My TV has a sound bar.

It is connected by an optical cable.

The TV itelf is connected to an ethernet switch, an HDMI cable
and by coax to TV aerial distribution amplifier.

I have a computer (configured as a home theater PC (HTPC), currently
mothballed, that I intend to restore as a MythTV server. It will also be
connected to the TV distribution amplifier, the ethernet switch and the
other end of the HDMI cable.

The HTPC and the TV/Soundbar are on opposie sides of the room.

When set up in my previous home, the sound came through a PC sound
system connected from the HTPC.

I am hoping to drive the sound from the HTPC through to the sound bar.

Is there any reason that this might not be possible? :(

TIA

--
Mint 20.3, kernel 5.4.0-139-generic, Cinnamon 5.2.7
running on an AMD Phenom II X4 Black edition processor with 16GB of
DRAM.

On 2/11/2023 4:24 PM, pinnerite wrote:
> My TV has a sound bar.
>
> It is connected by an optical cable.
>
> The TV itelf is connected to an ethernet switch, an HDMI cable
> and by coax to TV aerial distribution amplifier.
>
> I have a computer (configured as a home theater PC (HTPC), currently
> mothballed, that I intend to restore as a MythTV server. It will also be
> connected to the TV distribution amplifier, the ethernet switch and the
> other end of the HDMI cable.
>
> The HTPC and the TV/Soundbar are on opposie sides of the room.
>
> When set up in my previous home, the sound came through a PC sound
> system connected from the HTPC.
>
> I am hoping to drive the sound from the HTPC through to the sound bar.
>
> Is there any reason that this might not be possible? :(
>
> TIA
>

Normally, you would look on the Sound Bar manufacturer
site, for hookup diagrams.

If a device has HDMI-In and HDMI-Out, then you can route to
the Sound Bar first, then run the HDMI-Out to the TV set.

They give some examples of testing, here.

https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/390907/sound-via-hdmi-on-arch-linux

Paul

On Sat 11/02/2023 21:24, pinnerite wrote:
> My TV has a sound bar.
>
> It is connected by an optical cable.
>
> The TV itelf is connected to an ethernet switch, an HDMI cable
> and by coax to TV aerial distribution amplifier.
>
> I have a computer (configured as a home theater PC (HTPC), currently
> mothballed, that I intend to restore as a MythTV server. It will also be
> connected to the TV distribution amplifier, the ethernet switch and the
> other end of the HDMI cable.
>
> The HTPC and the TV/Soundbar are on opposie sides of the room.
>
> When set up in my previous home, the sound came through a PC sound
> system connected from the HTPC.
>
> I am hoping to drive the sound from the HTPC through to the sound bar.
>
> Is there any reason that this might not be possible? :(
>
> TIA
>
You should be OK provided there is only one earth connection (through a
13A plug) on the system, else you may get a hum loop.

In article <20230211212420.ee8dd971fcb2ad2705d4330b@gmail.com>,
pinnerite says...

> Is there any reason that this might not be possible?
>

Have you checked that the TV passes audio from the HDMI inputs to the
optical output and in a format that suits the soundbar?

On 11/02/2023 21:24, pinnerite wrote:
> My TV has a sound bar.
>
> I have a computer (configured as a home theater PC (HTPC), currently
> mothballed, that I intend to restore as a MythTV server. It will also be
> connected to the TV distribution amplifier, the ethernet switch and the
> other end of the HDMI cable.

> Is there any reason that this might not be possible? :(
>
> TIA
>

Works for me. My TV passes over incoming HDMI PC audio to its optical
output, and the attached Dolby Digital receiver then decodes the correct
multichannel outputs, if the source file or application has output
already encoded as such. Otherwise, normal PCM stereo.

--
Adrian C

On 12/02/2023 08:15, Woody wrote:
> You should be OK provided there is only one earth connection (through a
> 13A plug) on the system, else you may get a hum loop.

Around 1975, when was designing sound equipment, we solved that one by
earthing the kit to the chassis via a small resistor. That was enough
to keep the frame as a screen, but not enough to allow large earth
currents to pass, For 0.5p it solves hum loops entirely

--
"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social
conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the
windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) "

Alan Sokal

On 11/02/2023 21:24, pinnerite wrote:
> My TV has a sound bar.
>
> It is connected by an optical cable.
>
> The TV itelf is connected to an ethernet switch, an HDMI cable
> and by coax to TV aerial distribution amplifier.

People make things so complicated these days. A simple audio cable is
sufficient. Even a headphone output will do. Some sound bars use
Bluetooth even though the bar is inches from the TV, and introduce
delays in the sound leading to loss of lip-sync.

--
Max Demian

On 2/12/2023 9:17 AM, Max Demian wrote:
> On 11/02/2023 21:24, pinnerite wrote:
>> My TV has a sound bar.
>>
>> It is connected by an optical cable.
>>
>> The TV itelf is connected to an ethernet switch, an HDMI cable
>> and by coax to TV aerial distribution amplifier.
>
> People make things so complicated these days. A simple audio cable is sufficient. Even a headphone output will do. Some sound bars use Bluetooth even though the bar is inches from the TV, and introduce delays in the sound leading to loss of lip-sync.
>

The connection method affects the channel configuration you can do.

A TOSLink is stereo or AC3 5.1, or can be quad (at reduced quality).
And I've never run into someone with a working quad option (as proof
there really is a quad option). There may not be enough bandwidth in
the bitstream for a more-fancy format.

The TOSLink in stereo mode, should be every bit as good as analog stereo,
and with the optical path, there's no ground loop.

"TOSLINK cables are usually limited to 5 meters in length,
with a technical maximum of 10 meters"

And that's because the transmitter and receiver, have
low material cost. They do the link, the way a hobbyist
would create a link. One benefit of the choice of visible
red light, is it's easier to check "it's working".

Paul

On 12/02/2023 18:04, Paul wrote:
> On 2/12/2023 9:17 AM, Max Demian wrote:
>> On 11/02/2023 21:24, pinnerite wrote:

>>> My TV has a sound bar.
>>>
>>> It is connected by an optical cable.
>>>
>>> The TV itelf is connected to an ethernet switch, an HDMI cable
>>> and by coax to TV aerial distribution amplifier.
>>
>> People make things so complicated these days. A simple audio cable is
>> sufficient. Even a headphone output will do. Some sound bars use
>> Bluetooth even though the bar is inches from the TV, and introduce
>> delays in the sound leading to loss of lip-sync.
>>
>
> The connection method affects the channel configuration you can do.
>
> A TOSLink is stereo or AC3 5.1, or can be quad (at reduced quality).
> And I've never run into someone with a working quad option (as proof
> there really is a quad option). There may not be enough bandwidth in
> the bitstream for a more-fancy format.
>
> The TOSLink in stereo mode, should be every bit as good as analog stereo,
> and with the optical path, there's no ground loop.
>
>    "TOSLINK cables are usually limited to 5 meters in length,
>     with a technical maximum of 10 meters"
>
> And that's because the transmitter and receiver, have
> low material cost. They do the link, the way a hobbyist
> would create a link. One benefit of the choice of visible
> red light, is it's easier to check "it's working".

Sounds unnecessarily complicated. My current (Sony 32") TV has a single
3.5mm jack socket that can be configured as a headphone or line output.
Then all I need is a 3.5mm to twin phono cable.

--
Max Demian

On 2/13/2023 7:57 AM, Max Demian wrote:

>
> Sounds unnecessarily complicated. My current (Sony 32") TV has a single 3.5mm jack socket that can be configured as a headphone or line output. Then all I need is a 3.5mm to twin phono cable.
>

If you run an analog line level signal (~1VRMS) over a long
enough distance, you will be able to hear some
hum in the background. There will eventually be
a quality issue.

I don't usually see reports of TOSLink issues. In the
sense of optical failures. I don't know if anyone
makes custom receiver chips for TOSLink purposes or not.
It's just a LED and a photodiode or phototransistor
running at 6MHz or so.

The advantage of TOSLink, is no electrical grounds
are involved. It's as bulletproof as Ethernet.

Paul

On 11/02/2023 22:10, Paul wrote:

> Normally, you would look on the Sound Bar manufacturer
> site, for hookup diagrams.
>
> If a device has HDMI-In and HDMI-Out, then you can route to
> the Sound Bar first, then run the HDMI-Out to the TV set.
>
> They give some examples of testing, here.
>
> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/390907/sound-via-hdmi-on-arch-linux
>
>    Paul

Confirm my Soundbar has that ..... HDMIin and HDMIout as well as optical out

On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 15:51:41 +0000
Sargan <rick_hughes@gmx.com> wrote:

> On 11/02/2023 22:10, Paul wrote:
>
> > Normally, you would look on the Sound Bar manufacturer
> > site, for hookup diagrams.
> >
> > If a device has HDMI-In and HDMI-Out, then you can route to
> > the Sound Bar first, then run the HDMI-Out to the TV set.
> >
> > They give some examples of testing, here.
> >
> > https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/390907/sound-via-hdmi-on-arch-linux
> >
> >    Paul
>
>
> Confirm my Soundbar has that ..... HDMIin and HDMIout as well as optical out

Mine is a Kubik One.

Only micro usb in,
two optical in,
L & R RCA out; and
Sub out whatever that is. looks like RCA).)

:(

Alan

--
Mint 20.3, kernel 5.4.0-139-generic, Cinnamon 5.2.7
running on an AMD Phenom II X4 Black edition processor with 16GB of DRAM.

On 2/15/2023 4:41 AM, pinnerite wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 15:51:41 +0000
> Sargan <rick_hughes@gmx.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/02/2023 22:10, Paul wrote:
>>
>>> Normally, you would look on the Sound Bar manufacturer
>>> site, for hookup diagrams.
>>>
>>> If a device has HDMI-In and HDMI-Out, then you can route to
>>> the Sound Bar first, then run the HDMI-Out to the TV set.
>>>
>>> They give some examples of testing, here.
>>>
>>> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/390907/sound-via-hdmi-on-arch-linux
>>>
>>>    Paul
>>
>>
>> Confirm my Soundbar has that ..... HDMIin and HDMIout as well as optical out
>
> Mine is a Kubik One.
>
> Only micro usb in,
> two optical in,
> L & R RCA out; and
> Sub out whatever that is. looks like RCA).)
>
> :(
>
> Alan
>
Does the product line include a sub to go with it ?

Here is a short discussion about the sub option.

https://www.avforums.com/threads/sub-for-dali-kubik-soundbar.2074867/

This is an example of a bottom-firing sub. 150W.
You can set the cutoff frequency, so the bottom end of the Kubic
meshes with the top end of the sub.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/BK-Subwoofers-Gemini-II-Black-Ash/dp/B00KGC0VII

It's a box the cat can sleep on top of.

The problem with subs, where the amp is integral to the speaker cabinet,
is the amp runs hot because there's no cooling for it. This one could
be Class-D though, so it won't be as inefficient as older amps. The
capacitors inside units like this, are glued to one another, so the
vibration from the sub, doesn't snap the legs off the caps. One of the
failure modes, is the glue is actually conductive, and if it comes
in contact with conductors inside the design, it can short stuff.
(The glue ages when it is heated.)

But because these things are a "furniture design", I don't expect anyone
to turn back the clock and package the bits separately.

Creative had some nice 7.1 systems, where the electronics inside
would fail because of the poor glue selection. That, and the heat.
The design in that case, used 10 Class-D amps, three of the Class-D
amps fed the sub, the sub had three voice coils on it, and the voice
coils would add the signals together. And that's how the sub in
that case, got a 150W rating, as 3x50W input.

If you're into rap, some compositions have lots of bass,
for the specific purpose of giving your sub a reason for existing :-)

A friend at work, had stereo subs. Because he refused to believe you
could not "locate" the sound in the sound field. I can tell you
the walls in the townhouse had foil backed board in them, because
of the noise the foil made when the subs were active. The subs
had 36" cones. They're the biggest speakers I've ever seen in
someones house. You put bags of sand inside the cabinets, to keep
the sub "on the floor" :-) Too funny. The townhouse is in a row
of townhouses, and I can't imagine what the neighbours think during
a "stereo test run". The wife of course, is very happy with these
"things" in her living room. A whole family of cats could sleep
on the top of them. These were front-firing subs, because to
do a bottom firing sub would take up too much floor space.
That's how the speaker cabinets had room for the bags of sand
in the bottom of them.

So that's a taste of the "mystique" of subwoofers. It completely
slipped my mind, to buy one of those.

Paul

On 13/02/2023 19:28, Paul wrote:
> On 2/13/2023 7:57 AM, Max Demian wrote:

>> Sounds unnecessarily complicated. My current (Sony 32") TV has a
>> single 3.5mm jack socket that can be configured as a headphone or line
>> output. Then all I need is a 3.5mm to twin phono cable.

> If you run an analog line level signal (~1VRMS) over a long
> enough distance, you will be able to hear some
> hum in the background. There will eventually be
> a quality issue.
>
> I don't usually see reports of TOSLink issues. In the
> sense of optical failures. I don't know if anyone
> makes custom receiver chips for TOSLink purposes or not.
> It's just a LED and a photodiode or phototransistor
> running at 6MHz or so.
>
> The advantage of TOSLink, is no electrical grounds
> are involved. It's as bulletproof as Ethernet.

My amplifier doesn't have an optical output. I don't have a problem with
wired connections up to 3m or so, apart from the magnetic PU of the
turntable which needs to be as short as possible (it came with its own
lead and doesn't like extensions).

--
Max Demian

On 17/02/2023 12:54, Max Demian wrote:
> On 13/02/2023 19:28, Paul wrote:
>> On 2/13/2023 7:57 AM, Max Demian wrote:
>
>>> Sounds unnecessarily complicated. My current (Sony 32") TV has a
>>> single 3.5mm jack socket that can be configured as a headphone or
>>> line output. Then all I need is a 3.5mm to twin phono cable.
>
>> If you run an analog line level signal (~1VRMS) over a long
>> enough distance, you will be able to hear some
>> hum in the background. There will eventually be
>> a quality issue.
>>
>> I don't usually see reports of TOSLink issues. In the
>> sense of optical failures. I don't know if anyone
>> makes custom receiver chips for TOSLink purposes or not.
>> It's just a LED and a photodiode or phototransistor
>> running at 6MHz or so.
>>
>> The advantage of TOSLink, is no electrical grounds
>> are involved. It's as bulletproof as Ethernet.
>
> My amplifier doesn't have an optical output. I don't have a problem with
> wired connections up to 3m or so, apart from the magnetic PU of the
> turntable which needs to be as short as possible (it came with its own
> lead and doesn't like extensions).

Yeah I meant "input" not "output".

--
Max Demian

On 17/02/2023 16:46, Max Demian wrote:
> On 17/02/2023 12:54, Max Demian wrote:
>> On 13/02/2023 19:28, Paul wrote:
>>> On 2/13/2023 7:57 AM, Max Demian wrote:
>>
>>>> Sounds unnecessarily complicated. My current (Sony 32") TV has a
>>>> single 3.5mm jack socket that can be configured as a headphone or
>>>> line output. Then all I need is a 3.5mm to twin phono cable.
>>
>>> If you run an analog line level signal (~1VRMS) over a long
>>> enough distance, you will be able to hear some
>>> hum in the background. There will eventually be
>>> a quality issue.
>>>
>>> I don't usually see reports of TOSLink issues. In the
>>> sense of optical failures. I don't know if anyone
>>> makes custom receiver chips for TOSLink purposes or not.
>>> It's just a LED and a photodiode or phototransistor
>>> running at 6MHz or so.

It's practically useless for modern multichannel audio, does not support
uncompressed - HDMI surpasses that capability.

The only reason for connecting optical to a TV is where your equipment
doesn't support ARC over HDMI (or doesn't support HDMI itself).

>>>
>>> The advantage of TOSLink, is no electrical grounds
>>> are involved. It's as bulletproof as Ethernet.
>>

Ethernet is electrically isolated by transformers on the PCB. Coaxial
SPDIF is meant to be isolated as well, but manufacturers often cheap out.

>> My amplifier doesn't have an optical output. I don't have a problem
>> with wired connections up to 3m or so, apart from the magnetic PU of
>> the turntable which needs to be as short as possible (it came with its
>> own lead and doesn't like extensions).
>
> Yeah I meant "input" not "output".
>

Mistakes aside, if ye stop the average bod in the high street, the words
input and output are interchangeable and not wholly understood.

They don't find problems with entry and exit at the supermarket.

--
Adrian C

On 18/02/2023 11:17, Adrian Caspersz wrote:
> On 17/02/2023 16:46, Max Demian wrote:
>> On 17/02/2023 12:54, Max Demian wrote:
>>> On 13/02/2023 19:28, Paul wrote:
>>>> On 2/13/2023 7:57 AM, Max Demian wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Sounds unnecessarily complicated. My current (Sony 32") TV has a
>>>>> single 3.5mm jack socket that can be configured as a headphone or
>>>>> line output. Then all I need is a 3.5mm to twin phono cable.
>>>
>>>> If you run an analog line level signal (~1VRMS) over a long
>>>> enough distance, you will be able to hear some
>>>> hum in the background. There will eventually be
>>>> a quality issue.
>>>>
>>>> I don't usually see reports of TOSLink issues. In the
>>>> sense of optical failures. I don't know if anyone
>>>> makes custom receiver chips for TOSLink purposes or not.
>>>> It's just a LED and a photodiode or phototransistor
>>>> running at 6MHz or so.
>
> It's practically useless for modern multichannel audio, does not support
> uncompressed - HDMI surpasses that capability.
>
> The only reason for connecting optical to a TV is where your equipment
> doesn't support ARC over HDMI (or doesn't support HDMI itself).
>
>>>>
>>>> The advantage of TOSLink, is no electrical grounds
>>>> are involved. It's as bulletproof as Ethernet.
>>>
>
> Ethernet is electrically isolated by transformers on the PCB. Coaxial
> SPDIF is meant to be isolated as well, but manufacturers often cheap out.
>
>>> My amplifier doesn't have an optical output. I don't have a problem
>>> with wired connections up to 3m or so, apart from the magnetic PU of
>>> the turntable which needs to be as short as possible (it came with
>>> its own lead and doesn't like extensions).
>>
>> Yeah I meant "input" not "output".

Do turntables have optical outputs? And why is the whole caboodle called
a turntable so you have to say "platter" for the bit that goes round?

And why aren't the preamps of both the turntable and amplifier
switchable so you can plug anything into anything?

> Mistakes aside, if ye stop the average bod in the high street, the words
> input and output are interchangeable and not wholly understood.
>
> They don't find problems with entry and exit at the supermarket.

I think there's something funny about airports, especially the foreign
language terms for entry and exit. Does exit mean the exit to the plane,
or to the countryside?

--
Max Demian

On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 23:28:27 +1100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:

> On 18/02/2023 11:17, Adrian Caspersz wrote:
>> On 17/02/2023 16:46, Max Demian wrote:
>>> On 17/02/2023 12:54, Max Demian wrote:
>>>> On 13/02/2023 19:28, Paul wrote:
>>>>> On 2/13/2023 7:57 AM, Max Demian wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds unnecessarily complicated. My current (Sony 32") TV has a
>>>>>> single 3.5mm jack socket that can be configured as a headphone or
>>>>>> line output. Then all I need is a 3.5mm to twin phono cable.
>>>>
>>>>> If you run an analog line level signal (~1VRMS) over a long
>>>>> enough distance, you will be able to hear some
>>>>> hum in the background. There will eventually be
>>>>> a quality issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't usually see reports of TOSLink issues. In the
>>>>> sense of optical failures. I don't know if anyone
>>>>> makes custom receiver chips for TOSLink purposes or not.
>>>>> It's just a LED and a photodiode or phototransistor
>>>>> running at 6MHz or so.
>> It's practically useless for modern multichannel audio, does not
>> support uncompressed - HDMI surpasses that capability.
>> The only reason for connecting optical to a TV is where your equipment
>> doesn't support ARC over HDMI (or doesn't support HDMI itself).
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The advantage of TOSLink, is no electrical grounds
>>>>> are involved. It's as bulletproof as Ethernet.
>>>>
>> Ethernet is electrically isolated by transformers on the PCB. Coaxial
>> SPDIF is meant to be isolated as well, but manufacturers often cheap
>> out.
>>
>>>> My amplifier doesn't have an optical output. I don't have a problem
>>>> with wired connections up to 3m or so, apart from the magnetic PU of
>>>> the turntable which needs to be as short as possible (it came with
>>>> its own lead and doesn't like extensions).
>>>
>>> Yeah I meant "input" not "output".
>
> Do turntables have optical outputs? And why is the whole caboodle called
> a turntable so you have to say "platter" for the bit that goes round?
>
> And why aren't the preamps of both the turntable and amplifier
> switchable so you can plug anything into anything?
>
>> Mistakes aside, if ye stop the average bod in the high street, the
>> words input and output are interchangeable and not wholly understood.
>> They don't find problems with entry and exit at the supermarket.
>
> I think there's something funny about airports, especially the foreign
> language terms for entry and exit. Does exit mean the exit to the plane,

Nope, thats the gate.

> or to the countryside?

To outside the terminal.

On 18/02/2023 16:53, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 23:28:27 +1100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
> wrote:

>> I think there's something funny about airports, especially the foreign
>> language terms for entry and exit. Does exit mean the exit to the plane,
>
> Nope, thats the gate.

What about foreign airports with their funny foreign names?
>
>> or to the countryside?
>
> To outside the terminal.

Maybe it's only confusing if you don't know the lingo.

--
Max Demian

On Sun, 19 Feb 2023 04:52:07 +1100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:

> On 18/02/2023 16:53, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 23:28:27 +1100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
>> wrote:
>
>>> I think there's something funny about airports, especially the foreign
>>> language terms for entry and exit. Does exit mean the exit to the
>>> plane,

>> Nope, thats the gate.

> What about foreign airports with their funny foreign names?

Not aware of any that label it as the exit, even tiny little airports.

>>> or to the countryside?

>> To outside the terminal.

> Maybe it's only confusing if you don't know the lingo.

I doubt it. The most primitive wouldn't even label the exits as an exit.