Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Use optical out on TV or optical out on PS3

  • 31-07-2008 10:48am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭


    Am thinking of getting these speakers. Bedroom environment so don't have space for 5.1, so a nice 2.1 with virtual dolby would do.

    http://www.trustedreviews.com/home-cinema/review/2008/06/23/Sony-DAV-F200-Home-Cinema-System/p1

    So am using a Sony 32W4000 1080P TV which has optical output. Sending signal via HDMI to PS3. Need to figure out which will give better sound.

    1. Setup XMB to carry pcm audio signal over hdmi and then simply plug optical cable from tv into optical input on amp.

    2. Setup XMB to carry bitstream over optical, and plug optical cable directly into amp from PS3.

    Seems option 2 is the cleanest ?

    Anyone ?


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 907 ✭✭✭bandit197


    Option 2 ftw, I tried to set up option 1 on a mates setup and it wouldnt work
    properly at all. Much better to go straight from the source to the amp imo.

    edit: lovely system btw


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,709 ✭✭✭Balfa


    It's nothing to do with cleanliness. Since it's digital all the way, if you can get both to work then you'll be guaranteed no difference in sound quality either way.

    And I always have to say this: Don't forget to buy the absolute cheapest optical cable you can find. Again you'll be guaranteed there's no difference in audio quality.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,067 ✭✭✭L31mr0d


    I choose mysterious option number 3: Don't use Optical at all and use the lossless audio from the HDMI connection. Although you'll probably have to shell out more for a receiver that can handle HDMI.

    But if you must go with Optical, then yeah option 2 is by far the best option.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,689 Mod ✭✭✭✭stevenmu


    Some TVs won't pass dolby through to the optical, they will only pass stereo (I know you're only using 2.1s but you're better off having the bass seperated, and on some 2.1 systems you will get a better surround effect passing dolby). Also some TVs will introduce lag on the sound.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,373 ✭✭✭ongarite


    I agree with Stevenmu, keep the extra processing of the signal to a minimum and feed the optical from PS3 direct to SS system.

    Whats the point anyway of having optical out on TV anyway? I can't really see the benefit of it TBH?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,709 ✭✭✭Balfa


    ongarite wrote: »
    Whats the point anyway of having optical out on TV anyway?
    Because TVs have tuners in them :) How else would I be able to use an antenna to pick up TV and pass the sound to my receiver?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,039 ✭✭✭✭Kintarō Hattori


    I agree with ongarite, I don't see the point in having optical on a TV. I doubt the TV's audio processing capabilities are steller and if you are using an antenna to receive signal it's going to be stereo. So you're better off outputting in stereo, connecting to your amp by phono and freeing up that valuable optical connection for something else.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,689 Mod ✭✭✭✭stevenmu


    In theory with digital tv if channels were broadcast with 5.1 sound the optical could pass it on to an external reciever to process, unfortunatly in practice non of them are. Altough even with stereo and optical connection to external speakers would be digital and interference free.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,709 ✭✭✭Balfa


    if you are using an antenna to receive signal it's going to be stereo.
    I'm using the antenna, and it's digital 5.1. And 720p or 1080i, depending on the station.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭Flaccus


    Thanks for all the advice. Just using the TV purely for DVD, BluRay, PS3 games, and DivX. Not sky or watching any channels. Still evaluating my options. Ideally when I think about it, I'd like a setup with just speakers and amp that gives me a decent virtual dolby sound. No need for a dvd player considering I have the PS3. Also, after watching Batman Begins on BluRay tonight, I found the TV's speakers surprisingly decent though lacking in bass.

    I find these interesting.
    http://www.sony.ie/product/hcs-cinema-surround-kit/ht-is100#pageType=Overview

    Small enough speakers to position in room, HDMI passthu for video, and multi channel linear PCM over hdmi, plus lot of connectivity. However they are very expensive, probably lack midrange and you dont get dts hd, truhd, dd+ or ex, just ordinary dd and dtx. How much this matter though and are BluRay movies or games encoded in any of these more advanced formats ?

    With a budget of up to 800 euro what could I get for a bedroom environment (12ftx8ft). TV is in corner on desk, sitting approx 4-5 feet from it. Anyone ?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,039 ✭✭✭✭Kintarō Hattori


    Balfa wrote: »
    I'm using the antenna, and it's digital 5.1. And 720p or 1080i, depending on the station.

    Ah when you say antenna you mean a dish and not:

    labgear-high-gain-tv-aerial.jpg


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,709 ✭✭✭Balfa


    Ah when you say antenna you mean a dish

    No, I mean:rabbit-ears.jpg

    (that's rabbit ears, btw)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,039 ✭✭✭✭Kintarō Hattori


    Balfa wrote: »
    No, I mean:rabbit-ears.jpg

    (that's rabbit ears, btw)

    Oh I know what it meant. I've sold many many rabbits ears in my time. So how do you get a DD 5.1 signal as well as high definition signals from rabbits ears? I'm slightly confuzzled on that issue as to the best of my knowledge it's a very crap signal that most of them pick up.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,332 ✭✭✭311


    Oh I know what it meant. I've sold many many rabbits ears in my time. So how do you get a DD 5.1 signal as well as high definition signals from rabbits ears? I'm slightly confuzzled on that issue as to the best of my knowledge it's a very crap signal that most of them pick up.

    Thats like trying to get the truth out of george bush.:eek:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,709 ✭✭✭Balfa


    So how do you get a DD 5.1 signal as well as high definition signals from rabbits ears?
    It used to work better when I only lived about 30 miles from Cedar Hill. Now I live almost 50 miles away, and I only really get one or two of the stronger channels watchable, and only on a good day.

    All the stations transmit digitally and, in fact, all analogue transmission will cease here as of February 2009.
    I just use active rabbit ears and plug 'em into my ATSC tuner-equipped TV.


Advertisement