Optical cable question/recommendation?

[devwild]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sycraft Please note, there are audiophiles that disagree with the folowing. That said: One cable is as good as the next. There are no problems with interference. It either works, or it doesn't. The only reason for higher quality cables is less signal loss for long runs, and/or better flexability. On short runs, it doesn't matter. You can do 10gig ethernet, which is clocked in the gigahertz range over whatever you like at short range, audio is not a problem. Unless there is something difficult about your run, buy whatever you like. It's all digital, all optical, it doesn't matter.

Your statement does not pertain to optical equipment. Do some reading on optic networking, where quality of cable most certainly makes a difference even with short jumpers. Tremendously higher standards than toslink though, and multiple technologies.

Different quality toslink cables have a visible difference to their transmision quality (due to clarity, and dispersement), not just audible. There is most certainly a difference, one that can make it difficult to get a proper signal lock at all if you use a cheap cable.

 

[giovanni]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deuterium I am continuing to work on upgrading my home listening situation. I have just ordered a Lavry DA10 DAC. I plan on connecting this to my lossless music collection housed on external hard drives by either directly connecting to my laptop or through Airport Express. To do this, I need an optical cable. I am new to using an optical cable. Does an optical cable used in the system make as big a difference as analog cables? If so, can you recommend a source for a reasonable quality optical cable? Thanks.

you are kidding me !!! I am doing pretty much the same thing and actually posted a very similar question today. Are you copying

I got two replies and was done with it: ordered the VAN DEN HUL optical cable with one termination for the A/X (it only comes in one length so I am a bit worried there, but it looks great and hmm, should be good enough !).

gio

 

[giovanni]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT http://gallery.bcentral.com/GID51342...4-Optical.aspx And one of the dealers have it for $70, http://www.fatwyre.com/FATWYRE/FATWY...gital3_06.html Not sure that price difference worth it over Dayton glass though http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showd...number=180-952

The question would be at $70, do they ship for free ? they do at the VAN DEN HUL site, so $80 there includes shipping.

gio

 

[Deuterium]

Thanks all. After reading the 6moons review and all of the responses here, I talked to a tech guy at The Cable Company. I ended up ordering the WireWorld Supernova 5. Should be here in about a week. The Lavry shipped and should arrive about the same time. Your help is much appreciated.

 

[Albatross05]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chri5peed I was under the impression fiber-optics are fiber-optics? i.e. that any cable would be exactly like the next. However I am no expert in this, so could well be wrong. I'm probably getting a DAC with optical-in so this is relevant to me as it goes.

In general, that's what I was able to deduce from multiple discussions regarding this topic in various places online. You probably don't want to go with the cheapest opticable you can find but beyond a certain point, you're just wasting your money. The cheapest of the cheap (from what I understand) is plastic and I suppose I can see cheap plastic (or cheap glass, for that matter) being prone to distortion (that is optical distortion...not sure about it affecting the final sound). Of course, your goal is good sound so if there's a chance a cheapo cable could adversely affect your sound quality, you probably should spend a bit more. I wouldn't go overboard though. I've used many optical cables (ranging in price from a few dollars to over $50) and have never heard a difference (I don't have a top shelf system though).

 

[Sycraft]

Quote:

Originally Posted by devwild Different quality toslink cables have a visible difference to their transmision quality (due to clarity, and dispersement), not just audible. There is most certainly a difference, one that can make it difficult to get a proper signal lock at all if you use a cheap cable.

Doesn't matter, the data is digital. It's either transmitted or it's not, the signal is either in acceptable limits or it's not. Digital is demarcating two states. So anything above voltage/brightness level X is a 1, anything below is a 0. Margins are generally pretty wide too.

Over the short runs you are doing digital audio, using the non-homogenious light, at the low frequencies, I fail to see how an ultra high quality cable is needed. We can do gigabit ethernet (which has a 12.5GHz signaling frequency) over standard multi-mode fibre to distances of around 1km with 0 errors.

If you were at the limit and the signal was dropping parts, you'd notice in an audio signal because it would get all messed up. Bits would be dropped form all parts and when a significant bit got dropped, it'd be really apparant.

However, if you really believe that there's a big noticable difference, test it properly. Get yourself two normal $20 Belkin optical cables, and get whatever high end cable you like. Take your gear and have it put behind a partition of some sort. Then have a helper take the cables behind the screen and label them A, B, and C. Without you ever knowing which is which listen to them on some music as they are switched. Write down which two are the same. Have them randomize the A/B/C order, and do it again (you can use different music or the same music).

Do at least 10 tests,a dn 20 would probably be better. If you get it right more than 60-70% of the time, maybe there's something to talk about, however if it's really noticable it should be 100%. If your score is lower, you are likely just guessing and not really hearing anything.

The important thing is you cannot know which cable is which so your preconcieved notions cannot affect your judgement. Your helper needs to keep it a secret from you at all times the ordering, and only match it up with your results in the end.

If you can't pick out the cable blind, then there's probably nothing to it.

 

[devwild]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sycraft Doesn't matter, the data is digital. It's either transmitted or it's not, the signal is either in acceptable limits or it's not. Digital is demarcating two states. So anything above voltage/brightness level X is a 1, anything below is a 0. Margins are generally pretty wide too.

The sticky part about digital audio is that it's not just a digital signal - you also have to take into account jitter when using a non-buffered dac. Light diffusion in the cable makes a measurable increase in signal jitter, which has an audible effect when carried through to the D-A converstion stage. Many head-fiers have already looked into this and reported on these differences. On higher-end DACs with proper jitter correction there is less... if any... difference between cables, with the usual effect being that the really cheap cables can't get a lock at all. I don't believe in really high end optical cables myself, but I do believe it is a good idea to at least invest in a basic decent glass optical cable where you can expect consistent results.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sycraft However, if you really believe that there's a big noticable difference, test it properly.

Regardless of my opinion on the subject... trust me, this isn't a discussion you want to start here. Topics on cable testing almost always turn into a heated debate.

 

[Sycraft]

I know, but it's a fight I like to pick every once and a while. The reason is that people who are up on digital cable quality never seem to be willing to do a blind test. Seems strange to me, since it's very simple to set up and not that expensive. I mean I'd want to know if there really was an audible difference. If you already own the expensive cable, what do you have to lose?

I just know the extreme amount of snake oil that floats around out there, so I'm very sceptical of anything that doesn't have soem science backing it. Doesn't have to be an empricial measurement, though that's the best, but if listeners can't reliably pick out the difference, then I'm very inclined to say there's not any actual difference.

One thing I DO know, from having studied psychology, is your minds have an amazing ability to trick us. If we believe something should be the case, we percieve it as the case.

One of the best studies done on this was relating to auto accidents. People were shown a video of a crash and then asked questions about it. the way the questions were phrased depended on the results. When people were asked how fast the cars were going when the crashed, or slammed in to each other they got faster results than when the people were asked how fast the cars were going when they bumped or touched. Same video, but when people were given the impression it was lower speed, they percieved it as a lower speed.

I would just like the high end cable proponents to do some tests to see if there's any audible difference. I realise most peopel dont' have access to a scope to test for measureable differences, but a simple blind test is easy to conduct. Get a friend to help, buy two cheap cables, and spend a couple hours testing.

 

[gerG]

I will take the blind test, but I get to use one of my picky DACs that won't sync with a long plastic cable. I have tried explaining to it that it is only light pulses and it should make no difference, but it knows the difference. I suspect that it has no buffer capability, so it can't correct for errors like a buffered system.

Anyway, I have a warning: the MCM glass cables have changed recently. They used to have a very flexible jacket and a nice swivel connector. Now they have a larger plug that does not swivel (makes it a pain to connect blind) and the jacket is some stiff plastic that so far refuses to uncoil. I do not recommend them any more.


gerG

 

[Sycraft]

Having problem with LONG plastic cables is unsupprising. They don't transfer light as well, so it gets attenuated more quickly. Have the same basic thing in networking. A multi-mode fibre and laser are good to 1km, but not really any more. You just have too much signal loss, espically if there's a couple of patch panels. If you go single mode, you can go like 10km, however it's a better fibre. You can go longer than that too with long haul trancievers but again, better tranciever, better fibre. The longer you want a run, the better fibre you need to minimize loss. But over short distances, it doesn't matter. A 100m run will have no errors, regardless of the standard becuase it's well within the spec of all of them. The higher grade fibre gets you nothing.

However if you think you are proving something with a blind test like that, other than something already known (different attenuation rates) and that you aren't willing to take a real test, you aren't. Find a short Belkin cable, 1-3m, that your DAC works fine with. Then stack two of those up against a glass cable, preferably of the same length. The question isn't if the glass has less attenuation, of course it does, the question is when glass and plastic are short enough that both have attenuation in spec limits and the signal transfers fine, can you hear any audible difference.

The point of setting up a blind test is not to set up condiditons where you know what's happening ahead of time (ie one cable works, the others don't), it's not blind then and you prove nothing. The idea is setting up a situation where you DON'T know and seeing if you can tell.