HDMI to 5.1 analog audio extractor found

[~dave~~wave~]

IMHO, YMMV
Do your homework before buying, kids.

 

[MidiMagic]

Any HDMI audio interface product like this with only unbalanced rca outputs is going to be hot garbage. However, a "real" audio interface (USB, firewire, or thunderbolt connecting) with 6 or more outputs will usually start in the $300 range. So... $29.99 for a HDMI unbalanced interface? Might still be a good deal!

Why do you need balanced line? Nobody really needs balanced line unless the signal must be run a distance longer than about 6 feet. I would think that this would be put behind the amp.

What’s your Denon? For Surround Master, you really need a preamp or AVR with MCH analog in. Even if you found something that digitized the SM output, the result would be far from ideal after two D>A conversions.

One possible alternative: Get three stereo amplifiers.

For a master volume control, put a stereo volume control ahead of the Surround Master.

I am beginning to want one.

 

[ClassicalSurroundFan]

One possible alternative: Get three stereo amplifiers.

For a master volume control, put a stereo volume control ahead of the Surround Master.

I am beginning to want one.
[/QUOTE]
The SM has it’s own master level control, which is helpful.

 

[ar surround]

Is this the same as the X4400h? If so, you have no option I suspect you are going to like. You must use your 4400h as a pre-amp only and bypass the internal amplifiers. You would run your audio out of the MCH Pre-Outs to external power amplifiers for all of your channels. If the SM has stereo passthrough support, then you would put it between the AVR and these external amps, and connect its surround outputs and the 4400h pre-out surround outputs to an RCA switch. The external amps would probably sound better than the amp stage of the 4400r, but this is a big project.

Unfortunately, I have yet to find a 5.1 analog input to HDMI converter. If the solution is adding external power amplifiers with an RCA switch, the cost may warrant ditching the HDMI-only AVR and purchasing a new one with both HDMI and 7.1 analog inputs such as those offered by Marantz. But buyer beware yet again: the Marantz tone controls do not work on the 7.1 inputs.

The external amps would probably sound better than the amp stage of the 4400r, but this is a big project.

More powerful external amps should sound better in most cases...I use big external amps. But @GOS has uber efficient Klipsch speakers which probably do just fine with the internal AVR amps.

 

[ClassicalSurroundFan]

Unfortunately, I have yet to find a 5.1 analog input to HDMI converter. If the solution is adding external power amplifiers with an RCA switch, the cost may warrant ditching the HDMI-only AVR and purchasing a new one with both HDMI and 7.1 analog inputs such as those offered by Marantz. But buyer beware yet again: the Marantz tone controls do not work on the 7.1 inputs.

My understanding is there hasn’t been a non-software based multichannel A>D embedder in the past because it would’ve needed to also be encoded into DD or DTS for the SPDIF spec. Maybe a future SM will have non-passthrough SPIDF or HDMI out, but I actually have never seen a standalone audio decoder that output processed digital. I would imagine a MCH LPCM based HDMI embedder could be made, but Involve Audio would probably have to do it, because the SM may just be the only current device on the market that would use it. They probably shouldn’t though because the end result would be pretty sad after two full A>D>A conversions.

There are HT processors that can engage or disengage processing or filtering of the MCH analog input, but most of us would never use it because, again, preamp processing means an additional, detail-sucking, A-D-A conversion.

 

[~dave~~wave~]

The SM has it’s own master level control, which is helpful.

Without a remote control what good would that do?
That's a little too retro.

Then you would need balanced cables to run to the surround master from the sweet spot.
Or actually get off the couch to adjust volume?


I handed my small iPhone to a ten-year old over the weekend to take a picture.
He looked at it and started laughing, said "When was this made, 1813?"
Kids say the darndest things.

 

[ClassicalSurroundFan]

Without a remote control what good would that do?
That's a little too retro.

Then you would need balanced cables to run to the surround master from the sweet spot.
Or actually get off the couch to adjust volume?

Fair enough, which is another reason the SM should just be wired in downstream of a processor with no analog 5.1 input. Your choice for volume upstream: an AVR with modern HDMI functionality or a simple remote control attenuator.

 

[jimfisheye]

Where are these "terms" coming from lol? Extractor? Embedder? Sounds like brochure speak gone wild. Audio interface is the generic term for a device with analog and/or digital audio inputs and outputs made to connect to a host computer.

I understand that some of you are looking for HDMI <-> analog with the aim to connect a rogue DVD player to an AVR where one or the other only has a digital connection via HDMI. That runs into the copy protection gone wild stuff that tags along with many HDMI products as well as basic cheapness facsimile products the Chinese like to sell.

Meanwhile you can connect a standard audio interface to any computer and get access to all formats with no weird compromises (eg downsampled outputs, etc). Choose your adventure.

It's worth paying attention here because making a purchase mistake can be expensive and insulting! Spend $5000 on that Windows gamer computer your friend recommended and the latest AVR in Worst Purchase and discover the HDMI port on the computer or the AVR or both has audio disabled. That's the ringer example. And then the dozens of permutations of mismatched connectors/ports already mentioned. Spend $300 on that AI I mentioned, bring your own amps, any computer will do, and clicky clicky.

Re: balanced vs unbalanced analog connections.
It's not that unbalanced connections are always inferior. It's also not that the superior noise rejection and long cable support of balanced are required for every scenario. It's more that a modern product with only unbalanced connections is a telltale for cheapness. The unbalanced connection might not be a problem but the thing is also going to have trashy noise and linearity issues. They're selling this stuff to ear bud listeners. Just like bluray is a calling card for undamaged mastering and CD is a calling card for volume war mastering. It's more association than causation.

 

[ClassicalSurroundFan]

Where are these "terms" coming from lol? Extractor? Embedder? Sounds like brochure speak gone wild. Audio interface is the generic term for a device with analog and/or digital audio inputs and outputs made to connect to a host computer.

I understand that some of you are looking for HDMI <-> analog with the aim to connect a rogue DVD player to an AVR where one or the other only has a digital connection via HDMI. That runs into the copy protection gone wild stuff that tags along with many HDMI products as well as basic cheapness facsimile products the Chinese like to sell.

Cool, so your solution to content trapped inside hdmi for those who don’t want an AVR with crappy amps, such as all the MCH streaming music and movie content on AppleTV, or MCH audio from a 4K Blu ray player is to just forget about it?

For the AppleTV content there is no computer solution by design. For Blu rays, I don’t mind ripping the audio of a great concert, but I’m not going to turn my house into a mega-server of stored 4k videos I could’ve streamed or popped in a Sony player. Maybe Macs can play Blu-ray’s in surround, but I don’t have the software, nor do I want to constantly change output settings. Then there are SACDs, ripping of which is still above my pay grade.

An hdmi audio extractor extracts up to 8 channels of audio from an hdmi line, then passes the video on to a TV. An hdmi audio embedder can add or replace the audio on an hdmi line, then pass that on to an AVR or TV, but they only exist in stereo.

 

[jimfisheye]

Cool, so your solution to content trapped inside hdmi for those who don’t want an AVR with crappy amps, such as all the MCH streaming music and movie content on AppleTV, or MCH audio from a 4K Blu ray player is to just forget about it?

Forget about HDMI, yes. Avoid it instead of trying to work around it. And avoid products using it. Not allow my music to get trapped by evil HDMI in the first place!

Yeah man! Absolutely 100% forget about that noise trying to hijack my music!

 

[ssully]

Both products include audio interface function and are meant to be connected to a host computer. You'd go straight thunderbolt or HDMI from the computer to an AVR.

You'd use a straight audio interface and your own amps as the alternative to an "all in one box" AVR.

For heaven's sake, GOS needs RCA in, HDMI out, to an AVR (which will have tons of features that 'your own amps' won't). Neither of these products will help.

 

[ssully]

Yes, but those of us trying to avoid the all-in-one AVR box are still left without HDMI support without existing extractors. Not sure why someone with HDMI support built in their AVR would even be looking for an HDMI extractor.

Because they're using a 'Surround Master' , a device which evidently comes from the connectivity year 2000.

 

[ssully]

We want it all until reality sets in.
Lunatics is what we are, let’s face it.

Can I 'like' this post a few hundred time?

Rube Goldberg has nothing on surround audiophiles. Just peruse some of the setups and suggestions described in this thread.

 

[ClassicalSurroundFan]

For heaven's sake, GOS needs RCA in, HDMI out, to an AVR (which will have tons of features that 'your own amps' won't). Neither of these products will help.

No such device.

 

[ClassicalSurroundFan]

Because they're using a 'Surround Master' , a device which evidently comes from the connectivity year 2000.

An extractor (the OP topic) goes the other way - it breaks out hdmi in to analog audio. Nothing out there creates an hdmi connection from MCH analog except an audio interface, a computer and a lot of software.

 

[ssully]

No such device.

Yup!

 

[~dave~~wave~]

Where are these "terms" coming from lol? Extractor? Embedder? Sounds like brochure speak gone wild. Audio interface is the generic term for a device with analog and/or digital audio inputs and outputs made to connect to a host computer.

I understand that some of you are looking for HDMI <-> analog with the aim to connect a rogue DVD player to an AVR where one or the other only has a digital connection via HDMI. That runs into the copy protection gone wild stuff that tags along with many HDMI products as well as basic cheapness facsimile products the Chinese like to sell.

Meanwhile you can connect a standard audio interface to any computer and get access to all formats with no weird compromises (eg downsampled outputs, etc). Choose your adventure.

It's worth paying attention here because making a purchase mistake can be expensive and insulting! Spend $5000 on that Windows gamer computer your friend recommended and the latest AVR in Worst Purchase and discover the HDMI port on the computer or the AVR or both has audio disabled. That's the ringer example. And then the dozens of permutations of mismatched connectors/ports already mentioned. Spend $300 on that AI I mentioned, bring your own amps, any computer will do, and clicky clicky.

Re: balanced vs unbalanced analog connections.
It's not that unbalanced connections are always inferior. It's also not that the superior noise rejection and long cable support of balanced are required for every scenario. It's more that a modern product with only unbalanced connections is a telltale for cheapness. The unbalanced connection might not be a problem but the thing is also going to have trashy noise and linearity issues. They're selling this stuff to ear bud listeners. Just like bluray is a calling card for undamaged mastering and CD is a calling card for volume war mastering. It's more association than causation.

Well-spoken, brother.
This thread should be stickied, we're drilling down to the reality here.

@chucky3042 from Surround Master has always been totally transparent and helpful about his product.

Rube Goldberg has nothing on surround audiophiles.
Just peruse some of the setups and suggestions described in this thread.

Some excitable well-intentioned folks are clueless or get lost in the jargon and invent fantasy vaporware solutions to unsolvable problems.

The truth is out there.
Audio science is not the X-Files.

 

[ssully]

pesky little licensing

 

[chucky3042]

Because they're using a 'Surround Master' , a device which evidently comes from the connectivity year 2000.

The year 2000 and a budget that does not extend to $20K license fee every year for bugger all sales and 40% of board faults coming from the HDMI experience (our first series of Y4 system). Hell 90% of my home faults come from the HDMI from the FETCH box to the Sony TV. Just a shit system

We are looking at making a HDMI RCA to HDMI converter but budget/ time gets in the way and trying to pay 12 staff.

 

[ClassicalSurroundFan]

FWIW I consider 2000 a golden age of surround sound. DSD > to analog with the best amps you could get. DVD-A, no HDMI, huge major label studio budgets…