Usb v Optical v Coax

[maziansmarts]

Assuming equal quality cables are used which gives you the best sound quality when connecting a Streamer to a DAC?

[Ittaku]

It depends entirely on the quality of the components at either end and their implementation of each interface. The best components there is no difference. The worst components anything's possible.

Edited October 22, 2019 by Ittaku

[Irek]

In my experience USB connection from laptop is pretty good.  Theoretically a very good transport connected by optical or coax should make the same quality. Saying that I would prefer streamer and DAC in one box and than RCA to amp. 

[mattd2308]

I would take the  advice from both irek and ittaku, as they are  knowledgeable, just from reading posts (of other topics)of advice given (sound).

Me, I decided to use a fancy Wireworld Supernova 7 from my SACD player to my amp, mainly because of the odd favourable review and for something different other than rca (of which I use for SACD's). Tried coax, and as far as  I know I couldn't hear any significant difference.

Looks cool on the OLED display on the amp "OPTICAL 1  44.1khz".

Matt

 

Edited October 22, 2019 by mattd2308
More info

[Guest Muon N']

Results are/can be variable, as Con points out.

[Ittaku]

If in doubt, always audition. There is no reason you can't start out with the cheapest nastiest cables on all three interfaces and see which sounds the best that way. And then it's up to you what to do about the cables after that (I generally stick to the cheapest solidly made non-audiophile cables that adhere to standards that I can find.)

[JOEMT]

To  Ittaku  I can not agree with you on buy the cheapest cables if you want HI fI not Low fi  the cheapest are not hi fi 

[Addicted to music]

https://archimago.blogspot.com/search?q=USB+cables

 

Plenty of test on this site on USB, coax and optical.    There’s even a test on Power cables.....

 

 

[Ittaku]

3 hours ago, JOEMT said:

To  Ittaku  I can not agree with you on buy the cheapest cables if you want HI fI not Low fi  the cheapest are not hi fi 

Sure, you do what you want, and I'll do what I want. I didn't say others needed to do what I do, I just explained what I do and even said it's up to the individual earlier. I prefer to spend more on electronics and almost nothing on cables.

Edited October 23, 2019 by Ittaku

[KRSDarwin]

No horse in the race but Robert Harley in his excellent book “The Complete Guide to High End Audio” suggests that you should forget about optical unless you have no other choice (extract provided containing his reasons). 

Earlier in the chapter he said companies promoted TosLink (optical) because it was cheaper to make and easier to meet regulations on radiated noise.  

 

I’ve used TosLink for my Sonos and HA1 and couldn’t tell the difference, but then again that’s a step (or 3) away from high end audio.  

[Guest Muon N']

................

Edited November 21, 2019 by Muon N'

[emesbee]

Personally, I haven't been able to detect noticeable audible differences between the different connections, but that is totally subjective.

 

Up until quite recently I used optical quite a lot, but less so now. I mainly use coax when I listen to music (mostly CDs), and USB from my computer. I still use optical for a few other sources though.

 

I do agree that optical cables have a rather poorly designed connector. I've lost count of the number of times I've had signals drop out completely or intermittently, usually due to the cable being knocked a bit and not making a solid connection. Can be very frustrating.

 

[aechmea]

48 minutes ago, emesbee said:

Personally, I haven't been able to detect noticeable audible differences between the different connections, but that is totally subjective.

 

Up until quite recently I used optical quite a lot, but less so now. I mainly use coax when I listen to music (mostly CDs), and USB from my computer. I still use optical for a few other sources though.

 

I do agree that optical cables have a rather poorly designed connector. I've lost count of the number of times I've had signals drop out completely or intermittently, usually due to the cable being knocked a bit and not making a solid connection. Can be very frustrating.

 

Yeah; me too.

 

I don't really use Toslink because of the (seemingly always) loose connection.  Pretty poor design.  Used only for sound from a TV; a connection that is almost never used.  Mainly use coax(xlr) from CD transport to DAC, simply because the DAC has one of each input type and the transport is my only XLR equipped source box.  Therefore can have 4 inputs, one on each socket type.  Ie. logistics only and nothing to do with sound quality.  Never had any noise problems.

 

I use well-constructed but basic/non-expensive cables.

 

[JOEMT]

15 hours ago, aechmea said:

Yeah; me too.

 

I don't really use Toslink because of the (seemingly always) loose connection.  Pretty poor design.  Used only for sound from a TV; a connection that is almost never used.  Mainly use coax(xlr) from CD transport to DAC, simply because the DAC has one of each input type and the transport is my only XLR equipped source box.  Therefore can have 4 inputs, one on each socket type.  Ie. logistics only and nothing to do with sound quality.  Never had any noise problems.

 

I use well-constructed but basic/non-expensive cables.

 

Just had a look at Ittaku sound gear must run into the $1000s   than he says cheap cables ok  does not make sense to me .

[wolster]

@JOEMT

While you are new here, please respect fellow members, their opinions and choices, as per our guidelines.

Thanks!

14 hours ago, JOEMT said:

Just had a look at Ittaku sound gear must run into the $1000s   than he says cheap cables ok  does not make sense to me .

 

[MLXXX]

On 24/10/2019 at 12:44 AM, KRSDarwin said:

No horse in the race but Robert Harley in his excellent book “The Complete Guide to High End Audio” suggests that you should forget about optical unless you have no other choice (extract provided containing his reasons). 

I don't know why you describe the book as "excellent". That page you've reproduced sets out a set of audiophile views about alleged deficiencies in sound quality. It provides no evidence that the deficiencies would be audible. It's something anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of the technologies could have typed out off the top of their head in the 1980s.

 

To my mind that really is not good enough in a lengthy publication about high end audio. (It's perhaps acceptable in a short, informal, magazine article. Or perhaps someone posting a subjective view to this forum.)

 

With a book one would expect footnotes, providing references to properly conducted double blind tests, or at least to measurements. One would  expect quantification of the claimed deficiencies. One would expect commentary on how technology has evolved over the decades to address and combat such deficiencies.  For example the TOSLINK interface at the receiving end for a device manufactured in 2019 is likely to be more effective at dealing with jitter than a device manufactured in 1983. Technology has moved on and an author of a lengthy work would need to develop an understanding of that before being in a position to write authoritatively on TOSLINK as it relates to "high end audio".

 

Is that page you have reproduced followed [or preceded] by an explanation that if a buffer follows the interface with a suitably well controlled clock, any jitter will be eliminated, or at least substantially reduced?  That is a significant matter that would need to be mentioned for completeness.

[MLXXX]

16 hours ago, JOEMT said:

Just had a look at Ittaku sound gear must run into the $1000s   than he says cheap cables ok  does not make sense to me .

I can understand your confusion. A lot of internet cables on the market are extremely expensive and a lot of retail salespeople will recommend them.

 

There is a lot of controversy in audiophile forums over interconnect cables with one camp insisting you need very expensive cables and the other camp suggesting that for most purposes the cheap cables will do a perfectly good job, audibly indistinguishable from much more expensive cables.  I myself happen to align myself with the second camp.

[MLXXX]

On 24/10/2019 at 7:55 AM, aechmea said:

I don't really use Toslink because of the (seemingly always) loose connection.

I certainly have encountered some Toslink male connectors that wobble if pushed when engaged in the female socket. However I've never had one that lost signal when it was wobbled with my finger.   (Oftentimes I find a Toslink connector will fit snugly and tightly.)

 

I guess if you had a thumping bass causing vibration of the floor that this might lead to a small wobble in a loose Toslink connection.  Whether that would result in an audible difference I don't know, but I strongly suspect not. The Toslink receiver chips these days tend to iron out any short-term jitter.

 

In any case, the speed of the light in the fibre and any air space in the connection is so high that wobble would likely result in a timing difference that would require advanced laboratory-grade equipment to measure, it would be so minute.  So there may well be no need for a Toslink connection to be wobble-free.

 

If anyone has seen published research on the effect of Toslink connector wobble on audio signal timing perhaps that could be linked to. 

Edited October 25, 2019 by MLXXX

[sloper]

l tend to use optical due to the electrical isolation but l really hate toslink plugs.

But l am lucky l cant hear the difference in the connection type.

 

regards Bruce

[Ittaku]

1 hour ago, MLXXX said:

I can understand your confusion. A lot of internet cables on the market are extremely expensive and a lot of retail salespeople will recommend them.

 

There is a lot of controversy in audiophile forums over interconnect cables with one camp insisting you need very expensive cables and the other camp suggesting that for most purposes the cheap cables will do a perfectly good job, audibly indistinguishable from much more expensive cables.  I myself happen to align myself with the second camp.

Nicely explained. I also fall into the second camp. I know it seems most unusual that someone with a megabuck system wouldn't be buying exotic cables to match, but in my experience they just don't matter at all outside the analogue realm. I do have relatively expensive analogue interconnects and speaker cables, but my power cables and all digital communication cables are just solid performers all at or under the $100 mark. There's some conventional thinking that you have to spend proportionately on all components, but that is completely illogical if there's no audible difference unless you want to show your shiny wares. Now if you find they make an audible difference that is worth megabucks to you, go right ahead, but I don't hear anything, and it gives me even more budget to spend on gear instead.

[andyr]

21 hours ago, JOEMT said:

Just had a look at Ittaku sound gear must run into the $1000s   than he says cheap cables ok  does not make sense to me .

 

That's an 'interesting' comment, JOE. 

 

So more expensive  =  better sound?

 

To me, that equation is not always true.

 

Andy

 

[KRSDarwin]

On 25/10/2019 at 3:09 PM, MLXXX said:

I don't know why you describe the book as "excellent".

Hi MLXXX, I described Robert Harley’s book as excellent as that is exactly how I found it.  It covers a very wide gamut of Hi-Fi issues in a logical sequence and with great explanations and thoughtful views that are explained. I got a lot out of the book and would happily recommend it to anyone interested in Hi-Fi (especially those of us that are newer to the journey).

 

Cheers

[MLXXX]

18 minutes ago, KRSDarwin said:

Hi MLXXX, I described Robert Harley’s book as excellent as that is exactly how I found it.  It covers a very wide gamut of Hi-Fi issues in a logical sequence and with great explanations and thoughtful views that are explained. I got a lot out of the book and would happily recommend it to anyone interested in Hi-Fi (especially those of us that are newer to the journey).

 

Cheers

A lot of people report finding the book helpful.  Others criticize it for erring on the side of unsubstantiated subjective claims that echo doubtful audiophile lore. See for example https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R1OC2CRW52TJ0I/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0978649362

 

I'm sure there's a lot in it that's helpful but I would recommend taking its recommendations with a grain of salt, and seeking confirmation from other sources.

[Addicted to music]

On 25/10/2019 at 6:36 PM, Ittaku said:

Nicely explained. I also fall into the second camp. I know it seems most unusual that someone with a megabuck system wouldn't be buying exotic cables to match, but in my experience they just don't matter at all outside the analogue realm. I do have relatively expensive analogue interconnects and speaker cables, but my power cables and all digital communication cables are just solid performers all at or under the $100 mark. There's some conventional thinking that you have to spend proportionately on all components, but that is completely illogical if there's no audible difference unless you want to show your shiny wares. Now if you find they make an audible difference that is worth megabucks to you, go right ahead, but I don't hear anything, and it gives me even more budget to spend on gear instead.

backed up by:

 

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2013/04/measurements-usb-cables-for-dacs.html

 

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2013/05/measurements-toslink-optical-audio.html

 

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2013/04/guest-review-measurements-dr-franks.html

 

As you can see, I'm in the 2nd camp, unless the cable was damaged.  but im very sure that someone with bat specification ears will prove me wrong 

 

Edited November 3, 2019 by Addicted to music

[Chigurh]

I like the analogy that using expensive digital cables and expecting better audio is like using a more expensive printer cable and expecting an improvement in print quality. If it works, it works. I'll run for cover now.