HDMI sound card?

[Damon]

Why are there none, other than the auzen from a zillion years ago?  I would have thought someone would have made a new one by now. 

[KyadCK]

HDMI is full digital, and thus any card with only HDMI would just be, at best, a hardware decoder/reencoder for the various audio codecs to PCM, DTS, or Dolby, whatever you have on the other end.

 

An actual sound card is significantly more than that, including a two channel DAC at minimum, and usually a lot more including 5.1/7.1, line in, mic, DACs, ADCs, and usually a headphone amp, plus some software for various features.

 

When you are using HDMI, the Receiver is you soundcard, ad it provides the headphone jack, speaker jacks, and DAC to process your audio. HDMI off of your sound card would be no different than HDMI off your GPU or Motherboard, and those are both commonplace, so to include it on your soundcard at the cost of other features makes little sense.

[UltraMega]

Also HDMI is generally superior to any sound card though there are some features you may lose by going full hdmi audio that a sound card would provide.

[Damon]

1 hour ago, KyadCK said:

HDMI is full digital, and thus any card with only HDMI would just be, at best, a hardware decoder/reencoder for the various audio codecs to PCM, DTS, or Dolby, whatever you have on the other end.

 

An actual sound card is significantly more than that, including a two channel DAC at minimum, and usually a lot more including 5.1/7.1, line in, mic, DACs, ADCs, and usually a headphone amp, plus some software for various features.

 

When you are using HDMI, the Receiver is you soundcard, ad it provides the headphone jack, speaker jacks, and DAC to process your audio. HDMI off of your sound card would be no different than HDMI off your GPU or Motherboard, and those are both commonplace, so to include it on your soundcard at the cost of other features makes little sense.

Yes, it would be similar to how Creative's features all work over spdif and analog with their cards.  The dummy monitor work around with the current HDMI audio and going through a receiver is less than ideal.

 

12 minutes ago, UltraMega said:

Also HDMI is generally superior to any sound card though there are some features you may lose by going full hdmi audio that a sound card would provide.

Bingo.

[KyadCK]

10 hours ago, UltraMega said:

Also HDMI is generally superior to any sound card though there are some features you may lose by going full hdmi audio that a sound card would provide.

 

HDMI does not equal sound card, they are not comparable. Receivers or DACs equate to sound cards, and there are plenty of junk ones, just as there are junk sound cards.

 

HDMI is a digital communication medium that is capable of 8 channels at 24/192k PCM for 1.4 or 32 channels for 2.0/2.1, but nothing about HDMI itself has anything to do with the quality of the sound. If you want to compare in raw useless numbers, my AE-9 does 32/384k, which is technically 512x more detailed than HDMI 1.4, but that doesn't make it so given most lossless is recorded in 24/48k.

 

The one benefit HDMI has over S/PDIF is "more channels". You could also chose to use the sound card's DAC, if you prefer it over the receiver's, and run analog outputs from the card to the receiver's inputs, provided it supports the number of analog inputs you need, and use the receiver as an amp.

 

TL;DR: HDMI is equal to USB, S/PDIF, or PCI-e. Not sound card. Thus, it can not be superior to a sound card.

 

10 hours ago, Damon said:

Yes, it would be similar to how Creative's features all work over spdif and analog with their cards.  The dummy monitor work around with the current HDMI audio and going through a receiver is less than ideal.

 

Bingo.

 

If you really want Creative's software suite (emulated surround, crystallizer, bass boost, smart volume, etc) applied to speakers, which frankly makes no sense as those features are designed for headphones, then there's always the X7.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Creative-X7-High-Resolution-Headphone-Connectivity/dp/B00Q3XLGLU

 

Or you could use S/PDIF Optical to the receiver from any other sound card as long as you don't plan to go above 5.1 and don't mind DTS/Dolby compression.

 

That said, there is nothing in the Creative software suite that would work well on speakers except maybe emulated surround, and I can speak from experience that it doesn't accomplish much.

Edited October 22, 2020 by KyadCK

[UltraMega]

2 hours ago, KyadCK said:

 

HDMI does not equal sound card, they are not comparable. Receivers or DACs equate to sound cards, and there are plenty of junk ones, just as there are junk sound cards.

 

HDMI is a digital communication medium that is capable of 8 channels at 24/192k PCM for 1.4 or 32 channels for 2.0/2.1, but nothing about HDMI itself has anything to do with the quality of the sound. If you want to compare in raw useless numbers, my AE-9 does 32/384k, which is technically 512x more detailed than HDMI 1.4, but that doesn't make it so given most lossless is recorded in 24/48k.

 

The one benefit HDMI has over S/PDIF is "more channels". You could also chose to use the sound card's DAC, if you prefer it over the receiver's, and run analog outputs from the card to the receiver's inputs, provided it supports the number of analog inputs you need, and use the receiver as an amp.

 

TL;DR: HDMI is equal to USB, S/PDIF, or PCI-e. Not sound card. Thus, it can not be superior to a sound card.

 

 

If you really want Creative's software suite (emulated surround, crystallizer, bass boost, smart volume, etc) applied to speakers, which frankly makes no sense as those features are designed for headphones, then there's always the X7.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Creative-X7-High-Resolution-Headphone-Connectivity/dp/B00Q3XLGLU

 

Or you could use S/PDIF Optical to the receiver from any other sound card as long as you don't plan to go above 5.1 and don't mind DTS/Dolby compression.

 

That said, there is nothing in the Creative software suite that would work well on speakers except maybe emulated surround, and I can speak from experience that it doesn't accomplish much.

HDMI over HDCP 2.2 (4k hdmi) is going to give you clearly sound than any sound card will. 

[Damon]

It can't be that hard to replace the spdif port with an hdmi.  I want all the options I'd normally have with a sound card, using the hdmi interface.  And yes, technically the receiver acts as the dac for the sound card.  That's fantastic.  Not the point. 

Edited October 22, 2020 by Damon

[UltraMega]

23 minutes ago, Damon said:

It can't be that hard to replace the spdif port with an hdmi.  I want all the options I'd normally have with a sound card, using the hdmi interface.  And yes, technically the receiver acts as the dac for the sound card.  That's fantastic.  Not the point. 

Would be nice but for several reasons non exist. I tried HDMI audio over HDCP 2.2 once and it sounded EXTREMELY clean but since most music is just two channels and I have 5.1 surround, it left most of my speakers idle, so I switched back. Using a sound card gives me the option to listen to music with all my speakers. 

Edited October 22, 2020 by UltraMega

[Damon]

1 hour ago, UltraMega said:

Would be nice but for several reasons non exist. I tried HDMI audio over HDCP 2.2 once and it sounded EXTREMELY clean but since most music is just two channels and I have 5.1 surround, it left most of my speakers idle, so I switched back. Using a sound card gives me the option to listen to music with all my speakers. 

I had basically the same experience, which is keeping me on 5.1 analog via sound card.  I know that Creative has a software suite you can buy to use with onboard sound, but don't think it can do what I want.

[UltraMega]

13 minutes ago, Damon said:

I had basically the same experience, which is keeping me on 5.1 analog via sound card.  I know that Creative has a software suite you can buy to use with onboard sound, but don't think it can do what I want.

I think you basically need to find a receiver that has the features you would want from your sound card if you want to go full hdmi and still have some customizable options.

 

That said, I suspect that the new 120hz 4k hdmi 2.1 standard will require a receiver that fully supports hdmi 2.1 so now would be a bad time to start investing in a receiver setup anyway.

[KyadCK]

4 hours ago, UltraMega said:

HDMI over HDCP 2.2 (4k hdmi) is going to give you clearly sound than any sound card will. 

 

HDMI will provide no sound at all as it is not an analog signal that you can plug into a speaker.

 

3 hours ago, UltraMega said:

Would be nice but for several reasons non exist. I tried HDMI audio over HDCP 2.2 once and it sounded EXTREMELY clean but since most music is just two channels and I have 5.1 surround, it left most of my speakers idle, so I switched back. Using a sound card gives me the option to listen to music with all my speakers. 

 

http://manuals.marantz.com/SR7012/EU/en/DRDZSYyrtgycpw.php

 

Original sound mode > Multi Ch Stereo > This mode is for enjoying stereo sound from all speakers.

Original sound mode > Virtual > This mode lets you experience an expansive surround sound effect when playing back through just the front (L/R) speakers only, and when listening with stereo headphones.

 

Standard feature on nicer Receivers and Preamps, I use it on my AV7703 all the time.

 

3 hours ago, Damon said:

It can't be that hard to replace the spdif port with an hdmi.  I want all the options I'd normally have with a sound card, using the hdmi interface.  And yes, technically the receiver acts as the dac for the sound card.  That's fantastic.  Not the point. 

 

HDMI requires a video signal be sent, so yes it can be that hard. HDMI also requires certification, charges a royalty per port, and to meet spec requires that the soundcard be able to pump out several gigabits of data per second.

 

In comparison, S/PDIF in two channel 24/96 is 4.6mbps.

 

2 hours ago, Damon said:

I had basically the same experience, which is keeping me on 5.1 analog via sound card.  I know that Creative has a software suite you can buy to use with onboard sound, but don't think it can do what I want.

 

Onboard sound does not include the HDMI port because that is off the iGPU, so you are correct, it will not do what you want.

 

However, you can also use software to set up a virtual audio device such as VoiceMeeter.

Edited October 22, 2020 by KyadCK

[Damon]

Ah, so it's a BS standards issue, not a real technical reason.  That answers that.  HDMI should have an audio only standard then.  I don't want to run my monitor through a receiver and won't.  I'll stick with my analog. 

[UltraMega]

1 hour ago, KyadCK said:

 

HDMI will provide no sound at all as it is not an analog signal that you can plug into a speaker.

 

 

 

Yea, that didn't really need to be stated. Obviously I know you can't plug HDMI into a speaker. Not sure how you could have been lead to believe otherwise by anything I said.

 

 My point is that if you can get you're audio setup to be fully HDCP 2.2 compatible, which requires 4K HDMI, the sound will be better vs that which you would get from a sound card assuming the receiver being used is the same either way. 

 

I have tried this myself before, and it was really nice but ultimately I preferred having the settings/control that my sound card gives me.. well that and the the reciver I used was a little glitchy with a PC/windows at the time. The difference when listening to a super high quality audio file like a FLAC or watching a very high quality surround sound movie file with HDCP 2.2 vs a DAC style PCIe device is just leagues away, the difference is very apparent, to me at least. 

[Damon]

33 minutes ago, UltraMega said:

Yea, that didn't really need to be stated. Obviously I know you can't plug HDMI into a speaker. Not sure how you could have been lead to believe otherwise by anything I said.

 

 My point is that if you can get you're audio setup to be fully HDCP 2.2 compatible, which requires 4K HDMI, the sound will be better vs that which you would get from a sound card assuming the receiver being used is the same either way. 

 

I have tried this myself before, and it was really nice but ultimately I preferred having the settings/control that my sound card gives me.. well that and the the reciver I used was a little glitchy with a PC/windows at the time. The difference when listening to a super high quality audio file like a FLAC or watching a very high quality surround sound movie file with HDCP 2.2 vs a DAC style PCIe device is just leagues away, the difference is very apparent, to me at least. 

It did sound like the HDMI audio was better than the rca cables.  But like you said, it's not worth giving up all the control the sound card gives which is why I want an HDMI sound card (don't know why anyone would assume you want to plug an HDMI cable into your speakers ).

[KyadCK]

16 hours ago, UltraMega said:

Yea, that didn't really need to be stated. Obviously I know you can't plug HDMI into a speaker. Not sure how you could have been lead to believe otherwise by anything I said.

 

 My point is that if you can get you're audio setup to be fully HDCP 2.2 compatible, which requires 4K HDMI, the sound will be better vs that which you would get from a sound card assuming the receiver being used is the same either way. 

 

I have tried this myself before, and it was really nice but ultimately I preferred having the settings/control that my sound card gives me.. well that and the the reciver I used was a little glitchy with a PC/windows at the time. The difference when listening to a super high quality audio file like a FLAC or watching a very high quality surround sound movie file with HDCP 2.2 vs a DAC style PCIe device is just leagues away, the difference is very apparent, to me at least. 

 

The argument I am making is that HDMI itself is irrelevant and for whatever reason you think that HDCP is somehow involved even with just lossless music.

 

HDCP isn't even audio related, it's an anti piracy measure. High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection.

Quote

The system is meant to stop HDCP-encrypted content from being played on unauthorized devices or devices which have been modified to copy HDCP content.^[2][3] Before sending data, a transmitting device checks that the receiver is authorized to receive it. If so, the transmitter encrypts the data to prevent eavesdropping as it flows to the receiver.^[4]

 

The majority of lossless music is in 24/48 or 24/96 stereo, aka, 2.3mbps or 4.6mbps.

• S/PDIF TOSLINK is capable of up-to 125mbps, though my AE-9 can "only" output to (and my RX-V375 accept input of) 24/192, or 9.2mbps over this interface.
• USB can obviously do >400mbps.
• Bluetooth 5 can do 6mbps.
• Networking, obviously, is capable of 10/100/1000mbps.
• HDMI 1.4 can do 8 channels at 24/192 PCM, or ~37mbps.
• HDMI 2.1 can do 32 channels at 24/192 PCM, or ~147.5mbps.

Regardless of how you get your data to the receiver, provided you have enough bandwidth, are using the same formats, and the mediums by which they get to the receiver are digital (and thus use the built in DAC), the end sound once it it run on the DAC/Amps and kicked out to the speakers is the same. HDMI, and especially HDCP, in themselves, are irrelevant. The argument that you are actually making is either that your receiver's analog inputs are sub-optimal (which they commonly are), or the DAC in the receiver is better than the one in your sound card (highly possible). That is all. You would get the same music quality if you used S/PDIF off the sound card.

 

Now, if HDCP is handicapping your movie audio experience and not letting you run lossless on your sound card because the media companies fear piracy more than the heat death of the universe... That is a whole separate problem, but certainly a software one, not because of your sound card.

 

Also there is no "DAC style PCI-e device", DAC literally stands for Digital/Analog Converter. Every device that takes a digital signal and makes an analog one for a speaker to play has a DAC, be it a Shitt stack, a sound blaster card, or a top of the line receiver. If anything that would be a "PCI-e style DAC" as opposed to a "USB style DAC" or "multi-input DAC".

 

16 hours ago, Damon said:

It did sound like the HDMI audio was better than the rca cables.  But like you said, it's not worth giving up all the control the sound card gives which is why I want an HDMI sound card (don't know why anyone would assume you want to plug an HDMI cable into your speakers ).

 

If the sound was better over HDMI than RCA, then one of the following assumptions can be made;

• The DAC in the receiver is better than the one in your sound card.
• The sound produced by your sound card's amps are less than optimal to be re-amp'd by the receiver.
• The RCA input of your receiver is not properly isolated from the rest of the system and you are getting interference.
• The sound card is not properly isolated form the rest of the system and you are getting interference.

And all of the above are why it is preferred to use a digital interface when using an external audio solution.

 

But that begs the question again, what specific feature(s) from the SB suite are you looking to use?

 

Crystalizer, Bass, and Dialog+ are all just equalizer settings. Smart Vol is mostly irrelevant to speakers, so the last option is Surround, which... again, most receivers have channel duplication, and Creative's "Surround" is really a fake surround designed for headphones. Yamaha calls theirs "5/7 channel stereo", Marantz calls it "Multi Channel Stereo", etc, and the subwoofer crossover is usually set on the receiver unless you use a dedicated LFE channel.

 

Are you certain your model receiver doesn't have channel duplication built in?

Edited October 23, 2020 by KyadCK

[schuck6566]

Might I also suggest ck'n the quality of the rca cables? I had my creative speakers sounding like crap and was getting actual crackling sounds from my card/source.Turned out the jack on the end of the cable was flakey and if the wire was bent a little in 1 direction everything was ok,but if the wire was bumped(by my foot or moving the comp during cleaning)the static dropped channel would start again. Replaced with new cable and sound is great again.

Edited October 23, 2020 by schuck6566

[UltraMega]

1 hour ago, schuck6566 said:

Might I also suggest ck'n the quality of the rca cables? I had my creative speakers sounding like crap and was getting actual crackling sounds from my card/source.Turned out the jack on the end of the cable was flakey and if the wire was bent a little in 1 direction everything was ok,but if the wire was bumped(by my foot or moving the comp during cleaning)the static dropped channel would start again. Replaced with new cable and sound is great again.

Tldr.

 

HDCP is not the right term, you're right, but still want I am referring to is 4k hdmi level audio quality which is different than standard hdmi. 

 

Writing an essay about this won't change what one can hear clearly with their own ears. Using a 4k hdmi audio setup is just about there best option available in terms of signal quality is my only point. There are lots of reasons for this. 

Edited October 23, 2020 by UltraMega

[UltraMega]

1 hour ago, schuck6566 said:

Might I also suggest ck'n the quality of the rca cables? I had my creative speakers sounding like crap and was getting actual crackling sounds from my card/source.Turned out the jack on the end of the cable was flakey and if the wire was bent a little in 1 direction everything was ok,but if the wire was bumped(by my foot or moving the comp during cleaning)the static dropped channel would start again. Replaced with new cable and sound is great again.

Yea that will definitely matter as well.

[KyadCK]

36 minutes ago, UltraMega said:

Tldr.

 

HDCP is not the right term, you're right, but still want I am referring to is 4k hdmi level audio quality which is different than standard hdmi. 

 

Writing an essay about this won't change what one can hear clearly with their own ears. Using a 4k hdmi audio setup is just about there best option available in terms of signal quality is my only point. There are lots of reasons for this. 

 

The communication medium does not describe the quality of the source file, only the maximum rate at which data can be moved.

 

"4K HDMI" is not a thing. That is not a standard that exists. Every HDMI standard back to HDMI 1.4 is capable of producing a 4k signal, albeit at 30hz. HDMI 2.0 and 2.1 are still just 24/192 PCM per channel. It is no different from HDMI 1.4 which is also 24/192 per channel, and S/PDIF which is also 24/192 PCM per channel. The only difference is that HDMI 2.0 bumped the total channel count from 8 to 32.

 

Your testing environment is flawed, or you are suffering from placebo. If you feel there are "reasons" that are not listed in the actual specification of the medium you are choosing to back, then list them, along with a source on the info.

 

While you are at it, you should link the models of equipment you conducted your testing with, because I suspect that the receiver you used is of significantly higher quality than the SBZ you have listed.

[UltraMega]

3 hours ago, KyadCK said:

 

The communication medium does not describe the quality of the source file, only the maximum rate at which data can be moved.

 

"4K HDMI" is not a thing. That is not a standard that exists. Every HDMI standard back to HDMI 1.4 is capable of producing a 4k signal, albeit at 30hz. HDMI 2.0 and 2.1 are still just 24/192 PCM per channel. It is no different from HDMI 1.4 which is also 24/192 per channel, and S/PDIF which is also 24/192 PCM per channel. The only difference is that HDMI 2.0 bumped the total channel count from 8 to 32.

 

Your testing environment is flawed, or you are suffering from placebo. If you feel there are "reasons" that are not listed in the actual specification of the medium you are choosing to back, then list them, along with a source on the info.

 

While you are at it, you should link the models of equipment you conducted your testing with, because I suspect that the receiver you used is of significantly higher quality than the SBZ you have listed.

Digital vs analog definitely matters though. You will never get as clean of sound from a pc with a sound card because of the electrical interference, then you have to worry about the wires going from the pc to the receiver being thick enough/shielded from any additional interference. All of that goes away with hdmi, and the only time you have analog is from the receiver to the speakers. Not to mention the dac in a receiver is going to be better than that in a sound card 99% of the time.

[Damon]

3 hours ago, UltraMega said:

Digital vs analog definitely matters though. You will never get as clean of sound from a pc with a sound card because of the electrical interference, then you have to worry about the wires going from the pc to the receiver being thick enough/shielded from any additional interference. All of that goes away with hdmi, and the only time you have analog is from the receiver to the speakers. Not to mention the dac in a receiver is going to be better than that in a sound card 99% of the time.

Exactly this^^^

9 hours ago, schuck6566 said:

Might I also suggest ck'n the quality of the rca cables? I had my creative speakers sounding like crap and was getting actual crackling sounds from my card/source.Turned out the jack on the end of the cable was flakey and if the wire was bent a little in 1 direction everything was ok,but if the wire was bumped(by my foot or moving the comp during cleaning)the static dropped channel would start again. Replaced with new cable and sound is great again.

Not the quality of the cables.  It's analog vs digital to the receiver.  The sound quality is good using the rca cables, but the hdmi audio sounded a little bit cleaner.  

[KyadCK]

On 10/23/2020 at 2:29 PM, UltraMega said:

Digital vs analog definitely matters though. You will never get as clean of sound from a pc with a sound card because of the electrical interference, then you have to worry about the wires going from the pc to the receiver being thick enough/shielded from any additional interference. All of that goes away with hdmi, and the only time you have analog is from the receiver to the speakers. Not to mention the dac in a receiver is going to be better than that in a sound card 99% of the time.

 

All agreed until the last sentence. Name any model receiver you please and I can nearly guarantee that my AE-9 has a better DAC because the DAC in the AE-9 goes beyond the 24/192 HDMI is capable of. 32/384 from a ES9038PRO to be precise, while my AV7703 has a AKM AK4458VN which can do 32/192.

 

To be clear, unless I have a source audio file that is higher than 32/192 that doesn't actually matter, and the AV7703 can obviously do more than 5.1 channel output (being an 11.2 preamp and all) but point stands. The AE-9's DAC does have better THD ratings and this holds up in testing. It certainly won't have a better speaker line amp than most receivers, but it does have a much better headphone amp, beatable only by (expensive) dedicated headphone DAC/Amp combos.

 

These things are measurable by the way;

https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/report/dac/creative-ae-9-foobar-96.php#gsc.tab=0

 

With a total Line Out (RCA) THD of 0.000587% (expressed as a fraction, that is 1/170357th of a change, so a 20khz signal would be accurate down to 0.12hz, and the response curve is flat as a board), it is not the soundcard's problem, but simply fighting the reality of an external analog solution.

 

Here are the rear channels of the AE-9's speaker Line Out (3.5mm);

https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/report/dac/creative-ae-9-rear.php#gsc.tab=0

 

Interference from the case itself may be an issue with some sound cards, but not all. If I were to get an RCA-in speaker amplifier, without any of the extra circuitry that a receiver would have in it, there is a fair chance it would sound of comparable quality to a receiver of the same caliber plugged in with HDMI.

 

Granted this isn't "fair" as I'm comparing to one of the best sound cards on the planet, but it cost a quarter of what my AV7703 did, and the AV7703 can't operate until you buy amplifiers or speakers with them built in, so...

 

On 10/23/2020 at 6:28 PM, Damon said:

Exactly this^^^

Not the quality of the cables.  It's analog vs digital to the receiver.  The sound quality is good using the rca cables, but the hdmi audio sounded a little bit cleaner.  

 

I ask again;

 

• Are you using more than a 2.1 speaker sound setup.
• What specific features of the soundcard do you need when using your speakers.
• Are you certain your receiver model does not have channel duplication built in?

 

It is fully possible you could use S/PDIF TOSLINK and still use your soundcard's features on your speakers without needing to go analog. That is how I run my RX-V375 off my AE-9.

[UltraMega]

It would be pretty hard to prove the dac in your sound card beats the actual sound quality of a decent receiver, and you still run into electrical interference issues so you would have to be able to show that the better dac outweighs the benefits of having full digital output, and I suspect the latter would be by far more beneficial. 

 

The specs for hdmi 2.0 audio surpass anything you could ever practically need. Even if your sound card is capable of better sound on paper, I highly doubt that would be enough to overcome the downsides of using a internal sound card/dac vs digital.

 

Also, yes I am doing 5.1 surround. I have tried tos link and it doesn't work well for my needs.

[Diffident]

On 10/28/2020 at 11:10 PM, UltraMega said:

It would be pretty hard to prove the dac in your sound card beats the actual sound quality of a decent receiver, and you still run into electrical interference issues so you would have to be able to show that the better dac outweighs the benefits of having full digital output, and I suspect the latter would be by far more beneficial. 

 

The specs for hdmi 2.0 audio surpass anything you could ever practically need. Even if your sound card is capable of better sound on paper, I highly doubt that would be enough to overcome the downsides of using a internal sound card/dac vs digital.

 

Also, yes I am doing 5.1 surround. I have tried tos link and it doesn't work well for my needs.

HDMI cables are still subject to electrical interference, they're still copper  A good cable will have ferrite's on the end to help reduce it.  The only thing that is free of interference would be optical.

[UltraMega]

19 hours ago, Diffident said:

HDMI cables are still subject to electrical interference, they're still copper  A good cable will have ferrite's on the end to help reduce it.  The only thing that is free of interference would be optical.

To compare to analog, electrical interference is a non-issue with hdmi. Technically it can happen but it doesn't come up in practice because the signal is digital.

Edited October 31, 2020 by UltraMega