SPDIF cable - does it need to be anything special?

fobos8

Well-known member
Feb 3, 2016
11
3
10,525
Visit site
Hi guys

My source is a PC that is linked to a pair of AVI ADM 9.1s. I need to get a longer optical cable.

Can I use anything and do I have to spend loads of money on gold plated cable made by ecologically-minded virgins?

Kind regards, Andrew
 
D

Deleted member 108165

Guest
IMO, no, no big spend needed, just go for a well constructed cable (y) I've got an Atlas cable connection to my PC, my sister has a bog standard Amazon basics cable and they both sound the same.
 

abacus

Well-known member
Any decent standard optical cable will do. (Don't spend more than £10 on one (unless it is really long which means you can go up to £15) no matter what magic particles it uses)

Bill
 

Oxfordian

Well-known member
Hang on, you’re saying that the optical cable in stock at my local Currys/PC World for £3.49 (1m length) works just as well as one priced at £49.99 with gold plated connections on sale in the same store?

OMG!!!
 

Tinman1952

Well-known member
There are loads of people that would be willing to bet that, in a blind test, you couldn't consistently tell one optical cable from another.
You could make a lot of money proving them wrong :unsure:
All I know is I upgraded from a Van den Hul Optocoupler (£60) to a QED Performance Optical (£99) and not only did it sound clearer…it would pass 24/192 whereas the Van den Hul would only do 24/96…so not all cables are equal. Just my experience but you are free to disagree obviously 🙂
 
  • Like
Reactions: RoA

Gray

Well-known member
All I know is I upgraded from a Van den Hul Optocoupler (£60) to a QED Performance Optical (£99) and not only did it sound clearer…it would pass 24/192 whereas the Van den Hul would only do 24/96…so not all cables are equal. Just my experience but you are free to disagree obviously 🙂
Your bitrate example proves that there's a difference.
And true, given the choice, most people would prefer to know that they're listening to 192 rather than 96kHz.
But how many of them could tell by listening?
Again, it would be truly impressive to witness somebody reliably, blindly identifying the higher sample rate.
 

abacus

Well-known member
Toslink was never designed for 192 (1st generation was only 48) and currently only rated up to 96, and that assumes the equipment it is connected too can manage it. (Remember the electrical input gets converted to light and then converted back at the end)

There is very little music that is true 192 (Most is just upsampled as studios use mainly 48 or 96 for mastering) so a bit of a niche for most users, (Plus a lot of Hi-res when tested is actually worse than 44.1 (Going above 44.1 is pretty pointless as there is virtually no music that goes above 20K) as unless very young their hearing is not good enough. (Many people consider themselves to have good hearing, but get a big shock when professionally tested, as in most cases it turns out to be not as good as they thought it was)

Bill
 

Tinman1952

Well-known member
Toslink was never designed for 192 (1st generation was only 48) and currently only rated up to 96, and that assumes the equipment it is connected too can manage it. (Remember the electrical input gets converted to light and then converted back at the end)

There is very little music that is true 192 (Most is just upsampled as studios use mainly 48 or 96 for mastering) so a bit of a niche for most users, (Plus a lot of Hi-res when tested is actually worse than 44.1 (Going above 44.1 is pretty pointless as there is virtually no music that goes above 20K) as unless very young their hearing is not good enough. (Many people consider themselves to have good hearing, but get a big shock when professionally tested, as in most cases it turns out to be not as good as they thought it was)

Bill
I agree with everything you have said here 🙂 My point was just to show that not all optical cables are the same 👍
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts