• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

Orei HDA-939 HDMI Audio Extractor Review

Rate this AV Converter/Extractor:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 13 11.2%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 42 36.2%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 54 46.6%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 7 6.0%

  • Total voters
    116
I actually might have a use/need for this!

For a while now, I've been trying to find a solution to allow me to feed an audio signal to my wireless headphones...for my TV setup.
The challenge has been that my headphone transmitter only has analog inputs.
As I found out afterwards, any of the various HDMI audio extractor devices I tried don't decode DD+ (requires licensing $$).
So for now, I've just had to bypass the headphone transmitter and pair the headphones directly with the TV...but then I see significant audio delay issues which is annoying. (The headphones and transmitter support aptX low-latency, which the TV does not, and is something I specifically looked for when choosing a wireless headphone setup)

From what I see with this device, it SAYS that it's able to decode DD+ and give me a 2ch LPCM output, which is what I need. Might have to give this thing a try.
 
This needs to output multichannel LPCM audio if it can decode those formats... Or if it has to be analog then in a way someone can solder their own wiring onto it to get digital output and make this thing worth thousands and thousands.
 
This needs to output multichannel LPCM audio if it can decode those formats... Or if it has to be analog then in a way someone can solder their own wiring onto it to get digital output and make this thing worth thousands and thousands.
Decoded LPCM would be groovy for people with aging ultra-high end AVR's / Processors or potentially 8-channel DAC's.. Feed eARC from TV to extractor, SPDIF to DAC/Processor.
 
I still have eARC dropouts between my recent Samsung TV and Yamaha current series AVR. Could a device like this help, by the TV looking at a different eARC rx than the AVR? i.e. use it to simply act as an eARC to HDMI device.
 
Thank you, @amirm,
Did you detect any gross delays (latency) in the Analog/RCA outs?

I have been on the hunt for such a unit that only needs to be ~16bit accurate, w/minimal artifacts.
This Orei HDA-939 >for the price< is pretty close to my needs (missing XLR outs for Dante/AoIP).
It has a lot going for it but I still voted Postman Panther.

Key Features:​

  • HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2 / 1.4 compliant
  • Support 18Gbps video bandwidth
  • HDMI input supports video resolution up to 4K@60Hz 4:4:4
  • Support HDR, HLG, and Dolby Vision
  • Support two HDMI OUTPUT ports to output at the same time: HDMI OUTPUT 1 supports 4K Downscale to 1080p, HDMI OUTPUT 2 is the audio output port, which can provide high-bandwidth and high-quality audio for traditional AVRs
  • The audio of HDMI OUTPUT 1 supports Bypass or 2CH Downmix switching
  • Support ARC/eARC function: the ARC/eARC audio extracted from the TV can be transmitted to any AVR input through the HDMI audio output.
  • When the resolution of HDMI OUTPUT 1 is downscaled from 4K to 2K, the corresponding HDCP will switch from 2.2 to 1.4
  • Support up to Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master audio Downmix processing, with 2CH audio output through coaxial, fiber optical, and stereo audio ports
  • Support HDMI port, analog audio port, and digital audio port (coaxial and fiber optical) to output audio at the same time
  • The analog audio port only supports 2CH Downmix audio output
  • Audio extraction can be realized without connecting any HDMI receiver devices when there is an HDMI signal input
  • Input audio format supports up to 24bit 192KHz
  • Output audio can be controlled through API commands, including the volume increase/decrease and mute/unmute commands
  • Advanced EDID management: manage the communication between the EDID and the signal source through the EDID of display or internal storage
  • With LED indicators to indicate the power, status, and audio formats
  • 8-position DIP switch can control downscaling, downmixing, ARC/eARC function, HDMI audio embedding, and EDID management. If all 8 DIP switches are in the “off” position, the whole system should be controlled by API commands
This is an audio and video processor, which can extract HDMI audio signal (IIS or S/PDIF), decode Dolby Digital, Dolby Digital Plus, Dolby TrueHD, DTS, DTS-HD Master Audio, and then output 2.0CH LPCM audio. It also can process (Sound Channel Superposition) LPCM (up to 7.1CH) audio, and then output the audio as stereo (LPCM 2.0) over HDMI OUTPUT 2(Audio only), digital (optical and coaxial) or RCA (analog) audio port.
The product supports ARC/eARC function. The ARC/eARC audio returned from the TV can be output through digital and analog audio ports after being processed, or be directly embedded into HDMI and output by the HDMI OUTPUT 2 port.
Traditional AVR audio input ports cannot support high-bandwidth audio formats, so embedding audio into HDMI can provide users with complete high-quality audio. HDMI OUTPUT 1 port supports video resolution up to 4K@60Hz 4:4:4. The output can be Bypass or Downscale to adapt to different display devices.
 
Yep, but it would be nice if it worked properly at 0dBFS.
This is probably the one product where it's absolutely not an issue. People using this won't be playing low dynamic range poorly mastered CD content. I'd be rather surprised if the DAC ever sees a 0dbFS signal other than an explosion or gunshot in an action film, or an obnoxious advert. ;)
 
It would be nice to have a device like this to connect to an 8 channel DAC.
For me, this is a plan B if a processor goes on the fritz.

- Rich
 
Isn't this a completely different product and different purpose? How is the HDA-939 a "selector"?
Not sure if I am missing something here, the TeSmart unit costs $69 and while it is intended as a selector, it also provides an optical spdif output (audio extractor)

It wasn’t my intention to hijack this thread so let’s just consider this discussion closed.
 
What is the advantage of mixing multichannel sound to stereo vs using the stereo signal that the regular extractors provide?
 
Not sure if I am missing something here, the TeSmart unit costs $69 and while it is intended as a selector, it also provides an optical spdif output (audio extractor)

It wasn’t my intention to hijack this thread so let’s just consider this discussion closed.
Proposing alternative solutions is not "Hijacking a thread" Discussion forum is made to discuss but it's ok if you don't want to.
Good point about the SPDIF out, but the Orei equivalent product to the Teksmart switch you propose is also just 65$ also with an audio extractor (but in this case analog).


I think what you are paying for here are the CODECs (Dolby, DTS),
The two HDMI outs one multichannel audio only, the subpar DAC, etc. But yes the Delta is quite large.
 
What is the advantage of mixing multichannel sound to stereo vs using the stereo signal that the regular extractors provide?
Example:
Premise: your source is outputting an LFE. Then: The Multichannel downmix may include the LFE, which would probably be lost otherwise and now can be output by, for example, a normal sub as part of a bass management system.

Theoretically, this could also apply to other channels like surrounds and whatnot. [1]

The regular extractor probably only uses the readymade stereo track which is always included as a fallback in your average multichannel sound track format and does not use the data from an LFE by design.

I used the words may and probably above, because the manual of this device does not disclose what is exactly happening while downmixing. There was no formular provided to see which components get mixed to what ratio. If implemented sensible, it may sound good, but does not have to.

[1] if that is reasonable is another topic
 
  • Like
Reactions: MCH
Example:
Premise: your source is outputting an LFE. Then: The Multichannel downmix may include the LFE, which would probably be lost otherwise and now can be output by, for example, a normal sub as part of a bass management system.

Theoretically, this could also apply to other channels like surrounds and whatnot. [1]

The regular extractor probably only uses the readymade stereo track which is always included as a fallback in your average multichannel sound track format and does not use the data from an LFE by design.

I used the words may and probably above, because the manual of this device does not disclose what is exactly happening while downmixing. There was no formular provided to see which components get mixed to what ratio. If implemented sensible, it may sound good, but does not have to.

[1] if that is reasonable is another topic
I always thought, but i have no idea though, that the stereo signal was independent and "carrying all the information" mixed for stereo speakers in origin, not that it is just the L and R channels of the multichannel signal.
 
The decoding isn’t there. But if you don’t need that it’s a waste of money.

Would of came in handy for me. As I have a nice old onkyo I bought used, but it’s from 2007-8. Might have my friend buy it and take the avr so he can have a HT
 
What is the advantage of mixing multichannel sound to stereo vs using the stereo signal that the regular extractors provide?
Cheaper, previously more available, extractors didn't work with bitstream signals, only with LPCM multichannel. This unit seems to work with both and does a very good job digitally.

I use a commercial grade 4K Atlona HDMI AT-HDR-M2C Multichannel Converter:
AT-HDR-M2C.jpg


to take the HDMI multichannel output of my bedroom AVR (Marantz SR8015) and de-embed and downmix Dolby/DTS soundtrack and other multichannel music audio signals (from my ATT U-Verse, Roku, or Roon sources) to its toslink output which then transmits the digital downmixed stereo signal to my remote Sennheiser Digital Wireless RS 175 Headphone setup. Don't know the quality of the DAC in the Sennheiser, but this way I can listen to all the "goodness" of downmixed 7.1 audio via a wireless stereo headphone system in privacy without disturbing others in the household. It sounds very good, especially if I engage some of the "surround" settings of the Sennheiser. However, as costly as the Atlona unit is, Atlona hasn't figured out all of their HDCP bugs and very occasionally, when switching channels, it loses the audio track which requires a reboot of my Marantz (think it's the U-Verse module that has this issue, because it never happens with Roku or Roon).

I very much like this setup, but the Orei HDA-939 Extractor may be very tempting, first because of its much more affordable cost, and second, with newer technology, it may not [edited 2023/03/31] have these annoying HDCP bugs (hopefully with UniVersal [pun intended] compatibility).
 
Last edited:
I always thought, but i have no idea though, that the stereo signal was independent and "carrying all the information" mixed for stereo speakers in origin, not that it is just the L and R channels of the multichannel signal.
Sorry, I glossed over some parts. There are a bunch of variables to this. For a stereo signal, several things may have happened within the processing pipeline until the output, in this case stereo, occurs.

On the authoring side:
a. the Engineer took the already created 6 or 8 (or 10) discrete surround tracks/streams and downmixed them "manually" for the specific use-case of 2.0 output. This may or may not include information from the LFE, as this is in the hands of the Engineer.
b. the Engineer produced a fully independent stereo track which does not rely on the aforementioned surround tracks. This may or may not include effects which would have gone to the separate low frequency channel.
c. the decoder(receiver) took over the part of the Engineer and used an more or less arbitrary formula for blending the discrete surround tracks. LFE information could be transferred over to the stereo channels. This information may collide with the low frequency information from the remaining channels. AFAIK, for this reason LFE data is considered an addon/boost and is, or can be, discarded first, if necessary.

Even I only mentioned the LFE, parts of this applies to the other channels, too.

Several things could happen on the technical side:
1. b would show up as 2.0 on a description of a Blu-ray. A receiver may display this as 'DD 2.0 Stereo'. Or, also completely separated and mastered, it would be buried within the TrueHD track. One would just see 7.1 as designation (or TrueHD with the appropriate channels in the GUI of a decoder lighten up), even though the separate stereo mix is there. 'Carrying all the information' is, as described above, up to the engineer for both cases a and b.
2. if the technical designation is 7.1 for a given medium, the codec (let's say it is Dolby TrueHD in this case) could feature backward compatibility. If there is no meta information available describing how to end up with a a stereo track, 7.1 can be decomposed into 5.1 and into 2.0. Technically, it is the other way round: There are two streams for stereo as the groundwork. 4 channels (3.1) get added later on to create 5.1. Then, another two channels get added to create 7.1. It is possible that this 2.0 information gets requested by the playback device, discarding the information of the other channels in the process.
3. in case of c, a 2.0 track could be the outcome. However, there may also be a completely, separately mastered 5.1 release buried within a 7.1 release (along with the stereo one) for whatever reasons. AFAICS, you wouldn't even know from which source the 2.0 downmix was created from (with this box. A full blown receiver with a GUI would make this a bit easier). Is the decoder in this box looking at the metadata in every case? I don't know. Maybe it doesn't matter.


In short: one can't tell for sure most of the time.

Blu-ray is somewhat halfway specific in regards to mix designation. It gets less precise with streaming. In all, in my opinion, the whole thing is a mess. It is nearly impossible to tell what one will listen to.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MCH
be interesting to see how the generic $10 digital only hdmi extractors you see on ali express etc compare. been looking at getting one for my old xbox so i can run it alongside my pc setup.
 
It looks like a good value, well made product. When it comes to the onboard DAC, it's going to be better than any compressed multichannel stream anyway. If I need to extract the audio, I'd buy one.
 
I still have eARC dropouts between my recent Samsung TV and Yamaha current series AVR. Could a device like this help, by the TV looking at a different eARC rx than the AVR? i.e. use it to simply act as an eARC to HDMI device.
I just received the cheaper orei hda927 earc extractor/converter to HDMI. No decoding. It seems to have solved my earc drop out problems between my Samsung tv and Yamaha rxa2a avr. But CEC now won't turn the avr on though.
 
Back
Top Bottom