Optical vs Coax Revisited

I'm still debating whether to use an optical cable or a coax cable between my Outlaw 950 and the Denon 2200 universal player. Presently I'm using a basic Monster optical, but I've read so many conflicting reports. I asked the same question in the audioasylum.com forum and got mixed opinions. Can someone tell me, from a technical stand point, which cable would be better for my system and which brand? Thanks, Ron

Like you, I've heard a number of theories both ways. Coax seems to be recommended in many cases as a better interface because the signal is passed along directly rather than being converted to an optical format, although optical offers the advantage of not being affected by electrical noise caused by (for example) close proximity to power cables. There are some others around here who may be able to offer a more specific answer.

It's been a while since I had a regularly used source component with a coax digital output; if I were going to pick one up, I'd probably go with either the Outlaw PSC or a digital audio cable from Blue Jeans Cables. Optical cables are a bit easier. In my experience, the brand of optical cable is not really an issue from a sound standpoint. After using Monster, BetterCables, and Outlaw optical cables, I've standardized on Outlaw's PDO because they are more solidly made than most and as cheap as anything else I've seen ($20 for a 1.8 meter cable). BetterCable's opticals are at least as expensive as Monster, but my BetterCables optical has a loose connector on one end -- not real impressive for a cable that costs nearly four times as much for the same length as a PDO and three times as much for a shorter cable.

------------------
gonk -- 950 Review | LFM-1 Review | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | Saloon Links

Gong, thanks for your response. Since I'm currently using a fiber optic cable, I probably wouldn't notice much difference between different fiber cables. I'll try Outlaw's Coax and compare the 2. I should be able to isolate the cable from the power cords so I shouldn't have any interferences. Ron

optical is better in theory (especially for long pieces, like anyone has a fifty foot run from dvd to processor :-)) because it can move data faster and suffers no interference, but from my personal experience it makes no difference. one thing to keep in mind with an optical cable is they can break more easily than a dig. coax and youd want one with a snug fit into your components. any cable with some play in the connector could end up with the cable not lining up properly. as for sound quality of them both, i cant ever tell the difference. i think most people probably pick one over the over based on how many inputs of each that they have; you wouldnt want to tie up your last dig. coax if you had 4 free opticals and vice versa. luckily now a days most sources give you an option, even my hd cable box from time warner has multiple outputs (a small victory for mankind). oh and i am comparing sound quality using top of the line dig. coax compared to top of the line (price wise) optical cable, not a turd dig. coax and a nice optical :-).

curegeorg

"Move data faster?"

Gotta wonder what you mean by that?

I do believe that electrical impulses (not the electrons themselves) move ever so slightly slower than the actual speed of light, but (and I've not done the calculation) you'd probably need to string a couple of cables from here to the Moon and back before you might notice a difference. I think you can therefore pretty much rule out differences due to this effect in most home theatres!

And I don't believe that either cable is bandwidth limited for any home theatre application.

So I don't see how, or why, there would be a difference between either format - insofar as either format's ability to move the amounts of data required.

Regards.

Jeff Mackwood

I can add my personal experience only -

I have used bpth optical and coax with a $1600 receiver (Not Outlaw) and a $3,600 pre/pro and a $2,500 5 channel amp (Again, not Outlaw).

In each system, the optical cable sounded brighter, nore detailed, more analytial, etc., while at the same time sounding somewhat unpleasantly "edgy" - Listener fatigue after a while.

The coax cable was more laid back and mellow, but depending n the cable, could sound rolled off in the highs. Slightly muffled sound.

With each setup, I gravitated to the coax. I currently use a solid silver digital coax by a small company - No names in deference to the Outlaws. It's more expensive than some, but I have found that it has the detail of optical and the smoothness of coax. If you want more info, pls contact me offline, otherwise no bashing of the Outlaw cables, which I have NOT tried.

Thanks.

for now i will stick with the theory that light is faster than everything. just a hunch i have. fiber optic is going to replace coax in our country's infastructure because it is superior at data transmission, and that says enough for me.

Electricity does in fact move at less than the speed of light in coax cables - something like 75-80% of the speed of light. This specification (propogation delay) is found in the spec sheets of coax cables.

Audibly, this doesn't matter squat, unless you take into consideration the micro-nano-fly-fart length of time you are having to wait to hear the music verses from an optical cable. On the other hand, the processing needed to change the electrical signal to light and back again at the ends of the optical cable will introduce their own delays.

Which delay is greater? Does it matter? Do you care? Do I care? Does it effect the price of tea in China?

I don't know.......

tea in china will always be cheaper than tea here :-(. those commie bastards.

My two cents: If the sequence 1101000101010001 transmitted by the first device is interpreted by the second device as 1101000101010001, it makes not one wit of difference to the quality of the sound by what means the data arrived.

If many packets of 1101000101010001 are sent, and out of that the receiving device interprets some of the packets to be 1101001001010001 instead, then uses the erroneous information to generate an analog signal, you are going to hear more than a change in timbre, you are going to hear outright glitches in the signal.

If you detect an actual difference in the sound quality of coax vs. optical, the difference is in the sending and/or receiving device. This would involve the means by which the data is generated or interpreted (protocol, bit rate, word length, etc.) and then converted to analog for one interface vs. the other.

Earl Grey, hot, decaffeinated, please.


[This message has been edited by bestbang4thebuck (edited April 01, 2004).]

Just take a peak behind some higher end source components, they rarely have a toslink connection. They have a coax and sometimes a XLR digital connection.

mine do have optical as well as others. i enjoy the flexibility that differing connections offers me, just in case im feeling extra special one day and decide to switch it around.

It's a digital system. Speed of the photons/electrons isn't going to make it sound any different. Nor will noise, unless the noise is picked up and amplified by the analog section. Noise in the digital section (assuming it is well designed, and we wouldn't buy poorly designed stuff, right? Right?) will result in either nothing or a data error. THERE IS NO IN BETWEEN STATE IN A DIGITAl SYSTEM.

At one time I hoped the internet and folks day to day experience with digital data would make this more clear, but we live in a world where viruses can make a user jump through 3-5 hoops before activation and still spread. Sigh.

As Gonk points out, using optical has the advantage that there is no way that a grounding or other electrical problem might cause issues between equipment via a chunk of glass or plastic. Most important though, which inputs and are available on the back panel, that is, really, the key question.

how come people ask a question and then never post as to what they did for a solution....

[This message has been edited by curegeorg (edited April 08, 2004).]