Coaxial audio input vs optical

[grohl]

Generic 5.1 Klipsch home theater system. No, not the high-end stuff.

Recently bought an upconverting HDMI DVD player that has only coaxial out.

Should I return it for one with an optical out? Since they are both digital signals it doesn't matter, right?

 

[John]

Coax is a more robust connection and toslink is somewhat fragile. You'd probably fail a DBT between coax vs. optical anyhow.

 

[Howard]

At short distances, coax is probably the superior format.

 

[YOyoYOhowsDAjello]

Keep it and be happy

If you want a large thread from AT about digital connections
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=38&threadid=1966446&enterthread=y

 

[APE992]

Coax is superior over short distances due to it's lesser latency, no electrical->light->electrical conversion. Over longer distances optical is due to the fact it's traveling at the speed of light.

In reality, use whatever is more convienent. You probably won't notice a difference unless one cable is total junk or something.

 

[grohl]

I love you guys.

(probably the alcohol talking)

 

[YOyoYOhowsDAjello]

Originally posted by: grohl
I love you guys.

(probably the alcohol talking)

:shocked:

 

[John]

Originally posted by: Howard
At short distances, coax is probably the superior format.

I'd go on to say at any reasonable distance. Coax is generally better suited for very long runs and the RCA connectors make a solid connection. They may be more prone to emi/rfi, but they are usually well-shielded so it's not a problem. However in some cases coax can develop a ground loop while toslink could introduce jitter. Some might say that coax is also a better choice since it is a pure bitstream whereas a toslink modulates the signal into light and then has to demodulate it.

In case some people aren't aware you can use a 75ohm video cable for a digital coax.

 

[bob4432]

what is jitter?

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: APE992
Coax is superior over short distances due to it's lesser latency, no electrical->light->electrical conversion. Over longer distances optical is due to the fact it's traveling at the speed of light.

In reality, use whatever is more convienent. You probably won't notice a difference unless one cable is total junk or something.

Although the velocity of the flowing charges is quite low, the associated electromagnetic energy travels at the speed of light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_(electricity)

Even if electric signals had a velocity of 0.5c, the delay would be negligible for sound. Absolute delay is completely inaudible, while if the sound was synced with video, it would not be noticeable unless the cable was insanely long (while the video cable(s) were short).

 

[zephyrprime]

I seriously doubt that the conversion latency of light to electricty means squat in the context of audio signals. The bitrate of audio signals just are not high at all compared to other electronic interconnects. It seems to me that optical audio connects were just a BS product made by the audio industry for the technological jugheads so common in the audiophile community. Personally, I think the coax connection is better because it's cheaper and because toslink connections fall out too easily.

 

[Rubycon]

If you need to go that long you should not being using SPDIF in the first place. AES/EBU was built for that.

 

[Quasmo]

I use a coax cable (like for TV) with rca adapters on the end of it. It's great because the coax cable is well shielded and on my wall box, I dont have to have RCA pot just a cable port.

 

[YOyoYOhowsDAjello]

What does generic Klipsch mean btw? Quintets?

 

[Auric]

Originally posted by: Quasmo
I use a coax cable (like for TV) with rca adapters on the end of it. It's great because the coax cable is well shielded and on my wall box, I dont have to have RCA pot just a cable port.

Ja, I make my own with RG-6 and purposely crimp on F connectors rather than RCA plugs and then use RCA plug adapters because the F connectors cost nuthin' in comparison and thus the cable can be shortened (or lengthened) or otherwise reused at will (for various A/V & RF duties). So, it's cheap and EZ to work with and adapt to the specific requirements: length, interconnects, adapters such as mini or 90 degree elbow for tight spots, &c. while fiber optic and its Toslink interconnects (and adapters) are relatively expensive and fragile -susceptible to dust, damage from being bent or crushed, and so on.

Really, the sole advantage to optical is electrical isolation to preclude ground loops as mentioned.

 

[spikespiegal]

However in some cases coax can develop a ground loop while toslink could introduce jitter

Jitter is only an issue in the D/A conversion realm, and unless you are using a 1984 DAC I woulnd't worry about it.

If Coax were superior over Toslink over short runs, then I guess I should rip out my Fiber connections between floors and go back to 10base 2 (christ).

 

[CraigRT]

I like coax just cause as stated before, its likelihood of having a problem is far less than optical, with a bent/broken cable and finnicky ends.

I like coax better.

 

[grohl]

What does generic Klipsch mean btw? Quintets?

yes, matched with their low-end 10 in sub

Black Friday FTW