[Jon L]

Quote:

 It is said that the outer body mass of the
(outer shell)RCA connecter should be less like in the Eichmann's connecter. Is it correct?
Regards.   
   

RCA connectors definitely sound different for digital, but what is "right" is debatable.  I've compared Eichmann silver bullets to others, including the venerable Vampire 800 C/B (heavy pure copper with gold plating), and Eichmann had much better air, speed, and upper-mid articulation while Vampire had much more low-mid to bass richness, power, and overall roundness.  Some cheap, thin, generic gold-plated RCA's tonal balance was somewhere in between without actually having the "special" quality of either plug.
 
 
Quote:

 
3) When I got my new coax, I realized the other 2 cables were inferior in almost every respect. Soundstage, speed, detail, neutrality and transparency.

 
I have the same cable as your "new coax," along with some others, including my newly-acquired Stereovox XV Ultra, and my old reference Stereovox XV2.  I would be using the "new coax" if my (speaker) system did not have the capability to adjust the bass output.  With bass ouput adjusted a bit higher for Stereovox, I still (funnily?) use the XV2 (Yup, not the XV Ultra)...  So as usual, it all depends your system, tastes, and music, etc.
 

 

[Shahrose]

Quote:

 
I have the same cable as your "new coax," along with some others, including my newly-acquired Stereovox XV Ultra, and my old reference Stereovox XV2.  I would be using the "new coax" if my (speaker) system did not have the capability to adjust the bass output.  With bass ouput adjusted a bit higher for Stereovox, I still (funnily?) use the XV2 (Yup, not the XV Ultra)...  So as usual, it all depends your system, tastes, and music, etc.
 

Changing bass levels is akin to equalizing the sound. You've added another variable there and it doesn't allow a proper assessment of the cables. I use my headphone setup with no equalization to test all these cables. With my speakers, honestly, any of these cables can be made to sound decent by tinkering with the EQ or adjusting the sub.
 
Also, it's much harder to have a high resolution, transparent speaker system than a headphone system, unless you spend serious cash on room treatments and proper setup. I find I can discern resolution, transparency, speed etc. better with headphones generally.

 

[Jon L]

Quote:

Changing bass levels is akin to equalizing the sound. You've added another variable there and it doesn't allow a proper assessment of the cables. ..
 
Also, it's much harder to have a high resolution, transparent speaker system than a headphone system, unless you spend serious cash on room treatments and proper setup. I find I can discern resolution, transparency, speed etc. better with headphones generally.

 
I agree with you that in-room bass response is what screws up many speaker systems.  However, my speaker system is designed from the onset with an outboard electronic crossover, and the ability to tailor the bass response in a room is what allows for that "high resolution, transparent" speaker system.  Having owned bunch of speakers, I would never buy speakers that didn't allow that.  The EQ argument is valid, but changing speaker placement also changes many things including bass response, but that flexibility doesn't make evaluation invalid.    
 
For me, it's much easier to properly assess cables (and anything else really) with my speaker system, which has at least as much resolution as my Stax Omega II, HE Audio 'stat, and Senn HE60 'stat, in fact more resolution and transparency in terms of imaging, depth, and soundstaging, which comes in handy for evaluating things.  
 

 

[Shahrose]

Quote:

 
I agree with you that in-room bass response is what screws up many speaker systems.  However, my speaker system is designed from the onset with an outboard electronic crossover, and the ability to tailor the bass response in a room is what allows for that "high resolution, transparent" speaker system.  Having owned bunch of speakers, I would never buy speakers that didn't allow that.  The EQ argument is valid, but changing speaker placement also changes many things including bass response, but that flexibility doesn't make evaluation invalid.    
 
For me, it's much easier to properly assess cables (and anything else really) with my speaker system, which has at least as much resolution as my Stax Omega II, HE Audio 'stat, and Senn HE60 'stat, in fact more resolution and transparency in terms of imaging, depth, and soundstaging, which comes in handy for evaluating things.  
 

 
You must have quite a speaker setup to prefer it over the O2s and HE60s. I wonder if your impressions of the coaxial cables are at all different with your headphone setups.
 
BTW Jon, I urge you to fill out your profile when you get the chance. It makes it easier to respond to someone when you know their experience with equipment.

 

[slim.a]

 
Quote:

Hello slim.a, last week I received my BNC Oyaide BD-510 and connected to my Paradisea DAC,
sorry slim.a, in the sound there was no dynamics, energy, enthusiasm. It was very smooth n soft,
there was no attack. Then I decided to add an BNC-RCA adapter and pluged in the cable to RCA
input. Yes, now I fell the fullness by get back all the missed things, now the sound is as that what
should be.. I think the cable should  be broken in at least 100hrs. So, the BNC connection not
suitable for every system & every one's taste. Please tell me that when we add an adapter to BNC,
is there any change in the impedance causing distortion? It is said that the outer body mass of the
(outer shell)RCA connecter should be less like in the Eichmann's connecter. Is it correct?
Regards.   
   

Has anyone bothered to really read the whole review?
 
Below are a few extracts:
- An analog sounding digital cable
- Timbre - The sound of analog
- Highs: When I first listened to the Oyaide, I thought for a moment that it had a slightly rolled off high register. However, when I played tracks that contain instruments with a lot of upper harmonics content (violins, …), I realized that it actually conveyed more information on top, and instead it left aside the grunge and metallic edge that even so called “high-end” cables exhibit.
- The positive outcome of this bass presence and richness is that I never feel the lack of a subwoofer when listening through headphones. There is enough weight to the representation that my brain doesn’t interpret anything as being missing.
- To overcome this, some recordings and some audio equipment overemphasize the leading edges of the notes to enhance that sense of realism. But too often, the result is a dry, artificial and unnatural sound (to my ears at least). The Stereovox XV2 for instance was fast but artificial sounding.
- Overall the sound could be described as effortless resolution. It is not an increase in resolution for the sake of the resolution and transparency;
- This digital cable won’t magically transform a poorly designed DAC into a top-tier one. However, if you are happy with the performance of your DAC and have noticed that its performance is affected by the transport and digital cables, then the Oyaide could probably add something to the mix.
- Overall, the Oyaide is a beautifully built digital cable that brings you closer to the sound of “analog”
 
Maybe that it was unclear from reading the whole review, but If people are looking for sharp transients, a leaner tonal balance (such as the Stereovox XV2), the Oyaide IS NOT for you.
 
In no place in my review, it was implied that the Oyaide should be paired with a DAC such as the Paradisea (NOS + Tubed output). There is something called system synergy. And pairing an "analog"/smooth sounding cable with an already smooth sounding DAC is far from ideal.

Reviews should be read in perspective of what the reader has in his system. And only ONE change should be done at the time.
 
Shahrose has been dissatisfied about his Oyaide cable and whining about it repeatedly. He also bought many items after my reviews; the Artisan Ultimate Silver Dream, Jkeny's Hiface, Wireworld USB cable... Why does comment repeatedly only about his "negative" experience.
 
I have been open minded so far about Shahrose comments but I should point the following:
 
- Shahrose had ZERO experience with high performing digital cables prior to trying the Oyaide
 
- The Belden digital cable cannot even start to compare to something like the Oyaide/Stereovox XV2 in the context of a true high resolution system: if you don't hear the difference in low level details and tonal accuracty, your system is no truly high rez, regardless of how much you spent on it (except if your DAC is totally immune to jitter, which would negate the differences between digital cables anyway).
 
- Shahrose is now recommending to people a magical cable from downsize that is supposed much better than the Belden and the Oyaide (like if the 2 were performing at the same level). Anyone who has the slightest knowledge about digital audio would understand that it is essential to have a 75ohms compliant cable with low dielectric constant. A DIY cable might sound good on a few systems but cannot be recommended in good conscience to a lot of people. Even properly built digital coaxial cables (Stereovox, Oyaide, Sobek) don't guarantee that you will like what you hear. Getting a DIY cable is a much much bigger risk than getting one of the properly built digital cables.
 
Of course, one has to have some background and understand the theory before starting recommending stuff to people to minimize (but obviously not negate) the risks. When testing a digital cable, as good as it is, on a DAC that uses CS8416 digital receivers or similar (Y2 DAC, Paradisea...) One has to understand that such chips already have 200ps of intrinsic jitter (vs. 50ps for the DIR9001 for instance) which imply that by using a "transparent" cable they are actually listening to the digital receiver. Using a sharper cable (such as the Stereovox XV2) yields better subjective results on those occasions.
I personally have had the chance to compare both the CS8416 digital receiver and the DIR9001 digital receiver on the same DAC, and the results were astonishing: with everything else kept equal, the CS8416 sounded warm, slow and fuzzy (with no attack) while the lower jitter DIR9001 sounded tight, accurate and articulate.
By just replacing the DIR9001 by the CS8416 on my reference DAC for the testing and keeping everything else constant, I would have written a totally different description.
 
So should the reviewer try every other possibility out there or should the critical reader apply some logic before
 
So in order to minimize the risks, one has to understand the equipment they have and what kind of cable they are looking for. What is neutral in a neutral 
 
For those who are not familiar with my reviews, go ahead and read my other reviews here on head-fi. There are countless people agreeing with my findings regarding DACs, USB transports, headamps and cables. There will never be 100% accuracy and there will never be 100% agreement about something about this hobby of ours.
 
I apologize in advance for the tone of this post, but there are times when reading too much is too much. Shahrose's bashing about the Oyaide is getting tiring.
 
This is going to be my last post here on the Oyaide thread as I have better things to do.
 
Edit: I deleted my review and I will let Shahrose write a full review about whatever he thinks is worth recommending.

 

[Shahrose]

Not sure why you're attacking me here...aren't you guys having a whole discussion about the Oyaide cable and my impressions on your forums? (http://www.tweak-fi.com/apps/forums/topics/show/3573532-oyaide-cable) The only reason I posted was to clarify and add to *that* discussion which you yourself linked me to, since I didn't want to sign up on 2 forums. Also, I'm not recommending anyone to buy my cable. I have no affiliations with its maker and haven't even talked to him since I bought it off him months ago. I haven't been particularly impressed by its build quality either.
 
I'm actually baffled that you would get so angry...or angry at all. All I did was agree with someone who heard the same thing as I did, and it had nothing to do with you.

 

[dura]

I re-bought the Oyaide 510 last week; 130 cm instead of 70 cm, RCA-plugs.
In my former source I did not like its effect; between the squeezebox classic and the Havana sound got too sharp to my taste.
In the last year I chanced my source for a Logitech Touch and an Audio-GD Reference 5.
Much better, clear sound already. But I wondered if the digital cable I was using (a 1 m digiflex gold with two ferrite clamps) was holding it back.
With the digiflex sound was rather smooth and laid back, pleasant but not very much detail and a little bit lack of color.
I tried the Bolder digital cable, and was shocked by the difference; suddenly the sound stage was in front of the speakers, a very detailed spatial sound.
I guess basically my system gave more and better detailed treble, only by chancing a digital interconnect!
But all was not well, the Bolder in my -speaker based- system had the inclination to put percussion in front of the singer, a deadly sin in my book, and there was too much treble for my taste.
So back it went, and the digiflex was re-inserted. But now I knew I could change the sound signature of my system with the cable, so I decided to re-order the 510.
I've been listening for a week now and must say I'm very satisfied; compared to the Digiflex more space, more depth in front and behind the speakers, broader, much more detail and texture while everything stays in proportion. Compared with the Bolder the singer is in front of the instruments where he or she should be, spatiality is maintained but without exagerated treble,  tonality is very well balanced. What should sound sharp is sharp, what should be smooth is smooth.
The Oyaide seems to combine the pleasing musicality iof the Digiflex and the detail of the Bolder.
Is it smooth to my ear as it is often described? Depends where you come from, the system with the Digiflex was smoother, the system with the Bolder was sharper. In my system to my ears the Oyaide seems to be the perfect cable.
 
BTW, I think it is a pity the review has been withdrawn and frankly I do not really see the necessity of it.

 

[slim.a]

Quote:

I re-bought the Oyaide 510 last week; 130 cm instead of 70 cm, RCA-plugs.
In my former source I did not like its effect; between the squeezebox classic and the Havana sound got too sharp to my taste.
In the last year I chanced my source for a Logitech Touch and an Audio-GD Reference 5.
Much better, clear sound already. But I wondered if the digital cable I was using (a 1 m digiflex gold with two ferrite clamps) was holding it back.
With the digiflex sound was rather smooth and laid back, pleasant but not very much detail and a little bit lack of color.
I tried the Bolder digital cable, and was shocked by the difference; suddenly the sound stage was in front of the speakers, a very detailed spatial sound.
I guess basically my system gave more and better detailed treble, only by chancing a digital interconnect!
But all was not well, the Bolder in my -speaker based- system had the inclination to put percussion in front of the singer, a deadly sin in my book, and there was too much treble for my taste.
So back it went, and the digiflex was re-inserted. But now I knew I could change the sound signature of my system with the cable, so I decided to re-order the 510.
I've been listening for a week now and must say I'm very satisfied; compared to the Digiflex more space, more depth in front and behind the speakers, broader, much more detail and texture while everything stays in proportion. Compared with the Bolder the singer is in front of the instruments where he or she should be, spatiality is maintained but without exagerated treble,  tonality is very well balanced. What should sound sharp is sharp, what should be smooth is smooth.
The Oyaide seems to combine the pleasing musicality iof the Digiflex and the detail of the Bolder.
Is it smooth to my ear as it is often described? Depends where you come from, the system with the Digiflex was smoother, the system with the Bolder was sharper. In my system to my ears the Oyaide seems to be the perfect cable.
 
BTW, I think it is a pity the review has been withdrawn and frankly I do not really see the necessity of it.

I believe that head-fi wasn't the place to write a review about a digital cables for many reasons:
Some head-fiers read only what they want to read: They read the part where I say the Oyaide sounds excellent in my system, but they don't read the parts where I state that I use special power cords, a dedicated power filter, a special audio rack, maple platforms and 250€ per set Aktyna ARIS footers...
Expecting the Oyaide to sound good on all systems, regardless of the associated equipment was not the intent of my review. Pairing the Oyaide with something like the Paradisea is the worst combination I would have thought about.
Many head-fiers have never read other digital cable reviews and can be strongly biased towards the Oyaide.

Even though different digital cables can sound different, they are only digital cables. They have to transmit rapid changing high frequency square waves with the least losses possible from the transport side to the DAC side. Getting a proper 75 ohms cables gets you half way there. Getting a high performance cables with high purity conductors, tighter impedance values and low loss dielectric can get the little more "audiophiles" crave for.
 
So when I read comments such as "the Belden has better attack than the Oyaide" or that the Oyaide "lacks dynamics" or such, I can't help but feel a gap between the intent of my review and the expectations of the readers. By the definition and by design the Oyaide cannot lack anything in comparison to the Belden. Either they sound the same because the DAC being used has excellent jitter reduction or the Oyaide is objectively better.
Things such as jitter and reflections in digital cables can be measured and there is nothing around it. If people find an inferior cable as sounding better in their system there are many reasons to explain that. Some of them are:
- the user is looking for a coloration to cure some weakness already present in the system,
- the transports and the DAC do not comply with the rules of 75 ohms impedance matching and required high rise times,
- some fuzzy digital receivers such as the CS8416/14 require "compensation" to not sound bloated...
(Note: I consider the Stereovox XV2, Actinote Aria and Hifi Cables Sobek as in the same category, albeit with different sound signatures).
 
Given the multiple factors cited above, I feel that my review wasn't suited for such a place as head-fi. I have kept the review on my own website (tweak-fi). But there, at least, any reader will be confronted with a lot more info and data about my reviewing philosophy than what he would faced with when reading One review from me and basing their decision purchase on it.

 

[dura]

Okay, I thought it was primarely overreaction on the posts of Shahrose, which were not that offensive. 
I can imagine doing cablereviews on Head-Fi can be very frustrating and having your own site gives you more control.
On the other hand, it is thanks to your excellent review here on Head-Fi that I learned about the existence of this cable and am now enjoying better music from my system.
Of course I'll visit Tweak-Fi from time to time but my point is that, despite its disadvantages, Head-Fi is still a great source to learn about all kinds of interesting products from positive, interested people who like to help, and withdrawal of quality reviews like yours lessens that.

 

[Jon L]

Quote:

- some fuzzy digital receivers such as the CS8416/14 require "compensation" to not sound bloated...
(Note: I consider the Stereovox XV2, Actinote Aria and Hifi Cables Sobek as in the same category, albeit with different sound signatures).
 

How CS8416/14 receiver sounds is a subject that's highly debatable, but if you really felt that way, this information should have been at the top of the review since probably the vast majority of DAC's in use currently utilize CS8416/14 receivers.  But I agree it cannot be emphasized enough that one should not read one review (even several reviews) and decide to buy something and always expect similar results in his own system.  Thanks for the clarifications BTW.

 

[Zaek]

Sorry to bring back the thread.
 
With a leap of faith, I bought the Oyaide DR510. Have always been impressed with Japanese-made product. That's why giving it a try.
The build was amazing. But the initial impressive (hearing) wasn't good without burn-in.
 
Would like to ask the bros here how much burn-in is needed for this baby in order for it to shine?
500 hours???
 
 

 

[ornitorrinco]

Has anyone compared the Oyaide DR-510 to the Black Cat Silverstar 75?