PS3SACD.com Home
 
 HomeHome   Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Optical 125 Mbps & no SACD

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PS3SACD.com Forum Index -> Equipment
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
krzysop1



Joined: 13 Apr 2008
Posts: 28

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:27 pm    Post subject: Optical 125 Mbps & no SACD Reply with quote

Can someone inform me why if Toslink fiber optical cables can push data at a 125 Mbps why are there such limitations on the PS3 in relation to PCM throughput?
_________________
KRZY
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Brandon B



Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Posts: 392

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Optical fiber itself can do the bandwidth you mention. But the S/PDIF toslink optical standard does not include bandwidths that high, and the transmitter chips for that standard are not capable of it. So Sony, or anyone else wanting to "extend" the capabilities of toslink would have to due a custom design and run of transmitter chips, and then no one would have receivers capable of doing anything with it at the other end anyway.

Not Sony's fault, the limitations are on every toslink device out there.

BB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krzysop1



Joined: 13 Apr 2008
Posts: 28

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well it is SONY's fault. S/PDIF stands for SONY/Philips Digital Interface Format. They developed the standard to begin with.
_________________
KRZY
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Brandon B



Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Posts: 392

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'll assume you are kidding, since the format was developed a really long time ago with plenty of headroom and capability for the foreseeable future.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FunkyMonkey



Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 77

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Brandon B wrote:
I'll assume you are kidding, since the format was developed a really long time ago with plenty of headroom and capability for the foreseeable future.


He's not kidding. Sony and Philips developed it. They should have allowed for future lossless data transmission. It IS THEIR fault. Optical is/was the future, and they blew it. We are stuck with dumb HDMI. They missed a trick there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Seventh Taylor



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 401

PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sony and Philips did leave room for improvement and later on actually used that, both on optical and coaxial digital output: The standard was created for CD-DA output i.e. 44.1 kHz 16-bit PCM. Transport of this is standardized in IEC-60958. Later on the same wire became capable of carrying Dolby Digital, DTS and MPEG2 Multichannel audio, standardized in IEC-61937. Besides, also 88.2 kHz is (unofficially but de facto) supported.

Furthermore HDMI is anything but dumb. In fact I think it's the smartest connection since the European 'SCART' plug, and arguably smarter yet. Who wants to have scores of RCA connectors between his player and receiver?

Saying it was stupid not to anticipate HD signals here is like saying the creators of the NTSC and PAL standards many decades ago were stupid not to leave headroom for High-Definition TV, just because the aether can carry such signals (even in analog form).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
krzysop1



Joined: 13 Apr 2008
Posts: 28

PostPosted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dude, the fact that they did not leave options for improvement is their fault, even though they did a good job with it earlier. Look at DOS limitation for example. In older versions of Windows up until Windows Millennium, you had to work around a 640 kb limit on paging memory under DOS. This is because when DOS was stolen for a pence by Gate's and Co. systems were using 64kb and beefy ones had 128 kb of RAM. They multiplied by 10 and thought that no one would ever, ever need more than that. Whoooppps. S/PDIF is the same in this regard. Maybe they will still find a way to develop it to use its full potential. I am sure Toshiba has a few ideas in this regard. 125Mbps via fiber optics is way better than 24Mpbs via HDMI 1.3a then (b), (c) 1.4 (z) etc. etc. etc.
_________________
KRZY
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FunkyMonkey



Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 77

PostPosted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, I was being facetious when I described HDMI as "dumb". What I meant was that it has many flaws, most notably the deterioration of the signal over not-too-long distances. Also, it is prone to timing errors at high bit-rates from what I have read. I read an article on AVSforums website daming HDMI and wondering why somethign like CAT-5 was not used, i.e. computer-style cable that carries many many more bits with no problems whatsoever.

And I don't accept the comparison with PAL or NTSC - that is a picture coding-decoding system, not a transmission medium. Optical fibre is a transmission medium with a definite limit based on the capacity of the cable used. THAT should be the limit of the cable's abilities, not the coonnection configuration of the equipment on either side of the cable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Seventh Taylor



Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 401

PostPosted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FunkyMonkey wrote:
I don't accept the comparison with PAL or NTSC - that is a picture coding-decoding system, not a transmission medium.


Ok, granted.

FunkyMonkey wrote:
I was being facetious when I described HDMI as "dumb". What I meant was that it has many flaws, most notably the deterioration of the signal over not-too-long distances. Also, it is prone to timing errors at high bit-rates from what I have read.


Note that Toslink also suffers from signal deterioration over 'long' distances: for more than 5 meters or 10 at most you need a booster. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toslink

Anyway, I think probably the room for improvement is there, it just hasn't been used (yet). Of course you could blame them for that also... Perhaps it's not too late and such a standard ('HD Optical'?) can still be established. Of course one thing they'll want to see is proper copy protection. I'm no expert here but I suppose something like DTCP or HDCP can be applied. It does still leave us with the issue that even if Sony unilaterally starts offering such an output we'll still need to wait for receivers that can handle it though you could look to Sony for that as well. Perhaps they'll even like it better the more proprietary it is.

Since for the current generation of equipment (PS3) any such attempt comes too late, perhaps it's something for PS4?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Brandon B



Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Posts: 392

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 3:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FunkyMonkey wrote:
Brandon B wrote:
I'll assume you are kidding, since the format was developed a really long time ago with plenty of headroom and capability for the foreseeable future.


He's not kidding. Sony and Philips developed it. They should have allowed for future lossless data transmission. It IS THEIR fault. Optical is/was the future, and they blew it. We are stuck with dumb HDMI. They missed a trick there.


No shit, I know they developed it. Almost two decades ago. When you guys come to the real world where products' performance and their capabilities are designed to price points that allow them to actually be brought to market and successfully sold, we can continue the discussion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jens



Joined: 11 Nov 2007
Posts: 99

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 5:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FunkyMonkey wrote:
Optical is/was the future.


And perhaps it will always remain the future Mr. Green

I know in Asia it caught on but in Europe it never did. Coaxial digital output is the norm here. Not sure about America.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FunkyMonkey



Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 77

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="Brandon B"]
FunkyMonkey wrote:
No shit, I know they developed it. Almost two decades ago. When you guys come to the real world where products' performance and their capabilities are designed to price points that allow them to actually be brought to market and successfully sold, we can continue the discussion.


No, it's not worth having a discussion over a relatively minor matter when someone is so rude. Rolling Eyes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ken_wilsonii



Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 23

PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:42 pm    Post subject: Yes, it can carry sacd..depends on the setup its seems Reply with quote

Read the following,

http://www.hdtvsupply.com/diopca.html

My guess is the either spec needs to be updated for DolbyTrueHD, DTS-HD and other lossless formats. I thought the big problem was copy protection schemes and not the optical cable itself
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PS3SACD.com Forum Index -> Equipment All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum





Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group