There are a couple blu-rays that do seem to look worse like House of Flying Daggers, but that is so far from ordinary that it's hard to imagine what you are talking about. I've never played a blu-ray, even without HD audio support, that has sounded worse than a DVD release.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Wii U - No optical audio connector? Nintendo. Fix this!!
- Thread starter Fredrik
- Start date
There are a couple blu-rays that do seem to look worse like House of Flying Daggers, but that is so far from ordinary that it's hard to imagine what you are talking about. I've never played a blu-ray, even without HD audio support, that has sounded worse than a DVD release.
Am notI swear to god there is no difference playing a dvd with all the enhancement shit on on your ps3 or xbox or actual dvd player and a blu ray. The proof is with my own eyes. Actually the only difference Ive noticed with blu ray is that shit moves at a different speed. Like less frames per second or something.
I watch DVD's on a PS3. It does do a very good job of upscaling, but it's not Blu-Ray quality. It has none of the sharpness. It's basically an anti-aliased 480p picture, compared to a pin sharp 1080p picture.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
I do not believe that the number of people with optical audio are so few and far between. I have no intention to buy a completely new receiver just for the Wii U right now. Not that I would buy the Wii U for big AAA third party games. I'd think that Nintendo games will be more than playable with the TV stereo speakers, but I would miss the subwoofer, yes.
I would have to try what happens if I connect say a device with HDMI out to the Amplifier (which has an HDMI input, but for 5.1 audio I have always used optical cables for audio) and if the system is at least able to playback music and sounds through the speakers in some way... I could try with the iPhone and the HDMI video out cables...
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
True, but those of us with a decent enough AV setup with optical audio face the prospect of going back to TV speakers audio just for the Wii U. Either that or spending €300 for a new receiver with HDMI audio capability... while it is likely that both Xbox Next and PS4 will still offer optical audio support in addition to HDMI digital audio.
Just use coaxial and Dolby Pro Logic II. It sucks, but at least you'll get subwoofer. Basically the Wii U will be the same shitty audio as the Wii for you.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Can you? Uhm... I would have to try.
HDMI video + coaxial audio? I better check the receiver...
Shin Johnpv
Member
Am not
You need to get your eyes checked then. I'm not using that as a joke comment either, I'm being serious. Besides the resolution increase, BD introduced some majorly improved codecs, and higher bit rates, that shit all over even the highest resolution super bit dvds. The color depth on BDs is well beyond what was capable on the best of DVDs. No way is it possible to upres a DVD to meet that, let alone meeting the same amount of detail that's in a real 1920 x 1080 image. Just because YOU can't see a difference, doesn't mean there isn't one. It's a pretty big difference.
You shouldn't have said to research this. I deserve it fully if I'm just picking up the bait and I'm being trolled (nice job with that line if so, but if not... holy wow).
The difference between DVD and Blu-ray, other than that Blu-rays are often much better mastering jobs from the source, is simply actual internal resolution displayed on your screen (the pixel dimensions the original image is being resolved to before being displayed on your screen). This is independent of the size of the screen on which it is being displayed unless the screen doesn't support a given resolution at all.
Research:
Typical DVD resolution depending on aspect ratio of course is 640x480 (also known as 480p). Full HD is a resolution of 1920x1080 (1080p). Here are how those sizes compare.
The image of a movie or whatever at that resolution is then stretched (well, not exactly, but to keep things simple) to fit the dimensions of your screen. Clearly and obviously, the 480p image is going to be stretched a lot more than the 1080, and the images will occupy the same space.
If I were on my home PC I would just take screencaps of DVD quality versus 1080p of the same content at the same size to illustrate, but I'm at work.
It is perfectly reasonable to contend that on a small screen (sub-25 inches), or viewing from very far away, or if you have poor eyesight, that it does not make a difference. In all other circumstances it is pretty silly to claim that.
edit: All of what the poster above me said is true and makes a big difference especially the color reproduction stuff, but I was just trying to explain it in the simplest terms
Marty Chinn
Member
What? I think you're down playing the usage of optical audio a bit. It's probably the most common interface for 5.1 audio.
Oh make no mistake, I'm not advocating what Nintendo did. I think what they did was terrible. I was only trying to clear up someone thinking there was no such thing as HD audio, and that optical and HDMI audio capabilities were the same. HDMI is better, but there is no excuse for what Nintendo did.
On my receiver you can mix and match audio/video feeds. I'd just get a cheap receiver that handles the codecs though, I think the high def audio and a much cleaner setup for every one of your systems (including hooking the PC up to your television) is worth a couple hundred.
It really doesn't matter what you think your eyes are seeing, there is a significant FACTUAL difference between Blu-ray and DVD. The PAL DVDs are indeed slightly higher in resolution but nowhere NEAR the 1920x1080 delivered via the Blu-ray standard.
At absolute best, a PAL DVD would be 720×576 pixels.
To suggest that there is no real difference between 1920x1080 (progressive) and 720x576 (interlaced) is pure ignorance on your part.
My receiver is optical audio, but I run into my TV with HDMI and then go optical out from my TV to my receiver.
I'm unsure what I'm missing (if anything) but I've tried running my optical straight from my PS3 to my receiver and I can't tell a difference. Could be that I'm 2.1 only though.
I'm unsure what I'm missing (if anything) but I've tried running my optical straight from my PS3 to my receiver and I can't tell a difference. Could be that I'm 2.1 only though.
"AV Multi Out connector" is the output also available on the Wii offering composite, scart/rgb and component output. All of these are only in stereo.
Marty Chinn
Member
You're not getting 5.1 audio through your setup.
Christberg
Member
That'd be why. You only get 2.1 tops that way. If you wanted 5.1 you'd need a receiver for that.
Frankly I find DD 5.1 and standard DTS to be pretty lame in comparison to LPCM. Upgrade you receivers, peeps. It's woth the investment.
Shin Johnpv
Member
There's only a small handful of tvs that will/can pass the 5.1 mix through the TV to your receiver. What you should be doing instead is telling your PS3/360/TVReceiver/whatever is to output digital audio over it's optical out channel, and video over the HDMI port. Then plug the optical out directly into your receiver.
You can absolutely do this. I haven't run into a device that has HDMI and Optical that won't let you do this.
Marty Chinn
Member
It really depends on your speakers too though. Simply upgrading your receiver doesn't automatically mean you'll really hear the benefits.
Im not sayin absolutely no difference. Im saying little difference. Pal Dvds look very good when upscaled. No "artifacting" as someone above is insisting. As I said the biggest difference to me is the frame rate which to me makes it kind of unwatchable. Dunno how you americans can stand watchin movies like that. Its like all juttery.
By the way, why is a clearer picture inherently better? I mean, you obviously dont want something blurry, but if its slightly clearer I dont see how that makes the movie more enjoyable. Should film grain be removed too? Doesnt make much sense if you think about it.
FallingSputnik
Member
This is why I made sure that when I bought my receiver a few years back it absolutely had HDMI. What annoys me is having to figure out how to use my headset for when my wife doesn't want to hear the noise. I'm wondering if I could just use the toslink/digital out from my receiver.
Mizzou Gaming
Member
This is just flatout dumb. how expensive would it have been to just include a built in optical slot. It really makes 0 sense as there are a ton of people that still use this method.
It seems that you got differently mixed movies then. Just like they mixed DTS tracks of movies differently than Dolby Digital 5.1 tracks.
People already have trouble figuring out, if an MP3 is 192kbps or 256kbps. And you are saying that DTS fullbitrate - which means 1509 kbps - sounds lame compared to LPCM? Fascinating. Next you will probably tell me that golden 200$ HDMI cables sound better than the cheap 4$ ones.
Unless of course you are not actually a human. Maybe you are a dog, then this may be right. Or you are a computer. Sure, it's more accurate data. But human ears aren't able to tell the difference.
You get Dolby Surrond on Wii. Which is 2.0, but has surround sound encoded into it. It's not plain stereo. I mean you get actual surround sound of the stereo signal. This is basically the only hope left. If they don't include Dolby Surround in Wii U, well, no Wii U for me. Or at least I will wait till Wii U is 120$ cheaper, so that I can buy a HDMI audio decoder and won't pay "extra".
You also said that Optical was better than HDMI. A clearer picture is closer to what you see in the theater and thus closer to what the Director/D.P intended. A higher definition doesn't remove film grain and noise if the source material is filmed in that manner. You are changing your argument to something entirely different.
i said the optical thing ages ago..i admit im probably wrong bout that. And it does seem to be the intention of some filmmakers to remove film grain and stuff for blu ray transfers. Matt and Trey talked bout that in something for South Park movie. Star Wars did that too i think. Not to mention film makers just in general moving away from film to digital. Why else has the HD camera been invented? For nonsensically clearer picture. Anyway this is going off topic now
With movies, I believe the medium on which the movie is stored should have as little an impact as possible on what you see on the screen. Movies are filmed at resolutions much higher than DVD and still higher than Blu-ray as they are designed to be viewed on large cinema screens.
DVD inherently and dramatically reduces the quality of the original material. You lose detail that should be visible. Blu-ray does NOT artificially enhance the picture, rather, it serves to display an image much closer to what was originally intended.
It's funny that you mention film grain since that is one of the things which DVD fails to display properly due to its low resolution. It should also be noted that Blu-ray actually outputs a proper 16:9 picture. A DVD output on a 16:9 TV must be stretched which results in rectangular pixels which further degrades image quality.
A DVD could never produce something this sharp (a direct capture from Blu-ray)
http://www.highdefdiscnews.com/reviews/tekkonkinkreet/image1full.jpg
http://www.highdefdiscnews.com/screenshots/baraka_4.png
A comparison...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3570/3783031804_3760f32e53_o.jpg
WHY exactly are you so obsessed with sticking to DVD? I don't understand that logic. If you are really a lover of film grain you should embrace Blu-ray as it can actually do it justice.
What is the make and model of the display you are using to make these judgments?
TheAmazingXemo
Member
This. I would run your HDMI to your TV, let the TV handle sending the digital signal to your receiver via Optical TOSLINK. Just remember to manually set your supported audio codecs in the system options. Ex. PS3 when auto choosing HDMI will output PCM 2.0. You need to manually choose DTS 5.1 and Dolby Digital 5.1.
Depending on the quality of the original DVD mastering, the quality of the blu-ray, and the screen and viewing distance: once you're in a position to notice the difference at all (eyesight not being a factor), it ranges from "a large difference" to "a massive, completely incomparable difference." Little difference is very disingenuous, it simply isn't anywhere close to the same resolution being displayed (not to mention the other advancements in video reproduction like enhanced codecs).
I don't want to simply write off your opinions, I really don't, but if you're interested in this at all it's really important that you understand that you have no idea what you're talking about regarding framerate. The same movie will not have a different framerate being displayed on the same TV be it PAL, NTSC, or completely stripped of region. If anything is happening to modify the framerate as you watch it it's the specific TV you're watching it on that is doing so.
edit: I forgot about refresh rate... I guess that did result in different frame rates across the pond for TV content? Are those days still upon us?
Dr. Zoidberg
Member
On one hand, Nintendo should have put an optical connector on there for people, it couldn't cost that much. Of course they should put an Ethernet jack on there too but this is Nintendo, so...
On the other hand, I feel that the optical standard is going the way of the dodo sooner or later, so if they were going to be cheap this is one way to do it. I felt the urge to update my receiver to HDMI a couple years ago just to avoid all the extra cables. Plus my receiver only had 2 optical and 2 coax jacks which wasn't enough for everything at the time, especially since almost everything stopped supporting coax.
Coax..Hey, wait a minute! How come we're not mad that the Wii U doesn't have a coax audio out?
On the other hand, I feel that the optical standard is going the way of the dodo sooner or later, so if they were going to be cheap this is one way to do it. I felt the urge to update my receiver to HDMI a couple years ago just to avoid all the extra cables. Plus my receiver only had 2 optical and 2 coax jacks which wasn't enough for everything at the time, especially since almost everything stopped supporting coax.
Coax..Hey, wait a minute! How come we're not mad that the Wii U doesn't have a coax audio out?
I think it's pretty clear that the issue directly relates to people using outdated receivers.
Most of those people use Tos-link for audio not coax simply because more device feature optical output.
I can see this issue cropping up but sooner or later you have to face the fact that times change and hardware becomes outdated.
boyshine
Member
If you want to have a surround headset, your only choice is optical. That's how these headsets connect to both 360 and PS3. You can't pass surround sound through the TV, because most TVs only output stereo through the optical out connection.
No optical out on Wii U = no surround headset support.
A lot of people also use all-in-one home cinema systems, and a lot of these (not more than 1-2 years old) don't accept HDMI in, as they already have the dvd/blu-ray player built-in. So, to connect a gaming console and get surround sound with these, you'll need optical. Same with PC surround speakers with home console connections like the popular Logitech Z906.
That won't work. For one, most TVs only output a stereo signal via their integrated toslink port.
And even if a TV supports Dolby Digital 5.1 or DTS 5.1 output, the Wii U doesn't encode a DD/DTS 5.1 signal, only linear 6ch PCM. This means stereo is the maximum number of channels you will ever get out of a toslink port when the Wii U is involved (the same limitation applies to optical out ports on receivers - they can typically only pass through signals they receive via HDMI, not encode audio themselves)
I use a Beyerdynamic DT 990 Pro headphone in conjunction with an amp (Fiio E09K) and an Astro Mixamp for the Dolby Headphone processing. It is awesome with the PS3 as well as 360 - unfortunately, I'm now being downgraded to Stereo by Nintendo.
Unfortunately, there's no indication on Dolby Pro Logic 2 support for Wii U games (there are some Wii titles that support Pro Logic 2). It seems rather unlikely to me that Nintendo would license Pro Logic when they are scrimping on the much more important Dolby Digital 5.1 codec.
Flame Lord
Member
I've been thinking about getting a reviever and some speakers to go with it. I'm under the impression that all I have to do is buy speaker wire and cut it the length that I need and that was it. Am I about right?
plagiarize
Banned
it's plausible, however unlikely, that they could be using their own virtualised surround for headphone users. i've not extensively played the 3DS with headphones, but i'm under the impression that it does do virtual positional audio.
Christberg
Member
We're talking straight DD and DTS, not DTS MA or DD HD. Both of which sound the same as LPCM to me. DVD audio is a downgrade from Blu Ray audio and clearly so, same thing with the picture. Some of the newer DTS types are admittedly pretty close - DTS ES and whatnot. I'll admit that if you have a less expensive audio setup the differences between these are minimal.
The thing about MP3 that makes it OK is that you're usually listening to it on a cheap set of headphones where the audio difference is negligible because the equipment you're reproducing the sound on is sub par.
Bear in mind you're talking to someone who's something of an audiophile so this stuff matters to me. YMMV applies here, but HDMI has clearly been the audio cable standard for several years now.
And no, $100 HDMI cables are a waste of money. A HUGE waste.
The difference is that Dolby Pro Logic II needn't be supported by the hardware since anything that can do lossless stereo can support it. That's an important distinction as Nintendo doesn't need to license it for the hardware, every developer who wants it licenses it for its software instead.
I'm pretty sure license costs is also why Wii U doesn't do Dolby Digital 5.1 or DTS 5.1, without which optical is meaningless anyway.
The 3DS does, indeed, support virtual surround for headphones. By all accounts, the Wii U gamepad will do the same - still, this is a pretty cumbersome setup that requires an extra cable to a stationary setup for high-impedance headphones (an amp is necessary to drive them) and doesn't allow for the sound-mixing (listening to multiple inputs at the same time) a mixamp will do (I like to pipe in podcasts to listen to while gaming through the MP3 input). It's also why receivers aren't suitable replacements, as they don't mix sound, only pass through. If game audio is the only concern, most modern receivers do allow for virtualized surround through their headphone connectors (Marantz: Dolby Headphone, Yamaha: Silent Cinema; AV receivers tend to have lacklustre headphone ports, though).
soulassssns
Banned
No optical out is not a deal breaker for me. WiiU on launch day is all systems go for me.
I can't believe there are 20 pages of "discussion" about a missing optical port which wouldn't even function since it does not have software support.
I'm from Europe myself, and before the arrival of HDTV, I mostly imported DVDs and video games from the US.
Why?
Because games in 50Hz were slow as fuck, and the usual big black bars on the top and the bottom of the screen didn't help either. Very few publishers felt the need to optimize their PAL releases.
And regarding movies, I hated the PAL-speedup with a passion. I always noticed that voices sounded a little bit higher pitched, and especially during songs it was obvious that they played faster than they should have.
Also, PAL-DVDs often got rid of DTS tracks, because they needed the disc space for more languages.
Palette Swap
Member
I set up my newer PS3 Saturday and it felt good to choose what audio formats I wanted, reminded me of this thread.
That's kind of the result of people not reading the thread I guess. Someone has been pointing out the bandwidth/codec issues every other page since page 1.
Why do you think these are two independent issues? What I would like the Wii U to have is a toslink port that supports DD 5.1 - nobody cares about digital 2 channel PCM output.
Whether people know about the exact codecs involved or not doesn't matter, what they do know is that multichannel audio via an optical port is a useful thing.
Yeah, PS3's toslink audio support is what people clamour for with the Wii U:
Yes but AV Multi out is just a generic term for an Audio visual out port.
You're assuming that it's just the bog standard same as the Wii 1. We don't know that for sure, nowhere has that been stated in regard to the Wii U. It probably is the same, but I'm praying for a miracle here.
Consoles don't tend to have all the ports at the back for multiple sound etc, they have generic ports and then special cables for things like optical extensions and sound etc. It's not outside the realms of possibility that it could support analog output in RCA cable form for lossless LPCM sound - based on what I am reading. Linear PCM for HDMI is decoded inside the Wii U itself before being outputted. So the Wii U could decode it for analog too.
"Wii U uses six-channel PCM linear output via HDMI port, or analogue output via the AV Multi Out connector."
An RCA connector cable from that port could go into the back of your older receiver
Or maybe an HDMI to RCA cable with an split for multiple sound outputs? I've seen HDMI to component cables, R,G,B and left and right audio cables.
Would it be possible to get more than just left and right audio from this kind of cable? Or would it have to have a converter in between?
I'm reaching, I know.
I'm pretty sure the cable shown in the picture is a rip-off that won't work. While there are HDMI to Component video converters available on the market, they are active components that require an external power supply (edit: seems like the product has a power connector - still suspiciously small). I can't imagine that there is a working passive HDMI-Component converter available for purchase.
I think that for setups where an old receiver that doesn't accept HDMI poses the problem, buying a newer model is likely the best solutions. An AV receiver that doesn't have HDMI ports is probably either quite old at this point, or was a low-cost model that is easily replaced in the first place (this would apply to home-theatre receivers as well).
I've seen loads of HDMI to component cables but never needed or tried one before.
Man-is-Obsolete
Member
The problem with those cables is that on one end you have a digital signal and it somehow magically converts to analog by the time it reaches the other end. Like the person you quoted said in order to achieve such a conversion you would need an external box that is powered to convert an incoming digital signal to analog. If this sounds familiar it should. The switch from analog to digital signal for tv broadcast required a converter box to do a similar conversion, and similarily no cable on it's own could achieve the result. Because it's impossible.
Mithos
Member
Yeah, PS3's toslink audio support is what people clamour for with the Wii U:
Oh, how I wish I could rearrange the preferred order of sound signals on the PS3.
Many DTS supported games default to DD if both are active, and many DD only game default to Dolby Pro Logic 2 if DD is not active, having to turn on and off sound options before starting every single game to get the best sound is annoying.