Audible Difference Between Optical And Analog Cables?

J

jumpnblues

Audioholic Intern
My AVR is a new Yamaha RX-667 and I have a new Yamaha CD-C600 CD changer. The AVR manual recommends AV-3 input as the CD changer input, however, the only input jack for that channel is a coax pin which Yamaha's own CD changers don't have. I know I can input the CD changer in an audio input, no problem. But you would think if Yamaha recommends A/V input 3 for a CD changer they would at least have jacks to accommodate their own CD changers in that input?
The Yamaha CD changers I have both have optical outs and that's what I'm using. However, my AVRs both only have 2 optical inputs so I'm having to prioritize what gets the "best" cables and what gets "good" cables. I listen to music from the CD changers a lot. But they only accommodate either analog or optical outs.
I'm currently using the AVR optical inputs for my flat panel Panasonic Viera equipped TV and the CD changer. But I have a DVR with both component video and optical outs. My question is...should the CD changer or DVR get the optical cables? Don't forget the DVR also has component video outs. The CD changer only has optical or analog outs. Which way should I go? Will there be an audible difference?


Tom
 
jnelson88

jnelson88

Audioholic
I noticed a lot of CD changers/players come with Digital outputs now. When I listen to CD's. I like listening analog. To me digital sounds cold and hollow. Some people are different though, it also would depend on the music too.
 
J

jumpnblues

Audioholic Intern
I noticed a lot of CD changers/players come with Digital outputs now. When I listen to CD's. I like listening analog. To me digital sounds cold and hollow. Some people are different though, it also would depend on the music too.

j,


I asked this on another forum and, if I understood the response correctly, you can't get 5.1 or 7.1 surround with an analog cable. OTOH, I may not have correctly understood the response.
I just find it curious that on both my Yamaha AVRs they recommend A/V input 3 for CD changers while that input only accommodates a digital coax cable. And neither of my new Yamaha CD changers have digital coax outputs? I mean, you can obviously plug the changer in any number of alternative ways. But why wouldn't Yamaha recommend plugging a changer into an audio input, or provide the digital coax output on the changer to match up with their own recommended CD changer input (A/V input 3) on the AVR? Just seems like an inconsistency to me.
Having said all that, both Yamaha AVRs (RX-667 and RX-765) and CD changers (CD-C600 and CDC-697) are sonically excellent and very well designed and built...save for the relatively insignificant situation described above.


Tom
 
jnelson88

jnelson88

Audioholic
j,


I asked this on another forum and, if I understood the response correctly, you can't get 5.1 or 7.1 surround with an analog cable. OTOH, I may not have correctly understood the response.
I just find it curious that on both my Yamaha AVRs they recommend A/V input 3 for CD changers while that input only accommodates a digital coax cable. And neither of my new Yamaha CD changers have digital coax outputs? I mean, you can obviously plug the changer in any number of alternative ways. But why wouldn't Yamaha recommend plugging a changer into an audio input, or provide the digital coax output on the changer to match up with their own recommended CD changer input (A/V input 3) on the AVR? Just seems like an inconsistency to me.
Having said all that, both Yamaha AVRs (RX-667 and RX-765) and CD changers (CD-C600 and CDC-697) are sonically excellent and very well designed and built...save for the relatively insignificant situation described above.


Tom
You won't get 5.1 or 7.1 with analog, that is correct. Now as to the Yamaha CD changer situation, I'm not sure. Maybe they were picturing another CD change or player to go with it. Maybe they updated the manual from the previous RX-V line or two, I just checked my RX-V663 it has 4 CD inputs (2 COAX, 2 Toslink). So I couldn't say for sure. As for input issues, could you list (if you don't mind) what you are using those two inputs for?
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
I noticed a lot of CD changers/players come with Digital outputs now. When I listen to CD's. I like listening analog. To me digital sounds cold and hollow. Some people are different though, it also would depend on the music too.
Obviously, if you are listening to a CD, you are listening to a digital signal. If the sounds are different and you prefer the sound using the CD's analog outputs, then there is something about using the digital to analog converter in your CD that makes it sound better than the DAC in your receiver. Since they are both Yamaha products, there is a reasonable chance that both units use the exact same DAC! If so, you are more likely hearing a difference due to different levels of gain.

In theory, if both units use the same DAC, you should be able to by-pass a little more circuitry by using the optical cable and letting the AVR do the conversion. In digital form, there should be exactly 0 degradation of the signal, while an analog signal is subject to line losses (negligibly small though they would be). Additionally, if you are using a typical modern AVR with the digital signal processing features such as bass management, the AVR is having to reconvert the analog input back to digital again for the DSP to take place, then convert yet again back to analog, to feed the amp section.

For my Marantz components, both use identical DAC's. Because of the risk of a very high-level analog signal (as might happen in a very loud passage in a CD with high dynamic range) saturating the pre-amp section, I stick with the digital inputs where I can.

HTH
 
jnelson88

jnelson88

Audioholic
Obviously, if you are listening to a CD, you are listening to a digital signal. If the sounds are different and you prefer the sound using the CD's analog outputs, then there is something about using the digital to analog converter in your CD that makes it sound better than the DAC in your receiver. Since they are both Yamaha products, there is a reasonable chance that both units use the exact same DAC! If so, you are more likely hearing a difference due to different levels of gain.

In theory, if both units use the same DAC, you should be able to by-pass a little more circuitry by using the optical cable and letting the AVR do the conversion. In digital form, there should be exactly 0 degradation of the signal, while an analog signal is subject to line losses (negligibly small though they would be). Additionally, if you are using a typical modern AVR with the digital signal processing features such as bass management, the AVR is having to reconvert the analog input back to digital again for the DSP to take place, then convert yet again back to analog, to feed the amp section.

For my Marantz components, both use identical DAC's. Because of the risk of a very high-level analog signal (as might happen in a very loud passage in a CD with high dynamic range) saturating the pre-amp section, I stick with the digital inputs where I can.

HTH
Ahh yea, I don't have a Yamaha CD player or changer, The original poster does. Yes the sound the from the analog outs is the way I have mine plugged in. Which is what I said. What I am listening to is digital, until it gets converted to an analog Signal, which then goes to my RX-V663, since my RX-V663 is not powering my mains (left, right, center) my UPA-5 is. it goes to the UPA-5. But I have already said this by cutting a paragraph down to a Sentence. This is the way I like it, it sounds good to me.
 
J

jmhc

Audioholic Intern
The CD changer only has optical or analog outs. Which way should I go? Will there be an audible difference?
I guess you have to investigate which device has the better DAC chip (probably both use the same), if your receiver has better DACs then go digital, otherwise then analog is the way to go.
 
J

jumpnblues

Audioholic Intern
"[...As for input issues, could you list (if you don't mind) what you are using those two inputs for?]"


Sure, j. I'm using the optical inputs for a DVR and possibly my Panasonic Viera 58" VT25 flat screen. I say possibly because I'm running an HDMI cable from the cable box to my AVR and an HDMI from the AVR to the HDMI/ARC input of my TV and...I was advised I need to also run an optical audio cable back to the AVR to receive sound from the Panasonic Viera Cast feature on my TV. I'd like to be able to play Pandora, a Viera Cast feature, over my sound system. I evidently can't do it with just the HDMI cable as I get Pandora sound superimposed over whatever channel my TV is tuned to. IOW, I can't separate the Pandora Viera Cast signal from the TV channel signal. They both play over my sound system simultaneously. That's the long explanation as to why I might have to run an optical audio cable from the TV to the AVR, thereby using one of the 2 optical inputs. As I mentioned above, the other optical input is for the DVR which is not HDMI equipped. Are you thoroughly confused now, LOL??


Tom
 
J

jmhc

Audioholic Intern
I noticed a lot of CD changers/players come with Digital outputs now. When I listen to CD's. I like listening analog. To me digital sounds cold and hollow. Some people are different though, it also would depend on the music too.
If it were vinyl I'll second that, vinyl low frequencies are deeper than CDs and so is the dynamic range, but you have to play it in pretty expensive equipment to notice difference. In his case records are digital so is not about the type of connection is about digital to analog conversion.
 
jnelson88

jnelson88

Audioholic
"[...As for input issues, could you list (if you don't mind) what you are using those two inputs for?]"


Sure, j. I'm using the optical inputs for a DVR and possibly my Panasonic Viera 58" VT25 flat screen. I say possibly because I'm running an HDMI cable from the cable box to my AVR and an HDMI from the AVR to the HDMI/ARC input of my TV and...I was advised I need to also run an optical audio cable back to the AVR to receive sound from the Panasonic Viera Cast feature on my TV. I'd like to be able to play Pandora, a Viera Cast feature, over my sound system. I evidently can't do it with just the HDMI cable as I get Pandora sound superimposed over whatever channel my TV is tuned to. IOW, I can't separate the Pandora Viera Cast signal from the TV channel signal. They both play over my sound system simultaneously. That's the long explanation as to why I might have to run an optical audio cable from the TV to the AVR, thereby using one of the 2 optical inputs. As I mentioned above, the other optical input is for the DVR which is not HDMI equipped. Are you thoroughly confused now, LOL??


Tom
I get what your saying. Does you TV have COAX digital also (it would be orange)? If it does could you run it that way?
 
jnelson88

jnelson88

Audioholic
If it were vinyl I'll second that, vinyl low frequencies are deeper than CDs and so is the dynamic range, but you have to play it in pretty expensive equipment to notice difference. In his case records are digital so is not about the type of connection is about digital to analog conversion.
I know its odd, I can't explain it. Its weird, its funny since the hearing test I took after my first deployment from 07-09 reported I lost hearing in my upper khz freq range. I can tell when people run Class D mono block amps for their subs for cars and when they Use A/B amps for their subs. Blew the guy at the car audio place out of the water when I told him his award winning build sounded like garbage to me. Its odd... makes buying gear a pain to.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
If it were vinyl I'll second that, vinyl low frequencies are deeper than CDs and so is the dynamic range, but you have to play it in pretty expensive equipment to notice difference. In his case records are digital so is not about the type of connection is about digital to analog conversion.
This thread is turning into a mile of misinformation. Vinyl does not play lower than a CD! The mastering engineer has to roll off the low end a little to prevent groove kissing.

Next the dynamic range possible with CD is about 20 db greater than with vinyl.

In order for vinyl to match the dynamic range of a CD you have to have a dbx 2 encoded disc and play it back through a dbx 2 decoder.

As far as to which unit does the conversion, given good equipment it should not make a difference.

I know if I use my RME Fireface 800, recognized as one of the best units in the industry, the difference between that doing the conversion and the DACS in my Marantz AV 8003 pre/pro is zero.

Now vinyl can sound very good. I play a lot of it, and I'm listening to it now. But as a medium it is not the technical equal of the CD.

Now in the pop world all bets are off, and you are awash in technical idiots who don't know how to master and do respectable post production work.

In the classical world we don't have to put up with that, thank goodness.

To claim the the Vinyl LP is a better medium from a pure technical point of view is just plain voodoo.
 
jnelson88

jnelson88

Audioholic
This thread is turning into a mile of misinformation. Vinyl does not play lower than a CD! The mastering engineer has to roll off the low end a little to prevent groove kissing.

Next the dynamic range possible with CD is about 20 db greater than with vinyl.

In order for vinyl to match the dynamic range of a CD you have to have a dbx 2 encoded disc and play it back through a dbx 2 decoder.

As far as to which unit does the conversion, given good equipment it should not make a difference.

I know if I use my RME Fireface 800, recognized as one of the best units in the industry, the difference between that doing the conversion and the DACS in my Marantz AV 8003 pre/pro is zero.

Now vinyl can sound very good. I play a lot of it, and I'm listening to it now. But as a medium it is not the technical equal of the CD.

Now in the pop world all bets are off, and you are awash in technical idiots who don't know how to master and do respectable post production work.

In the classical world we don't have to put up with that, thank goodness.

To claim the the Vinyl LP is a better medium from a pure technical point of view is just plain voodoo.
TLS Guy their was something I was going to ask you but I completely forgot what I was going to ask as soon as I hit PM... well when I remember I send you a MSG.
 
Seth=L

Seth=L

Audioholic Overlord
Vinyl pressings, especially of more recent material, have greater dynamic range than their CD counterparts (because of how they mastered the CD release, not a limitation of the medium).

Many vinyl collectors and audiophiles claim vinyl is technically superior, but it's not. It is worse than unfortunate that the vinyl pressings often sound better than the CD.

In regard to using the analog connection vs. the digital one, it depends on the situation. I typically find that digital connections are less of a hassle, especially when dealing with the same tier equipment such as the Yamaha CD player and receiver discussed here in this thread. Technology revolving around DACs is pretty much beyond necessity in terms of intelligible differences. Their implementation could become relevant in certain circumstances. You could put a great DAC inside of a cheap CD player with piss poor line level output (maybe something in the analog output adds noise, or the voltage is too low or high) and the result would be poor performance. This sort of problem should be rare, but it does happen.

Because the connection is analog the possibility of audible interference is more probable. Analog signals are more effected by electromagnetic interference and AC noise. Usually if the player is of sound construction and the cables are 75 ohm, sheilded, and of good quality, the possibility of interference is significantly diminished.

Each analog stage adds noise to the signal path. If the SNR (signal to noise ratio) of the CD player and receiver are both very low, you may not experience any problems with stereo hiss at the listening position.

Digital connections can too suffer from interference, however it is less likely the effect would be audible. Coaxial digital cables should be 75 ohm and shielded, exactly the same as composite video and subwoofer cables.

Functionally there is no difference between using the digital connection or the analog connection because the digital to analog conversion process is going to take place either in the receiver or the CD player. Basically, it has to happen because the amplifier is analog (like all amplifiers, even the ones that claim to be "digital"). Some will debate that because there is a smaller power supply and less electronics overall inside the CD player in comparison to a receiver that you should use the analog outputs. Others will argue that the motors inside the CD player can introduce noise in to the signal path and degrade the analog output so you should use the digital output to connect to the receiver.

Basically it's a hairy mess with no definitive answer. You will just have to try both for yourself and see which works best for you.

In regard to your concern for 5.1 and 7.1, unless you have DTS CDs (hardly anyone does) then you need not worry about that. Pretty much all CDs you can buy are 2 channel only. DTS CDs are extremely rare and typically are special order items. In fact, I don't even know if they still make them.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Functionally there is no difference between using the digital connection or the analog connection because the digital to analog conversion process is going to take place either in the receiver or the CD player.
You forgot a third case - which is where the digital to analog conversion process happens both places.
In any typical AVR where any DSP is engaged (such as Audyssey or Yamaha's YPAO or if the AVR's bass management is used for the subwoofer) you are using the receiver's DAC regardless of whether the input is analog or digital.
I doubt there is any audible difference, but it makes sense to me to keep the signal digital so as to avoid those two extra DAC conversions (from digital to analog in the CD player, then back to digital in the AVR) before the signal reaches the amp.
Also, I thought using a digital input avoids the risk of over-loading the pre-amp. Isn't this correct?
Thanks.
 
J

jmhc

Audioholic Intern
I know its odd, I can't explain it. Its weird, its funny since the hearing test I took after my first deployment from 07-09 reported I lost hearing in my upper khz freq range. I can tell when people run Class D mono block amps for their subs for cars and when they Use A/B amps for their subs. Blew the guy at the car audio place out of the water when I told him his award winning build sounded like garbage to me. Its odd... makes buying gear a pain to.
I agree, its all about what is sounds good to you.
 
J

jmhc

Audioholic Intern
Many vinyl collectors and audiophiles claim vinyl is technically superior, but it's not. It is worse than unfortunate that the vinyl pressings often sound better than the CD.
Technically speaking vinyl does cover greater frequency range than CDs and also greater to DVD audio, SACD and Blu-ray titles at 96khz (even though the difference with the last 3 is shrinked to a minimal and vinyl doesn't exceeds 192khz titles).

To my belive that extra frequency range its totally unnecesary because CDs can cover up the entire human threshold range, I mean why do I need 40+ khz frequency if my ears can only reach to 20khz and even if I could at what price?? 100,000 for a pair of speakers, 200,000 for an amplifier?? its not my intention to disrespect audiophiles but its insane.
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
Technically speaking vinyl does cover greater frequency range than CDs and also greater to DVD audio, SACD and Blu-ray titles at 96khz (even though the difference with the last 3 is shrinked to a minimal and vinyl doesn't exceeds 192khz titles).

To my belive that extra frequency range its totally unnecesary because CDs can cover up the entire human threshold range, I mean why do I need 40+ khz frequency if my ears can only reach to 20khz and even if I could at what price?? 100,000 for a pair of speakers, 200,000 for an amplifier?? its not my intention to disrespect audiophiles but its insane.
Where are you getting your facts? I love vinyl but what you are stating is absolutely wrong.

Read this and edumacate yourself on vinyl vs CD.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/technical-articles/426-a-secrets-technical-article.html

and part two

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/technical-articles/427-a-secrets-technical-article.html
 
J

jmhc

Audioholic Intern
This thread is turning into a mile of misinformation. Vinyl does not play lower than a CD! The mastering engineer has to roll off the low end a little to prevent groove kissing.

Next the dynamic range possible with CD is about 20 db greater than with vinyl.
You are absolutelly right, my bad what I meant was relative dynamics, thanks for correction.
 
Last edited:
J

jmhc

Audioholic Intern
Where are you getting your facts? I love vinyl but what you are stating is absolutely wrong.

Read this and edumacate yourself on vinyl vs CD.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/technical-articles/426-a-secrets-technical-article.html

and part two

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/technical-articles/427-a-secrets-technical-article.html
Gee, I really don't remember where I read it, it was a few years ago, but what I do remember is that I read that quadrasonic records have signal frequencies that can reach to 50 khz aprox..

I really didn't give to much importance because no matter what they say there is no way I'm gonna change digital for analog.

Anyway I'll read the links you pointed, so thank you for it.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top