|
Post by MarciaFunebre on Nov 23, 2018 17:44:37 GMT -5
My question is why are there no Thunderbolt connections to Emotiva Processors? Obviously USB has problems with uncompressed Multi Channel sound as it was discussed somewhere here (kinda like a SPDIF/TOSlink bandwidth problem...?)
For linking my computer to the processor it would take away all the problems and need for multiple connections for various applications. E.g. HDMI is just wonky and unstable when turning off and on equipment, among other things it insists that the processor is another computer screen, when it is not, Analog In for surround sound requires another audio interface and for optical connections files have to be encoded/compressed. What a mess. One Thunderbolt connection and all this could be history. Or no?
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,333
|
Post by DYohn on Nov 23, 2018 18:20:22 GMT -5
Do ANY A/V processors have Thunderbolt connectors?
|
|
|
Post by MarciaFunebre on Nov 23, 2018 20:31:36 GMT -5
Do ANY A/V processors have Thunderbolt connectors? I don't know (I wonder too), but it seems to be a no-brainer on the wish-list. Also, I do not understand why USB 3 would not be adequate enough for multi channel sound.
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Nov 23, 2018 21:57:03 GMT -5
My question is why are there no Thunderbolt connections to Emotiva Processors? Thunderbolt and USB 3.1 type C are only now starting to get traction; far too late in the RMC's design cycle. However your point is valid in that it's the future and all external DACs are going to go this route sooner rather than later. Processors/AVRs will eventually follow. Would like to see it replace HDMI, but I doubt the content providers are on board. It'll be interesting.
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Nov 23, 2018 23:18:15 GMT -5
That is a good question. With Network connectivity I don't worry about a USB C connection. All of my USB is 2.0. Would be curious what unfolds there.
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Nov 23, 2018 23:52:46 GMT -5
Interesting question and conditional on hdcp being implemented to keep Hollywood happy . Unfortunately hdcp is not backwards compatible with thunderbolt it seems so good luck getting concensus among ce's There has been mention of an ethernet expansion option iirc for the RMC1 but probably for long cable runs.. communities.intel.com/thread/82101
|
|
|
Post by junchoon on Nov 28, 2018 8:01:23 GMT -5
We will always have the option of expansion module. But I really doubt there are that many thunderbolt based audio systems
|
|
|
Post by Hair Nick on Nov 28, 2018 9:44:41 GMT -5
That is a super specific need. I could see maybe a future where units have a type C connector since that is the direction that everyone is moving.
We will never have a thunderbolt connector on our units.
|
|
|
Post by Loop 7 on Nov 28, 2018 12:42:55 GMT -5
I guess I could see Emotiva implementing I²S and/or USB-C if they become ubiquitous on DACs.
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Nov 28, 2018 13:24:21 GMT -5
That is a super specific need. I could see maybe a future where units have a type C connector since that is the direction that everyone is moving. We will never have a thunderbolt connector on our units. Actually a USB Type C connector is what’s used for Thunderbolt 3, so some devices (like newer Apple Macs) support both the USB and Thunderbolt protocols over the same connector. So yes, it seems a USB C connector would be the right choice, and it should support USB 3.x; the question might rather be, is there a reason to also support Thunderbolt 3 (or a future version)? Here’s what the new Mac mini supports on the USB C connector: Four Thunderbolt 3 (USB-C) ports with support for: * DisplayPort * Thunderbolt (up to 40 Gbps) * USB 3.1 Gen 2 (up to 10 Gbps) * Thunderbolt 2, HDMI, DVI, and VGA supported using adapters
|
|
|
Post by Casey Leedom on Nov 28, 2018 13:51:58 GMT -5
Regardless of the issue of USB C versus Thunderbolt, let's just look at the bandwidths that we're talking about. They both theoretically max out at 40Gb/s. This is wildly above any Audio format, so I'm presuming that the only interest is for video?
Casey
|
|
|
Post by MarciaFunebre on Nov 28, 2018 16:14:02 GMT -5
That is a super specific need. I could see maybe a future where units have a type C connector since that is the direction that everyone is moving. We will never have a thunderbolt connector on our units. OK, maybe I should have said USB3 (or C). And that is not a specific need at all. Is it such an exotic thing to use your computer as a music player? HDMI is fine for video, but I don't care about video 99% of the time and having the processor pop up as another screen because of a very aggressive HDMI implementation and hijack my existing computer configuration for multiple screens every single time, with me having to manually switch everything back to where it belongs is simply tedious and not effective. Therefore, USB3 (USB C or Thunderbolt or what have you) would take care of that and I'd wish Emotiva would give this a bit of thought. Maybe the simple question as a start - why not upgrade the USB port to at least USB 2 because then you can have multi channel PCM. For surround sound I often use my MOTU interface that will take firewire (via thunderbolt) and provides analog 5.1 on the other end. I wish I could skip this for just listening sessions.
|
|
|
Post by Casey Leedom on Nov 28, 2018 16:28:05 GMT -5
But even DSD512 (AKA DSD x8) is only 22MHz x 1bit/Hz which is lower that USB 2.0's 480Mb/s bandwidth by a factor of 10 (for two channels). Where's the need for USB C's 40Gb/s bandwidth for audio?
Casey
|
|
|
Post by enricoclaudio on Nov 28, 2018 17:21:14 GMT -5
The only benefit of Thunderbolt (2 or 3) for audio is low latency. But this is only beneficial for DAW software as it's recording software the only one that benefits from low latency. For playback, it's not critical. In fact, most pro audio interfaces work very well with USB 2.0, like my Apogee Quartet audio interface.
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Nov 28, 2018 17:51:46 GMT -5
My question is why are there no Thunderbolt connections to Emotiva Processors? Obviously USB has problems with uncompressed Multi Channel sound as it was discussed somewhere here (kinda like a SPDIF/TOSlink bandwidth problem...?) For linking my computer to the processor it would take away all the problems and need for multiple connections for various applications. E.g. HDMI is just wonky and unstable when turning off and on equipment, among other things it insists that the processor is another computer screen, when it is not, Analog In for surround sound requires another audio interface and for optical connections files have to be encoded/compressed. What a mess. One Thunderbolt connection and all this could be history. Or no? I’ve owned an Emo. Processor for over 4 years and needed to look up Thunderbolt connection to even know what that was. Perhaps not as commonplace as you may think? Bill
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,902
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 28, 2018 18:14:04 GMT -5
The bottom line is very simple.....
Thunderbolt is an "Apple thing" (it's basically "Apple's answer to high-speed USB"). And, since USB is the standard preferred by virtually all non-Apple devices, and Apple computers are in a minority, most people are much more interested in USB.
Many of the complaints you have against HDMI are actually complaints against how specific products implement HDMI. (And this is especially true of computer HDMI cards.)
HDMI and Thunderbolt are both inherently complex... and so equally subject to the possibility of "wonkiness". The reason Thunderbolt SEEMS more stable and reliable is that it is part of the Apple ecosystem. (So, like most other parts of the Apple ecosystem, it has traded reliability and consistency for less flexibility and a higher price.)
Before any Apple fans become offended by my last comment....
The fact that so many devices support HDMI counts as "better flexibility and more options"... And the fact that, in comparison, so few devices support Thunderbolt, labels it as "more proprietary and less readily available on actual devices".
My question is why are there no Thunderbolt connections to Emotiva Processors? Obviously USB has problems with uncompressed Multi Channel sound as it was discussed somewhere here (kinda like a SPDIF/TOSlink bandwidth problem...?) For linking my computer to the processor it would take away all the problems and need for multiple connections for various applications. E.g. HDMI is just wonky and unstable when turning off and on equipment, among other things it insists that the processor is another computer screen, when it is not, Analog In for surround sound requires another audio interface and for optical connections files have to be encoded/compressed. What a mess. One Thunderbolt connection and all this could be history. Or no? I’ve owned an Emo. Processor for over 4 years and needed to look up Thunderbolt connection to even know what that was. Perhaps not as commonplace as you may think? Bill
|
|
|
Post by pknaz on Nov 28, 2018 18:23:47 GMT -5
The bottom line is very simple.....
Thunderbolt is an "Apple thing" (it's basically "Apple's answer to high-speed USB"). And, since USB is the standard preferred by virtually all non-Apple devices, and Apple computers are in a minority, most people are much more interested in USB.
Many of the complaints you have against HDMI are actually complaints against how specific products implement HDMI. (And this is especially true of computer HDMI cards.)
HDMI and Thunderbolt are both inherently complex... and so equally subject to the possibility of "wonkiness". The reason Thunderbolt SEEMS more stable and reliable is that it is part of the Apple ecosystem. (So, like most other parts of the Apple ecosystem, it has traded reliability and consistency for less flexibility and a higher price.)
Before any Apple fans become offended by my last comment....
The fact that so many devices support HDMI counts as "better flexibility and more options"... And the fact that, in comparison, so few devices support Thunderbolt, labels it as "more proprietary and less readily available on actual devices".
I’ve owned an Emo. Processor for over 4 years and needed to look up Thunderbolt connection to even know what that was. Perhaps not as commonplace as you may think? Bill While Apple may have been the first computer company to incorporate thunderbolt into their devices, it is not proprietary to Apple, it was developed by Intel, and I have Windows machines that are built around it. It will be the future, as it supports many things beyond high speed USB. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Nov 28, 2018 20:07:21 GMT -5
The bottom line is very simple..... Thunderbolt is an "Apple thing" (it's basically "Apple's answer to high-speed USB"). And, since USB is the standard preferred by virtually all non-Apple devices, and Apple computers are in a minority, most people are much more interested in USB. Many of the complaints you have against HDMI are actually complaints against how specific products implement HDMI. (And this is especially true of computer HDMI cards.) HDMI and Thunderbolt are both inherently complex... and so equally subject to the possibility of "wonkiness". The reason Thunderbolt SEEMS more stable and reliable is that it is part of the Apple ecosystem. (So, like most other parts of the Apple ecosystem, it has traded reliability and consistency for less flexibility and a higher price.)
Before any Apple fans become offended by my last comment....
The fact that so many devices support HDMI counts as "better flexibility and more options"... And the fact that, in comparison, so few devices support Thunderbolt, labels it as "more proprietary and less readily available on actual devices".
While Apple may have been the first computer company to incorporate thunderbolt into their devices, it is not proprietary to Apple, it was developed by Intel, and I have Windows machines that are built around it. It will be the future, as it supports many things beyond high speed USB. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)Right, it’s an Intel thing and Apple has been the ‘early adopter’. Since we have no reason to believe that any Emotiva processor currently slated for production has, or will have USB C / USB 3 / Thunderbolt; this discussion must be considered about a ‘next generation’ processor, which (practically) is years away. So it would seem for this next gen processor, this type of connection would be a valuable inclusion, and could add great capability and flexibility for both audio and video.
|
|
|
Post by pknaz on Nov 29, 2018 1:01:31 GMT -5
The thing that makes thunderbolt so attractive, is that it leverages a common physical interface, and allows PCIexpress, DisplayPort, USB, Power and other very useful protocols to ride on top of TB. I personally see it as the next "USB" - and therefore have started standardizing as much as I possibly can on it personally. Most of my laptops and desktop computers have ThunderBolt interfaces, and I've swithced to USB-C/ThunderBolt charging of my laptops/peripherals.
With that said, having USB-C or Thunderbolt on an audio processor/interface/device isn't something I see as very beneficial at the moment, but something I do believe will be important in 3-5 years time from now. I have plenty of USB-C to USB-A adaptors/cables that I could quite happily use if I wanted/needed to for the time being. Once we hit the tipping point of devices moving over to USB-C and Thunderbolt, I suspect the demand for having this type of interface on audio equipment will be more advantageous.
I wouldn't be surprised in the least to see consumer electronics adopt ThunderBolt, and by extension DisplayPort, as the video/audio transport in the future, eventually moving away from the HDMI physical interface.
|
|
|
Post by pknaz on Nov 29, 2018 1:05:46 GMT -5
|
|