[jeremy205100]

HDMI is also updated every few years. Since the DAC would have to have an HDMI output to pass on the video signal, this means that it would have to be updated on HDMI's schedule to ensure that the latest video features are passed on. This will result in everyone who had a previous version likely having to upgrade to ensure compatibility with their new fancy devices. Schiit would also have to time their releases with these updates. 
 
While I would love an HDMI input, I don't see it happening. I was pissed to see optical go on the new Apple TV, especially since the box is taller... 
 
The best method would be to get an A/V receiver and have the digital outs go to the DAC.

 

[Jason Stoddard]

  The best method would be to get a AVP and amps or (barf) A/V receiver and have it take care of surround duties, but don't rely on it to output 2-channel reliably from HDMI sources thanks to Hollywood's draconian copyright protection.

 
Fixed that. 

 

[Clemmaster]

On the bright side: we can now get awesome multibit AVPs from yesteryear for dirt cheap because of their outdated video capabilities!

The Proceed AVP must be the best bargain today! Can be had for ~600, sometimes less depending on the condition.

It's a great 2ch DAC and preamp. Now, if we could upgrade the filter with, say, a simple burrito filter, that'd be the best you'd ever need! Even a taco filter would do...

 

[valiant66]

As long as you can get your device to output PCM stereo then it should work with any Schiit DAC with an optical input.

The surround formats are problematic, but I doubt schiit is will leap in to surround decoding anytime soon.


Update: I included amazon link as an example. The audio extractor seems like it should do what you need but I'm not 100% sure. Do you homework before buying!

Perhaps I was unclear. No, I must have been unclear. Too early in the morning, it was. I KNOW Jason is uninterested in surround. I said so right in the post. However HDMI =/= surround. That is, HDMI will carry any PCM signal, including stereo 16/44. Do new digital devices even come with optical out any more? And do I really want to commit my lovely digital signal to a $25 "converter" of unknown provenance?

Don’t get me wrong. I'm not promoting or even desiring HDMI, I just see that more and more devices come with that as their ONLY did it’ll out. As I said I see a time when most PCM signals will be carried over USB or HDMI: optical & RCA will fall by the wayside. ESBU is already pretty much pro only.

Maybe my original question should have been"would Schiit consider making an HDMI to USB / optical / whatever converter so people with new gear can use it with their old Schiit?"

 

[cishida]

Perhaps I was unclear. No, I must have been unclear. Too early in the morning, it was. I KNOW Jason is uninterested in surround. I said so right in the post. However HDMI =/= surround. That is, HDMI will carry any PCM signal, including stereo 16/44. Do new digital devices even come with optical out any more? And do I really want to commit my lovely digital signal to a $25 "converter" of unknown provenance?

Don’t get me wrong. I'm not promoting or even desiring HDMI, I just see that more and more devices come with that as their ONLY did it’ll out. As I said I see a time when most PCM signals will be carried over USB or HDMI: optical & RCA will fall by the wayside. ESBU is already pretty much pro only.

Maybe my original question should have been"would Schiit consider making an HDMI to USB / optical / whatever converter so people with new gear can use it with their old Schiit?"

 
What I was trying to say is that HDMI->optical converters already exist. As long as your HDMI device outputs PCM-only (I believe the apple TV will do this) these existing HDMI->optical devices *should* allow you to connect HDMI-only devices to any Schiit DAC with a optical input. At least worth a try, IMO.

 

[jeremy205100]

   
Fixed that. 

I don't have a lot of home theater/speaker experience really, and I've never really compared AVP and amps vs. a receiver. I also respect your opinion because I have both an Asgard 2 and Fulla and they are both amazing. But with that being said... 

When Schiit wants to put out some AVPs and amps I'll consider ditching my 20 year old A/V receiver my dad gave me to power my speakers. This receiver was bought with my beautiful KEF speakers and has great synergy with them. 
 
People will likely cringe after hearing this, but I get around its lack of optical by using a $50 DAC I got from Amazon. Works surprisingly well for my Xbox and it can decode various dolby signals which is important. I also have some other analog sources plugged into the receiver. The thing is a giant Denon metal brick. Since I use mostly new sources, and don't use the receiver to convert (it couldn't) I am surprisingly surprised by how amazing the KEF speakers sound. 
 
While I would love to have a setup with tons of different components, it would be unwise to underestimate the benefits of the affordability and convenience of A/V receivers. The newer ones can be had for $400-500, and considering HDMI and wireless standards are always changing, I wouldn't want to spend more on an AVP every few years.
 
EDIT: Also, I agree copyright protection and dolby signals make it a nightmare. This can be an issue even with optical though.  I had to upgrade my monitor a few years ago because it wasn't HDCP and wouldn't play Blu Rays on my Xbox One. I can't think of a stupider reason to have to upgrade a monitor. 

 

[kstuart]

This is a question aimed at Mike (@Baldr), since it is related to the "megacomboburrito" filter design - but anyone with any insight can chime in.
 
Is there a way to convert 96khz files to 44.1khz without approximations?
Clearly, if one was going instead from 96khz to 48khz, you just throw out every other sample.
But, to go to 44.1khz, there seems to be a lot of math involved.  Conceptually, it seems that it involves some points - for example - where the calculated sample is 12.37 and so you have to round down to 12 ("0000000000001100").
Or, am I missing some advanced math tricks that are involved ?
 
Thanks!

 

[cishida]

This is a question aimed at Mike (@Baldr
), since it is related to the "megacomboburrito" filter design - but anyone with any insight can chime in.

Is there a way to convert 96khz files to 44.1khz without approximations?
Clearly, if one was going instead from 96khz to 48khz, you just throw out every other sample.
But, to go to 44.1khz, there seems to be a lot of math involved.  Conceptually, it seems that it involves some points - for example - where the calculated sample is 12.37 and so you have to round down to 12 ("0000000000001100").
Or, am I missing some advanced math tricks that are involved ?

Thanks!

My understanding is that a schiit DAC (combo burrito filter or not) would never convert 96 kHz to 44 kHz. I don't see how the question is related to the comboburrito filter?

 

[kstuart]

 

This is a question aimed at Mike (@Baldr
), since it is related to the "megacomboburrito" filter design - but anyone with any insight can chime in.

Is there a way to convert 96khz files to 44.1khz without approximations?
Clearly, if one was going instead from 96khz to 48khz, you just throw out every other sample.
But, to go to 44.1khz, there seems to be a lot of math involved.  Conceptually, it seems that it involves some points - for example - where the calculated sample is 12.37 and so you have to round down to 12 ("0000000000001100").
Or, am I missing some advanced math tricks that are involved ?

Thanks!

My understanding is that a schiit DAC (combo burrito filter or not) would never convert 96 kHz to 44 kHz. I don't see how the question is related to the comboburrito filter?

Correct, a DAC would not do so, that is why I said "related to the "megacomboburrito" filter design".  It's the same sort of math that Mike would be doing for the filters in the ADC and DACs he designed, so it is an issue he is very familiar with.
 
For the relevance, of this, think of the recordings that are made in 24bit 96khz (either from microphones or from playback of an analog master tape) and then converted down to 16bit 44.1khz for CD release.   My question is whether that can be done without introducing errors (and what it takes to do so).
 
( The experience of comparing playback with the megacomboburrito filter that does a precise calculation, with DACs that use a less accurate filter, shows that such errors and inaccuracies can be audible. )

 

[cishida]

 
Correct, a DAC would not do so, that is why I said "related to the "megacomboburrito" filter design".  It's the same sort of math that Mike would be doing for the filters in the ADC and DACs he designed, so it is an issue he is very familiar with.
 
For the relevance, of this, think of the recordings that are made in 24bit 96khz (either from microphones or from playback of an analog master tape) and then converted down to 16bit 44.1khz for CD release.   My question is whether that can be done without introducing errors (and what it takes to do so).
 
( The experience of comparing playback with the megacomboburrito filter that does a precise calculation, with DACs that use a less accurate filter, shows that such errors and inaccuracies can be audible. )

 
Based on my understanding of sample rate conversion, I think the answer is "no" to your question about 96 kHz -> 44 kHz. No way to do it without introducing errors and artifacts, but I think some methods could sound better than others. For example, going from 96 kHz to a much higher sample rate and then back to 44 kHz may sound better than going directly from 96 to 44.
 
Regarding the filter, I think I misunderstood what you meant by "related". I meant that I don't see it as directly related as no schiit product ever does this sort of math. Stepping down sample rate would would destroy samples, which would contradict one of the primary stated goals of Schiit.
 
ADDED LATER: I agree that awkward step downs sound bad. I don't have a deep understanding of why. Schiit seemed to spend a lot of time ensuring them never had to do this sort of math - so I'm sure Mr Moffat can elaborate in much more detail as to why it is so important to avoid.

 

[atomicbob]

Here is a website that has evaluated a number of Digital Audio Workstation Sample Rate Conversion algorithms. They are not all equal:
 
http://src.infinitewave.ca/
 
In the default comparison, the top picture is how it should look, given minimal damage to the downsample, the bottom shows a truly obnoxious downsample. These are representative of the tools available in the pro audio segment. One of the many variances that can occur in content delivery format.

 

[kstuart]

Thanks atomicbob, that's a good resource on my exact question.

 

[atubbs]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I really hope this is not a trend with other products.

 
Meh. The Apple TV converts your material to 48kHz, even if it's 44.1kHz. Because reasons. Why are we getting hung up on whether or not there's an optical digital port?
 
In any event, they provide digital audio on the HDMI port like everybody else. It's where the industry is going, along with the desires of 99.938% (scientifically pulled out of my butt) of their customers.
 
There's no loss of capability to speak of and let's be honest, does anybody really think optical SPDIF is a good idea in the first place? HDMI is the connector de rigueur for AV in the same way that USB is the connector for things plugging into computers. There may be arguably better mechanisms, but we might as well bemoan that firewire ports have transitioned from being esoteric to an endangered species. Nobody cares and neither should you. Good riddance, optical audio. You were a mistake and nobody will miss you.

 

[Koolpep]

   
Meh. The Apple TV converts your material to 48kHz, even if it's 44.1kHz. Because reasons. Why are we getting hung up on whether or not there's an optical digital port?
 
In any event, they provide digital audio on the HDMI port like everybody else. It's where the industry is going, along with the desires of 99.938% (scientifically pulled out of my butt) of their customers.
 
There's no loss of capability to speak of and let's be honest, does anybody really think optical SPDIF is a good idea in the first place? HDMI is the connector de rigueur for AV in the same way that USB is the connector for things plugging into computers. There may be arguably better mechanisms, but we might as well bemoan that firewire ports have transitioned from being esoteric to an endangered species. Nobody cares and neither should you. Good riddance, optical audio. You were a mistake and nobody will miss you.

A big hurray for removing choice!! Less choice of how to connect your stuff - yeah! We should celebrate it instead of moaning. Changing from the old to the new Apple TV I had to re-arrange and er-cable my whole living room setup - yippee, finally I was forced to do it, thank you Apple.
 
HDMI is the future because it supports copyright protection (HDCP) - yeah! That is so awesome.
 
Fun aside: optical was a great idea, no buzzing and fuzzing, no electrical connection between devices, less noise, no frigging drivers -  liked it a lot and I am NOT looking forward to the day when they abolish the optical output from the Macbook Pro (I use optical out it a lot). Of course I will survive with USB, as I already use it most of the time, but I will still miss it and I won't be able to use some of my cherished equipment anymore.
 
Cheers,
K

 

[bigro]

It seems to me Apple TV is targeted towards the crowd that wants Bluetooth on everything and are perfectly happy with sound bars being the solution for all audio. Do I agree with ditching the Optical?  Nope I like Having Options of connectivity without having to add a possibly Inferior converter into the chain even if it is just an Apple TV . I have an older Apple TV with optical out and it works well but I understand Why they may have made the decision. Possibly the same reason why the Modi Optical Does not exist anymore. We probably have all 5 People on the planet who own Apple TV's and Use the Optical output on this thread. I help a lot of people with Setting Up A/V and I am the only person I know who uses or even knows what to do with an optical out. The majority of people want the convenience of 1 cable for all so I suspect the optical output dropping off went unnoticed by a vast majority of apple customers.
I did Try a amazon HDMI to Analog converter...it sucked. Back to amazon that went.
 
While we are on Apple TV I suspect they have done their share of market research and still opted for a non phone/ iDevice remote. While the phone app to control the world makes for great marketing, supporting various flavors of Operating systems and updates as well as wireless protocols superseding others will also present issues long term for support. When you buy a DAC that can be upgraded and you can actually get upgrades then the chance is  very good it will be around a lot longer than the lifespan of the idevices available today.