PDVD8 & TrueHD Audio

[hlkc]

Audio format: TrueHD, Digital EX, DTS-HD, DTS, DTS 96/24 decoding, DTS-ES (Discrete and Matrix)...
Output: SPDIF optical or coaxial or Analog..

Not sure, if it is marketing trick or what, but as a average consumer, it seems to me lately with the BD technology and PDVD8 launched, I see a lot of different audio stream formats. I am not follow all these formats closely and I hope someone here can give me some ideas.

First, I don't have SPDIF coaxial out from my MB; only SPDIF optical out. So what is the audio output port we need to use for so called "TrueHD" format? Below are my few questions:

1) What is the different between a "TrueHD" audio and DD and/or DTS SPDIF out from a HTPC?

2) Is what so called "TrueHD" audio can only pass thru analog but not in SPDIF coaxial or optical?

3) Is TrueHD audio stream playing from PDVD8 BD materials from my HTPC can only transfers from analog out but NOT SPDIF optical or coaxial?

4) In PDVD8, we can choose SPDIF or HDMI out from Audio section. Since I don't have HDMI out just a SPDIF audio signal out from my pre-amp and DVI video signal to my plasma, I assume I've no choice to choose SPDIF out. Is that means I am not taking a full advantage of what so called "TrueHD" audio? If so, is that mean if we need to do a full "TrueHD" audio, we have to have HDMI first to receiver and the HDMI/DVI out from receiver to monitor? Id don't think we can't do that. If so, how?

I just want the best audio and video out from my HTPC and the best I thought is DVI or HDMI out from my HTPC GC and SPDIF or optical out to my receiver.

5) Inside PDVD8 SPDIF output mode, we have 3 options, primary audio, AC3 and DTS down mixing. Which option should I use in order to take the full advantage of my audio setup? Correct me if I am wrong, it looks like if I choose for example DTS, somehow PDVD8 will modify the audio stream and make it to DTS to my pre-amp. But is it a good thing to do or should we just follow what the studio/manufacture supposes to offer, not touching or modifying the signal to DTS?

Thank you your feedback in advance.

[kdssrugby]

Ok, now that this is part of the Faq list, I ll summarize so that most people wont have to go reading the next couple pages:

Kdssrugby's guide to Hi-Def Audio

What is a lossless audio format?
A lossless track is an audio track that is bit for bit identical to the master recording with no compression or changes.

What are examples of lossless audio formats?
TrueHD, DTS HD MA and LPCM are all lossless audio codecs found on high definition discs.

Can I play a lossless format on my PC?
Yes and no. Total Media Theater (TMT) currently allows uncompressed audio to be sent via analog or hdmi using an Asus Xonar 1.3 card (which can be used with TMT 3 platinum). If you do not have this card then the audio signal is downgraded (from a lossless track to a lossy track which is not bit for bit identical to the original recording)

Currently only lossy tracks can be played on Powerdvd although a card from Auzentech, similar to the Asus card, will arrive in april of 2009 that will enable full audio pass through.

The reason for the down conversion of audio signals is due to a protocol called PaP (protected audio path) which functions in a similar manner to HDCP. Because PaP does not yet exist in Powerdvd, the audio is downmixed to the lossy core. This process downmixes the sound from a 24bit/96khz signal down to a 16/bit/48khz signal. Theoretically many people are unable to hear the difference between 24bit/96khz and 16/bit/48khz, but other have reported this is not the case.

What is a lossy format?
Dolby Digital and DTS are examples of a lossy format and are found on DVD and some blu-rays. A lossy soundtrack is created by compressing the original studio master so that it can fit on a smaller space (DVD's don t have the capacity to hold an uncompressed audio track along with video). To shrink the file size, many studios remove sound frequencies that theoretically cannot be heard by the average human ear. Basically it's like the coles notes of audio, just the essential sounds that you need to hear.

When will I be able to play a lossless audio format on my PC?
Cyberlink (who make Powerdvd) are working with various companies like Auzentech and ASUS to create a sound card that will allow PaP and allow for full resolution audio. Auzentech is creating a X-FI sound card which will allow HDMI 1.3 output but it's release has been pushed back often and it is unclear when it will be available for certain. If it does arrive it will only be compatible with Powerdvd 9 through an add on audio pack. ASUS makes the Xonar 1.3 sound card which will enable full HD audio via HDMI when using TMT 3 Platinum. Previously this was only capable in Asus' version of TMT which was patched independently. A slim version of the card will also be soon available for smaller PC's. A PCI-E card is required to use the cards.

Once I jump all the hoops, how do I play a HD audio track and what equipment will I need to play it?
(The following is speculation since we do not know how Cyberlink will implement hi def audio. I am assuming it will be similar in nature to set top players.)
To hear TrueHD and DTS-MA (once Auzentech and Asus release their cards) you will need a Receiver that is HDMI 1.3 compatible to bitstream the information to, and it must support the formats (i.e TrueHD and DTSHDMA). If you do not have a HDMI 1.3 receiver, then you can have the players decode the audio into PCM format which will give you almost the exact same sound and will work on HDMI 1.1 receivers. Using the Xonar 1.3 card, you can output the audio via HDMI or 7.1 analog (if you buy the daughter card) to your receiver using Total Media Theater.

Do I have to use HDMI? What about S/PDIF or Coaxial?
Yes.You cannot use S/PDIF or coaxial audio connectors due its limited bandiwidth. Since the information on a lossless audio format is so large, these cables cannot transmit the information required fast enough. If you use these connections, Powerdvd will downconvert the signal to its lossy core.

What signal should I send to the reciever?
If you have a HDMI 1.1 Reciever, you should send LPCM. If you have a receiver that is HDMI 1.3 and can decode the lossless formats you have 2 options. You may bitstream it or send it via LPCM. If you are planning on watching a Blu-ray disc with a PiP (Picture in Picture) then you will have to use PCM. In most cases you will not be able to use this feature with bitstream enabled (explained here:
http://www.dolby.com/consumer/techno...HD_avrs_1.html ) If you do not intend to use such features, then you can use bitstream.

[thedatman]

Audio format: TrueHD, Digital EX, DTS-HD, DTS, DTS 96/24 decoding, DTS-ES (Discrete and Matrix)...
Output: SPDIF optical or coaxial or Analog..

Not sure, if it is marketing trick or what, but as a average consumer, it seems to me lately with the BD technology and PDVD8 launched, I see a lot of different audio stream formats. I am not follow all these formats closely and I hope someone here can give me some ideas.

First, I don't have SPDIF coaxial out from my MB; only SPDIF optical out. So what is the audio output port we need to use for so called "TrueHD" format? Below are my few questions:

1) What is the different between a "TrueHD" audio and DD and/or DTS SPDIF out from a HTPC?

2) Is what so called "TrueHD" audio can only pass thru analog but not in SPDIF coaxial or optical?

3) Is TrueHD audio stream playing from PDVD8 BD materials from my HTPC can only transfers from analog out but NOT SPDIF optical or coaxial?

4) In PDVD8, we can choose SPDIF or HDMI out from Audio section. Since I don't have HDMI out just a SPDIF audio signal out from my pre-amp and DVI video signal to my plasma, I assume I've no choice to choose SPDIF out. Is that means I am not taking a full advantage of what so called "TrueHD" audio? If so, is that mean if we need to do a full "TrueHD" audio, we have to have HDMI first to receiver and the HDMI/DVI out from receiver to monitor? Id don't think we can't do that. If so, how?

I just want the best audio and video out from my HTPC and the best I thought is DVI or HDMI out from my HTPC GC and SPDIF or optical out to my receiver.

5) Inside PDVD8 SPDIF output mode, we have 3 options, primary audio, AC3 and DTS down mixing. Which option should I use in order to take the full advantage of my audio setup? Correct me if I am wrong, it looks like if I choose for example DTS, somehow PDVD8 will modify the audio stream and make it to DTS to my pre-amp. But is it a good thing to do or should we just follow what the studio/manufacture supposes to offer, not touching or modifying the signal to DTS?

Thank you your feedback in advance.



Hey I hope you get some answers,

I have similar questions but they have only been partially answered. I'm new at this and don't know nearly as much as other members.

You have a very nice audio system. I also have a good system over all not as nice as yours but for me it's as good as it gets. (I'm married now)

I have a Bryston SP1.7 processor, Canton ergo 120 and matching center channel cm-51. The bryston has no hdmi but has 5.1 analog input. I use an Echo Mona audio card it has 6 rca outs configured for 5.1 surround. It sounds great if it wasn't for all the hoop-la on these boards about down sampling. I would be happy.


I think in your situation if you have to use am optical (same as coax) you will always be limited to that bandwidth so if your Theta does not have an upgrade path. I don't know what your choices would be. Bryston has an upgrade path and it's not cheap but even their current model does not have hdmi. They are believers in waiting till the format is solid before they include it.

From what I read PDVD 8 even as of today does not send full audio output to the audiocard. In the near future they will encrypt it and send it to be decrypted by a audio card that is not let on the market. I like how my Mona sounds even at the current 16/48 it sounds better than anything I have heard as of yet.

is it possible that because I am remuxing and using 3319a that it's not being down sampled?

My other idea I posted before and got no replies. Can Anydvd offer an audio decrypting plugin? So once PDVD8 sends it to the audiocard anydvd decrypts it. That is if they can't develop a player.

[kdssrugby]

@datman, I don t think its possible for anydvdhd to decrypt the audio, at least at this point. Since powerdvd doesn t support the full resolution, slysoft can t unlock what isn t supported. Maybe once cyberlink enables full resolution audio in Powerdvd, Peer and James and the gang could find a work around. Though I do see some issues with that. The only way to have a PAP is by using HDMI 1.3, so if you re using analog, you would not likely have full res audio as an option, only by selecting HDMI from the pull down. So you would likely have to buy an HDMI 1.3 compatible card anyway, thus defeating the purpose.

[thedatman]

My other idea I posted before and got no replies. Can Anydvd offer an audio decrypting plugin? So once PDVD8 sends it to the audiocard anydvd decrypts it. That is if they can't develop a player.

I was speaking hypothetically.

So like it or not I should either be happy with what I have or be prepared to do some serious upgrading:bang::mad::confused::(

[Jong]

@kdsrugby

It is not a bitrate issue. There is more than enough capacity in 1.1 for all current HD formats.

PAP does not require HDMI 1.3. Audio over 1.1 is perfectly secure. It is transporting TrueHD or DTS-HD over HDMI requires 1.3, 1.1 simply does not have the protocols to support them.

Multi-channel LPCM (at least as good, arguably, possibly, even better as there are no risks of decoder errors) can be transported securely over HDMI 1.1 and that of course requires a higher bitrate than the lossless compressed formats. The reason why this is not supported at the moment has nothing to do with the HDMI output interface. It is because there is no secure audio path internal to the PC that prevents the HD audio being intercepted and copied. Cyberlink are working with a number of companies to develop their own secure audio path protocol that will allow multi-channel LPCM to be passed to HDMI 1.1 devices or TrueHD/DTS-HD to 1.3 devices.

As mentioned in another thread though, passing the TrueHD/DTS-HD bitstream will prevent "advanced" disc features, like PiP commentary, from working. For those you would need the player (e.g. PDVD) to convert to LPCM before passing to the amp, as is recommended by both the new disc standards.

[kdssrugby]

Hello again Jong, I believe this is like the 4th thread on this topic we ve sparred on. I just realized why you keep going on about HDMI 1.1. I thought you meant on the PC side, not the reciever side. I ve been assuming that most people that would be taking advantage of Hi-def audio would have 1.3 recievers like the Onkyo 605. My bad.

I m not sure if I was clear or not, but I did mention that the lack of PAP was a software issue, though you still need a HDMI card. I even mentioned Auzentech working with Cyberlink on the issue (forgot about ASUS).

And thanks for the info about PiP, I must have missed that. Kind of a pain in the a$$.

[Jong]

Hi there. Yes, my 18 month old Denon 4306 (HDMI 1.1) supports multi-channel LPCM but cannot decode the new codecs. In theory this is no issue as player-side decoding is the preferred method for all HD (as mentioned ad-nauseam!).

Decoding lossless formats should be identical whether done by the player or the amp. They are lossless after all. It is like unpacking a zip file - all tools have to achieve the same result or software would not install etc.

The problem at the moment is that even if you were able to get multi-channel LPCM to an HDMI audio port (which you cannot) PDVD downsamples (as you mention). But it's all a little moot as you cannot pass multi-channel LPCM and neither can you pass TrueHD/DTS-HD bitstream! But in theory all these issues should go away once the PDVD secure/protected audio path is in place. At least the reason for all of them does; We will have to see about the implementation!

[hlkc]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL THE ANSWERS SO FAR!!!

Now, after I read all the threads here, it seems to me that this TrueHD audio is not available today, right? In order for me to make sure I understand, let me ask few more questions and PLEASE DO Correct me if I am wrong.

1) It seems to me HDMI 1.3 protocol/cable is the ONLY way to transfer what so call "TrueHD" Audio from our HTPC to our receiver, right? If it is the case, after Google few mins, I don't see any HTPC GC or audio card that is HDMI 1.3 built in today. Is that means this "TrueHD" Audio is NOT available for HTPC users like us today?

2) What I confuse the most is if I understand correctly, since HDMI carries a lot of data inside therefore it can't be transfer/carry on. What I mean is we can only get HDMI signal from player to a integrated TV, monitor and speakers together, is the only way we can experience "TrueHD" audio today?

If it is the case, how we, HTPC users, can have HDMI 1.3 to HDMI audio signal to amp and another HDMI video signal to monitor? Or, we have to HDMI 1.3 to receiver and hope our receiver can continuous/carry on the video signal out to monitor? Is this the way for the future for the "TrueHD" audio happening to our HTPC users?

3) It seems to me, we can't do what so called "TrueHD" audio today until the following conditions met:

a) PDVD MUST secure/protected audio path is in place and not down sampling and send the audio path out to put receiver.
b) We need HDMI 1.3 card from HTPC and HDMI in receiver to do all these decoding.
c) Since PDVD doesn't support the full resolution therefore AnyDVDHD can't unlock what isn't supported. Once PDVD support AnyDVDHD needs to unlock the audio portion.

In any case, this seem to me this is ONE BIG SERIOUS wish list and upgrade to a lot of people, right? If I am not right, and if you are enjoying "TrueHD" audio today, can you please share your HTPC and receiver set up to me?

Many thanks again!

[roog]

IMHO, the best solution will be HDMI 1.3 audio. The first available way, that I know of, to do this will be an Auxentech X-Fi Prelude (available now), an Auzentech HDMI X-Tension soundcard (not yet available), and a HDMI 1.3 receiver (available now). You're looking at a minimum of 1000 USD, not including speakers, for this capability.

Hopefully Auzentech will come up with a way to extract the HDMI 1.3 audio from BD/HD discs and pass it unmolested to the receiver. Otherwise, your at the mercy of PowerDVD8 Ultra to supply the audio and they like to monkey around with the data stream before passing it along.

Just an off-the-wall idea I came up with, but if someone could figure out a way to supply the two additional 7.1 surround channels to a second S/PDIF output it would be great short term solution. You could play these channels using a low cost 2.1 channel receiver or amplifier.

[hlkc]

IMHO, the best solution will be HDMI 1.3 audio. The first available way, that I know of, to do this will be an Auxentech X-Fi Prelude (available now), an Auzentech HDMI X-Tension soundcard (not yet available), and a HDMI 1.3 receiver (available now). You're looking at a minimum of 1000 USD, not including speakers, for this capability.

Hopefully Auzentech will come up with a way to extract the HDMI 1.3 audio from BD/HD discs and pass it unmolested to the receiver. Otherwise, your at the mercy of PowerDVD8 Ultra to supply the audio and they like to monkey around with the data stream before passing it along.

Just an off-the-wall idea I came up with, but if someone could figure out a way to supply the two additional 7.1 surround channels to a second S/PDIF output it would be great short term solution. You could play these channels using a low cost 2.1 channel receiver or amplifier.

Hi roog,

So uxentech X-Fi Prelude (available now) or an Auzentech HDMI X-Tension soundcard can deliver HDMI 1.3 audio portion from HTPC to receiver? Also, in order to take full advantage of TureHD audio, we need a receiver that can do TrueHD like DD, DTS, right?

[Jong]

1) Is pretty much true. To pass TrueHD you need 1.3 and there is no solution right now that can pass it. However, the reason is more to do with software limitations (lack of an internal secure audio path) than the capabilities of some HDMI solutions. Even converting to analogue on the PC, still results in downmixing and probably always will.

2) I do not fully understand. But I think you are mistaken. You certainly can pass HDMI from one device to another eg. from player to amp and from amp to a TV and use the amp to decode the audio. It is certainly possible to play TrueHD and DTS-HD now using a stand-alone player connected to a suitable amp.

3)
a) true
b) not really true. It is perfectly possible to decode TrueHD in the player and pass LPCM to a suitable amp over HDMI 1.1 and the results should be identical, since unpacking a lossless format does not require any clever algorithms to re-create the sound. The player should simply pass the bits it unpacks.
c) AnyDVD is not really involved in this. Any solution I can think of that can playback the audio will be able to work with the original disc without AnyDVD. Ripping the disc is of course another matter.

[kdssrugby]

Hey HLKC.

1)HDMI is the only way you will get hi def audio, but as Jong mentioned, HDMI 1.1 will work. The difference is that LPCM decodes the stream with te HTPC whereas bitstreaming it will let the reciever decode the audio. Jong prefers to send the LPCM (decreased likelihood of decoding errors, and because his reciever is only HDMI 1.1) but if you have a reciever that can decode DTS HD MA or TrueHD, the only way those icons will light up is by bitsreaming it.

You are correct, there are no current products with HDMI 1.3, though they would be of no use until Powerdvd supports it.

2) You would not have to use the integrated speakers on your Tv. Here's what would happen once the software supports Hi res audio, and you have the hardware, is this (at least this is how Auzentech is approaching it): You would have a dvdi to hdmi cable running from your video card into the sound card. The sound card would have a 2nd HDMI port which would combine the video and the audio and send it to your reciever. From the reciever you would have another HDMI cable going to your TV. This method allows the audio and video to be synced together.

3) It seems like you have got it. The only thing I m unsure on is whether anydvd would be able to unlock the audio. The only reason for doing so would be to use analog, and I don t know if that will work. I ll PM peer and see if he can give me a quick yes or no answer.

Edit; dang, Jong beat me to it while I was writing.

[roog]

If I'm not mistaken, HDMI has to be 1.3 or better to handle TrueHD.

[hlkc]

This is getting somewhere, I hope?

After few mins research this device (http://www.digitalconnection.com/Products/Video/HS42A.ASP) CAN separate HDMI 1.3 audio AND video. If it is true then all we need is just one of this unit and we can have TrueHD today? Of course we need a TrueHD receiver too. Also, it look like this unit can even send signal to receiver via SPDIF. What do you guys think?

[kdssrugby]

@roog: Its a bit convoluted but here's the reality. LPCM and TrueHD etc is the same. The difference is that TrueHD is packed in a file equivalent to a zip file. The reciever decodes it itself instead of powerdvd. So if you want the reciever to decode it, then yes, you need HDMI 1.3, if you want the player to decode then you ll only need 1.1. In both cases Powerdvd would need to support the full resolution audio.

@HLKC:
Kind of but not really. Yes it can separate the audio, but it looks like it can only send the audio over spdif or coaxial.As mentioned before, these cannot handle trueHD.

[roog]

@roog: Its a bit convoluted but here's the reality. LPCM and TrueHD etc is the same. The difference is that TrueHD is packed in a file equivalent to a zip file. The reciever decodes it itself instead of powerdvd. So if you want the reciever to decode it, then yes, you need HDMI 1.3, if you want the player to decode then you ll only need 1.1. In both cases Powerdvd would need to support the full resolution audio.

Thx, I want the receiver to decode.

[SamuriHL]

Thx, I want the receiver to decode.

I definitely don't. You loose too much functionality that way. While it's true that the sound quality between LPCM and bitstreaming should be equal, there's one small point that people forget. Profile 1.1 titles. If you're doing PiP, you need the streams to be mixed. Well, guess what, if you're bitstreaming, you can't mix them. The player needs to decode to LPCM, mix in the profile 1.1 PiP audio, and send the mixed stream to the receiver. I would prefer this to bitstreaming and letting the receiver decode it. Given what we've seen out of the receivers that can decode so far, I'm also not impressed. One of the Onkyo's I believe required a firmware update to fix a sound decoding problem. Yes, a receiver requiring a firmware update. No, I have NO idea how that process works, either. :D In any case, let the player deal with it. Much easier in the long run and you won't notice any difference in quality.

[hlkc]

@roog: Its a bit convoluted but here's the reality. LPCM and TrueHD etc is the same. The difference is that TrueHD is packed in a file equivalent to a zip file. The reciever decodes it itself instead of powerdvd. So if you want the reciever to decode it, then yes, you need HDMI 1.3, if you want the player to decode then you ll only need 1.1. In both cases Powerdvd would need to support the full resolution audio.

kdssrugby,

So what if we want the player, PDVD, to decode? what format will I able to stream to receiver? In any cases, we still need "TrueHD" logo receiver like few years ago "DTS"?

QUOTE=kdssrugby;105972]@HLKC:
Kind of but not really. Yes it can separate the audio, but it looks like it can only send the audio over spdif or coaxial.As mentioned before, these cannot handle trueHD.[/QUOTE]

So this piece (http://www.digitalconnection.com/Products/Video/HS42A.ASP) only can separate the video and audio but it won't deliver what we wanted, HDMI 1.3 signal to receiver since SPDIF can't deliver such signal, right?

Based on this this thread #3 (http://www.avrevforum.com/showthread.php?t=152), it can be done. So I assume it is NOT a true statement.



also,

[SamuriHL]

kdssrugby,

So what if we want the player, PDVD, to decode? what format will I able to stream to receiver? In any cases, we still need "TrueHD" logo receiver like few years ago "DTS"?


If you allow the player to decode the audio, you will *ALWAYS* be sending LPCM uncompressed streams. This, IMO, is desired for the reason I already mentioned. That means that the player decodes TrueHD, DTS-HD MA, etc to their uncompressed LPCM streams and sends the raw data down whatever pipe you're sending it down. (Analog or HDMI, in this case, as SPDIF simply can't handle anything beyond DTS' 1.5mpbs output) LPCM is the way to go IMO.

EDIT: To make what I'm saying even more clear, if you're letting the player decode the audio, the receiver does NOT need to have the DTS-HD MA and TrueHD decoders built in.

[roog]

I definitely don't. You loose too much functionality that way. While it's true that the sound quality between LPCM and bitstreaming should be equal, there's one small point that people forget. Profile 1.1 titles. If you're doing PiP, you need the streams to be mixed. Well, guess what, if you're bitstreaming, you can't mix them. The player needs to decode to LPCM, mix in the profile 1.1 PiP audio, and send the mixed stream to the receiver. I would prefer this to bitstreaming and letting the receiver decode it. Given what we've seen out of the receivers that can decode so far, I'm also not impressed. One of the Onkyo's I believe required a firmware update to fix a sound decoding problem. Yes, a receiver requiring a firmware update. No, I have NO idea how that process works, either. :D In any case, let the player deal with it. Much easier in the long run and you won't notice any difference in quality.

The Pioneer Elite series TrueHD receivers have a usb port so a firmware update could theoretically be performed using it.

Thx for the info, my current receiver is only 1.1 so I'll be using your method until I upgrade. I still don't trust Cyberlink's audio processing though. Do you know of a better way to convert TrueHD to LPCM?

Are you really using PIP with BD/HD audio?

[kdssrugby]

Exactly right SamuriHL (not that I would expect anything else from you).
@HLKC: What the person on that thread said, was that the product is HDMI 1.3, so you can send TrueHD through it and it will stay the same BUT only if you use HDMI. If you use coaxial or spdif, then it will not do TrueHD. To get TrueHD you would have to use a HDMI cable and send the signal from the computer/player to the reciever and then to the tv using only HDMI, no spdif or coaxial.

[kdssrugby]

Man, I feel Dolby shoudl be paying us for the # of times TrueHD has been mentioned on this thread.
@roog: while PiP isn t big now, once more players out there become 1.1 and there are more discs have it, it might eventually replace audio commentaries on newer discs. And its not always a talking head, sometimes its storyboards or green screen stuff (Like on the HD DVD of 300 which had a PiP of the whole movie minus the effects.)

[hlkc]

If you allow the player to decode the audio, you will *ALWAYS* be sending LPCM uncompressed streams. This, IMO, is desired for the reason I already mentioned. That means that the player decodes TrueHD, DTS-HD MA, etc to their uncompressed LPCM streams and sends the raw data down whatever pipe you're sending it down. (Analog or HDMI, in this case, as SPDIF simply can't handle anything beyond DTS' 1.5mpbs output) LPCM is the way to go IMO.

EDIT: To make what I'm saying even more clear, if you're letting the player decode the audio, the receiver does NOT need to have the DTS-HD MA and TrueHD decoders built in.

So all we need are:
1) Player decodes the audio. In our case, we need CL to able to do that and sending the uncompressed streams to the receiver using just analog cable; like the mini-out to RCA-in to our receiver. In this case, we DON'T need ot get any special TrueHD receiver and dealing with all the HDMI 1.3 cabling, right?

2) In the receiver side, what format/output we are going to choose?

3) When will CL make their PDVD going to do the decoding part?

4) What about AnyDVD HD, I read someone said that it needs to decode the audio part too, right? can you comment about that?

Thanks!

[hlkc]

Exactly right SamuriHL (not that I would expect anything else from you).
@HLKC: What the person on that thread said, was that the product is HDMI 1.3, so you can send TrueHD through it and it will stay the same BUT only if you use HDMI. If you use coaxial or spdif, then it will not do TrueHD. To get TrueHD you would have to use a HDMI cable and send the signal from the computer/player to the reciever and then to the tv using only HDMI, no spdif or coaxial.

Understood now. But if I use this MB (http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=572&l4=0&model=1862&modelmenu=1) come with sound card then I can just use analog cable between my HTPC and receiver and I can experience the TrueHD even I don't have HDMI 1.3 and TureHD decoder receiver, right?

But of course we need PDVD decode/uncopress the TrueHD signal first?

[kdssrugby]

1) Right. Powerdvd needs to be able to send uncompressed audio. If you use analog then you do not need HDMI 1.3 compatible equipment.BUT, we do not know how Cyberlink will do TrueHD, so analog might (probably not) not give you the full sound.

2)
a)For HDMI: If you want to do PiP, then tell powerdvd (when it is able) to do PCM, but if you don t use that then tell it bitstream. When it goes to the reciever tell it to do HDMI and then PCM or bitstream.

b)For analog, just select 5.1-7.1 speakers in Powerdvd and on the reciever, select analog/multi-channel

3) We don t know, but whenever a card that has HDMI 1.3 comes out is most likely. I think that is around June.

4)I m still waiting to hear from peer, but i don t think it does.

[kdssrugby]

Whoops you posted before I could answer your 1st post. Ok here's my reply to the 2nd post.
That soundcard will not give TrueHD. What it can do is take the sound and mix i so that it sounds like 7.1, but it is not actually TrueHD

We also don t know if Powerdvd will allow analog to have full res audio. If it does then yes you are correct, but I do not think they will. We will not know until they add it to powerdvd.

[Jong]

I do not believe that analogue will ever be decoded @24/96 for the reason it is not now - analogue audio by it's very nature is not secure - anyone can copy it. Even when a secure audio path is in place and you can bitstream or send raw 26/96 LPCM over HDMI PDVD will still have to downmix for analogue. Now whether you can tell or not depends on your hearing and the quality
of your components. Plus, remember, many soundtracks currently are 16/48 even if LPCM or TrueHD!

If you do choose to go analogue I would certainly recommend installing one of the high quality audiophile cards mentioned, not using the output on your motherboard. One of the surest way of messing up sound quality is with poor quality digital to analogue conversion and motherboard D to A is average to say the least!

[kdssrugby]

Agreed. I used my onboard sound for a while but it was of poor quality. Another issue is that a certain amount of static will be transmitted if you use onboard audio, which isn t noticable during loud scenes, but is during quiet ones or ones with dialogue, especially with lossless tracks which need to be played louder than lossy ones (ok I ve only really had this experience with TrueHD, it s not usually the case with PCM or DTS MA)

[Jong]

Jong prefers to send the LPCM (decreased likelihood of decoding errors, and because his reciever is only HDMI 1.1):) No. It is mainly to exploit the full benefits of the new format, as I mentioned earlier and SamuriHL mentioned more recently.

The decoding issue should not matter one way or the other. I only mention that with a real LPCM soundtrack there is no decoding so no potential, however small, for errors. If we have a TrueHD soundtrack the results really should be identical, whether done by player or amp unless there is a bug (once we have a secure audio path so do not need to downsample). This is different to lossy formats where different implementations can have different outcomes. With lossy formats there is no single perfect way to reconstruct the sound.

I chose my amp because I was happy that there was no need for, or benefit of, my amp to do the decoding.

Some may find this article on the Dolby web site interesting.

http://www.dolby.com/consumer/technology/trueHD/avrs/trueHD_avrs_1.html

[kdssrugby]

Sorry that I misconstrued what you meant Jong. It makes sense though.

I got Webslinger to add this to the Faq list (it's #15) so I tried to condense wht we've discussed and out it in post #2 on this thread. Check it out and let me know if I need to change anything. Thanks.

[hlkc]

Agreed. I used my onboard sound for a while but it was of poor quality. Another issue is that a certain amount of static will be transmitted if you use onboard audio, which isn t noticable during loud scenes, but is during quiet ones or ones with dialogue, especially with lossless tracks which need to be played louder than lossy ones (ok I ve only really had this experience with TrueHD, it s not usually the case with PCM or DTS MA)

When it comes down to my hobby, I am not hesitate to spend few more bucks and do it right.

So to recap, PDVD needs to decode the uncompressed streams to the receiver using the analog cables from my HTPC and a better audio card like Auxentech X-Fi Prelude and choose the right option in such as full range speakers in Vista set up... and I will able to hear TrueHD audio from my non-TrueHD audio receiver, am I right?

[kdssrugby]

Yes and no.At the moment that will give you the best sound but not TrueHD. To get the equivalent of True HD with a HDMI 1.1 receiver you will need 2 things:
1)A HDMI soundcard to send a PCM signal to the reciever.
2) Powerdvd to decode uncompressed audio.

It is not likely that analog will ever be able to play TrueHD

[Jong]

Good idea to get this in the FAQ.

Your last point though is wrong. It is simply impossible to listen to mixed soundtracks, e.g PiP commentaries or (potentially) Internet-streamed audio, when bitstreaming. If you want to listen to those you will have to convert to PCM in your player. It has nothing to do with decoding errors.

Also, as Dolby point out in their article, many disc will prohibit bitstreaming, so it will not always be an option.

I think you should make it clear (maybe by linking to the Dolby article) that the preferred way of listening to audio, as the studio intended, is to convert in the player to PCM - so commentaries, button audio and streamed content can all be mixed before passing to the amp. However, bitstreaming the main soundtrack will be an option for some discs, if your amp supports it and you only wish to listen to the main soundtrack, without any additional content.

[kdssrugby]

Thanks Jong, its fixed I think.
The confusion was from post #18, I thought SamuraiHL was implying that you could bitsream it, didn t realize it was to separate thoughts (preferring PCM to Bitsream, and mixing audio for PiP in the Player; not preferring the player to decode not the receiver using bitsream) thanks for clearing that up.

[Jong]

Yes and no.At the moment that will give you the best sound but not TrueHD. To get the equivalent of True HD with a HDMI 1.1 receiver you will need 2 things:
1)A HDMI soundcard to send a PCM signal to the reciever.
2) Powerdvd to decode uncompressed audio.

It is not likely that analog will ever be able to play TrueHDAs he says! In the short term analogue offers the best solution, but it is likely to always be hampered by being downmixing to 16/48.

In the medium term HDMI will be better.

Bitstreaming (if your amp supports it) will guarantee that PDVD (or other player) does not mess around with the sound in any way, but will prevent you exploiting advanced features of the disc. As kdssrugby said, in future there may be no separate commentary track, only PiP commentary which needs to be overlayed on the regular soundtrack. So not having this could mean no commentaries. However, once PDVD have got over the problem of PaP there should be no reason for them to mess with the audio (except when using analogue). It will be easier simply to "unpack" the audio, not mess with it (unless mixing other audio), and send it to the amp.

[SamuriHL]

Yes and no.At the moment that will give you the best sound but not TrueHD. To get the equivalent of True HD with a HDMI 1.1 receiver you will need 2 things:
1)A HDMI soundcard to send a PCM signal to the reciever.
2) Powerdvd to decode uncompressed audio.

It is not likely that analog will ever be able to play TrueHD

Sorry for the delayed responses to this thread...was away working on a home fixing project.

Anyway, that last statement is deceiving in that analog could never directly play any compressed format without decoding first. (Don't get me wrong, I KNOW what you meant, I'm just saying how someone could misinterpret what you're truly meaning to say there). For analog, ALL the formats, including DD and DTS for that matter, need to be decompressed into their basic streams and sent as LPCM data. Now, you think TrueHD will never be fully decoded without being downsampled for an analog audio path, and I tend to mostly agree with you on that. The real question is this...once the changes to PowerDVD are made to have secure audio paths, will they allow non-AACS titles to be decoded at full resolution without downsampling. :) The reason this is a good question is because eventually we may be able to record our own HD audio tracks for personally recorded material. Will that material, which does NOT have any protection on it, only play at full res on a secure audio path? Now, if the answer is that unprotected content will not be downsampled, then we got game. :D

[SamuriHL]

Good idea to get this in the FAQ.

Your last point though is wrong. It is simply impossible to listen to mixed soundtracks, e.g PiP commentaries or (potentially) Internet-streamed audio, when bitstreaming. If you want to listen to those you will have to convert to PCM in your player. It has nothing to do with decoding errors.


Absolutely correct.


Also, as Dolby point out in their article, many disc will prohibit bitstreaming, so it will not always be an option.


Snikes. I wasn't aware of that! So why the hell would anyone pay big bucks for a receiver that can decode all the fancy HD audio tracks when you can buy a cheaper player that accept LPCM and spend more on good speakers?! :D

[davinleeds]

Yes and no.At the moment that will give you the best sound but not TrueHD. To get the equivalent of True HD with a HDMI 1.1 receiver you will need 2 things:
1)A HDMI soundcard to send a PCM signal to the reciever.
2) Powerdvd to decode uncompressed audio.

It is not likely that analog will ever be able to play TrueHD

This is what I found:
Figure 3 Connection via Multichannel Analog Inputs

A connection through either of these existing interfaces will let you experience the full potential of the high-resolution audio delivered on next-generation optical formats.

"full potential"
http://www.dolby.com/consumer/technology/trueHD/AVRs/trueHD_avrs_2.html

Seems like least expensive route if your receiver is equipped, and many pre hdmi receivers may get a new lease

[SamuriHL]

Thanks Jong, its fixed I think.
The confusion was from post #18, I thought SamuraiHL was implying that you could bitsream it, didn t realize it was to separate thoughts (preferring PCM to Bitsream, and mixing audio for PiP in the Player; not preferring the player to decode not the receiver using bitsream) thanks for clearing that up.

Woops, sorry. My bad. Yea, you can't bitstream if you're doing 2 audio streams mixed as in PiP. And I do prefer LPCM for that and a few other reasons. (Like no need to get an expensive fancy player to decode all the audio when my PS3 and perhaps in the future my HTPC can do it for me. ;))

[SamuriHL]

As he says! In the short term analogue offers the best solution, but it is likely to always be hampered by being downmixing to 16/48.

In the medium term HDMI will be better.

Bitstreaming (if your amp supports it) will guarantee that PDVD (or other player) does not mess around with the sound in any way, but will prevent you exploiting advanced features of the disc. As kdssrugby said, in future there may be no separate commentary track, only PiP commentary which needs to be overlayed on the regular soundtrack. So not having this could mean no commentaries. However, once PDVD have got over the problem of PaP there should be no reason for them to mess with the audio (except when using analogue). It will be easier simply to "unpack" the audio, not mess with it (unless mixing other audio), and send it to the amp.
Man I don't even want to THINK about the kinds of bugs we're going to have when they're mixing HD audio at full resolution and attempting to shove a mixed LPCM stream down an HDMI path. Look and how well PiP "worked" when the first profile 1.1 titles came out. So, you do have a point about PDVD not necessarily being the best possible solution to decode audio, but, maybe Auzentech won't let them screw it up. :D

[kdssrugby]

@ SamuriHL, You're absolutely right (re: post #37). I was thinking solely about Blu-ray/hd dvds. If it doesn t have aacs then you should get 24bit/96khz no prob. And while we may someday be able to create out own lossless audio for our own home movies, is that necessarily a good thing (lets just say that some ambient effects should be left unheard)

@davinleeds: unfortunately that is in regard to set top players, i.e the HD Xa2. Though correct me if I m wrong, but if (or when) they impliment those image constraint tokens, analog will be down converted. (and I have no Idea why powerdvd doesn t allow it, but set tops and TMT do)

[Jong]

Snikes. I wasn't aware of that! So why the hell would anyone pay big bucks for a receiver that can decode all the fancy HD audio tracks when you can buy a cheaper player that accept LPCM and spend more on good speakers?! :DI'd say it is largely because there is so much confusion out there about these new formats, as this thread testifies!! Many think you need it.

Plus the amp manufacturers do not want their product simplified and devalued. Someone will put in the decoders to give more items on their checklist. How does your average shop assistant explain why one amp has HD decoding and another does not?!

it is not that dissimilar to the whole "deep color" confusion, where HDMI 1.3 has capability built in for some future HD standard, yet to be defined. Neither Blu-ray or HD-DVD have deep color encoded on their discs (nor do I think any consumer display is able to render it even if they did) yet still you see people selling a deep color capable interconnect as a benefit!

[kdssrugby]

Ya, deep colour is useless, there is no footage available that has a 30 ( or 36- 48 ) bit colour depth (not sure if you could create a 10 bit from an 8 bit but I think it wouldn t be the same). I have to behonest, I was sucked up into the marketing. I figured it was best to get a receiver that was "future proof" (i.e. HDMI 1.3 and played all the codecs. ) fortunately i found it on ebay in October for $300

And how confused would the consumer get if they saw their disks had TrueHD and DTS MA, but no player supported it (even though they could send it via PCM). I m sure Dolby and DTS also have their fingers in the pie as well

[SamuriHL]

@ SamuriHL, You're absolutely right (re: post #37). I was thinking solely about Blu-ray/hd dvds. If it doesn t have aacs then you should get 24bit/96khz no prob. And while we may someday be able to create out own lossless audio for our own home movies, is that necessarily a good thing (lets just say that some ambient effects should be left unheard)


Did you really think I cared one way or the other whether or not I can make my home movies with HD audio?! :D LOL! The point being that I want my player to support it just in case I ever do. GRIN :) That way when AnyDVD removes the fracking protection on my discs, I'm HOPING against hope that it won't get downsampled anymore as you're well aware.

[SamuriHL]

I'd say it is largely because there is so much confusion out there about these new formats, as this thread testifies!! Many think you need it.

Plus the amp manufacturers so not want their product simplified and devalued. Someone will put in the decoders to give more items on their checklist. How does your average shop assistant explain why one amp has HD decoding and another does not?!

it is not that disimilar to the whole "deep color" confusion, where HDMI 1.3 has capability built in for some future HD standard, yet to be defined. Neither Blu-ray or HD-DVD have deep color encoded on their discs (nor do I think any consumer display is able to render it even if they did) yet still you see people selling a deep color capable interconnect as a benefit!

Very good point. I'm thinking that new Onkyo 576 looks better all the time. MSRP is 400 bucks so you can bet it'll be below 300 on places like Amazon. I don't think I could resist temptation on that. It does not have the decoders built in, but, again, I say who cares. If it can accept LPCM over HDMI, I'm good to go.

As for deep color on HDMI 1.3, don't get me started. That is the biggest fraud I've ever seen. Does ANYONE honestly believe that by the time anyone actually USES it that it'll be the way 1.3 supports it? Give me a break. :)

[davinleeds]

@ SamuriHL, You're absolutely right (re: post #37). I was thinking solely about Blu-ray/hd dvds. If it doesn t have aacs then you should get 24bit/96khz no prob. And while we may someday be able to create out own lossless audio for our own home movies, is that necessarily a good thing (lets just say that some ambient effects should be left unheard)

@davinleeds: unfortunately that is in regard to set top players, i.e the HD Xa2. Though correct me if I m wrong, but if (or when) they impliment those image constraint tokens, analog will be down converted. (and I have no Idea why powerdvd doesn t allow it, but set tops and TMT do)

I know, TMT and
http://reviews.cnet.com/av-receivers/yamaha-htr-5860-black/4505-6466_7-31339828.html?tag=also
make fine together. For now--we always seem to want more...

[SamuriHL]

Yamaha has failed to impress me with their latest lower to midrange receivers. The Onkyo's truly have way more features. I have a yamaha now and do love it, but, no HDMI makes me a grumpy person. :D That's why I'm considering the Onkyo 576 when it's released. Or perhaps if they replace the 605 with something better I'll consider it, but, it has to be in a decent price range. I'd prefer to stick with Yamaha as I have for the past 10 years, but, I'm just not feeling the love for their receivers right now.

[roog]

As I see it, the only thing analog audio has to offer is the two additional surround channels. Not to mention that most titles don't have decent surround encoding to begin with.

The problems that exist with analog are AC hum, RF interference from the computer, and signal loss before it gets to the receiver. I may be wrong, but most modern receivers probably convert the signal back to digital before playing it, thus degrading the signal even further.

IMHO, it's better to stick with 5.1 digital until we have a viable solution for 7.1 digital.

[Jong]

That's certainly my plan. And now that DTS Mixing works, with PDVD8, the sound from a lossless track, downmixed, is really not at all bad. Once there is a trouble-free HDMI solution though I will be there!

[SamuriHL]

As I see it, the only thing analog audio has to offer is the two additional surround channels. Not to mention that most titles don't have decent surround encoding to begin with.


Um, no. The sound quality is most DEFINITELY higher for me by using analog than SPDIF. It's not even a contest. LPCM vs heavily compressed DD or DTS. Yea, no, sorry. :)


The problems that exist with analog are AC hum, RF interference from the computer, and signal loss before it gets to the receiver. I may be wrong, but most modern receivers probably convert the signal back to digital before playing it, thus degrading the signal even further.


My Yamaha simply passes through the 6 channel input. It does ZERO processing on it at all. I have no problem with hum or interference of any kind. Signal loss, probably, but, I'll take the very minor signal loss vs much higher quality sound.


IMHO, it's better to stick with 5.1 digital until we have a viable solution for 7.1 digital.

Couldn't disagree with you more on this one.

[SamuriHL]

That's certainly my plan. And now that DTS Mixing works, with PDVD8, the sound from a lossless track, downmixed, is really not at all bad. Once there is a trouble-free HDMI solution though I will be there!

Certainly HDMI is the way to go, but, there's a reason the high end players add analog outputs. :) Analog has gotten a dirty name over the years, but, really, people need to calm down over the digital vs analog debate. A decent set of cables and analog will sound just fine. You're pumping out MUCH higher quality sound over analog than you are with downmixing it to DTS and SPDIF.

[Jong]

Yeh. I do accept that. But I've just decided, for once, I cannot be bothered for the sake of a few months. Now if 6 months down the road it is clear HDMI isn't happening I may re-appraise!:)

[hlkc]

Ok after some digging around I have some ideas and like to confirm with you guys. Please take a look for me and confirm since this will be my HTPC road map /project going forward.

1) With this card (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/audio/3992-auzen-hdmi-1-3-board-pics-info.html) we can able to get HDMI 1.3 audio signal out from our HTPC then out to any receiver takes LPCM audio stream for the true TrueHD audio. On the other hand we can remain the same for the video stream, DVI or HDMI out from our GC to monitor.

2) With this card (http://www.auzentech.com/site/products/x-fi_prelude.php), we can able to do the analogue way from our HTPC then out to the receiver that not any receiver takes LPCM audio stream for the true TrueHD audio. On the other hand we can remain the same for the video stream, DVI or HDMI out from our GC to monitor.

For the receiver front, we will choose something equivalent to analogue mode to accept PCM signals from the HTPC and let the PDVD sends the correct stream, not downmixing to each channel to receiver.

On a side note, I can't tell you guys how much I love my Theta Casablanca pre-amp and Krell Amp. It is so dynamic and powerful. I am trying to see how I can not get another receiver and keep the CB and playing all these TrueHD audio.

Many thanks!

[SamuriHL]

Yeh. I do accept that. But I've just decided, for once, I cannot be bothered for the sake of a few months. Now if 6 months down the road it is clear HDMI isn't happening I may re-appraise!:)

Ok. I can live with that explanation. :)

[roog]

My Yamaha simply passes through the 6 channel input. It does ZERO processing on it at all. I have no problem with hum or interference of any kind. Signal loss, probably, but, I'll take the very minor signal loss vs much higher quality sound.


Thx Samuri, I respect your opinion.

Didn't you mean to say 8 channel instead of 6 channel?

What sound card are you using?

[SamuriHL]

Thx Samuri, I respect your opinion.

Didn't you mean to say 8 channel instead of 6 channel?

What sound card are you using?

At the moment I'm using my built in HD audio realtek audio. I'm waiting to get an HDMI enabled sound card later this summer. But even with my crappy built in mobo audio, I can still hear the difference. But, I only have 6 channel input on my yamaha. (Another reason I'm looking at the Onkyo's) I'll likely get a new receiver before I get a sound card.

[roog]

At the moment I'm using my built in HD audio realtek audio. I'm waiting to get an HDMI enabled sound card later this summer. But even with my crappy built in mobo audio, I can still hear the difference. But, I only have 6 channel input on my yamaha. (Another reason I'm looking at the Onkyo's) I'll likely get a new receiver before I get a sound card.

I have realtek on my ASUS P54-VM HDMI. I have a LOGITECH z-5500 5 speaker system that I haven't tried yet, but I should be able to do a 1:1 comparison with digital vs analog when I set it up. Also, my home theater setup has a 7.1 receiver so I need to try it there as well. It sounds great with 5.1 digital so it will interesting to see how it performs using PDVD8 and analog. I'll let you know when I get both working. Maybe my opinion will change then.

[SamuriHL]

I have realtek on my ASUS P54-VM HDMI. I have a LOGITECH z-5500 5 speaker system that I haven't tried yet, but I should be able to do a 1:1 comparison with digital vs analog when I set it up. Also, my home theater setup has a 7.1 receiver so I need to try it there as well. It sounds great with 5.1 digital so it will interesting to see how it performs using PDVD8 and analog. I'll let you know when I get both working. Maybe my opinion will change then.

I'd be curious as to whether you hear a difference with that setup. It's similar to what I have in my bedroom for a speaker set up. Eventually when I get a new receiver the yamaha will move in there. But I'd like to know which you think is better on that setup.

[hlkc]

Hey HLKC.

2) You would not have to use the integrated speakers on your Tv. Here's what would happen once the software supports Hi res audio, and you have the hardware, is this (at least this is how Auzentech is approaching it): You would have a dvdi to hdmi cable running from your video card into the sound card. The sound card would have a 2nd HDMI port which would combine the video and the audio and send it to your reciever. From the reciever you would have another HDMI cable going to your TV. This method allows the audio and video to be synced together.

Hi kdssrugby,

Well I guess there are too many threads in short period of time therefore I miss this one.

So based on what you are saying the Auzentech approach:

From my GC first I need my DVI-D or HDMI out to Auzentech HDMI X-Tension soundcard's HDMI in.

From Auzentech HDMI X-Tension soundcard HDMI audio out to any receiver that offer TrueHD audio decoder.

From this TrueHD receiver's HDMI out video signal to the monitor.

In a nut shell, video stream from GC to this sound card. Sound card sends video and audio signal to 1st stop, TrueHD receiver. Receiver send audio to each speakers. Receiver also send the video signal to monitor. In this case, we will have HDMI 1.3 carry the TrueHD audio signals to the amp and also will sync up the video.

But before anything happens, we still need something like PDVD not downsampling the audio stream first.

so we are waiting for 2 things here. First PDVD new release, not downsampling the BD stream and second, Auzentech HDMI X-Tension soundcard in next few months, right?

also do I need the Auzen Prelude 7.1 sound card? If so, where is going to fit in my picture above?

[thedatman]

[

In any case, this seem to me this is ONE BIG SERIOUS wish list and upgrade to a lot of people, right? If I am not right, and if you are enjoying "TrueHD" audio today, can you please share your HTPC and receiver set up to me?

Many thanks again!

I am! I still wish it could be better.

I went for a bike ride and this thread exploded. I started a few loosly relating to this. I'm may be wrong about this but lately I feel like I've be blackballed but whatever. I don't even know why I'm posting here,except that maybe some of my logic might make since to you.

[thedatman]

[QUOTE=Jong;105994]I do not believe that analogue will ever be decoded @24/96 for the reason it is not now - analogue audio by it's very nature is not secure - anyone can copy it. Even when a secure audio path is in place and you can bitstream or send raw 26/96 LPCM over HDMI PDVD will still have to downmix for analogue. Now whether you can tell or not depends on your hearing and the quality
of your components. Plus, remember, many soundtracks currently are 16/48 even if LPCM or TrueHD!
QUOTE]

I have been reading and I do understand that the powers that be are saying (Quietly) that the sound must be down sampled for security reasons. I think there is no logic behind that. If for some reason I wanted to record the audio tracks for some kind of pirating exploits couldn't I just buy a highend stand-alone BDplayer and record the analog outs? I could do it with my audio card. So what are they gaining?:doh:

[thedatman]

When it comes down to my hobby, I am not hesitate to spend few more bucks and do it right.

So to recap, PDVD needs to decode the uncompressed streams to the receiver using the analog cables from my HTPC and a better audio card like Auxentech X-Fi Prelude and choose the right option in such as full range speakers in Vista set up... and I will able to hear TrueHD audio from my non-TrueHD audio receiver, am I right?


I'm not in the market for a new audio card but the only one I have read about here is Auxentech X-Fi Prelude . I'm sure there are many more and how does it sound? It's not like you can go in and listen to it before you buy. I have an older Echo Mona http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/Discontinued/Mona/specs.php now I don't think anyone should buy this specifically for htpc. I owned it from a failed recording venture. What I don't like about the Auxentech is the minyjacks maybe I'm wrong but if you want good cables you are going to have to use adapters and in my mind that sucks. Or you can buy custom cables terminated rca to 1/8 inch stereo. I also owned 3 1m pair of http://transparentcable.com/products/audio/ultra_interconnects.html also from the business. nice write off. I use on the front 3 (L,C,R) all the way to the amp.

There are many audio cards set up like the Mona. So I would look around

[thedatman]

As I see it, the only thing analog audio has to offer is the two additional surround channels. Not to mention that most titles don't have decent surround encoding to begin with.

The problems that exist with analog are AC hum, RF interference from the computer, and signal loss before it gets to the receiver. I may be wrong, but most modern receivers probably convert the signal back to digital before playing it, thus degrading the signal even further.

IMHO, it's better to stick with 5.1 digital until we have a viable solution for 7.1 digital.


I get no hum from my htpc

[thedatman]

Certainly HDMI is the way to go, but, there's a reason the high end players add analog outputs. :) Analog has gotten a dirty name over the years, but, really, people need to calm down over the digital vs analog debate. A decent set of cables and analog will sound just fine. You're pumping out MUCH higher quality sound over analog than you are with downmixing it to DTS and SPDIF.


I totally agree with you on this. Actually analog can sound better than digital.I have read that even 24/96 is not as good as 1/2 inch tape.

[sondeterra]

Don't let this turn into an argument on the efficacy of technology I still own a Modifified dynaco tube Preamp a Stereo 70, 3 Mk4's, 5 Realistic Electrostat 2a's, 3 turntables,2 Dolby S cassette decks, and Pioneer 909 Reel to Reel, not to mention all the cassettes, reel to reel tapes, and 7000 lp's, gee why do I hate moving?:bang::bang::rock:

[thedatman]

Ok after some digging around I have some ideas and like to confirm with you guys. Please take a look for me and confirm since this will be my HTPC road map /project going forward.

1) With this card (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/audio/3992-auzen-hdmi-1-3-board-pics-info.html) we can able to get HDMI 1.3 audio signal out from our HTPC then out to any receiver takes LPCM audio stream for the true TrueHD audio. On the other hand we can remain the same for the video stream, DVI or HDMI out from our GC to monitor.

2) With this card (http://www.auzentech.com/site/products/x-fi_prelude.php), we can able to do the analogue way from our HTPC then out to the receiver that not any receiver takes LPCM audio stream for the true TrueHD audio. On the other hand we can remain the same for the video stream, DVI or HDMI out from our GC to monitor.

For the receiver front, we will choose something equivalent to analogue mode to accept PCM signals from the HTPC and let the PDVD sends the correct stream, not downmixing to each channel to receiver.

On a side note, I can't tell you guys how much I love my Theta Casablanca pre-amp and Krell Amp. It is so dynamic and powerful. I am trying to see how I can not get another receiver and keep the CB and playing all these TrueHD audio.

Many thanks!

hlkc before you start to throw the baby out with the bath water. Let me say this, I would bet your Theta Digital Casablanca probably sound better than any of the receivers that have been talked about here. I would not even be surprised if the Theta using the spdif is going to sound better than a $500 receiver usind hdmi 1.3. I was looking at the Theta Digital Casablanca 3 and it has 5.1 analog ins does yours?

If you have the analog ins than use them with the onboard card for now and go somewhere that you can look at many different audio card, hopefully somewhere you can return it if you don't like it and go with analogs. Unless you want to spend another 4 or 5 grand on a new processor. I'm surprised if they do not have an upgrade path.

Bryston does and they are in the same league. Like I said before Bryston does not even offer hdmi in the upgrade. They will but not until the standard is set. I can wait I have another 17 years of warranty left

[andy o]

I totally agree with you on this. Actually analog can sound better than digital.I have read that even 24/96 is not as good as 1/2 inch tape.

Eh? Not to sound confrontational in such a friendly forum (hope I'm not), but I've read a lot from "audiophile" publications and sites, and I think 90% of it is bunk, even in the most popular publications. This analog/digital thing seems to me a battle between romantics and cold-hearted geeks. The best way to assess reality is being as dispassionate and neutral as possible! Something akin to this has also raged for years now in digital photography. Digital formats, especially the current "high-res" technology (not talking about 1983 CD's) has far surpassed analog, in my opinion.

Anyway, that said, I also agree with Samuri that in current circumstances analog audio has very good potential compared to S/PDIF, but you do need a nice card and also (I'm about to test how important these are - see below) good interconnects. The speaker wire, on the other hand can be cheap as long as it's short/thick enough. Don't buy into the expensive speaker cable!


---------------------------------
About my interconnects (hope this helps someone, go and build yours too!):

I'm about to build interconnects (got 100ft of Belden 1505f cable and Canare RCA connectors). The cost of a 6-ft stereo RCA cable would amount to about 21 bucks, which is not too shabby considering that it's high-quality coaxial cable, yada yada... I've been using the multichannel cables that came with my Cambridge Soundworks 6.1 system and my Creative DDTS-100 decoder I bought bundled with them. From HTPC 5.1 analog to switch, from switch to sub/sat speakers (analog), and from big PC S/PDIF to decoder, then to switch then to speakers. The final cable run for the HTPC was pretty long and it's a mess of other cables and AC plugs underneath the table. But it wasn't that bad.

I recently put those speakers to bed and got 4 Definitive Tech Studio Monitor 350's and a DefTech ProCenter 1000 (they're on the desk). I don't have a receiver but I bought cheap and weak, but very clean, Sonic Impact amps, that put out about 6W of clean sound at 8 Ohm. With 90dB SPL and at about 70cm from the speakers, I'm just fine. Now I notice interference hum! I have to turn down the volume on the amps to get rid of it, and I still can hear very loudly the sounds put out by the Asus Xonar DX I got in the HTPC, but when I connect my iPod on its dock, I have to turn up the volume in the amps, and I can hear the hum. I didn't hear any hum when connecting the ipod dock directly to the amp with shorter higher-quality cables. The amps are very clean.

So, long story short, I'm gonna replace the cheap interconnects and hopefully it will give me a measurable difference. One downside is that at the ends I'm gonna have to use many converters since none of the ends take RCA! I am also in the process of rebuilding my HTPC, and I just got an Asus P5E-VM HDMI. Now I'm gonna have to get an HDMI receiver! I'm thinking won't need a video card for that, since I also grabbed an E8400, and I say acceleration schmacceleration!

[andy o]

I'm not in the market for a new audio card but the only one I have read about here is Auxentech X-Fi Prelude . I'm sure there are many more and how does it sound? It's not like you can go in and listen to it before you buy. I have an older Echo Mona http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/Discontinued/Mona/specs.php now I don't think anyone should buy this specifically for htpc. I owned it from a failed recording venture. What I don't like about the Auxentech is the minyjacks maybe I'm wrong but if you want good cables you are going to have to use adapters and in my mind that sucks. Or you can buy custom cables terminated rca to 1/8 inch stereo. I also owned 3 1m pair of http://transparentcable.com/products/audio/ultra_interconnects.html also from the business. nice write off. I use on the front 3 (L,C,R) all the way to the amp.

There are many audio cards set up like the Mona. So I would look around

I am probably gonna get flak for saying this, but Transparent are fairly well-known purveyors of snake-oil. No broadcast professionals that I know of use those cables (admittedly I don't know many, but still :D). Their claims and marketing (and therefore prices) are extraordinary, and yet they run away as quickly as possible from the curse words "blind" and "test", especially when put together in that particular order.

In any case, I also don't think good-enough quality RCA adapters are much of a problem for audio, since the interference happens along the length of the cable. As long as it provides a solid connection, I don't think it will make a difference.

[Jong]

Actually analog can sound better than digital.I have read that even 24/96 is not as good as 1/2 inch tape.Of course this is academic as the audio on a Blu-ray disc IS digital there is no "all analogue" option.

The question is where it gets converted from digital to analogue - on the PC or in the amp. It comes down to which device has the better digital to analogue converters and, if we choose to convert to analogue on the PC, ensuring there is no signal loss in the connectors and cables.

[w1seman]

Um, no. The sound quality is most DEFINITELY higher for me by using analog than SPDIF. It's not even a contest. LPCM vs heavily compressed DD or DTS. Yea, no, sorry. :)



My Yamaha simply passes through the 6 channel input. It does ZERO processing on it at all. I have no problem with hum or interference of any kind. Signal loss, probably, but, I'll take the very minor signal loss vs much higher quality sound.



Couldn't disagree with you more on this one.

Analog Out via a high-end Soundcard definitely sounds way better than any SPDIF-out. I couldn't agree more on SamuriHL's opinion/statement. I even go further and doubt that when full-HDMI Support will be available any sub-3K Euro Receiver will ever match the sound of my M-Audio Delta 1010!

[kdssrugby]

HI hlkc, sorry for taking so long to reply, I ve been studying for exams. You understand correctly. Where does the X-FI prelude fit it? What happens is you buy that card and use it like a normal sound card. You then buy the extension card and place it in the slot next to it and connect it by a cable. The HDMI extension card requires the X-FI prelude to work. You cannot use it by itself.

[kdssrugby]

All I can say is wow, I leave for like 6 hours to study and come back and find 3 more pages, its crazy. To jump into the analog/digital debate, I agree with Jong. True HD and DTS HD MA are both digital formats so I personally would prefer to transmit them digitally. On the other hand I lke analog because it is relatively cheap (don t have to buy the extension card, the prelude etc). If they had full res analog audio I would likely use that instead of HDMI, purely for cost reasons.

Out of Curiosity, a number of you have been saying that your receivers would sound as good/better with analog than cheaper ones with HDMI. Obviously I m not going to go and buy a Marantz reciever or anything, but how would a Onkyo 605 compare?

[thedatman]

I am probably gonna get flak for saying this, but Transparent are fairly well-known purveyors of snake-oil. No broadcast professionals that I know of use those cables (admittedly I don't know many, but still :D). Their claims and marketing (and therefore prices) are extraordinary, and yet they run away as quickly as possible from the curse words "blind" and "test", especially when put together in that particular order.

In any case, I also don't think good-enough quality RCA adapters are much of a problem for audio, since the interference happens along the length of the cable. As long as it provides a solid connection, I don't think it will make a difference.

why would a broadcast professional use them? I agree that they would hardly be worth the money except at that time I wrote it all off but I CLEARLY could hear improvements. These type of improvement are very subtle I don't think any action packed film would benefit much from them. A film with a good music score, I believe they do.

[thedatman]

Analog Out via a high-end Soundcard definitely sounds way better than any SPDIF-out. I couldn't agree more on SamuriHL's opinion/statement. I even go further and doubt that when full-HDMI Support will be available any sub-3K Euro Receiver will ever match the sound of my M-Audio Delta 1010!

well we will never know:disagree:

[thedatman]

All I can say is wow, I leave for like 6 hours to study and come back and find 3 more pages, its crazy. To jump into the analog/digital debate, I agree with Jong. True HD and DTS HD MA are both digital formats so I personally would prefer to transmit them digitally. On the other hand I lke analog because it is relatively cheap (don t have to buy the extension card, the prelude etc). If they had full res analog audio I would likely use that instead of HDMI, purely for cost reasons.

Out of Curiosity, a number of you have been saying that your receivers would sound as good/better with analog than cheaper ones with HDMI. Obviously I m not going to go and buy a Marantz reciever or anything, but how would a Onkyo 605 compare?

What I was saying if you had already purchased a $3-5,000 pre-amp / processor it would sound better than a $500 receiver that has hdmi 1.3. Of coarse we will never know for sure. No way to test. So if you can only afford a $500 receiver buy it and enjoy it do all the tweaking you can afford but if you already own a expensive highend unit don't throw it out because it has no hdmi 1.3 input. At least not till the format is actually in place and all products are on the market. Besides most films are in 16/48 anyhow for those that are what you have available today is as good as it's going to get.

[andy o]

why would a broadcast professional use them?

I don't think we should get into a discussion over cable efficacy here (we'll just have to disagree:disagree:, and sorry for having brought it up), but I'll just answer this one. It's simply because professional broadcast environments are the most taxing for equipment and cables. Very long runs as usually done there reveal the weaknesses of the cables more readily, and they have actual engineers that get hired and paid for knowing this stuff. No doubt they need the best of the best, but the cables they use (Belden and Canare are mentioned time and again) are far from the price per ft than even Monster, let alone Transparent or Pear.

By the way, I do like some Monster cables, most if not all of them have good build quality. I am not partial to much of the flak they get for being overpriced. Only some of them are too overpriced I think.

[SamuriHL]

I totally agree with you on this. Actually analog can sound better than digital.I have read that even 24/96 is not as good as 1/2 inch tape.

That's probably quite accurate. A lot of people still prefer the life like sound of vinyl vs the robotic lifeless sound of CD. Analog is not the most horrible thing in the world. It just depends on the application and a set of variables. Digital removes a lot of those variables but not all. And it's not perfect, either. Bandwidth limitations exist in the digital world but not so much in the analog one. Ah well, to each their own. If they're happy with their solution, it's all good.

[roog]

HI hlkc, sorry for taking so long to reply, I ve been studying for exams. You understand correctly. Where does the X-FI prelude fit it? What happens is you buy that card and use it like a normal sound card. You then buy the extension card and place it in the slot next to it and connect it by a cable. The HDMI extension card requires the X-FI prelude to work. You cannot use it by itself.

I entered a support ticket with Auzentech asking if the X-Tension had to be installed in a slot adjacent to the Prelude and they said the cable would be long enough to install it in a non-adjacent slot. In my system I need to install Prelude in the slot to the right of a two slot PCI-Express video card and the X-Tension in the slot to the left with the cable crossing over the video card.

If you look at the X-Tension card (http://www.audiojunkies.com/blog/1054/auzentech-hdmi-xtension-soundcard) the part that plugs into the slot is very short, and doesn't seem to have any electrical connections on it, so I suspect that it is only used to align and support the card. Hopefully it is positioned so it can be plugged into either a PCI or a PCI-Exprsss slot.

[SamuriHL]

All I can say is wow, I leave for like 6 hours to study and come back and find 3 more pages, its crazy. To jump into the analog/digital debate, I agree with Jong. True HD and DTS HD MA are both digital formats so I personally would prefer to transmit them digitally. On the other hand I lke analog because it is relatively cheap (don t have to buy the extension card, the prelude etc). If they had full res analog audio I would likely use that instead of HDMI, purely for cost reasons.

Out of Curiosity, a number of you have been saying that your receivers would sound as good/better with analog than cheaper ones with HDMI. Obviously I m not going to go and buy a Marantz reciever or anything, but how would a Onkyo 605 compare?

That's one of the receivers I'm looking at. I think it would sound really good for a midrange/lower cost solution. It has 2 HDMI ports and from all I've read about it sounds really good. Probably much better than my current yamaha. Oh, and just to throw fuel on the analog/digital fire...at some point in the chain, even if you're "all digital" you're still getting analog. :D Last I knew speakers don't particularly do well with a digital signal. :) In any case, analog is fine. HDMI is also decent. All I want is the ability to output the highest quality sound I can get. That's it. :)

[thedatman]

I don't think we should get into a discussion over cable efficacy here (we'll just have to disagree:disagree:, and sorry for having brought it up), but I'll just answer this one. It's simply because professional broadcast environments are the most taxing for equipment and cables. Very long runs as usually done there reveal the weaknesses of the cables more readily, and they have actual engineers that get hired and paid for knowing this stuff. No doubt they need the best of the best, but the cables they use (Belden and Canare are mentioned time and again) are far from the price per ft than even Monster, let alone Transparent or Pear.

By the way, I do like some Monster cables, most if not all of them have good build quality. I am not partial to much of the flak they get for being overpriced. Only some of them are too overpriced I think.

We are talking about 2 different markets. I doubt there has ever been a test comparing Belden and Canare and companies like Transparent. No broadcast firm would ever think of spending that kind of money on cables.

In a high-end stereo/home theater setting you can hear improvements. Are they worth the money? Probably not.

I don't care for Monster cable but it's not their fault. It's because they stole the whole show. It's the only name known by 99% of the people, kinda like Bose. People that go to Best buy and get a $30 cable it's not going to sound any better than the ones that came with the equipment. The reason to buy a $30 cable is because it's constructed better and will have fewer problems over the years.

[thedatman]

That's probably quite accurate. A lot of people still prefer the life like sound of vinyl vs the robotic lifeless sound of CD. Analog is not the most horrible thing in the world. It just depends on the application and a set of variables. Digital removes a lot of those variables but not all. And it's not perfect, either. Bandwidth limitations exist in the digital world but not so much in the analog one. Ah well, to each their own. If they're happy with their solution, it's all good.



A guy once explained to me a basic analogy of digital sound . He said, " analog sound is like a wave infinitely smooth. Digital, say CDs take that same wave instead of being smooth it would have 44.1 thousand steps. In 24/96 you would have 96 thousand steps. I never really understood the difference between 16 and 24 bit. The step analogy make since to me perhaps over simplified

[roog]

That's probably quite accurate. A lot of people still prefer the life like sound of vinyl vs the robotic lifeless sound of CD. Analog is not the most horrible thing in the world. It just depends on the application and a set of variables. Digital removes a lot of those variables but not all. And it's not perfect, either. Bandwidth limitations exist in the digital world but not so much in the analog one. Ah well, to each their own. If they're happy with their solution, it's all good.

In the past the analog argument was valid but I don't think this is the case with the digital technology used now. The early digital receivers did not have very good digital-to-analog converters so I think this was the problem. Some current receivers even have a mode that mimics the sound of vinyl if you prefer it.

I grew up during the vinyl age and never enjoyed the pops and clicks or the hum and noise when playing a low volume track. How many people even have a turntable connected to their receivers now? The newer turntables even convert the analog signal to digital for output to a computer via usb.

[SamuriHL]

A guy once explained to me a basic analogy of digital sound . He said, " analog sound is like a wave infinitely smooth. Digital, say CDs take that same wave instead of being smooth it would have 44.1 thousand steps. In 24/96 you would have 96 thousand steps. I never really understood the difference between 16 and 24 bit. The step analogy make since to me perhaps over simplified

Good analogy. Analog gives you the full stream. Digital gives you a sampling. hahaha. :) The higher the bitrate and the more samples you take, the closer digital is going to sound to the full stream. But it'll never truly reproduce the full stream as data will be lost. It's the difference between going to a concert and listening to it on CD.

[andy o]

The reason to buy a $30 cable is because it's constructed better and will have fewer problems over the years.

Yes, I agree with that (still disagree about Transparent though:D, but it'd make a long discussion mostly pointless here), and that's the reason I like some of them. The higher-end ones though, I can see why people give them a hard time.

There was a much-publicized comparison between some Monster speaker wire and a coat-hanger, and they were ridiculed badly, but in all fairness, a coat-hanger will probably rust easier, and it's pretty hard to run all the way to the surrounds!

[SamuriHL]

In the past the analog argument was valid but I don't think this is the case with the digital technology used now. The early digital receivers did not have very good digital-to-analog converters so I think this was the problem. Some current receivers even have a mode that mimics the sound of vinyl if you prefer it.

I grew up during the vinyl age and never enjoyed the pops and clicks or the hum and noise when playing a low volume track. How many people even have a turntable connected to their receivers now? The newer turntables even convert the analog signal to digital for output to a computer via usb.

Therein lies the problem. Digital is not the end all be all of sound. There is one thing it does well...reproduces the exact same sound faithfully. But as I said, it's a sampling of the original. There's simply not enough bandwidth to record every single bit of audio. At 96 you're getting a very high sampling rate and that's good. But analog isn't sampled.

Now, in relation to what we're talking about in this thread, it makes no difference at all. The streams we're talking about are digital. At some point before they are played on the speakers, they are converted back to analog. Where best that happens is a matter of opinion. If you have a very nice high end receiver, doing it there might make sense. Maybe. If you have a high end sound card, letting it output the analog channels might make sense.

In any case, this is getting WAY off topic with this analog vs digital debate and is simply a matter of opinion. In the end you have to decide what it is you want for audio quality. Then you have to decide what method to use to acquire it. Whether it's HDMI or analog output or SPDIF, if the sound quality is something you're happy with, the rest of this discussion is pointless.

[thedatman]

Good analogy. Analog gives you the full stream. Digital gives you a sampling. hahaha. :) The higher the bitrate and the more samples you take, the closer digital is going to sound to the full stream. But it'll never truly reproduce the full stream as data will be lost. It's the difference between going to a concert and listening to it on CD.

unless you are talking about an Aerosmith concert from the late 70s

[SamuriHL]

unless you are talking about an Aerosmith concert from the late 70s

LOL. I wasn't really thinking rock and roll concert, but, sure. :) I was thinking a full orchestra, actually. Hearing it live and hearing it sampled are different experiences. Both can be enjoyed, certainly, but they are not equal.

[thedatman]

LOL. I wasn't really thinking rock and roll concert, but, sure. :) I was thinking a full orchestra, actually. Hearing it live and hearing it sampled are different experiences. Both can be enjoyed, certainly, but they are not equal.

I knew that but I couldn't help myself

[andy o]

Good analogy. Analog gives you the full stream. Digital gives you a sampling. hahaha. :) The higher the bitrate and the more samples you take, the closer digital is going to sound to the full stream. But it'll never truly reproduce the full stream as data will be lost. It's the difference between going to a concert and listening to it on CD.

It seems to me that most modern audio consoles would be using DSPs instead of analog EQ, so a concert's audio is probably digitized somewhere along the way.

Anyway, when nyquist frequency goes a fair bit higher than audible frequency, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway. You can "draw" an analog wave that has "perfect" resolution, but it's completely moot if you (or by today's best standards, even dogs) can't hear any of it.

The thing about high-res audio is not that it produces inaudible high-frequency sound that somehow makes the music "richer" or something like that, like many people think (I used to too). When Nyquist is too close to the audible range (as in 22050Hz for a CD) the anti-aliasing filters needed had to be pretty sharp (now with high-res mastering it's much better), so they would screw phase information, and that was the main audible problem back in the day.

I still agree that given current conditions analog has better potential than S/PDIF though.

[roog]

With the exception of some high-end sound cards, I doubt that the digital-to-analog converters are better than those used by current digital receivers. Also, I don't think that most current receivers pass-through the analog signals. I may be wrong about this, but I think they convert the analog signals to digital then back to analog. So, unless you have analog only amplifiers, when you use the analog outputs from a sound card with a digital receiver, you go from digital to analog, then analog to digital, then back to analog again. Each time the signals are converted you probably lose some fidelity. With digital pass-through from the sound card to the receiver, you only convert to analog once. IMHO, for most people, this is the best way to go.

[thedatman]

With the exception of some high-end sound cards, I doubt that the digital-to-analog converters are better than those used by current digital receivers. Also, I don't think that most current receivers pass-through the analog signals. I may be wrong about this, but I think they convert the analog signals to digital then back to analog. So, unless you have analog only amplifiers, when you use the analog outputs from a sound card with a digital receiver, you go from digital to analog, then analog to digital, then back to analog again. Each time the signals are converted you probably lose some fidelity. With digital pass-through from the sound card to the receiver, you only convert to analog once. IMHO, for most people, this is the best way to go.


Mine does it's called "5.1 analog bypass "

http://bryston.ca/sp2_m.html

[digitalfreak]

A word of caution - Don't assume that the Azunetech extension board will support TrueHD / DTS MA bitstreaming. There's a thread about it over at AVSForum, and the folks from Azunetech will only commit to LPCM output.

Edit: Here's the AVSForum link (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12874335#post12874335)

[thedatman]

A word of caution - Don't assume that the Azunetech extension board will support TrueHD / DTS MA bitstreaming. There's a thread about it over at AVSForum, and the folks from Azunetech will only commit to LPCM output.

Edit: Here's the AVSForum link (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12874335#post12874335)


that is my point. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water until ALL products are on the market

[SamuriHL]

It seems to me that most modern audio consoles would be using DSPs instead of analog EQ, so a concert's audio is probably digitized somewhere along the way.

Anyway, when nyquist frequency goes a fair bit higher than audible frequency, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway. You can "draw" an analog wave that has "perfect" resolution, but it's completely moot if you (or by today's best standards, even dogs) can't hear any of it.

The thing about high-res audio is not that it produces inaudible high-frequency sound that somehow makes the music "richer" or something like that, like many people think (I used to too). When Nyquist is too close to the audible range (as in 22050Hz for a CD) the anti-aliasing filters needed had to be pretty sharp (now with high-res mastering it's much better), so they would screw phase information, and that was the main audible problem back in the day.

I still agree that given current conditions analog has better potential than S/PDIF though.

Very true. Digital can certainly create a very compelling experience and I don't mean to take away from that at all. I'm just trying to counter the perception that digital is somehow always better than analog when clearly it's not so cut and dried. HD audio has certainly raised the bar pretty high as far as a good reproduction of the original sound goes. As long as I can somehow reproduce that as faithfully as possible on my speakers I'm happy. Whether it's a digital pipeline to the receiver or analog inputs I really couldn't care less as long as the end result is something I can live with. Currently, in my situation, that is analog.

[SamuriHL]

With the exception of some high-end sound cards, I doubt that the digital-to-analog converters are better than those used by current digital receivers. Also, I don't think that most current receivers pass-through the analog signals. I may be wrong about this, but I think they convert the analog signals to digital then back to analog. So, unless you have analog only amplifiers, when you use the analog outputs from a sound card with a digital receiver, you go from digital to analog, then analog to digital, then back to analog again. Each time the signals are converted you probably lose some fidelity. With digital pass-through from the sound card to the receiver, you only convert to analog once. IMHO, for most people, this is the best way to go.

Mine does, too. No processing at all of the analog input. It's straight pass through to the speakers.

[SamuriHL]

A word of caution - Don't assume that the Azunetech extension board will support TrueHD / DTS MA bitstreaming. There's a thread about it over at AVSForum, and the folks from Azunetech will only commit to LPCM output.

Edit: Here's the AVSForum link (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12874335#post12874335)

This is also why I haven't committed to buying an Auzentech yet. The cost, the fact that the HDMI expansion card will take another slot (which I don't have in my HTPC), and the fact that we don't have ANY idea if it'll truly work the way we want. My advice is that if you're looking for HDMI from the HTPC->receiver then hold off until everything is out, as thedatman is saying. Otherwise you'll potentially end up with something you aren't happy with and doesn't work the way you want.

[roog]

Mine does it's called "5.1 analog bypass "

http://bryston.ca/sp2_m.html

It turns out that most receivers probably have this capability, but the average user won't know how to use it. I think that my argument about the digital-to-analog converter quality still applies. Anyway, I know that there will still be some analog diehards, but when HDMI audio is fully implemented on PCs, they will be the only ones still using analog.

[SamuriHL]

It turns out that most receivers probably have this capability, but the average user won't know how to use it. I think that my argument about the digital-to-analog converter quality still applies. Anyway, I know that there will still be some analog diehards, but when HDMI audio is fully implemented on PCs, they will be the only ones still using analog.

Not me. As soon as I get all the pieces in place I'll go HDMI and use LPCM. However, CURRENTLY analog is the best sound I can get from my equipment which is why I use it. My only point on this analog vs digital "debate" is that far too many people equate digital to ALWAYS being superior to analog which is not the case. That's the only real point I was trying to make. HDMI has enough bandwidth to send an LPCM stream to a receiver. I'm good with that. It eliminates some of the drawbacks of analog (cable length, quality, etc). But SPDIF vs analog on HD audio tracks isn't even a question in my book.

[andy o]

I don't like how Auzentech switched from C-Media to X-Fi. I don't know how much difference it makes in games, but the HTPC features are far better in my opinion in the X-Meridian. The Creative X-Fi effects, I don't care for at all. Their version of Dolby Headphone+DPLII sucks greatly. I don't trust them too much after that fiasco, especially when they said it was "lack of chip availability" when several others were and are still using the very same chipset. If anything, they should have just kept the X-Meridian in the line, and added the X-Fi Prelude. That would have made a killer line that nobody else had. My guess is Creative told them to drop the X-Meridian (and all but one of the Dolby features) if they wanted X-Fi.

Anyway, I think the Asus cards are just better as HTPC cards, and who knows, Asus's pseudo-emulation of EAX 5.0 may be worth something for games.

[thedatman]

It turns out that most receivers probably have this capability, but the average user won't know how to use it. I think that my argument about the digital-to-analog converter quality still applies. Anyway, I know that there will still be some analog diehards, but when HDMI audio is fully implemented on PCs, they will be the only ones still using analog.

Only because I spent way to much money on this baby. I'm not getting rid of it till the warranty runs out. Besides someday they will have an upgrade to hdmi 1.3 or what ever the final one is.

and if that's a big if cyberlink does start encrypting the analog outs to be sent to a audio card capable of decrypting the analog at that point perhaps slysoft can help us out and us analog guys won't be left behind.

just like we paid extra for the HD option on anydvd I'm sure many would gladly pay for that too.

[roog]

Not me. As soon as I get all the pieces in place I'll go HDMI and use LPCM. However, CURRENTLY analog is the best sound I can get from my equipment which is why I use it. My only point on this analog vs digital "debate" is that far too many people equate digital to ALWAYS being superior to analog which is not the case. That's the only real point I was trying to make. HDMI has enough bandwidth to send an LPCM stream to a receiver. I'm good with that. It eliminates some of the drawbacks of analog (cable length, quality, etc). But SPDIF vs analog on HD audio tracks isn't even a question in my book.

I have no problems with your approach. By HDMI being fully implemented on PCs, I meant the use of LPCM as well. Right now, you can only get S/PDIF through HDMI on PCs. My real rub is the myth that analog is always better than digital.

From the specs that I've seen, it looks like HDAudio on PCs might have enough bandwidth for 8 channel LPCM. However, it remains to be implemented in a way that the output could be routed through HDMI. If a way could be devised to make it work, this would definitely be the lowest cost way to provide full bandwidth 8 channel audio through HDMI.

[roog]

Only because I spent way to much money on this baby. I'm not getting rid of it till the warranty runs out. Besides someday they will have an upgrade to hdmi 1.3 or what ever the final one is.

and if that's a big if cyberlink does start encrypting the analog outs to be sent to a audio card capable of decrypting the analog at that point perhaps slysoft can help us out and us analog guys won't be left behind.

just like we paid extra for the HD option on anydvd I'm sure many would gladly pay for that too.

Your in for a long wait. It looks like your amp has a 20 year warranty. By that time, who knows what the standard will be?

[SamuriHL]

I have no problems with your approach. By HDMI being fully implemented on PCs, I meant the use of LPCM as well. Right now, you can only get S/PDIF through HDMI on PCs. My real rub is the myth that analog is always better than digital.

From the specs that I've seen, it looks like HDAudio on PCs might have enough bandwidth for 8 channel LPCM. However, it remains to be implemented in a way that the output could be routed through HDMI. If a way could be devised to make it work, this would definitely be the lowest cost way to provide full bandwidth 8 channel audio through HDMI.

Indeed. That would be pretty sweet. For now I may end up picking up that Onkyo 576 receiver when it comes out and hooking up my PS3 through it. That would certainly give me the absolute best sound quality I'm going to get. I'd VERY much like to get my HTPC up to that level of sound, though, so, I really do hope they get us a solution this summer. Of course, I'm going to have to pick up another couple of speakers if I get the Onkyo as I only have 5.1 sound right now. Darn. :D

[roog]

Indeed. That would be pretty sweet. For now I may end up picking up that Onkyo 576 receiver when it comes out and hooking up my PS3 through it. That would certainly give me the absolute best sound quality I'm going to get. I'd VERY much like to get my HTPC up to that level of sound, though, so, I really do hope they get us a solution this summer. Of course, I'm going to have to pick up another couple of speakers if I get the Onkyo as I only have 5.1 sound right now. Darn. :D

The Onkyo 576 looks really nice for the price but unless you have some really efficient speakers, in my experience, 80 watts per channel is not enough to get the volume level I want.

[SamuriHL]

The Onkyo 576 looks really nice for the price but unless you have some really efficient speakers, in my experience, 80 watts per channel is not enough to get the volume level I want.

It's only 80? Crap. That won't do with my speakers. The yamaha can drive these things through the roof. The 605 is 90 which would probably be ok. And I just looked on Amazon...they're blowing out the Onkyo's right now. 350 bucks for the 605. TEMPTING....SOOOO tempting.

[SamuriHL]

OH FRACK ME! :D

http://www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=TX-SR606&class=Receiver&p=i

::MAJOR DROOL:: I think my heart just broke. :D

[frg]

A guy once explained to me a basic analogy of digital sound . He said, " analog sound is like a wave infinitely smooth. Digital, say CDs take that same wave instead of being smooth it would have 44.1 thousand steps. In 24/96 you would have 96 thousand steps. I never really understood the difference between 16 and 24 bit. The step analogy make since to me perhaps over simplified
About the difference between 16 and 24 bit, it is exactly like with a picture.

On your PC, try switching the Color Quality in the Display Properties of your Monitor, from 32 to 16 bits, and you will notice that the color palette will be drastically reduced.

Well it's the same with sound!

Using more bits allows to define with more nuance a sound.

You will notice f.i. that dialogues become more intellligible, when encoded with 24 bit instead of 16.

To make it short:
- Frequency means definition, like 1024x768 or 1920x1080 for a picture.
- Bit allocation means nuance, like 16 bit or 32 bit colors for a picture.

Hope this helps you... ;)

[frg]

I have no problems with your approach. By HDMI being fully implemented on PCs, I meant the use of LPCM as well. Right now, you can only get S/PDIF through HDMI on PCs. My real rub is the myth that analog is always better than digital.

From the specs that I've seen, it looks like HDAudio on PCs might have enough bandwidth for 8 channel LPCM. However, it remains to be implemented in a way that the output could be routed through HDMI. If a way could be devised to make it work, this would definitely be the lowest cost way to provide full bandwidth 8 channel audio through HDMI.
By the way, unzipping DTHD or DTS-MA inside the HTPC, would be the only right way to send HD soundtracks to an amplifier!

If HD soundtracks are decoded inside the amplifier, it will be impossible to mix a second soundtrack (from a PiP comment f.i., like in Resident Evil: Extinction).
In fact this could be only used when watching the bare movie (i.e. with no interactivity at all).

When sending LPCM to your amplifier (which only needs to be HDMI 1.1), the only problem will be that you won't ever see the Dolby or the DTS logo light on in your [last generation, HMI 1.3, more expensive ;)] amp's display.

How frustrating! :D

[roog]

OH FRACK ME! :D

http://www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=TX-SR606&class=Receiver&p=i

::MAJOR DROOL:: I think my heart just broke. :D

I'd go for the 805. Plenty of power (130W), THX2 ultra, and better DACs. You should be able to find it at a higher discount than the lower price models. The only thing I don't like is it only has 3 HDMI inputs. I like having 4 for PC, PS3, XBOX 360, and Cable. I could make out with 3 if I used Component Video for the 360 but I hate the way they implemented the S/PDIF connector.

[SamuriHL]

I'd go for the 805. Plenty of power (130W), THX2 ultra, and better DACs. You should be able to find it at a higher discount than the lower price models. The only thing I don't like is it only has 3 HDMI inputs. I like having 4 for PC, PS3, XBOX 360, and Cable. I could make out with 3 if I used Component Video for the 360 but I hate the way they implemented the S/PDIF connector.

I'd have to look at the price. That's going to be over 500 bucks I think. I'm not sure my budget will allow that any time soon. I'm not even sure I can swing 500 at the moment.

[kdssrugby]

I was perusing the AVS forums lately, and I ve been noticing a lot of DTS HD MA tracks are being reported to have loud pops. Some are: Golden Compass, AVP:Requiem, the Fly and a number of others. I curious if anyone knows if this is a hardware issue or an encoding issue. It makes me leary to want to play those tracks (once we have DTS HD MA capability) and risk my speakers.

[roog]

If HD soundtracks are decoded inside the amplifier, it will be impossible to mix a second soundtrack (from a PiP comment f.i., like in Resident Evil: Extinction).


Samuri says he's done PIP using LPCM. Look at his earlier posts.

[SamuriHL]

Samuri says he's done PIP using LPCM. Look at his earlier posts.

Right, and that's being done by the player not the amplifier. LPCM is the only way to mix audio streams together. Bitstreaming doesn't allow for that. Bitstreaming is the method used to send a TrueHD/DTS-HD MA/etc track directly to the receiver for it to decode. Using that method, no PIP audio.

[hlkc]

hlkc before you start to throw the baby out with the bath water. Let me say this, I would bet your Theta Digital Casablanca probably sound better than any of the receivers that have been talked about here. I would not even be surprised if the Theta using the spdif is going to sound better than a $500 receiver usind hdmi 1.3. I was looking at the Theta Digital Casablanca 3 and it has 5.1 analog ins does yours?

If you have the analog ins than use them with the onboard card for now and go somewhere that you can look at many different audio card, hopefully somewhere you can return it if you don't like it and go with analogs. Unless you want to spend another 4 or 5 grand on a new processor. I'm surprised if they do not have an upgrade path.

Bryston does and they are in the same league. Like I said before Bryston does not even offer hdmi in the upgrade. They will but not until the standard is set. I can wait I have another 17 years of warranty left

Thank you for your compliment!!!

This is bother me the MOST!!! I can't tell you how much I love my Casablanca. If it comes down to I must have other receiver to do all these TrueHD Audio, I might even want to do that before get rid of my CB. Btw, Theta will have the upgrade path to HDMI 1.3 for CB in Sep/Oct but I have the feeling it will cost few thousands of dollars :( That's why I am trying to go around and see what I can do... They offer something called 6 shooter today and with that I can able to do the analog input for all 6 channels instead of just 2 now. I am thinking to do that now.

[hlkc]

Of course this is academic as the audio on a Blu-ray disc IS digital there is no "all analogue" option.

The question is where it gets converted from digital to analogue - on the PC or in the amp. It comes down to which device has the better digital to analogue converters and, if we choose to convert to analogue on the PC, ensuring there is no signal loss in the connectors and cables.

I can't agree more about your statement :agree:

[hlkc]

HI hlkc, sorry for taking so long to reply, I ve been studying for exams. You understand correctly. Where does the X-FI prelude fit it? What happens is you buy that card and use it like a normal sound card. You then buy the extension card and place it in the slot next to it and connect it by a cable. The HDMI extension card requires the X-FI prelude to work. You cannot use it by itself.

Actually I just get off a 20 mins call with Auzentech and I got more info now.

1) They are working on a card that with combine X-Fi and X-tension all-in-one in Q3. If you have X-Fi now, you can just get the X-tension. If you don't like me, just wait and get this card and save us a slot.

2) Press release is coming out Q2. No above products we talked here will be release until Q3, the earliest :(

3) Once we have the combo, X-Fi and X-tension then we can just HDMI 1.3 out to TrueHD receiver and we will able to have TrueHD audio like today DTS and DD...

[hlkc]

What I was saying if you had already purchased a $3-5,000 pre-amp / processor it would sound better than a $500 receiver that has hdmi 1.3. Of coarse we will never know for sure. No way to test. So if you can only afford a $500 receiver buy it and enjoy it do all the tweaking you can afford but if you already own a expensive highend unit don't throw it out because it has no hdmi 1.3 input. At least not till the format is actually in place and all products are on the market. Besides most films are in 16/48 anyhow for those that are what you have available today is as good as it's going to get.

Yup, my sytem cost $10K+ and I sure not ready to throw it out to window for a receiver just to have TrueHD logo on it.

I don't meant o show off but here is my system (http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vhome&1177540473&view) and I love it every min from 2 channel iTune playback to 5.1 PDVD BD playback.

[kdssrugby]

Thanks for the update HLKC. I don thave that much room in my case so a 1 card solution would be the best.I update The FAQ on the first page.
And man, that is some crazy hardware you got.I m only a poor university student, so i only have "crappy" Harmon Kardon HKTS 15's. 1000watt 5.1, Sharp 42 lcd and an Onkyo 605.

[hlkc]

A word of caution - Don't assume that the Azunetech extension board will support TrueHD / DTS MA bitstreaming. There's a thread about it over at AVSForum, and the folks from Azunetech will only commit to LPCM output.

Edit: Here's the AVSForum link (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12874335#post12874335)

Yes, when I just on the phone with them, they sounded like he won't or they are still working on that.

[hlkc]

Thanks for the update HLKC. I don thave that much room in my case so a 1 card solution would be the best.I update The FAQ on the first page.
And man, that is some crazy hardware you got.I m only a poor university student, so i only have "crappy" Harmon Kardon HKTS 15's. 1000watt 5.1, Sharp 42 lcd and an Onkyo 605.

Thank you for the update and compliment. I sure don't have your set up when I was in college 20+ years ago ;)

[kdssrugby]

Thanks for the link digital freak, it definitely seems like LPCM is the only thing available at the moment (not that I am complaining). Though I would be curious to see if they include bitstreaming on a standalone card or if they ll try to just cash in and but the same tech on a single board.

[kdssrugby]

Well I don t drink and I don t have a girlfriend so I don t have anything else to spend my money on.(plus you didn t have ebay back then) I just hope in 20 years i have such high quality speakers and a reciever as you (not likely since I m probably going to be a teacher)

[thedatman]

Thanks for the update HLKC. I don thave that much room in my case so a 1 card solution would be the best.I update The FAQ on the first page.
And man, that is some crazy hardware you got.I m only a poor university student, so i only have "crappy" Harmon Kardon HKTS 15's. 1000watt 5.1, Sharp 42 lcd and an Onkyo 605.

Mine is also well up in that range. Perhaps not my smartest purchase. From single days. I don't regret it one minute but if I had it to do all over again I'd go for the Onkyo 805 and get a $5000 mountainbike and put the rest in the bank.

[kdssrugby]

Ya, I some times have buyers remorse looking at my shelf of hi-def movies, especially the 75 or so HD DVDS. I also maybe 80 or so Blu-rays, but I guess you only live once. Out of curiosity, datman, have you seen the Italian Job remake? Iwas wondering if your speaker setup was like Seth Greens in that movie ;)

[thedatman]

Ya, I some times have buyers remorse looking at my shelf of hi-def movies, especially the 75 or so HD DVDS. I also maybe 80 or so Blu-rays, but I guess you only live once. Out of curiosity, datman, have you seen the Italian Job remake? Iwas wondering if your speaker setup was like Seth Greens in that movie ;)


no I haven't but it's on my list now when I get it I'll let you know. I'm betting mine is far more humble.

I'm like way old school when it come to surround my 1st good processor was a Fosgate dsl 2 and it was $1200 in 91. Then I had a Fosgate 3a. Anyone go back that far?

[kdssrugby]

Wow! I didn t start Kindergarten until '92. (Not trying to make yuo feel old or anything). The Italian job isn t a bad movie, I prefer the original with Michael Cain though. Seth Green has a set up in the movie that is so powerful that it can rip the clothes off a girl in the movie (You see it in the credits). I ve never heard of Fosgate, are they still around?

[thedatman]

Wow! I didn t start Kindergarten until '92. (Not trying to make yuo feel old or anything). The Italian job isn t a bad movie, I prefer the original with Michael Cain though. Seth Green has a set up in the movie that is so powerful that it can rip the clothes off a girl in the movie (You see it in the credits). I ve never heard of Fosgate, are they still around?


No the were an American audio company they got bought out by Citation. Bob Fosgate was a major innovator in the development of prologic. It was actually built on the quad systems that came out in the 70s

[hlkc]

no I haven't but it's on my list now when I get it I'll let you know. I'm betting mine is far more humble.

I'm like way old school when it come to surround my 1st good processor was a Fosgate dsl 2 and it was $1200 in 91. Then I had a Fosgate 3a. Anyone go back that far?

Yup, I am with you but back then Fosgate was my dream. My first amp was Sony and few years after that I quickly move to 2 channel, a full Spectral. It is the BEST 2 channel system in my life.

[thedatman]

Yup, I am with you but back then Fosgate was my dream. My first amp was Sony and few years after that I quickly move to 2 channel, a full Spectral. It is the BEST 2 channel system in my life.

I never really had a 2 ch system. A surround system always came first. When I did upgrade for better sounding music. I got a Bryston bp-20 preamp (yea I'm a sucker for the warranty) It was a big improvement over the fosgate 3a.So I connected the 2 through the tape loop. When I listened to music I used the volume on the bryston for surround I flipped the tape monitor. That was my surround. It worked great.

I even used that Fosgate to get my first 6.1 system. By hooking it up to the stereo rear outputs and got a center rear channel out of it.

Man I was crazy:agree:

[Turtleggjp]

Here's a question. Can HDMI carry sound alone, or does there have to be video as well? If so, I would like to see a sound card with an HDMI port that can simply output a digital 7.1 LPCM signal to a receiver. That way, games could also use the digital connection to your receiver. If video does need to be present, just fill it in with blank video (should be easy enough to generate), or have an option for an input from the video card. I don't think that such a video card would need to be very expensive, since it wouldn't need any of the fancy DACs that can makes the higher end sound cards so expensive.

[hlkc]

Here's a question. Can HDMI carry sound alone, or does there have to be video as well? If so, I would like to see a sound card with an HDMI port that can simply output a digital 7.1 LPCM signal to a receiver. That way, games could also use the digital connection to your receiver. If video does need to be present, just fill it in with blank video (should be easy enough to generate), or have an option for an input from the video card. I don't think that such a video card would need to be very expensive, since it wouldn't need any of the fancy DACs that can makes the higher end sound cards so expensive.

The way I understand is when x-tension available then you can do either DVI or HDMI from your GC to this card and single HDMI 1.3 to receiver for audio and then HDMI video out from your receiver to your mointor OR
GC straight to monitor and x-tension for audio only to receiver.

[kdssrugby]

The way HDMI works, is that basically HDMI audio piggybacks the video stream, so like you said, you would need a dummy video stream.The way i understand the new Auzentech card(s) work is this: you send video from the GC to the Sound card via HDMI, and then from there to the reciever. There are dvi to HDMI adapters so that shouldn t be an issue. As for games, I would assume that you could output the signal through HDMI, though you would have to set the output mode (likely LPCM). None of this would require anything new to be added to the GC. But it would be nice to have an all in one solution, but like you said, the dacs would drive up the cost.

[andy o]

I have no problems with your approach. By HDMI being fully implemented on PCs, I meant the use of LPCM as well. Right now, you can only get S/PDIF through HDMI on PCs. My real rub is the myth that analog is always better than digital.

From the specs that I've seen, it looks like HDAudio on PCs might have enough bandwidth for 8 channel LPCM. However, it remains to be implemented in a way that the output could be routed through HDMI. If a way could be devised to make it work, this would definitely be the lowest cost way to provide full bandwidth 8 channel audio through HDMI.

Wait a minute, then why did I just buy a friggin G35 motherboard? Is there anything I should know about the Asus P5K-VM HDMI that any of you guys that have it can tell me? Granted right now I don't have a receiver but I may get one if I move. Is HDMI audio not working?

[andy o]

About the difference between 16 and 24 bit, it is exactly like with a picture.

On your PC, try switching the Color Quality in the Display Properties of your Monitor, from 32 to 16 bits, and you will notice that the color palette will be drastically reduced.

Well it's the same with sound!

Using more bits allows to define with more nuance a sound.

You will notice f.i. that dialogues become more intellligible, when encoded with 24 bit instead of 16.

To make it short:
- Frequency means definition, like 1024x768 or 1920x1080 for a picture.
- Bit allocation means nuance, like 16 bit or 32 bit colors for a picture.

Hope this helps you... ;)

That's not really the difference, with 16 vs. 24 bits of audio the audible difference is about dynamic range. Your analogy has an error of magnitudes. While pretty much all people could readily tell a 16-bit image compared to 24, if looked close enough (with monitors, close enough is like 99% of the time) the difference is not remotely as clear-cut with 24-bit audio. Your example also assumes that you have the same color gamut.

But with audio, it would be like expanding the color gamut, so you could see a bigger range of colors, and not necessarily more nuanced steps. Also, some of the extra bits may be lost in the noise, as it is currently happening with 14-bit RAW cameras as the 40D. There is no evidence that the 14-bit RAWs do anything for smoothness nor dynamic range, and there is very credible evidence that the 2 extra bits get lost in the noise.

Of course with 8 extra bits, it is very improbable that the same is happening with audio, since 16-bit has not reached the limit of the DR of other parts of the chain like in those 14-bit cameras.

But going back to the subject, if you noticed a difference, it wouldn't be in dialogue, it would most likely be in dynamic range. If you noticed a difference in "smoothness" that would probably be the domain of high sampling frequency, not high-bit audio. If the source and everything in the chain don't have enough DR, then 24 bits won't do you that much good.

What worries me about the whole thing is Cyberlink doing the downsampling, it doesn't bother me that much when movies come in 16/48. It may or may not be only psychological annoyance, since I can't say with any credibility that I hear a difference with 16/48 and downsampled 24/48 audio, but I don't like Cyberlink messing with the audio anyway.

[Turtleggjp]

Wait a minute, then why did I just buy a friggin G35 motherboard? Is there anything I should know about the Asus P5K-VM HDMI that any of you guys that have it can tell me? Granted right now I don't have a receiver but I may get one if I move. Is HDMI audio not working?

I was looking for a sound card with HDMI so I didn't have to replace my motherboard (and CPU). I don't think there's anything wrong with the G35, just too little choice in terms of brands (I only see Intel and ASUS with G35 chipsets on Newegg).

What worries me about the whole thing is Cyberlink doing the downsampling, it doesn't bother me that much when movies come in 16/48. It may or may not be only psychological annoyance, since I can't say with any credibility that I hear a difference with 16/48 and downsampled 24/48 audio, but I don't like Cyberlink messing with the audio anyway.

I agree. This is why I'm trying to keep PowerDVD out of the loop when playing back my movies. I just created a 7.1 FLAC file from 3:10 to Yuma's LPCM soundtrack, and the size went down from 5.25GB to 1.47GB! I would like to be able to play this with Media Player Classic, and send the decoded LPCM stream via HDMI to a 7.1 receiver someday. Such a scenario would eliminate the need for things like a Protect Audio Path.

[hlkc]

Wait a minute, then why did I just buy a friggin G35 motherboard? Is there anything I should know about the Asus P5K-VM HDMI that any of you guys that have it can tell me? Granted right now I don't have a receiver but I may get one if I move. Is HDMI audio not working?

I look at your board and the Maximus Extreme and I don't think your board can carry audio stream signal just video to monitor.

Anyway, it seems to me our only near term option will be:
(1) The X-tension card HDMI out (audio) to HDMI in (audio) to any TureHD audio receiver. Your video signal will remain the same GC to monitor.

(2) The HDMI or DVI GC out (video signal only) to X-tension HDMI in and X-tension will add the audio signal in and then single HDMI 1.3 cable to TrueHD Audio receiver and audio stops right there and your video stream (HDMI out - video signal only) will continuous the journey to your monitor (HDMI or DVI in to your monitor).

On a side note, I just bought this just release 3650 with HDMI (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814103053), no need DVI-HDMI adapter GC and replacing my 3 days old dual DVI 3650. The reasons I bought this one are HDMI (no adapter need), suppose carry 5.1 sound and if I choose to send my video AND audio using one HDMI 1.3 cable then I can use this HDMI port, no mail-in rebate and $20 less expensive :-)

[andy o]

I look at your board and the Maximus Extreme and I don't think your board can carry audio stream signal just video to monitor.

Anyway, it seems to me our only near term option will be:
(1) The X-tension card HDMI out (audio) to HDMI in (audio) to any TureHD audio receiver. Your video signal will remain the same GC to monitor.

(2) The HDMI or DVI GC out (video signal only) to X-tension HDMI in and X-tension will add the audio signal in and then single HDMI 1.3 cable to TrueHD Audio receiver and audio stops right there and your video stream (HDMI out - video signal only) will continuous the journey to your monitor (HDMI or DVI in to your monitor).

On a side note, I just bought this just release 3650 with HDMI (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814103053), no need DVI-HDMI adapter GC and replacing my 3 days old dual DVI 3650. The reasons I bought this one are HDMI (no adapter need), suppose carry 5.1 sound and if I choose to send my video AND audio using one HDMI 1.3 cable then I can use this HDMI port, no mail-in rebate and $20 less expensive :-)

Well, the whole shebang about the G35 is that it will carry 7.1 LPCM audio. I do know if it's working right with the drivers, it should.

Anyway, about your card, you do know that it's the same 5.1 S/PDIF-limited audio you also got with your previous 3650 and the ATI adapter, right (I'm 99% sure)? It's not "real" HDMI audio and you don't need a "1.3 HDMI cable" (I'm not sure if those exist anyway). I would have also chosen that card because the ATI adapter is too bulky and protrudes too far, but you need to consider that you're not getting any better audio than S/PDIF (and it's still not clear to me if the ATI 5.1 solution even supports DTS, though I don't see why not).

ATI have done a pretty shady marketing move with their 5.1 "HDMI" audio. It is a pretty convenient and helpful in-the-meantime solution, but the way they have put it, many people think they're getting full HDMI audio, and this has been going for almost a year, since the HD2000 series came out.

[kdssrugby]

like andy said, you are getting 5.1 audio, its just not hi def. The best it can do is 2 channel PCM. The HDMI on your card uses HDMI 1.2, so it wouldn t be able to send TrueHD, sorry. But if I remember correctly, you only have a 2 channel system anyways so it won t make a difference to you until you get 5.1 or 7.1. It s still a nice card though.

[hlkc]

Well, the whole shebang about the G35 is that it will carry 7.1 LPCM audio. I do know if it's working right with the drivers, it should.

Anyway, about your card, you do know that it's the same 5.1 S/PDIF-limited audio you also got with your previous 3650 and the ATI adapter, right (I'm 99% sure)? It's not "real" HDMI audio and you don't need a "1.3 HDMI cable" (I'm not sure if those exist anyway). I would have also chosen that card because the ATI adapter is too bulky and protrudes too far, but you need to consider that you're not getting any better audio than S/PDIF (and it's still not clear to me if the ATI 5.1 solution even supports DTS, though I don't see why not).

ATI have done a pretty shady marketing move with their 5.1 "HDMI" audio. It is a pretty convenient and helpful in-the-meantime solution, but the way they have put it, many people think they're getting full HDMI audio, and this has been going for almost a year, since the HD2000 series came out.

I just called Asus and the first tech guy told me your HDMI port has no audio stream just video stream and then he transfered me to more a senior tech and now they said your on board HDMI does have audio stream like SPDIF 5.1 out. Well I don't trust them and if you can confirm with us or at least to me that your on-board HDMI has audio stream and whether carry 7.1 LPCM audio, it will be great. Thanks!

Yes, I realized that it is the same audio as my 3650. The reason I bought is when the time I need to route my HDMI back to the X-tension for video only, I can use this HDMI out without the adapter and I never need 2 DVI out and I prefer to have more choice, HDMI, DVI and VGA out in this card.

like andy said, you are getting 5.1 audio, its just not hi def. The best it can do is 2 channel PCM. The HDMI on your card uses HDMI 1.2, so it wouldn t be able to send TrueHD, sorry. But if I remember correctly, you only have a 2 channel system anyways so it won t make a difference to you until you get 5.1 or 7.1. It s still a nice card though.

Yup, I realized we will not get any HDMI 1.3 until X-tension here. In my setup, it is even more complicated. My pre-amp manufacture will not offer any HDMI 1.3 upgrade path at least later this year. When they do, they will probably want few grands. Therefore, I am thinking to do the analogue way for every channel of my 5.1 system.

[andy o]

I just called Asus and the first tech guy told me your HDMI port has no audio stream just video stream and then he transfered me to more a senior tech and now they said your on board HDMI does have audio stream like SPDIF 5.1 out. Well I don't trust them and if you can confirm with us or at least to me that your on-board HDMI has audio stream and whether carry 7.1 LPCM audio, it will be great. Thanks!

Yes, I realized that it is the same audio as my 3650. The reason I bought is when the time I need to route my HDMI back to the X-tension for video only, I can use this HDMI out without the adapter and I never need 2 DVI out and I prefer to have more choice, HDMI, DVI and VGA out in this card.


Yeah, I would have chosen that card for that too, I actually did choose an MSI nVidia 8600GTS just for that feature alone (though you'd need a S/PDIF 2-pin out from your mobo or sound card for that one). Just wanted to make sure you were not one of those being virtually conned by ATI into their "HDMI audio" marketing. As long as you know what you're getting, that card looks great. I even felt tempted to return my recently-bought 3450 that I got for a disappointing slimline (that one is going back!), so I don't need slim profile anymore. But alas, I already sent the rebate.

About the Asus board, I will be getting it later in the week. But like I said, I don't have a receiver right now, and I don't really need it. I don't even have a big-screen TV, just my 26" NEC monitor. A plasma would be in order before a receiver I think. And before that, I would probably have to move. In any case, the G35 chipset and the ASUS board are being touted, and confirmed by some users at avsforum, to do 8-channel uncompressed LPCM. I think that's the main advantage over G33, and G45 will bring H.264 and VC-1 acceleration as well as HDMI 1.3, but I don't need those.

If anyone is using the Asus P5E-VM HDMI, please let us know their experience?

[dharris]

Right, and that's being done by the player not the amplifier. LPCM is the only way to mix audio streams together. Bitstreaming doesn't allow for that. Bitstreaming is the method used to send a TrueHD/DTS-HD MA/etc track directly to the receiver for it to decode. Using that method, no PIP audio.

Right. Sorry Im a little confused by the previous comments. The whole 1.3 hdmi nonsense is only a requirement to bitstream and pass DDTHD and DTSHDMA. Otherwise, you can use existing hdmi hardware (assuming it supports it) to pass 8 channel audio via LPCM (for these purposes, lets just assume the same as the other formats). In the case of the intel chipsets and the upcoming 8200 IGPs from NVIDIA, they both pass 7.1 over the hdmi - unlike the amd 780g which only does 2 LPCM channel over hdmi.

Assuming the software is not restricting you (thanks PDDVD)!

EDIT: Nevermind, misread the above posts

[SamuriHL]

Right. Sorry Im a little confused by the previous comments. The whole 1.3 hdmi nonsense is only a requirement to bitstream and pass DDTHD and DTSHDMA. Otherwise, you can use existing hdmi hardware (assuming it supports it) to pass 8 channel audio via LPCM (for these purposes, lets just assume the same as the other formats). In the case of the intel chipsets and the upcoming 8200 IGPs from NVIDIA, they both pass 7.1 over the hdmi - unlike the amd 780g which only does 2 LPCM channel over hdmi.

Assuming the software is not restricting you (thanks PDDVD)!

EDIT: Nevermind, misread the above posts

Just to clarify HDMI 1.1 is sufficient for 7.1 LPCM. And that's what I intend to use for my audio when I get a receiver that can support it. The current crappy implementations of HDMI support on the PC do indeed seem to limit us to 2 channel LPCM which is a joke at best. Newer versions, be they HDMI 1.3 or not, will support 7.1 LPCM. If they do support HDMI 1.3, then yes, they should be able to bitstream the compressed formats if that's your thing.

Again, I know you edited your post to say you misread what I was saying, but, I just wanted to make it clearer.

[hlkc]

Yeah, I would have chosen that card for that too, I actually did choose an MSI nVidia 8600GTS just for that feature alone (though you'd need a S/PDIF 2-pin out from your mobo or sound card for that one). Just wanted to make sure you were not one of those being virtually conned by ATI into their "HDMI audio" marketing. As long as you know what you're getting, that card looks great. I even felt tempted to return my recently-bought 3450 that I got for a disappointing slimline (that one is going back!), so I don't need slim profile anymore. But alas, I already sent the rebate.

About the Asus board, I will be getting it later in the week. But like I said, I don't have a receiver right now, and I don't really need it. I don't even have a big-screen TV, just my 26" NEC monitor. A plasma would be in order before a receiver I think. And before that, I would probably have to move. In any case, the G35 chipset and the ASUS board are being touted, and confirmed by some users at avsforum, to do 8-channel uncompressed LPCM. I think that's the main advantage over G33, and G45 will bring H.264 and VC-1 acceleration as well as HDMI 1.3, but I don't need those.

If anyone is using the Asus P5E-VM HDMI, please let us know their experience?

Since you mentioned G45, then let me make sure first... with in the near future X-tension card (HDMI 1.3 audio) and your 3450 and my 3650 (HDCP video), we don't need the G45 MB in order to do what we want to do here, right? On the other hand, if we get the G45 MB, I assume and I hope that new MB will able to stream 8 channel LPCM audio to receiver without the X-tension and HDCP video to monitor, right?

[dharris]

I cant say personally but from what I have read, the g35 chipset passes LPCM 7.1 over hdmi. I assume the G45 will also do the same as well. The diff will be in the dedicated IGP that can do full HA (among other diff im sure)

Whether the g45 supports bitstream audio over 1.3 HDMI i do not know (it looks like it will support the video implementation but who knows on the audio)

[andy o]

Since you mentioned G45, then let me make sure first... with in the near future X-tension card (HDMI 1.3 audio) and your 3450 and my 3650 (HDCP video), we don't need the G45 MB in order to do what we want to do here, right? On the other hand, if we get the G45 MB, I assume and I hope that new MB will able to stream 8 channel LPCM audio to receiver without the X-tension and HDCP video to monitor, right?

If everything's working all right, then yeah, we wouldn't need the G45. That's in theory, assuming it's working fine, as it should. :D

The G45 is supposed to add HW acceleration of video formats and I'm not sure about bitstream, but G35 supposedly can already output 7.1 LPCM, and I certainly hope the Asus P5E-VM HDMI has no problem at least doing that. There are no other G35 mobos in sight, at least from the "big guys" besides a pretty crappy Intel one, which doesn't even have DVI. I think they just strapped the G35 chipset for its GPU there, which is supposedly better than the G33's.

[hlkc]

Yeah, I would have chosen that card for that too, I actually did choose an MSI nVidia 8600GTS just for that feature alone (though you'd need a S/PDIF 2-pin out from your mobo or sound card for that one). Just wanted to make sure you were not one of those being virtually conned by ATI into their "HDMI audio" marketing. As long as you know what you're getting, that card looks great. I even felt tempted to return my recently-bought 3450 that I got for a disappointing slimline (that one is going back!), so I don't need slim profile anymore. But alas, I already sent the rebate.

Got this GC from Newegg today but when I opened, it has 2 DVI not VGA, DVI and HDMI... Call them and they issue RMA and they said don't order this card yet and they don't know such card is in their inventory yet.

[andy o]

Got this GC from Newegg today but when I opened, it has 2 DVI not VGA, DVI and HDMI... Call them and they issue RMA and they said don't order this card yet and they don't know such card is in their inventory yet.

There is actually one review for the card you ordered, and he seems to have the correct card. Maybe at Newegg they just shipped you the wrong card but still have the one you want. It does look good. Now I'm not really sure what should I do with my 3450, it is not valuable enough to go through the trouble of selling it, and I don't know if it's powerful enough to make a significant difference with my G35 graphics. The G35 doesn't have HW acceleration for HD discs, but I don't think I'll be needing it with a C2D E8400 running just at native 3.0 GHz (but could be easily overclocked and still run cool).

And also there's an added "benefit" that HW acceleration would be disabled in PowerDVD (hopefully, I've not built this HTPC yet) and allow me to change color/contrast and other settings. Although it seems PowerDVD 8, at least in XP, can actually change color/contrast within the application even with HW acceleration on with Purevideo HD and UVD cards, something that 7.3 had greyed out. That is an advantage that I haven't seen mentioned in PowerDVD 8 threads, so I don't know if everyone is having it, or if it happens in Vista as well.

[roog]

Got this GC from Newegg today but when I opened, it has 2 DVI not VGA, DVI and HDMI... Call them and they issue RMA and they said don't order this card yet and they don't know such card is in their inventory yet.

Try the Zotac 9600GT. It doesn't have HDMI but the audio works with a DVI to HDMI cable so you don't have to use the included adapter. You do need a motherboard with a S/PDIF out pin header. Some other brands have this feature as well but check before buying. Card looks very nice with its full length cooling shield.

If you're dead set on HDMI on the card, the PALIT NE/960TSX0252 looks great but it's a 2 slot card. It also has an external S/PDIF input as well as the internal one.

P.S.- Was told by EVGA that the NVIDIA 8000 series has display problems when used with a HDTV and that the 9000 series correct this.

[hlkc]

There is actually one review for the card you ordered, and he seems to have the correct card. Maybe at Newegg they just shipped you the wrong card but still have the one you want. It does look good. Now I'm not really sure what should I do with my 3450, it is not valuable enough to go through the trouble of selling it, and I don't know if it's powerful enough to make a significant difference with my G35 graphics. The G35 doesn't have HW acceleration for HD discs, but I don't think I'll be needing it with a C2D E8400 running just at native 3.0 GHz (but could be easily overclocked and still run cool).

andy,
Can you point me to that review?

Try the Zotac 9600GT. It doesn't have HDMI but the audio works with a DVI to HDMI cable so you don't have to use the included adapter. You do need a motherboard with a S/PDIF out pin header. Some other brands have this feature as well but check before buying. Card looks very nice with its full length cooling shield.

If you're dead set on HDMI on the card, the PALIT NE/960TSX0252 looks great but it's a 2 slot card. It also has an external S/PDIF input as well as the internal one.

P.S.- Was told by EVGA that the NVIDIA 8000 series has display problems when used with a HDTV and that the 9000 series correct this.

roog,
Thanks for the tips. Frankly speaking, I don't need a GC. My current, before I bought this card, HD 2600 pro, is pretty good and delivered the performance I need already. Just want to try something new and see if there is any change. I am waiting the G45 MB and once I have that I plan to build a crazy HTPC with Origen 21T (http://www.origenae.com/en/htpc_s21t.htm), yup, 10 HDD and all the things I want to get long time ;) Until then I will just do a small upgrade here and there and see any improvements I can pick up.

[andy o]

andy,
Can you point me to that review?

It's on the newegg page for the card you ordered, the one you linked in a previous post:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814103053

[hlkc]

It's on the newegg page for the card you ordered, the one you linked in a previous post:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814103053

I read that one I thought there is another one. Thanks!

[andy o]

I read that one I thought there is another one. Thanks!

I thought you ordered that card, didn't you? But then you received one with 2 DVI ports, which is definitely a totally different model. In that review the guy did receive the card that has VGA, HDMI and DVI, so it might just be newegg sending you the wrong one. I would think they still have them in stock.

[hlkc]

I thought you ordered that card, didn't you? But then you received one with 2 DVI ports, which is definitely a totally different model. In that review the guy did receive the card that has VGA, HDMI and DVI, so it might just be newegg sending you the wrong one. I would think they still have them in stock.

Yes, I ordered that card, VGA, HDMI and DVI, Monday AM and arrived yesterday but with only 2 DVI out. Called Newegg and all the sku and part numbers are the same as the one in my box that's why the phone rep told me not to re-order and wait for few weeks first.

[andy o]

Yes, I ordered that card, VGA, HDMI and DVI, Monday AM and arrived yesterday but with only 2 DVI out. Called Newegg and all the sku and part numbers are the same as the one in my box that's why the phone rep told me not to re-order and wait for few weeks first.

I see on their website that the only two models they offer have 2 DVI ports. I wonder how the reviewer received the actual pictured card. From the model names, it seems that the model number indeed is for the dual-DVI card, maybe the HDMI card will have another model number. Bad luck I guess, but it seems like a worthwhile card, if it comes out soon enough. You still have some options though. I'd get an nVidia 9600 GT, someone recommended one with HDMI if I'm not mistaken. Do you know if your mobo has an internal S/PDIF out connector? (2-pin in a 3-pin space if I remember correctly).

[hlkc]

I see on their website that the only two models they offer have 2 DVI ports. I wonder how the reviewer received the actual pictured card. From the model names, it seems that the model number indeed is for the dual-DVI card, maybe the HDMI card will have another model number. Bad luck I guess, but it seems like a worthwhile card, if it comes out soon enough. You still have some options though. I'd get an nVidia 9600 GT, someone recommended one with HDMI if I'm not mistaken. Do you know if your mobo has an internal S/PDIF out connector? (2-pin in a 3-pin space if I remember correctly).

I did a similar research with the Newegg rep when I got my RMA and that's why she told me not to order it until few weeks later... Actually I won't use the HDMI audio at least for now. I use SPDIF optical to a DIP (http://www.monarchyaudio.com/DIP.htm), a jitter correct/reduction unit and then SPDIF coaxial to my pre-amp. Anyway, beside what I mentioned reasons before, since I paid a bit more locally for 2 DVI I thought for a bit cheaper why not have HDMI and DVI in case I need the HDMI audio or video at later time.

[kdssrugby]

I just checked out windows update and there was on optional one called IDT- Audio- IDT HDMI. Anybody know what this does?

[JackBauer006]

IMO it's possible to output a TrueHD/DTS-HD MA or any kind of lossless Audio trough a Analog output perfectly without losing qulity or downconverting to lossy audio...
I am using 8 Analog Outputs to use 7.1 TrueHD etc. and comparing the audio to a BluRay Player with HDMI 1.3 and the lossy cores, and it sounds the same as with HDMI 1.3 and you can't compare the 8 Analog Outputs in any way with the lossy cores, so I would recommend you using the 8 Analog outputs on your MB, but this is only possible if you use Onboard Soundchips like the Realtek HD-Audio 889A (as found on the new Gigabyte MBs) or similar. I have no expiriences with add-on Cards so I'm not able to give you any advice if you're going to use a add-on card.

I hope this will help you...

I use the the Gigabyte GA-X38-DQ6 with Realtek HD-Audio 889A Soundchip, the latest Realtek Drivers v1.9x, and PowerDVD 8.0 Ultra

[kdssrugby]

Thanks Jack, but the only thing is I prefer my X-fi to the onboard (I get a background interference at high volumes)Oh well, I ll just wait until the auzentech card comes out

[hlkc]

IMO it's possible to output a TrueHD/DTS-HD MA or any kind of lossless Audio trough a Analog output perfectly without losing qulity or downconverting to lossy audio...
I am using 8 Analog Outputs to use 7.1 TrueHD etc. and comparing the audio to a BluRay Player with HDMI 1.3 and the lossy cores, and it sounds the same as with HDMI 1.3 and you can't compare the 8 Analog Outputs in any way with the lossy cores, so I would recommend you using the 8 Analog outputs on your MB, but this is only possible if you use Onboard Soundchips like the Realtek HD-Audio 889A (as found on the new Gigabyte MBs) or similar. I have no expiriences with add-on Cards so I'm not able to give you any advice if you're going to use a add-on card.

I hope this will help you...

I use the the Gigabyte GA-X38-DQ6 with Realtek HD-Audio 889A Soundchip, the latest Realtek Drivers v1.9x, and PowerDVD 8.0 Ultra

Hi Jack,

Thanks for your sharing. So let me try to see if I understand you or not...

With your Gigabyte GA-X38-DQ6 MB, they're using the on board Realtek HD-Audio 889A Soundchip to process the D to A and output to the 8 analog mini jacks from back of the MB to your receiver/pre-amp and you get a TrueHD/DTS-HD MA sound that is better than a standalone BD player using HDMI 1.3 out to the same receiver/pre-amp. Am I understand you correctly?

Thanks

[JackBauer006]

The sound isn't better compared with the stand-alone player, but it's nearly the same quality (stand-alone Player for a few hundred Euros will allways be better than an onboard-card:)) but it sounds thousand times more realistic than the lossy cores you'll get by connecting Computer and Amp with the S/P-DIF. I'm sure there are/will be better solutions than an onboard-card but as I said, I have no expiriences with Auzentech or even X-Fi so I can't compare the quality.

[hlkc]

The sound isn't better compared with the stand-alone player, but it's nearly the same quality (stand-alone Player for a few hundred Euros will allways be better than an onboard-card:)) but it sounds thousand times more realistic than the lossy cores you'll get by connecting Computer and Amp with the S/P-DIF. I'm sure there are/will be better solutions than an onboard-card but as I said, I have no expiriences with Auzentech or even X-Fi so I can't compare the quality.

Jack,

Thanks for your reply. Do you have one of those TrueHD audio receiver now such as Onkyo TsXR605 and above or Pioneer TSX91THX and above? I assume when you are doing your way, 8 analogue mini-jack to the receiver now, it will not light up those TrueHD light in your receiver since it is not detecting the correct flag in the signal, right? But when you compare to a standalone player output to the same receiver, TrueHD light will light up since it will detects the correct flag in the signal, right?

Thanks.

[Jong]

Hi. The TrueHD light will not come on with analogue or LPCM input because the amp is not having to decode a TrueHD encoded soundtrack, that is all. It says nothing about the quality. An LPCM soundtrack is equal or even higher in quality - lossless and no chance of any decoder problems - and that will not light the light either. I really would not worry about that.

[hlkc]

I see on their website that the only two models they offer have 2 DVI ports. I wonder how the reviewer received the actual pictured card. From the model names, it seems that the model number indeed is for the dual-DVI card, maybe the HDMI card will have another model number. Bad luck I guess, but it seems like a worthwhile card, if it comes out soon enough. You still have some options though. I'd get an nVidia 9600 GT, someone recommended one with HDMI if I'm not mistaken. Do you know if your mobo has an internal S/PDIF out connector? (2-pin in a 3-pin space if I remember correctly).

Andy,

Finally I have the right card in my possession now :-) Order Wed and here today. Will try that this weekend and if you care to know will let u know but I would say it is the same as what I have now. Btw, they have $15 mail-in rate now, net $80, just one day after I ordered :mad: Will call and see can I get that $15 back later.

[andy o]

Andy,

Finally I have the right card in my possession now :-) Order Wed and here today. Will try that this weekend and if you care to know will let u know but I would say it is the same as what I have now. Btw, they have $15 mail-in rate now, net $80, just one day after I ordered :mad: Will call and see can I get that $15 back later.

Thanks, but in the meantime I got myself the Asus P5E-VM HDMI motherboard, and I'm stuck with onboard graphics (though no problems whatsoever with a C2D E8400). I've been thinking of getting a more powerful graphics card for my work PC, right now I have the 8600GTS that I had on my HTPC, which replaced an aging X1900GT. I'm thinking an 8800GT or GTS with an Accelero S1 cooler, but with my luck, the minute I buy it nVidia will come out with a 9800GT. Maybe I'll just wait for the next die shrink.

[hlkc]

Thanks, but in the meantime I got myself the Asus P5E-VM HDMI motherboard, and I'm stuck with onboard graphics (though no problems whatsoever with a C2D E8400). I've been thinking of getting a more powerful graphics card for my work PC, right now I have the 8600GTS that I had on my HTPC, which replaced an aging X1900GT. I'm thinking an 8800GT or GTS with an Accelero S1 cooler, but with my luck, the minute I buy it nVidia will come out with a 9800GT. Maybe I'll just wait for the next die shrink.

Nothing wrong with that. I am thinking to build a small PC and thinking to use your Asus P5E-VM HDMI MB too. If not I just go ahead to get one of those Cisco media player and stream the contents from my VMC HTPC...

[andy o]

Nothing wrong with that. I am thinking to build a small PC and thinking to use your Asus P5E-VM HDMI MB too. If not I just go ahead to get one of those Cisco media player and stream the contents from my VMC HTPC...

I'm liking this Asus P5E-VM HDMI, but one thing that I didn't anticipate was that as I need to use the onboard graphics, it will eat up 256MB of my RAM. You can choose to use 128MB instead in BIOS, which is what I did, but with everything running for HTPC use (AnyDVD HD, Xonar DX control panel, Comodo Firewall, NOD32, Bluetooth, Logitech panel/drivers), I still get like 740-750 MB RAM usage when everything's settled down at startup in Vista 32. I don't usually use this HTPC for graphics or photography work, so I get by just fine with 2GB of RAM. I don't think 1 GB would cut it though.

[hlkc]

I'm liking this Asus P5E-VM HDMI, but one thing that I didn't anticipate was that as I need to use the onboard graphics, it will eat up 256MB of my RAM. You can choose to use 128MB instead in BIOS, which is what I did, but with everything running for HTPC use (AnyDVD HD, Xonar DX control panel, Comodo Firewall, NOD32, Bluetooth, Logitech panel/drivers), I still get like 740-750 MB RAM usage when everything's settled down at startup in Vista 32. I don't usually use this HTPC for graphics or photography work, so I get by just fine with 2GB of RAM. I don't think 1 GB would cut it though.

Thanks for your tips. This (http://www.kustompcs.co.uk/acatalog/info_5404.html) is another MB I am thinking about for my miniPC and also thinking this (http://www.kustompcs.co.uk/acatalog/info_1314.html) case too.
But ultimately I sure want to re-do what I have to the new G45 as soon as they come out :)

[hlkc]

This afternoon I stopped by one of my local AV retailer and check out Pioneer and Denon TrueHD receivers. I did a lot of A/B testing with these 2 brands and also with the last generation HDMI 1.2 without TrueHD and I have to say that I hear some different but not a big different that most people talked about. I don't mean to blow my own horn... but I have been stereophile for years and own many high end equipments for long time. If it is truth that TrueHD makes such a big different then all I can think of is either someone use a old receiver/pre-amp compare to these receivers or this retail shop setup such as cables, power conditioner or whatever is not performing well...

[Jong]

What were you comparing? TrueHD vs s/pdif? (DD? DTS?).

[hlkc]

What were you comparing? TrueHD vs s/pdif? (DD? DTS?).

Pioneer standalone BD player HDMI 1.3 to 2 different TrueHD receivers and 1 last generation receiver using DTS SPDIF from same standalone player.

I was particular comparing for clarity for the center and bass for both. But once again, I guess I can't hear much different.

[mcnaugha]

This is too massive to work through every post.

I'll just add my thoughts...

I initially got caught up in the marketing hype of TrueHD, etc. thinking I needed a newer receiver for it, not realising my HTPC was already capable of outputting it through its 7.1 analog outputs. I had been using SPDIF and thought I needed to go to HDMI v1.3 output at some point. I then discovered my PC could output the new formats through its multi-channel outputs. My existing receiver actually came with a switch box which let me switch between the receiver going to the 7.1 speakers and the direct output from the PC. Wow, thanks to PowerDVD I suddenly had the ability to playback the HD audio formats. It had all been a confusing mess. I don't need a pricey receiver and HDMI audio output. Perhaps you don't either.

Only thing I quickly discovered was that my onboard HD audio codec was overloading my CPU and I kept getting dropped frames. I have a Core 2 Extreme QX9650... so I was like what-the-fcuk. I bought the Auzentech X-Fi Prelude and now everything HD is great. Having said that, the Auzentech drivers are absolutely sh!t. They're not outputting the right stuff out of the SPDIF and their tech support won't listen. My machine was really unstable for quite a while after installing the drivers. Seems to have settled now. Although I'm about to update with the latest patch.

It was only after further research that I learned that LPCM is actually better (or the same I suppose) and that most HD discs are coming with that anyway.

TrueHD is just a compression format. It's just a way of storing the audio data on the disc. It has no more magic than the LPCM. If a disc has LPCM on it, I don't get why they've bothered with TrueHD as well. Marketing!

Ok technically I'm apparently not getting as high fidelity as those with pricey receivers, but I honestly don't care. The sound is amazing as it is. When I win the lottery I'll buy one of those receivers.

[andy o]

This is too massive to work through every post.

I'll just add my thoughts...

I initially got caught up in the marketing hype of TrueHD, etc. thinking I needed a newer receiver for it, not realising my HTPC was already capable of outputting it through its 7.1 analog outputs. I had been using SPDIF and thought I needed to go to HDMI v1.3 output at some point. I then discovered my PC could output the new formats through its multi-channel outputs. My existing receiver actually came with a switch box which let me switch between the receiver going to the 7.1 speakers and the direct output from the PC. Wow, thanks to PowerDVD I suddenly had the ability to playback the HD audio formats. It had all been a confusing mess. I don't need a pricey receiver and HDMI audio output. Perhaps you don't either.

Only thing I quickly discovered was that my onboard HD audio codec was overloading my CPU and I kept getting dropped frames. I have a Core 2 Extreme QX9650... so I was like what-the-fcuk. I bought the Auzentech X-Fi Prelude and now everything HD is great. Having said that, the Auzentech drivers are absolutely sh!t. They're not outputting the right stuff out of the SPDIF and their tech support won't listen. My machine was really unstable for quite a while after installing the drivers. Seems to have settled now. Although I'm about to update with the latest patch.

It was only after further research that I learned that LPCM is actually better (or the same I suppose) and that most HD discs are coming with that anyway.

TrueHD is just a compression format. It's just a way of storing the audio data on the disc. It has no more magic than the LPCM. If a disc has LPCM on it, I don't get why they've bothered with TrueHD as well. Marketing!

Ok technically I'm apparently not getting as high fidelity as those with pricey receivers, but I honestly don't care. The sound is amazing as it is. When I win the lottery I'll buy one of those receivers.

Some people (I don't think I would) would prefer the movie sound to get out unmolested and even undecoded so their receivers can do all the work. They don't trust PowerDVD to decode the stuff, and I guess with reason. PowerDVD downsamples everything to 16-bit/48 kHz audio, and some people (certainly not me) are upset about that, so the ultimate assurance that audio is unperturbed would be bitstreaming.

There are advantages when the audio is decoded by the player though, such as mixing commentary audio and stuff like that. Personally, I don't care about anything but the movie itself, so I don't really care either way.

One true, palpable advantage of having the movie in one of these "HD" formats is of DTS-HD MA, and it seems Dolby dropped the ball with TrueHD in this regard, and that is the "core" DTS track that both DTS-HD and DTS-HD MA have which immediately makes the movie compatible with S/PDIF receivers. Dolby Digital Plus has it, but not TrueHD, which lead to some problems with some movies with TrueHD audio (I think most if not all of them have to have a secondary DD or DD+ track. And of course LPCM can't do this at all, your player will need to encode to DTS or DD to transmit anything over 2 channels through S/PDIF. It also seems TrueHD on blu-ray (not on HD-DVD somehow) requires an inordinate amount (for an audio codec) of CPU power to be decoded. This might be a PowerDVD issue, I don't know. I haven't tested with 8 or with the latest 8 patch though.

[kdssrugby]

I was just checking out Toms hardware's preview on the New ATI card and apparently the new 4870 card will support 7.1 audio via HDMI, possibley being 1.3a compliant. Curious if this can do lossless audio (certainly be cheaper than going the Auzentech route).
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ati-radeon-4800,5375.html

[hlkc]

I was just checking out Toms hardware's preview on the New ATI card and apparently the new 4870 card will support 7.1 audio via HDMI, possibley being 1.3a compliant. Curious if this can do lossless audio (certainly be cheaper than going the Auzentech route).
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ati-radeon-4800,5375.html

"The Radeon 4800 series also includes 7.1 channel-via-HDMI support and color output also got a “significant” boost, our sources said. We were unable to confirm HDMI 1.3 support, but we would not be surprised if that in fact is the case. The Unified Video Decoder is now in generation 2 and is called "UVD2"."

I hope so and if it is the case, I will be the first to line up to get this baby :D I just picked up the Onkyo version of the Integra pre-amp. With this new addition, I am only down to PDVD not downmix (8.5?), maybe this 4850 card or Auzentech route then I should be able to do lossless audio format :)

Oh one more note, I like to share with you guys that about the video. I use my DVI/HDMI cable from my HTPC to my plasma for long time. I just replaced the HDMI/HDMI 1.3b cable and the color is better. According to the people who sold the cable to me, he said 1.3b is better than 1.3a and can carry a deeper color. So for whoever looking to upgrade their cable to do this 1.3 game, make sure get the HDMI 1.3b and you will notice the different.

[andy o]

Which cable did you get, and which people did you buy it from? Just curious.

[hlkc]

Which cable did you get, and which people did you buy it from? Just curious.

Hi andy,

I have been using RAM Electronics (http://www.ramelectronics.net/audio-video/video-cables/hdmi-cables/c10000-c12000-c12001-p1.html) older 1.1 DVI/HDMI cable. Since Lenexpro is local to me therefore I pick up 3 HDMI/HDMI cables (http://www.lenexpo-electronics.com/7M-23FT-ATLONA-FLAT-HDMI-CABLE-WHITE-COLOR-.-HDMI-1.3b-Certified-p-16718.html) from them and replace what I have. Btw, my evaluation is not going to Onkyo, just straight from GC and my SAT set-top box to my plasma. Will hook up to Onkyo this weekend.

[SoulMan]

Can I play a lossless format on my PC?
Yes and no. Total Media Theater (TMT) currently allows uncompressed audio to be sent via analog or hdmi using an Asus Xonar 1.3 card (which can be used with TMT 3 platinum). If you do not have this card then the audio signal is downgraded (from a lossless track to a lossy track which is not bit for bit identical to the original recording)


Hello,

So, using TMT & an Asus Xonar 1.3, is it possible to output uncompressed audio through ASIO output drivers?

My idea is to reroute them using console (a VST host), dooing active crossover with izotope ozone, and output them to an other soundcard (one or two Audiotrack Prodigy 7.1 HIFI), using one chanel for each speacker.

The console/ozone/prodigy part already works fine, and can work for example when I play HD audio rips with foobar (with a 24/96 samplerate limitation for console).

So, I'm curious to know if it's possible to use this active PC based crossover for BR discs, and this ability (or not) will influence my choices for ly future PCHC investment :)

thank you for your help.