Any way for motherboard S/PDIF to nVidia HDMI

xen111

Commendable
Jul 29, 2016
15
0
1,560
0
I know that most graphics cards these days don't come with an S/PDIF passthrough header.

But HDMI audio has its own problems when given to Receivers. Many receivers, or at least mine does, might supersede the HDMI audio over the audio given from optical or coaxial sources.

Alright, with that weird intro I will say that I want to find a way to get my motherboard's audio into the HDMI of the receiver, so of the graphics card.

Is there any way, if not through hardware, to achieve this through software in .e.g. Windows?

I am just looking for a way to route the S/PDIF out of one device through the output of the graphics card, you might say. So to route it as the input of the HDMI audio device.

Ideally, I want to route the output of the S/PDIF as input of the graphics card HDMI, so to select the input of the HDMI audio signal. I wish I could do that: to set the source.

Is this possible at all? The motherboard has the VIA VT1708S audio chipset. I want to set the input of the nVidia controller to the output of the VIA S/PDIF signal, but I am not sure this has ever existed for Windows with whatever software.

Basically it should be standard feature to route audio like that but I'm not sure if it has ever been done?
 

gopher1369

Distinguished
Jan 20, 2012
100
0
18,660
14
Wouldn't it be easier to connect the HDMI directly to your TV for video then separately run an optical cable to your receiver for audio?

Edit: also specifically what issue are you having with audio over HDMI? Your issue sounds, unusual, not something I've ever come across before. I might not be understanding you correctly.
 

xen111

Commendable
Jul 29, 2016
15
0
1,560
0
Yes of course. My Onkyo TX-SR578 is however so stupid (or the engineers were, to my perception) that it no longer supports selecting the Optical or Digital or Coaxial input as superseding HDMI in all cases. So whenever a HDMI audio signal on the same port comes in, the S/PDIF goes silent. That is the reason (and sole reason, I must say).
 

xen111

Commendable
Jul 29, 2016
15
0
1,560
0
The older TX-SR507 had the option to "promote" Optical/Digital/Coaxial to the most important input for audio. But the newer model didn't have that option anymore :(. This is why I cannot use HDMI audio and must now dedicate a separate input to S/PDIF, which is doable, but it gets worse if you also need analog audio (for the Zone 2 system) (they have).
 

xen111

Commendable
Jul 29, 2016
15
0
1,560
0
To further elucidate:

This motherboard doesn't support it but on my other PC I have a soundcard on which the Digital audio and Analog audio are really given through the same device, it is an excellent sound card (Club 3D Theatron Agrippa 7.1 (DTS)) and it will put output on the analog connection as well when using the S/PDIF as the sound device in Windows.

This is required for the Onkyo to have both main zone and zone2 output.

Or just analog but I'm not doing that.

So with that sound card I can select the Digital output of the soundcard and have both digital and analog coming out of the thing at the same time, which is what I want. This motherboard doesn't support that unfortunately but I guess it has benefits as well, I don't know.

But the problem is that I can't use S/PDIF when the HDMI cable is connected to the same input on the receiver.

Why do I need S/PDIF? Not sure anymore for this one. I can stick to HDMI just fine I guess. But I've always preferred Optical (S/PDIF). Initially I wasn't aware that the digital+analog feature doesn't work on this mobo.

So you might say: just use HDMI + analog, and if you want to put something to analog, just use CheVolume (I have that tool installed and purchased). So on this computer there is not really that strong a need to use S/PDIF at all because it doesn't combine with analog anyway. The analog quality of the default motherboard device is dirt poor though compared to the other sound card just mentioned. I like the sound coming out of the S/PDIF better though (should be the same right).
 

xen111

Commendable
Jul 29, 2016
15
0
1,560
0
But supposing, just supposing I wanted to have HDMI video and analog audio on the same input on the receiver (same selector).

Not possible. I would have to feed *something* through HDMI to get it on the same input. It's just a limitation of the Onkyo you might say.

But disabling the HDMI audio device in Windows doesn't usually work. It worked a while in Windows 7 but not now on this computer in Windows 10.

So that's the reason for wanting to combine a different audio output on the HDMI connector; because it is the only input my receiver will accept from the computer while I am also using HDMI video

(I always thought combining audio and video on one signal would be a bad idea, and here it is...).
 

gopher1369

Distinguished
Jan 20, 2012
100
0
18,660
14
Now I'm even more confused. Audio over HDMI is vastly superior to audio over SPIDIF, and you appear to be saying that audio over HDMI works just fine with your Onkyo receiver, so I still don't understand what you're trying to achieve, why is SPIDIF even a consideration?
 

xen111

Commendable
Jul 29, 2016
15
0
1,560
0
No the HDMI sounds more hollow. Besides I like S/PDIF better, and that's still no answer to the question you know. I did not ask why I should prefer HDMI or something. I just asked if there were to be a possibility to route on audio signal over the device for the next.

But if you wanna know, there can be various reasons such as that on a different computer (with the sound card) I have had issues with dual-monitor where turning the HDMI monitor off would cut off the sound to the HDMI as well.

It is just not dependable to be depending on your HDMI exclusively for the sound. That is the biggest reason perhaps: I want to have options.

This was on Linux and it took me a long time to reconfigure the display setting automatically when the monitor would turn off such that the proper resolution on the Receiver (to the receiver) was selected such that the sound would not be cut off, etc.

That's the problem with HDMI: combining audio and video on one cable, and that leads to problems. I could have predicted those problems when I first heard of it, and I did.
 

gopher1369

Distinguished
Jan 20, 2012
100
0
18,660
14
No the HDMI sounds more hollow.
This is literally impossible. If you're, for example, watching a movie with DTS sound, DTS is DTS. What cable you use to transmit the DTS is completely irrelevant.

HDMI is superior because it supports lossless audio. S/PIDIF can only transmit heavily compressed (lossy) audio because it has very limited bandwidth, typically Dolby Digital or DTS. HDMI can transmit much higher quality lossless audio formats like DTS Master Audio, Dolby Digital TrueHD or Dolby Atmos.


and that's still no answer to the question you know.
I did cover this earlier, to repeat: plug your HDMI cable from your PC directly into your TV/monitor, then run a separate optical cable from the motherboard to your Onkyo receiver -> video goes over HDMI, audio goes over S/PDIF.
 

xen111

Commendable
Jul 29, 2016
15
0
1,560
0


No stupid. That's no way to wire Optical or Coaxial or S/PDIF over HDMI. And I also told you that my Onkyo doesn't deal well with that and that this is the prime reason for me asking this question. So you give an answer that doesn't even work, and I already told you that, and I posted this question because it doesn't work, and you're still not getting that. I already have a separate cable running to the receiver and it doesn't work apart from plugging it into a separate audio-only input but those are severely limited (as in, only one available) and what ever you say that's not an answer to the question.

I did not ask you (or anyone) to solve my problem. I asked you (or anyone, who knows who might be reading right) to answer a technical question on the possibilities of Microsoft Windows. I did not ask you to fix my life, and I didn't ask you to tell me how to live okay. I asked a technical question as to the possibilities of Microsoft Windows. Nothing other than that.

Why must it always be this way? Why can't people just answer the question you've asked instead of meddling with your life? Yes and no matter how small it may seem (to you) that is what you are doing, mister ....
 

xen111

Commendable
Jul 29, 2016
15
0
1,560
0
Although I must say that maybe it sounds incomprehensible now that I would want to wire some Windows S/PDIF device over some Windows HDMI device when I don't even want to use HDMI. But the benefit would be that I get better combinations of devices I use in Windows (and Linux as well, perhaps, if it comes down to it).

Oh and before you ask or say: you don't need to understand why I want to do this.

The question as to the technical possibilities of Microsoft Windows does not require an understanding as to what it would be for. It's a simple engineering question and normally you would expect such matrix behaviour to already be available. For example both Realtek and VIA support something they call "Stereo Mix" but it doesn't work all that well from what I've found and is severely limited I guess.

Add to that that something like CheVolume already supports the routing functionality of applications to devices, but does not support multiplexing I think. There are also applications that support recording some audio device but this requires the Stereo Mix that I just mentioned, or maybe they can do it anyway. Any such program could loop back the recorded audio onto a new device, but maybe this would incur a processing overhead. Still it seems like something that could be done easily and maybe some programs already do it, I don't know. I was asking about that.

You could also picture an application implementing a virtual audio device and then route the input to that device over some real devices but I'm not sure Apple does not hold patents to that.
 

xen111

Commendable
Jul 29, 2016
15
0
1,560
0
Thanks I'll check it out. At any rate you give an actual answer, and I don't think it would have happened without my "rudeness". For all it's worth, and I think it's worth a lot actually, trying to force people into your way of doing things is the most rude thing there is, it is just also the most accepted thing there is and goes under the banner of nobility and goodness and Yes I do extremely object to that harassment that everyone on every forum in the world constantly has to endure. It is the lowest form.

You don't get what you want unless you speak out, and that's just the way it is. Sorry for not being able to better express this and in a more concise form without having to go through all that, but you have to win your battles first before they become easier, I guess.

The amount of time lost in this world because people spend more time trying to derail you is just abysmal imo.

Thanks for the link. I seem to be "grossing" (grossieren, Dutch) in those sorts of items :p. The trouble is they all require power :p. The good part though is that it requires USB power, erm, 5V power, which means USB :D. I'm still trying to get or invent a better solution to better power all those silly little devices with less adapters and less outlets needed. In principe it is very easy to craft your own USB to mini-plug cables but I don't yet know if they already exist. Probably they do. It would be nicer to charge that kinda stuff or load that kinda stuff you know with a USB dock or USB charging station or something of the kind. There is no use in having a multitude of 5V adapters all doing the same thing for no reason whatsoever.

Maybe you could also just split those outgoing cables, well, whatever.

The thing actually looks pretty nice you know.

The reason I came back to this thread today, and thank you for responding by the way....

Is that there is another reason HDMI does not work well. Why is this? Well it is a receiver problem but not so easily solved.

The receiver needs time to adjust to the changing HDMI signal and the graphics card closes the stream apparently after the sound stops playing. So the first second of every song? Even if it is the first 1/4 second? It is gone. That is MUCH worse than having a lower quality sound, and I can't really hear the difference, apart from maybe not liking my receiver's "pure" sound so much. The muddled sound of optical may even sound better than the unmuddled sound from HDMI, if you know what I mean.

Strangely, I also hear a difference between one nVidia card and the next. I hear the difference between two different optical outputs. Of course the analog outputs vary greatly, but I do notice the difference between optical from my motherboard and optical from my soundcard. On this one pc that has both. I notice it.

Strangely my nVidia GT 640 (640 GT?) produces a better HDMI sound (on a different motherboard) than does my GTX 950. It is just something I notice. "Omg this is better :D". I know probably that the high end vendors rumour this is due to timing, I think that could be true, I don't know.

I'm just saying I notice a difference and usually select my preference based on that. Regardless actually I do remember optical having the same issue at some point as HDMI in this case, just not today? You know what I did on Linux?

I used ffmpeg to create a silent 1-hour audio track and put it on repeat in the background upon login. Except that all these solutions require more work to get functional in a good way and it just is not a pleasant thing to have to do. Plainly, it sucks to have to pick that as your solution. These sound cards / HDMI devices just close their sound signal. And the receiver responds to that by having to renegotiate something.

Maybe that's my wonky receiver again. But I forgot about this thing. I have to constantly now fucking restart every song I freaking play because the first 1/2 second is missing from the song. GREAT PEOPLE :D. :(. ;-(. I am currently logged onto a motherboard that has optical on board but without the sound card. Let's try it. In this test :( I get the same result as on HDMI.

Now I remember why I .. I don't remember. There was a difference between AMD graphics who did this thing and nVidia graphics who didn't do this thing, but I don't remember which was which. It could have been that my motherboard AMD HDMI kept it open and the nVidia card I had back then closed it off. It was due to the driver or apparatus. It was not something "HDMI" mandatory.

I don't remember having this issue with the audio card, but I'm not entirely sure. I don't know if all Receivers are this wonky.

It has always been an issue to me and also a reason I used analog audio for my CD-players rather than optical because the optical, yes, from the same brand, would miss the first half a second of the audio track which is just not acceptable right.

It's not acceptable you know. At which point any sense of superior quality falls by the wayside okay. I think I am fairly certain my soundcard did not exhibit this behaviour or I should have remembered that as well (have been using it for yeeeeaars with optical).

So even though you can say here please that there is no issue with HDMI as a standard; the point and fact is simply that you have no CHOICE when the audio can only be ROUTED over that HDMI cable. If the HDMI circuitry at either the receiving end or at the graphics card end -- that do not specialize in audio, you know -- is faulty, you are already screwed hard in the butthole.

Which I think is a good thing, we just use it for something bad. So now what you do? Replace your graphics card in the hopes of something better? That's not doable. Replace your Receiver in the hopes of something better? It might be doable, but good luck to you in finding something else.

You are just simply locked into something because you have no choice because the channels are combined.

Well the fact that my receiver cannot prefer Optical over HDMI is then my little problem, that's true. Regardless that seems to be the idea right. HDMI over everything.

Anyway, I hope this paints the picture as to why separate cables and separate channels are in fact preferable if you don't want to be screwed hard over by some flawed implementation of anything, the likelihood of which increases the more this stuff is combined. Component-based design gives independence, independence gives freedom, and freedom gives reliability in the fact of something else not being designed the way you want it to, because you can choose something else and have it anyway.

Not so with HDMI. That's all. In any case, I hope you will reconsider your stance on rudeness. I am sorry for making a messy thread content-wise.

I think interfering with and questioning choice is the most rude thing there is. Asking some stranger you don't know "Why do you want to do this? You should do something else" is the most rude thing there is. This person lives possible on the other side of the ocean and you think his life is your concern and that he or she should do what you tell him to? Who gave you the right to impede or intrude open the life or choices of another?

Who gave you the right to direct the course of someone else's life or day? Just because you have the willingness to answer an informational question? That is not a moral question. It was about knowledge, not ethics. and not direction or commandment.

People should just learn, I feel, at least, to respect the path of another person. Interfering with choice is the most common thing on the internet today. This person didn't invent it. But millions do it every day and it is very hard to get informational answers about anything because they all want to change you.

People seem to have nothing better to do than to fix other people.

Maybe I am doing the same here, it is just my opinion. You can do what you like. I'm jus saying it's not helpful and it is not friendly. And yes it does incur some wrath if you keep doing it to people, at least to me it does. I have only so much time and patience to deal with it in a friendly way. You are just the next 100th person doing it this week, I suppose. Could be true right.

I don't have time to indulge the next person again and the next person again and the next person again endlessly until they have stopped being concerned as to WHY I want it and they will answer HOW I could achieve it.

Maybe that is a regretful thing and I guess it is. But time is money, you could say, and I don't have time to educate you here. It is not my job to tutor those who can't understand why I would want something. In some instances it would cost you the rest of your life to do so. And your life and your choices are not another's concern. I repeat.

They are not. Why do you want it? Is not a good question. Particularly not if you are going to argue with every answer you get as if your desires are better than his or theirs. And these questions always lead to arguments, so they are not sincere questions, asking for information.

They are intrusive questions seeking to interrupt and destroy the original intent of the original person asking the question or wanting to do the thing. They are "interferential" by nature. Every person who asks "Why do you want it?" is going to fucking mess with you. Or try to.

The Why of something is not anyone's concern. You know the saying from the underworld "No questions asked?" That is what is meant by it. They don't ask "Why do you need it?" No they just sell it to you. No argument, no difficulty, just business, in that sense.

Imagine a baker questioning as to why you want a bread and whether it is the right bread for you. And every day, you have to go through the same argument. I can tell you that after a while you will be like "Can you just fuck off?" unless you are very mature about it and are capable of silencing them with perhaps more direct and clear ways.

So please you know. Learn the ways of the real world. Learn the ways of real people who are actually doing something worthwhile with their time. Getting on the internet is such a huge risk of wasting your time that I barely even do it even more, because every "bread" I want to buy leads to endless discussions with morons thinking they know better.

Every time I enter an IRC channel I am apprehensive. Every time I post on a forum, some in particular, I "hold my heart". Because there are always going to be people intent on ruining your day.

If you get sucked into some argument or someone's problem resolution strategy you don't like? LOST YOUR ENTIRE fucking evening or more.

And then it takes you fucking 6 hours to discover something "with the help of someone else" who is a "volunteer" and "needs to be respected for that" whereas freaking Google could have told you in 30 minutes or less.

Why? Because Google generally doesn't question your motives. That's why. Now you can call this people skill but that's not it. People skills is cutting people off early. That's people skills. The internet is populated by meaningless individuals who are looking for ways to waste their own time and everyone else they can touch as well.

And then if you are direct, efficient, and get to the point ASAP and you succeed in that in some respectful way? Are they happy?

No, you get into arguments anyway because you didn't provide all of the information they requested, which would have meant spending two more hours in senseless debate.

Instead, you were efficient, direct, perhaps a bit ruthless, but you solved your problem in a timely manner. They happy? Not at all. Other people will chime in and tell you they have no "time" for you if you don't provide all the information they supposedly "need" to troubleshoot your problem. Which would result in endless time-wasting. But they DO have time for THAT.

Not saying anyone here did that today but it is pretty much of the same style as the person who answered me here. A person clearly not interested in helping me find a solution to a problem he disagreed with, or to a desire he thought was wrong.

Maybe I am mistaken about that, please tell me. From the looks of it, I seem to be pretty accurate in that.

In times of trouble, polite forms are allowed to be discarded. What is important is that you find safety. To get out of danger.
 

xen111

Commendable
Jul 29, 2016
15
0
1,560
0
If you read that, I think you should get a statue erected for you. Jesus christ that was long :p.

In any case thank you for the solution or a solution in any case, it is not really a software solution that I was hoping to get, or asking for, or perhaps wanting to know if it existed.

All the same I think it is a dependable answer and a pretty nice device from the looks of it. Always love seeing those optical ports on stuff. And it's a cross-platform solution as well. So thank you for that mister JED.
 

xen111

Commendable
Jul 29, 2016
15
0
1,560
0
Well thank you. Without reading everything back, I don't recall why I wanted this. There doesn't seem much benefit in having the sound card generate the audio that the video card then outputs. As I said the original problem was that my receiver cannot prefer S/PDIF over HDMI audio. I am still to this day using either HDMI (audio) or S/PDIF but it has to be on a separate input (source) and I only have one of those available and I wanted to do this twice.

So I have the HDMI selected on a video source input, and then select another audio-only source so the image stays the same while the sound changes. That way I can have HDMI video but S/PDIF audio, no other way :(. However the problem is that I was also using "Zone 2" (analog audio) but the HDMI obviously cannot generate analog audio. So the soundcard CAN generate analog audio, at the same time as that it generates digital audio. Therefore, if I want both analog and digital over the same software device (in Windows) I have to select the sound card as my output device.

I cannot select 2 output devices at the same time (that would also be a solution).

So HDMI is not an option if I really need analog, and combining HDMI with the sound card is not easy. The receiver has a limited amount of audio-only inputs, and in fact only ONE that also has analog input. This is generally dedicated to the CD player. I can get around that by using an external DAC, but anyway...

Windows doesn't have a good way to spread sound over multiple output devices. (You'd think that would be easy). The software that exists can only send sound over a specific device (per application) but not 2 at the same time.

There exists software called Virtual Audio Cables (http://www.vb-audio.com) that can create a virtual device you can send audio to, but it only seems to be used for connecting recording applications to. You can't actually use it to connect to the outputs of two existing devices, it seems. Or, to be able to connect those two devices to it (forward sound from that virtual device to the real devices).

So my question was really a software question. Of course, the little device that J_E_D_70 linked would do the trick, but I hate getting new hardware in the home currently ;-). It's a solution though. Regards.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
C Audio 2
C Audio 3
T Audio 2
C Audio 1
Exotic_Nefariousness Audio 1
A Audio 2
A Audio 2
K Audio 3
N Audio 4
T Audio 1
R Audio 3
J Audio 1
E Audio 2
gijoe50000 Audio 16
M Audio 2
S Audio 1
C Audio 17
I Audio 2
I Audio 12
Joder921 Audio 4

ASK THE COMMUNITY