Optical Cable Question

[EdwardGein]

To begin with if you don't think there is a difference in CD, DVD or TV sound when connected optically to a receiver, don't bothering answering this question. To the true believers, do all optical cables produce the same sound or is the difference unnoticeable? Specifically, I can get an optical cable on Ebay for $6 new & I just bought a Phillips PXT1000 fiber optics cable for $20. Are all optic cables under $100 going to produce the exact same sound quality? How about over $100?

[cam]

I will exclude myself also.

[kexodusc]

Are all optic cables under $100 going to produce the exact same sound quality?
Cables don't produce sound...that should tell you something.


How about over $100?

If the receiver is receiving the signal, a $100 cable isn't going to make the digital info any more or less accurate than the $6 cable. It might be longer, have better shielding, or be more durable but that's probably it.
Don't make the same mistakes I made on my early HT systems.

[noddin0ff]

To the true believers, do all optical cables produce the same sound or is the difference unnoticeable?

What's the point in believing in an unnoticeable difference? Does it really matter if you one-hand clap with your right hand, or your left? If you're a believer, you don't need to ask this question, you take it on faith.

self excused, too.

[bjornb17]

To begin with if you don't think there is a difference in CD, DVD or TV sound when connected optically to a receiver, don't bothering answering this question. To the true believers, do all optical cables produce the same sound or is the difference unnoticeable? Specifically, I can get an optical cable on Ebay for $6 new & I just bought a Phillips PXT1000 fiber optics cable for $20. Are all optic cables under $100 going to produce the exact same sound quality? How about over $100?

i see a major problem here: why would you tell "non-believers" to not answer your question? It sounds like you just want to hear what you already believe, without keeping your mind open to other possibilities.

The first time i hooked up an optical cable in place of a coaxial cable, i thought it sounded so much better. It tunrs out that i just has the bass management settings setup different for whatever was coming into the Optical-In. Once i equated all the settings on my receiver, they sounded just the same.

My $0.99 optical cable from ebay sounds the same as the $50 optical cable my friend bought at best buy (and later returned when he realized he wasted $49.01 + tax). The only thing that was different was the build quality. As the previous poster said, the optical cable does not do anything to the signal. That is up to the receiver to do.

[EdwardGein]

[QUOTE=bjornb17]i see a major problem here: why would you tell "non-believers" to not answer your question? It sounds like you just want to hear what you already believe, without keeping your mind open to other possibilities.

Another closeminded smart alec remark. All I was asking and saying, look again, is if someone who believed such as I do that different systems get better optic sound, then do certain optic cables get better sound then others? Is this so hard to fathom. Therefore a no answer would be perfectly acceptable from someone who thought different optical systems may get better sound. I don't see what is so difficult to understand. Chances are however, no one will be able to answer my question, because whoever the power hungry moderator is, they decided once again to interfere and put this on another board.

If you believe sound from any system is the same by optic cable which I obviously don't, why would I want to hear another lame answer from these people. This board is getting worse every day!

[markw]

i see a major problem here: why would you tell "non-believers" to not answer your question? It sounds like you just want to hear what you already believe, without keeping your mind open to other possibilities.Yep, that's our hershon all right.

[noddin0ff]

Is this so hard to fathom. Therefore a no answer would be perfectly acceptable from someone who thought different optical systems may get better sound. I don't see what is so difficult to understand.

Uh, ya. It is pretty hard to fathom. A person who thought different optical cables get better sound couldn't possibly give you a 'no' answer, however acceptable that might be to you. Maybe a better way to ask your question would be

"Is there anyone out there who has heard a difference when comparing optical cables? If so, could describe the differences you heard, what cables you were using, and what your set up was?"

You could add 'pretty please' and maybe get fewer flames.

[bjornb17]

Another closeminded smart alec remark.

Hershon, how could i be closed minded? In the other thread, i followed your advice to get better sound from my optical port on my HK DVD22 player. I was listening for differences that just werent there. When all the auditioning peramiters were the same (same listening location and receiver settings), the sound was exactly the same as it was on any other dvd player i've listened to on my setup.

[shokhead]

A good mid priced RS cable will work just fine. BTW,just answer his fricken question. I wouldnt buy a $10 or a $100 cable. I just got a 6' toshlink from RS for 29 bucks.

[EdwardGein]

This board is almost worthless now and my brother & I are almost tempted to leave it for good. It use to be helpful to get a straight answer or recommendation to a simple question. Instead all it consists of nowadays are bizarre questions to minuteae or stupid answers to valid questions. Let me spell this out again, as apparently your high IQ's fail to comprehend this. Let us assume for argument sake that if you connect a DVD player to a receiver by optic cable, the higher quality DVD players will produce better sound than the lower quality players. Therefore will different optic cables produce the same exact sound or not? If not, what specific cable brand model at what cost would you recommend?
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[bjornb17]

This board is almost worthless now and my brother & I are almost tempted to leave it for good. It use to be helpful to get a straight answer or recommendation to a simple question. Instead all it consists of nowadays are bizarre questions to minuteae or stupid answers to valid questions. Let me spell this out again, as apparently your high IQ's fail to comprehend this. Let us assume for argument sake that if you connect a DVD player to a receiver by optic cable, the higher quality DVD players will produce better sound than the lower quality players. Therefore will different optic cables produce the same exact sound or not? If not, what specific cable brand model at what cost would you recommend?
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

okay for about the billionth time on this board and about the 3rd time in this specific thread... No, it doesn't matter!

About the only thing that really changes is construction quality and appearance. If you want a cable that looks pretty and is more sturdy, then you will probably have to pay more, otherwise they are all about the same. my $0.99 optical cable from ebay works just as well as the more expensive stuff i've tried. The only thing that is different is that it's lightweight and unattractive. The sound is the same.

[kexodusc]

Hershon, the optical cable especially shouldn't add anything to the signal. For one optical cable to sound better than another you'd have to assume that something is either being removed from the signal or added.
You shouldn't want anything added, and the great part about optical cables is that they don't just choose which information to remove. It either works, or it doesn't.

Do you have any possible suggestions as to why an optical cable might give better sound? Higher quality doesn't necessarily mean better sound. More durability, better looks, better connection maybe...better sound quality? Possibly, I'd like to know why and how though.

[noddin0ff]

OK, seriously. Let's start with

Let us assume for argument sake that if you connect a DVD player to a receiver by optic cable, the higher quality DVD players will produce better sound than the lower quality players.

You would get better answers if you started with an assumption that made sense. A higher quality DVD player will potentially produce better sound than a low quality player BUT, only through the ANALOG outs. The DVD player does not process the signal for the optical out, so the quality of a functional DVD player doesn't make a difference with the optical/digital out.

But, reality aside, assume there is an imaginary difference. Then


Therefore will different optic cables produce the same exact sound or not?

Rephrased the question is "will different optical cables transmit the exact same signal equally well"

Optical cables in this case transmit a digital signal (they don't transmit sound). The whole point of a digital signal is that it is very very robust. The whole point of making digital connections in the first place is to eliminate cable quality from the equation. It is easy to tell if the signal is a '1' or a '0' even if the signal is weak or degraded. This means that the quality of the cable matters very very little. Cable quality matters far more for an analog signal than a digital one. There are certain kinds of signal errors that theoretically can occur in optical cables; I suppose some people claim they hear them. Modern DAC's are designed to compensate and correct these errors. A coaxial cable for a digital connection doesn't have these problems, is cheaper, and easier but that's my opinion. The answer to your question is 'yes'. But, I'm a non-believer, forgive me.

[EdwardGein]

I said if you think all systems will sound the same with digital optical sound don't bother responding to the question. What part of this do you not understand? I did not post to get into a debate over this issue but to hear thoughts from people who think that digital connections have different sound quality on whether the actual optical cable brand and model made a difference and if so what would they recommend. They very well can think that systems offer different digital sound but optical cable brands do not influence this. In which case I'll probably buy the cheapest optical cable in the future.
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[noddin0ff]

and we're off and running!

[EdwardGein]

That type answer was all I was looking for. I never said the optical cable brand & model number made a difference- I just don't know and wanted to hear from others who might know but still think different systems sound different on digital connections like my HK 31 DVD player and another brand. I just asked because I can get one for $6 on Ebay, bought one at a store for $20 because it was convenient, have seen $200 ones sold & i'm just trying to get the best sound quality I can for my system. Why doesn't anyone want to give a brother a break!

[EdwardGein]

There was an extensive article that stated that digital signals are more than 0's and 1's and digital signals have different sound quality that someone else (not me or Hershon) posted here but I'm not going to go into that because that wasn't the purpose here. If I have a question about depth perception I am not going to ask a blind man for his advice and so if I have a question on optical cables I am not going to ask someone who thinks digital sound is the same on all systems. Kabish!

[bjornb17]

That type answer was all I was looking for. I never said the optical cable brand & model number made a difference- I just don't know and wanted to hear from others who might know but still think different systems sound different on digital connections like my HK 31 DVD player and another brand. I just asked because I can get one for $6 on Ebay, bought one at a store for $20 because it was convenient, have seen $200 ones sold & i'm just trying to get the best sound quality I can for my system. Why doesn't anyone want to give a brother a break!

the point is that questions very similar to yours have been asked a hundred times in other threads, most of which were started or contributed to by you. It's a very simple concept. And i answered your question correctly, since i said it doesnt matter and that a cheap cable is fine for an optical connection.

Now, if you want to get into the technicalities of why i should or shouldn't have answered your question, or if it was answered properly, well then that's your problem. We're just stating the facts and you don't want to acknowledge them.

Oh, an by the way, English IS my second language. Maybe it's your fifth or sixth language because you can't seem to get these concepts into your head. ZZZIINNNGGG :D

[cam]

This board is almost worthless now and my brother & I are almost tempted to leave it for good. It use to be helpful to get a straight answer or recommendation to a simple question. Instead all it consists of nowadays are bizarre questions to minuteae or stupid answers to valid questions. Let me spell this out again, as apparently your high IQ's fail to comprehend this. Let us assume for argument sake that if you connect a DVD player to a receiver by optic cable, the higher quality DVD players will produce better sound than the lower quality players. Therefore will different optic cables produce the same exact sound or not? If not, what specific cable brand model at what cost would you recommend?
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
I have an idea for you there Edward, give your bro Hershon a call, ha ha ha ha hee hee hahahahaha, sorry about that, where was I, oh ya, give your bro Hershon a call and ask him about anything you might need to know about amps, receivers, speakers, cables, set up recommendations and the like. Your bro has extensively learned all there is to know about HT equipment and how it should sound. Now I know you and your bro are tight so I don't see why he wouldn't want to share his vast knowledge of all he has learned from the help of AR and all its members. Hell, Hershon has learned so much from this site, ha ha ha heeeheeehahahah, where was I, oh ya, Hershon has learned so much from this site, maybe he might get asked to become a moderator, and then Geoffcin won't have to edit all your posts.

[markw]

This board is almost worthless now and my brother & I are almost tempted to leave it for good. Don't let the door hit yas on the way out guy(s).

[royphil345]

In my experience a glass optical cable sounds better. I compaired a modestly-priced glass cable ($30.00) from eBay to a plastic Monster Cable that costed a little more. I heard a very noticeable difference between the two. Seemed some of the 1s and 0s were getting lost in the plastic cable. Less bass and detail.

I had it explained to me that the plastic cables are quite wide and jitter is caused by light going straight through the cable and light reflected off the walls of the cable arriving at slightly different times. I was told that a better DAC would correct the jitter. My equipment is pretty modest.

The glass cables are thinner to begin with and made up of many smaller strands, so there is much less jitter. I have seen a plastic cable that was made up of many small strands. My guess is that this cable would also perform well. It was expensive though.

[bjornb17]

In my experience a glass optical cable sounds better. I compaired a modestly-priced glass cable ($30.00) from eBay to a plastic Monster Cable that costed a little more. I heard a very noticeable difference between the two. Seemed some of the 1s and 0s were getting lost in the plastic cable. Less bass and detail.

I had it explained to me that the plastic cables are quite wide and jitter is caused by light going straight through the cable and light reflected off the walls of the cable arriving at slightly different times. I was told that a better DAC would correct the jitter. My equipment is pretty modest.

The glass cables are thinner to begin with and made up of many smaller strands, so there is much less jitter. I have seen a plastic cable that was made up of many small strands. My guess is that this cable would also perform well. It was expensive though.


i was going to suggest in the other thread that you and edwardgein might get along well but i refrained from doing so :)

[royphil345]

What's that supposed to mean?

Should I be offended?

If the guy wants to start a debate about whether there's a difference in sound quality using different digital optical cables, this would be the place to do that.

If you find this thread old and boring, ignore it.

What's so terribly exciting about "buy a NAD... buy an Adcom... buy a Rotel... buy a Project" a hundred times a week???!!!

All I said is that there really is a difference and price doesn't seem to have much to do with it. Glass really sounds much better to me after much experimentation, especially with a more modest DAC, and can be had for the same price or much less than many plastic cables. The only way I can describe the difference I heard is that when I hooked up the glass cable, the sound was distinctly fuller and smoother. Thought that piece of info might be helpful someday to the many people who think there is no difference between optical cables. I have a CD player with only an optical out (not my only one) and was very happy to find an inexpensive way to get better sound out of it.

I'm here to learn and try to be a little helpful whenever (rarely) possible. I've been around here a good while and have always been polite to everyone, no matter how strongly I happen to disagree with them. If you've got some sort of beef with the guy who started this thread, I wish you wouldn't take it out on me. If you disagree with me on the glass cables, I'd be happy to hear any kind of reason for that. I'd probably get out all my cables and listen again!!! I wouldn't want to recommend anything that was "snake oil". I try to be very careful about that. I wouldn't want anyone throwing away money on my account (or out of my account... lol). The comment you made just isn't much of an argument. To be honest, I really don't know what it's supposed to mean??? If I'm taking it the wrong way, I apologize.

You're sort of new here. When did you become so sure a different optical cable won't make a difference? Have you tried many of them?... or no reason to because you just know?

I've known for years that the cable room is a bad place. Don't know what I'm doing here anyway!!!

[mixadude]

LOL! :D Jitter from plastic as opposed to glass LOL! :D

If'n you say so I'll listen. I'm interested, but I'm one of 'em in a tough room. I'm new here too, but I'm anything but new in audio. I'll need definative proof.

I don't really mean to diss you with yer premise, (don't answer if you don't fink so) but I'm a very old hand at audio (like almost 80% of my entire life and I'm old), and I've seen lotsa snake oil.

I'll stay tuned :D



BTW, I worked on the fiber links for the Oscars last year on the red carpet, length was more like thousands of feet :eek:

[royphil345]

When you consider that a cheap plastic optical cable is about 1/8" wide, there are going to be bends in the cable, and the inner walls are reflective... How could you not have some jitter?

Wouldn't a cable that's thinner to begin with, and is made up of 250 separate fine strands that do not crosstalk be more accurate?

Best thing would be to listen THEN talk though... lol at another "EXPERT" who hasn't compared the two cables and therefore has NO EXPERIENCE with the subject being discussed.

[mixadude]

Jitter isn't loss, it's jitter. Kinda like rocket science isn't brain surgery.

look at yer hands. got all yer fingers?

look again, are they shaking?

now ya knows one more fing bout digital. :p

egad, i'm too old for this.

So I don't listen to the feeds that I get paid a King's ransom for???? yer nutz:eek:

[royphil345]

Who said anything about loss? Jitter is error in timing. One good cause would bends in a crappy, fat plastic toslink.

Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

The difference is not at all small. My plastic toslink sounds like crap. The glass much better. And for some reason, coax better still.

"So I don't listen to the feeds that I get paid a King's ransom for???? yer nutz"

How the heck would listening to anything through one type of cable help you discern how it might sound through another? yer nutz... and judging by your arguments, probably a little intoxicated.... I would hope anyway!!!

[mixadude]

Who said anything about loss? Jitter is error in timing. One good cause would bends in a crappy, fat plastic toslink.

Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

The difference is not at all small. My plastic toslink sounds like crap. The glass much better. And for some reason, coax better still. maybe you should treat you're kit wiv a little more respect. Also if you think you have a faulty piece, you should toss it. But... simple loss will still not present as jitter.

I'm done wiv you. PPL pay me very large sums of money to make stuff work and don't argue wiv me. FO in due respect or lack of it as the case may be :p

[royphil345]

That's your best argument? You totally miss the point and say FO??? LOL LOL LOL

...too bad they're probably going to erase all this......

[mixadude]

How the heck would listening to anything through one type of cable help you discern how it might sound through another? yer nutz... and judging by your arguments, probably a little intoxicated.... I would hope anyway!!! OK, I'm back. And maybe I'm nutz for doing so. I will say that when I do this stuff (we) i use glass since we go so far. But I've never heard an appreciable difference for short distances. Also to be fair, we use the good stuff.

But!!! I still don't buy that if you can achieve a link at all that any possible distortion might be from any FO cable. But like I said, OK I'll listen. But!!! so far all you got is flames. Nothing substantial. It's on you. :D

[royphil345]

Hello? What are you talking about? What's on me?

Just basically suggested anyone stuck with only an optical connection try a glass cable because it sounded better to me. They don't cost any more than some of the plastic cables at Wal-Mart. I don't sell them. I don't care the least bit who tries one and who doesn't. Nothing's on me!!!

I don't care how strongly anyone disagrees. I didn't say anything to deserve being flamed by you or that other guy. Especially since you both really had nothing at all to say on the matter besides flaming me.

[mixadude]

I'm sorry, sometimes this stuff makes me laugh. I recently (in the last 3 months) built a 900 point mixed analog and digital patch bay for a major TV show on one of the big 3 here in the states. My supervisor came by and pointed to a wire that was (not) questionably misplaced. He said well it looks like you're one jack off, at which point I chimed in and joined the chorus. LOL One jack off! I laughed so hard!!! :D

[mixadude]

What's on me?

Just suggested anyone stuck with only an optical connection try a glass cable because it sounded better to me. They don't cost any more than some of the plastic cables a Wal-Mart. I don't sell them. I don't care the least bit who tries one and who doesn't. Nothing's on me!!!

I don't care how strongly anyone disagrees. I didn't say anything to deserve being flamed by you or that other guy.Ok fine then, you're clean and I'm nutz :cool:

[mixadude]

next time ask me an easy one :D

[mixadude]

That's your best argument? You totally miss the point and say FO??? LOL LOL LOL

...too bad they're probably going to erase all this......

LOSFL :D you're in a topic that includes the abbreviation FO and don't even know it :D

[royphil345]

They're probably going to start erasing way before FO!!!... and context is everything sometimes.

[royphil345]

I didn't even say proof. Said I heard a difference in the cables and that's how it was explained to me. The people who sell 'em use the jitter argument also. Would hate to think there's any dishonesty in the Hi-Fi biz!!! Actually, it's probably true. Nowadays they'd probably be busted for making false claims about a product.

Also heard that reflections could be an issue.

It did make sense to me that reflections off the inside walls of a thicker cable would cause some blurring or jitter or something...

There must be a reason you use glass for longer runs. There has to be some difference. Audible? I say yes. So do alot of other people. I've even read reviews by people who prefer the plastic cables because they sound warmer.

[mixadude]

LOL! Sorry dude I thought you went asleep. Nah, this is funny. I would like to see proof of jitter though! ;)

[royphil345]

How did those last posts reverse positions? We broke Audio Review!!!

[mixadude]

I didn't even say proof. Said I heard a difference in the cables and that's how it was explained to me. The people who sell 'em use the jitter argument also. Would hate to think there's any dishonesty in the Hi-Fi biz!!!

Also heard that reflections could be an issue.

It did make sense to me that reflections off the inside walls of a thicker cable would cause some blurring or jitter or something...

There must be a reason you use glass for longer runs. There has to be some difference. Audible? I say yes. So do alot of other people. I've read reviews by people who prefer the plastic cables because they sound warmer.Well if you must know, I don't really know. But,,, I was Chief Engineer at a company that specialized in fiber. That's all done now, but several alliances still apply and I defy the likes of you to come between me and my guys. So Fiber Optics. Get it?

Never know who you'll meet here. Just be glad you did :D

[mixadude]

Oh, BTW, you don't know what you're talkin about. you're nutz!!! :D

[noddin0ff]

Well if you must know, I don't really know. But,,, I was Chief Engineer at a company that specialized in fiber. That's all done now, but several alliances still apply and I defy the likes of you to come between me and my guys. So Fiber Optics. Get it?

Never know who you'll meet here. Just be glad you did :D

dude-
You haven't put up a single FACT to counter anything royphil has stated. You've just been rude and inserted a lot of smilies. For someone who claims to be wise and experienced, I'd at least expect you to know what jitter is before you question its existence. You sound like you just got out of high school and had your first beer.

I don't happen to believe optical cables make much of a difference but the reason I believe that is because most DAC's can fully compensate for jitter. Different cables and couples from what I've read can introduce jitter in a signal for exactly some of the reasons royphil mentioned as well as refractive index differences between the materials of each component, which he didn't. If royphil can hear it on his system I'll skeptically take him at his word.

[royphil345]

Thanks noddinOff!!!

I've also been thinking that maybe there's really more than just jitter happening here. I'm having problems wording this correctly... but here goes...

Isn't jitter just simple timing error? Like some of the pulses of light to the DAC arriving a fraction of a second too early or late? Seems to me that with a thicker cable, you'd end up with the same signal arriving at slightly different times (with different parts of the light beam being reflected off of the cable walls more times and taking slightly different routes through the cable)? Sort of a "blurring" or "ghosting" effect as opposed to just plain jitter? Might this cause some correction errors in the DAC?

I'M NOT PRETENDING TO KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS AT ALL!!! Just a hypothesis, or question if someone knows the answer. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Just trying to figure out if there could be a scientific reason for the differences I heard by thinking about it, instead of simply spouting out things I think I know with no facts to back them up.

[mixadude]

Thanks noddinOff!!!

I've also been thinking that maybe there's really more than just jitter happening here, because you end up with the DAC receiving different beams of light at the same time (actually the same beam of light, parts of which are reflected in different directions) with different amounts of jitter? So the signal is more "blurred" than if all the light reaching the DAC had the same amount of jitter? Might this cause some correction errors in the DAC? I'M NOT PRETENDING TO KNOW ANYTHING HERE!!! Just a hypothesis, or a question if anyone knows. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. At least I'm actually thinking about it, instead of just spouting out what I think I know without any facts to back me up. Look into my eye. (http://www.home.agilent.com/cgi-bin/pub/agilent/editorial/cp_MiscEditorial.jsp?LANGUAGE_CODE=eng&ID=304586&COUNTRY_CODE=US&CT=1018&cmpid=92994) Usually I find that a can of air will fix most fiber problems. Sometimes thought it takes a tdr to locate the break or crimp. As for plastic or glass? OK if you say so.

Here's some more smilies :D :D

[royphil345]

Well... You can't STILL be drunk. Only thing you've proven to anyone is your complete lack of credibility, tact, and knowledge. Congrats!!!:)

I'd say that even if you are still drunk after all this time, the lack of credibility thing would still apply!!!;)

[mixadude]

Very nice. When yas get done lookin at the eye and actually try to learn something instead of spoutin and poutin, go look in the mirror.

Note: no smiley here.

[royphil345]

What was I supposed to learn from that? If you're so experienced, why can't you discuss a not so complicated concept in your own words? 'Cause you're just a rude, dumb kid is my bet.

...Big smiley in mirror... ROTFLMAO at you completely losing it and showing everyone here the truth about you!!!

[mixadude]

As far as I know, most errors in FO transmission occur at the ends, unless there is some damage somewhere along the medium, and those can be located with tdr. When i find one that's acting up I just get another. When we do long runs we install many extras just for this purpose, so we aren't trying to polish an end there in the field, in a big hurry.

I suppose glass might be more optically pure than plastic. I'm pretty sure i remember there are also wavelength capability differences, but if a system is designed properly then I doubt if it would matter. Most likely the ends are the biggest difference between a cable that sounds good and one that doesn't.

[royphil345]

So, what your saying is, you specialize more in operating and troublshooting FO systems. You haven't compared glass and plastic cables for sound quality in a Hi-Fi system, or really looked into the differences between them. Why all the flak then?

...And you again want to make it perfectly clear that you know what a TDR is (where does that fit into any of this?). Does your daddy work with FO systems?

ROFLMAO!!!:)

[mixadude]

Here's somethin else to look at (http://www.evertz.com/resources/Fiber_Optics_Tutorial.pdf)

I really can't buy that there is any appreciable difference between plastic and glass in a properly designed five foot piece of either. I do think that how well the ends are made and maintained matters more.

Have a nice day Mr. always polite to everyone ;)

[royphil345]

Are you really that lost? ...There's everyone and then there's you. You dished out PLENTY of disrespect and trash for no reason at all before I returned the favor. What did you expect? Don't expect much respect from me in the future either.

"Here's somethin else to look at"

Oh... very interesting again... not

More random information you got from the internet about the very basics of a FO system that has little to do with the discussion. You want to point out what part of that supports your argument?... Didn't think so. Your only argument so far in all these posts is "I just don't think..." WEAK But, actually would have been a very acceptable post and opinion without all the disrespect, garbage, random information, and arguments that had nothing to do with the issue.

[mixadude]

OK then. I'm sorry if I was disrespectful. I'm clearly outclassed here when comparing rudeness and audio abilities.

I also think everybody should buy cheap gear and really expensive cables, just as long as they're happy with their hifi experience.

Have a nice day.

[jneutron]

Holy crap...what a garbage thread.

TDR is Time Domain Reflectometry. It is used to find a discontinuity in a line. Send a pulse down the line, look for the reflection..a break or kink in the line will send signal back to the source.. measure how long it took, divide by two, and with the prop speed of the pulse known, calculate how many feet down the line the problem is. This is the exact same method used by the telephone company decades ago to locate breaks in the twisted pair that goes to your phone..

Two types of fiber optic lines I am familiar with...stepped index, and graded index. Both keep the signal towards the center of the line by different designs.. Both have dispersion characteristics..

A five, ten, 20 foot run of any fiber, glass or plastic, will not suffer from "multipath" ghosting, the path length or prop speed vs radial distance from the core is not sufficient to do anything like that.

Jitter is NOT introduced by the light bouncing inside the cable...different "path lengths" can affect the risetime of the pulse at the receiver..if the cable is too long, it may cause the pulses to be outside the receiver's capabilities. If it is too long, the fiber's frequency dependent dielectric coefficient could cause pulse spreading..that article mixa pointed to states jitter per length of cable, but that simple specification is incorrect...however, for the guys in the field, it is very very good for general understandings of how the fo cables and systems will work. Pulse spread equations are too esoteric to have the field guys use them...it's actually receiver specs jitter w/r to pulse spreading.. not fiber per se...

Mixadude is correct..the vast (and I mean vast) bulk of FO problems are due to the termination surfaces (cleaving and polishing), and integrity of the cable length, kinks breaks, etc.

If you swap 1 meter cables and hear a diff, you have problems with the setup and interfaces, not the fact of plastic or glass..

Cheers, John

[Resident Loser]

...why always facts?...jneutron, don't you know it always upsets the applecart?

We make up custom length fiber-optic cables in the field...like soldering(but not really)care in prepping the fiber, adhesive and connectors is a good start...then the ends are fixed in a jig and polished until they pass light from a calibrated source to a reciever unit...it ain't rocket science...pretty straightforward if you have the patience...sloppy mechanical skills usually produce poor results.

jimHJJ(...I know you know...)

[jneutron]

...why always facts?...jneutron, don't you know it always upsets the applecart?..
Just call me "Don"...where's that windmill?

...sloppy mechanical skills usually produce poor results.

In all aspects of life. (don't go there);)

One word.....plastics..

Cheers, John

[Resident Loser]

...English teacher Mr. DeAngelis would say "Droll sir, quite droll"...

jimHJJ(...long ago and far away...)

[Monstrous Mike]

Holy crap...what a garbage thread.
John, you should know by now that there are only three main ways to change somebodys mind about something: force, emotion or logic. Obviously force is not an issue here so we are dealing with emotion and logic (logic includes science, facts, laws, reason, the truth, etc.).

When somebody says they heard (or saw) something you are dealing with emotion and sometimes all the facts in the world are not going to convince them that they didn't actually hear or see what they did or that there is some other explanation for it.

As a matter of fact, I think this sort of thinking is an impediment to the advancement of society. I really stuck around here a while ago because I found audiophiles to be a prime example of someone who has determined a belief based on emotion. The only science they would accept is something that supported their belief while rejecting anything to the contrary (this is a classic case of confirmation bias).

Perhaps we should consider teaching children in school how to think critically and avoid being swayed in their beliefs by a bombardment of emotional arguements which can easily suppess factual and logical points of view.

Addendum:

I have been thinking about this some more and I believe global warming is an issue which has an emotion/logic/science conflict in its arguements. Granted, it was all started by scientists, specifically University of Massachusetts geoscientist Michael Mann and colleagues who came up with the poster child of global warming, the hockey stick graph. When politicos got hold of this, the emotion machine went into work and now we are faced with global flooding, super hurricanes, no icecaps, etc. unless we all stop driving, close coal plants and ride bikes. There are a growing number of scientists who now admit we really know less than we think we know and the "hockey stick" graph is due to mathematical artifacts. On top of that, nobody can correctly link increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to rising global temperatures. And actually, CO2 is not a pollutant but rather a necessary gas which is needed for plant life and vegetation.

However, in the minds of the average joes, the thoughts of ice caps melting and flooding New York will be indeed very hard to reverse. It's much easier to create a monster than to convince people that it was a possible fabrication.

Obviously, this issue is infinitely more important than audio cables but I think the principles of why and how people believe in what they believe in are the same. And in the end, emotion will win out over logic, reason and science most of the time.

This has got to change, IMHO. Scientists love to be wrong. That's progress. Emotional people hate to be wrong.

[EdwardGein]

Hershon stated that he got better sound on his HK 31 DVD player by using an optical cable. You complained that the optical cable on your HK 22 DVD player did not produce the same results and blame Hershon. What's wrong with this picture? You are comparing apples to oranges or 2 different models and blaming Hershon because you didn't get the same result on your model that he got on a different one.

[Beckman]

Don't know if there is an audible difference but:

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/fiber-optic1.htm

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=fiber-optic.htm&url=http://www.tpub.com/neets/tm/106-10.htm

[Ihatehershon]

This board is almost worthless now and my brother & I are almost tempted to leave it for good. It use to be helpful to get a straight answer or recommendation to a simple question. Instead all it consists of nowadays are bizarre questions to minuteae or stupid answers to valid questions. Let me spell this out again, as apparently your high IQ's fail to comprehend this. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:


Anytime you feel like going and not coming back......by all means,GO!!!!!!!!!
Why are we wasting our time with this loser, who pretends he knows about Home Theater. Every post of Hershons starts an Argument. You all know me under LEAFS264 and Hershon got me so mad, I gave him a what for, and was banned by Eric for it. Fine that was my falt. But it just dawned on me that if we stop responding to the RETARDED,FEEBLE,CHILD LIKE cries for attention that Hershon has, This board would be so much better for it!! He really is a Home Theater virgin. But to pass himself off to others as a Audiophile is just low and cowardly.
So, Hershon you and "your brother" (ya right) can rub salt for I'll i care. Just please stop wasting our time.

Jay

[EdwardGein]

Let's see you obviously have no life and need to resort to using my brother's screen name as part of yours and yet, you call Hershon and I losers. Personally I call that pathetic.

[Ihatehershon]

Let's see you obviously have no life and need to resort to using my brother's screen name as part of yours and yet, you call Hershon and I losers. Personally I call that pathetic.




Lets recap. When you first started posting under Edwardgein, everybody called you Hershon anyway because we knew who it was. But you retorted by saying and I quote
"I'm not Hershon and I have never heard of this person Hershon you speak of "
OOOOOOHHHHHHH so now he is your "Brother"
Stop with the lies.....
HERE ENDITH THE LESSION...GRASSHOPPER.

[FLZapped]

Cables don't produce sound...that should tell you something.
.

Oh sure they do, just take one and tie it to the end of a stick and whip it around....it'll make lots of sound.....

-Bruce

[hermanv]

Holy crap...what a garbage thread.

Jitter is NOT introduced by the light bouncing inside the cable...different "path lengths" can affect the risetime of the pulse at the receiver..Cheers, JohnLets see John, slow rise time equals uncertain slicer levels at the input buffer and add some everpresent noise and the inevitable result: edge to edge jitter. Or non-cumulative time sampling uncertainty if one wants to pontificate.

So even thought the plastic fiber doesn't make jitter, the different path lengths cause time smear or slow rise times if you preffer that term and (what was that?) results in (Oh god what have I done) jitter. Therefore, plastic fiber cables cause jitter (but you are right by god, they only do it when they're in use). Glass fiber has better rise time, less time smear.

Whether or not jitter affects the sound of a given system is highly dependant on the design of the data recovery stages. So the effect varies from one system to another, but to claim that plastic cables can not cause jitter is focusing the microscope so close that the end result (jitter) experienced by the user is lost. It would seem all of us contribiute some garbage to the world.

Coax is cheaper, doesn't have the mechanical interface problems, has better rise times, so it outperforms plastic fiber over short distances, what was the question?

[bjornb17]

Hershon stated that he got better sound on his HK 31 DVD player by using an optical cable. You complained that the optical cable on your HK 22 DVD player did not produce the same results and blame Hershon. What's wrong with this picture? You are comparing apples to oranges or 2 different models and blaming Hershon because you didn't get the same result on your model that he got on a different one.

You're closed minded, and not worth my time.

[jneutron]

Lets see John, slow rise time equals uncertain slicer levels at the input buffer and add some everpresent noise and the inevitable result: edge to edge jitter. Or non-cumulative time sampling uncertainty if one wants to pontificate.

So even thought the plastic fiber doesn't make jitter, the different path lengths cause time smear or slow rise times if you preffer that term and (what was that?) results in (Oh god what have I done) jitter. Therefore, plastic fiber cables cause jitter (but you are right by god, they only do it when they're in use). Glass fiber has better rise time, less time smear.

Whether or not jitter affects the sound of a given system is highly dependant on the design of the data recovery stages. So the effect varies from one system to another, but to claim that plastic cables can not cause jitter is focusing the microscope so close that the end result (jitter) experienced by the user is lost. It would seem all of us contribiute some garbage to the world.

Coax is cheaper, doesn't have the mechanical interface problems, has better rise times, so it outperforms plastic fiber over short distances, what was the question?
Good...one who understands..I make the assumption that since you are a communication engineer, you fall into that category...your verbage certainly shows that.

Simplistic explanations are necessary for those in the field.. You certainly see that the players here arguing do not have the level of understanding you possess..your explanations are above them. The distinction between the cable "creating" jitter, which it doesn't exactly do, and the receiver input's inability to distinguish the signal clearly as a result of pulse spreading and noise, is lost here..so I glossed over the topic..

The question posed here was that a one meter length of plastic is sufficient to introduce jitter at at a level which corrupts a simple audio rate bitstream. The response from at least two, me included, is that the end interfaces will be far more significant for a one meter run, than any possible dispersion effect.

Agreed?, or, have you more info to share?

Cheers, John

[hermanv]

My first outboard D to A showed a distinct improvement in sound quality between a coax connection and a plastic Toslink cable. I reasoned that it was possibly jitter.

About a month later I was offered a super deal on a Monarchy jitter reduction box, so I bought one. After adding the box, the difference between the Toslink and Coax cables dissapeared. The Toslink cable was 1 meter long, my system was mid priced Conrad Johnson (not allways known for superb impulse response or resolution) So even in a moderate system the effect of jitter was noticable. Longer cables and better systems would probably be more sensitive.

Now once the whole jitter issue was raised, many manufacturers took pains to fix it, so it may be less an issue than ever before. If anyone asks, I just recommend coax. I usually say buy a composite video cable, adding the words "digital cable" to the packaging appears to substantially increase the manufacturing cost.

One other point, I think Toslink is an LED driver not a laser and the receiver is a photo transistor not a PIN diode so the issues of fiber cleaving, matching, polishing, etc. seem to have far less impact than they do in the laser driven ultra high bandwidth communications cables. I have never tried glass fiber cables, but the majority of reviewers have said that they sound much better. Enough so, that I suspect the issues of fiber terminations are not the predominant cause of system degradation when using optical connections.

[jneutron]

My first outboard D to A showed a distinct improvement in sound quality between a coax connection and a plastic Toslink cable. I reasoned that it was possibly jitter.

About a month later I was offered a super deal on a Monarchy jitter reduction box, so I bought one. After adding the box, the difference between the Toslink and Coax cables dissapeared. The Toslink cable was 1 meter long, my system was mid priced Conrad Johnson (not allways known for superb impulse response or resolution) So even in a moderate system the effect of jitter was noticable. Longer cables and better systems would probably be more sensitive.

Now once the whole jitter issue was raised, many manufacturers took pains to fix it, so it may be less an issue than ever before. If anyone asks, I just recommend coax. I usually say buy a composite video cable, adding the words "digital cable" to the packaging appears to substantially increase the manufacturing cost.

One other point, I think Toslink is an LED driver not a laser and the receiver is a photo transistor not a PIN diode so the issues of fiber cleaving, matching, polishing, etc. seem to have far less impact than they do in the laser driven ultra high bandwidth communications cables. I have never tried glass fiber cables, but the majority of reviewers have said that they sound much better. Enough so, that I suspect the issues of fiber terminations are not the predominant cause of system degradation when using optical connections.
Thanks.

From your description, you did not compare glass vs plastic. As I recall, this was part of the initial thread topic...instead, you found that plastic was a problem..

Since you substituted a "presumably" better receiver, then found plastic worked as well as coax, you accepted the statement that it was jitter, and that the box was designed to reduce it..but, you didn't consider that the box may just have a better front end..maybe they used a PIN? Who knows.

From your short text here (after all, this isn't the "AUDIO LAB":) ), you didn't eliminate reflections from the receiver terminus, pulse spreading, losses..but just subbed a receiver.. It would be nice to know what the actual solution was, but I'm sure most don't have the equipment at home to make that determination.

Cheers, John

[hermanv]

It is quite hard to speak in absolutes, but a couple of reasonable assumtions follow:

The Monarchy jitter box retails for about $200. Probably the build cost is $100 "out the door". This usually equates to a parts cost of $50 or less. So almost certainly they used a comercially available Toslink female reciever jack with built-in optical detector - maybe 18 cents, not a $10 and up exotic diode and amplifier. If you are going to regenerate a digital signal using phase lock loops and an expensive low jitter, voltage controlled oscillator you would most likely not pay to fix the problem twice by also using expensive receivers on all three inputs. But you are right, I can not guarantee this.

The reviews I mentioned compared glass to plastic on a large number of different manufacturer's receivers with the glass fiber never underperforming the plastic (although some heard no difference, none ever said plastic was better) So here a number of optic to electrical junctions were tested and if it was the junction, it was likely that at some point one would have noticed plastic was occasionally superior to glass. Again there is no absolute guarantee that every possible combination was tested and probably none were instrumented.

Jitter ends up as the most probable common denominator.

Sometimes anyone of us can be wrong, but most birds that waddle and quack are in fact ducks.

[jneutron]

It is quite hard to speak in absolutes, but a couple of reasonable assumtions follow:

The Monarchy jitter box retails for about $200. Probably the build cost is $100 "out the door". This usually equates to a parts cost of $50 or less. So almost certainly they used a comercially available Toslink female reciever jack with built-in optical detector - maybe 18 cents, not a $10 and up exotic diode and amplifier. If you are going to regenerate a digital signal using phase lock loops and an expensive low jitter, voltage controlled oscillator you would most likely not pay to fix the problem twice by also using expensive receivers on all three inputs. But you are right, I can not guarantee this.

The reviews I mentioned compared glass to plastic on a large number of different manufacturer's receivers with the glass fiber never underperforming the plastic (although some heard no difference, none ever said plastic was better) So here a number of optic to electrical junctions were tested and if it was the junction, it was likely that at some point one would have noticed plastic was occasionally superior to glass. Again there is no absolute guarantee that every possible combination was tested and probably none were instrumented.

Jitter ends up as the most probable common denominator.

Sometimes anyone of us can be wrong, but most birds that waddle and quack are in fact ducks.All of us are wrong at one time or another...that is indeed, my work environment...50-50 shot, I have, of being correct..:eek:

I would have considered other factors such as signal strength, bw, terminus reflections, and such, before just arbitrarily accepting jitter as the most likely culprit..as you say, probably none were instrumented, so the assumption that jitter was "most likely"... could be right, or could be wrong..

The use of "ice cream science" is not very scientific by it's nature, as causality is not demonstrated by correlation..

Oh, btw..ice cream science: Sharks attack at the beach...ice cream is sold at the beach...if you get rid of the ice cream, the sharks will stop attacking..

Correlation, not causation.

So, the statement that jitter is the cause is a guess..not supported by actual testing, to the best of your knowledge...but a guess nonetheless...

Perhaps a good guess, perhaps not..neither of us can shed light on the true reason, without a more rigorous measurement scenario.

Cheers, John

[mixadude]

This is a very old thread, but I've actually been employed as a fiber tech on most of the Monday Night Football this year, as well as other major events since this rageous thread came to be. I guess they couldn't find anyone that knows what they're doing or had more than my 30 years of experience in audio and video.

I can't really find much difference in using 1500 feet of (single mode) fiber or 50 feet regarding jitter as long as the fiber is good. I definately see light loss, but the electronics seem to adequately take care of the jitter if the fiber (including termination) is in reasonably good shape.

When it goes bad what we get in the audio are crackles and clicks and pops almost like a sample rate mismatch, or a total link loss. When it's marginal there is plenty of jitter and you can see it on the eye scope even with a 100 Hz or sometimes even a 1000 Hz high pass, but by then it's almost a total loss. A clean signal will ofter show some jitter, but there is a threshold where it becomes audible, and when it does it's very noticeable.

Now these Evertz racks and cards we use are very pricey, pushing $250,000 for each system. Each system runs about 60 channels of audio; some analog, some digital, HD video, SD video and serial data. Many of the glasses have several systems MUXed on each one. I've been managing 3 of those systems in different locations. I can't really say how this stuff equates to the prosumer stuff, but that's my current experience on fiber.

Given all of that, I wouldn't consider running fiber a good alternative to copper for short distances, it's just too physically problematic. Cat 5 is much easier and even more reliable.

But to answer the original question, as long as the fiber is rated for the appropriate wavelength and type involved, and the terminations are good, i think the pricing is a sucker's game.

[royphil345]

I absolutely agree on not paying ridiculous sums of money for an optical cable.

Which terminations would be more likely to remain perfectly shaped and perfectly clear for the life of the cable? Plastic or a modestly-priced glass cable? Would seem like a good selling point for those that don't have your test equipment or knowledge to repair a cable. Maybe why glass cables often sound better in a home environment... dude...

[mixadude]

Yeah, I can see spending a little extra for a better termination housing. As far as plastic or glass, I can't really say, all we use is glass for our stuff, but for a short s/pdif ehh... whatever works. My take on it is that if there is detrimental jitter you will definately and obviously hear it, no problem, no guessing necessary. If it's within compensatable limits of the system, you will not. There is always jitter! It's just a matter of how much can be tolerated by the system before it becomes untenable, but when there are errors beyond the limits, it's obvious. It also happens at different frequencies. Low frequency jitter is generally more easily handled by the system but there is usually more of it.

I don't know how everybody might use this stuff in their home systems, but my hifi sits in one place. I might turn it around and make a change a few times a year, so there is almost no wear and no opportunity for dust or other goo to get in the connections.

On the stuff I use in broadcast, we might change it around and relocate it several times a week, often across country. It's all portable including the glass. I spend more time cleaning fiber ends than anything else at work. I don't actually move the cables or equipment, the "utilities" do it. I just make it work. Every time I plug in, I clean and inspect the ends. I don't re-butt ends in the field, I have spares. Out of a TAC-12 line we design our systems to use 9 online max. When there's a dead one I just re-patch and replace the whole TAC-12 before the next show. I send the faulty stuff back to the shop, where they can put it on the TDR and cleave and butt it in a controlled environment, and determine the billing.

My biggest headaches are interfacing to house fiber lines where it's impractical to run our own. I clean them and run a laser meter on them at various wavelengths and use what works, but there's always loss through the connections. It's just balancing acceptable limits on various lines sometimes.

I have had a few problems with cards going bad. That's more interesting actually. One of them actually blew a chip right off the circuit board! In a mobile situation like this it could have been caused from just about anything, probably a bad patch on a data line on that one.

[PaDave]

Fiber Optic cables do not need any RF shielding because it is immune to any RF frequency interference, sheilding is only so the Glass or Plastic cable does not break if bent, and no their is no difference in sound quality unless you are running low grade equip. between the three,

[mixadude]

Yeah, and it's also immune to ground loops as a transmission medium.

But at some point the signal gets down from light to electronics and even in the digital world the electronics are susceptable to both RFI and ground loops, it's just harder to detect than in analog.

[AudioBack]

There are three kinds of poeple who post on this subject. The first understands the fundimentals of audio electronics and says "ITS DIGITAL!!!! CABLES MAKE NO DIFFERENCE!!!!" The second says "I tried both and coax sounds warmer and optical sounds too bright." The third says " I tried both and heard absolutely no difference." Who is right? Sorry, the tech heads win on this subject. It IS digtial. On or off. There is no 20 to 20kHz running through a digital cable. It is a code. Digital is a square wave that cannot be mistaken for only half on. The reason why cheap cables do effect analog sound is because different frequencies travel at different speeds and different places inside the wire. Analog is way more vunerable to interference being noticable due to the fact that that the analog signal is the last stage before amplification. It would take an awful lot of noise to make the D/A converter to think on when it should be off. For the people who do hear this monumental difference between coax and digital, here's an idea. Use the same CD or DVD player and connect both outputs to your reciever and switch off. Don't Compare your PS2 to your XBOX360 to Denon DVD player. Yes I have tried them both, and not even with an official "COAX" cable. I used a good quality monster rca against a good quality monster optical. Absolutelty no difference. At first I wanted the optical to be better and almost biased my ears to make it sound better. But the truth is if you are out of optical connections on your reciever, use coax. If you're out of coax connections use optical. All game systems have optical outputs and no coax. Hook your game systems up optical and your cable/sat and DVD player up coax. It doesn't matter. About the expense of the cables you should buy. I paid 40 bucks a set for all my analog connections for 3 ft cables. Why not more expensive? I don't believe my current setup is capable of producing sounds that would need a 300 dollar cable. Why not cheaper? I have no hums, no channels cutting out on me due to shorts in the wires, and noticably better sound quality than that of a 3 dollar cable. Digital connections are one 50 dollar monster optical purchased at 25 with a Best Buy discount. The others are Acoustic research for 15 to 20 a piece. All cables have good build quality and have been moved around several times without damage. I have yet to "Break" an optical cable. I read that some guy bought a 150 dollar optical and it broke. I don't normaly make it a habit to walk my dog with my cables. Anyway, if you listen to anything that I say, just hear this. Stay away from the "GOLD PLATTED" optical cables.

[blackraven]

Very good post AudioBack. I just got into an argument with a friend on this exact same subject. There should be no difference in sound between Optical and Coax digital as its a digital signal of 1's and 0's. Either signal is getting through or it isnt. I think people that hear a difference are just fooling themselves. There was a test done by a cable manufacturer who assembled a group of audio experts and asked them as a group to rate the changes in sound quality of different high end cables. This was a blind study and the same cheap cable was used each time without ever changing to high end cables. The end result was that each time the experts were told that a cable had been changed, they heard a difference in sound quality! Nice example of the placebo effect!

[hermanv]

Hello AudioBack;

I think maybe you only have part of the information about how this works and why Toslink originally had difficulties..

SPDIF has an embedded clock, that means that some of the data was signal and some was used to recover the data clock from the same bit stream. Early digital devices had difficulty recovering a jitter free clock signal fom the plastic fishing line (only a slight exageration) called Toslink. You see those marevolous transisions from one to zero or back ended up at the far end of a Toslink connection with a significant slope, this leads to indecision in the clock recovery circuit called jitter. Most modern outboard DACs have fixed this (basically an electronic flywheel).

In those early devices both the glass fiber and coax offered audibly superior perfomance; really people do not make this stuff up. Its not so much as half on as on or off, as it was too soon or too late. A digital stream must include not only the voltage level for a given sample, but also the information as to when to shift to this new sample from the old sample. This information needs to be presented pretty much as accurately as the voltage level in order to fix the instantaneous voltage on the input to the signal recovery filter.

If you buy a used early DAC this is still largely true, most modern DACs just don't care. Coax is both cheap and readily available it is largely immune to noise and offers a very good generic solution.

[Dusty Chalk]

It's not that black and white. I get an audibly inferior signal every time my transport -- which is also an SACD player -- switches from off to on (generating a PCM signal). If that's the case, then it's not as simple as "it works or it doesn't". There's also jitter, and reflections, which may cause the receiving DAC to experience jitter that wasn't there at the output of the transport.

[StevenSurprenant]

I went from a plastic cable to a glass cable and clarity improved. Was it a worthy improvement? Most definately! I will keep the glass cable in the circuit unless something better comes around.

By the way, I've been gone from this forum for a very long time because several people had decided that it was their right to ruin our audio hobby with their anti-cable garbage.

Personally, I do not welcome their opinions. nor do I listen. I would classify them as the terrorists of audio. They refuse to let us enjoy our interests, and will do everything to sour the experiance. They are closed minded and more importantly, they only care about their own opinion. DAM Terrorists!

I would reccomend to everyone here that they post thier questions about cables and don't respond to these self centered idiots.

[markw]

By the way, I've been gone from this forum for a very long time because several people had decided that it was their right to ruin our audio hobby with their anti-cable garbage.

Personally, I do not welcome their opinions. nor do I listen. I would classify them as the terrorists of audio. They refuse to let us enjoy our interests, and will do everything to sour the experiance. They are closed minded and more importantly, they only care about their own opinion. DAM Terrorists!

I would reccomend to everyone here that they post thier questions about cables and don't respond to these self centered idiots.No wonder nobody missed you.

But, if we ever want a one-sided lecture with no opposing views allowed, we know where to find you.

...and I call myself an elitest jerk? I bow to you. I'm not worthy.

[StevenSurprenant]

Since I've been gone so long I will respond this once.

This is exactly what I was talking about.

Your opinion is that if I don't agree with you, you will troll me...

What makes you think that when people ask about cable qualities or recomendations they are asking for an opposing view?

Why do you think that because I don't buy into your wire doesn't make a difference concept that I am closed minded? I used to believe as you did until proven wrong. It doesn't make sense that wires do sound different, but they do. I was opened minded enough to consider the other opinion, you are stuck in yours and if someone doesn't agree with you, they are wrong.

I know that this is falling on deft ears, but you've been told.

You've been trolling this forum for years now and it's still the same old story. Yes, I remember you.

[GMichael]

Since I've been gone so long I will respond this once.

This is exactly what I was talking about.

Your opinion is that if I don't agree with you, you will troll me...

What makes you think that when people ask about cable qualities or recomendations they are asking for an opposing view?

Why do you think that because I don't buy into your wire doesn't make a difference concept that I am closed minded? I used to believe as you did until proven wrong. It doesn't make sense that wires do sound different, but they do. I was opened minded enough to consider the other opinion, you are stuck in yours and if someone doesn't agree with you, they are wrong.

I know that this is falling on deft ears, but you've been told.

You've been trolling this forum for years now and it's still the same old story. Yes, I remember you.

Welcome back.

But why so rude right out of the box? Calling people Terrorists if they don't agree with you? What's up with that?

[markw]

And you have made your point . It's just not the point you wante4d to make.


Your opinion is that if I don't agree with you, you will troll me...So disagreeing with you is trolling? Grow up. I call it just pointing out an arrogant fool who, surptisingly enough, sees himself as the second coming. What size hat do you need to fit that ego in?

And, there's always this gem from your previous post,


Personally, I do not welcome their opinions. nor do I listen.Yeah, right. You've made it abundantly clear that only your opinion counts. Well, maybe to you and a few weak willed and less learned fools who buy your BS without question, but you ain't the world.

Yeah, you made your point, all right. You're just another a pompous sphincter who thinks they know everything and the whole world is wrong, except those who agree with you.

Welcome to the big city, kid.

But, I do thank you for complimenting my hearing abilities. (you might want to check out the definition of "deft")

[markw]

But why so rude right out of the box? Calling people Terrorists if they don't agree with you? What's up with that?Note his total number of posts. He didn't like what he saw here and went away crying because people had the sheer audacity to disagree with him.

He's your typical audionazi who doesn't want to hear (or even allow) anything that he doesn't agree with.

[StevenSurprenant]

Welcome back.

But why so rude right out of the box? Calling people Terrorists if they don't agree with you? What's up with that?

I love the audio hobby very much and still do. Many years ago I frequented this site often. This site was a blessing for those trying to learn about audio. We could talk about the things we liked and ways to tweak the system to make it sound better, it was great. However, every time when I went to the cable section of the forum and asked for recommendations, I would get barraged with these people telling me that wire was wire. I didn't ask for them for their opinion, nor was it welcomed. I wanted to hear from people that had cables they liked.

After a couple of years of these hecklers responding to every post with their naysayers attitude, I left the forum. I didn't want to put up with their harrassment any longer. Frankly, I don't understant their need to try and force their belief on others. I felt bad for the first time poster who got blasted when they would ask for a cable recommendation. It just went on and on...

Today I came back to the forum hoping that things had changed for the better, but no! You may feel that I was wrong blasting these, as I called them, terrorists, but many of us had left the forum because of them. They serve no useful purpose and do nothing to but cause negativity.

I have nothing against them for expressing their opinion, it's just that they never stop.

Anyway, When I started reading the forum today, it brought back memories of all the grief that these people caused.

My apologies...

Steve

[noddin0ff]

grief?

[markw]

grief?Well, If I hear people arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, I don't feel bad in asking them to show them to me before I acknowledge they even exist. I guess not being able to do so can cause grief.


Frankly, I don't understant their need to try and force their belief on others.But, It's obvious feels perfectly justified in forcing his beliefs on others. I guess that's different.


I have nothing against them for expressing their opinion, it's just that they never stop.Well, considering this thread has been fairly dormant for quite some time, I'd say this is a textbook example of the pot calling the kettle black.


IToday I came back to the forum hoping that things had changed for the betterUp to today, it had.


You may feel that I was wrong blasting these, as I called them, terrorists, but many of us had left the forum because of them.As I said earlier, it HAS changed for the bettter.


They serve no useful purpose and do nothing to but cause negativity.Gee, I haven't seen any negativity here until you popped your head up out of the primordial slime. Isn't that what's callled a "self-fufilling phrophecy"?


Anyway, When I started reading the forum today, it brought back memories of all the grief that these people causedLike my momma always said, "If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen". If this forum causes him that much stress, he should seek psychiatric help immediately, and I mean that seriously. Personally, I don't care if he strokes out, but his belligerant posts here indicate that he's the the type that might wind up in a bell tower with a 30-06 picking off people as they walk by.

[GMichael]

As the light changed from red to green to yellow and back to red again, I sat there thinking about life. Was it nothing more than a bunch of honking and yelling? Sometimes it seemed that way.

Was that you this morning? Wake up will ya?! I've got places to go, things to see, people to do.

StevenSurprenant,
You didn't bother me at all. Was just curious as to why you were so darn mad. Did markw park in front of you too?

[hermanv]

Hi StevenSurprenant:

I agree that glass fiber will be superior to plastic fiber and that the difference will affect sound quality in some, but not all systems. The difference has to do with how the signals are processed in the receiver (D to A) portion, a good design will recover enough timing information that cable differences all but disappear. Early D to A designs seemed to forget that not only was it important to decide which of 65,536 instantaneous voltages to assign to the D to A output, but that it was equally as important to decide exactly when to assign the newest sample value.

To return to your point, I also believe that coax is an even better solution. Why? It’s not so much that the bandwidth of coax is better than glass, it’s not. It’s the shortcommings of the consumer SPDIF system. Commercial glass fiber data systems use laser diodes for the controlled light source and pin diodes for the signal detectors. Both of these devices reach well into the Gigahertz frequencies (read very fast edges). On the other hand home electronics SPIF ports use an LED and a photo transistor; these are probably a thousand times slower than their commercial light driver/receiver counterparts. By being so much slower they give up many of the advantages of fiber.

Coax drivers and receivers are easier to build and will typically have exceptionally good bandwidth. Coax is dirt cheap and a good performer, the home cable networks send TV signals for 40 or more channels over miles of the stuff with very little signal degradation.

If your equipment has the standard RCA jacks for coaxial data, give it a try, it’s inexpensive. Given that you are already using glass, it’s likely that any differences would be small.

[StevenSurprenant]

Hi StevenSurprenant:

I agree that glass fiber will be superior to plastic fiber and that the difference will affect sound quality in some, but not all systems. The difference has to do with how the signals are processed in the receiver (D to A) portion, a good design will recover enough timing information that cable differences all but disappear. Early D to A designs seemed to forget that not only was it important to decide which of 65,536 instantaneous voltages to assign to the D to A output, but that it was equally as important to decide exactly when to assign the newest sample value.

To return to your point, I also believe that coax is an even better solution. Why? It’s not so much that the bandwidth of coax is better than glass, it’s not. It’s the shortcommings of the consumer SPDIF system. Commercial glass fiber data systems use laser diodes for the controlled light source and pin diodes for the signal detectors. Both of these devices reach well into the Gigahertz frequencies (read very fast edges). On the other hand home electronics SPIF ports use an LED and a photo transistor; these are probably a thousand times slower than their commercial light driver/receiver counterparts. By being so much slower they give up many of the advantages of fiber.

Coax drivers and receivers are easier to build and will typically have exceptionally good bandwidth. Coax is dirt cheap and a good performer, the home cable networks send TV signals for 40 or more channels over miles of the stuff with very little signal degradation.

If your equipment has the standard RCA jacks for coaxial data, give it a try, it’s inexpensive. Given that you are already using glass, it’s likely that any differences would be small.


Thanks hermanv,

Actually, I had tried both optical and Coax and settled on optical. Never the less, I wasn't aware of the information that you presented above. Something to keep in mind!

Thanks

Steve