Digital Interconnects

Ambrose

New member
Feb 19, 2008
53
0
0
Having just read comment on another post, I wonder if it is worth trying a better coax cable in my setup?

I have old Chord Codac silver plus currently and an optichord.

Seems to be the only thing I have skimpt on.

Can these have the same impact as analogue interconnects?

Cheers

Ambrose
 

Overdose

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2008
279
1
18,890
There is only one way to find out. Just be sure to borrow some cables or at least make sure you can return a bought cable if you don't like what you hear.
 

Overdose

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2008
279
1
18,890
There is only one way to find out. Just be sure to borrow some cables or at least make sure you can return a bought cable if you don't like what you hear.
 

paradiziac

New member
Jan 8, 2011
17
0
0
:help:

Like OD says...

Try a freebie RCA interconnect lead and see if it sounds any different?

Or seeing as you have a G1500HD, try:

http://markgrantcables.co.uk/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=40_3&products_id=266

30 day returns policy as I'm sure you know.
 

idc

Well-known member
Jan 2, 2008
1,113
67
19,270
Please do try beforeyou commit to buy, such as a cable with a returns policy. It is very hit and miss whether there will be any SQ improvement and if there is one, what the SQ improvement will consist of.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
As with any digital electrical interface, it operates at much higher frequencies than most interference, and as so, isn't really affected by most of it. Certainly less affected than analog. Upgrading from cheap pound shop rca leads to better quality ones would give a much bigger SQ improvement than upgrading from a cheap S/PDIF cable to an expensive one...

With optical toslink connections, the money spent on a better cable goes into making the cable surround protect the glass fibre better. There'll be no improvement in sound quality what so ever unless the fibre is broken, and then it'll simply break up, in a binary "all or nothing" style, than degrade the sound... I recently got a new toslink cable because my old one was breaking up occasionally. The difference in brightness at the ends when I compared new and old was huge. No more breaking up, but sound quality obviously didn't improve beyond that...
 

Ambrose

New member
Feb 19, 2008
53
0
0
I will be sure to demo on trial if I do go down this road.

I just wondered if anyone has tried experimenting with different COAX cables? Surely someone has who can offer opinions!!!!!

Thanks

Ambrose
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
i-CONICA said:
There'll be no improvement in sound quality what so ever unless the fibre is broken, and then it'll simply break up, in a binary "all or nothing" style, than degrade the sound
I disagree, certainly with respect to different cables whether coax or toslink. You may hear some difference in SQ depending on the differing levels of jitter that the cables impart on the signal. Basically the signal goes into the cable as a square wave and as it goes along the cable may have the edges rounded so that the transition from "high" to "low" or vice versa is not so clearly defined. This leads to timing issues at the other end (normally a DAC) and its this timing error that is known as "jitter". To what expect a cable imparts jitter on a signal and you can hear any difference can only be measured via listening to one cable against another.

As others have said here, compare cables and be sure you can return them if you don't want them.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Jitter is a non issue in modern audio electronics, it's no more than a scare word put out there to get people to spend more money needlessley, and it doesn't help people by telling them otherwise IMO..
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
ooh.. said:
Jitter is a non issue in modern audio electronics, it's no more than a scare word put out there to get people to spend more money needlessley, and it doesn't help people by telling them otherwise IMO..
Ooh, now I'm running scared :shifty:
 

paradiziac

New member
Jan 8, 2011
17
0
0
ooh.. said:
Jitter is a non issue in modern audio electronics, it's no more than a scare word put out there to get people to spend more money needlessley, and it doesn't help people by telling them otherwise IMO..
This topic is making me jittery, need a drink I think :cheers:
 

fr0g

New member
Jan 7, 2008
445
0
0
For the record, I am using one half of an analogue interconnect as a coax digi cable. It sounds exactly like the one I misplaced...don't ask :)
 

Ambrose

New member
Feb 19, 2008
53
0
0
I would. but £190 is way past my budget :boohoo:

What changes did you notice over previous (?) cable please?

Thanks

Ambrose
 

idc

Well-known member
Jan 2, 2008
1,113
67
19,270
Dr Lodge said:
ooh.. said:
Jitter is a non issue in modern audio electronics, it's no more than a scare word put out there to get people to spend more money needlessley, and it doesn't help people by telling them otherwise IMO..
Ooh, now I'm running scared :shifty:
Dr Lodge, can you show any evidence of jitter

1 - being audible

2 - affecting sound quality

As a man of science (or maybe philosophy, in which case please resourt to science) you will have loads of evidence of such.
 

Ambrose

New member
Feb 19, 2008
53
0
0
Hi Max,

I take it you are non-believer.

I go by what I hear, if I like / perceive improvement then 8)

Else I will return nothing lost, except postage.

I am a recent convert to mains / power cords..... :twisted:
 

idc

Well-known member
Jan 2, 2008
1,113
67
19,270
Here is evidence that audible jitter is not an issue

http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/ast/26/1/50/_pdf

"In order to determine the maximum acceptable size of
jitter on music signals, detection thresholds for artificial
random jitter were measured in a 2 alternative forced
choice procedure. Audio professionals and semi-professionals
participated in the experiments. They were allowed to
use their own listening environments and their favorite
sound materials. The results indicate that the threshold for
random jitter on program materials is several hundreds ns
for well-trained listeners under their preferable listening
conditions. The threshold values seem to be sufficiently
larger than the jitter actually observed in various consumer
products."

What has been happeneing is that jitter has become a supposed issue, but all that further jitter reduction is doing is making the already inaudible, even more inaudible.
 

paradiziac

New member
Jan 8, 2011
17
0
0
Ambrose said:
I go by what I hear, if I like / perceive improvement then 8)

Else I will return nothing lost, except postage.
Sounds like a very scientific approach.... :clap:

I do exactly the same.

Regarding jitter, I gave up once I discovered that there is random jitter, deterministic jitter, period jitter, cycle-to-cycle jitter and half-period jitter, master clock jitter, software jitter, cross-talk, ground bounce... :?

Bearing these complexities in mind, I realized there is no way I could determine whether a manufacturer was

a) untruthfully trying to tell me that jitter was a non-issue in most/any kit, so I might as well buy their (budget?) product or

b) trying to scare me into thinking that it was an issue, just so that I could solve that by buying their expensive (uniquely jitterless) kit

So...it comes back to personal experiment, listening. Seeing for yourself rather than believing manufacturers. It's the best anyone can do unless they are hifi designers with intimate knowledge of the contents of the box. If, after listening, your expensive demo kit sounds no better than your existing cheap kit, great!
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
9
0
paradiziac said:
Regarding jitter, I gave up once I discovered that there is random jitter, deterministic jitter, period jitter, cycle-to-cycle jitter and half-period jitter, master clock jitter, software jitter, cross-talk, ground bounce... :?

Bearing these complexities in mind, I realized there is no way I could determine whether a manufacturer was

a) untruthfully trying to tell me that jitter was a non-issue in most/any kit, so I might as well buy their (budget?) product or

b) trying to scare me into thinking that it was an issue, just so that I could solve that by buying their expensive (uniquely jitterless) kit
Now you've given me the Jitters :O .....all I can do is hope Linn know what they are doing. :pray:
 

BenLaw

Well-known member
Nov 21, 2010
475
7
18,895
paradiziac said:
So...it comes back to personal experiment, listening. Seeing for yourself rather than believing manufacturers. It's the best anyone can do
Sorry, that just isn't true. You don't have to believe manufacturers nor try and rely on your own (unreliable) ears / brain. You can consider proper scientific research, such as that linked to by idc.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
BenLaw said:
paradiziac said:
So...it comes back to personal experiment, listening. Seeing for yourself rather than believing manufacturers. It's the best anyone can do
Sorry, that just isn't true. You don't have to believe manufacturers nor try and rely on your own (unreliable) ears / brain. You can consider proper scientific research, such as that linked to by idc.
+1 Ben..
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Ambrose said:
Hi Max,

I take it you are non-believer.

I go by what I hear, if I like / perceive improvement then 8)

Else I will return nothing lost, except postage.

I am a recent convert to mains / power cords..... :twisted:
Hi, i believe in all sorts of things, but the notion that a fully working digital cable can have any effect on sound is not one of them :)
 

Thompsonuxb

New member
Feb 19, 2012
129
0
0
BenLaw said:
paradiziac said:
So...it comes back to personal experiment, listening. Seeing for yourself rather than believing manufacturers. It's the best anyone can do
Sorry, that just isn't true. You don't have to believe manufacturers nor try and rely on your own (unreliable) ears / brain. You can consider proper scientific research, such as that linked to by idc.
So if you can hear differences between cables ....what does it mean?

your ears are unreliable??...seriously...are you being serious
 

BenLaw

Well-known member
Nov 21, 2010
475
7
18,895
Thompsonuxb said:
BenLaw said:
paradiziac said:
So...it comes back to personal experiment, listening. Seeing for yourself rather than believing manufacturers. It's the best anyone can do
Sorry, that just isn't true. You don't have to believe manufacturers nor try and rely on your own (unreliable) ears / brain. You can consider proper scientific research, such as that linked to by idc.
So if you can hear differences between cables ....what does it mean?

your ears are unreliable??...seriously...are you being serious
I'm not especially militant about digital cables / jitter (much less than others who've posted on this thread, for example) but am I being serious? Yes, yes I am being serious. Seriously.

I conduct no other part of my life on the basis of belief and subjectivism, I don't see why I would conduct this part on that basis. If you say you can hear a difference, feel free to carry out an ABX test to show us that that is genuinely the case. Or indeed even link to one. Until then, yes I suspect the combination of your ears and your brain is unreliable.
 

Thompsonuxb

New member
Feb 19, 2012
129
0
0
Interconnects do make a big difference especially over long term listening. Its the small differences/neuances which can make the big difference to any ones music. Sibilance on female voices for example can ruin a tune (for me anyway) or bass thats monotone without texture or treble thats not defined or seperated. this is the difference interconnect choice can make.

Digital interconnects make more difference than anolog by the nature of the digital signal. Its more precise and less splashy at the top end - in my limited experience though QED digital interconnects offer good value. I have a QED quinex 1 25pounds its an excellent interconnect especially for music . I also own a QED sr75 50 pounds which is not so good with music - no science it just does not sound as good.

its also worth trying a single leg on your anolog interconnects..... ;)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts