|   Optical or Coaxial????? | payner
Jul 25, 2002 8:03 AM | | Is coaxial better? From what I've been told it sounds like there is no difference. |
| re: Optical or Coaxial????? | Keith from Canada
Jul 25, 2002 8:42 AM | | This question has been asked a million times so I'll give you the quick answer that seems to pretty much sum up the views:
The is no difference between the two for short-moderate lengths. Optical cables don't like to be bent around corners or run for long distances. Coax is cheaper.
That should about sum things up for ya! |
| re: Optical or Coaxial????? | wanderingbob
Jul 25, 2002 8:44 AM | | The coaxial connection for digital output has more bandwidth than the optical (Toslink) connection, even though fiber-optic cables generally have more bandwidth than copper ones. However, whether this increased bandwidth makes a detectable difference in the quality of the digital audio is a matter for auditions, opinions, and DBT's.
On the other hand, I've heard that the optical is less liable to electromagnetic interference, which makes sense to me. So if your digital source to processor run is a long one and your environment is electrically noisy, the optical might make sense.
Bob Gardner
wanderingbob@yahoo.com |
| re: Optical or Coaxial????? | MonstrousMike
Jul 25, 2002 12:58 PM | | Unless you are doing something out of the ordinary, there is no difference IMHO. |
| Well IMO it gets more complicated than that. | kelsci
Jul 25, 2002 2:36 PM | | I recently finished a group of experiments with whatever coaxial cables I had laying in my closet versus one that I had choose a year back in a previous experiment. I have not found any other coaxial to give me the sound and imaging quality over the one I have used for over a year. In fact I did a test on two different brands of DVD players.
I again did a recent test on one of my players(Zenith 2300) which features opt/coax output. In this case I tried a GE and a AR optical connection. The AR had a nice overall sound but seemed to rolloff the high end. The GE did not roll off the high end. The high end was very clean with the GE. One would think there really should be no difference in sound or tone quality from an optical cord. Well, IMO I hear a difference.
I had recently made adjustments both physical and electrical in nature to my satellite and sub speaker system.
I found I could use the same vol and adjusment settings for the GE Optical and the coax cable I mentioned above with the Zenith. I felt the coax exercised better control over the imaging than did the optical when it came to movies. With music, whether CD or DTS, I liked the tonal quality of the optical over the coax. This experiment reminded me of the difference in listening to music over transistorized and tube type amplifiers. The optical IMO sounds more "tubelike". It is possible that a "damping factor" effect exists between these two digital information carriers(higher on the coax-lower on the optical). |
| You're barking up the wrong tree... | MonstrousMike
Jul 25, 2002 3:21 PM | | I have studied the effects of digital cables and optical cables. I have been in contact with an engineer from Toshiba about the Toslink interface.
And cables have been a large part of my profession: <a href="/crforum?14@@.ef8da95/67">MonstrousMike "Let's find the truth..." 7/24/02 10:46am</a>
While I do not profess to be an expert, nor do I think my opinion is entirely correct, nothing in experience and education can explain what you heard.
In a digital audio signal, there is nothing I can come up with that "rolls off the high end". This is the characteristic of an analog low pass filter, not a digital audio signal. |
| I believe I am barking up a right tree | kelsci
Jul 26, 2002 3:11 AM | | My collegue, MonstrousMike; I have expressed myself in the best way possible as to what I heard between those two optical cables. I am not questioning your experience or education on this matter.
What I think is going on is the existence of "signature" in the digital domain. That signature is somewhere in those optical cables and is altering the digital data. I am not an electronics engineer, but I bet you that if there is an instrument that could send digital data thru the cable and interpret its findings, what I am hearing would show up on that data. If I am correct, all I can say is; "I must have taken the RED PILL". |
| I believe I am barking up a right tree | mtrycrafts
Jul 26, 2002 10:21 PM | | b ; I have expressed myself in the best way possible as to what I heard between those two optical cables.
Yes, you perceived something. What protocol did you use to eliminate any human bias in your comparison? Did you uses DBT methodology? If not, there is no need for further discussions on your perceptions as we don't know if it was imagined or not.
b What I think is going on is the existence of "signature" in the digital domain.
You may think this, but do you have evidence to support that this exists?
b but I bet you that if there is an instrument that could send digital data thru the cable and interpret its findings, what I am hearing would show up on that data.
Well, you placed the cart before the horse. You have not established that you really heard a difference, you just claimed a perceived difference. Not the same. Once you can establish an audible difference, then an investigation why is warranted, not before. |
| I made a bet with myself that I would hear from "MTRY" on this | kelsci
Jul 27, 2002 2:33 AM | | Mtry; We "sparred" a little nearly two years ago or so over my "logic" of testing. I think that the "only" way I can comment to you is to see my post, SIGHTED TESTING.
Mtry; while it is important to try to find ways of proving an assumption via testing, it is also important to have faith in oneself if for some reason you find something in your labors that just does not jive with the so called "status quoe". With respect, KELSCI |
| I made a bet with myself that I would hear from "MTRY" on this | mtrycrafts
Jul 27, 2002 10:02 PM | | I see you changed your moniker, why?
those posts are not available anymore.
b it is also important to have faith in oneself if for some reason you find something in your labors that just does not jive with the so called "status quoe".
What is it that doesn't jive with the status quoe?
But ones knowledge is more important than faith. |
| MTRY; about faith and knowledge | kelsci
Jul 27, 2002 11:44 PM | | These two concepts sometimes go hand in hand. That's about all I can say from my own experience. |
| MTRY; about the "moniker" | kelsci
Jul 27, 2002 11:59 PM | | The definition of a "moniker" is an "alternate" name. To my best knowledge, I have posted under the moniker; kelsci. A few reviews on audioreview were posted under my real name some time ago probably before I came up with the moniker, kelsci. When eTOWN was a living dot.com website, the registration for kelsci did not go through, so I used kelscifi. On one or two non-related home theater sites I might have used a different moniker before I came up with kelsci.
What you stated to me one time in the past was simply this:
"I question your methods". |
| MTRY; about the "moniker" | mtrycrafts
Jul 28, 2002 7:57 PM | | I just don't remember this moniker from way back then. Maybe another one then? |
| Kelsci, roll off "high" or "lows" is not in digital dictionary. | KiD SmokE
Jul 25, 2002 11:17 PM | | One reason Digital is different from analog is because of this reason. Since a snap shot of analog signal at that moment (either deep base to extreme highs) are taken digitally, then anything that happen to this signal along the way will effect the entire frequency range since both snap shots of deep "bass" or "highs" look exactly like each other (either high or low).
So for Coax or Optical cable, high or low notes are indistinguishable and all are treated the same. So if any thing happen, either all suffer, or none. As mike mentioned, losing highs is only associated with analog domain.
Even if we assume the worst scenario (using of long run of cheap RCA cable for Coax, or not so stellar performance of electrical-to-optical converter for Toslink, then synchronization (clocking) might suffer due to rounding of signal sharp transits (from "0" to "1" and vice versa).
For this type of error, we might get slight smear effect (I don't know how to describe it otherwise) because of non linearity (step motion instead of continuous) of analog signal that was put together by the DAC.
I don't know if I made any sense or not :) |
| Well, KID SmokE; see my reply to "MIKE" and now discuss yours | kelsci
Jul 26, 2002 3:59 AM | | Alot of this digital "business" just like other forms of electronic phenomena is hard to describe. Accordingly, the audio info carried in digital data form should be an absolute CONSTANT. Perhaps the best proof of that is that this typewritten message will appear the same in FORM regardless of the brand of monitor and computer used.
With both the coax and optical experiments, I had the home theater equipment itself(receiver,dvd player,speakers). These are the CONSTANTS one needs to conduct any kind of experiment.
Now we come to the VARIABLES. That is the assortment of coax cables that I tried. There are all kinds of companies making this wire. What we do not know is the "recipe" being used by each company for the center and ground elements of the wire. All we have is the manufacturers word that it is 75 ohm coax cable. You and I have no measuring instruments to verify this to be true.
Suppose all the wire was 75 ohms as stated regardless of the "recipe". I find that I still cannot get consistency of performance from my equipment. Then there must be something that is affecting that digital audio data. I would think it is the "recipe". That recipe has now become a SIGNATURE of any particular coax cable. If I went food shopping and bought 5 different brands of apple pies, they would still be apple pies, but each receipe could have differences affecting the crust and flavor of the filling. You and I might favor one or more brands over the others by sampling a piece of each. Perhaps the SIGNATURE is affecting the clocking so you might be on to something.
Please see my response to "MIKE" on the optical cable. |
| You do have understanding of digital concept. | KiD SmokE
Jul 26, 2002 4:01 PM | | You wrote:
>Accordingly, the audio info carried in digital data form should be an absolute CONSTANT. Perhaps the best proof of that is that this typewritten message will appear the same in FORM regardless of the brand of monitor and computer used.
You seem to have good understanding of digital concept which make arguing your point harder (may be I should meet you halfway like I do with Woochifer..LOL).
The only thing I can say is that we apply the Constant and Variable concept to audio, the only difference would be that in audio, a clocking (synchronization) is used to point out to the Receiver's DAC beginning and ending of each bits (0s and 1s). The only thing that could go wrong here is if the transport system can not deliver clocking (very sharp transit) at the precise moment it was initiated.
Due to sharpness of cable (both optical and coax, quality made), we can rule out cable that could alter clocking- especially at low bit frequency of 3 MHz. So the only thing left for us to focus on (if there are any difference between optical and coax output) would be Electrical-to-optical converter in the DVD player and Optical-to-Eletrical converter in the Receiver. This device if made cheap might introduce slight error called jitter.
So going back to your situation, then your DVD player Optical converter might not have stellar performance which mean no matter what cable you use, clocking error is still there...at least it is true theoretically :)
As also to be fair to other side (I know Mtry will kill me for above comments), I also have question your results if it was a "sighted" test. To be sure of your result, is there any way you can run that test again without you knowing which cable is used (either Optical or Coax). I think you be surprise at your results :) |
| Sighted testing | kelsci
Jul 27, 2002 2:11 AM | | I believe you mean if I wore a blindfold, did I have someone else changing or not changing the two cables in order to test my senses. Mine was a non-blindfolded sighted test. I knew which cable I was using. I will during the test "close my eyes" listening to a particular passage to determine a difference. I do not have an assistant to try to do I believe what is called a "double blind" test.
There is something not being said here. That is "the human factor". Some of us possess POWERS OF AWARENESS others do not possess. A simple analogy to this is that when you and I were students in school, we may have found ourselves excelling in one subject better than some other students in the same class and visa-versa.
The more you have experience with this type of equipment, the more aware you become of its performance whether good or bad. I have "toyed" with a variety of electronic equipment since 1950 at the age of 4. I find myself very powerful in sensing differences in tone at the very least. This is not just my own ego trip. Those people that know me know I have certain insights and come to me for advice. They know that I will do my best not to lead them into the land of the "bubbameinster". |
| Sighted testing | pctower
Jul 27, 2002 11:42 AM | | b Some of us possess POWERS OF AWARENESS others do not possess.
Have you ever had your amazing "POWERS OF AWARENESS" verified by independent double blind testing?
b This is not just my own ego trip.
With all due respect, it sure seems to me as if that's all it is.
And I'm an unrecovered yeasayer. I hate to think what my audio therapist, Dr. Mytrcrafts, would have to say to all this.
PS to Dr. Mytrcrafts: This is fun. Like catching fish out of a bathtub. |
| Pctower, the test don't have to be "blind folded". | KiD SmokE
Jul 27, 2002 2:15 PM | | The sighted test will work as long as one don't know which cable is used. Sorry, I am a newbie at this :)
Kelscie: can you run cable vs optical test (if you still have Zenith DVD player)?Let somebody change the cable while you listen without telling you which cable is used. It shouldn't take more than 15 minutes. I be interested in the results :) |
| Pctower, the test don't have to be "blind folded". | kelsci
Jul 28, 2002 12:59 AM | | KidSmoke; One of the darnest things is to be able to find somebody to work with you to do the "blinded" test. This is why in my postings you have not scene me report a double blind test to begin with. One person that I know lives 40 miles away,busy with his job and family, and could not work 3 different remotes to activate his surround system, so he is buying a new Sony universal remote. This is a person who has a Doctorate in Accounting. Three remotes mean nothing to me to operate. I told him, that I would not last more than 10 seconds in his first class he took to get the doctorate. |
| Sighted testing | mtrycrafts
Jul 27, 2002 10:12 PM | | b Dr. Mytrcrafts, would have to say to all this.
Thanks for the honorary title :)
You have done well, I am proud of my first graduate :) |
| Hey PC; what's running; I'll get my rod, reel and bait. | kelsci
Jul 28, 2002 12:39 AM | | In home theater I will admit to one area of ego that I have. That is with surround sound dealing with passive and active circuitry. I do not know everything in the universe about this subject. Some of the things I do would seem obtuse to many. There is one difference here. I have some of my "obtuse" models working for my pleasure.
My "moniker"(nickname) that my friends gave me during the l960's was THE FISH. Living in Queens, N.Y., I fished all over Long Island's north and south shore. I not only cleaned the fish that I kept, but I would do a biological examination of their stomachs to see what they fed on from the various areas around Long Island. What I learned that there was alot of myths pertaining to the feeding habits of certain species. |
| You do have understanding of digital concept. | mtrycrafts
Jul 27, 2002 10:08 PM | | b (I know Mtry will kill me for above comments),
Those days are over:) Besides, it seems reasonable. And your questioning of sighted auditioning and comparing is right on :) |
| Optical or Coaxial? | Norm Strong
Jul 25, 2002 10:16 PM | | If there's a difference in sound quality, it's clearly going to be small--very small. So, one might wonder why there's a choice. Why was optical invented in the first place? I hope there was an excellent reason for this marketing decision, since it has been a disaster from the consumer's point of view.
e.g., I might have liked to buy a Panasonic receiver. Unfortunately, although it has 4 digital audio inputs, 3 of them are optical and only one is coax, and I need 2 coax inputs. Result? Strike Panasonic from the list.
The introduction of optical connections was a negative factor from the very beginning. I only hope there were good and sufficient reasons to complicate our lives. I know I won't soon forgive them for this fiasco. |
| WHY STRIKE out the Panasonic?... | nick4433
Jul 26, 2002 6:31 AM | | Norm I'm sure you have heard of converters? Why not get a converter that will convert an optical to coax. I am quite positive there must be something out there. |
| WHY STRIKE out the Panasonic?... | Norm Strong
Jul 27, 2002 10:50 AM | | In answer to your question: I make it a practice to start out with equipment that does the job as received. I would never buy a receiver that required immediate modification. |
| Okay..... | nick4433
Jul 27, 2002 12:00 PM | | But even at the cost of sacrificing sound qualities that you liked in the receiver to begin with? Buying the converter is a small price to pay given the larger scheme of things such as performance IMHO! |
| Thanks everyone | payner
Jul 26, 2002 5:05 AM | | Well I went out and got a coaxial cable. I was using a Optical cable but I'm using it for my xbox.
Anyway I really can't tell if there is a difference or not?
I don't think so, Maybe if I had higher end equipment.
In my line of work we use optical cables for data transfers of large video and audio files but the video and audio formats are differnet than whats on a DVD.
There is no way we could use a coaxial cable the distance's are just to far.
Well thank you everyone for replying to my post. I guess well never know and I do have the equipment to check ohms on cables and I will check to see if my cable is 75 ohms. |
| Thanks everyone | raindance
Jul 27, 2002 4:46 AM | | Checking the impedance of the cable will start an entire new discussion... The cable is only 75 ohms at certain frequencies... This is not the same as resistance - are you sure you want to get into this one? I advise you to read the label on the cable & if it says 75 ohms, believe it!!! |
| |
