Analogue audio vs. HDMI Audio

M

Methadras

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 19, 2000
Messages
6,132
I've got an old Technics 2.1 receiver that is about 25 years old and was looking at upgrading to either a Yamaha/Onkyo 5.1. However, I sort of thought that I'm not ready for a 5.1 system yet and would see how much longer I can wait until I'm actually ready to dive in. However, one question kept me thinking in terms of the whether audio from tv to my receiver which is analogue now will sound any different going through HDMI? I think not, but I'd rather cut through all of the audiophile minutiae and ask for some unbiased opinions.

BTW, I'm not an audiophile at all, but instead look for the best bang for the buck and if that means spending a little extra to get it, I will. I want my system to be optimal, not high end for the sheer sake of it. Anyway, thanks to anyone that will offer their thoughts.
 
Eh.

Unless something is _wrong_, there's no real difference. The big problem comes in feeding that HDMI audio. Namely, can your current rig generate 5.1 HDMI audio? I know that mine can't..
 
I get interference from time to time when I used analog and audio was a little "fuzzy" to my ears. Now that I'm using HDMI both of those issues are gone. Not an audiophile BTW.
 
fyi, generally the audio from your tv does not go over hdmi to the receiver, usually its optical or coax digital.
Only the latest tvs & receivers with ARC (audio return channel) will the audio travel "back" from the tv to the receiver over hdmi.

Other hdmi input devices would feed audio to the receiver across hdmi. (Blu ray player, for example).
 
With properly shielded cables, analog has the potential to carry the best sound.

HDMI is much easier to get a good signal across and it will be nearly just as good an a super expensive analog setup.

Also, generally you plug your source (BluRay player, PC, SAT box) directly into the receiver via HDMI, and then connect the receiver to your display via HDMI.

Both the audio and video go from the source to the receiver, and the sound is processed there. Then the video only is sent from the receiver to the display. Audio doesn't even reach the display.
 
I'm surprised nobody has brought this up, but there is another difference too in that you're using the DACs of two different devices. HDMI would be using your receiver's DACs, and analogue is using the DACs of the source box. Now, I know we're not talking about audiophile stuff here, but common sense would tell you that in most cases, a dedicated piece of audio equipment will have better audio related components than something like a TV. Ultimately, all other things (dacs, snr, etc) being equal, there is no difference between analog and HDMI, since the source signal is the same. but in this case you're talking about what would actually be doing the decoding of the sound, and that introduces a variable outside of just what wires you're using.
 
What Activate: AMD said is very true.

It is especially true if your source material is 5.1 (DVD, SACD, or Blu-ray) or 7.1 (Blu-ray) and you have the source sending an analog audio signal to your receiver, then your source, whatever it is, is responsible for DA conversion and possibly downmixing and, in the case of outputing analog 2.1/x.1, crossover frequencies.

That said, some sources have a high quality DAC and analog outputs, but others do not. It is difficult to say which is the case without knowing more, but generally I would, at the very least, output analog 2.0 and have your receiver output analog 2.1 such that the receiver handles the subwoofer crossover.

It is easier to answer the Optical/Coax vs. HDMI debate though, in case this factors in at all. In this case HDMI is only beneficial, for sound quality, if you play Blu-rays or SACDs.

Other than the above, there are far too many variables involved to give you a "decisive" answer without knowing quite a bit more information.
 
Thank you all for your input. My reciever is a Technics SA-GX505 that I've had forever and thought moving to a 5.1 modern receiver to couple it with my Vizio 55" LED LCD would just allow me to hook up nothing but HDMI cables with the speaker wire to the Polk 70's, the CS2 center and no sub yet. But from what I see here, I won't gain anything outside of simpler cable management and that isn't worth dropping $300 or so extra for a new receiver. Yet.
 
I have to agree that it is ALL about the DACs. And I HIGHLY doubt the DACs on a Blu Ray player can beat even a 150 USD receiver. Also does the player even convert the TrueHD or does it convert from the sublayer Dolby Digital 5.1?
 
Most Blu-ray players will convert and send TrueHD out via its analog outputs, if it has them, but you are correct in that most Blu-ray players have very poor DACs and output stages.

There are a few Blu-ray players, however, that are known to have decent analog output, such as a few models made by Panasonic and Sony, that can be had for under $300 which will keep pace with inexpensive receivers.

Then of course you have the higher end offerings such as the discontinued Oppo BDP-83SE(-NE) and (and its upcoming replacement which is not yet announced), Marantz UD7005 and up, Cambridge Audio 650BD, and others which use very high end DACs and have very good to spectacular output stages, but the cheapest (and worst performing) player in this lineup still goes for over $700.
 
Methadras said:
Thank you all for your input. My reciever is a Technics SA-GX505 that I've had forever and thought moving to a 5.1 modern receiver to couple it with my Vizio 55" LED LCD would just allow me to hook up nothing but HDMI cables with the speaker wire to the Polk 70's, the CS2 center and no sub yet. But from what I see here, I won't gain anything outside of simpler cable management and that isn't worth dropping $300 or so extra for a new receiver. Yet.
Click to expand...
Thats not really the conclusion. My point is that if you get a modern receiver, you're upgrading yourself from the built-in DACs on your BD player (and whatever else you're using) to the built in ones on your receiver. Thats a sound quality increase. Unless you've got one of those audio/video-phile quality BD-players with really good DAC's, the ones in a receiver are going to be better. Right now, with analog audio going into the receiver, your receiver is basically just doing audio switching and amplification without any decoding. going to HDMI would change that
 
many modern receivers also have (configurable) automatic room-eq systems, like audyssey.
Uses a microphone positioned in several places around your room to measure/calibrate the audio.

I like the way it affects the sound in my setup anyway.

i believe mcacc is another brand's name for similar functionality.
 
Activate: AMD said:
Thats not really the conclusion. My point is that if you get a modern receiver, you're upgrading yourself from the built-in DACs on your BD player (and whatever else you're using) to the built in ones on your receiver. Thats a sound quality increase. Unless you've got one of those audio/video-phile quality BD-players with really good DAC's, the ones in a receiver are going to be better. Right now, with analog audio going into the receiver, your receiver is basically just doing audio switching and amplification without any decoding. going to HDMI would change that
Click to expand...

I understand, but the I can't see a justification to moving to dropping another $300 on a receiver just to acquire a better DAC when in my mind and in my opinion the sound coming out of my receiver now is quite good.
 
Fair enough. Thats the problem with these things. People have such different measures of whats good enough for them. Some people get all excited for $10k speakers, while others are perfectly happy with ones that only cost 50 bucks. You'll never know how something sounds in your personal setup until you've tried it, and by that point its hard to do a subjective comparison. It could just be that you don't know what you're missing (and i mean that in the best and most fair way possible). But if you're happy with what your system is doing for you now, then you're right, there isn't a compelling reason to switch.
 
Methadras said:
I understand, but the I can't see a justification to moving to dropping another $300 on a receiver just to acquire a better DAC when in my mind and in my opinion the sound coming out of my receiver now is quite good.
Click to expand...

AMD hit the nail right on the head. Before you come to that conclusion I would suggest auditioning systems.
 
Activate: AMD said:
Fair enough. Thats the problem with these things. People have such different measures of whats good enough for them. Some people get all excited for $10k speakers, while others are perfectly happy with ones that only cost 50 bucks. You'll never know how something sounds in your personal setup until you've tried it, and by that point its hard to do a subjective comparison. It could just be that you don't know what you're missing (and i mean that in the best and most fair way possible). But if you're happy with what your system is doing for you now, then you're right, there isn't a compelling reason to switch.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that fair criticism. I've had several systems that I've built over the years and I've seen and heard some very expensive/powerful systems too. I think I have fairly good ear, but I also know the limitations of what this system I'm putting together does and what I need it to do and for the money i've spent so far, my bank. For right now, the SA-GX505 is doing quite well and I am planning a 5.1. I already have the Polk 70's left/right and cs20 for a center and I'm planning on two polk ceiling speakers in another year or so and once that happens, then I'll drop for a good 5.1 with all the bells and whistles.
 
Audio is such a personal world. For me, I don't mind running additional cables for analog audio but some prefer the cleanliness of HDMI.

I ran through this issue back when the HD DVD / Blu Ray war started. I got an unbelievable deal on an RCA HD DVD player. The analog output on this thing was excellent with the SHARC audio processors. Sure, I had to run more cables but to get an HDMI receiver at that time that had better DACs/DSPs than what was in the player would have cost a fortune.
 
How exactly did you hookup the tv with the stereo system
all I want to do is have the tv sound come out my stereo speakers
any help would be great thanks
 
Well, only two possibilities for sharing audio signal between a display with speakers (TV) and a dedicated speaker system: either your TV has a line out jack or your (stereo) receiver has one.

If you are talking about using HDMI source specifically and only, then you'd either need a receiver with hdmi input and output (I'm just assuming this exists because I just use analog so far in my 33 years) or your TV just has to have a line output (preamp).

On my Vizio M321i-A2 (highly recommended as computer monitor) there is a pair of RCA outputs. From there I would have to use an adapter to connect the TV audio out to my old-ass Harmon/Kardon 2.1 system, which accepts 1/8' coax input.

What would that net me? I'm not sure... I'd get output from my 32" TV speakers, which are almost certainly terrible, added to my budget speakers which sound "acceptable" to me. Then there's the question of DACs. I'm pretty sure I'd be making use of the TV's DACs there (which I'm pretty sure are not where Vizio spent the money), and not the source's. But that would be something one of the [H] gawds would have to verify--I'm just guessing.

And holy necro. Thanks anyway, gave me something to consider and post about on my quest to 50.
 
Steve Pawlewicz said:
How exactly did you hookup the tv with the stereo system
all I want to do is have the tv sound come out my stereo speakers
any help would be great thanks
Click to expand...

If your TV and receiver both use HDMI 1.4, you can use the audio return channel on an HDMI lead to feed audio back into the receiver.
 
Steve Pawlewicz said:
How exactly did you hookup the tv with the stereo system
all I want to do is have the tv sound come out my stereo speakers
any help would be great thanks
Click to expand...

It's simple. What TV do you have?

Does your TV have a headphone output?
>If so, then use a 3.5mm to RCA Stereo cable and you are good to go. Go to www.monoprice.com for the cable.

Does your TV have an optical or coaxial output?
>Use a optical/coax to analog
 
I Have a lg led tv in the past I had it hooked up with a dvf/vcr but the one I have now has no tuner in it so just use my cable box for the tuning
Stereo has jack for a vcr 1 and vcr2 the rest are all being used
I had anolg tv last year at this time so this is a whole different set up for me
do I use the video jacks with audio jacks as well
 
Last edited:
You cant plug video jacks into into audio jacks.
If you mean something else, you need to be clearer what your options are.
 
this is what I have on both of my stereo and LG tv
Do I treat the Stereo as A componet or A/V set up

 
Last edited:
Just an fyi, if you are getting a buzz over an analog audio out from your computer, you might have a grounding problem from the sound card. Alternatively you could always get a ground loop isolator which should clean the buzz out of the audio. I used one of these in my truck when installing a new radio and made a hell of a difference. I think the alternator was causing the issues with weird power spikes or something.
 
Your TV doesnt have line out on the rear.
Instead you will have to find the headphone out socket and use that to feed stereo to your amp.
This will likely need a 3.5mm stereo jack to RCA stereo lead.
(The above has already be stated by other forum members btw!)

Its more convenient anyway as you can now use your TVs remote control to change the volume.

You dont need to connect the video up between the amp and TV.
 
Ok I went and got the headphone jack connector anf it is 6foot at Home Depot
next ? Is do I use the center out speakers or use the vcr 1 vcr 2 audio jacks
or should I plug it in each and see which is better
I know how to I just like doing things right 1st time
 
Plug it in where you have somewhere to plug it.
How difficult is it to unplug/plug a lead in, getting it right first time has no relevance here, you arent going to break anything.
You've wasted probably 10x more time waiting to see what we say.
Since we cant see the whole back of your amplifier, we couldnt possibly know which is most appropriate anyway!

From the picture, VCR 2 is free.
Theres no point plugging stereo into the centre speaker, its only one speaker.
 
You haven't shown us all of the TV's jacks. What is the TV make/model/size?
 
My tv is LG LED 42 inch
Oh and I do not waste time I like to have other people's input
I was plumber today and lawn person and have done wash
And picked up my son at school lol
 
Steve Pawlewicz said:
My tv is LG LED 42 inch
Oh and I do not waste time I like to have other people's input
I was plumber today and lawn person and have done wash
And picked up my son at school lol
Click to expand...

What's the model number?

And our input really isn't needed. Just guess and check - nothing to damage here.
 
42cs570
before we went this I had Sylvania big tube tv
I had the stereo hooked up through 2 vcrs and then the tv
I now have a Motorola cable box and 1 vcr which does not have a tuner with dvd player
I just want to go from tv to stereo system
 
Your TV doesn't have any analog outputs - headphone or otherwise.

Step 1: Buy this: http://www.amazon.com/FiiO-Digital-...e=UTF8&qid=1382578436&sr=8-1&keywords=fiio+d3

Step 2: Buy this too: http://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-...e=UTF8&qid=1382578600&sr=8-1&keywords=optical

Step 3: Connect the optical cable from the TV to the FiiO D3. Then connect the D3 to any available input of the receiver.

It seems like you have your DVD player and cable box hooked up in the worst possible way. You should use component (not composite) at the minimum.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
I Do have have the head phone jack
on the side of thr the tv is av ports hdmi ports ubs port
I only posted the back of tv
 
OK. Then just connect a cable from the 3.5mm headphone jack to any receiver input aside from phono.
 
I got the result that I needed by using the line out in my vcr/dvd to the stereo system which must be on when wanting to listen to the sound through the stereo
 
CrimandEvil said:
I get interference from time to time when I used analog and audio was a little "fuzzy" to my ears. Now that I'm using HDMI both of those issues are gone. Not an audiophile BTW.
Click to expand...

I wonder if that's the noise I sometimes hear, well most of the time hear, coming through my speakers. I wish there was a way to block it. It's rather annoying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top