digital coaxial vs fiber optical cable

[rajacat]

Cables do make a difference! In this particuliar case, the substitution of a quality (Blue Jeans Cable http://www.bluejeanscable.com/) digital coaxial cable for the stock fiber optic cable to the digital connection between a Squeezebox3 and my Panasonic XR55 resulted in a very discernable improvement in overall sound quality. Granted this was not a direct comparison because it is also a switch in the type of terminal used (digital optical vs digital coaxial) but it is a relatively cheap, $20 or so, improvement that results in a substantial increase in SQ. The 340SE's are so sensitive that, sometimes, just a minor change in equipment can make a difference. I believe that the digital jitter was reduced from this upgrade. BTW, IMO, the Squeezebox is one of the most cost effective improvements that you can make to the enjoyment of your system. http://www.slimdevices.com/

[bikeman]

Cables do make a difference! In this particuliar case, the substitution of a quality (Blue Jeans Cable http://www.bluejeanscable.com/) digital coaxial cable for the stock fiber optic cable to the digital connection between a Squeezebox3 and my Panasonic XR55 resulted in a very discernable improvement in overall sound quality.
Did you find out what the problem was with the "stock fiber optic cable?"

David

[swank121]

Interesting. I noticed the opposite, with a digital connection between my Audigy 2 and H/K AVR-635. Sound quality improved slightly by changing to an optical connection. This could also be entirely my imagination.

It is impossible to conclude that coaxial is better than optical in all situations. Since different transmitters and receivers are used for each interface, one may be higher quality than the other at either end, in which case you could hear a difference using theoretical "perfect" cables. Experimenting is the only way to determine which sounds best to you.

FWIW, the differences I heard from switching to an optical cable were not worth $20. I needed the coaxial cable for my subwoofer. :)

[rajacat]

Digital coax is not better than fiber optical in all situations.http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/toslink.php
However, a quality digital coax should be better than a run-of-the-mill fiber optical cable. I might have heard the same improvements to my SQ by purchasing a mil spec fiber optical cable instead of the $20 dig. coax. All fiber optical cables are not of the same quality. I clearly perceived an improved SQ from my system with this relatively cheap upgrade so, for me, it was worth the money.

[linecircle]

Would digital cable quality affect PCM or AC3 or both? (due to the different encoding they each use) I'm assuming the quality difference is with respect only to the jitter introduced, and not attenuation or noise. If it were jitter, the transmitter and receiver would play a significant role too. Or,... am I totally lost on this subject?

[bikeman]

Would digital cable quality affect PCM or AC3 or both? (due to the different encoding they each use) I'm assuming the quality difference is with respect only to the jitter introduced, and not attenuation or noise. If it were jitter, the transmitter and receiver would play a significant role too. Or,... am I totally lost on this subject?
This issue has been discussed to death and back on AVS as well as other boards. Some folks think there's a difference, some folks don't. If you go to AVS and do a search, you'll find all the information and misinformation that you could possibly want. If you're "totally lost on this subject," it's best not to spend money fixing what isn't broke in the first place. After you've spent way too much time researching the issue and you decide you'd like to spend more money, go for it.

David

[steelgtr]

Cables do make a difference! In this particuliar case, the substitution of a quality (Blue Jeans Cable http://www.bluejeanscable.com/) digital coaxial cable for the stock fiber optic cable to the digital connection between a Squeezebox3 and my Panasonic XR55 resulted in a very discernable improvement in overall sound quality. Granted this was not a direct comparison because it is also a switch in the type of terminal used (digital optical vs digital coaxial) but it is a relatively cheap, $20 or so, improvement that results in a substantial increase in SQ. The 340SE's are so sensitive that, sometimes, just a minor change in equipment can make a difference. I believe that the digital jitter was reduced from this upgrade. BTW, IMO, the Squeezebox is one of the most cost effective improvements that you can make to the enjoyment of your system. http://www.slimdevices.com/


I have to respectfully disagree. Digital is digital, either it works or it doesn't. There is no signal degradation like on analog signals or speaker cables that are too small


bob

[rajacat]

I have to respectfully disagree. Digital is digital, either it works or it doesn't. There is no signal degradation like on analog signals or speaker cables that are too small


bob

Here is an interesting article which disagrees with your point of view.
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue22/nugent.htm

[bikeman]

Here is an interesting article which disagrees with your point of view.
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue22/nugent.htm
Points of view are all well and good but if there's something to all this then it would be published. Any cites?

David

[rajacat]

I don't know about any cites and I don't want to spend the time proving my case. I guess we all believe what we want to believe, eh? So if it is all just digits and jitter is just a fantasy and the equipment doesn't matter, then all digital amps, with equal power, should sound exactly the same. The Panny should sound no different than the all digital no-holds-barred super amps appearing on the scene with their price-no-object interconnects, eh?

[Asliang]

Points of view are all well and good but if there's something to all this then it would be published. Any cites?

David

The problem with this type of argument is it relies on the other side to keep digging for details. Probably why rajacat isn't up to the fedex quest.

EDIT: I read that article. Kind of strange he sort of says things matter-of-factly. He states that upsampling adds detail to the music. I would expect a 88.2KHz upsample to be an exact audio replica minus the noise from the 22.05KHz digital filter. And...upsampling that's not exactly twice the frequency of the original is problematic. He just says upsampling is better. Funny man :P

[bikeman]

The problem with this type of argument is it relies on the other side to keep digging for details.
Correct. When someone makes a statement which ends with an exclamation point, I think that requires a bit more than someone who says that they hear a difference. As I've stated over and over, I accept the fact that some folks hear a difference. If someone has some evidence that the difference that's being heard is coming from some cables, I'm very interested in why they are convinced that's the case. So far, that evidence dosen't exist but new evidence is always possible.

David

[Lee Bailey]

Personally, I prefer having as few conversions as possible in any audio/video/digital stream. For that reason I use the digital coax connection.