speed3 Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Just curious as to what people use most for a digital connection from source components to their preamp/receiver. I use digital optical but I know others who use digital coaxial. Which do you use, and what is the reason behind it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwatkins Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 I use both and my ear notices no difference between the two. Physics of the digital transmission would indicate that if the 1s and 0s are getting there unimpeded there will be no difference in the two. Traditional electron excitation of coax can be more easily influenced by outside forces, but most cables are very well protected from that. In the future - the use of lightwaves can have a dramatic effect on real bandwidth available. In today's electronic environment that has limited (if any) real value. The differences - you can make electrons bend around a corner much better than light waves and there is a longer history of making those connections. Light is also more difficult to run longer distances (although that rarely applies to our homes). Light is the future for bandwidth growth and will be the most secure long term. I'd continue to use both without any real near term concern. If you follow the addictive path of most here you won't have to worry about the future passing you by with antiquated connections - you will probably be there before most... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale W Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 I've also used both and find no difference between the two. currently i'm using a monstercable silver series rca conection, sounds just fine. My local dealer let me take home a 300.00 optical cable to try and i found no change at all. But then again my ears are not what they use to be, maybe others can tell the difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fini Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 I've been using coax, thinking it may be a bit more durable, but my new dvd player (Panasonic DVD-CP72K) has only an optical digital output, no coax. I may just stick with the analog cables for a while, or go to BestBuy and pick up an AR toslink (or some OM Smokey Links). fini Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougdrake Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 I'm using optical for my DVD and VCR because it removes any electrical connection between my audio and video systems, necessary because I have a ground hum originating from somewhere in my video system that I cannot isolate/remove. I'm using electrical for my CD changer, allowing my receiver to do the decoding for 2-channel music as well. DD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j-malotky Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 I use Coax. When I tried TOSLINK I noticed more timing errors between my older DVD player and my newer HT Processor, so I did some research, this is it in a nutshell. Coax uses a raw S/PDIF (Sony/Philips Digital Interface Format). S/PDIF uses a 16-bit data word to carry the digital signal. It takes the 16 bit data directly from the disk read and sends it down the COAX line. Very simple and elegant design. TOSLink is completely different. It was designed to become a standard to be used by all AV equipment as a protocol to carry data over an optical line. Each TOSLINK transmission line carries eight monaural audio channels (four stereo channels). The output device uses a Modular Digital Multitrack (MDM) recorder to create the TOSLINK data much like a computer network data. Each packet has a header and data section. On the receiver side the TOSLINK data is run through a MDM to decode the data and either send it to the DAC's (Digital to Analog Converters), or some MFG have included the DACs into the MDM. There is the problem. TOSLINK is a standard, but each manufacturer is required to create there own MDM's to encode and decode the TOSLINK. TOSLINK by design requires more data to be transmitted because of the 8 track design and header info on each data packet. Much more overhead than COAX. Since all MDMs are not standard, there in lies the bulk of the problem. This is why I prefer the raw 16 bit data given to my processor via COAX. JM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j-malotky Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Oh - a few more thing about AV optical cable. I have NO idea why the runs have to be shorter, but they do. Makes no sence because In the computer world (Ethernet) you can only run copper CAT 5 cable 300 feet. (270 feet for safety). But you can run 100FX optical cable 20 miles. And that is using LED lamps that are simular to AV equipment. Optical cable is very brittle, if you bend it too tight, you break strands and loose brightness. That is why in data centers optical wire is run in rigid conduit, and not just hanging out of the back of servers dangling on the ground where you can step on them like Cat5 wires. JM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale W Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Good post JM learn something new every day . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.