Optical Audio vs. HDMI Audio?

[Adam Dickie]

please Demystify the Mystified?

Hello and Welcome to a Thread to discover if the optical connection is equal to that of HDMI.

I have read in Some spots that HDMI can Transfer 8 discrete chanels of audio at

24bit/196KHz and Optical can't?

has anybody the proof of this?

[57]

You may be confusing the restrictions on a connection vs what a connection can actually do. For example, there's nothing that limits a component video connection on a DVD player to 480P, other than electronics in the DVD player due to DRM concerns. I believe the same is true for the optical connection on SACD/DVD-A players for example, it's restricted by DRM, not capabilities. I believe there were some DVD/AVR combinations (the Pioneer "i" series if I recall correctly) that allowed the (optical) connection to work for example.

HDMI is required for HD Audio for example on BD players, which will not output HD audio via the Optical (or coaxial) connection. The HDMI "handshake" ensures that the devices are "Kosher"

Someone else will have to comment on whether the bandwidth is actually a limitation - I would have thought that an optical cable has plenty of bandwidth since a small optical cable can handle almost an entire cable system...

[PlaceHolder]

Well... optical fibres *CAN* carry huge amounts of data, but there has to be suitable technology (hardware and software) on both ends to generate/process the data. You don't pay thousands of dollars for a TOSLINK capability in your AV equipment, so you're not going to get the capabilities of systems that cost thousands (or millions) of dollars (like the ones that run under sea cables.)

If Wikipedia can be trusted ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOSLINK ) it says that current bandwidth is 125 Mbps which is nowhere near a challenge for a fibre link, but is still pretty respectable. However, HDMI is way more capable than that, according to this site (http://www.hiddenwires.co.uk/resourc...051201-02.html ) HDMI v1.2 is spec'ed for 1.824Gb/s for audio... that's more than 14 times what the TOSLINK cable is spec'ed for.

I am pretty sure the majority of reason why HDMI has the advantage is that its newer technology (that is still receiving ongoing funding for advancement) that is cheaper to implement because the digital to light and light to digital is still expensive to do at higher bandwidths. The content manufactures are going to line up behind (i.e. fund) the most secure (against piracy) option, and right now that is also HDMI.

[merve04]

TOSLINK doesnt come close to fibre they use in city streets or the ocean. There are typically 2 types of fibre, you got single mode and multimode. The biggest differences is the size of the fibre and the distance you can go with the fibre. How far, your taking about KM with single mode and maybe 5,6,7 hundred metres with multimode. With the use of these 2 fibre's.. its not the cable itself thats limited, but the equipement. The fibre is really an limitless path for the information, but the hardware is rediculously expensive if you want to push down more data, and now they are getting into multiplexing information down the fibre, sending 2,3,4 laser beams down the same strand but at a slightly different angle in the fibre. With TOSLINK, yes its a type of fibre, but its plastic fibre, its huge when compared to single mode or multimode fibre and uses a laser that people can see to the naked eye, which means its going to be slow. Bassically your A\V amps, DVD players and any other equipement would cost you soo much if you really wanted a optical connection that could cary the amount of information that HDMI can. Fibre is really dessigned for long haul, how far is your dvd player?? Copper connection is still the best choice for short distances. IMHO TOSLINK was a waste of time, money, research, developement and was another failed attempt of a Sony product.

[57]

I see far too many inaccuracies in your post to accept any of your other claims.

a laser that people can see to the naked eye, which means its going to be slow.

It's the speed of light!

TOSLINK was a waste of time, money, research, developement and was another failed attempt of a Sony product.

Um it's TOSLink. The TOS coming from Toshiba, not Sony. You're confusing the SPDIF protocol (developed by Sony and Philips) with TOSLink. TOSLink does use the protocol, however, so does coaxial audio cable, to which SPDIF most often refers. For more, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spdif

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toslink

[theterran62]

Quote:
a laser that people can see to the naked eye, which means its going to be slow.

It's the speed of light!

thats pretty funny

With TOSLINK, yes its a type of fibre, but its plastic fibre

actually TOSLINK can use multistrand glass quartz fibres too.