[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif As I understand it, while only 1's and 0's are being sent, it's possible that the electrical signal could still be distorted such that you don't get a perfect square wave when they are transmitted.

you don't undersand; square waves are NOT NEEDED to get where the 0 and 1 are.

most dacs reclock and detect bits JUST FINE. a 10 yr old dac might have issues with jitter but not the modern ones.

 

[Phyltre]

Quote:

Originally Posted by linuxworks /img/forum/go_quote.gif glass fiber is not toslink. toslink is plastic, baby. cheap junky plastic. yet it gets the job done JUST FINE! glass is not needed (or wanted, even) in this case.

Actually this can vary. Different applications, different materials.

Quote:

TOSLINK may use inexpensive 1 mm plastic optical fiber or it can use higher quality multi-strand plastic optical fibers or even quartz glass optical fibers, depending on the desired bandwidth and application. TOSLINK cables are usually limited to 5 meters in length, with a maximum of 10 meters, for reliable transmission without the use of a signal booster.

The glass ones aren't terribly expensive, either:
http://www.uniqueproductsonline.com/6ftgltodiauc.html

 

[Xoton]

So what's the difinitive head-fi response to this question?

I'm about ready to pick up a new optical cable and was wondering if it matters. I did notice a huge difference in COAX. I plugged a mid-grade COAX into my system, and IMMEDIATELY said, "woah, where's the sound?!!" and quickly went back to my thicker older one. Could be burn-in...but it was definitely there. I'll probably just buy a better optical cable too, just to be safe...but I'd like to know.

 

[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phyltre /img/forum/go_quote.gif Actually this can vary. Different applications, different materials. The glass ones aren't terribly expensive, either: 6 Ft. Glass Toslink Digital Audio Cable

my understanding is that you CANNOT just swap glass for plastic.

the digital audio wavelength is NOT fddi or atm or sonet! (datacomm stuff).

toslink is DESIGNED for plastic.

making the phys transport glass is dumb. it does not help one tiny bit and actually could be the WRONG solution.

toslink should be plastic. ATT connectors can be glass but no one uses that for spdif digital audio.

 

[apatN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xoton /img/forum/go_quote.gif So what's the difinitive head-fi response to this question?

Ehm, coax with proper connectors and shielding?

 

[gregorio]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif As I understand it, while only 1's and 0's are being sent, it's possible that the electrical signal could still be distorted such that you don't get a perfect square wave when they are transmitted. Unless a DAC has some means of dealing with this and timing jitter in the signal, it's suceptable to the quality of the source feeding it and the quality of the cable. The cheaper DACs I've owned seem to be very susceptable to this, while my current expensive one doesn't seem to be affected by it so much.

DACs do not need a perfect square wave, far from it. Providing the DAC can tell that the signal is roughly square shaped, the result is going to be bit perfect. You would need a really significant fault or substantial interference to destroy the basic waveform shape. Most DACs have a PLL (phase locked loop) which are very effective at removing all jitter introduced during transmission.

G

 

[S J]

Anyone else realize this thread is 8 years old?

 

[zeroibis]

Resurrected by one troll posting "glorified plastic" a sad day indeed.

 

[Xoton]

I'm thinking glass optical cable is the way to go (if you have to use toslink, rather than coax).

TOSLINK Interconnect History & Basics — Reviews and News from Audioholics

Basics of Plastic Optical Fiber

Just thinking of a plastic window as opposed to a glass one...kind of makes sense to stick with glass. I'd rather just go coax, but my bluray player and DTV receiver are TOSLINK.

 

[linuxworks]

again, toslink was NOT designed for glass.

throwing money at a problem isn't always sensible. glass is not part of the spdif spec. they use 'bundles' of glass just to get the same work done. is that smart? (hint: no.)

stick with what its designed to run on. plastic is not 'bad' because its plastic. you also aren't running long distances.

the designers of spdif and toslink essentially knew their stuff and the format works as-is. no need to 'doctor it up' if its not inherently broken (and its not).

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanimal /img/forum/go_quote.gif glorified plastic

Holy Thread Resurrection!
Bumping a 7 1/2 year old (August 2001) with nothing more constructive to say.

 

[spanimal]

I'm not that dum!. I Promise, I didn't know it was 8 years old. I do have some smarter sounding posts. I didn't know about the edit button. I was researching digital cables because It felt I could hear the difference between analogue cables. I was curious as to what digital connection between coax and optic. The whole digital thing I am on the fence as to its effect on quality and wondered. I remember being told about glass being liquid when I was a kid - This post completely fascinated me untill someone had to point out I was the idiot. OK I'll just shut up now.

 

[spanimal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by apatN /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ehm, coax with proper connectors and shielding?

The general concensus is that coax is better than optical but coax is more susceptible to interference. My gut feeling (using only this logic) is that perhaps optics is better (the pacebo of the LIGHT?). Its difficult for me to read technical data than descriptive literature. What are your thoughts?

 

[Currawong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by krmathis /img/forum/go_quote.gif Holy Thread Resurrection! Bumping a 7 1/2 year old (August 2001) with nothing more constructive to say.

Lol, and the arguments probably haven't changed since then.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanimal /img/forum/go_quote.gif The general concensus is that coax is better than optical but coax is more susceptible to interference. My gut feeling (using only this logic) is that perhaps optics is better (the pacebo of the LIGHT?). Its difficult for me to read technical data than descriptive literature. What are your thoughts?

Who's concensus? Who said these things? Has anyone made measurements, done tests and have conclusive proof? I think you need to research yourself more.

 

[spanimal]

Your being a bit harsh to the new guy. Considering he is trying to amend for a silly post and is seeking advice from more experienced members, I feel you should make him feel welcome and not relegate his initail experiences in Head-Fi into a negative one. I myself have read in a few common audio publications that for longer lengths optics is more preferable than electric due to the increased risk of exposure to interference. Is it wrong for him to seek the opinion of others. If my memory serves me right - Junior wasn't even directing the question to you. Shame on you.