Using an external DAC in a HT chain with WDTV as source

[kneo]

I currently use WDTV as a source which is connected to my AVR (Yamaha 473) via HDMI. The audio is set to digital pass-through via HDMI. Everything works fine like this, but now I want to introduce an external DAC in this chain for music.

So I have connected the WDTV's optical out to the DAC and the audio out of the DAC is connected to one of the 'Audio In' of the AVR. Now I face two issues

1. WDTV does not simultaneously outputs digital signals through both HDMI and optical. You have to choose one of them for a digital passthrough. Since I want to use a DAC, I have to choose optical, but that means I lose audio on the TV as my input is still selected as 'HDMI1' on my AVR (for outputting the video out of WDTV). If I switch my AVR input to the AV In, I lose the video altogether and the audio works fine. I want both video and audio.

2. If it's possible for me to watch the video from one of the inputs and listen to audio of another input on my AVR (I still don't know how to do this), it means that I always have to get the audio output through the DAC in the chain, even when I don't want to use it e.g. while watching movies.

Is there a better way to use DAC in this chain?

 

[Pyrrho]

It would be better to not bother with the external DAC. It is a waste of time and money. Your Yamaha has fine DACs in it. In fact, if you use an analog input on your Yamaha, there is a good chance that it will convert the signal back to digital for processing, and then reconvert it to analog. Just use the HDMI on the Yamaha and forget about the external DAC. Return it and get your money back if you can.

 

[slipperybidness]

I'll have to disagree. The biggest improvement I ever made to my system was an external DAC. Even my wife still raves about it, and she usually rolls her eyes and walks out of the room when I change something and ask her if she can hear the difference.

Even graduating from my big box store Polks to my current Dynaudio speakers elicited nothing more than a "meh" out of her.

External DAC's are definitely not a waste of time or money. Especially on budget receivers.

What receiver and what external DAC?

Modern DACs are now a mature technology (ie great performance on the cheap), so assuming that it was a modern receiver, then I suspect you have something else at play here.

Did you do a blind listening test? Did you level match?

 

[Pyrrho]

What receiver and what external DAC?

Modern DACs are now a mature technology (ie great performance on the cheap), so assuming that it was a modern receiver, then I suspect you have something else at play here.

Did you do a blind listening test? Did you level match?

I think you are feeding a troll. Consider this:

.... The biggest improvement I ever made to my system was an external DAC.

More important than changing main speakers, subwoofers, etc.? Think about the dramatic measurable differences between different speakers, and then think about how that compares with differences between DACs. Some ideas are so ridiculous that they are impossible to parody.

And what story like this is complete without the standard reference to the wife who rarely shows an interest in audio:

Even my wife still raves about it, and she usually rolls her eyes and walks out of the room when I change something and ask her if she can hear the difference.

...

That is a standard accompaniment to the ridiculous claim in audio. No nonsensical story is complete without it. People use that story in an attempt to support their claims about their power cords improving their sound and other nonsense.


Never mind the fact that all of this totally ignores the fact that one is likely using the DACs in the receiver anyway; as I stated previously, when using analog inputs on surround receivers, it is common for the receiver to use analog to digital convertors to convert the signal to digital for processing, and then to use its DACs (digital to analog convertors) to reconvert it to analog. So if there were a problem with the receiver's DACs, one would get whatever problem there is with them anyway in most cases. What the external DAC does is add extra and unnecessary processing to the signal (converting to analog and then the receiver reconverting to digital), that can only degrade the sound. The reality is, using a separate DAC almost invariably degrades the signal. If it works well, the degradation will not be audible. But there is no reason to add any unnecessary degradation to the signal, even if it isn't audible, especially when one has to go to trouble and expense to add the degradation to it!

 

[slipperybidness]

I think you are feeding a troll. Consider this:



More important than changing main speakers, subwoofers, etc.? Think about the dramatic measurable differences between different speakers, and then think about how that compares with differences between DACs. Some ideas are so ridiculous that they are impossible to parody.

And what story like this is complete without the standard reference to the wife who rarely shows an interest in audio:



That is a standard accompaniment to the ridiculous claim in audio. No nonsensical story is complete without it. People use that story in an attempt to support their claims about their power cords improving their sound and other nonsense.


Never mind the fact that all of this totally ignores the fact that one is likely using the DACs in the receiver anyway; as I stated previously, when using analog inputs on surround receivers, it is common for the receiver to use analog to digital convertors to convert the signal to digital for processing, and then to use its DACs (digital to analog convertors) to reconvert it to analog. So if there were a problem with the receiver's DACs, one would get whatever problem there is with them anyway in most cases. What the external DAC does is add extra and unnecessary processing to the signal (converting to analog and then the receiver reconverting to digital), that can only degrade the sound. The reality is, using a separate DAC almost invariably degrades the signal. If it works well, the degradation will not be audible. But there is no reason to add any unnecessary degradation to the signal, even if it isn't audible, especially when one has to go to trouble and expense to add the degradation to it!

Yeah, "the DACs will do more to improve the sound than going from Bose to Salk speakers"

Absolutely no reason to "double DAC". And, for me for music, I'm doing Pure Direct so I'm not using my receiver DAC unless it is needed (ie I'm feeding in a digital signal).

Now, my other rig is 2.1 separates with a USP-1 (analog) preamp. For this setup, an external DAC makes sense (one of the few times an external DAC makes sense).

 

[Pyrrho]

Yeah, "the DACs will do more to improve the sound than going from Bose to Salk speakers"

Exactly. Such absurdities are beyond parody.

Absolutely no reason to "double DAC". And, for me for music, I'm doing Pure Direct so I'm not using my receiver DAC unless it is needed (ie I'm feeding in a digital signal).

...

One can bypass all internal processing, but it often is not a good idea, as in most cases, that means bypassing the subwoofer and bass management for the main speakers, and therefore not getting the deepest bass and also causing more distortion from the main speakers when they try (and fail) to reproduce the deepest bass. It also means bypassing any internal EQ that may have been used to correct for speaker deficiencies and room affects on the sound. So in most cases, using the internal DACs is the most sensible decision, because in most cases, the best setting will involve digital processing anyway.

Of course, some people don't like using their subwoofers for music, because they set it too high because they like it that way with movies. But properly set, it adds depth to the bass and reduces distortion from the main speakers, in virtually all cases.

A few surround receivers have an analog bass management system for dealing with this, but it is not the most common way receivers are done, and we still have no reason to use the external DAC over the internal ones in such a system.

 

[slipperybidness]

Exactly. Such absurdities are beyond parody.




One can bypass all internal processing, but it often is not a good idea, as in most cases, that means bypassing the subwoofer and bass management for the main speakers, and therefore not getting the deepest bass and also causing more distortion from the main speakers when they try (and fail) to reproduce the deepest bass. It also means bypassing any internal EQ that may have been used to correct for speaker deficiencies and room affects on the sound. So in most cases, using the internal DACs is the most sensible decision, because in most cases, the best setting will involve digital processing anyway.

Of course, some people don't like using their subwoofers for music, because they set it too high because they like it that way with movies. But properly set, it adds depth to the bass and reduces distortion from the main speakers, in virtually all cases.

A few surround receivers have an analog bass management system for dealing with this, but it is not the most common way receivers are done, and we still have no reason to use the external DAC over the internal ones in such a system.

I do agree with most of what you state, but not so much in this particular setup.

(obviously) I have tried it both ways (RC on and Off etc). I prefer RC for movies, but pure direct for music. The RC on music is absolutely detrimental (Pio MCACC), but it works good for movies. Also, one of my sources is Phono and it would just be silly to run a phono signal thru a ADC/DAC.

Furthermore, I am running GE Triton IIs. These have built-in subs with built in amps, so again your comments aren't the best suited to these particular speakers.

Finally, I currently have my F15HP sub hooked up to the L/R preouts on my Pio and I have the config setup thru the sub's amp. I realize this isn't ideal, but it's not easy to get to the back of my Pio and I haven't felt like doing it with the LFE out.

So like I say, your general statements don't apply too well in this situation. Granted that they would be reasonable statements for 90% of the other users.

 

[Pyrrho]

...
So like I say, your general statements don't apply too well in this situation. Granted that they would be reasonable statements for 90% of the other users.

That is why I emphasized the words "often" and "most." The comments are general, rather than advice adapted to a specific setup. They are good general rules, that most people should be following. But general rules are not absolute, and that most people should follow them does not mean that everyone should.

 

[kneo]

Okay, looks like you guys are recommending against using an external DAC in this chain. With hindsight I kind of understand the reasons behind it. To clarify a few things, I did test this out in Direct mode only (just to ensure that the receiver is not using any signal processing of it's own). Also the DAC that I am using is not a high end one. I am using Muse mini which is a very basic entry level DAC. Yamaha's internal DAC gave a better output than this. Having said that, I was still wondering how one can connect an external DAC to this chain?

My query is more about WDTV's limitation to pass digital through only one connection at a time and my AVR's ability to combine video and audio inputs from multiple sources.

PS - I am a 'relative' n00b to this world.

 

[TheHills44060]

kneo which WDTV unit do you have? I have set up a WDTV Live Hub and the WDTV Live Streaming Player both simultaneously sending video to the television via HDMI and the sound via optical to my DAC. I do not use an Audio/Video receiver (I'm running a pre/amp combo) so this configuration was critical for me and it works like a charm.

Perhaps the older WD units cannot send both signals at he same time?

EDIT: Forgot to mention that the HDMI does indeed send audio to the television too but I mute it so that i don't have sound coming from both the tv and stereo system.

 

[kneo]

It's the WDTV Live Streaming Player. I think if I connect your type of connection it would work, but at least for me the audio is NOT transmitted through both the mediums.

 

[TheHills44060]

Ok kneo I think I found the caveat. In order to have audio from both connections you have to set the audio out to STEREO, which I currently do. What is is yours set at?

 

[kneo]

In that case it would not be multi channel

Sent from my C2104 using Tapatalk

 

[TheHills44060]

well yes, does that at least work? Just trying to troubleshoot and help you out.

 

[kneo]

That does work. From what i have learnt it does not support simultaneously transmitting digital from both hdmi and optical

Sent from my C2104 using Tapatalk

 

[TheHills44060]

Aww ok. That stinks. Wonder if its a hardware limitation or firmware.