WD TV Live and 96khz audio

I have posted on the beta firmware and now released firmware threads that I am having problems with 96khz audio files being downsampled to 48khz.

OPthers have also had this problem.Can someone from WD please tell me if this is still a known bug, or is there something wrong with my setup.

I have a Sony STR-DA2400ES av amp.

I am also experiencing a problem with the non digital pass-through of ac3 files via HDMI.

OPT is fine.

Just had reply from Guy_k WD Test engineer…regarding the 96khz downsampling.

He has confirmed that the Hub has been fixed, but the WD TV live still has the 96khz downsampling bug.

It may or may not be fixed…I hope it will…I will then be able to fully appeciate highr res audio.

The players based on Sigma cipset downsampled always to 44.1 or 48kHz. WDTV Live did it and does it too… that is not news.

At some point (Firmwares with number 3) the signal was not even bit perfect - I have a HDCD capable receiver and I can see when the HDCD flag is “broken”… Luckly since FW series 4 that was fixed back.

I can confirm that on WD TV Media Live Plus, 24bit 96khz stereo flacs and wavs still get downsampled to 48khz, while 24/88.2 get downsampled to 44.1khz.  It crashes on 24/192 stereo files, and no sound at all for 5.1 24/96 flacs and wavs.  This is even though in the “release notes” they said the high resolution audio “bug” was fixed.

Also for some DTS wav files (5.1) it reads the total time much shorter, and stops in the middle of the file.

This is for the latest firmware available.

In Audio/Video setting,  “digital pass through” for HDMI was chosen, and “digital pass through via optical” for optical output was also chosen, respectively.  Same downsampling to 48khz results as before.

Note that optical output (SPDIF) is normally perfectly capable of 24/96 pass through as this is within specs.  I have been able to do this from my laptop via soundblaster USB soundcard without any problem.  And it’s an old and slow laptop too (Pentium 3 600mhz)

Can someone from Western Digital respond to this?

It was fixed in the Live Hub, but the fix didn’t make it into the Live/Live Plus firmware. I’m pushing to get the fix into the next update. 

Any information regarding DTS wav 5.1 files and FLAC 5.1 files? Thanks

Please, please try to get Live TV Plus fixed to handle HD (24 bit) audio.  It’ll expand the market to the growing group of people looking for HD music servers.  The number of internet sites distributing 24/96 - 24/192 music is starting to gain momentum.  Not just Classical and Jazz but now rock groups like the Beatles, Rolling Stones etc are re-releasing their music in Hi Definition.

I’m hoping the Live TV Plus gets fixed and will become my perfect media server.  Otherwise I will be giving it to one of my “i-Everything” children, who is not interested in HD music, and I’ll be buying a compediting device that does HD music.

OK the latest update 

Firmware Version 1.04.31_B

makes problems worse:

– 24bit/96khz flac stereo files continue to be downsampled to 48khz and play as before.

– 24bit/88.2khz flac stereo files now appear being played (the playback slider moving) but nothing transfered over HDMI connection at all.  The receiver used to display 44.1khz as this was downsampled and you can hear the music.  Now the receiver does not display anything, and obviously no sound at all.

As you said in the last (.22) firmware the 24/96 passthrough would be pushed to the this release, but it has not.  Can you please anwer?  Thanks

Latest firmware update 1.05.04_B still does not fix this issue.

It’s been 2 firmware updates over more than 2 months already.

Can you, Guy_K, or anyone else with WD firmware team, please comment and stop ignoring this?

nghnam wrote:

Can you, Guy_K, or anyone else with WD firmware team, please comment and stop ignoring this?

What are you expecting from them?

If you scroll up you see:

Guy_K wrote:

It was fixed in the Live Hub, but the fix didn’t make it into the Live/Live Plus firmware. I’m pushing to get the fix into the next update. 

It would seem likely, since the Hub users claim that it didn’t actually get fixed and files are still being downconverted (reports of initially showing 96k and then changing to 48k at the AVR), that perhaps WD had to start from scratch with trying to fix it?

And in the other threads folks keep starting about the same thing you get responses like:

Guy_K wrote:
We’re working on it. Not sure when it’ll be properly fixed.

 

What else do you need them to say?  They’re trying.  Would you rather have the engineering team trying to fix it and other problems, or do you want them spending all their time in here saying the same thing over and over and over again?

If you read the thread, you’d see that this was actually described in the release note of firmware .22

That was 3 firmwares ago, not to mention saying something that wasn’t there.

And since when “next” update is 2 firmwares of not doing it?

So what do you want to say for them?  And why are you?

Let them speak.

This is a user-to-user forum.  It’s not the place for you to make requests for the WD engineering team to come and answer to you personally.

As long as I adhere to the Terms Of Use, I’m free to respond to any post here, whether that’s to your liking or not.

“Something that wasn’t there”??  I _ said _ that second quote of Guy’s was quoted from one of the other threads that people keep making about this… this isn’t the only thread about 96 downsampling.  They do answer periodically, even if they don’t have to.  Nobody can really help it if that’s not to your personal liking.

They keep saying they are working on it and that they don’t know when it would be fixed.  If they do come to your beckoning, I’m sure they will just say the same thing they’ve been saying all along.

nghnam wrote:

 

So what do you want to say for them?  And why are you?

 

Let them speak.

Although WD sponsors this forum, this is primarily a user to user forum, meaning that it is users of the device helping other users. The WD staff and engineers have very little participation here (although they do seem to participating more than they used to).

“Something that wasn’t there” means the 96khz pass through in the release notes of firmware .22

I did not mean something that came from your post.  It came from the company itself.

And Guy_K did respond, saying pushed to next firmware.

And because he did respond, I certainly have the right to follow up on what he said.  Since it’s been 2 firmwares since.

If a company said something was going to happen, and it didn’t, by what credibility can it expect from people to believe that its engineers responsible are “working on it” instead of the working on the un-asked for social apps like Facebook?

It’s not a personal request for the Live Plus to make instant coffee.  It’s a follow up on what the company has said.

nghnam wrote:

 

If a company said something was going to happen, and it didn’t, by what credibility can it expect from people to believe that its engineers responsible are “working on it” instead of the working on the un-asked for social apps like Facebook?

 

The word is priority. Obviously its higher priority for them to add apps than it is to fix your problem. After all its their product and they can prioritize as they see fit. Your problem is somewhere on the list after their priorities.

nghnam wrote:

If a company said something was going to happen, and it didn’t, by what credibility can it expect from people to believe that its engineers responsible are “working on it” instead of the working on the un-asked for social apps like Facebook?

Some issues take longer to find and fix than others.  Look at how many firmwares didn’t have the 3TB drive fix, and how long they were at fixing it… look at all the version 1.03 releases trying to fix the non-working HDMI, and how long all that took…

And, as Rich points out, WD prioritizes problems.

I’d guess that bugs that make things totally unplayable for all users are given a higher priority than things that are an inconvenience to a handful.  After all, it’s not that the 24/96 files refuse to play… it’s just that they’re currently playing at 24/48.

I’d think expecting them to drop everything else, to find the downsampling issue and fix it and recompile the O/S and test it, would kinda be like asking Ford to stop worrying about the “exploding gas tanks” on the Pinto and instead work on changing the orientation of the handle on the transmission fluid dipstick because it’s awkward to reach and it would be better if the handle was more accessible.

The 24/96 might be the end of the world to you, but it sure looks most people keep asking for other things to get fixed first… even things that stopped working before the downsampling issue showed up.  That’s life.

When the problem is finally resolved and it is working, the next firmware will in almost all certainty contain the fix… the unknown is whether that’s the very next firmware released, or whether it’s 8 firmwares from now.