[Chri5peed]

^ I've an Optocoupler Mk.2, I got it more because the specialist audio place I got it from ordered it from Van Den Hul and I chose the exact specs[connectors/length].

Incidentally, yesterday I ripped all The Beatles Anthology CDs. For those 6CDs every song got AR confidences of 70-80. Surely these errors burstning from CDs are really drops in the ocean?

 

[gregorio]

"I can see by your post you know very little to nothing about how digital audio works, and don't want to know, because that would show the gross flaws in your arguments."

Hahahaha. Classic! Shame then that I've earnt more than a decent living over the last 20 years from creating digital audio and as a nice little sideline, lecturing on the subject at university.

As I said, you sit there and enjoy your $100 cable and I'll sit here and laugh at you for being an idiot!! And, CD's have errors, shock, horror, never knew that one. You want to explain to me how error correction works then, just in case I've forgotten about it since I studied it, probably before you were born!! Just out of curiosity, have you any idea whatsoever what a fact actually is?

G

 

[Chri5peed]

^ Actually the only idiot is not the purchaser of a 'super' cable, its the purchaser of said cable who has gone hungry from buying cable.

Its like those who buy physical CDs entirely for the coverart and booklet. Technically a waste, but not to them, same story w/cable.

My Van Den Hul looks nice.

 

[majkel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hahahaha. Classic! Shame then that I've earnt more than a decent living over the last 20 years from creating digital audio and as a nice little sideline, lecturing on the subject at university.

Shame indeed, for your university. It's quite common that in many universities worldwide people give lectures about things they actually don't know much about. You seem to be another example. Poor students.

Man, digital electronics are basics which I had on several subjects finished with exams - digital and switching circuits, digital instrumentation, optoelectronics, data transmission and others. Finished with the MSc EE degree. Do you think I find it the reason to say I know something about the digital audio? No. Do you think I find several DSP projects (HW/SW) related with audio as another proof of my digital audio excellence? Again, no. I know digital electronics from broader point of view coming from my practical experience with digital audio like CDPs, DACs, optical fibers, coaxial cables, etc. Quote:

As I said, you sit there and enjoy your $100 cable and I'll sit here and laugh at you for being an idiot!! And, CD's have errors, shock, horror, never knew that one. You want to explain to me how error correction works then, just in case I've forgotten about it since I studied it, probably before you were born!! Just out of curiosity, have you any idea whatsoever what a fact actually is? G

So we'll keep on laughing at each other.

Error correction in SPDIF? Take a cold shower. Better find out how it happens that you hear no pops when a frame is lost - just for the beginning.

 

[ashmedai]

Quote:

Originally Posted by majkel /img/forum/go_quote.gif Looks like you didn't understand. As I said before, problems with logical thinking are very coherent with assumptions kind of "cables don't differ, optical fibers don't differ". Have you ever seen a single proof saying all cables must sound the same? Please, show me.

The word you were looking for is "consistent," not "coherent." Someone with the background you're claiming should know the difference.

GJ

 

[majkel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ashmedai /img/forum/go_quote.gif The word you were looking for is "consistent," not "coherent." Someone with the background you're claiming should know the difference. GJ

Sure my English is not as good as my mother tongue. I rely on my dictionaries, they might be wrong in terms of meaning differences between these two words expecially that there are several kinds of English used worldwide. In Polish they'd both work for me with my preference of word "coherent" in that sentence. It might be also the case you thought I meant something different. Finally I could choose the word "convergent". I like it.

 

[gregorio]

lol, it just gets funnier!

 

[majkel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif lol, it just gets funnier!

Where do you come from, Mr Shy? Are you ashamed to share this detail with us?

 

[oqvist]

hmm what have I started. I did get the blujeans cable some week ago. the optical cable is an upgrade to the flimsy standard plastic cable in the way that no more flimsy connectors that don´t fit right and fall out ot place.

Better functionality and better looks is what you pay for I suppose. I can also say there is 0.0 % difference in sound from coaxial or optical out to my Keces fast switching betwen

...
But really get an optical cable with connectors as seen on the picture no more frustration

 

[oldson]

does cable length make a difference?

i bought a £40 cable to replace the freebie, with my dac, couldnt hear a difference. got a refund!

 

[oqvist]

Must be very long for it to really matter... Exactly how long I don´t know I just use 1 metre cables there it don´t matter at all on my system anyway

 

[ashmedai]

I think the length threshold is supposed to be >20ft before plastic starts sucking. But yeah, my longest is 5 or 6. Bit-perfect or close enough.

 

[musician]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ashmedai /img/forum/go_quote.gif The word you were looking for is "consistent," not "coherent." Someone with the background you're claiming should know the difference. GJ

As being a non native speaker I can see only that 'coherent' means being connected together. As consistent means that something is constant throughout the time. [Latin coherent: cohaereo = to be connected -->OP intention?; consistent: consistere = to be standing still]
Nonetheless, why do you guys fight so much over it? Do you have to pick on the language now? Are you out of arguments?

As on the topic:
Surely there is jitter. Some may have more and some less. Question is how much is really present and how much can you personally hear? And after that how good is the DAC? etc. etc.

Of course we can scientifically discuss this matter in an ideal system.

But fact remains: If you look at all possible problems which could arise on the way from the source to your brain, then the digital transport is the least you should be worrying about.
Some nice little facts (w/o me stating what degree I am holding):
- human ears loose perception for certain frequencies beginning with the age of 20yrs
- cables transporting analog signals are prone to interference, e.g headphone or loudspeakers
- most modern CDs are not even tipping the edges of the specifications, e.g. dynamics; and are poorly mastered
- Did you ever compare a superb analog signal with a standard digital output? My Denon CD-Player gives a better digital out, while the Cambridge seems to has a better analog output- compared to the other plug on the same player.
Can you be certain to have eliminated all of these things and many more?

Conclusion:
Without going too much into detail: If you have paid a premium for your equipment then those few extra bucks wont hurt. But if you consider it rational there is not much left for differences between two optical cables!

 

[David_N]

I've got a VDH on the way from England (Couldn't source it from North America

) so I'll post a mini-review when it gets here! I have a couple of cheaper cables to compare it to.

 

[gregorio]

Musician - "If you look at all possible problems which could arise on the way from the source to your brain, then the digital transport is the least you should be worrying about."

At last, someone else with some sense contributing to this forum!

Someone else mentioned paying a big premium for cables because of their appearance. If someone wants to pay $100 per ft for cable because they like the way it looks, fine. I've got no problem with that. Same as if someone thinks that an extra $5,000 for a yellow paint job on a Ferrari looks great. But if that person says and advises others that their Ferrari actually performs better because of it's yellow paint job, compared to a standard red Ferrari, and that paying the extra $5,000 is worth it in terms of the Ferrari's improved performance then I'll feel justified in calling them an idiot!!

G