5.1 question

[Buckle-meister]

Well, at least I know where you're coming from. ...and here I thought you had a head on your shoulders but you would rather play games. pity...

I stated that unlike coaxial cables, optical cables aren't susceptible to interference. Not once did I mention cable lengths, practicality, cost, or anything else. Nor did I recommend to Tampaud that he go for an optical rather than coaxial cable, yet in you jump, all guns blazing.

You seem to be the one intent on proving me wrong. I'm not trying to prove anything.

Nor is anybody else here. Get off your high-horse.

Regards

 

[j_garcia]

Well, yes and no
With such a short run of digital cables, even coat hangers have been shown to work without signal degradation The famous coat hanger experiments of a number of years ago. Too bad the links to this experiment no longer working.

I've seen the coat hangar thing. I've posted back and forth with one guy who tried it and, yes it does appear to work. I haven't tried it, so I can't tell you if it works WELL or not. I'll see if I can get a link from him.

 

[markw]

Oh, come off it , Bucky.

I stated that unlike coaxial cables, optical cables aren't susceptible to interference. Not once did I mention cable lengths, practicality, cost, or anything else. Nor did I recommend to Tampaud that he go for an optical rather than coaxial cable, yet in you jump, all guns blazing.



Nor is anybody else here. Get off your high-horse.

Regards

You've been trying to prove me wrong ever since you chose to ignore all the qualifications in the link. Get off of it.

You specifically chose to ignore the atypical conditions where it's one advantage might make a difference. In the real world they are mitigated by their precarious joins and rigidity issues.

Yeah, strychnine might have some uses in rare cases the medical world but it's still classified as a poison for good reasons.

Don't get me wrong. If thereare no more digital coaxial inputs it will work but, given the choice between the two in a normal environment, coax is the obvious choice.

so, you get off it. Quit being so disingenuous

 

[mtrycrafts]

I've seen the coat hangar thing. I've posted back and forth with one guy who tried it and, yes it does appear to work. I haven't tried it, so I can't tell you if it works WELL or not. I'll see if I can get a link from him.

Yes, if that is the original guy, that would be great. The one I saw used testing equipment to measure the bit stream and data transmitted, no errors
I wouldn't use it either, waste of time, but a good experiment not to be hysterical about short runs of digital cables, or, for that matter, video cables.

 

[Buckle-meister]

You've been trying to prove me wrong ever since you chose to ignore all the qualifications in the link.

Wow! Talk about paranoia. For your information, I have not been trying to prove you wrong at all. Initially, I was curious as to why you thought an optical connection was an 'abomination'; a rather strong word to my mind.

After condemning to hell for all eternity optical cables, I thought I'd highlight the fact that they have an advantage over coaxial cables to try and mitigate the impression that this type of connection is appalling when in fact it is not. Around about this time, all hell broke loose.

You specifically chose to ignore the atypical conditions where it's one advantage might make a difference. In the real world they are mitigated by their precarious joins and rigidity issues.

In the real world, there are thousands of people who have no issues whatsoever with using optical cables.

so, you get off it. Quit being so disingenuous

I am not trying to impress anyone. In a technical knowledge shootout between the two of us, I have no doubt as to who would be the winner.

Regards

 

[markw]

Seems like I've stepped on a personal preference. Sorry about that.

In the real world, there are thousands of people who have no issues whatsoever with using optical cables.

Look. optical cables work. When all is well, they "sound" just like coaxial cables. But, unless the distance between the source and destination is more than 10 feet AND there are MAJOR RFI/EMI issues (or there are simply no more coax IO), they are an needlessly complex and expensive situation to a problem that simply doesn't exist.

If one "prefers" them, fine but please, don't try to sell them to unsuspecting newbies based on need or sound. That's just bad advice and a waste of their money.

Some people "prefer" Hummers. They might serve a useful purpose in rugged terrain in deep snow but all I still see here are soccer mom's wallowing all over the roads here in joisey picking their progeny up from schools or driving to get their hair done. Yeah, they "need" Hummers.

I am not trying to impress anyone.

Don't worry. You didn't. Well, maybe you did but not in the manner in which you would like.

If I let the air out of your preference, I apologize. But, look at the bright side. If you choose to listen and learn you might save money in the future.

 

[Buckle-meister]

If one "prefers" them, fine but please, don't try to sell them to unsuspecting newbies based on need or sound. That's just bad advice and a waste of their money.

Are you under the impression that I prefer optical cables over coaxial? As I stated before, I did not try to 'sell' anything to anyone. Do you not understand? You jumped (and continue to do so) to the wrong conclusions.

Don't worry. You didn't [impress anyone]. Well, maybe you did but not in the manner in which you would like.

Once again, I am not trying to impress anyone. For someone seemingly trying to help folk, that's quite the condescending attitude you've got there.

If I let the air out of your preference, I apologize. But, look at the bright side. If you choose to listen and learn you might save money in the future.

That's the second time you've mentioned preference. Sounds like you're fishing for information here, so let me help you out; I do not have a preference of optical over coaxial cables. And I have no problem with learning, In fact I usually enjoy it; just not from someone more intent it seems on putting folk down than educating them in a helpful and friendly manner.

Regards

 

[markw]

boy, talk about the pot trying to call the kettle black.

And I have no problem with learning, In fact I usually enjoy it; just not from someone more intent it seems on putting folk down than educating them in a helpful and friendly manner.

So, you REALLY don't think you were playing word games to try to prove me wrong?

The only thing you've done in the latter part of this thread is to backpeddle and try to say that you never really said anything.

Boy, for a guy who admittedly has nothing to say you sure waste a lot of bandwidth arguing with someone who does. Is that a learning disability or mere stubborness?

Whatever you say, bucky.

 

[Buckle-meister]

So, you REALLY don't think you were playing word games to try to prove me wrong?

That's right Markw, I REALLY don't.

The only thing you've done in the latter part of this thread is to backpeddle and try to say that you never really said anything.

Um, don't think so.

Boy, for a guy who admittedly has nothing to say you sure waste a lot of bandwidth arguing with someone who does. Is that a learning disability or mere stubborness?

At least I don't resort to personal insults. But you're right Markw, there has already been far too much written, so I'll not try to change what cannot. Have a nice day.

Regards

 

[Tritonman]

OK, here's a stupid question. I know DVDs usually have 6 channels of audio (5.1), and I know my stereo supports 5.1 and has 6 speakers. Yet, the connection between my DVD player and my stereo is simply a stereo RCA cable. So how are the 6 channels of audio travalling over 2 cables? Thanks.

To sum up this thread for you tampaud.

By using a stereo rca cable you are not getting Dolby Digital/DTS. You are purely getting stereo. You are using a Left/Right analog connection between your dvd player and your receiver. In short..it doesnt matter which you use.


To get 5.1/6.1/7.1 you will need EITHER an Optical Cable or a Digital Coaxial cable. (I use the termonology Digital Coaxial to seperate RG6 coaxial which is the type your cable company uses to get cable into your house vs Digital Coaxial which is basically a 75ohm RCA connection.) Whichever you use, Optical/Coaxial depends on what your DVD player supports and whatever available Digital connections your receiver has left.
There is really no noticable difference between the 2 unless you are running them +10ft. If not..then dont worry about it. Both have their positive and negatives but thats a whole nother thread.

As a side note..its sad that this simple question turned into this type of thread. This really does not help the thread starter.

 

[markw]

good post. I agree, particularly with the last paragraph.

To sum up this thread for you tampaud.

By using a stereo rca cable you are not getting Dolby Digital/DTS. You are purely getting stereo. You are using a Left/Right analog connection between your dvd player and your receiver. In short..it doesnt matter which you use.


To get 5.1/6.1/7.1 you will need EITHER an Optical Cable or a Digital Coaxial cable. (I use the termonology Digital Coaxial to seperate RG6 coaxial which is the type your cable company uses to get cable into your house vs Digital Coaxial which is basically a 75ohm RCA connection.) Whichever you use, Optical/Coaxial depends on what your DVD player supports and whatever available Digital connections your receiver has left.
There is really no noticable difference between the 2 unless you are running them +10ft. If not..then dont worry about it. Both have their positive and negatives but thats a whole nother thread.

As a side note..its sad that this simple question turned into this type of thread. This really does not help the thread starter.

I thought I was done after post 5, or post 7 at the most.