Simple HDMI -- Is there a way to split video and HDMI ARC?

It could be the same audio data, but a normal HDMI feed interleaves audio with video and control data. ARC sends only audio, in the reverse direction, via a dedicated pin.

That was also my thinking. Having worked with other receives with both HDMI in and out, I just assumed this to be the case.

But these guys are unfortunately right. I tried hooking up a Chromecast directly to my Beam Tonight and started streaming a tv-show to the Chromecast - but no sound.

Sound returned as soon as I switched the Beam back to getting its signal from my TV’s HDMI-ARC.

So as others have suggested, the OP will likely need an audio extractor to extract the audio an feed that to the AMP using the separate adapter or use the other inputs on the AMP.

 HDMI in and out through a single HDMI port?

Yes and no I guess.

As I understand it from the answers in this post, it’s an input in terms of sound but otherwise an output. 
 

If you have a look at many mid to high end receivers, they typically have one HDMI that goes to the TV and then several HDMI inputs so they work as HDMI-hubs.

You can then connect  game consoles, streaming boxes, Blu-ray players etc. to the receiver. 
 

The receiver will play audio from these inputs, send video from all these inputs to the tv as well as play any audio from the tv. I have attached an example.

Well, I’m not sure if it’s the official definition, but if you think of an HDMI port as IN or OUT in terms of video, then there are no IN/OUT HDMI ports.   None of the IN ports can send out video.  The single OUT port cannot take in video….it can take in audio, but only through the ARC channels.

The Sonos HDMI connection actually works the same as that receiver’s OUT/ARC port.   The difference is that it sends a screen saver video with no sound OUT, not connected sources, while receiving audio from the TV.

Would have been nice if Sonos had added at least one HDMI in in the AMP.

Could have saved a lot of costs when using it for installments as only one HDMI-cable would need to be installed from the tv to the place where the AMP will be located and then all Blu-ray’s etc. could be hooked up to the AMP. 
 

I am building a new house and will be putting in AMPs for tv etc. Due to this limitation, I will need at least two HDMI-cables installed for each tv. 

Then each Sonos device would need to have more than one ‘pass through’ HDMI Port, one for each device you wanted to connect to a TV. And then you’d need to add video switching, too, all of these things increasing the complexity of the device, and the cost of manufacture. And how many pass through ports is the right number? By utilizing the HDMI-ARC system, they’ve allowed the TV to function in all those roles. 

You might want to consider mounting the amps on the wall behind TVs rather than in a central closet somewhere. That would keep you from having to wire hdmi and speaker wires for the amp.  It’s just my opinion, but I don’t think I’d wire blu ray and other sources to a central location either.  For streaming sources, you can use a smart TV or a fire tv/roku stick.  I wouldn’t think you’d need blu ray on every TV, but where you do want it, do you want to have to go to the closet to put in a disk.  Similar for gaming consoles.  Although you may not be using disks anymore, you still need the console to be in range of controllers.

Just my thought, and obviously you may have different needs and goals.  Part of the benefit for using Sonos for whole house audio is that you don’t need to centrally wire everything.

I guess there is no right number, but if they had added just one, I could add more with a switch. 
 

The AMP is directly aimed at installations. It is intended to be mounted in racks for large house installations. In those kind of setups, it makes sense to also hideaway a lot of the devices you would connect to a tv. 
 

And as mentioned, a lot of other amplifiers manage to squeeze several of these in at lower prices than the AMP. 
 

I am not a hater - I am going for the AMP anyway. But would have appreciated just one input. Would have saved me a good deal on installation.

I do indeed. We are going for a very clean look. In-ceiling speakers only. TVs mounted flush against the wall and will be as discrete as we can get  (Frame TV or similar).
 

So will definitely not be putting up cabinets or putting AMPs and Apple TV’s behind the TVs which which will add significant space between the TV and the wall. The Sonos sub will go underneath the sofa. I am ok going to the next room to put in a Blu-ray the few times a year the family lets me dig one out from my treasure chest.

Will have some tiny Alexa devices around the house and a few Apple TV remotes to control everything.

Oh, I completely understand the cost implications for your particular setup. I was looking at it from the company point of view. Is it worth developing and adding a feature that a very small percentage of users might use, and make life more challenging for the majority of their market, which I picture as people not educated in a/v technologies? I would assume some PM/VP looked at those numbers, had a discussion with a group of people, and took the decision that it want the right move for Sonos.

There are a lot of those small decisions that don’t fit my particular world, ranging from Apple, Dell, Google, Sonos, Tesla, Mazda, etc. Not a one of these companies make a product that is perfect for my particular situation, so I make accommodations by picking the one that best fits the needs I have identified. Like both you and I have with Sonos.

There will always be things that we want them to change. We can only hope that at some point, it makes economic sense for Sonos (and the rest of these companies, too!) to do so.