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>

 

[Guest]

<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 ass 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

Why pay outrageous prices? You can't put a "price" on quality. 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]

Wow

<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.