Debate Thread: Scott's Hi-res Audio Test - Page 29 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 733Likes
 
Thread Tools
post #841 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 03:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TVOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,881
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 68
I'm a bit unclear about the 30hz jitter. Is this a common jitter frequency, particularly HDMI, or just being used for subjective analysis? If it's related to HDMI, as 30hz is also a common US video frame rate, has this been checked with sources using other video frame rates?
TVOD is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #842 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 03:55 PM
Senior Member
 
spkr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 249
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audionut11 View Post
There needs to be two separate discussions for audio based gear.
Nope. You aren't the first to express the desire to keep people posting certain way because he doesn't approve of it. Link In such case, who gets to decide what is or isn't subjective/objective? You?
spkr is offline  
post #843 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 04:03 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,409
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Once again, great. We have heard you loud and clear. What else do you want to say that you have not?
Answer my question(s) with a clear and concise answer from YOU... not WE.

No graphs, no charts, no links to... whatever. Is that loud and clear enough?
Thanks in advance!
Ratman is offline  
post #844 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 04:39 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,013
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 688 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVOD View Post
I'm a bit unclear about the 30hz jitter. Is this a common jitter frequency, particularly HDMI, or just being used for subjective analysis? If it's related to HDMI, as 30hz is also a common US video frame rate, has this been checked with sources using other video frame rates?
No there is no rhyme or reason for it. I did some testing to change the scan rate/resolution of the video and at least on the machine I tested it on, it did not change any of the correlated distortions. I suspect these are internal timers and such fire off and causing the spikes but this is just a guess.

I showed this measurement to Arny earlier when he insisted on 30 Hz being some kind of magic number:



The X cursor is the frequency of the first three peaks in these three devices. The signal tone is 12 Khz. So subtract those from that and you get their frequencies. Only one is at 30 Hz. The others are higher.

Also visible but not addressed in the listening tests is that broadening/shoulder around our main tone. None of that should be there. This is the same signal going through my obsolete, 15 year old Mark Levinson DAC (through USB->S/PDIF);



A designer managed to get this kind of performance 15 years ago but HDMI products put out the garbage above. And folks say that is not "sloppy engineering."

Anyway, that broad shoulder is due to unpredictable (pseudo random) activities of the system bleeding into the DAC in the AVR/Processor. Clearly that is no 30 Hz jitter. Attempting to simulate the distortions on HDMI across broad set of products with 30 Hz tone as Arny is doing, is like investigating a jet airplane crash by throwing a paper airplane to see what it does . To the uninitiated (or biased) it may seem like the "same" thing but obviously it remotely is not.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #845 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 04:55 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,013
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 688 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
Answer my question(s) with a clear and concise answer from YOU... not WE.

No graphs, no charts, no links to... whatever. Is that loud and clear enough?
Thanks in advance!
Here is your concise answer:


Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #846 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 04:55 PM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 129 Post(s)
Liked: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
OK, I will make this short to keep up with your attention span.


Do you know if they are or aren't?


Oh, I have the data and already provided it. There is no question it is poor engineering or else the Audio Engineering Society would not have said this:

HDMI, the point-to-point connector required for BR and HD video, has excellent bandwidth and an Ethernet data link (HDMI 1.4), but lacks an audio clock. HDMI receivers must derive audio word clock from the video pixel clock, commonly resulting in very high jitter that affects quality and can be audible. Some high end receivers address the jitter and many companies are researching it but current solutions are expensive and uncommon.

That is poor engineering: "very high jitter that affects quality and can be audible." Engineers get paid to build audio equipment that is transparent. If their peers in the industry say they are compromising quality, then that is bad engineering unless you are a shill for the manufacturers. Hoping that is not the case, please put on the best case you can as to why they are wrong. And what is your qualifications to say otherwise.
Sorry Amir, they're your pretty graphs, not mine. So far, you have presented no bias controlled listening tests to back up your claim that what you have measured is audible.

As for the AES, theyre not wrong. Their statement is the same as "if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle". Furthermore, you have yet to post what "very high levels of jitter" is as an actual number, and the bias controlled listening tests used to establish this limit. Because of this, your claims of "poor engineering" are ambiguous and arbitrary.
koturban is offline  
post #847 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 05:02 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,013
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 688 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban View Post
Sorry Amir, they're your pretty graphs, not mine.
There were no graphs in my response to you. You even quoted it. What graph did you imagine to be there?

Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban
So far, you have presented no bias controlled listening tests to back up your claim that what you have measured is audible.
And none of you provided any that says it isn't. Please don't keep using this fallacious argument. Absence of data is not data. You may have convinced yourself otherwise but that is not how the world turns.

Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban
As for the AES, theyre not wrong. Their statement is the same as "if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle". Furthermore, you have yet to post what "very high levels of jitter" is as an actual number, and the bias controlled listening tests used to establish this limit. Because of this, your claims of "poor engineering" are ambiguous and arbitrary.
Why are you mixing me with AES? I did not write this:

HDMI, the point-to-point connector required for BR and HD video, has excellent bandwidth and an Ethernet data link (HDMI 1.4), but lacks an audio clock. HDMI receivers must derive audio word clock from the video pixel clock, commonly resulting in very high jitter that affects quality and can be audible. Some high end receivers address the jitter and many companies are researching it but current solutions are expensive and uncommon.

They are saying *commonly resulting*. Is your aunt commonly found to have what you say? I assume not. So try again with something that reflects reading what they have written. Prove them wrong. Explain why something is good for them but not you. And how what they describe as "commonly resulting in very high jitter" is a sign of good engineering.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #848 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 05:29 PM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 129 Post(s)
Liked: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
There were no graphs in my response to you. You even quoted it. What graph did you imagine to be there?
Don't play obtuse. You've posted them numerous times throughout this thread.

Quote:
And none of you provided any that says it isn't. Please don't keep using this fallacious argument. Absence of data is not data. You may have convinced yourself otherwise but that is not how the world turns.
There is no data to support my claim of an invisible leprechaun in my pocket, either.




Quote:
Why are you mixing me with AES? I did not write this:

HDMI, the point-to-point connector required for BR and HD video, has excellent bandwidth and an Ethernet data link (HDMI 1.4), but lacks an audio clock. HDMI receivers must derive audio word clock from the video pixel clock, commonly resulting in very high jitter that affects quality and can be audible. Some high end receivers address the jitter and many companies are researching it but current solutions are expensive and uncommon.

They are saying *commonly resulting*. Is your aunt commonly found to have what you say? I assume not. So try again with something that reflects reading what they have written. Prove them wrong. Explain why something is good for them but not you. And how what they describe as "commonly resulting in very high jitter" is a sign of good engineering.
[/QUOTE]

I asked you to post what "very high level of jitter" is, not whether it was "commonly resulting".

You keep posting it to support your assertion. If you don't want to associated with it, stop posting it.
koturban is offline  
post #849 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 05:47 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,013
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 688 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban View Post
I asked you to post what "very high level of jitter" is, not whether it was "commonly resulting".
Once again you ask me about what AES has written. I didn't write this:

HDMI, the point-to-point connector required for BR and HD video, has excellent bandwidth and an Ethernet data link (HDMI 1.4), but lacks an audio clock. HDMI receivers must derive audio word clock from the video pixel clock, commonly resulting in very high jitter that affects quality and can be audible. Some high end receivers address the jitter and many companies are researching it but current solutions are expensive and uncommon.

They are saying HDMI jitter can be audible. Isn't that your question? They are giving the answer.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #850 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 06:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 6,021
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Amir, two questions (multiple parts):

1. In post 844, are both FFT's 64k points? What happens if you zoom in on the tone in the ML results to span the same frequency range as the other plot? It looks to me like the ML is a solid win anyway, but be nice to see a 1:1 comparison.

2. Does the AES define what "very high jitter that... can be audible" is? Magnitude and/or frequency? I do not know what they consider audible (let my membership lapse years ago).

Curious, thanks - Don

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is offline  
post #851 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 06:51 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,755
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Liked: 440
Yes, I've been curious since reading that group report as to what they consider high jitter that's audible, too. There needs to be some sort of face put on that comment. As it stands now it might have been a group of well respected chefs saying sharp knives can be dangerous. As it stands now, the comment is somewhat irresponsible.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #852 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 06:56 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,013
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 688 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post
Amir, two questions (multiple parts):

1. In post 844, are both FFT's 64k points? What happens if you zoom in on the tone in the ML results to span the same frequency range as the other plot? It looks to me like the ML is a solid win anyway, but be nice to see a 1:1 comparison.
Yes, the FFT has 64K points. Here is the zoomed graph comparing the Mark Levinson 360S DAC to the rest I had shown earlier:



Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50
2. Does the AES define what "very high jitter that... can be audible" is? Magnitude and/or frequency? I do not know what they consider audible (let my membership lapse years ago).
I could contact Vicki (co-chair) and find out but I need a better excuse than someone online needs to know . Any reputation I have left will go down the toilet.

My sense is that they are seeing the same data I have been posting which raises the eyebrow of anyone in the industry. It is a giant step backward in performance.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #853 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 07:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 6,021
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Thanks Amir.

Is the ML also driven by HDMI?

Knowing the chairlady would be nice, but I can wait until Monday so you don't bother her on a weekend. I was really hoping it would be elsewhere in the report, or some report, or some journal article they referenced.

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is offline  
post #854 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 07:09 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,013
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 688 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post
Thanks Amir.

Is the ML also driven by HDMI?
No that is driven by S/PDIF (it is a pure DAC). Here is another Mark Levinson product that is driven by HDMI:



There is almost a 40 db reduction in noise/jitter/distortions.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #855 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 07:28 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVOD View Post
I'm a bit unclear about the 30hz jitter. Is this a common jitter frequency, particularly HDMI,
30 Hz is a number that shows up repeatedly in technical tests of HDMI equipment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TVOD View Post
or just being used for subjective analysis?
Not a chance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TVOD View Post
If it's related to HDMI, as 30Hz is also a common US video frame rate,
Agreed. I don't think this is a coincidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TVOD View Post
has this been checked with sources using other video frame rates?
Not intentionally that I know of.

The video frame rate involved with AVR jitter tests is not specifically given that I have seen.

Other possible frame rates would be 24 Hz and 60 Hz.

But here is a key relevant factoid.



The Just noticeable distortion level of FM distortion does not change appreciably from about 16 Hz to 64 Hz, so the frame rate probably doesn't matter that much.

However, if there were any takers for ABX tests based on 24 Hz or 60 Hz for example, I would oblige with appropriate test files.
Attached Images
File Type: png Just noticable FM disotrion.png (113.2 KB, 66 views)

Last edited by arnyk; 06-21-2014 at 07:52 PM.
arnyk is offline  
post #856 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 07:49 PM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,555
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1032 Post(s)
Liked: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
No that is driven by S/PDIF (it is a pure DAC). Here is another Mark Levinson product that is driven by HDMI:



There is almost a 40 db reduction in noise/jitter/distortions.
All below audible thresholds, as has been pointed out repeatedly. What's the point, exactly?


Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
post #857 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 07:50 PM
Senior Member
 
urapnes1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post

Actually... IMHO it is a non-issue for everyone. You seem to be the only individual that keeps trying to drive the golden spike. Is HDMI really that horrible? Is it your recommendation that no one should use it?
I disagree. Hdmi can be convenient, but feels like it was not fully baked before releasing to the mainstream. Handshake issues, copy protection, difficulty in distribution in a multi-monitor environment and the speed at which equipment is obsoleted. I guess I just like the old way better. Pretty much anytime the consumer is forced to use only one option, we lose..so-yeah, If the only option we have, has a flaw in it, I'd like to know.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
you should move on to another thread
If all of this bothers you so much, perhaps you should take your own advice.
amirm likes this.
urapnes1 is offline  
post #858 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 07:56 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Once again you ask me about what AES has written. I didn't write this:

HDMI, the point-to-point connector required for BR and HD video, has excellent bandwidth and an Ethernet data link (HDMI 1.4), but lacks an audio clock. HDMI receivers must derive audio word clock from the video pixel clock, commonly resulting in very high jitter that affects quality and can be audible. Some high end receivers address the jitter and many companies are researching it but current solutions are expensive and uncommon.

They are saying HDMI jitter can be audible. Isn't that your question? They are giving the answer.
So what?

When I walk though the woods on hiking trips a tree could fall on me, and actually I've been pretty close to having that happen to me. Step lively, Arny! ;-)

Should I stop walking through woods or stop using equipment with HDMI interfaces?

BTW the above piece says:

"HDMI, the point-to-point connector required for BR and HD video, has excellent bandwidth and an Ethernet data link (HDMI 1.4), but lacks an audio clock."

Didn't I just get beaten up for saying that HDMI lacks an audio clock in an audio discussion?

Last edited by arnyk; 06-21-2014 at 07:59 PM.
arnyk is offline  
post #859 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 08:00 PM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,555
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1032 Post(s)
Liked: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
I disagree. Hdmi can be convenient, but feels like it was not fully baked before releasing to the mainstream. Handshake issues, copy protection, difficulty in distribution in a multi-monitor environment and the speed at which equipment is obsoleted. I guess I just like the old way better. Pretty much anytime the consumer is forced to use only one option, we lose...so-yeah, If the only option we have, has a flaw in it, I'd like to know.

If all of this bothers you so much, perhaps you should take your own advice.
Lols, all over the place. Is that the point of this whole exercise, to discredit HDMI? I call shenanigans.

Ratman likes this.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
post #860 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 08:22 PM
Senior Member
 
urapnes1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Lols, all over the place. Is that the point of this whole exercise, to discredit HDMI? I call shenanigans.
No it is not to discredit, but you have to admit that to try to hookup a bluray player to an hdmi system and a non-hdmi system while trying to retain the high-res audio is a pain. Case in point. I have the flat screen on the wall picking up the signal via a receiver over hdmi. All the audio is handled by the receiver. I wanted to feed the high-res audio tracks to a non hdmi pre/pro via analog inputs. Additionally I wanted to take the video and send that to a hdmi projector. It is not straight forward. Analog would be easier in this situation. I could buy 2 bluray players, but I'm not going to run two cable boxes.

As for handshake issues. Just last night I had to manually turn on the receiver because it did not het the auto-control signal to turn on from the tv.

As for obsoleting. I would venture to guess that a large % of the receivers sold within the last 3 years are unable to handle 4k.
urapnes1 is offline  
post #861 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 08:31 PM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,555
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1032 Post(s)
Liked: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
No it is not to discredit, but you have to admit that to try to hookup a bluray player to an hdmi system and a non-hdmi system while trying to retain the high-res audio is a pain. Case in point. I have the flat screen on the wall picking up the signal via a receiver over hdmi. All the audio is handled by the receiver. I wanted to feed the high-res audio tracks to a non hdmi pre/pro via analog inputs. Additionally I wanted to take the video and send that to a hdmi projector. It is not straight forward. Analog would be easier in this situation. I could buy 2 bluray players, but I'm not going to run two cable boxes.

As for handshake issues. Just last night I had to manually turn on the receiver because it did not het the auto-control signal to turn on from the tv.

As for obsoleting. I would venture to guess that a large % of the receivers sold within the last 3 years are unable to handle 4k.
Interesting... my Elite SC-55 outputs to two HDMI displays concurrently while feeding analog audio via prepro outs. Ok, older HDMI does not handle 4K. But what does? Component video? DVI?
imagic is online now  
post #862 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 08:41 PM
Senior Member
 
urapnes1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Interesting... my Elite SC-55 outputs to two HDMI displays concurrently while feeding analog audio via prepro outs. Ok, older HDMI does not handle 4K. But what does? Component video? DVI?
Not sure if SDI does 4k. Not really consumer oriented though.

5 years ago dual hdmi output was not as prevalent. Likewise, are you aware of any receivers with analog audio out that can run 2 separate 5.1 set ups via hdmi simultaneously?

Hdmi is great for simpler implementations, just does not give the kind of flexibility analog had. That was the point I was making.
urapnes1 is offline  
post #863 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 09:39 PM
Senior Member
 
urapnes1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Lols, all over the place. Is that the point of this whole exercise, to discredit HDMI? I call shenanigans.
Seriously, what was the point of your post/reply? If you wanted clarification, all you had to do was ask. Claiming I was trying to play games seems a little out of place coming from someone whom I presume is affiliated with AVS.
urapnes1 is offline  
post #864 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 10:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 6,021
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
No that is driven by S/PDIF (it is a pure DAC). Here is another Mark Levinson product that is driven by HDMI:

<image elided>

There is almost a 40 db reduction in noise/jitter/distortions.
Thanks again Amir.

The ML is clearly better, but both appear to have noise in the mud. Audible mud? Heck if I know, but -90 dBFS is a long way down. The Anthem has little "shelves" around the main signal tone, wonder if that is the effect of jitter or dithering? Anyway, thanks for the info! - Don
imagic likes this.

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is offline  
post #865 of 2920 Old 06-21-2014, 10:45 PM
Senior Member
 
spkr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 249
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
I could contact Vicki (co-chair) and find out but I need a better excuse than someone online needs to know
What you are saying is, until you do (find out), you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to audibility of HDMI jitter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
My sense is that they are seeing the same data I have been posting which raises the eyebrow of anyone in the industry.
That's something you would have to find out first.

Last edited by spkr; 06-21-2014 at 10:47 PM.
spkr is offline  
post #866 of 2920 Old 06-22-2014, 01:34 AM
Member
 
symphara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 77
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
No it is not to discredit, but you have to admit that to try to hookup a bluray player to an hdmi system and a non-hdmi system while trying to retain the high-res audio is a pain. Case in point. I have the flat screen on the wall picking up the signal via a receiver over hdmi. All the audio is handled by the receiver. I wanted to feed the high-res audio tracks to a non hdmi pre/pro via analog inputs. Additionally I wanted to take the video and send that to a hdmi projector. It is not straight forward. Analog would be easier in this situation. I could buy 2 bluray players, but I'm not going to run two cable boxes.
An Oppo 103 or 105 should work in your setup, if I understand it correctly. They have two HDMI outputs and multichannel analog out.
symphara is offline  
post #867 of 2920 Old 06-22-2014, 04:28 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,555
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1032 Post(s)
Liked: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
Seriously, what was the point of your post/reply? If you wanted clarification, all you had to do was ask. Claiming I was trying to play games seems a little out of place coming from someone whom I presume is affiliated with AVS.
I write for AVS. That doesn't mean I don't have an opinion, or a sense of humor.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
post #868 of 2920 Old 06-22-2014, 04:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
I disagree. Hdmi can be convenient, but feels like it was not fully baked before releasing to the mainstream.
Or, a half-baked rumor driven judgement is being made.

Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
Handshake issues
Surprise, many people didn't understand how HDMI handshaking worked because it was the first A/V protocol that they worked with that even had handshaking. Also, some of the initial implementations were a little weak, but who is surprised by that? Inability to distinguish design from implementations noted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
copy protection
No modern A/V protocol has credibility with providers without it, sad to say.

Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
difficulty in distribution in a multi-monitor environment
Do you know how HDMI does that and can you cite a competitive interface standard that does it better?

Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
and the speed at which equipment is obsoleted.
Welcome to the 21st century!

Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
I guess I just like the old way better.
Umm, you and Ned Ludd.

Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
Pretty much anytime the consumer is forced to use only one option, we lose.
HDMI is just another option, and you're damning the fact that it exists, right?


Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
If the only option we have, has a flaw in it, I'd like to know.
That way you can justify leaving your feet stuck in the mud, I guess.


Quote:
Originally Posted by urapnes1 View Post
If all of this bothers you so much, perhaps you should take your own advice.
Back at you!
Ratman likes this.

Last edited by arnyk; 06-22-2014 at 04:37 AM.
arnyk is offline  
post #869 of 2920 Old 06-22-2014, 04:36 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by spkr View Post
What you are saying is, until you do (find out), you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to audibility of HDMI jitter.
All you have to do is look at Amir's results in his ABX DBT to figure out what he should know about the audibility of HDMI jitter. I don't believe he was even the most sensitive listener.

Does Amir believe the evidence gathered by his own ears?
arnyk is offline  
post #870 of 2920 Old 06-22-2014, 04:39 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,555
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1032 Post(s)
Liked: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
All you have to do is look at Amir's results in his ABX DBT to figure out what he should know about the audibility of HDMI jitter. I don't believe he was even the most sensitive listener.

Does Amir believe the evidence gathered by his own ears?
That's the crux of it, thanks Arny!

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
Closed Thread Audio theory, Setup and Chat

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off