The Official (and only) Optical vs. Coaxial Thread

[Wirehed]

Taxi's suggestion is pretty close to what I was thinking.

And someone from the audio shop will be administering the test, so you can just enjoy Taxi.

I have Dom's cable here to test as well. And We'll throw in some nice Top-o-the-line Transparent too.

[brian]

Wouldn't you want to use the same clip? The most important thing science ever taught me was that you should only change one variable in an experiment, otherwise the results could be skewed by the new variable. In this case, only the cable would be changed, and you want people concentrating on that one clip. If there is a difference, you want people to take note of it, and get used to the clip. Its hard to compare say, Pink Floyd music and John Williams, to be able to see if there is a difference in cables.

The only instance you want to change the clip is if you rerun the whole experiment, with the same cables and order as you did the first time, only using a new clip. Then you would see consistencies/inconsistencies between what people hear.

[Taxi]

brian: I do think that the clips should always be the same when actually comparing two cables. I would suggest though, that when a different set of cables is compared, that using the same clip EVERY time could skew the results, since I would think you'd naturally compare what you're hearing now with what you heard during the last test. (Gee, this one sounds better than the last two.) By switching clips every few tests, you are forced to concentrate on what you're listening to, since it's not the same thing each time.

So, just to be clear, cuz I think I'm not being clear...

Test 1

Cable A -- Cable B <-- Audio Clip 1
Cable C -- Cable C <-- Audio Clip 1
Cable B -- Cable A <-- Audio Clip 2
Cable D -- Cable A <-- Audio Clip 2
Cable C -- Cable B <-- Audio Clip 3
Cable B -- Cable B <-- Audio Clip 3
Cable A -- Cable D <-- Audio Clip 4
Cable A -- Cable C <-- Audio Clip 4
Cable C -- Cable D <-- Audio Clip 5
Cable D -- Cable A <-- Audio Clip 5

Something like that. We should try to work some of this out on Friday night.

[Enzian]

That sounds good Taxi! I can;t wait to "hear" your opinions!

I think there should be
For X = A to D
Cable X -- Cable X test
End For

[Taxi]

Enzian: Well sort of...

I think what you meant was

For X = A to D
For Y = A to D
Cable X -- Cable Y
Next Y
Next X

Otherwise we'd always be comparing the same cables to each other.

(And yes, I agree. I just didn't want to type it all out. )

[Wirehed]

heh, what a bunch of geeks we are.

[evancich]

If you want this test to stand up to scientific rigors, then you should measure with orthogonal sensors. When you guys run this test, add a spectrum analyzer and a sound level meter. These are sensors that give hard data, data that cannot be argued over if the sensors are setup correctly.

Also, list your assumptions, for example:
1) TOSLINK and DCoax have the same output level (that is, a the same bit pattern thru each cable will generate the same wattage at the speaker)
2) The receiver you are using is NOT skewed to one input or the other (that is, Tosh equipment would probably not be good to use…)

[Ruined]

Optical vs Coaxial?

Even the very best Toslink optical cable (the optical interface that consumer devices use) pales in comparison bandwidth-wise to any cheap, properly made 75ohm coaxial cable. Yes, RCA cables could be subject to RF interference, but if the cable is designed well with proper shielding the digital signal should not be affected in the slightest. Not to mention that optical cables are far more fragile than coax cables, and more pricey as well. To sum up, a $400 Toslink optical cable is inferior to a $15 Radioshack Gold 75ohm coax cable. It hurts, but it's the truth

NOTE: Dolby Digital/DTS (the bulk of home theater material) should not be affected at all by cabling, due to its packeted nature. With DD/DTS, it either works or it drops out. On the other hand, PCM (CD) transmissions can actually sound less pleasing to the ear without dropouts when using poorly contstructed cables. It is also worth noting that when concerned with PCM digital transmission that the cable is not the only thing to consider. The source (such as the CD/DVD player) and the destination (such as the receiver/prepro) can both also contribute to how accurate the final PCM sound is after your receiver/prepro is done with it compared to the PCM track on the original CD.

My advice? Go with a well made 75ohm coax cable. It will last the longest and cost you the least. Plus, if it makes you feel better it is capable of much higher bandwidth than Toslink optical offerings. So go buy that $10-20 Radio Shack Gold Video/Digital cable or maybe if you want something that looks a little nicer and is built noticably better you could snag an AudioQuest VSD-1 ($25) cable. Anything more is a waste of money.

[Enzian]

It's been awhile, Taxi...

No, though. Of course you'd want to compare different cables! I was refering to the fact that every cable should be faux-switched, and that the listeners should be asked to tell the difference between the same cable for every TYPE of cable.

[octopus1256]

Did you all see the optical cable in Aliens? For those who didn't its at 1:40 on the DVD ( the part with Bishop wiring an uplink), man that was thick!

I chose coaxial, it seems more robust than optical, and won't break if yanked.
Optical would be better if I had the DVD player more than 2 metres away, but its only 20cm away...

[Oscar Antonio M]

I use Optical cable, because my Panasonic does not have Coaxial
But my G.E. does.

And when i get to replace my HT equipment i will see if the Panasonic Progressive Scan player has it.

But anyways, the optical works perfectly.

I also have a question, isnt Coaxial analog?.
Because its like those red and white stereo cables, if i am not mistaken.

[1138]

Well, the coaxial cables are used in HT for digital signals.

Though, really, there are no digital/analog cables. It just depends on what kind of signal they're carrying. There are digital and analog singals.

For instance, you can use a plain old RCA 'analog' cable on the coax connections of your HT and it will still work. Thus, it's become a 'digital cable' so to speak.

[tomdkat]

Of course, we ALL know "Monster" cables are the absolute best since they produce "better" binary ones and zeroes. They are a lot "shinier" and therefore more efficient....

(Ok, I'll shut up now.... )

Peace.....

[Oscar Antonio M]

I will believe Coaxial when i hear it.
My other G.E. player has it, but it sucks (great audio and video, but its way too slow and just to jump to a scene there is a lot of complications, but hey it has voice pitch control and zoom options!)

As far as i can tell my Optical cable works great.
Though it breaks too easily, i cannot put the player where i want (i had to put it in the mere front of its furniture) because the signal might dissapear all of the sudden.

When i get to replace my equipment (No, i dont want it to be ruined, i love it!) i will be sure that my Progressive Scan player has Coaxial, i still have the cable that came in with the Sony HT system.

And also 2 questions (That might be out of topic) : Does Coaxial improve difference between DD and DTS?.
And if so, the advantage goes to...?.

[Oscar Antonio M]

Oh and BTW, thanks for what you said 1138.

[tomdkat]

Originally posted by Oscar Antonio M
And also 2 questions (That might be out of topic) : Does Coaxial improve difference between DD and DTS?.

I don't think it can because the DD or dts audio is either decoded in the A/V receiver or surround sound processor and the encoded DD or dts signal would pass over the optical or digital cable OR it is decoded in the DVD player itself and the 5.1 outputs are analog coax outputs, so there is no chance to output a decoded DD or dts signal via optical cables......

Now the quality of the DD or dts decoder might suck, but that is another issue....

Peace.....

[1138]

Yes, to the cable, a digital signal is a digital signal. It just transmits a series of high and low signals (representing 1 and 0 respectively). It's up to the receiver (or decoder) to see a difference.

[Enzian]

Originally posted by tomdkat
Of course, we ALL know "Monster" cables are the absolute best since they produce "better" binary ones and zeroes. They are a lot "shinier" and therefore more efficient....

(Ok, I'll shut up now.... )

Peace.....

I know a "one" when I see it, and YOU, Sir, are an inferior "one" if I've ever seen one. Back of the line! RESEND! I am the Gatekeeper DAC and while you trip through my thresholds, I know you're not as good as another "one"!

[TwistedByDesign]

Just out of curiosity, how do you know whether your system needs Optical or if it needs Coaxial?

[1138]

The coax connectors look like reguylar RCA cable type connectors. They're usually ornage (rather than yellow, red, ro white of the RCA analog types).

Optical is usually a little squarish peg connector. If it's covered (they usually are unless ussed) then it'll have a little plastic peg sticking out of it. You'll have to pull this out when you connect an optical cable.




There's the orange coaxial on the right (to the left of the power in) and the opitcal to the left of it.

[TwistedByDesign]

alright, thank you very much, I was wondering about that. But the odd thing is that it appears my reciver only has Optical, and my DVD player only has Coaxial.

[George McFly]

Originally posted by Morticia




twist my arm.....am I too late?

crack!!!!!!!!!!!!! what was that sound?

I use optical outputs I'm not sure if mine even has coax

Originally posted by Seamonkey



Group hug.

What? no kiss?

Originally posted by 1138
And if Enzian told you to jump off a cliff, would you?

Don't worry 1138 he wouldn't have to jump I'd give him a little push :p
j/k Seamonkey

[Chromy]

Honestly, I think that bit for bit copying of a music track from one player to another (across a digital cable) and then doing a file compare between the original and the copy on a PC would be the best way. If the original is identical to the copy with any cable you throw at it, then the cable is not affecting the sound at all. This has got to be possible...

Chromy

[brian]

Or you could just copy the CD's, and use some software that analyzes the audio's wave pattern. Take a screenshot of the wave patterns for each CD. Then import them into a photo editor, line them up, overlap the two, making the top one semi-transparant. You would be able to see if they perfectly overlap each other.

Not sure if that makes any sense to anyone else... I get the feeling it wont...

[feldon23]

It is really bizarre that neither this thread nor the sound test "organizing" thread have links to any information, comments, etc. about the sound test.

Did the event happen?

Where would one find that topic?

[Taxi]

Here ya go.

[Wirehed]

As soon as I get a chance I'll post the story that printed in the magazine.

[Enzian]

Well, after ripping out walls, re-doing the plumbing, electrical, ceilings, floors, walls, the entire kitchen and the living room, I finally set up my HT! Yay!

Holy Batcrap! I also re-did the phone lines, the coax and installed cat5e network drops in a little "wiring closet" under the stairs. I also placed any wires I came across in the closet. And commonly used tools. Like hammers. Skillsaws. Sawzalls. Damn. I just threw 'em in there.

And my HT cables were in there. My TOSlink cable, included. No covers. Ho Lee Crap.

It was tangled (tightly! ), covered in plaster dust, and it had a number of nicks in the casing.

When I pulled it out of there, I was sweating. I knew it wasn't gonna work. I knew it. There's no way it could.

Or so I thought. I cleaned the cable with a damp cloth. I cleaned the connectors on my eyeglasses' cleaning cloth. The nicks weren't too bad, upon inspection.

The thing works! And with the layout of the new, smaller living room, my HT sounds a million times better! Yeah, baby!

I'm thinking: (beware) This is not telecom-grade fiber. This isn't even multimode fiber. This is probably some sort of transparent plastic, like the kind used in toys and novelty lamps. All it has to do is transmit a bright, widely dispersed light from a little LED. Easy. Anything with more quality than crumpled Saran wrap would work.

[jrmetziii]

In the digital signal transmission world there are significant differences in the quality of a signal received via optical versus copper media. Optical signals are not subject to Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) or Electrical Frequency Interference (EFI). So comparing optical versus coaxial is like comparing apples versus oranges. Even considering the high degree of shielding used in a good coaxial cable, it is still susceptible to EMI/EFI. Optical signals are not susceptible to either. Digital Audio Conversions (DACs) are different depending on transmission media as well as the qualitiy of the DACs used by the vendors. It is possible to experience better results using coaxial media with one vendor while another vendor's results may clearly indicate better results using optial media.

So how can you control the tests knowing vendors and media are both variables. As is each listener's sound quality preferences. It is like finding the perfect mate.

I struggle with deciding what media to use for my system, from amplifier to speakers, from component to component. A combination of medias may yield the best results.

My system, HIFI equipment vendor is primarily DENON. I own a DENON AVR 5803, planning on adding the DVD9000 (to replace an aging SONY DVD player), keeping the DP-47F Turntable, the TU-500 FM Tuner, and the Dual Cassette Deck . Scheduled for replacement is the DENON 5 disc CD/CDR/CDRW/MP3 Player.

A SONY VCR was recently added and a 400 disc SONY CD Player (just to keep my CDs safe) is on order and will replace the aging DENON 5 disc player.

Additionally, my main speakers are KEF UNI-Qs as is the matching centerchannel. The rear surround speakers are B&W bookshelf DM 600-S3s and a Mirage 400 watt dual 12" driver subwoofer. I haven't even standardized on a speaker vendor.

The connecting cables between components are changing from copper to fiber optic. The connections to the speakers will either remain copper or change to wireless. A combination is possible.

I have less difficulties with my home network where I have copperwire throughout the house, speeds running at 100MBps in Full Duplex Mode, with connections all switched, no sharing of bandwith until the uplink to the network router and cable modem communicate with the network at 10MBps Full Duplex and a Wide Area Connection with a speed of 1.5MBps. 5 Computers and an X-BOX depend on this network as do the 4 printers, 1 scanner and one all-in-one machine. Copper is preferred over airwaves due to speed, reliability and containment of information.

I don't know how anyone can design a completely fair blind test of media connections. I'll continue to monitor this thread for a posting from Albert Einstein with the answers.

Cheers,

John Metz
jrmetziii@comcast.net

QUOTE]Originally posted by Miggy


Let's examine this logically. The DVD or CD player sends out the audio information in digital format (0 and 1). With optical connection, this information gets sent in the form of light waves, which then arrives at the receiver, is processed, corrected (if necessary), then converted to analog. With coaxial, the digital information is sent along as pulses of electricity, which then arrives at the receiver, is processed, corrected (if necessary), then converted to analog. Now, assuming the reciever only has one DAC, the only possible difference would be in the circuitry going from the optical input to the DAC and the coaxial input to the DAC. But, I can't see even that and especially not enough difference to have it add more bass one way or the other.

Miggy, the Thief [/quote]

[1138]

So are you saying that optical is perfect?

And comparing them is not apples and oranges. They both transmit a digital signal. They both do the same thing.

And I don't think anybody is arguing about EM interference on coax or any possible reflection problems with optical.

The big argument is that one side believes that because both are carriying a digital signal, they'll end up sounding the same. That because of the way the information is encoded, it's fairly medium independent. And that basically, both will either work or not work and when they don't, it'll be obvious.

[sub780lime]

did this thread ever have a poll, i didnt check the first page, sorry, lazy-if it hasnt had one i think added one would serve well

[sub780lime]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

look i killed a thread, how disappointing

[aintnosin]

Question: Has anyone worked with one of those gizmo boxes that convert coax to optical or vice versa? How well do they work?

[brian]

Originally posted by aintnosin
Question: Has anyone worked with one of those gizmo boxes that convert coax to optical or vice versa? How well do they work?

I bought a $20 one -- and works fine. No digital drop outs, and i couldn't hear the difference. My set-up isn't exactly high-end, but it gets the job done.

[lord_loafer]

My simple way of seeing this arguement is that optical has to be converted from electric/light/electric - so loses on the conversion, but because it's light, is not as affected by electrical interference.

Coaxial on the other hand is electric/electric, so has no conversion involved, but is more succeptable to noise from other equipment.

Just my little contribution.

Thanks,
Mark.

[Iguana Man]

Originally posted by aintnosin
Question: Has anyone worked with one of those gizmo boxes that convert coax to optical or vice versa? How well do they work?

I've got one for my game consoles. My XBox and PS2 each have an optical going into the box, and then a coaxial out to my A/V receiver. I'd have the 'Cube and my Dreamcast connected too, but they don't support 5.1. Anyway, it auto senses the console that's powered up and it works just fine for me. Sound quality isn't degraded from what I can tell. Then again, I'm using it for video games and not "critical listening". Here's a link to the one I'm using;

http://209.248.228.2/aacconsumers/1155detc.html

[I 8 Piglet]

while I am still in the camp of coax and optical produce the same quality sound, I just learned somthing new. I recall that someone here made a digital coax cable out of some things like a rusty nail and an old coat hanger, (I think it was Chromy but I dont remember) and it worked just fine. So I have always just used any old rca cable for my digital coax needs. Well with all the problems I had getting my new setup squared away I ended up needing a long audio cable. So again I just used a cheap av cable that the cable left me (to use as component video no less). I should have noticed something was not kosher when the first tip I plugged in snapped right off (it was Yellow), but I just went ahead and switched to the white and left it at that. This thing was terrible the audio would drop out all the time. And its quite anoying with a Sony reciever, because it takes so long to regognize digital signals, and it clicks when it does so, so we were constantly losing a half second or so of sound and then getting that anoying click. It was absolutly the worst when I watched the parachute scene from the second BoB episode, just about every 30 seconds or so it would drop out.

In the end, I replaced the cheap cable with one of my radio shack cables, and it works just fine.

[Ruined]

edit: nevermind I replied to this 2yrs ago :p

[Shadowman82]

I have so far been using Optical but I am planning to upgrade my home theatre system soon so I too wondered if one was bettter than the other .

I asked Panasonic who told me that there is no technologically proven answer to say one is better .