|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.166.203.36
In Reply to: RE: cost posted by Joe Murphy Jr on January 22, 2008 at 19:55:07
,
Follow Ups:
... to Joe Public. If the general public was, in theory, confused by the concept of two competing formats (as Warners marketing division claims) then they'd be completely dumbfounded if offered a choice between two incompatible methods of transferring data from point A to point B.For all intent and purpose, the DVI standard was compatible, worked just fine and didn't have as many handshake issues that HDMI, but DVI cables can't carry sound. The two big selling points for HDMI are an ability to transfer picture and sound together and the relatively low cost of cables (making one standard universally accessible). If an optical system could've been implemented to satisfy both bandwidth and cost requirements without being too fragile (an issue with some fiber optic cables) then the high definition gurus probably would've opted for a unified optical standard similar to the one you're suggesting.
Cheers,
AuPhPS: Oscar, the new Denon AVR-1908 arrived today; I should have it fully connected, checked out and ready to go for the A/V summit Saturday! Now the true test will be running Zone 2 to my Audible Illusions line stage for the front channels; then everything will be on track. :o)
... or DD/DTS chipsets or video decoder chipsets or...
The Toslink hookup is actually easier than the HDMI hookup. I've been doing a lot of this lately since I don't have a Toslink switcher yet (multiple Toslink sources, one Toslink input channel on the pre/pro).
A (high bandwidth) fiber optic connection would still be smaller and lighter than an HDMI cable, you can even hook it up in the dark, just look for the "light splash" from the FO transmitter and plug the cable in.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: