optical cables vs coaxial cables

[Rick]

<font color='#000000'>What's better to use for a digital connection and why?</font>

[RLA]

<font color='#000000'>Hi
Here is my .02 cents on the subject of digital cables.
While some may claim to be able to here the differences in digital cables I seriously doubt that most “Audiophiles” with modest systems would be able to tell the differences between a optical cable and a coax digital interconnect.The cable you choose should have decent build
quality and make a good mechanical connection.I think that high end digital cables offer little if any in performace gain and your $$ would be better spent in other areas of
your system. *Remember the signal is 1’s and 0’s nothing more *Optical cables are less prone to RF interference but a well sheilded coax should have no trouble either
Happy Listening</font>

[rpgonzalez]

<font color='#000000'>this is my take too. Thats why I &nbsp;just go with the optical cable. There is a big mess behind my system, and you need an expensive coax for proper shielding from my snakes den. I try as hard as I can to make sure power sources do not come in contact with RCA connects, and an optical is one less to worry about. Also, a GREAT coax is about $60 or more, but any ol $45 optical will do. HOWEVER...I have heard and witnessed myself instances of the digital optical sound being out of synch with lip movement. This is bothersome!

Tidbit: I had to buy an optical for my PS2 (no coax), but decided the sound coming out of that this was worthless anyway so I got that cable and added to my nak.</font>

[GermanMan]

<font color='#000000'>From a pure technical standpoint:

There is no difference. &nbsp;The end result is the exact same audio data stream reaching the decoder. &nbsp;Anyone who suggests otherwise is mistaken.

If I hand you a digital document, say a pdf file, there is no difference in the content regardless &nbsp;if it was delivered on a 3.25&quot; floppy, a dat data tape, or as an email attachment.


Now, there are some issues about the cables themselves, as already mentioned- the coax can be affected by electromagnetic interference, which an optical can not. &nbsp;Optical is usually a bit less flexible.

Any anomolies that occur, like a sychron problem, is a defect in some other part of the equipment with either the player or decoder not feeding or handling the data properly. &nbsp;The two signals start and end life at the same point in the player and decoder. &nbsp;They are split (copied) and then converted to the appropriate electrical/optical signal, run down the medium and then converted back into a bitstream and fed into the same decoder so the location of the 'defect' is limited. &nbsp;However, its not a general problem of one or the other interconnect if such an equipment defect shows up.</font>

<font color='#000000'>For most people, using the equipment most people use, I think that there is no audible difference. *I can't hear one, but I don't have high-end equipment or interconnects.
On another forum, I read that optical undergoes an extra stage of conversion that may degrade the signal quality, but the person who stated this didn't actually say it was audibly worse to him--it was what you might call an &quot;academic&quot; statement, not meant as a recommendation for coax.
Optical is easier to damage, and if you temporarily disconnect w/out covering up the tips of cables or ins/outs on recvrs, cd players, etc, when you reconnect you may get some interference with the light signal from dust or humidity that you won't get w/coax metal-to-metal connections. *On the other hand, coax can reportedly pick up interference that optical can't.
I use both kinds, mass-market brands, and can't tell a difference. On my Onkyo HT in a box, I use coax but used to use optical. *No difference. *On my 2-ch system, I use optical, via an optical switcher, also a mass-market brand. *Due to ltd number of inputs on recvr, I use my MD deck as a DAC/pass-thru to recvr, &amp; have 2 sources connected to its optical input (it only has optical). *It sounds fine to me.
There may be lab tests that confirm or refute what I've said, but I'm not talking about lab tests. *If I had a state of the art HT recvr that cost more than all my current gear combined, maybe I'd be pickier.</font>

[Borg]

<font color='#000000'>My 2 cents...
I've heard that a &quot;cheap&quot; optical cable can induce jitter. *This is more pronounced when using SPDIF. *See this link:
http://www.digido.com/jitteressay.html

Personally I think that if you are using a HTPC w/ SPDIF, you might want to use coax. *I've tried both from a HTPC....can't hear a difference, but then again I don't consider myself that much of an audiophile. *I think that when connecting other components, you'll be safe with either.</font>

[steve]

<font color='#000000'>OK, its time for my 2-cents. &nbsp;I prefer a digital coax and here's why.

1) You're almost guaranteed a good connection with a coax. &nbsp;Unlike the new &quot;trap door&quot; fiber optic connections that are being put on the *** end of the Sony Receivers and others, the Coax connection is solid and a proven design. &nbsp;What happens with the new &quot;trap door&quot; fiber optic connection design is that after two or more installs/uninstalls, the door brakes. &nbsp;Well, the &nbsp;door is also used to hold on the fiber optic cable, and without the door, that connection is lost. &nbsp;Your only hope after is to rig the cable on with adhesive, or use another connection and change sources on your AV equipment.

2) Each end of a fiber optic cable is just that, an optic. &nbsp;Optics are prone to scratches and breakage. &nbsp;If you accidentally mess up an end during installation or handling, you're screwed out of an expensive cable. &nbsp;Yes, even an &quot;audiophile&quot; can screw up connecting this cable. &nbsp;What can happen, for example, is you may be in a tight area (like behind a wall unit), and you can't see the back of the equipment. &nbsp;So now your forced to blindly try to install the fiber optic connector, which is obviously, orientation sensitive. &nbsp;You feel, you prod, and you push, but it ain't going in : ). &nbsp;Then suddenly, with all that poking around, you snap off the lens, or scratched the lens without knowing it.

My thought is stay coax. &nbsp;You just plug the cable in and there you are. &nbsp;No fussing with orientation, trap doors, and the worrying about the cable falling out due to it's own weight.</font>

[Elvis1977]

Digital Coax for me.

[pzaur]

I use whichever I have a cable for. Here are some decent coaxial cables for very little. The build is excellent and they look nice. The only downside is that they are a little stiff.

AR Pro II Coaxial (video) Cables and others (http://www.accessories4less.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi)

Why pay outrageous prices? You can't put a "price" on quality. Monoprice.com (http://www.monoprice.com) is another place to look. Very unassuming and they work.

-pat

[rnatalli]

Given the choice, I go with well-shielded coax simply because the connectors on opticals tend to be flimsy when plugged in.

[acacia987]

<font color='#000000'>this is my take too. Thats why I &nbsp;just go with the optical cable. There is a big mess behind my system, and you need an expensive coax for proper shielding from my snakes den. I try as hard as I can to make sure power sources do not come in contact with RCA connects, and an optical is one less to worry about. Also, a GREAT coax is about $60 or more, but any ol $45 optical will do. HOWEVER...I have heard and witnessed myself instances of the digital optical sound being out of synch with lip movement. This is bothersome!

Tidbit: I had to buy an optical for my PS2 (no coax), but decided the sound coming out of that this was worthless anyway so I got that cable and added to my nak.</font>


I don't think i have ever spent $45 on a cable, especially not an interconnect. i use optical and get them from Monoprice for about 8-10 bucks. cant go wrong and they work great. in order to justify $45 interconnects, your system budget would have to be mega expensive (following the whole 1-5% on cables rule).

[jonnythan]

Quit dredging up 5 year old threads!

[garbage pale kid]

<font color='#000000'>this is my take too. Thats why I &nbsp;just go with the optical cable. There is a big mess behind my system, and you need an expensive coax for proper shielding from my snakes den. I try as hard as I can to make sure power sources do not come in contact with RCA connects, and an optical is one less to worry about. Also, a GREAT coax is about $60 or more, but any ol $45 optical will do. HOWEVER...I have heard and witnessed myself instances of the digital optical sound being out of synch with lip movement. This is bothersome!

Tidbit: I had to buy an optical for my PS2 (no coax), but decided the sound coming out of that this was worthless anyway so I got that cable and added to my nak.</font>

it sounds more like your amp i doubt its the cable

[Adam]

it sounds more like your amp i doubt its the cable

Unfortunately , rpgonzalez hasn't logged in for over two years, so he's probably not going to get the message. :)

[jinjuku]

Given the choice, I go with well-shielded coax simply because the connectors on opticals tend to be flimsy when plugged in.

I have had optical running for years. Never a problem. Nowadays not everything has the digital co-ax on it. I would invest in the optical knowing that it is going to become more and more predominate.

I wouldn't worry about connection rigidity.

[rnatalli]

Nowadays not everything has the digital co-ax on it.

Tell me about it. My DirecTV receiver only has optical. I just don't like that they don't have a tight fit when plugged in. Other than that, they're the same to me.