Support NeoGAF

[Bobby Roberts]

I can't honestly think of the last time I used Coax to connect surround sound. Maybe my LD player? More often than not, a device will have optical over Coax for that connection. Optical is way more common in devices and I bet in practice. I'd really be surprised if this is true at all.

Most devices since 1996 offer both right next to each other - including Laserdisc players. Since RCA cables are ever omnipresent (and you pretty much have to go out of your way to purchase a TOSlink cable, often at inflated prices) people, in my experience, choose to pass digital signals via the coax option over the TOSlink.

In fact, I'm pretty sure a fair amount of Blu-Ray players bypass the optical option entirely, only allowing for analog stereo and coax digital as audio options aside from HDMI. The number of devices that are optical only as opposed to optical/coax or coax only is probably in the minority.

We're both just kinda guessing here, though. It'd probably take some google-fu to figure this definitively.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Most devices since 1996 offer both right next to each other - including Laserdisc players. Since RCA cables are ever omnipresent (and you pretty much have to go out of your way to purchase a TOSlink cable, often at inflated prices) people, in my experience, choose to pass digital signals via the coax option over the TOSlink.

In fact, I'm pretty sure a fair amount of Blu-Ray players bypass the optical option entirely, only allowing for analog stereo and coax digital as audio options aside from HDMI. The number of devices that are optical only as opposed to optical/coax or coax only is probably in the minority.

We're both just kinda guessing here, though. It'd probably take some google-fu to figure this definitively.

Just off the top of my head, Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2, PS3, OnLive, AppleTV, Roku, WDTV, GoogleTV boxes, my Pioneer Kuro Elite, my Sony 3DTV, my Sony CRT HDTV, and every Tivo I've ever own, including HD ones and the DirecTV integrated ones have all had optical but no coax. I'm not even sure if any of the devices I have hooked up right now have Coax ports on them. So that's why I find it perplexing that Coax is more common.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

Just off the top of my head, Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2, PS3, OnLive, AppleTV, Roku, WDTV, GoogleTV boxes, my Pioneer Kuro Elite, my Sony 3DTV, my Sony CRT HDTV, and every Tivo I've ever own, including HD ones and the DirecTV integrated ones have all had optical but no coax. I'm not even sure if any of the devices I have hooked up right now have Coax ports on them. So that's why I find it perplexing that Coax is more common.

Every blu-ray/dvd player I've ever purchased has coax/optical, as has every cable-box. (Shrug) again - we're both relying almost solely on anecdotal evidence. There's gotta be someone somewhere who has this shit on a spreadsheet somewhere that we can google up.

edit: Damn - preliminary googling shows no real evidence other than anecdotal regarding which is used more, coax or optical, and even that is super-fuzzy. Though I'm willing to bet most people just use the HDMI out on the Xbox 360/PS3 to get their audio, or the packed in yellow/red/white RCA adapter to get their audio, as opposed to getting a TOSlink cable to plug into the back of the reciever. Same w/ Roku or Google TV. They don't realize that their 5.1 is being downmixed to 2.0 and then matrixed back out to pseudo 5.1 when they use the red/white. Hell, this thread is great at proving most people don't fundamentally understand the basics of surround sound, so long as the sound "Surrounds" - be that PL II, basic Surround, or discrete 5.1/7.1

Hi-def audio is like a magical wonderland for a LOT of consumers. Which is why HTIB is so popular.

 

[jimi_dini]

I disagree. Choices I have to pay for that I'll never, ever need do suck.

Let's be real for a moment: Nintendo is a publicly traded company. They won't tap into their warchest to give ~10% of their customers an option. An option even most of those ~10% won't need anymore a few years down the line. It simply doesn't make sense.

We will see how many people are going to complain. Most people will find out, after they bought the Wii U, because they don't know the technical details.

And you're right, I'm actually concerned - because I am a shareholder. And I don't want to pay for that option.

As if the consumer wouldn't pay for it. No, Nintendo would have to pay for it. Better: the shareholders would have to pay for it. Exactly. smh

If people don't buy the Wii U just because of this stupid decision (assuming they don't support Pro Logic II - which would make sense going by your argument "holding onto Dolby"), then the decision was just wrong. I for example will wait till the Wii U hits 200$ in case they don't support DPLII. And even now, I haven't preordered Wii U - which I would have - just because of this nonsense.

Tell me one thing: Why do they support RCA out instead of dumping that altogether. THAT one is really obsolete. Still they support it, wasting precious cents.

In fact, I'm pretty sure a fair amount of Blu-Ray players bypass the optical option entirely, only allowing for analog stereo and coax digital as audio options aside from HDMI. The number of devices that are optical only as opposed to optical/coax or coax only is probably in the minority.

The ultra-cheap bluray players support Coax only, because it's cheaper. If you don't buy the cheapest model, they almost always support both. Anyway, my PS3 supports optical out only. No coax out for PS3.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Every blu-ray/dvd player I've ever purchased has coax/optical, as has every cable-box. (Shrug) again - we're both relying almost solely on anecdotal evidence. There's gotta be someone somewhere who has this shit on a spreadsheet somewhere that we can google up.

edit: Damn - preliminary googling shows no real evidence other than anecdotal regarding which is used more, coax or optical, and even that is super-fuzzy. Though I'm willing to bet most people just use the HDMI out on the Xbox 360/PS3 to get their audio, or the packed in yellow/red/white RCA adapter to get their audio, as opposed to getting a TOSlink cable to plug into the back of the reciever. Same w/ Roku or Google TV. They don't realize that their 5.1 is being downmixed to 2.0 and then matrixed back out to pseudo 5.1 when they use the red/white. Hell, this thread is great at proving most people don't fundamentally understand the basics of surround sound, so long as the sound "Surrounds" - be that PL II, basic Surround, or discrete 5.1/7.1

Hi-def audio is like a magical wonderland for a LOT of consumers. Which is why HTIB is so popular.

Doing some quick Googling myself, and the only thing I found so far is that Logitech states Optical is far more common than Coax on their site. Also, thinking about it more, how many devices do you find out there that have Coax but not Optical. I've already listed a ton of devices that have Optical and not Coax. Another thing to consider is look at receivers out there. Which has more ports? In both of my receivers that I have, both have more Optical than Coax. I think these are all signs that Optical is more common than Coax.

I do agree that people don't know what they're listening to very often. I've witnessed it myself even with people who have high end equipment. Kinda scary when they've dropped a few grand on something and they're listening to it on Pro Logic for a Blu Ray movie. The same could be said about HD resolution though too. Many people were viewing that incorrectly or thinking their SD content was now HD. So it doesn't surprise me one bit about audio which people seem to be less aware/knowledgeable about.

 

[UltimateIke]

My Samsung Blu-ray player has coax, but not optical. >_<

But it's okay. I plan on buying an HDMI receiver very soon for that, the Wii U, and my PC.

 

[Mudkips]

People don't like to read the thread I guess. At all I mean. It's not just "old" receivers (which is bullcrap anyway, a proper multi-thousand-dollar receiver from 10 years ago isn't obsolete. It just doesn't support some codec out of the box, because the connectors nor the codecs were available at that point.

That's pretty much the definition of obsolete.
I upgraded. I'm happy. Just be like me.

I would get the 7770, worth the price difference.

The PC is for movies/etc., not games.

Out of curiosity, I just tried it and they were not 1ms return times. They were 6ms, 3ms, 3ms, 6ms, and this is pretty close to the router and a pretty good router. In fact I just tried it again 6 inches from the router and got 4ms, 8ms, 3ms, and 3ms. Let's not try to play down the deficiencies of WiFi. On top of the latency, there is speed, and drop out from interference. I'll take a wired connection any day over WiFi.

30 feet away through 2 walls and an iron bath tub. 2.4 GHz in a crowded area.

I would prefer wired but let's not lie about wifi. +5ms of latency is nothing and you shouldn't ever have drop outs if you have decent hardware. Throughput is the real issue.

 

[Teletraan1]

I disagree. Choices I have to pay for that I'll never, ever need do suck.

Let's be real for a moment: Nintendo is a publicly traded company. They won't tap into their warchest to give ~10% of their customers an option. An option even most of those ~10% won't need anymore a few years down the line. It simply doesn't make sense. It makes even less sense going forward, because if they're getting in bed with Dolby now, they'll have to carry that load around for more than ten years and at least two hardware generations.

The cheap Blu-ray players don't matter at all. They have to support Dolby. It's part of the spec. They probably don't want to, and the players would probably be $5 cheaper if they didn't have to.

And you're right, I'm actually concerned - because I am a shareholder. And I don't want to pay for that option.

Stockholder Mentality vs Consumer Mentality Round 6. You think of it as costs that Nintendo shouldn't have to pay. I think it has created a barrier to purchase and will end up costing me maybe 100-200x what I was willing to pay extra for Nintendo to include in the first place. The gamble that Nintendo made here was that they estimate that I am a small minority. We will see.

 

[jimi_dini]

That's pretty much the definition of obsolete.
I upgraded. I'm happy. Just be like me.

If I even "upgraded" to a 500$ receiver, I would effectively downgrade. If I "upgraded" to a receiver in my current range, I would pay way more than 1000$. My current receiver isn't even that old. My speakers are 15 years old. Do they sound worse because of that? Hell no.

Most receivers nowadays don't even have analog 5.1 in anymore. Mine has that including 4x optical in, 2x coax in and much more. I need 5.1 analog in for my SA-CD player (and that especially w/o downsampling the input to 44khz or 48khz/16bit, which some of those current "superior" receivers do, which would ruin my SA-CD output).

So you see, "upgrading" would be quite expensive for me, anything besides that would be downgrade. The only thing that would make a bit of sense would be buying a HDMI audio decoder. But why should I waste 150$ for that?

I wanted to buy Batman Arkham City on Wii U. But if I just get plain stereo, I will instead buy it for my PS3. Where I will get actual surround sound. And the Wii U will be put on hold. I would even accept DPLII surround, which would still suck but would be somewhat acceptable for games. But stereo? No way.

I mean the latest PS3 models could have dumped optical out and maybe Dolby Digital support as well. Would be a bit cheaper for Sony. But they didn't.

I would prefer wired but let's not lie about wifi. +5ms of latency is nothing and you shouldn't ever have drop outs if you have decent hardware. Throughput is the real issue.

I tried the same on my wireless and used 500 byte packets instead. Sure, most of the time I got 1ms or less. But there were several instances, where I got up to 66ms.

Now download 10GB and try it again. When I download a really large file, I will even get packet loss (as in packet takes way too long) on those pings every 3 or 4 seconds.

 

[Marty Chinn]

I would prefer wired but let's not lie about wifi. +5ms of latency is nothing and you shouldn't ever have drop outs if you have decent hardware. Throughput is the real issue.

Now have someone turn on a microwave and see what happens to your connection.

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

Yeesh there is some elitist talk going here. It's okay you can still support Nintendo and think this is a dumb move. Lol.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Yeesh there is some elitist talk going here. It's okay you can still support Nintendo and think this is a dumb move. Lol.

Yep. Also, anyone who is pointing out that this isn't good doesn't automatically mean they're running on old out dated hardware. There are people who this doesn't affect that still think this is a bad idea.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

Yeesh there is some elitist talk going here. It's okay you can still support Nintendo and think this is a dumb move. Lol.

Isn't that implied by talking about optical outputs?

 

[Fredrik]

Can't believe that my old thread is still relevant, so many things are so awesome with the WiiU but this issue makes me worried about other stuff as well. If they can't even get audio right then what else will they forget to include. I bet it won't use any HD sound techs that comes with HDMI either.
I actually had my hopes up with all the secrecy regarding the backside and that the press wasn't allowed to take photos. But then someone posted a photo anyway. and no optical audio port. :/

 

[Marty Chinn]

Can't believe that my old thread is still relevant, so many things are so awesome with the WiiU but this issue makes me worried about other stuff as well. If they can't even get audio right then what else will they forget to include. I bet it won't use any HD sound techs that comes with HDMI either.
I actually had my hopes up with all the secrecy regarding the backside and that the press wasn't allowed to take photos. But then someone posted a photo anyway. and no optical audio port. :/

They already are and that is why people are bitching.

 

[AtomicShroom]

Meh Dolby Digital audio has an inherent "input lag" of around 50ms, while Dolby Pro-Logic II doesn't. So I'll stick with PL-II, thank you very much.

 

[SmokyDave]

They already are and that is why people are bitching.

Do we know for sure which formats are supported? I find it hard to believe they'd support DTS-HDMA or DD-HD given what we know so far. There's no 7.1, is there?

The PS3 never got any real credit for its exceptional audio hardware so maybe Nintendo have found the right place to sacrifice quality. It's hard to put 'sounds great' on the back of a box.

 

[Antagon]

If I read everything right, Wii U won't sound worst though, outside of it's lack of 7.1 support. And if DD 5.1 really has 50ms of audio lag, the WiiU actually will be better in some ways. If you use HDMI of course.

 

[alr1ght]

Do we know for sure which formats are supported? I find it hard to believe they'd support DTS-HDMA or DD-HD given what we know so far. There's no 7.1, is there?

The PS3 never got any real credit for its exceptional audio hardware so maybe Nintendo have found the right place to sacrifice quality. It's hard to put 'sounds great' on the back of a box.

It's PCM only.

 

[Fredrik]

Meh Dolby Digital audio has an inherent "input lag" of around 50ms, while Dolby Pro-Logic II doesn't. So I'll stick with PL-II, thank you very much.

Might be a good thing? most modern TVs are incredibly slow, even in Game mode, might get you lip-sync problems if the audio is fast.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Do we know for sure which formats are supported? I find it hard to believe they'd support DTS-HDMA or DD-HD given what we know so far. There's no 7.1, is there?

The PS3 never got any real credit for its exceptional audio hardware so maybe Nintendo have found the right place to sacrifice quality. It's hard to put 'sounds great' on the back of a box.

We know they're using uncompressed PCM which is really no different than DTS-HDMA or Dolby True HD other than storage size. All three are lossless audio formats.

 

[SmokyDave]

It's PCM only.

I thought it might be.

We know they're using uncompressed PCM which is really no different than DTS-HDMA or Dolby True HD other than storage size. All three are lossless audio formats.

I'd feel happier seeing some certified support. Never mind.

 

[Reallink]

I'd imagine most people get discrete multichannel surround through HDMI or Coax. The number of Toslink users is probably much smaller in comparison. I'd also imagine most people using HTIB are unable to discern Dolby Pro Logic II from DD/DTS 5.1

My opinion is that you're way out of touch. Optical was THE go-to standard for at least 10-15+ years. I would hazard a guess that most people born after '80-'85 have probably never touched or heard of coax for multi-channel audio. HDMI was only widely standardized in AVR's back in '08 or so. I have to think optical is BY FAR the most common multi-channel connection right now. Maybe not towards the middle or end of the U's lifespan, but definitely right now.

 

[Shin Johnpv]

Can't believe the number of people telling other people to throw out their current audio setup to defend Nintendo not including optical out which is still a current and widely use connection. Heck, I have a fairly high end setup, and I still use optical for some things, especially since I'm out of HDMI ports.

Listen I agree it should have an optical out, my biggest complaint about the GC and Wii was lack of optical out.

I say right there it should have an optical out. No where am I defending Nintnedo not including optical. What I do stand against is people who are willing to spend a couple hundred bucks on any kind of a/v equipment with out doing some research.

Also no where do I tell people to throw out their current systems. I do say though that if you buy a 500 $ bluray player with speakers and think you're getting an A/V receiver consider it a life lesson and next time do some research.

Don't fucking put words in my mouth.

 

[pestul]

Hopefully there is an accessory option, because I'm not upgrading my Optical/Coax receiver any time soon. I was hoping I could feed it through my TV, but from what I've been reading, the TV only sends stereo sound from the optical out.

 

[SmokyDave]

Don't fucking put words in my mouth.

This has nothing to do with the rest of your post, but next time, say: "don't put fucking words in my mouth". Even "don't put words in my fucking mouth" would be an improvement.

Man, sometimes it feels like only us Brits can swear properly.

Edit: shit, just thought. If English is your second language, disregard this post. Also, I apologise for my arrogance.

 

[Marty Chinn]

I say right there it should have an optical out. No where am I defending Nintnedo not including optical. What I do stand against is people who are willing to spend a couple hundred bucks on any kind of a/v equipment with out doing some research.

Also no where do I tell people to throw out their current systems. I do say though that if you buy a 500 $ bluray player with speakers and think you're getting an A/V receiver consider it a life lesson and next time do some research.

Don't fucking put words in my mouth.

You were advocating that there should be some fault on the consumer though and I took that as a defense of the lack of optical port. I don't think it's fair at all to put it on the customer front for buying something that uses optical for surround sound audio.

Also, calm down and lighten up a bit.

 

[Shin Johnpv]

You were advocating that there should be some fault on the consumer though and I took that as a defense of the lack of optical port. I don't think it's fair at all to put it on the customer front for buying something that uses optical for surround sound audio.

I do think it's fair. You have to take some responsibility for your own actions in life. If you're investing in something that's 300 - 500 dollars, and it turns out to not work with the things you want, or it doesn't support the latest what ever, well that's kind of your own fault. I would never buy ANYTHING with out doing research first.

Like I said, I FULLY agree Nintendo should have included optical out there. I've been complaining about that since the GC days. I have to draw the line though at playing the innocent uneducated victim card for some one not doing their job as a consumer.

Ignorance is just no excuse IMHO.

 

[Marty Chinn]

I do think it's fair. You have to take some responsibility for your own actions in life. If you're investing in something that's 300 - 500 dollars, and it turns out to not work with the things you want, or it doesn't support the latest what ever, well that's kind of your own fault. I would never buy ANYTHING with out doing research first.

Like I said, I FULLY agree Nintendo should have included optical out there. I've been complaining about that since the GC days. I have to draw the line though at playing the innocent uneducated victim card for some one not doing their job as a consumer.

Ignorance is just no excuse IMHO.

I don't think you can have it both ways though. Either Nintendo should have it and it's reasonable for a consumer to expect it to be there, or it's not unreasonable for Nintendo to have it implemented and the consumer should totally have predicted this outcome. You can't say Nintendo should have included it, so it's the consumers fault for not knowing that optical wouldn't be good enough.

 

[Shin Johnpv]

I don't think you can have it both ways though. Either Nintendo should have it and it's reasonable for a consumer to expect it to be there, or it's not unreasonable for Nintendo to have it implemented and the consumer should totally have predicted this outcome. You can't say Nintendo should have included it, so it's the consumers fault for not knowing that optical wouldn't be good enough.

You absolutely can have it both ways, because neither of those things are what I'm saying. Lots of things should be a certain way, and are expected to be a certain way. That's no guarantee that they are though, and before investing 300 - 500 dollars into something it only makes sense to double check, and do some research.

That ignores the fact that assuming the Wii-U would have optical out was a bad assumption anyway.

Yes Nintendo should have included optical out. If some one runs out and buys something to use with the Wii-U though before confirming that the Wii-U has the outputs to hook into their new device, well that's their own fuck up.

It really isn't that hard to do research in this day and age. Open an internet browser, go to google.com and begin. I'm sorry but ignorance is no excuse now a days. There is so much information at the average person's finger tips that there is no excuse.

My point is that before investing in something to use with something else, do some research and make sure they work together. Yes this doesn't apply to the folks with older receivers, its strictly about people buying new ones.

 

[CLEEK]

If you've bought a receiver in the past few years that doesn't have HDMI input, you have gone out of your way to ensure that not only is it not future proofed, it doesn't even support current HD standards. You won't be able to get Dolby True HD or DTS-HD sound from BDs or your PS3, as the bandwidth for these is too big to be sent over optical.

HDMI is the current (and future) standard for video and audio, and has been for years. If part of your AV set up doesn't work with this standard, it's time to upgrade. It's no different from buying a new HDTV to upgrade from an SDTV, if you want to enjoy HD video.

 

[Finaika]

If you've bought a receiver in the past few years that doesn't have HDMI input, you have gone out of your way to ensure that not only is it not future proofed, it doesn't even support current HD standards. You won't be able to get Dolby True HD or DTS-HD sound from BDs.

My receiver which I bought around 2 years ago only have optical inputs.

 

[CLEEK]

My receiver which I bought around 2 years ago only have optical inputs.

If you want HD sound and future compatibility, it's time to upgrade.

 

[Finaika]

If you want HD sound and future compatibility, it's time to upgrade.

Is there really an audible difference between standard 5.1 surround and HD sound for the normal (ie not an "audiophile") people?

 

[CLEEK]

Is there really an audible difference between standard 5.1 surround and HD sound for the normal (ie not an "audiophile") people?

Yes, of course. As long as your speakers don't distort the sound, you should clearly hear the difference. You don't have to be an AV nut to see the difference between DVD and BD. Likewise with hearing the improvement with HD sound. Can you tell the difference between a low bit rate mp3 and a CD?

I am in no way an audiophile. I have a lower model Pioneer receiver, Mordant Short speakers and Audio Pro sub. Bought them about 18 months ago for under AU$2k, although the same models are much cheaper now. The step up from my previous 6-year-old HTiB for DD/DTS 5.1 was staggering. And then being able to enjoy HD sound was another level up again. I could have saved money by buying an older receiver that didn't have HDMI, but I wanted HD sound and to future proof my purchase for the foreseeable future.

The lossless HD audio that the next gen will have is going to be awesome. It's already there for movies, and I can't wait for gaming to finally catch up. Totally worth the upgrade if you're still rocking DD/DTS receivers.

 

[AndresON777]

I'm not surprised at all so I didn't get too upset

I'm just glad the wifi is N. It is right?

 

[wsippel]

As if the consumer wouldn't pay for it. No, Nintendo would have to pay for it. Better: the shareholders would have to pay for it. Exactly. smh

I'm not sure what you're trying to say? There are only two options: The consumer pays, which would affect me, or Nintendo pays, which affects their margins and therefore the dividents. Unlike the vast majority of companies in the industry, Nintendo actually does pay out almost all of their profit to their shareholders.

If people don't buy the Wii U just because of this stupid decision (assuming they don't support Pro Logic II - which would make sense going by your argument "holding onto Dolby"), then the decision was just wrong. I for example will wait till the Wii U hits 200$ in case they don't support DPLII. And even now, I haven't preordered Wii U - which I would have - just because of this nonsense.

Tell me one thing: Why do they support RCA out instead of dumping that altogether. THAT one is really obsolete. Still they support it, wasting precious cents.

Because RCA is free and the true lowest common denominator. Also, RCA will still be around when most people don't even remember what S/PDIF was. So no, RCA is not obsolete and won't become obsolete for another few decades. More importantly, RCA is just a connector - the signal is always the same, no matter what analog connector you use (RCA, XLR, all TS and TRS connectors, Tuchel, DIN and so on).

 

[brochiller]

I'm not surprised at all so I didn't get too upset

I'm just glad the wifi is N. It is right?

Yes.

 

[PetrCobra]

This has nothing to do with the rest of your post, but next time, say: "don't put fucking words in my mouth". Even "don't put words in my fucking mouth" would be an improvement.

Man, sometimes it feels like only us Brits can swear properly.

Edit: shit, just thought. If English is your second language, disregard this post. Also, I apologise for my arrogance.

This is nice and all but there are also people like myself who would actually prefer native speakers to correct their grammar from time to time. Everyone is so afraid that they might insult someone. No arrogance is necessary when it comes to this but I really feel that on international forums like this one, people should be able to indicate that it's okay to spell-check their posts if that's anyone's hobby. I'd do that, put a message to my signature or click a checkbox somewhere, and I'm sure my English would suck less soon enough ;-).

Also, I'll be connecting the Wii U's HDMI to my 24" DELL IPS monitor, then streaming analog stereo audio from the monitor's 3.5mm jack to my cheap 3-way Genius stereo speakers. Sorry to hear that people will be missing their optical 5.1 outputs though

 

[ipukespiders]

afaik most tvs downconvert hdmi audio to 2 channel when passing through the optical jack.

it only outputs surround when used with the digital TV tuner.

I skipped the bulk of the thread, and this may have been discussed more, (apologies if so) but as it directly relates to me - I don't have a "receiver" with hdmi, I use z-5500s - I decided to investigate this.

If this affects you, you might want to read this thread (3 pages) in full. I've found out that 2 of my tested tvs - a sony 55ex500 and a samsung ln40a450 - do in fact output DD 5.1 on the optical output to my logitech z-5500s. The display on front shows it, and the audio test in wipeout hd confirms it. Tested with 360 and ps3.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1389050/tvs-with-5-1-passthrough-from-hdmi-to-spdif

Take the time to test it out for yourselves. In fact, now I can simplify my setup, as I should be able to rid myself of my pelican and joytech switch boxes for both tv sets.

 

[alr1ght]

well the Wii U doesn't output DD5.1 so no, you're not set.

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

well the Wii U doesn't output DD5.1 so no, you're not set.

This a dead horse at this point, but the lack of Dolby digital is the big story here and the OP and even title should be updated to reflect that part.

 

[Marty Chinn]

I skipped the bulk of the thread, and this may have been discussed more, (apologies if so) but as it directly relates to me - I don't have a "receiver" with hdmi, I use z-5500s - I decided to investigate this.

If this affects you, you might want to read this thread (3 pages) in full. I've found out that 2 of my tested tvs - a sony 55ex500 and a samsung ln40a450 - do in fact output DD 5.1 on the optical output to my logitech z-5500s. The display on front shows it, and the audio test in wipeout hd confirms it. Tested with 360 and ps3.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1389050/tvs-with-5-1-passthrough-from-hdmi-to-spdif

Take the time to test it out for yourselves. In fact, now I can simplify my setup, as I should be able to rid myself of my pelican and joytech switch boxes for both tv sets.

That's not going to fix it for you. The Wii U outputs uncompressed 5.1 PCM, not Dolby Digital 5.1.

 

[Het_Nkik]

So since I need to buy a new receiver to get surround sound out of a Wii U... any recommendations? Running 5.1 in a fairly small room right now so I don't think I need anything crazy.

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

So since I need to buy a new receiver to get surround sound out of a Wii U... any recommendations? Running 5.1 in a fairly small room right now so I don't think I need anything crazy.

Really any entry level NEW Denon or Yamaha or Pioneer will do.

 

[Arc07]

I'm about to pull the trigger on one of these. My older Yamaha system has been flawless for the past 8 years.

 

[Marty Chinn]

So since I need to buy a new receiver to get surround sound out of a Wii U... any recommendations? Running 5.1 in a fairly small room right now so I don't think I need anything crazy.

What's your budget and do you have speakers already?

Really any entry level NEW Denon or Yamaha or Pioneer will do.

Don't be so quick to assume on this one. I noticed a lot of the lower end are cutting out a lot of inputs that used to be fairly common. Like the low end Pioneer doesn't have any component video inputs which was shocking to me.

I'm about to pull the trigger on one of these. My older Yamaha system has been flawless for the past 8 years.

Before you do, you may want to look at this:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B007O5ATC8/?tag=neogaf0e-20

 

[Stewox]

I just noticed on the specs sheet and pics of the back side of the upcoming Wii U that they neither mention or show an optical audio connector or any other audio out connector.

They NEED to fix this.

Otherwise everyone without HDMI connector on their surround sound reciever won't get digital audio at all with Wii U. On 360 and PS3 they'll get beautiful DTS and Dolby Digital 7.1 sound etc. On Wii U they'll get analog stereo sound. Most people will probably just connect the HDMI in the TV and go with the TV sound.

I think this is unacceptable. They can't release a HD console in 2012 without some kind of digital audio connector except through HDMI. We can't all buy new sound recievers just to get Wii U to sound good.

Nintendo. FIX THIS!

Yes I agree, I thought about this since the E3 when specs were released and I got it in the back of my mind, this is one of those little disappointments in the USB3.0 ballpark.

I think you'll need a good HDMI splitter with optical out, because an ordinary splitter has HDMI out, this may be expensive though.

 

[Het_Nkik]

What's your budget and do you have speakers already?

Yep, I have speakers. I'm willing to spend up to $400 if the diffence in quality is worth it but I'd prefer to spend $300 or less.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Yep, I have speakers. I'm willing to spend up to $400 if the diffence in quality is worth it but I'd prefer to spend $300 or less.

Take a look at this then:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B007O5ATC8/?tag=neogaf0e-20

$326, has 6 HDMI inputs.