• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports?


  • Subject: Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports?
  • From: Brian Willoughby <email@hidden>
  • Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 05:57:55 -0800

Thanks for the pointer to the RME FireFace 800. I have sent a message to their support contact and identified myself as a Mac OS X developer needing this feature.


Meanwhile, I will comment that the zero-filled samples you see are "by design" because SPDIF is a Constant Bit Rate (CBR) stream. When storing a file, Variable Bit Rate (VBR) makes the most sense, because there is no reason to waste unused data space. However, SPDIF is real time, and you cannot skip time just because you run out of data for a block. In fact, CBR in compressed audio formats was devised primarily because of the prior existence of constant bit rate transmission media such as SPDIF, ISDN, et cetera.


Even more important is the fact that SPDIF combines the clock with the data, so those zero-filled samples must be there in order to maintain the constant sample clock for the DAC. Even though the surround channels must be decoded from less data, the timing of the incoming blocks, sample by sample, determines the outgoing conversion clock for the multiple DAC chips. The clock recovery still acts as if 2 channels of 16- or 24-bit audio is coming in, recovering the clock based on this, and then driving 6 channels of output (in the case of 5.1 surround).

But I am a still little surprised that you would see many zero samples. I have encoded 4.0 audio into a 5.1 DTS stream, simply because I had no need for a center channel, and I imagine that this was very wasteful of bandwidth. But it seems like a full 5.1 mix with audio in all channels and significant LFE energy would use nearly all of the 1.5 Mbps bandwidth available. I will take your word for it, though, since I have not done any analysis of commercial releases to see if my assumptions are correct.

If only all digital audio devices were interconnected with FireWire and clocked by the final DAC rather than the data source, I think we wouldn't be stuck with such unwieldy standards as S/P-DIF.

Brian Willoughby
Sound Consulting


On Jan 22, 2008, at 05:01, Mikael Hakman wrote:

That sounds cool -- which FW device is that?

What is the FireWire interface with 32-bit integer format for digital audio (SPDIF)? Does it need a special driver to work with a Mac?

It's RME Fireface 800. According to User's Guide there are drivers for both operating systems on the disk, and installation procedures are well described.


P.S. DTS only uses the lower 14 bits of the audio sample, so that the digital noise is at -12 dB. Seems like a shame to lose 96 kbps of bandwidth.

Not only that! If you look at the actual content of SPDIF when transmitting DD or DTS then you'll see that large parts of each block do not transmit any information at all. All samples are set to zero. This is because compressed data, even for 6 channels, require much fewer bytes than 2 channels PCM for corresponding time length. Each block in SPDIF is of fixed byte length, and for given rate, also of fixed time length. Therefore they have to fill it with zeros when actual data for this time length is shorter. Talk about wasting bandwidth! All this seems to steam from the fact that SPDIF was designed to transfer digital audio *signals* as opposed to *data*. Then someone come up with the brilliant idea of sending compressed data through it. Then AES adopted all this, and now we are where we are.


Regards/Mikael



_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Coreaudio-api mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports?
      • From: "Mikael Hakman" <email@hidden>
    • Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports?
      • From: Stephen Davis <email@hidden>
References: 
 >OT: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports? (From: Stephen Davis <email@hidden>)
 >Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports? (From: "Mikael Hakman" <email@hidden>)
 >Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports? (From: Stephen Davis <email@hidden>)
 >Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports? (From: "Mikael Hakman" <email@hidden>)
 >Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports? (From: Brian Willoughby <email@hidden>)
 >Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports? (From: "Mikael Hakman" <email@hidden>)
 >Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports? (From: Brian Willoughby <email@hidden>)
 >Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports? (From: "Mikael Hakman" <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports?
  • Next by Date: Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports?
  • Previous by thread: Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports?
  • Next by thread: Re: I/O device with multiple *independent* SPDIF ports?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread