- Aug 1, 2019
Hey SPK this thread was kind of timely for me.to be frank, it seems so strange that in this day an article with so many misconceptions would be written. Not only can optical support 192k bandwidth (was literally listening to a 192k FLACC over optical when I read this) that wouldn’t have any affect whatsoever on streams at a lower sample rate. It isn’t like the bits are frolicking more freely in copper, making those treble notes more sweet.
furthermore the question of interference; because the signal is Digital it’s either there or it isn’t. While some massive amount of interference might potentially flip a low bit to a high bit, if you have that level of interference in your system then something else is certainly very, very wrong, and your cable choice is the least if your worries. If such digital interference is audible, it’s going to completely wreck the stream - not just some sort of subtle effect - that’s how digital works, it either is or it isn’t.
While 20 years ago these sorts of misconceptions about digital signals were understandable, today it should be common knowledge that digital interference is not the same as analog interference and behaves completely differently.
Now I think the biggest advantage of coaxial over consumer optical is that coaxial is will work better over distances greater than ten feet, though I could be wrong about that.
so assuming that the dac is equal in quality i would convert at the receiver. I could be mistaken, but my impression is that analog signals, especially unbalanced, low level signals, are susceptible to noise whereas digital signals, especially optical, are not. So you want to keep your analog signal path as short as possible.Hey SPK this thread was kind of timely for me.
Not sure if you have an opinion on this but:
I have a panasonic ub9000 dvd player which I also use for cds, and a yamaha RX-A2080 av amp.
Question is -- is it 'better' to use the DAC in the player, or the DAC in the receiver for CD playback? Assuming they're broadly similar, my thought was, do the conversion close to the source but I'm a total noob so that could be nonsense.
If better to use the receiver; I have an optical cable already. I take it from your opinion that there shouldn't really be anything in it between that and a similar quality coaxial cable? (makes sense to me).
If better to use the panasonic dac, then should I go ordinary analogue interconnects, or the balanced pin cables? why?
Might be I'm overthinking it all at the 'level' of equipment i have...so if you say 'just run what you have' I get it too...
This alone likely will not matter much, but this is, in my opinion, your best practice. with analog everything is cumulative, a lot of little things will tend to add up, so its best to get as much right as practical, at least within reason.Sweet, thanks for that. I *THINK* it sounded subtly better using the receiver dac anyway, but wasn't sure. Good to have a rational explanation for it tho. cheers.
Pretty much this outside the fact that almost all HDMI cables shorter then 10 to 15ft max are copper. Really, you just need a well shielded cable although it's always a good idea to keep all cable runs as short as possible in my experience.so assuming that the dac is equal in quality i would convert at the receiver. I could be mistaken, but my impression is that analog signals, especially unbalanced, low level signals, are susceptible to noise whereas digital signals, especially optical, are not. So you want to keep your analog signal path as short as possible.
Also, think of your DAC as the source, not the player (transport) since the DAC is the source of the analog signal. So in this mindset keeping your source in close proximity still applies.