• 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!

Why can't audio industry standardize on a common digital audio "hdmi"?

Vasr

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
1,409
Likes
1,923
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?
 

kn0ppers

Active Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2019
Messages
192
Likes
258
Location
Germany
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).

Let me intervene right there. No we don't. Maybe some people do, but definitely not a majority and definitely not the majority in the consumer audio field. And even in the pro field, you want compatibility with older gear and other gear, so you'd be back at the start with adapters and interfaces.
 
OP
Vasr

Vasr

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
1,409
Likes
1,923
If by majority you mean I am a two channel stereo guy and I don't think anybody needs anything else. And that would certainly appear to be a majority of those here.

But that is being stuck in the past. Backward compatibility has always been handled while we have progressed otherwise. It is also not what people want now, but what new and useful things can be built if the compatibility issue was taken care of.

I want to get a 2.1 signal from a bass management unit (could be a PC but not necessarily) to a DAC - can't use TOSLINK out, the unit doesn't have USB out. Or the DAC only takes AES

I want to produce a DSP box for multi-channel audio room correction and sell it for a drop in replacement to anyone's audio stack. What do I use USB? AES? Any of them only occupy a portion of the market, so all of them? I just won't build it or have limited use solutions like miniDSP requiring converters and adapters if at all.

I make a great two channel DAC. I would love to do this for multi-channel but I don't want to get into the mess of HDMI licensing. If I use USB, I cater to only a PC segment of the market. If I use AES then I cater to only another section of the market. So I won't bother. Hence we land up with just a few multi-channel units at 4 figure numbers. If I allow all possible connectors, then I land up having to implement the different clock sync things and get all of them correct which blows the budget and delivery schedules and support issues.

I want to connect both my streamer box with TOSLINK and my gaming system with surround sound (7.1 LPCM) to the Okto 8 Pro. How do I do that easily? Yes, buy three different converters, dongles or adapters

I want to dock my smartphone to any audio device so it can play multi-channel audio. If the device does not have USB, I am out of luck. Or use HDMI but that is a licensing mess.

The problem isn't that there are some work-arounds for all these uses cases but rather this messy situation is inhibiting many vendors to come up with useful solutions.

One can make the case that USB will work for all but that creates some legacy issues on what you can do and won't be accepted by others that prefer something else.

All of this are things that standards processes have gone through for decades ignoring the "we don't need no nothing else" objections.

I do see a lot of kvetching about the evil HDMI empire but not the inclination to provide a solution. This is why it requires thought leaders and influencers.
 
OP
Vasr

Vasr

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
1,409
Likes
1,923
Just to clarify, I am not proposing use of HDMI protocol and so the downsides of HDMI and the evil designs of its creators are irrelevant. I know that can set off a lot of people here.

Having a compact single connector for multi-channel audio can use the same connector but not the protocol.

Also if USB can do a lot of the things and the industry settles on that as the connector type, that is OK with me. But the protocol to handle new and future audio related pins or channels, etc., are limited by the general evolution of the USB protocol that has to handle a large number of things.

The important thing is that one providing a digital in/out box has to provide just one type of connector, one type of clock handling, etc. Not fill the back panel with an AES connector for every two channels, etc. Those were designed for a different use case when the connectors went to different destinations and each of them were two channels at most.
 

kn0ppers

Active Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2019
Messages
192
Likes
258
Location
Germany
I must say I find your style of writing quite hard to follow. I know the limitations of interconnections, I don't think the people you'd like to discuss this with require as much of the anecdotal evidence you present.
 
OP
Vasr

Vasr

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
1,409
Likes
1,923
I must say I find your style of writing quite hard to follow.
:oops:
Perhaps we should let others who may not have that problem speak and avoid speaking for others? ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: NDC

waynel

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 14, 2019
Messages
1,035
Likes
1,288

Inner Space

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,285
Likes
2,938
Having a compact single connector for multi-channel audio can use the same connector but not the protocol.

Can't disagree in a theoretical sense, but it's a poor connector mechanically. In all my systems over the years it's the only connector which ever fell out accidentally. I would be reluctant to adopt.
 

garbulky

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
1,510
Likes
827
I think an HDMI connection that succeeds has to be one that is the same as the HDMI format out there, perhaps an upgrade. But the problem is that the HDMI versions are constantly changing with HDCP and things being required. The other is that most of them carry video signals, so the DAC needs to be able to handle the passthrough functionality. Which is a REALLY tall order for a cheap dac.

I never bothered with USB except to try it out. I liked the idea of 100% compatibility and simplicity with SPDIF coax and toslink connections. When USB asynchornous came out, there were a lot of driver issues. Now MS finally issued a built in driver, but I never was interested. So I've stayed with Toslink, BNC, and Coax inputs, all being currently used on my Emotiva DC-1 DAC.
Unfortunately with the current generation, the devices have phased out these connections. So I bought an HDMI digital audio extractor which has allowed me to still use my Fire TV while getting 4k HDR10 passed through.

The strengths of DACS, at least it used to be is that with Coax or TOSLINK, it was future proof for two channel. No matter how audio evolved, for the most part, you didn't have to wrry about your dac getting obsolete. But now with these connections finally phasing out, I have to resort to those HDMI extractors. But I see my friends who are purchasing the latest 4k receivers and processors only to throw them away after a few years as the standards change again. meanwhile my DACs have never needed to be upgraded due to standards changes.

Until the audio industry includes a standardized HDMI audio standard that allows for DACs to passthrough HDMI video signals no matter what version they are on, I think HDMI DACs will take time to standardized. Currently, I think most of the industry think that the only people interested in HDMI is AVR's receivers or soundbars. They don't even think of those interested in high quality two channel.
 

Jinjuku

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 28, 2016
Messages
1,278
Likes
1,180
I would rather prefer the audio industry to adopt one of the already existing Audio over IP standards (AES-67 / Dante / Ravenna / AVB).

Add PoE to that. AF standard should be way more than adequate. Then we can wait for the PoERegen to hit the market.
 

JoachimStrobel

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 27, 2019
Messages
518
Likes
303
Location
Germany
Which source yields a Mch USB signal from an official Media? I do not think there is any.
What about SDI? The MiniDSP forum had a thread about an HDMI to SDI Mch Converter that would not bother about HDCP issues as SDI was regarded as Pro only. I believe there is an Oppo mod. that costs as much as an Oppo and yields three Spdif Toslink sockets derived from HDMI Mch..... But syncing three DACs seems to be the issue there...
And I agree totally: HDMI Mch is a disgrace for the Stereophile world.
 
OP
Vasr

Vasr

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
1,409
Likes
1,923
Can't disagree in a theoretical sense, but it's a poor connector mechanically. In all my systems over the years it's the only connector which ever fell out accidentally. I would be reluctant to adopt.

I don't disagree.

That is mostly because they don't come with locking connectors. For some reason, display port connectors seem to work much better. That is an easy to solve problem.
 
OP
Vasr

Vasr

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
1,409
Likes
1,923
When do you need that as a stand alone device?

My interface (RME ADI-2 Pro) just has it built in.

All use cases for miniDSP UDIO-8.
Expensive equipment may have it but it shouldn't require people to buy expensive equipment to get multitude of interconnects. The problem is the multitude of interconnects used.
 
OP
Vasr

Vasr

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
1,409
Likes
1,923
I think an HDMI connection that succeeds has to be one that is the same as the HDMI format out there, perhaps an upgrade. But the problem is that the HDMI versions are constantly changing with HDCP and things being required. The other is that most of them carry video signals, so the DAC needs to be able to handle the passthrough functionality. Which is a REALLY tall order for a cheap dac.
I agree with all of your points which is why the need to stay away from HDMI for digital audio interconnects. But nothing prevents the use of the physical connectors and cables for a different protocol for audio only. It is a much higher bandwidth interconnect than USB and the existing certifications for HDMI uses ensure some QC for high speed interconnects.
 
OP
Vasr

Vasr

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
1,409
Likes
1,923
Add PoE to that. AF standard should be way more than adequate. Then we can wait for the PoERegen to hit the market.

Audio over IP is more geared towards zone distribution than equipment point-point interconnects which can guarantee latency (to keep things simple at either end).
 

raistlin65

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
2,279
Likes
3,421
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
:oops:
Perhaps we should let others who may not have that problem speak and avoid speaking for others? ;)

As a former writing professor, I can tell you that your writing does have some issues. Issues that make it more difficult to follow than most people's writing I have seen on this forum.

Just saying he's not wrong. I have no interest in debating it with you, but you may PM me if you would like further analysis.
 
OP
Vasr

Vasr

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
1,409
Likes
1,923
Which source yields a Mch USB signal from an official Media?
This is part of the problem. The multi-channel interconnect is being led by the industry with DRM concerns, not the rest of the audio industry which is using a mess of interconnect technologies. So, it is not a surprise they find HDMI eminently unsuitable.

I can't think of anything sillier than using a separate AES cable (or a connector in the back panel) for every 2 channels you want to carry between two units. Not a scalable solution for multi-channel.
 
Top Bottom