Stop Using Optical Cables (Toslink) For Home Theater!!

[@requiett]

Optical has always "just worked" for me. With HDMI, I often get "no signal" errors, version mismatches, HDCP handshake errors, no audio or no video, interference problems, and bent connectors. Never once had those issues with optical.

[@Drummasterjay]

Same

[@Boskibro]

If you are not doing actual Atmos then 100% use optical. HDMI sucks and has a bunch of issues. There is zero discernible sound quality difference between HDMI and optical unless you have a true atmos system. (Then it only makes a difference when listening to atmos content which is pretty rare still).

[@thelonestranger777]

@@Boskibro I've noticed that HDMI "sounded" louder when testing between optical and HDMI. Of course this wasn't some scientific official testing methodology. Just some sound bar I had that I was messing around with.

[@00Clive00]

Oculus Quest 2 uses a bespoke 5m fiber optic cable, used for PCVR when connected to a computer.

[@ryancraig2795]

Exactly what I came in to say. Optical just works. But it does mean that my tv had has to convert the digital stream coming in to something supported over optical. Anyway my receiver is from 2005 and SPDIF is the only digital input it accepts. Guess I should update one of these days.

[@markdrury7483]

I’m a recording engineer, and for many years the industry has been sending 8 channels of 24bit 48khz audio simultaneously through optical digital cables. Maybe TVs dumb it down? No idea. But I can assure you optical can handle 8 channels of full res audio. I’m using optical for my home theatre because ARC gives me a jumbled stuttering digital mess.

[@fuxseb]

You might have been using ADAT Lightpipe (same TOSLINK connectors) or MADI (SC conectors as used in computer networks). I don't think that anyone would use a consumer-oriented solution like S/PDIF in an industrial setting.

[@markdrury7483]

@@fuxseb my point is, an optical cable is an optical cable. It’s capable of carrying 8 channels of audio. If the TV isn’t sending 7.1, you can’t blame the cable.

[@snap-off5383]

Can I connect the optical OUT from my M-audio profire 2626 to the optical input connector on my stereo? Is there different protocols for the 5.1 vs 7.2 and this 8 channel of which you speak? The receiver has 4x optical inputs one dvd, one tv, and two "md/dat".

[@christianlauridsen8930]

@@markdrury7483 its the standard, toslink is not capable of sending surround sound uncompressed, therefore you get lower quality sound as the bandwidth in the standard simply isnt supported. I do use optical from PC to external amp with inbuilt hight quality DAC, fine for that purpose, but thats just stereo, would never go optical for surround sound.

[@metaldreams3595]

@@markdrury7483 He said that optical could carry more channels but after two they're compressed and no longer lossless.

[@pedroluciano2643]

Chris, as a 25 yrs. plus veteran in a/v high-end sales, design, installation, service, etc. i can say optical still is quite usefull and a serious problem solver. Furthermore, in many cases it is the only way to extend the life of an older good receiver that does not have ARC or e ARC when using a new smart tv's apps and features. And optical can support thae bandwith in theory, just not implemented.

[@ltburch2000]

Optical at this point is always kind of a legacy thing, though I have modern devices with it they are only including it for legacy purposes. For my most modern devices even HDMI has been surpassed by USB-C as the preferred connection.

[@ryancraig2795]

That's what I'm doing. Using my 2018 OLED to switch inputs and feed my perfectly good 2005 receiver with optical. Simple, and minimizes the wires going to the receiver (but more HDMI cables going to the tv).

[@R3TR0R4V3]

A Toslink to RCA converter works great on vintage 70's receivers too. 👍

[@alphaforce6998]

@@ltburch2000 Toslink is fine for anything up to 5.1, which is going to be most people. HDMI is convenient and if the device has HDMI then use it, but if not, no reason to ditch toslink.

[@electric8668]

Pedro Luciano Exactly

[@r0tb3rt]

Optical is hassle free. It just works, you plug it in and that´s it. I never understand when I see people saying "stop using this" "stop using that" There are pros and cons for everything. People should use whatever suits them best.

[@metaldreams3595]

Ill tell you why. Cos optical will compress channels above two. No longer lossless. HDMI is even more hassle free cos its video and audio in one. "Ohhhh!" (clap into a 360 spin into a 70s disco splits) Yayuss!

[@marioluigi9599]

@@metaldreams3595 what about using USB over HDMI?

[@ZeusTheTornado]

@@marioluigi9599 USB will most probably give better sound, but it can't go as long as an optical cable

[@marioluigi9599]

@@ZeusTheTornado why would USB give better sound than HDMI? Aren't they both digital? And why does the HDMI signal suffer from bad sound quality, if all it does is deliver digital information. Surely it doesn't matter if that gets slightly distorted, because it will be reconstructed at the other end

[@ZeusTheTornado]

@@marioluigi9599 Because HDMI typically and generally suffers from jitter, distortion, higher noise floor, etc. Specially compared to USB. Of course performance can and will vary depending on the DAC chip and the implementation on the device

[@TonyPombo]

Yes, "Toslink" is inferior to HDMI, but fibre optic (in general) is *far* superior to HDMI. It's a shame they never updated Toslink. Fibre basically has no limit on cable length, is immune to EM interference, has much higher bandwidth, and is very cheap to make. Plus, no licensing fees need paid to the HDMI forum. Example: in networking, copper wires (like HDMI) can only support 10Gb bandwidth and max out at 100 meters (if you lucky). Fiber can support >100Gb and max length is measured in kilometers. There is a reason all telco and cable ISPs are installing fiber now. It surprises me that 30 years later, fiber cables haven't taken over everything. The only thing they cannot do is carry electricity. Image how nice it would be to use only the mini-Toslink connectors instead of HDMI that are big, often expensive, and must be inserted one way. Mini-HDMI and Micro-HDMI exist, but they are more fragile and can still only be installed one way. Yup, Toslink is inferior, but fibre is not. Here's to hoping someone introduces a fiber standard to replace Toslink, HDMI, and all the others.

[@MrBloodybeak]

yea but not many people have actual fiber optic with glass vs plastic

[@TonyPombo]

@@MrBloodybeak For sure, you would have to use glass instead of plastic (inside the wire) to achieve max performance. Also, would need laser emitters instead of LEDs, but this all could have been part of a "version 2.0" spec.

[@ruimartins1061]

All new houses in my country is obligated to have fiber optical in walls...

[@ckought69]

I agree, we need a new, faster audio-only interconnect standard. It doesn't necessarily need to be toslink or even optical, just something fast enough to carry about a dozen channels of uncompressed audio (for some future-proofing). It's not efficient or economical to use a standard that's video centric (HDMI) to just carry audio signals. In a lot of ways, it'd actually be better to use copper cables. With copper, custom length cables and in-wall installations are much cheaper because you don't have to have a specialist to install the connectors on the ends. They're also more flexible and easier to run, which saves time and cost. They could easily start using USB-C cables to interconnect audio devices. USB-C can do up to 40Gb speeds (USB4). CAT8 network cables would also be an option, since they can do 25Gb to 40Gb, depending on the run length. They would be extremely cheap to implement, and they could use different connectors so that there'd be no confusion with accidently plugging them into networking devices.

[@TonyPombo]

@@ckought69 You're right that terminating fiber at custom lengths requires specialized tools and some practice. Maybe someone can invent an inexpensive DIY kit for home users. The problem with USB-C is the severe length restrictions. Shielded Ethernet 10Gb+ cables (CAT6a/7/8) are very bulky and pricy. Glass fiber cables are much thinner, more flexible, and more durable than most people expect. They are skinnier, lighter weight, and more bendable than the average USB-C cables I use to charge my phone. I think this hypothetical fiber A/V standard should support dozens of channels of uncompressed audio AND stereo 8k@120hz video. This way it can be an audio cable, video cable, or both. I'd like it to be a replacement for all other digital wires including HDMI. But it'll never happen because HDMI is too entrenched and is "good enough". Maybe when we exceed the limits of HDMI, our new optical format can take over. But the HDMI people will probably scare people by saying things like, "if you don't baby the wire, it'll break". It's not _that_ fragile. Ask any telecom worker. I've personally taken a spare wire and tired it in a knot as tightly as I could, and it still worked; I stretched it very hard, and it still worked. To "break" it, I had to kink the wire, smashing the bend completely flat with a pair of pliers. But once I undid the kink, it started working again.

[@nugznmugz]

I love that the guys says it's incapable of "lossless audio" of more that two channels. ADAT uses the exact same fiber optic cable and can transmit 8 channels at up to 24 bit 48khz. It's not the cable that is the limiting factor, it's the S/PDIF format.

[@dustycarrier4413]

To be fair; you'll not get a consumer TOSLINK supporting device that supports anything but SPDIF.

[@pwells479]

Next video should be: HDMI ARC doesn't always work....so use toslink.

[@MG-im8ku]

That would be the video I make lol ARC is great.....If it always worked. Which it doesn't

[@snap-off5383]

is that a setting on most modern TVs?

[@jordanmcoyne]

HDMI ARC/eARC almost always introduces random handshake/lip sync/input switching/device power issues. On paper, it sounds great, but it rarely works without a hitch in practice (in my experience, of course). The only quality upgrade ARC offers over optical is the ability to carry DD+ and DD+ Atmos, which is still lossy. Yes, eARC will carry lossless audio, but that's only relevant for Blu-Ray or UHD Blu-ray Discs. If you're really concerned about getting lossless audio for discs, then you should have a proper A/V receiver that handles your input switching and just passes video along to the TV. if you have a high-end soundbar, it should have HDMI ins so you can connect a BD player and proper streamer (Apple TV/Shield/Roku Ultra) to it, so again, you don't have to fuss with ARC/eARC.

[@l21n18]

Streaming audio is lossy?

[@corruption1724]

Agreed I constantly would either have to manually reboot my tv or soundbar to get it to work proper. So I just switched it back to optical

[@l21n18]

What about eARC from a blu-ray?

[@kobeandgary]

I never have problems out of my eARC setup 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@MG-im8ku]

@@corruption1724 Exactly the same thing I had to do. Arc was too glitchy and kept making my soundbar not work. I said screw this, went back to optical and kept it there. It was annoying as hell. And to be honest, the audio quality wasn't significantly better when it was working (that may or may not just be my ears though lol), even when watching things from a blu ray player.

[@victorblakey4260]

Actually, fibre optic using Toslink connectors, can handle 8 channels of 48 kHz 24 bit digital signal using the ADAT light pipe format, so, 5.1, and 7.1 are quite easy to use.

[@MrBOB39]

I use it for a 5.1.2 set up That ARC-HDMI Can't Accept

[@dougle03]

This is correct, but I'm not sure if Tascam offer licencing for the format. It might be the same connectors and fibre specification, but the encoder/decoder is different for ADAT-LP and is now only found in long since retired equipment. I have a soundcard somewhere that implemented the ADAT format... Must dig that out...

[@gumbilicious1]

This discussion is dead on. Consumer electronics don’t get the adat controllers, so they can’t use adat to bus 8 channels, but I use it in my studio, save a bunch of connections. I am not sure it is dead though, my thunderbolt 3 presonus supports it for external preamps

[@unknownregions5014]

Actually it can handle up to 96khz, not 48khz, but this is more pro audio spec rather than home audio spec

[@recordingwhiz]

@@dougle03 The ADAT 8ch format is far from obsolete and has been a standard still available currently on many (most) multi-channel recording studio interfaces and not only can it do 8X 48k 24bit, but can do 4x 96k in the proper interfaces. the new trend is for the audio to go on to network formats of whether Audinate (Dante) or AVB. but that is another chapter.

[@joker927]

It's a shame SPDIF was never updated. It just works and the bending has never been an issue in 20 years of using toslink. Lossless audio basically only comes from disks which very people actually buy so toslink/optical is still often a good option for many people. Modern consoles dropped it so I predict it's dead. Pretty good informative video.

[@Chris_at_Home]

It would be interesting to see what the loss is. A trick in the communications industry with fiber optic when needing attenuation with nodes to close and no attenuators in hand is wrap it around a pencil. One wrap is about 1dB of loss.

[@IFeelTheDark]

As it turns out, most lossless audio today comes via downloads from online storefronts and streaming from sites like Tidal.

[@snap-off5383]

Is SPIDIF limited to 2 channels?

[@joker927]

@@snap-off5383 It can handle 5.1 but only using compressed audio like DTS

[@josephmartinez7363]

Optical could be more capable than HDMI, The internet using optical cable carries videos up to 12k resolution with dolby atmos hd lossless easily

[@rankydoodle0073]

I love Optical cables. They’re very basic. Surround sound is what I’m concerned about the most. Other virtual surround sounds such as Dolby Atmos is awesome, maybe someday I’ll experience them myself.

[@carnage4907]

Atmos is not virtual surround sound. It takes at least 7 speakers and a sub to produce true atmos. Soundbars, TV’s, and headphones now all use a virtual version of atmos. But a true atmos system is at least 5.1.2

[@jas_bataille]

@@carnage4907 And there are several interfaces for the home studio market that indeed use the ADAT protocol to carry 8 channels of 24 bits audio so that people can mix scores at home, on a Dolby surround system. Sigh...

[@Jmoneysmoothboy]

@@jas_bataille I love the idea of forever tricking people into the idea of you're just one cable away from perfect home theater

[@maxstr]

Dolby Atmos supports optical/TOSLINK. It has to compress it using Dolby Digital Plus, but it works.

[@Computrones]

I need no more than optical. The sound is pure and perfect 6.2 receiver. No need Atmos. too overwhelming! Atmos is ok for Movie theaters. 5.1 is just ok for Home use with Toslink or coaxial. up to DTS hd or Dolby Pro. Good for music and for movies.

[@ChrisMajestic]

Atmos/TrueHD is more about lossless clarity than immersion.

[@mixedup5858]

HDMI fiber 😂

[@thirtysixverts]

I'm primarily a hifi guy who uses his speaker setup (stereo and subwoofer) for movies with my projector. So, for me, since I never do anything but stereo listening, optical works great! Also - ARC is super cool but is one of those technologies that has been walled off from the hifi world for some reason. It's near impossible to find a quality DAC that takes in HDMI/ARC. This brings up a question for me - how do I make sure I'm getting stereo audio from my projector or streaming device (Roku Ultra)?

[@user-xh5pi2nf9q]

Same!

[@blazetownsend8785]

I am using Optical for my bookshelf speakers on my computer, and HDMI Arc on the sound system as it was needed for the best listening for that.

[@blasterman789]

Two channel plus sub sounds better than 99.9% of multichannel via sound bars. Atmos through a soundbar is like watching a pirated IMAX movie shot with a 2008 smartphone.

[@user-xh5pi2nf9q]

@@blasterman789 I even feel like surround can be distracting and can pull me away from enjoying the movie to be honest.

[@thirtysixverts]

@@user-xh5pi2nf9q hot take - in the home environment, absent a true theater room, surround sound is the most overrated thing you can spend your money on. Stereo plus sub ftw

[@randomtube8226]

It comes down to 3 things. Equipment, settings, and specs. Once you gets these matched correctly . Everything will work fine. I found that optical works fine up to DTS 5.1ch only receivers and most standard sound bars. But after that format and multi channel. Its best to go with HDMI. Its also best to find 4K blu ray players that has two HDMI outputs across two separate HDMI cables. One for your TV or projector and one for your receiver. The one that goes to your TV/projector will have both audio and video. So you can still use your TV speakers if you want. The one that goes to your receiver is just audio only.

[@PMPerformance]

Hdmi is obviously the way to go, but when HDMI pass through is problematic, sometimes you don’t have much of a choice. I begrudgingly had to use optical from my A9G to my reciever due to hdmi pass through not working between the devices.

[@Zeromaus]

"Begrudgingly" as if the audio quality loss is noticeable lol

[@PMPerformance]

@@Zeromaus because there are other issues involved. No audio mode switching dependent on content you are watching,no volume meter on the screen when you adjust volume. Those are big issues for me that I struggle with daily because of this.

[@NikolayVutov]

What did Master Yoda say when he first saw himself in 4k? - HDMI

[@joeythefoxxo]

HDMI and optical both have ups and downs. I use HDMI for streaming and regular TV, and optical for my Xbox. It just works best that way.

[@onlyzach1]

Through 3 different TV/Soundbar/Receiver setups I've only found one where I can use HDMI Arc on them. The other 2, there was some type of interference I had to use a Optical cable to get the audio reliable. Wished CEC was a ton more reliable than it is. Even still, great video!

[@albertsparrow9485]

This seems to be an engineering issue, there's no reason besides funding that optical audio could not be made to support Dolby Atmos. It can be done it just depends on who wants to do it.

[@tybera1114]

Everything is an engineering and funding issue. The thing is there's no reason to do it. The HDMI interface is still not fully saturated, and there are no benefits to optical over HDMI as they are both a digital signal. In fact, you would need to move to an optical bundle system (multiple optical fibers in a cable or multiple cables) and have a bundle decoder (similar to the way fiber internet works) to get the exact same data that HDMI already carries on the other end. Hell, USB 3.0 can send more channels of data ,far cheaper, with zero additional R&D or engineering. The reason optical was created is because it came at a time before USB and HDMI and it was the only way to send digital signals from things like CD players or DVD players to DACs and receivers (or speakers with built-in DACs) this was done so you could get a bit-perfect duplication on the other side without a bunch of conversions to analog to digital and back again. In fact even old expensive DACs would often just passthrough analog signals, so if you used component cables, there was no point in a fancy DAC. The reason they still exist today is because of more legacy and audiophile hardware and devices such as the $800 dollar Martinez CD players that sound freaking amazing. The more expensive ones do use USB instead of optical. Sorry for the TLDR post, I just looked into all this and thought it was interesting.

[@jreyman]

@@tybera1114 The optical cable, itself, has no real bandwidth limitation. The limitations reside in the devices at both ends of the optical cable. Simply by changing to a full spectrum (multi-color fiber-optic transmission) pulse emitter and pulse detector would drastically increase data, and we haven't even talked about changing to modern pulse rates, across each light wavelength, yet. Improve the tech in the devices at both ends, and any TOSLINK cable can easily handle a massive data increase.

[@tybera1114]

@@jreyman multicolor wouldn't work due to latency of the waves. You would need a way to resolve the wave differences and speed differences of the various photons and which got there first. Optical doesn't have Bandwidth, but it does have data limits.

[@kennethiman2691]

To me optical sounds superior to HDMI.

[@xbenas]

It does one job and it does it very well. Meanwhile, HDMI ARC and eARC is a bunch of headaches and mess that you have to struggle to get it working right.

[@evilformerlys4704]

It isn't, plain and simple.

[@MG-im8ku]

For me it's not that it sounds better. It just works better. MUCH better. Never had issues with optical. Arc on the other hand has been non stop issues for me.

[@simmcowaPang122]

​@@MG-im8ku I've had issues, with my cheap DAC that converts toslink to RCA, but I just turn it off and back on and everything's fine lol. Optical works great for me

[@danieljackheck]

Lol Dolby Atmos on a sound bar.

[@claymccauley]

Really the most compelling reason to use HDMI over Toslink is reduced cable clutter. Modern toslink supports 125Mbit/sec bandwidth. Dolby Atmos tops out at 18Mb/s (truehd lossless) and DTS-HD Master Audio is closer to 25Mb/s. Both are well below the limit for Toslink. The catch is if you're using Atmos, Dolby limits truehd to HDMI. If it goes over Toslink or coaxial S/PDIF it will use the compressed codec.

[@IAmNeomic]

The issue is that the industry spec for TOSLINK has never been updated. Sure, the technology of optical has as it has other uses beyond audio, but the entertainment industry never heavily invested in it because by the time home theater became affordable and more mainstream, HDMI had come along and was a more versatile standard, as it could handle lossless 5.1 and 7.1 audio, along with video, and even an internet connection (though very few devices actually used internet over HDMI). There are very few devices and manufacturers that support lossless/uncompressed audio over TOSLINK just because the manufacturing costs of the chips to do so is so high, because they're not mass produced. 99% of the audio devices out there can only deliver a compressed signal over optical because of the old, inferior specs that the industry never bothered to update. So rather than getting Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD Master Audio, you're just getting their lossy versions, Dolby Digital at 640kbps and DTS at 768 kbps.

[@claymccauley]

@@IAmNeomic It's not really about cost or the TOSLINK spec, it's about DRM. Putting high quality "lossless" digital audio on HDMI ensures that it's protected by HDCP. This is what the entertainment industry wants and it's why Dolby TrueHD only supports HDMI. The arguments you make about older equipment are true for HDMI as well. There are plenty of non-4k capable pre-TrueHD receivers that will only support the lossy Dolby codecs.

[@theslimeylimey]

S/PDIF Toslink can carry a 5.1 DTS 1.5 mb/s encoded audio stream of 5 channel audio to be decoded by your audio receiver. That is double the bandwidth of what Netflix is streaming for their Atmos audio. Unless you are watching physical blu ray discs on a high end 7.1 system, S/PDIF optical is more than adequate for good quality 5.1 surround or am I missing something here? Point being, these days source material will be the limiting factor for the vast majority of people who are consuming compressed source material not blu ray discs. Re-encoding a 256kb mp3 for example into a 24/192khz PCM audio file doesn't make it better because it's now higher bandwidth.

[@Avril.Lavigne]

👏👏👏👏👏👏

[@DruuzilTechGames]

Depends on what source you're using. If you're using a PC, then running HDMI from your GPU to a receiver or a soundbar and then out from that to your display creates input lag, and for HDMI 2.1 you have very few options right now, all of which are pretty expensive.

[@SalivatingSteve]

Yep HDMI passthrough introduces input lag when gaming!!

[@TemporaryTemporary-y2j]

To be fair, the people who'd actually hear the full potential of true surround sound would actually be those who've spent a small fortune on their audio receivers and a prestine speaker systems. On your average 5.1 system, while of course HDMI surround would sound better, Spdif 5.1 isn't too shabby either, considering when it came out. And HDMI Arc is notorious for sometimes having issues like random disconnections in which instances the humble optical cable could still be a viable backup: the good (or bad) thing about optical spidif is that it's a dumb connection... It either works or it doesn't. There are instances of the HDMI Arc connections randomly activating recievers/TVs in a few systems.

[@ChrisMajestic]

I see a lot of comments referring to fiber optic HDMI cables. Yes, fiber itself is incredibly useful for sending large amounts of data which is why I regularly recommend fiber HDMI cables. However, in this video I'm specifically referring to Toslink which has limited bandwidth compared to modern fiber connections. This is why I referred to it as Toslink instead of optical through most of the video. 😉

[@bayete1979]

In the video you use optical , toslink and SPIDIF interchangeably. This is wrong . Even the title of your video on its face is misinformation. That optical cable is capable of extremely high data transfer rates . When it is used as an ADAT connection it can carry 8 channels of 48 kHz uncompressed audio . Many devices use the cable as SPIDIF which is usually a high bandwidth stereo configuration . On those devices it will be labeled specifically as SPIDIF. On other devices where it is labeled as “optical” you should refer to the user manual in order to determine the format that is native to the device . These devices are usually in a 5.1 uncompressed configuration by default. Sharing misinformation like this affects your credibility bro . Fix this quickly.

[@EmblemParade]

@@bayete1979 Yes, perhaps his terminology was a bit confusing, but Mr. Majestic is not wrong in essence because practically all equipment guides refer to "optical" and "TOSLINK" interchangeably. the bottom line is that most optical S/PDIF is limited to 3.1 Mbit/s and thus requires compression to transfer all the data we need nowadays, which means loss of quality. Meanwhile, you're a bit wrong -- not all optical cables are made the same and are of equal quality. The TOSLINK cable is designed for transferring LED light, not LASER. Some cables are plastic, others glass. As for optical HDMI cables -- they are indeed quite cool, but they won't change the quality in any way. Their use cases are fairly rare: 1) for extending to very long distances or 2) for environments with high interface, conditions you are very unlikely to have in a home theater. Actually, HDMI 2.1 does mean shorter copper cables, so perhaps we'll see more optical HDMI in use at home. Also, thank you Mr. Majestic for the "Toskink" typo, that made my day. :)

[@MaZEEZaM]

As someone who has used optical for years up until recent years using USB or HDMI, very useful info I was unaware of. Now, what's this Optical HDMI? I've not heard of this before?

[@ChrisMajestic]

@Bayete Williams Thanks for your input. In this video I'm specifically referring to home theater audio. Adat doesn't really apply to this as I've never seen an adat interface on a piece of modern home theater equipment that supported lossless surround formats. This is also why I said "not to be confused with high fidelity stereo setups" which is a place where you'll commonly find toslink or adat (if you include professional audio equipment). I didn't use optical and spdif interchangeably in the video although i did oversimplify it considering most (if not all) toslink ports on home theater equipment are labeled as optical and use SPDIF for data transmission on the data link layer. Again, once you factor in the fact that that I'm referring exclusively to home theater and lossless surround sound like True-HD and DTS-HD, things like adat are irrelevant since they don't apply. I agree that I could have been clearer on this though. So I have added "(Toslink)" to the title of the video. But again, your concerns seem to apply more to professional audio equipment more than consumer grade home theater audio equipment. I appreciate your input. 😁

[@Lou-Lou.]

I thought only eARC was capable of lossless surround sound, I'm pretty sure I read somewhere regular ARC has to compress the audio the same as toslink for surround sound output

[@MrBOB39]

You are Exactly Right

[@timgraysontv]

I'll stick with high end coaxial cables, I love them!

[@snap-off5383]

Is there a difference between the SPDIF and the COAX digital protocls? Can COAX do more than 2 channels?

[@user-xd1qr9lg6v]

To say that optical cannot support more than 2 channels is incorrect. spdif and toslink were designed as a 2 channel format. 20 years ago Adat lightpipe (Alesis brand) uses the same fiber optic connections as spdif, but carried 8 channels of 48 kHz 24 bit audio data. This format war is all about the patent licensing fees and corporate control over which companies are allowed to grow their product features. This argument is mute because all resolutions of audio and video can transmit point to point over wifi, but they don't. Fiber is a superior data hard wiring and I would expect that if someone wasn't stepping on progress, that all new housing would have room to room matrix for audio, video, security, lighting, communications, and would remote control over LE bluetooth by last year.

[@sarhtaq]

Well Toslink is still used in several studios around the world. After all it supports 8 channels at 48KHz 24bit, or 4 channels at 96KHz at 32bit. It is getting replaced by protocols like Dante though (256 channels 96KHz at 32bit, a bit less if you run 192KHz) :) Correct HDMI supports up to 192KHz at 32bit, so in that regard it "can" be superior, then again how much of the compressed streaming audio/video people watch have that rates.... ;)

[@dougle03]

ADAT LightPipe.

[@NerdyMeathead]

You have to use HDMI is what the companies want, get a new 4k 120 TV. Oops now that receiver doesn't work.toslink is the answer . They drove hard to get rid of component connection since there is no security.

[@NEKRWSPHERE]

So... How do you send sound from computer to computer using HDMI? Ah, that's right - you can't. As far as "lossless audio" - the human ear cannot hear the difference between 320+ Kbps MP3 and 24-bit .WAV. I have no idea why people need to purchase expensive 4-8Tb SSDs just so they can cram in all their .wav files, which take an insane amount of space compared to MP3. Unless they compose music, but if they do so using Ableton or Audacity - it makes more sense to save your work as .aup files, and you can convert them to .wav whenever necessary for say making a slideshow in KZbin. Now, as far 5.1 and 7.1 formats, - optical ADAT cables are quite capable of carrying 8-channel audio, albeit everything beyond 2.1 is carried in a compressed form (technically 0.1 (subwoofer) is also compressed, however because of the way human hearing works in regards to bass, - it doesn't make one's listening experience any different. Another thing about 5.1 and 7.1 - it's great if you are a gamer or if you prefer immersive experience when watching movies and are using a bunch of surround speakers. But as far as just standard music listening, - these formats are not all they are cut out to be. First off - they are rare. Another thing is - not everyone would enjoy a 7.1 format. I know I have issues with it, especially when it comes to tracks I'm familiar with from listening to them in headphones. Now, as far as music production, - I do have a lot of issues with interference where I live so I generally either use a SPDIF or, I leave my options open by using a USB3. I do wish most mixers came with HDMI, and computer sound cards came with HDMI "IN" but unfortunately neither do. So which format and type of cable to use depends a lot on the user's preferences, occupation, hobbies and what is most commonly available for acceptable price.

[@Jagc0316]

Optical has been a necessity for my new soundbar. I went from an old, classic AV receiver to a sleek LG Dolby Atmos soundbar and it sounds fine on 2ch and Dolby 5.1 content enough low end for me. But when I played any Atmos encoded content, 4k/streamed, for some reason LG forgot to process the low end audio into the speakers so it sounds tinny. Through HDMI/arc there is no way of changing the audio encoding on Disney+/netflix, but if I play through optical, the TV only outputs 5.1. Sorted the low end. It has upfiring Atmos speakers which I was not too impressed with so I don't mind sticking with just 3 channel Dolby digital audio.

[@R3TR0R4V3]

I'm a vintage hifi stereo kind of guy.. Optical is the only thing that allows me to use my new Vizio HDTV with my old Marantz 2230 receiver. The TV's DAC was too slow, using only RCA cables, which resulted in unbearable latency. A Toslink to RCA converter fixed that.. It's working perfectly fine now. Honestly I could give a shit less about Atmos and all that.. I'd rather use my old receivers from the 70's, because they sound warm, full and tube-like. Today's stuff sounds cold & sterile. No thanks! 😎

[@MrMom950]

Keep in mind that Audio coming from any streaming service is compressed anyways. So unless you have an atmos setup Or physical media… Not really any point in upgrading to hdmi from optical if only doing a 5.1 system

[@MrMom950]

That being said. It’s like $20… so just do it if you can lol My avr is an old school beast mode Denon 3802… with no hdmi ports.. so it would cost me gobs of money to swap to hdmi

[@MrMom950]

But of course I will upgrade when I get a new AVR... whole point is sort of... don't sweat Optical if you are only streaming...

[@absolutium]

Even Atmos is compressed most of the time unless the source is BluRay with a TrueHD Dolby container.

[@ChrisMajestic]

This video was more of a message to people who have a setup that supports hdmi and are still using optical instead of hdmi. I never told anyone to upgrade. I agree that if you have a soundbar or basic 5.1 setup and your setup doesn't support hdmi its not a huge deal to use optical. This is why I said make sure you don't have hdmi. 😉

[@carnage4907]

@@MrMom950 the Denon Avr-S760H is $450 at costco. I highly recommend it. Not perfect. But it supports every current and near future standard

[@johannjohann6523]

Plus Toslink/fiber optics is the ONLY way to not get signal interference as it is NOT copper wires (which do). Information is sent not via cabling but a beam of light called a laser. Sorry, but it really is the best audio connection there is, and nothing will probably ever surpass it. So chuck your HDMI cables for audio.

[@SirDragonClaw]

"Toslink" is inferior to HDMI, but fibre optic (in general) is far far far far superior to HDMI in pretty much every way. It's a shame they never updated the Toslink spec.

[@kjrchannel1480]

I say a stop using DRMI(HDMI) All hail spdif may it live decades to come. I don't need 7 channel speakers either. For those who don't remember the Sounblaster days when the front, surround, and WWF/center could have its own pcm output. Obviously that was to complicated so it didn't stick. I will keep my VGA to. Screw the graphic card pushers.

[@joedirt6222]

I learned something today. Thanks! 😁

[@JB-bo6yf]

The only really good thing that optical cables are good for is if you have like a CD player by itself from your receiver head unit other than that I would just use HDMI and use Optical only for a CD player🌞🌞🌞🌞

[@TheWesman45]

Optical is fine for non atoms and stereo. In fact, depending on the quality of your stereo, it's better to use optical then ARC. There are lots of audiophile reasons this is true, but it boils down to running your pure digital signal through the comparably dirty environment of your TV's circuitry.

[@ChrisMajestic]

Agreed. This was stated in the video.

[@TheWesman45]

@@ChrisMajestic No, it wasn't. This applies to my comment about AES as well. You made one throw away comment about how "hifi is a whole different ball game." That's true, it is, but you didn't state really any reason why that is true. That's fine, you aren't a hifi channel, but don't assume your viewers are idiots who aren't paying attention. I'm a law talking guy, I don't miss stuff.

[@shmoooo1]

Does it mean that optical is fine not just for stereo, but even for 5.1 non atmos? I was under impression that even for 5.1 non atmos the quality goes as follows: eARC > ARC > Toslink. I am building 5.1 setup (studio monitors, subwoofer, pre-amplifier and projector) and I wonder if the Toslink hinders the audio quality and if I should move to either ARC or eARC...

[@TheWesman45]

@@shmoooo1 So, todlink might be more compressed, but honestly the compression is so good nowadays that you won't notice it unless you are critically listening to high quality music(lossless, high bit rate mp3, flac, etc). The real reason to use eARC/ARC is the CEC and lip sync. It also really depends on your setup.

[@shmoooo1]

@@TheWesman45 Thank You, I will give it a try!

[@marcB917]

Hdmi should be better in practice, maybe it works better with high end stuff I dont know, but at the lower end, you still find soundbars even from Sony that dont play 5.1 channel audio through HDMi ARC, or TVs that wont pass it through..so you have to have both cables, one for the CEC and the other for 5.1 audio from the tv. Even those that do, if they're anything less than 5.1 with rear speakers the ability is often wasted as the downmix multichannel audio and play it as stereo

[@dontetidwell4867]

Thank you Chris! I work at Best Buy part time as a Home Theater Advisor and every video has made me extremely smart. Thank you

[@Boskibro]

Keep in mind that optical is significantly more reliable. Atmos needs HDMI, otherwise I always recommend optical or running both in the event hdmi doesn’t work. Lots of TVs have tons of issue with ARC

[@dontetidwell4867]

@@Boskibro that's why you use a higher grade HDMI. I sell HDMI cables that that conduct using higher grade silver and have better internal shielding.

[@MG-im8ku]

@@Boskibro My Samsung tv has issues with arc non stop. Had to go back to optical. And it shouldn't be a compatibility issue because my soundbar is also a Samsung lol Always had problems with arc when I tried. Either the audio wasn't coming out of the soundbar, but the tv speakers instead. Or when I try to turn one source on, everything else turned on and it became annoying trying to single out what I wanted to turn on and what I didn't. I spent more time trying to sort out problems than enjoying my set up lol

[@michaelwyckoff7593]

Unfortunately for me I have a sound bar that doesn't have HDMI support inputs so I use a optical cable. I'm not to concerned about the better option of HDMI because I'm only looking to improve the sound of the TV because as we all are aware TV speakers usually are lousy. It will suffice for my situation.( Just want better TV sound).

[@secretagentjesus4406]

Thanks for the clarification, I'm in the middle of upgrading. Going with optical for convenience in a medium-budget setup, but always appreciate knowing.

[@thepayne7862]

Optical works just fine for surround sound out of my ps2. Optical is great for older equipment. Been using the same optical cable for 10 years.

[@metric152]

I upgraded my AV system a few years ago and struggled with eArc turning on components I didn’t want. The final solution was to use optical out from my TV and all of my other components routed into my sound bar and one video signal going to the TV. Optical is still good in a few places where you don’t need to worry about losing out on Dolby audio

[@alphaforce6998]

I'm setting up a system with an older receiver that doesn't support modern HDMI - it's only 1.4 and 1080p, but it sounds so good I do not want to get rid of it. I'm planning to use either a HDMI matrix switch OR better yet a plain HDMI switch with two outputs and a HDMI splitter. This way, all of your HDMI devices plug into the switch, one output goes to your TV or projector, the other output goes to a HDMI input on the A/V receiver. The reason for going with a switch + splitter instead of the seemingly more convenient HDMI matrix option is to avoid handshake issues and dropouts which are often caused by HDCP or insufficient power on the HDMI ports.

[@timgraysontv]

Screw that! I'll stick with my super simple coax cable. I love it, so why change...

[@DueM]

Depends entirely on what format you're sending, toslink is fine for the formats it supports. Coaxial is a better option if available though for the same formats, hdmi is the best overall option mainly because it supports a wider range of codecs.

[@curvingfyre6810]

What makes coaxial better? Is it a different kind of compression?

[@DueM]

@@curvingfyre6810 it's an electrical signal and doesn't have to convert like toslink, wider bandwidth as well and more stable. Its not a major optical is fine for most people

[@curvingfyre6810]

@@DueM from what I understand, the conversion is if anything the same speed, and the software is otherwise identical, so considering the lack of grounding loop risk, and identical dafa, wouldnt toslink be slightly better?

[@DueM]

@@curvingfyre6810 toslink has reduced dynamic range and maxes out at 24bit 96khz in comparison to 24bit 192khz on coaxial. The conversion process from electrical to fiber optic and back again also introduces jitter and occasionally lag/clocking issues depending on optical sensor quality.

[@yaheyaquazi7043]

I bought a Bose 900 Soundbar that supports Dolby Atmos, but my TV is old (not even 4K) it has ARC but can only transfer PCM. So I got a Sound extractor, it extracts sound from HDMI, using that, I now get Dolby Digital (previously PCM was the limit). Do you recommend how I can solve my issue other than buying a new TV? Thanks!

[@gone2dmtns]

Optical was a quick and easy way for me to get audio from my desktop PC to the AV receiver. HDMI wasn't an option so one has to do what they have to do. It's good to know that if HDMI output is available then that's the way to go. Thanks for the explanation.

[@martinabernathy205]

I am doing the same thing because I couldn't find a better way. I do have an issue getting the sound started, for lack of a better word. When I first start my PC, or wake it up from sleep mode, I get no sound from my receiver/speakers. Even though my SPDIF is seleceted as the source on my PC, I have to re-select it to get the sound started.

[@gone2dmtns]

@@martinabernathy205 Yeah, the Realtek controls on my PC are a pain to switch from desktop speakers to the optical output. and back. Sleep mode is always an adventure.

[@iamtragos]

Title is a bit misleading . Optical is perfectly acceptable for what it offers .

[@AlexandreLollini]

I have not yet been convinced by any multichannel audio setup anywhere. I enjoy much more a setup that is basically a 2.1 and the effect is even better on 3d glasses kind of movies. The most important is to have good signal, good level, clarity, and align audio delay with picture. Check polarity, ant surface reflections, distance between the wall floor and speakers. When all is good, tested and measured, the impact, the punch, the depth, the dynamic the 3D all this is better.

[@jimsmith1579]

I would gladly avoid the costly Toslink cable if my HDTV offered another audio outpuy

[@TexasScout]

One thing to consider in a Home Theater set-up: In my case, Optical made sense because I can run the home theater speakers OR the TV speakers. When people are sleeping, I can run the TV speakers and it won't disturb them.

[@blkspade23]

The most disturbing thing about HT speakers I'd imagine would be the bass, since otherwise the volume could be adjusted to be no louder than the TV speakers. You could probably just set a preset on your receiver that removes/lowers the bass.

[@edgarllamas4041]

You should still be able to do that with HDMI. Most decent AVRs have audio pass thru.

[@TheSubZero187]

Can switch to tv speakers on the tv setting even with hdmi

[@jeffreyaird7357]

@@TheSubZero187 that's what I'm saying, I do that now with my home theatre system without optical

[@TheSubZero187]

@@jeffreyaird7357 I mainly have a setting mode for nighttime. So the bass isn’t powerful and the system itself isnt crazy loud at certain volumes. Definitely better than tv speakers anytime.

[@davis6048]

Just another person talking shit, just another way to get you to spend more money. I have 20 different ways to listen to audio now with optical my audio Is so good thru my Yamaha receivers I don't give a shit . Just another way to force you to buy the next stupid audio trick that really cant improve audio to make a difference. They will have to not use optical to change me.

[@johnlira3316]

I have my tv optical to Yamaha aventage receiver what setting do i choose for best audio pcm or bitstream

[@tjwalker960]

Another thing to consider with HDMI is that it’s all digital. In the old analog days, copper was subject to interference which resulted in people buying Monster-type cables to reduce the interference as much as possible - or go optical where possible. With digital, you either have a connection or you don’t. If you do, your ones and zeros result in picture and sound - no need for high-end cables that cost too much. If you don’t have a connection, then no sound and no picture - also no interference - there’s just nothing.

[@chrisaltman5834]

Everything interacts with each other and can create “noise” and introduce that into the signal. Yes, a digital cable will work or it won’t but your audio quality with HDMI will very greatly. Highly recommend trying to attend an Audioquest Cable demo. To this day I’m absolutely amazed at how much MORE audio details you can hear with better quality cables that introduce less “noise” into the signal. It’s jaw dropping for me.

[@jediknight38]

I’ve used an optical audio cable for nearly 20 years and have had NO issues whatsoever.

[@Vince26010]

I sincerely love your channel. Thank you Chris for sharing so much information about our commune passion. Great channel, useful practical advices, top explanations, well made video editing, always up to date with actual tech, and on top of it all your genuine sympathy shines through our screens and invites us to keep on watching more. Thank you sir.

[@rfrancoi]

Informative, as usual. Thank you.

[@CL-kx5tn]

For audiophiles, it makes sense to use HDMI if they are very specific to the sound output they want like DTS, THX, Atmos, etc. but for majority average users, TOSLINK will do the work as well just as HDMI. I connected my TV to my Bose soundbar using TOSLINK. On the orher room, one of my older devices connected to my receiver with Bose surround speakers with TOSLINK.

[@Mewzyc]

Audiophile will probably only care about Dolby, dts, atmos, etc .. if they are watching like a blu ray concert. But for just music listening which is mainly 2.0, it's all about the amp/dac, speaker/headphone, and if the quality is lossless like flac or alac

[@timking2600]

Yes none of this applies to "soundbar users" but for folks with high end (5+ discrete speakers and an Processor capable of the lossless formats (Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD-MA, for example), he's right.... while it's not a physical limitation of this cable type, all consumer home theater devices won't carry "lossless" 5+ channel audio over TOSLINK; you have to use an HDMI cable if you want that capability.

[@daraghmorrissey]

I had challenges getting Arc getting to work with an older receiver so used fibre optic. The new AVR I picked up last week works great with Earc so dropped my fibre cable. Just make sure you get high bandwidth cables.

[@jimmichael3857]

I would love to use HDMI to my sound bar… but get this: Brand new LG G1 OLED + LG SP9Y Atmos soundbar… and over HDMI eARC the two devices are UNUSABLE. First, CEC does not work AT ALL over this setup. When using eARC, the TV’s remote volume up/down WILL NOT control the sound bar volume, period. Ok, so not a huge deal since I use a Harmony remote anyway… but the deal breaker is that once I DO get sound out of that setup, when I turn off the sound bar and turn it back on… nothing but silence until I manually switch to a different soundbar input, then back to eARC, after which I get sound again. Completely unusable. Plug in my trusty old optical cable, and it’s perfect, not fuss, no muss. I think it’s insane that two high end products from the SAME BRAND work so poorly together over eARC (and yes I use a certified 48Gbps cable), but that’s the current LG reality. So for me, optical is here to stay until/unless they fix this with firmware in one or both devices.

[@sgtGiggsy]

Well, the thing is, if you have a 10+ years old home theater, you don't have a choice, so this advice is useless. I don't think it's usual that people throw out their perfectly well-working home theater. It's not something you change 2-3 years. We have a nearly 20 years old Yamaha at home, and it still works flawlessly. Home theaters didn't go through as radical improvements in the last 15-20 years as the majority of consumer electronics.

[@thepayne7862]

The only reason i updated my yamaha surround sound receiver which I had for over 10 years was because it didn't do hdmi. I still made sure they one I replaced it with had optical and component inputs for my older consoles. I also made sure it worked with my current speakers so I didn't have to replace those.

[@d.e.b.b5788]

It's okay. My ears aren't Hi def anyway. More like high deaf.

[@barryhallsack8852]

My HDMI ARC is super unreliable on my emotiva, optical is reliable and works! I also don't have Dolby Atmos I'm more of a stereo Listener. I do have 5.2 that's all I need for my home theater. Chris is absolutely right HDMI is better just not as reliable from my experience.

[@ChrisMajestic]

Unfortunately HDMI-CEC can be very unreliable on some equipment and some manufacturers are better with implementation than others. I've had a ton of issues with Samsung TVs although newer models seem to be much better.

[@barryhallsack8852]

@@ChrisMajestic yeah you're definitely right I need to get some new equipment, I'm using the old emotiva xmc1. Cool videos keep up the hard work happy holidays cheers!

[@clashwithmoi8926]

I use spdif because it looks cool af, I love plugging in the cable and see the light shine out the other side. It's a very rewarding visual feedback of seeing something functioning.

[@cmorichie7202]

I agree lol

[@ButeSound]

Toslink has beaten them all over time. All hail optical.

[@donut044]

I only have 2 hdmi ports on my tv so optical works fine

[@M0D60]

I find it hard to understand HDMI best them all

[@victordeoliveiramelo]

I have the same toslink cable since 1995! not fragile at all! works great for my use cases...mainly hifi...

[@Sosa87]

would Toslink be my best option if I want to have an av receiver for my GoogleTV and surround sound but need my PC hooked up directly to the projector because I want to take advantage of my UHD50X’s 240hz at 1080p? Or Is there any way to use hdmi to transmit only audio and not the video

[@kharmastreams8319]

Well, my preamp don't have hdmi, but it does have optical input, so optical from TV to preamp works like a charm. Think I'll use optical over going back to built in TV speakers

[@ealanosborne]

That T-shirt is DOPE! 😂 Thanks for keepin' it real regarding TosLink!

[@mikedriskell8326]

Like the video...but I love the shirt :)

[@robertmedina4520]

Can you go over Bluetooth Transmitter setups? I got two family members who can't hear very well, so they can't hear the dialog unless they are near the speaker or have the volume to deafening levels. I have been using Taotronic Bluetooth transmitter with a Bose Soundlink which has been fantastic for my use, but the Bose is starting glitch (it's the original, so it has to be over a decade old by now) and I want to upgrade to a newer one. Unfortunately, new Bose devices removed the mute button, which we use constantly during commercials and so I can talk to the family members who can't hear. I need something that connects to the tv, that has audio control with a remote (with mute button), and tranmits a Bluetooth signal. Any recommendations?

[@bonicb11b3]

A lot of people here, including chris are confusing toslink with spdif. Toslink is the type of optical cable, capable of sending multiple channels uncompressed at the speed of light. Spdif, or sony/Phillips digital interface is an encoding standard used by consumer grade equipment that is where the limitations come from. Not sure why consumer gear dont support the much superior adat format with spdif as a fallback if connected to incompatible hardware.

[@purpleghost4083]

Actually, Toslink is a type of connector that is used on optical cables and jacks, not the type of the cable itself.

[@bonicb11b3]

@@purpleghost4083 you are correct. The key point is that it is a hardware specification and doesn't refer to any data format or compression as the video suggests.

[@Supperconductor]

I'm still on Toslink. I can't find an HDMI splitter that can send 4K to my display and 2K to my old AV Preamp.

[@bryanp4827]

Umm, optical doesn't send ANY video signal, furthermore, it doesn't have the bandwidth to allow decoding of lossless higher quality audio...

[@Supperconductor]

@@bryanp4827 Yeah, I know that. I'm trying to use my 4K TV for *VIDEO* and my AV Preamp for *AUDIO*. If I plug my Apple TV 4K directly into my Preamp and use it as the switcher, it will send only 2K video to my TV.

[@MasterMark5]

@@Supperconductor New pre amp time

[@ivancarmo4599]

I'm in the same situation. My Denon 2807 receiver doesn't have 4/8k hdmi. I connect my devices directly to the hdmi on the TV Samsumg 8k and the audio on the receiver, through the optical cable.

[@Supperconductor]

@@MasterMark5 Too much money. My Marantz AV-7005 still sounds amazing.

[@andrewdiamond2697]

I had no idea - so I'm one. I thought Optical and HDMI were about equal. I don't think I have optical in on anything anymore in any case since I upgraded my receiver about 2 years ago, though. Just RCA cables on a B&O turntable and an old Nakamichi tape deck, and HDMI everywhere else. I did buy new HDMI cables as well when I got the receiver.

[@richardlandgrebe4917]

Optical never has Radio frequency or magnetic interference problems that wire has

[@evilformerlys4704]

Takes quite a bit to aren't a digital signal though, like actually damaging the cable, radio signals currently ongoing in your home isn't going to affect your HDMI cables

[@adj2]

I understand what you are saying. Very likely the optical is the best connect for now. But now that I have a better understand ARC I will be reevaluating things when I add new Components.

[@Stefan-]

Toslink in itself isnt the limitation, ADAT lightpipe uses the exact same toslink cable and can transfer 8 channels in uncompressed better than CD quality (24 bit 48KHz) audio through one toslink cable so that technology which was invented by Alesis decades ago could technically be used for home theater as well, but was intended and used for recording studios and i use it a lot myself.

[@stevebennett2447]

8 channels of 24bit48khz, or 4x24bit96khz or 2 channels of 24bit192khz with s/mux. Very flexible, besides the cable 😛

[@ChandarSunderraj]

please make a video about any good hdmi 2.1 splitter that enables splitting one 2.1 source to tv and sound bar... since the tv doesn't have 2.1 port and the Atmos soundbar doesn't have a passthrough... trying hard to have a good atmos experience 😇

[@afifa_123-t3b]

👍 I'm 🇮🇳 india

[@njm1971nyc]

Your "compression simulation" just proves you don't understand digital audio compression!! There are two distinct types of "compression" when it comes to audio. You picked the wrong one!

[@lamarwest7739]

How can I connect a SAMSUNG TV MODEL NO: UN50ES6150 (HDMI and Optical ports) to Bose Model AV3-2-1 GSX Media Center (RCA/optical connections)? Should the connection from the Bose Model AV3-2-1 GSX Media Center, be converted to HDMI (for better sound)? Any suggestion would be appreciated, Thanks

[@awesomereviews1561]

Nope.

[@BlindReflex]

So I went through a myriad of sound testing. When I originally saw this video I thought you were wrong to say that because of someone doesn't have an HDMI output they should use optical. But after further testing I feel like you should never use optical, Bluetooth sounds just as good and RCA sounds just as good. Sometimes better in the highs. Anyway that's my opinion. RCA or HDMI is the answer

[@vicdmise]

Correct...sort of. Optical cable CAN send multichannel hi-def audio losslessly. In pro audio, the ADAT standard sends up to 8 channels of audio at 24bit/48k max, and using the SMUX protocol it can send up to 4 channels at 24/96k. Unfortunately, Toslink uses the S/PDIF standard to move just 2 channel audio at up to 24/96k.

[@BenFilley]

Ok so here’s my question. Running a pc through a 7.1 home theater system. It’s mostly a gaming rig so I haven’t been to heartbroken about not getting it working 100%. I have a pioneer elite receiver that I’ve been using wired from the pc via spdif. My biggest concern is delay/lag in the video image by having to pass through the receiver. Is that something I need to actually concern myself with or is it basically non existent? I’m not talking about audio desync, I mean additional latency between the video source and the output image. Kinda like how you put modern tvs in game mode to reduce input latency. I’ll swap over to arc right now if I’m not going to encounter lag.

[@rons3486]

He said Toslink is inferior to HDMI... HDMI might be better at sound but Optical is better at WORKING! I had nothing but problems (sound drop-outs, no sound, delays...etc) when I used HDMI-Arc. I have no issues, at all, with Optical, it works consistently.

[@MM13forlife]

Blah blah blah

[@Ponlets]

i have a Logitech z906 5.1 setup and it uses optical for my xbox and 3 individual 3.5mm jacks for my PC it supports Dolby Digital and DTS surround for the optical inputs ... how does my system have that if what you say is true (or am i missing something)

[@rossn5186]

Unfortunately I'm locked into using fibre as my Marantz receiver was the last model before the introduction of HDMI. I'm waiting for my receiver to crap out so I can upgrade it but it just will not die - may have something to do with it also being the last model to be manufactured and assembled in Japan.

[@Labor_Jones]

This is a new (I wondered what that was for?) topic... Thanks .... connecting means more viewing.... Thanks ........ BUT.... I AM PRETTY MUCH an ONLY - S T E R E O guy - Thank You :)

[@igorb2674]

majmun crn

[@oldschoolfunkster1]

I currently have both HDMI AND optical cable connected to the same home theatre setup. Does one cancel out the other? Also, I know there are different HDMI cable levels. How do I know if I have a current upgraded one when they usually don't have any info on the cable itself?

[@stereoazimuth]

First off, S/PDIF, means Sony Phillips Digital InterFace. It is a digital data transmission standard. Toslink optical was invented by Toshiba, hence TOSLINK...Toshiba Link. Yes, Toslink can send S/PDIF standard, but it can also send many other types of digital signals, just like coax connection. Coax is not limited to S/PDIF data transmission. This is why many jacks stopped using the S/PDIF reference on the jack and referring to the type of connector (coax, Toslink, etc.). Secondly, you can transmit 4 channels of full resolution lossless audio up to 96kHz with one Toslink optical cable. Yes, it does have that amount of bandwidth, although it is mostly used in Pro Audio under a protocol called S-MUX. Otherwise it can carry 8-channels of 24/48 PCM data over one Toslink cable. ADAT used this standard to send 8 channels of digital audio. The biggest reason to NOT use Toslink is that more modern receivers can do lower compression or even lossless delivery through higher standards of HDMI for coax OR Toslink for Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD Master Audio, Dolby Atmos and DTS:X. However, if your receiver does not support these standards, Toslink is just fine. Television is still only broadcasting in standard Dolby Digital 5.1 (most even in 2.1 or even 2.0 for the sub-channels) and the streaming networks only offer Dolby Atmos/Dolby Digital Plus, which is a lossy format. Only BlueRay (for now, this may change later) is about the only way to get full Dolby True HD, but only if you have HDMI eARC and decoding devices that support it. And then all the different HDMI standards...lol

[@LovelyKittenMusic]

6:46 minutes of a redundant video just to say that Toslink has bandwidth limitations which it doesn't apply if you get a true glass fiber cable and not a plastic one.

[@almostawesomewithwill9251]

Ok hears a tricky question for you: when using a smart projector (or smart tv i suppose)( im using a lg HU70LA) and streaming netflix, what cable method is best for audio out to your home theater receiver? Because your not sending video out to your receiver, arc hdmi cables arent an option right?

[@TheMattMercy]

I have to use Toslink for my surround systems as they are analog (3.5mm stereo in, RCA out. It was an old system (Logi Z506) on clearance, snagged up 4 for $60 each (MSRP $100) Rather than buy a $300 receiver, I found a decent decoder box for ~$35? However, it decodes from TOSLINK (which I re-pair with 3 RCA-to-3.5mm splitter adapters). I have yet to see a decoder box do eARC -> decoded RCA/3.5mm surround. If I did, I'd probably buy it asap. But even the $130 replacement for the Z506, the Z606, is RCA-input, and the next step up, the $400 Z906, is 3.5mm OR Optical - no HDMI.