what feature of hdmi 2.1 it is in connection to.

From my perspective I believe the Denon is meant to support DSC. Otherwise if the Denon is not meant to support DSC then they could have just said as the Xbox series X uses DSC it's not supported and done nothing to resolve the issue. Something has forced their hand to resolve that incompatibility. It could be a simple as bad press as we are all talking about it and from other posts retailers are putting the incompatibility in product descriptions to no doubt cover themselves lol
 
Last edited:
My opinion is they covered themselves with the inclusion of one word in that first paragraph. Key.

Had it said all the features of the new HDMI version that would have been different. By adding the word key they are saying we can decide what we think they are.

It's frustrating that hdmi standards are largely optional and up to the Mfr to decide which ones to implement and yet still be allowed to say they are hdmi 2.1 devices. I.e. you don't even need to have 48Gbs ports as supporting FRL and 24Gbs port appears to be sufficient to use the hdmi 2.1 reference.

As to hdmi 2.1 it's not allowed to be applied to cables

It only applies to source / output devices and there are plenty of those where hdmi 2.1 is used in their manuals and advertising.
Yeah, that is a choice word ... but in the second pdf they state 8k60 which can't be done without compression which seems to be the thing that is breaking xbox connectivity. At the end of the day they have openly admitted the equipment is faulty so establishing the Amp is broken isn't an issue, it's whether the solution is an acceptable fix. Personally, if that little box fixes everything without decompressing or decompressing/recompressing the stream and adds next to no latency then it seems like a reasonable workaround. For some people this will not be an acceptable workaround and they will actually want their faulty Amplifier repairing.

rOb
 
Yeah, that is a choice word ... but in the second pdf they state 8k60 which can't be done without compression which seems to be the thing that is breaking xbox connectivity. At the end of the day they have openly admitted the equipment is faulty so establishing the Amp is broken isn't an issue, it's whether the solution is an acceptable fix. Personally, if that little box fixes everything without decompressing or decompressing/recompressing the stream and adds next to no latency then it seems like a reasonable workaround. For some people this will not be an acceptable workaround and they will actually want their faulty Amplifier repairing.

rOb

They have been very choice with their wording here too' as it only refers to 8k/60 and does not specify bit depth or if chroma subsampling.

8k/60 10bit yuv 4:2:0 only requires 40.1Gbs link and doesn't need DSC.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom