Optical or coaxial? Which is best?

YurAnus

I have my dvd player hooked up with optical and coaxial. The only diff between the two to me is optical has more db output. Witch do you prefer and why?

Lie495s14 · 03-05-2006, 05:30 | posts: 572

from what i have heard, that optical gives best sound, but can't carry very far so you very unlikely finding optical cables longer than 6 feet. coaxiol is very near the quality of optical and also run longer cables.

if you go the circuit city's round room, you often see their ricivers facing the DVD players across the room, they were connected with coaxi cables since optical lines can't run that long under the carpet.

ROBSCIX · 03-06-2006, 17:24 | posts: 16,079 | Location: Guru3D Audio Lab

Also Optical is not subject to the same interferance Coaxial is.. Plain inductance, EMI..etc. I think both are limited by length though because it's a digital signal and that signal would start to degrade the longer the run is...One would think anyway...

03-06-2006, 17:42 | posts: n/a

Optical. it carriers more signals. is less likely to suffer from cross talk. and isn't effected by electo magnetic fields.

Robscix.. single signal Fibre optics is good for 80-140km before it needs to be either recieved or Boosted (via booster stations)

when it comes to home theatre... i doubt its gunna be running 80km LOL

kwak · 03-06-2006, 18:49 | posts: 6,569 | Location: Galactic Sector QQ7 Active J Gamma

hes talking about home entertainment stuff, so its toslink, not lan-grade optical wolverine. toslink is indeed limited in length, but i dont know how long it can be. its main advantage is that it doesnt suffer from crosstalk at all. the only wa the signal degrades would be because of impurities in the fibre, or if you cut open the insulation. other than that, it doesnt degrade, because of something called total internal reflection, which keeps the entire light ray within the fibre.

03-06-2006, 19:45 | posts: n/a

i understand that its toslink, but i doubt that you'd need to go further then about 3 meters to plug into a digital optic reciever....

ROBSCIX · 03-06-2006, 20:47 | posts: 16,079 | Location: Guru3D Audio Lab

I thought Toslink was a certain kind/Brand..But not all optical is considered Toslink correct?

HanShot1st · 03-06-2006, 21:50 | posts: 1,153

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROBSCIX

I thought Toslink was a certain kind/Brand..But not all optical is considered Toslink correct?

Fiber optic audio cable was developed by Toshiba, but it's become a standard format and all digital audio optical cables are the same, Toslink or not.

Also, there is absolutely no difference in sound quality between coax and optical, the signal is 100% the same when it reaches your A/V receiver.

kwak · 03-06-2006, 22:04 | posts: 6,569 | Location: Galactic Sector QQ7 Active J Gamma

Quote:

Originally Posted by HanShot1st

Fiber optic audio cable was developed by Toshiba, but it's become a standard format and all digital audio optical cables are the same, Toslink or not.

Also, there is absolutely no difference in sound quality between coax and optical, the signal is 100% the same when it reaches your A/V receiver.

exactly. i may have exaggerated a bit in my previous post, the crosstalk and interference in a normal home theater system are negligible really.

ROBSCIX · 03-06-2006, 22:12 | posts: 16,079 | Location: Guru3D Audio Lab

Yes I understand about Toshiba developing the technology, SO Toslink is their brand name for optical connections..I hope what I am saying is making sense. I always thought that Toslink was a different type of optical connection..insofar as the coding was diffeferent not the cabling...thx for the info ...News to me I just call it optical,lightpipe or Coaxial...But you could say Toslink and it measn optical as well...Good to know..

BuildeR2 · 03-06-2006, 22:50 | posts: 1,642 | Location: Austin TX

eek! Witches scare me anyway.

guruboy · 03-06-2006, 23:02 | posts: 251 | Location: not sure any more

Hook them both up and listen for your self
Low priced units ..coax may be better
High priced units will used better parts ... optical may be best
coax is cheaper to make

orenda635 · 03-06-2006, 23:28 | posts: 6,867 | Location: GTA, Ontario, Canada

Coaxial. Why? Optical is better in terms of quality, but not by much. Most people won't hear the difference, even on a high end unit. Coaxial is also a lot cheaper than fiber optic cables. You can spend $50 or more on a signle cable while coaxial is half that price.

Joey · *Last edited by Joey; 03-08-2006 at 04:01.*

These are digital signals; go for the cheapest cable you can get. It makes no difference. It will either be a full bit stream (error correction in there as well remember) or no connection. If you get any artifacting it will be VERY noticeable pops and breaks in sound. This is a digital stream; there is no fine detail and low/high frequencies to keep clean.
For hooking up a coax just get any video grade (shielding wise) RCA cable. Keep it as short as possible and you should have zero problems. If you want to go the optical route, to be cooler, get the cheapest cable you can find, that's what the professionals do, even for broadcast quality.
Note: If you go optical you might have a bit more lag in sound as the signal has to go through a bit more converting circuitry to go from Electricity - Light - Electricity. I can notice this a little on my DVD player, but that might just be the DVD player. So that might not be the case with your setup.

edit: very good info in this podcast. http://revision3.com/systm/avcabling

YurAnus · 03-09-2006, 02:14 | posts: 775 | Location: Fayetteville, NC

I went the optical route. I bought acoustic research cables they were 21$ for a 3ft and 29$ for 6ft. I am very pleased with the sound. I havent noticed any lag in the sound.

The Kyle · 03-12-2006, 11:53 | posts: 4,113

Damn. I was looking for this info a while back. Great stuff, ty.

Phoenikx · 03-14-2006, 18:52 | posts: 591 | Location: Kaleidoscope

Quote:

Originally Posted by YurAnus

I have my dvd player hooked up with optical and coaxial. The only diff between the two to me is optical has more db output. Witch do you prefer and why?

The matter is not a preference, but a distance, since both - digital coaxial and digital optical inputs/outputs - deliver the same quality sound.
Optical connection can handle longer distances between sources with ease, without data loss.

ROBSCIX · 03-14-2006, 22:14 | posts: 16,079 | Location: Guru3D Audio Lab

These distances are irrelavent when talking about home theatre, we are taling LONG, LONG distances before signal degradation. I always thought the same thing but another person set me straight...seriously this is not a issue with HT....hope that helps.

Phoenikx · 03-14-2006, 23:48 | posts: 591 | Location: Kaleidoscope

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROBSCIX

These distances are irrelavent when talking about home theatre, we are taling LONG, LONG distances before signal degradation. I always thought the same thing but another person set me straight...seriously this is not a issue with HT....hope that helps.

The original issue is : difference between "optical" and "coaxial".
What are you questioning ?

I am not sure what subject you are trying to express, here.

Toji · 03-16-2006, 00:12 | posts: 74 | Location: Waipahu

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolverine69r

Optical. it carriers more signals. is less likely to suffer from cross talk. and isn't effected by electo magnetic fields.

Robscix.. single signal Fibre optics is good for 80-140km before it needs to be either recieved or Boosted (via booster stations)

when it comes to home theatre... i doubt its gunna be running 80km LOL

first post at guru 3d but not in tech forums

Yes optical is immune to EMI and RFI, You can't have cross talk with optical. Cross talk is caused by electrical magnetism within a cable that transmits electrical signals. Therefore optical is immune to crosstalk.

There is also diffrent grades of optical, the mode of the laser, and the refration index of the glass or plastic used wich really deterimes it's lenth. But fortuantely for home useres don't need to wory about that. 6ft is more than long enough for most purposes which is the reason why retailers rarely cary optical or any HT (with exception of standard "VCR" audio and video cables) related cables over 6ft.

Coaxil is really not coaxil, but your standard RCA cable. You infact can take a standard RCA cable and plug it into coaxil audio outputs/inputs. People used coaxil cales and put RCA plugs at the end to improve sheilding of digital signal. Most retail coaxil cables provide more than enough sheilding.

which is better? It a matter of what your HT suports. If you have optical ports and coaxil, you can use coaxil for a DVD Player, and save optical for devices that don't suport coaxil such as game consoles (PS2, Xbox, Xbox 360 only use optical)

Plus you can get a 6ft optical cabel from Walmart for 20 bucks, which is not expensive, and performs just as good as Monster Cables that cost 3x as much.

Phoenikx · 03-20-2006, 23:17 | posts: 591 | Location: Kaleidoscope

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toji

first post at guru 3d but not in tech forums

Yes optical is immune to EMI and RFI, You can't have cross talk with optical. Cross talk is caused by electrical magnetism within a cable that transmits electrical signals. Therefore optical is immune to crosstalk.

There is also diffrent grades of optical, the mode of the laser, and the refration index of the glass or plastic used wich really deterimes it's lenth. But fortuantely for home useres don't need to wory about that. 6ft is more than long enough for most purposes which is the reason why retailers rarely cary optical or any HT (with exception of standard "VCR" audio and video cables) related cables over 6ft.

Coaxil is really not coaxil, but your standard RCA cable. You infact can take a standard RCA cable and plug it into coaxil audio outputs/inputs. People used coaxil cales and put RCA plugs at the end to improve sheilding of digital signal. Most retail coaxil cables provide more than enough sheilding.

which is better? It a matter of what your HT suports. If you have optical ports and coaxil, you can use coaxil for a DVD Player, and save optical for devices that don't suport coaxil such as game consoles (PS2, Xbox, Xbox 360 only use optical)

Plus you can get a 6ft optical cabel from Walmart for 20 bucks, which is not expensive, and performs just as good as Monster Cables that cost 3x as much.

I agree.
I remember playing with RCA cables as digital ones, instead. It was fun

A slightly aside of the main topic
I disagree with you on quality of cables.
I tested video signals, with high-quality cables vs. standard ones.
A degradation of video signal was clearly visable, using standard cables.

ROBSCIX · 03-21-2006, 00:51 | posts: 16,079 | Location: Guru3D Audio Lab

Quality of plain copper Coaxial cable only goes so far though. I understand about proper cables caompared to budget cables..BUT there is a limit when your just wasting your money. Certain brand names capitalize on peoples ignorence and they end up getting ripped of for a plain cable. Quality cable will provide quality signals. That has limits also..just a thought.

Toji · 03-22-2006, 18:17 | posts: 74 | Location: Waipahu

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenikx

I agree.
I remember playing with RCA cables as digital ones, instead. It was fun

A slightly aside of the main topic
I disagree with you on quality of cables.
I tested video signals, with high-quality cables vs. standard ones.
A degradation of video signal was clearly visable, using standard cables.

No where in my statement did i mention video cables. I said optical. I have a monster brand optical cable and a genaric one I picked up at walmart. You will not be able to notice the diffrence unless you had some sort of testing equipment. If your ears can't tell, then what does it matter?

Besides all video cables whether digital or analog use electricity on shielded copper cables. In these cases, the thicker the gauge of the copper medium and better the sheilding is produces better signal quality, but also increasses cost of the cable. However it will only be noticed in a test environment. In a real world environment, not very many people will tell the diffrence between a $20 dollar video cable vs a $100 video cable on a side by side viewing comparison, unlike a testing environment where you can test resistance, EMI and RFI interfearance levels. If you eyes can't tell the diffrence what does it matter?

Phoenikx · 03-22-2006, 22:38 | posts: 591 | Location: Kaleidoscope

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toji

No where in my statement did i mention video cables. I said optical. I have a monster brand optical cable and a genaric one I picked up at walmart. You will not be able to notice the diffrence unless you had some sort of testing equipment. If your ears can't tell, then what does it matter?

Besides all video cables whether digital or analog use electricity on shielded copper cables. In these cases, the thicker the gauge of the copper medium and better the sheilding is produces better signal quality, but also increasses cost of the cable. However it will only be noticed in a test environment. In a real world environment, not very many people will tell the diffrence between a $20 dollar video cable vs a $100 video cable on a side by side viewing comparison, unlike a testing environment where you can test resistance, EMI and RFI interfearance levels. If you eyes can't tell the diffrence what does it matter?

Here, it is my original post (again) :

Quote:

A slightly aside of the main topic
I disagree with you on quality of cables.
I tested video signals, with high-quality cables vs. standard ones.
A degradation of video signal was clearly visable, using standard cables.

It is written "A slightly aside of the main topic", clearly.
I mention the Video signal, and not the Audio one.

Besides, in order to notice a difference in audio quality, one needs to take 2 factors under consideration :
- THD (Total Harmonic Distortion), that is a crucial feature since an amplification process has its limits as well, regardless of the technology applied
- speakers, and that depends of variety of factors

I did tested my audio/video rack system using a standard cable for S-video connection, and MonsterCable-THX-made one. I tested that cable for my camera, and used for testing DVD playback, only. I noticed the difference in picture quality, immediately.

I do not use "MonsterCable-THX-1000" - series cables. That is way too pricey, and does not seem to justify its tag-price.
"MonsterCable-THX" serie is good enough, for me

No, I am not so eager to invest my funds in some "fancy stuff", and overpay for that greatly. It is all the way around. However, a good merchandise requires an extra financial support, sometimes, and those guys want to sux everything possible from a client's pocket. I know that.

Allegiance · 03-27-2006, 07:04 | posts: 365 | Location: Australia.

You would not be able to tell the diffence between Optical and Coaxial. Maybe if you have very hi-end equipment. Lexicon or Meridian. Other than that I dont think so. With the 'cable quality' issue. Better shielding can help more. I remember i had a standard antenna cable, and a quad shield rg6. The quad shield provided better signal. Infact, if you can get ahold of some Quad Shield RG6. You can make the into a great cable. I use it for component. It is suppose to be the equivelent of an expensive component cable. Also, i think the top range monster cable coax cables are gas injected...