digital coax or optical cables?

[GMichael]

My system will let me use digital coax or digital optical cables for audio to and from: Yamaha RX-V2500. Is one any better than the other? My first thought would be to use the optical because it can not be affected by electro-magnetic fields around it. But the manual says that if I were to connect both, the receiver will default to the coax and ignore the optical. To me, this suggests that the coax are better. Has anyone ever tested these and found one to be better than the other?

[noddin0ff]

Either should be fine. I think coax is cheaper and easier. Some say that cheap optical cables are inferior (cheap plastic optical cable is not as robust for transmitting light). But a digital signal is a digital signal. It shouldn't matter how you connect, especially over typically short distances.

[hermanv]

The inexpensive optical cables are plastic fiber as opposed to the expensive glass fiber cables. Plastic cables have far more time smear (results in jitter) than glass. Coax has very little time smear.

If your digital to analog converter includes jitter correction it will make little or no difference but if it doesn't, the coax offers a quality advantage. This advantage is fairly small but nevertheless real.

So (IMHO) for inexpensive cables you get the best quality per dollar for coax. If you buy video cables like those used for composite video (the ones with the yellow RCA jacks) they seem to be cheaper than the ones marked "digital" both are coax . Unlike others, I've heard no improvement with increased prices for coax, but my D to A has an excellent jitter recovery scheme.

Most people (including me) that use these forums are concerned with small or even miniscule improvements, why not get the small improvement coax offers?

[GMichael]

Thanks guys. I'll look into getting a coax cable. Too bad I already let the guy at Tweeters talk me into the optical cable. Monster cable ta boot. (yuck) Forgive me for I knew not what I was doing.

[noddin0ff]

It's my understanding from what I've read that jitter correction might have been a problem years ago. But now all DAC's are better and cheaper and all have sufficient jitter correction. It is true that cheap plastic optical doesn't transmit light as well and is more prone to light loss at the ends, but in a typical home set up, I don't think this makes any difference. Every now and then someone claims to get good digital connections with wire coathangers. That may be urban legend, but I tend to believe it could be true.

[kexodusc]

The coat-hanger expirement is worth reading up on...

Most material I've seen on the issue of jitter suggests it isn't a problem for cable lengths less than hundreds of feet as we're talking about infinitely small numbers for jitter. Also, that most DAC's have correction for this now, and that the information is processed slower than the time it takes to travel anyway, making the reality of jitter all but zero.

I won't pretend to know what any of this fangled stuff means, though.

Who knows? I've never heard an optical cable that sounded "not right"...they either work or they don't.

Wanna play it safe, get the coaxial cable.

[JBMAudio.com]

My system will let me use digital coax or digital optical cables for audio to and from: Yamaha RX-V2500. Is one any better than the other? My first thought would be to use the optical because it can not be affected by electro-magnetic fields around it. But the manual says that if I were to connect both, the receiver will default to the coax and ignore the optical. To me, this suggests that the coax are better. Has anyone ever tested these and found one to be better than the other?

Simple rule of thumb here. For runs under 100 feet, go for Coax, it is cheaper, more durable, and just plain easier.

[noddin0ff]

Simple rule of thumb here. For runs under 100 feet, go for Coax, it is cheaper, more durable, and just plain easier.

Are you saying for runs OVER 100 feet go for optical? Or just being humorous in suggesting to always go Coax. Because a long run of optical would be very expensive and likely impractical...

[GMichael]

Over 100 feet? Would this be for a remote location? DVD player in one room that is zone 2 for the receiver? Or do some people just have larger rooms than I'm used to seeing? LOL.

[JBMAudio.com]

Are you saying for runs OVER 100 feet go for optical? Or just being humorous in suggesting to always go Coax. Because a long run of optical would be very expensive and likely impractical...

Because of the distance, optical would be a better choice for runs over 100 feet, but since hardly anyone ever has these long of runs, coax is the way to go

[Monstrous Mike]

Are you saying for runs OVER 100 feet go for optical? Or just being humorous in suggesting to always go Coax. Because a long run of optical would be very expensive and likely impractical...

The Toslink optical interface found in home audio is only designed for maximum runs of 25 to 30 feet. It is not a normal optical connection but was designed by Toshiba to allow for the use of inexpensive (plastic) cables with inexpensive connectors. (The challenge in real glass fiber optical cables is the glass to connector manufacturing.) Real optical cabing and interfaces would be too expensive for home audio users.