coax or optical (fiberoptic)?

[vintage_dog]

which is preferred for use bet cd transport and dac? and why?

[Hyperion]

Facts:

*Coax and Toslink sound different.
*Different coax cables sound different.
*Different toslink cables sound different.
*Sounding different does not always mean sounding better.

Coax pros:

*Allegedly sound better - more audiophile correct.
*More durable than toslink
*Coax interface is usually better designed than the toslink counterpart in high end audio components in anticipation that the audiophile will use it instead of toslink

Coax cons:

*Lack of Standards. Although S/PDIF calls for a standard of 75 ohms, not all S/PDIF interfaces and cables follow the standard.
*Ground loop issue and noise leakage from one component to another.
*Susceptability to RFI.
*Mediocre interface (RCA)

Toslink pros:

*No ground loops.
*Impervious to RFI.

Toslink cons:

*Fragile cable
*Alleged slow rise time, distorting clock signals
*Alleged limited bandwidth resulting to loss of information
*Toslink interfaces usually not as well designed as Coax in audio components
*Limited length

Notes:

A nutty friend of mine who has recently concluded a shootout of digital cables has pronounced a verdict that Glass toslink in fact sounds better than coax and plastic toslink.

AT&T Glass and AES/EBU (as well as proprietary interfaces like I2S) are generally accepted as technically better than either coax or toslink.

I personally do not find transport/DACs to sound significantly better than good stand alone cdps in terms of musicality. They usually have bigger soundstages, maybe a smidge better resolution, maybe a more refined sound and most of the time, worse pace and rhythm.

[SD-6]

Hyperion,

How much are the glass TOSLINK? I know some TOSLINKs suffer from latency thus the reason why they sound different. Some bits and bytes either get delivered first or last.

A lot of people don't notice the difference...

[Hyperion]

Glass toslink is more expensive than plastic toslink and are usually available in 1m or 2m lenght only, but considerably less expensive than boutique grade Coax or AT&T Glass or AES/EBU.

These are supposed to be the good glass toslink stuff:

WireWorld Supernova III+ - $100
Sounds Professional Glass Toslink - $60
Audiotechnica Glass Toslink - price unknown

[rtsyrtsy]

A nutty friend of mine who has recently concluded a shootout of digital cables has pronounced a verdict that Glass toslink in fact sounds better than coax and plastic toslink.

AT&T Glass and AES/EBU (as well as proprietary interfaces like I2S) are generally accepted as technically better than either coax or toslink.

You're not the first one I heard say this. Sonny Tuazon swears by this.

[stjohn]

in my VERY limited understanding. . .
coax transmits soundbits via electrical energy (electrons bombarding one another) along this 'wire' at 'certain speed' and subject to contaminations...

glass optic transmits sound bits that have been converted from electrical signals into 'light beam' so it travels fasssster, and though subject to contamination, could not be as much as that of ordinary wires. . .

simple thought: if wires are better, then why are data transmission changing over to optics?

now - your IC is merely 1m long (or even less); and i don't believe you'd want your DAC 10m away or installed in another room - for ANY/WHATEVER reason (defeats the psychoanalytic & visual impact ). Will the sound-quality be REALLY different (other than a flee's whisper, assuming you really could here the difference)? I could not answer this with much confidence. . . if EVER there is a discernable difference, it is 'usually' in the brigther side (you like that?). WHY? because it is clearer? because it is cleaner? Probably. But I really don't know - technical is different from practical and what YOU can actually hear.

simple thought 2: if the cost of 'improvement/upgrade' takes an arm and a leg, but does not include your in-law, then it's not worth it

greets!
egay

[rtsyrtsy]

simple thought: if wires are better, then why are data transmission changing over to optics?

One major reason is the distance over which data needs to travel. Signal over wires roll-off in amplitude over many meters of copper much faster than light traversing fiber. Thus requiring signal amplifiers along the line to boost the signal.

If you're sending signal under the Pacific from Manila to the U.S., that can be an awful lot of amplifiers or signal boosters that can break down over time!

Going back to the question on which is better as I/C, I think one of the audio websites (www.sdinfo.com yata) recently ran such a coax vs. TOSLINK test and concluded that it depends on the system so we should try both if you can--what a way to get to our precious audiophile wallets.

One of the arguments often used by coax proponents is that the signalling components used in most TOSLINK connections are really lousy and cheap whereas coax has greater volume and thus economies of scale so generally performs better.

I've never bothered with TOSLINK. Bibili ko na lang ng CD.

[JackD201]

Mods, Please move to Tech Archives

Thanks!

Jack

[skeesix]

Does it make a difference if one uses hardwires and Tosslink cables at the same time? Same with HDMI and component cables? HDMI cables are still expensive. Does it really make a difference? Any recommended brands, lenghts, and outlets. thanks

[John Martin]

Theres only one Toslink cable I would highly recommend. Its the Analysis plus.