Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all.
Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage") |
|
Post Reply 
|
Page 123> |
| Author | ||
Dean 
Special Collaborator 
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
 Topic: Digital coaxial vs opticalPosted: June 22 2011 at 13:19 |
|
|
he said "sonically speaking" - but I'm not harping, if there is no explanation/clarification forthcoming then I'm not that bothered.
|
||
|
What?
|
||
 |
||
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 13:01 |
|
|
^ Sure, but this time there's also a category mistake involved. It's not entirely fair to harp on it endlessly though, since I'm sure that Oliver didn't deliberately put it that way.
|
||
|
||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 12:02 |
|
It's déjà vécu.
|
||
|
What?
|
||
|
||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 11:29 |
|
|
I guess it's digital coaxial vs digital optical...
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 11:28 |
|
|
digital vs. optical ... that's like analog vs. tape. But it's really fractally wrong ... on many planes, no matter how you look at the expression.
|
||
|
||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 11:23 |
|
|
Because it is a matter-of-fact Dean, come on....
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 11:11 |
|
 This I have got to hear.... go on, tell us why.
|
||
|
What?
|
||
|
||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 11:10 |
|
|
I have had my cd player connected to two devices, a Denon mini-hifi and a Marantz AvReceiver, to the former through RCA, to the latter with toslink/optical. Of course both are different amps so the comparison is unfair, but now it sounds better, with toslink.
All I read everywhere points to equal performance from optical and digital coaxial, with advantages to coaxial in runs with bends (light won't bend) and advantages to optical in other areas. |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: March 26 2004 Location: France Status: Offline Points: 6308 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 11:06 |
|
|
BTW, sonically speaking, digital cable is better than optical cable.
|
||
|
||
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 11:05 |
|
|
^ Sure - I'm just plugging Audiogalaxy, and some people might be interested to know that it's an interesting alternative to cloud-based services.
|
||
|
||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 11:04 |
|
|
Say no to Clouds, say yes to.... open skies?
Hard drive > clouds physical format > hard drive  |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 07:54 |
|
|
^ then it isn't the cloud and I don't have a problem with it.
|
||
|
What?
|
||
|
||
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: June 22 2011 at 07:12 |
|
|
With Audiogalaxy, Subsoniq etc. the music stays on your own computer ... you use your personal, private cloud so to speak.
|
||
|
||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: June 18 2011 at 08:34 |
|
|
^ the main reason is battery drain - I'm too absent minded to keep the 'phone charged so the less I use it for non-phone apps the longer I can go without recharging. If the archos battery goes flat it's no big deal.
I'm about as unexcited about the rebranding of the internet as the cloud (or the iNternet as the iCloud) as it is possible to get - as I've said before, this is the beginning of the end of owning the music you buy and that's a very bad thing.
|
||
|
What?
|
||
|
||
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: June 18 2011 at 07:45 |
|
|
I guess it's hit or miss - some people experience frequent drop-outs with bluetooth devices, for others it works just fine. As far as streaming around the house is concerned, I'd rather use WLAN, but afaik there aren't any definitive standards yet (except for proprietary stuff like Apple's AirPlay). Well, since my "house" is only one room, I could use bluetooth for that anyway.
 As for Archos vs iPhone/Android for listening: I really like the "one device less to carry around" argument, plus the "access to my entire collection via Audiogalaxy" that I made in the other thread. There's also the Napster app - it works quite well. And sooner or later we'll have Apple's iCloud/iMatch and competing, similar services from Amazon and whatnot.
|
||
|
||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: June 18 2011 at 04:19 |
|
I bought a Chumby One the other day (more for a laugh for than any other reason) - it's one of those "It's useless and I don't need it, but I want one" type gadgets (same description could apply to an iPad really)... basically a wifi connected desk clock running linux, it streams web content as well as FM and web radio, and streamed Ipod and Squeezebox from my PC. (Currently listening to Morow Prog Rock Radio through it [np: Steve Hackett ~ Emerald And Ash]) Edited by Dean - June 18 2011 at 04:24 |
||
|
What?
|
||
|
||
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: June 18 2011 at 03:52 |
|
|
^ That's also why I refrained from posting some real advice: It doesn't matter too much - the differences are marginal (read: non-detectable) either way. I guess it comes down to which cable is cheaper and/or more practical to use.
Personally, I can say once again in this thread that I'd even recommend (modern) bluetooth cable free headphones. Yes, lossy compression is used, no, it doesn't negatively affect the listening experience.
|
||
|
||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: June 18 2011 at 02:16 |
|
My initial answer still stands: "Whether you use the DAC on your CD player and make an analogue connection to the receiver or make a digital connection to the DAC on your Receiver is purely a matter of personal preference to what they sound like."
Since your CD player and your AV receiver are both Marantz then it's a fair bet that the DACs are either identical or very similar so that is unlikely to produce any real difference, which one you uses is purely down to which route you prefer when you listen (if you can honestly tell a difference). If you do it right then it should not matter which you use, however logically a single toslink cable is going to be neater and more reliable than two pairs of RCA interconnects, and it's cheaper too - a $2 toslink is always going to be cheaper than $20 RCA cables.
Did you know that the light shining down a fiber-optic cables is subject to Rayleigh Scattering? Small planetoid isn't it. |
||
|
What?
|
||
|
||
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: June 17 2011 at 23:24 |
|
You obviously don't need a dedicated headphone amp when you have a device that has a headphone jack which is suitable for higher-impedance headphones. Hopefully you'll really be absent from these threads for a while - it reduces the likelihood that naive users will be fooled into spending their hard earned money on useless gadgets.
|
||
|
||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: June 17 2011 at 19:16 |
|
|
Thanks Dean, your answers are always fascinating. One final question: since price is not an issue (at work I can get a toslink cable for 2 dollars, a d a good one at that), what is the better connection? Going with the line out in the headphone amp via analog or still using toslink for the cd>amp and analog only for cd>headphoneamp ?
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Post Reply
|
Page 123> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Digital coaxial vs optical
Topic Options
Mr ProgFreak wrote:
. You really have to stick around There's nothing more entertaining that the discussions between you and Dean.