• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

miniDSP Tide16 - Holy Grail with 16 Channel Atmos/DTS:X, high SINAD

markus said:
That’s a constraint of ARC, not Tide16. Bandwidth ARC 1 Mbps, eARC up to 37 Mbps.

View attachment 526589
Click to expand...
That table is wrong concerning SPDIF btw. SPDIF can transfer at least 1.4 MBit/s. That's how PCM 16 bit 44.1KHz is transmitted and that is also the bandwidth DTS on DVDs had. In fact some implementation allow even for more providing 24 bit and 96KHz PCM. This is another example for why we actually never needed something like HDMI for audio purposes.
 
Steakhouse said:
That table is wrong concerning SPDIF btw. SPDIF can transfer at least 1.4 MBit/s. That's how PCM 16 bit 44.1KHz is transmitted and that is also the bandwidth DTS on DVDs had. In fact some implementation allow even for more providing 24 bit and 96KHz PCM. This is another example for why we actually never needed something like HDMI for audio purposes.
Click to expand...
The key point being it's not possible to have any form of copyright protection over SPDIF (i.e. HDCP, etc.).
 
Steakhouse said:
That table is wrong concerning SPDIF btw. SPDIF can transfer at least 1.4 MBit/s. That's how PCM 16 bit 44.1KHz is transmitted and that is also the bandwidth DTS on DVDs had. In fact some implementation allow even for more providing 24 bit and 96KHz PCM. This is another example for why we actually never needed something like HDMI for audio purposes.
Click to expand...
It is no accident that the designed data rates for lossy multichannel were based on what you could get through an IEC 60958 frame designed for PCM at various frame rates…
 
Steakhouse said:
That table is wrong concerning SPDIF btw. SPDIF can transfer at least 1.4 MBit/s. That's how PCM 16 bit 44.1KHz is transmitted and that is also the bandwidth DTS on DVDs had. In fact some implementation allow even for more providing 24 bit and 96KHz PCM. This is another example for why we actually never needed something like HDMI for audio purposes.
Click to expand...
Whether HDMI was the most adequate choice made back in 2002 as an interface to transfer 8 channels of 192 kHz at 16-24-bit audio with a maximum aggregate sample rate of 768 kHz is arguable. Perhaps another separate physical higher speed interface similar to S/PDIF and AES/EBU but improved upon could have been engineered at the time. That said, this higher bandwidth data transfer rate requirement could not have been supported on the existing S/PDIF, Toslink or AES/EBU interfaces at the time. Furthermore, the transfer of those 8 channels at 192 kHz/24-bit up to HDMI 1.4 (2009) required some form of lossless compression codec to make that possible.

Personally, I'd rather have lossless codecs like Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio going through HDMI with all the added jitter and HDCP crap that comes with it than plain old Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS that are the equivalent of multichannel MP3 (DTS to a lesser extent than DD).
 
Last edited:
jam said:
Whether HDMI was the most adequate choice made back in 2002 as an interface to transfer 8 channels of 192 kHz at 16-24-bit audio with a maximum aggregate sample rate of 768 kHz is arguable. Perhaps another separate physical higher speed interface similar to S/PDIF and AES/EBU but improved upon could have been engineered at the time. That said, this higher bandwidth data transfer rate requirement could not have been supported on the existing S/PDIF, Toslink or AES/EBU interfaces at the time. Furthermore, the transfer of those 8 channels at 192 kHz/24-bit up to HDMI 1.4 (2009) required some form of compression codec to make possible.

Personally, I'd rather have lossless codecs like Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio going through HDMI with all the added jitter and HDCP crap that comes with it than plain old Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS that are the equivalent of multichannel MP3 (DTS to a lesser extent than DD).
Click to expand...

Funnily enough the best movie soundtracks (War of the worlds, Master and Commander) were the lossy dts versions. Also the ac3 from the DVD of LoTR is the most dynamic. We dont really need lossless. A high enough bitrate is enough. I would take a cinema mix of the mentioned movies on the DVD any day over some lossless but dynamic compressed and highpassed LFE nearfield mix atmos slop. /rant off :)
 
Steakhouse said:
Funnily enough the best movie soundtracks (War of the worlds, Master and Commander) were the lossy dts versions. Also the ac3 from the DVD of LoTR is the most dynamic. We dont really need lossless. A high enough bitrate is enough. I would take a cinema mix of the mentioned movies on the DVD any day over some lossless but dynamic compressed and highpassed LFE nearfield mix atmos slop. /rant off :)
Click to expand...
War of the worlds and Master and Commander being the best movie soundtracks is purely subjective and your opinion. Others will list their own best sounding movie soundtracks. I've watched WotW, MaC and LotR on DVD a long time ago through my 5.1 setup but in DTS since my Rotel AVR from 2001 supported DTS, which was not supported on all AVRs back then. Since then, I've rewatched MaC and LotR on Blu-ray in DTS-HD MA 5.1 through my Marantz AVP but it was too far apart in time for me to make a valid comparison to DTS. I do agree that MaC has one of the very best audio soundtracks ever; hearing those cannonballs rip all over through your room is amazing.

However, I do have a habit of swiching the audio codecs every now and then between the newer lossless codecs (DDTHD & DTS-HD MA) and DD on Blu-ray/4K to compare the SQ (not Atmos as I'm not equipped for that). BDs always have lossless codecs with DD being the minimal requirement and DTS is non existent on those discs. My Marantz AVP setup is much more resolving compared to my old Rotel one. I much prefer the sound of the lossless codecs to DD as I find the sound fuller, smoother, less harsh and more natural. So my opinion is that we do need lossless. To each his own.
 
Steakhouse said:
Funnily enough the best movie soundtracks (War of the worlds, Master and Commander) were the lossy dts versions. Also the ac3 from the DVD of LoTR is the most dynamic. We dont really need lossless. A high enough bitrate is enough. I would take a cinema mix of the mentioned movies on the DVD any day over some lossless but dynamic compressed and highpassed LFE nearfield mix atmos slop. /rant off :)
Click to expand...
I had several laserdiscs with great Dolby Digital and DTS tracks. I’ve been disappointed when watching some of those movies using DVDs, Dolby Atmos streams and blu-ray discs. Though, some blu-ray discs with multichannel PCM tracks are great.
 
Master and Commander won an Oscar for sound effects and we got the theatrical mix for the DVD release. The UHD Atmos version and als the DTS HD BD got a highpass filter at around 35Hz and is also less dynamic (as with every nearfield mix). To me that is objectively worse. I highly doubt that someone can make out the difference between DTS and DTS HD in a blind test. The loss of dynamic and low bass in the nearfield mix is easily to make out.1,4 Mbits for 6 channels is plenty. And SPDIF can offer up to 8 Mibits. We never actually needed lossless formats and instead got neutered near field mixes. That is where I am coming from


Concerning the discussion about not having hdmi 2.1 48 Gbits with the Tide16: The solution is quite easy. The Playstation or PC would be connected to the TV directly and audio goes through whatever eARC offers. For gaming this is enough imo.
 
Last edited:
Steakhouse said:
This is another example for why we actually never needed something like HDMI for audio purposes.
Click to expand...
jam said:
Whether HDMI was the most adequate choice made back in 2002 as an interface to transfer 8 channels of 192 kHz at 16-24-bit audio with a maximum aggregate sample rate of 768 kHz is arguable.
Perhaps another separate physical higher speed interface similar to S/PDIF and AES/EBU but improved upon could have been engineered at the time.
Click to expand...
john61ct said:
Still true, IMO wise to avoid AMAP
Click to expand...
As far as this cynical mind can tell, the only purpose of HDMI (and history seems to be repeating itself with Dante for that matter) is to make a lot of money people that don't deserve it. I think it's the worst thing that ever happened to domestic audio on every level.

SDI carried high resolution video down a coaxial cable long before HDMI, so there's no way you can't put high resolution multi channel audio down it.

HDCP copy protection works on DVI, so we never needed HDMI for that. Copy protection comes from the coding of the data, not the physical cables and connectors.

But it's what we've got. /Rant Off

The one glimmer of hope for HDMI for me is ARC and eARC. Amir tested ARC on the Bluesound Node Icon Streamer and Luxsin X9 Smart Stereo DAC & Preamp.
He got SOTA results, same as any spdif, USB or streaming input. Never been done before with any HDMI audio input to anything.
This is one of the things that makes me optimistic about AVPs - let the TV do the video switching, and just input audio (and only audio) over eARC.
 
Last edited:
Yep. That is what I was referring to. And yes, eARC should be the opt out of using audio devices for managing sources and the endless hdmi update cycles.
 
john61ct said:
Using a dumb screen, what is the best way to feed hi-res from a PC?
Click to expand...
From a PC, you can send hi-res audio to the Tide16 via USB, Coax SPDIF, or Optical. Whatever works best for you.

(I'd use Optical for electrical isolation)
 
staticV3 said:
From a PC, you can send hi-res audio to the Tide16 via USB, Coax SPDIF, or Optical. Whatever works best for you.

(I'd use Optical for electrical isolation)
Click to expand...
Sorry I neglected to include

Using a dumb screen, what is the best way to feed hi-res VIDEO from a PC?

in my OT question.

AFAIK a dumb screen has either no audio, or at least none worth tapping into compared to a whatever full multichannel audiophile rig
 
john61ct said:
Sorry I neglected to include
Using a dumb screen, what is the best way to feed hi-res VIDEO from a PC?
in my OT question.
AFAIK a dumb screen has either no audio, or at least none worth tapping into compared to a whatever full multichannel audiophile rig
Click to expand...
It sounds like to need an Orei or HD Fury device.
 
staticV3 said:
Could you post the screen's model number? I'm struggling to figure out the exact use case here.
Click to expand...
It was a general question, looking to replace my ViewSonic 1080p monitor - that only has HDMI and VGA.

I guess DisplayPort and USB-C DP Alt mode are the only mainstream alternatives these days?

I have no need for "a TV" whatever that might mean these days, and certainly don't want anything smart.

Sorry for the thread diversion, I thought it was a simple question
 
john61ct said:
It was a general question, looking to replace my ViewSonic 1080p monitor - that only has HDMI and VGA.

I guess DisplayPort and USB-C DP Alt mode are the only mainstream alternatives these days?

I have no need for "a TV" whatever that might mean these days, and certainly don't want anything smart.

Sorry for the thread diversion, I thought it was a simple question
Click to expand...
Where are you incorporating the Tide16 in your system? Using a monitor instead of a tv?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom