Toslink and optical - same thing?

[sclamb]

I have an Arcam CD73T and it has a Toslink out, as well as the normal RCAs. I have seen that some amps, such as the Grace 901, state that they have optical inputs.

Is the optical input the same as the Toslink on the CD player? If I connect them, will it bypass the DAC on the CD player and use the DAC in the 901? Lastly, is the DAC in the 901 likely to be better than the DAC in my £399 Arcam unit?

Thanks.

Simon

 

[OneMalt]

Toslink is indeed an optical digital connection. It is named thus after it's developer, Toshiba.

As for the rest, it makes my head hurt to think about it.

 

[lan]

Toslink is a kind of optical connection. In your case they are the same connection.

Yes if you connect them you will bypass DAC on CD.

If you already have both CD73T and 901, just give it a listen. Although the Grace maybe better, sometimes somepeople don't like better.

 

[Music Fanatic]

Quote:

Originally posted by sclamb Is the optical input the same as the Toslink on the CD player?

Yes Quote:

If I connect them, will it bypass the DAC on the CD player and use the DAC in the 901?

Yes Quote:

Lastly, is the DAC in the 901 likely to be better than the DAC in my £399 Arcam unit?

Yes

Quote:

Thanks.

You're welcome

 

[sclamb]

Thanks for all your replies. I can now honestly state that I know whether Toslink is the same as optical etc.

Simon

 

[chillysalsa]

Toslink is to optical
as
RCA is to electrical

There ARE other formats for optical output though, really high end players will use the AT&T connector.

 

[D-EJ915]

I think TOSLINK is specifically the square connector, because the PCDP/MD type of optical connecter is called the Mini-Optical...soo...yeah

 

[rsaavedra]

Do you guys know the exact chips on each component and know for sure the DAC chip in the Grace is of higher quality than the one in that Arcam?

Well, even assuming the DAC in the Grace is better, using a Toslink connector probably introduces jitter that doesn't occur (as badly) within a CD player doing the D/A conversion. On a related issue, I understand for audio purposes a digital coaxial connection is always preferable/better to a toslink, coax is supposedly less prone to jitter problems.

Cheers,
Raul

Edit: If the link doesn't seem to work directly. Click on articles on the left column of options on that page, and select the "Jitter" link to read about it.

 

[Wodgy]

The coax vs. optical argument has no simple answer. Optical is better if you have a receiver that will attenuate jitter; it's also better if you have an electrically noisy source (e.g. a computer). Coax is better if you have good cables and an unknown quality receiver.

 

[sclamb]

I presume from the above comments that the DAC portion of the 901 may not produce as good a result if connected via optical cable as using the integrated Arcom CD & DAC.

Am I right in saying that there is no other way to connect the 901 to a CD player to bypass that player's DAC other than using the optical output?

If so, then perhaps the 901 is aimed more at those who have a CD transport only, and want a DAC and headamp in one unit.

Simon

 

[Wodgy]

I'm not sure that's what we were saying. rsaavedr was pointing out some of the arguments in favor of coax digital, and I was pointing out that there are also arguments going the other way. With the Grace you can try both (it has optical, coax, and pro AES/EBU digital inputs), so you can pick whatever sounds better in your setup. I suspect your Arcam has both optical and coax outputs.

In the grand scheme of things, the DAC and its surrounding power supply and analog section usually matters way more than minor details like jitter, so it's very possible that the Grace would be an improvement in your system. I don't know how old your CDP is (I'm not familiar with it specifically), but there have been major advancements in DACs over the last few years.

 

[rsaavedra]

Quote:

Originally posted by sclamb Am I right in saying that there is no other way to connect the 901 to a CD player to bypass that player's DAC other than using the optical output?

No, the Grace 901 also has a coaxial digital input. Hover the mouse over "rear panel" in the following page, so you can see it:
http://www.gracedesign.com/products/901/901frame.htm

Cheers,
Raul

 

[rsaavedra]

Quote:

Originally posted by Wodgy rsaavedr was pointing out some of the arguments in favor of coax digital, and I was pointing out that there are also arguments going the other way. With the Grace you can try both (it has optical, coax, and pro AES/EBU digital inputs), so you can pick whatever sounds better in your setup.

I think that's the best thing to do, to try both with good cables for each case, and see what sounds best. What I was suggesting was only what seems to be some sort of concensus slightly favoring digital coax over toslink, but it depends on the whole setup indeed, source, cables, and the DAC and whole equipment that goes after that cable.
Cheers,
Raul

 

[sclamb]

Thanks for all the information. I have an opportunity to try the 901 with my set-up so I will try and borrow all the different types of connectors.

My Arcam is the latest model, and the WM8740 multi bit sigma delta DAC from Wolfson Microelectronics, which is a 24-bit, 192kHz capable DAC .

Arcam state "(it) has the lowest noise and distortion figures we have ever seen".

Simon

 

[Music Fanatic]

Quote:

Originally posted by rsaavedr Do you guys know the exact chips on each component and know for sure the DAC chip in the Grace is of higher quality than the one in that Arcam?

Well, as I said in this poist, the Grace features the Crystal 43122, a truly splendid DAC.