Vasr
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2020
- Messages
- 1,409
- Likes
- 1,926
I know hdmi sets off knee-jerk reactions but this has nothing to do with the HDMI protocol. I know people think we already have USB but we need a better solution for exclusive audio use that is not confused with USB ports used for multiple purposes (or Thunderbolt or Firewire or whatever generic protocols exist).
This is also not about the content industry and the entire DRM related monopolies and the licensing. There is a whole industry out there that is outside that - pro-audio, sound cards, boutique manufacturers catering to stereo and multi-channel non-drm content, etc.
But not a single compact standard exists to use independent of the number of channels except USB but since USB has a general purpose use, just sticking in a USB wire is not going to recognize it as an audio device and sound cards are not going to put USB ports in their soundcards to avoid confusion.
Why not replace the Toslink/Optical/AES/Coax/USB/ mess each with its own limitations and no universal plug and play capability with a single multi-channel connector for the same reasons the original HDMI came about. For digital audio transmission that has applications from stage to studio to consumer electronics. Give the ability to have galvanic isolation if necessary for this connector as an option, so we don't have expensive solution per stereo cable.
I would even use the same physical connectors as the HDMI port and cables that already come with it but not the HDMI protocol which is the one with the licensing issues. Plenty of bandwidth to do audio. Just like some vendors do I2S over HDMI ports and cables nothing to do with HDMI protocol. So there isn't yet another cable type to buy.
But design the protocol bottom up so that you include proper clock sync channel - so you don't have the zillion clock sync methods within the fragmented platforms that some screw up more than others - transmission of two-way 16-32 channels of digital audio (no video) - so you don't have different connectors and often different products to choose if you want 2.0 or 2.1 or 7.1 or 16.0 or whatever because you can't plug in one to the other, no power transmission - so you can't introduce interference in poorly shielded cables and anemic output in USB powered gizmos pretending to be audiophile equipment, etc.
And make it open-license so that no entity enforces IP or licensing (but you can still have third party conformance certification and testing)
Aren't there any thought-leadership entities or individuals and influencers who can be thinking about this and co-opting the above industries who can all benefit without having to jump on the HDMI bandwagon or stay with multiple connectors and protocols with adapters and converters and extractors.
Do we really need a $300 USB to AES converter? Or a $100 TOSLINK to AES converter? For no reason other than the fragmentation?
I don't think this is rocket science, just a willingness to progress for mutual benefit and avoidance of those that say nothing can be done.
Thoughts?
This is also not about the content industry and the entire DRM related monopolies and the licensing. There is a whole industry out there that is outside that - pro-audio, sound cards, boutique manufacturers catering to stereo and multi-channel non-drm content, etc.
But not a single compact standard exists to use independent of the number of channels except USB but since USB has a general purpose use, just sticking in a USB wire is not going to recognize it as an audio device and sound cards are not going to put USB ports in their soundcards to avoid confusion.
Why not replace the Toslink/Optical/AES/Coax/USB/ mess each with its own limitations and no universal plug and play capability with a single multi-channel connector for the same reasons the original HDMI came about. For digital audio transmission that has applications from stage to studio to consumer electronics. Give the ability to have galvanic isolation if necessary for this connector as an option, so we don't have expensive solution per stereo cable.
I would even use the same physical connectors as the HDMI port and cables that already come with it but not the HDMI protocol which is the one with the licensing issues. Plenty of bandwidth to do audio. Just like some vendors do I2S over HDMI ports and cables nothing to do with HDMI protocol. So there isn't yet another cable type to buy.
But design the protocol bottom up so that you include proper clock sync channel - so you don't have the zillion clock sync methods within the fragmented platforms that some screw up more than others - transmission of two-way 16-32 channels of digital audio (no video) - so you don't have different connectors and often different products to choose if you want 2.0 or 2.1 or 7.1 or 16.0 or whatever because you can't plug in one to the other, no power transmission - so you can't introduce interference in poorly shielded cables and anemic output in USB powered gizmos pretending to be audiophile equipment, etc.
And make it open-license so that no entity enforces IP or licensing (but you can still have third party conformance certification and testing)
Aren't there any thought-leadership entities or individuals and influencers who can be thinking about this and co-opting the above industries who can all benefit without having to jump on the HDMI bandwagon or stay with multiple connectors and protocols with adapters and converters and extractors.
Do we really need a $300 USB to AES converter? Or a $100 TOSLINK to AES converter? For no reason other than the fragmentation?
I don't think this is rocket science, just a willingness to progress for mutual benefit and avoidance of those that say nothing can be done.
Thoughts?