My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical
jacks. Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are
they all equal?

Paul L wrote:

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical
jacks. Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are
they all equal?

They should give identical results.

Graham

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...


Paul L wrote:

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical
jacks. Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are
they all equal?

They should give identical results.


As will two tin cups connected by a string.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 08:15:30 GMT, Paul L wrote:

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical
jacks. Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are
they all equal?

The optical signal has to be converted from/to an electrical signal.
So theoretically I suppose the coax connection might be cleaner. But
there's no practical difference. On domestic gear both systems use
components costing a few pennies. Which work fine :-)

"Paul L" wrote in message
om

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial
and optical jacks. Which connection should I use to get
better sound quality or are they all equal?

The coax connection can create a ground loop, and cause hum. Or it may not,
depending on the rest of your system.

Coax is better for long runs, such as 30 feet or more.

In typical use, there's no practical difference.

"Paul L" wrote in message
om...
My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical jacks.
Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are they all
equal?

They are equal.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message

"Pooh Bear"
wrote in message ...


Paul L wrote:

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial
and optical jacks. Which connection should I use to get
better sound quality or are they all equal?

They should give identical results.

As will two tin cups connected by a string.

On the face of it, this appears to be total nonsense.

"Paul L" wrote in message
om...
My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical jacks.
Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are they all
equal?

The coaxial connection is superior, although modern digital receiver chips
have narrowed the difference.

In the service manuals for certain digital preamps, Sony instructs that the
adjustment for harmonic distortion must be performed with a signal source
delivered by the coaxial input. This shows that in some cases, the digital
input receiver can suffer with an optical connection, in a measurable way.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Paul L" wrote in message
om...
My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial
and optical jacks. Which connection should I use to get
better sound quality or are they all equal?

The coaxial connection is superior, although modern
digital receiver chips have narrowed the difference.

In the service manuals for certain digital preamps, Sony
instructs that the adjustment for harmonic distortion
must be performed with a signal source delivered by the
coaxial input. This shows that in some cases, the digital
input receiver can suffer with an optical connection, in
a measurable way.

No excuse for this kind of flaw at all.

Indeed, because of the elimination of EMI with optical, if anything Sony
should be recommending the use of the optical input for critical
adjustments.

I'm surprised that Sony is admitting to building such flawed equipment. I'm
surprised that they are building such flawed equipment.

Laurence Payne writes:

On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 08:15:30 GMT, Paul L wrote:

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical
jacks. Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are
they all equal?

The optical signal has to be converted from/to an electrical signal.
So theoretically I suppose the coax connection might be cleaner.

That's one theory.

Other thing to consider with coax connection is that the coaxial
connection can more easily be interfered by electrical signal
and carry noise to your equipment...

In very ideal system coax might be threoretically sliglty better.
In real-life situations it is pretty impossible to say which one
of the potential problems of the coax system or the optical
system cause more problems to the sound...

But there's no practical difference. On domestic gear both systems use
components costing a few pennies. Which work fine :-)

You are right on this.

--
Tomi Engdahl (http://www.iki.fi/then/)
Take a look at my electronics web links and documents at
http://www.epanorama.net/

"Paul L" wrote in message
om...
My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical jacks.
Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are they all
equal?

Its all digital right? Unless there is a design flaw, I would think all the
digital 1s and 0s would arrive in the same order either way. I don't know
the protocol in these, but on a computer network, the protocol checks to be
sure the data arrives exactly as it was sent for if a single bit got
changed, the data or program could be trashed.
-S

SimonLW said:

Its all digital right? Unless there is a design flaw, I would think all the
digital 1s and 0s would arrive in the same order either way. I don't know
the protocol in these, but on a computer network, the protocol checks to be
sure the data arrives exactly as it was sent for if a single bit got
changed, the data or program could be trashed.

You sound a bit addled. Have you tried inserting a flash card into your
ear? That might clear up your fogginess.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

In the service manuals for certain digital preamps, Sony
instructs that the adjustment for harmonic distortion
must be performed with a signal source delivered by the
coaxial input. This shows that in some cases, the digital
input receiver can suffer with an optical connection, in
a measurable way.

No excuse for this kind of flaw at all.

Indeed, because of the elimination of EMI with optical, if anything Sony
should be recommending the use of the optical input for critical
adjustments.

I was wondering the same thing. If it's digital, why isn't it absolutely
bit-for-bit identical both ways? The optical input would be immune to
electromagnetic noise, and that should be the only difference. Normally
they should be indistinguishable because electromagnetic noise strong enough
to disrupt a digital signal is rare.

On 10 Jan 2006 14:17:38 +0200, Tomi Holger Engdahl wrote:


Laurence Payne writes:

On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 08:15:30 GMT, Paul L wrote:

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical
jacks. Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are
they all equal?

The optical signal has to be converted from/to an electrical signal.
So theoretically I suppose the coax connection might be cleaner.

That's one theory.

Other thing to consider with coax connection is that the coaxial
connection can more easily be interfered by electrical signal
and carry noise to your equipment...

In very ideal system coax might be threoretically sliglty better.
In real-life situations it is pretty impossible to say which one
of the potential problems of the coax system or the optical
system cause more problems to the sound...

In real life systems, the data is digital and unless there are errors,
"slightly better" makes absolutely no difference whatsoever.

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Paul L" wrote in message
om...
My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial
and optical jacks. Which connection should I use to get
better sound quality or are they all equal?

The coaxial connection is superior, although modern
digital receiver chips have narrowed the difference.

In the service manuals for certain digital preamps, Sony
instructs that the adjustment for harmonic distortion
must be performed with a signal source delivered by the
coaxial input. This shows that in some cases, the digital
input receiver can suffer with an optical connection, in
a measurable way.

No excuse for this kind of flaw at all.

Indeed, because of the elimination of EMI with optical, if anything Sony
should be recommending the use of the optical input for critical
adjustments.

I'm surprised that Sony is admitting to building such flawed equipment. I'm
surprised that they are building such flawed equipment.

I'll bet this issue is as simple as the input test point for the THD
distortion adjusment is simply tied to the coax digitial in in some way
and not to the optical. Maybe they put the test point in front of a
source selector relay matrix but chose to include only tap. Once again
Morein shows his propensity to leap to conclusions wholly unsupported
by the available facts.

ScottW

mc wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

In the service manuals for certain digital preamps, Sony
instructs that the adjustment for harmonic distortion
must be performed with a signal source delivered by the
coaxial input. This shows that in some cases, the digital
input receiver can suffer with an optical connection, in
a measurable way.

No excuse for this kind of flaw at all.

Indeed, because of the elimination of EMI with optical, if anything Sony
should be recommending the use of the optical input for critical
adjustments.

I was wondering the same thing. If it's digital, why isn't it absolutely
bit-for-bit identical both ways? The optical input would be immune to
electromagnetic noise, and that should be the only difference. Normally
they should be indistinguishable because electromagnetic noise strong enough
to disrupt a digital signal is rare.

And if the digital signal *does* get disrupted the effect is sudden, huge and
very evident..

There's no 'gradual degradation' with digital signals like losing some HF or
adding a bit of hum. Either it works or it doesn't. Therefore comparisons about
quality are *almost* entirely bogus from first principles.

The exception as I understand it is jitter on the digital signal. If the clock
recovery is poorly implemented, I believe this can degrade the audio a bit.

Graham

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 07:33:44 -0500, SimonLW wrote:


"Paul L" wrote in message
. com...
My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical jacks.
Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are they all
equal?

Its all digital right? Unless there is a design flaw, I would think all the
digital 1s and 0s would arrive in the same order either way. I don't know
the protocol in these, but on a computer network, the protocol checks to be
sure the data arrives exactly as it was sent for if a single bit got
changed, the data or program could be trashed.

Of course, but audio bits are *magic* and magic bits always sound better
when passed through expensive cables. Everybody knows this.

It doesn't matter if the cables are so electrically medciore that the
receiver can barely differentiate a zero from a one. It doesn't matter if
the cables are designed without the slightest attention paid to sound
engineering principles. Cables made from iguana spit will sound better than
cables made from plain ordinary copper, but only if they're expensive as
hell.

"mc" said:

Indeed, because of the elimination of EMI with optical, if anything Sony
should be recommending the use of the optical input for critical
adjustments.


I was wondering the same thing. If it's digital, why isn't it absolutely
bit-for-bit identical both ways? The optical input would be immune to
electromagnetic noise, and that should be the only difference. Normally
they should be indistinguishable because electromagnetic noise strong enough
to disrupt a digital signal is rare.


A common mistake.
The S/PDIF signal is analog in nature.
Just as with RF signals, an incorrect termination might cause
reflections ( "a bad SWR") which, in turn, are said to cause jitter.

Jitter doesn't have to be a problem per se.
When the incoming signal in e.g.a DAC is reclocked for instance, the
jitter must be very extreme to have any effect at all.
If that extreme is reached (not likely), the result will be silence,
not degraded audio.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:48:01 +0100, Sander deWaal wrote:


"mc" said:

Indeed, because of the elimination of EMI with optical, if anything Sony
should be recommending the use of the optical input for critical
adjustments.


I was wondering the same thing. If it's digital, why isn't it absolutely
bit-for-bit identical both ways? The optical input would be immune to
electromagnetic noise, and that should be the only difference. Normally
they should be indistinguishable because electromagnetic noise strong enough
to disrupt a digital signal is rare.


A common mistake.
The S/PDIF signal is analog in nature.
By that definitions, there are no digital signals. All signals are
analog in nature. What makes a signal "digital" is the fact that it can
only be in a very limited number of states, for example positive being a 1
and negative being a zero. It doesn't matter that signal is analog and that
there's an infinite number of values that translate to a 1.


Just as with RF signals, an incorrect termination might cause
reflections ( "a bad SWR") which, in turn, are said to cause jitter.

Jitter doesn't have to be a problem per se.
When the incoming signal in e.g.a DAC is reclocked for instance, the
jitter must be very extreme to have any effect at all.
If that extreme is reached (not likely), the result will be silence,
not degraded audio.

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:25:50 +0000, Signal wrote:

In real life systems, the data is digital and unless there are errors,
"slightly better" makes absolutely no difference whatsoever.

You *can* have the exact same datastream with audible differences.

If you'd said "data" I'd have let you get away with that one :-) But
"datastream" includes the timing.

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:25:50 +0000, Signal wrote:

"AZ Nomad" emitted :

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical
jacks. Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are
they all equal?

The optical signal has to be converted from/to an electrical signal.
So theoretically I suppose the coax connection might be cleaner.

That's one theory.

Other thing to consider with coax connection is that the coaxial
connection can more easily be interfered by electrical signal
and carry noise to your equipment...

In very ideal system coax might be threoretically sliglty better.
In real-life situations it is pretty impossible to say which one
of the potential problems of the coax system or the optical
system cause more problems to the sound...

In real life systems, the data is digital and unless there are errors,
"slightly better" makes absolutely no difference whatsoever.

You *can* have the exact same datastream with audible differences.

No, you can't.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:25:50 +0000, Signal wrote:


"AZ Nomad" emitted :

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical
jacks. Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are
they all equal?

The optical signal has to be converted from/to an electrical signal.
So theoretically I suppose the coax connection might be cleaner.

That's one theory.

Other thing to consider with coax connection is that the coaxial
connection can more easily be interfered by electrical signal
and carry noise to your equipment...

In very ideal system coax might be threoretically sliglty better.
In real-life situations it is pretty impossible to say which one
of the potential problems of the coax system or the optical
system cause more problems to the sound...

In real life systems, the data is digital and unless there are errors,
"slightly better" makes absolutely no difference whatsoever.

You *can* have the exact same datastream with audible differences.

Yeah. Your equipment can be such a piece of crap that it hasn't
a stable local clock.

Usually you have to go out of your way to find such garbage.

Oh wait, I almost forgot. If you pay big bucks for such garbage,
its "better".

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:17:59 GMT, AZ Nomad
wrote:

You *can* have the exact same datastream with audible differences.

Yeah. Your equipment can be such a piece of crap that it hasn't
a stable local clock.

Nope. If the timing's off it isn't the same datastream. He made a
point of saying "datastream" instead of just "data".

"Signal" wrote ...
Yes, a stream of data. You seem to be insisting that the term "data
stream" invariably also describes the timing of the data therein. Can
you provide an authoritative definition that confirms this?

Can YOU provide "authoritative definition" of your particular
notion of what "data stream" means? Certainly "data stream"
implies the broader context of timing, encoding, modulation,
etc. which "data" does not, at least IMHO.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Clyde Slick" wrote in message

"Pooh Bear"
wrote in message ...


Paul L wrote:

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial
and optical jacks. Which connection should I use to get
better sound quality or are they all equal?

They should give identical results.

As will two tin cups connected by a string.

On the face of it, this appears to be total nonsense.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Clyde Slick" wrote in message

"Pooh Bear"
wrote in message ...


Paul L wrote:

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial
and optical jacks. Which connection should I use to get
better sound quality or are they all equal?

They should give identical results.

As will two tin cups connected by a string.

On the face of it, this appears to be total nonsense.

Depends if string is wet.

geoff

"Tomi Holger Engdahl" wrote in message

Other thing to consider with coax connection is that the coaxial
connection can more easily be interfered by electrical signal
and carry noise to your equipment...


And ground-loops. But there has to be a very crass interference of any sort
to causre one single bit error, or induce jitter that would cause a bit
error.

geoff

"Signal" wrote in message

You *can* have the exact same datastream with audible differences.

Please explain how.

geoff

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Paul L" wrote in message
om...
My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical
jacks. Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are
they all equal?

The coaxial connection is superior, although modern digital receiver chips
have narrowed the difference.

In the service manuals for certain digital preamps, Sony instructs that
the adjustment for harmonic distortion must be performed with a signal
source delivered by the coaxial input. This shows that in some cases, the
digital input receiver can suffer with an optical connection, in a
measurable way.


No it doesn't. I shows Sony have more faith in the integrity of any form of
coax over the variable quality of (potentially cheap-and-nasty) optical.

geoff

AZ Nomad wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:25:50 +0000, Signal wrote:

"AZ Nomad" emitted :

My DVD player and my digital reciever have both coaxial and optical
jacks. Which connection should I use to get better sound quality or are
they all equal?

The optical signal has to be converted from/to an electrical signal.
So theoretically I suppose the coax connection might be cleaner.

That's one theory.

Other thing to consider with coax connection is that the coaxial
connection can more easily be interfered by electrical signal
and carry noise to your equipment...

In very ideal system coax might be threoretically sliglty better.
In real-life situations it is pretty impossible to say which one
of the potential problems of the coax system or the optical
system cause more problems to the sound...

In real life systems, the data is digital and unless there are errors,
"slightly better" makes absolutely no difference whatsoever.

You *can* have the exact same datastream with audible differences.

Yeah. Your equipment can be such a piece of crap that it hasn't
a stable local clock.

Usually you have to go out of your way to find such garbage.

Oh wait, I almost forgot. If you pay big bucks for such garbage,
its "better".

Because it's purer it picks up the timing 'imperfections' ! ;-)

Graham

You *can* have the exact same datastream with audible differences.

What is the cause of the differences, then?

That's like saying, "You can hit the exact same keys and not type the same
words."

"mc" wrote in message
. ..

Indeed, because of the elimination of EMI with optical, if anything Sony
should be recommending the use of the optical input for critical
adjustments.

I was wondering the same thing. If it's digital, why isn't it absolutely
bit-for-bit identical both ways? The optical input would be immune to
electromagnetic noise, and that should be the only difference. Normally
they should be indistinguishable because electromagnetic noise strong
enough to disrupt a digital signal is rare.

I was thinking - and someone else pointed out - that it may simply have to
do with their testing logic. There may be some small part of the circuitry
that they want to include or omit from the test procedure at this step.

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...

AZ Nomad wrote:


Yeah. Your equipment can be such a piece of crap that it hasn't
a stable local clock.

Usually you have to go out of your way to find such garbage.

Oh wait, I almost forgot. If you pay big bucks for such garbage,
its "better".

Because it's purer it picks up the timing 'imperfections' ! ;-)

In fact there is a marketing strategy buried in this. If a piece of
equipment is excessively sensitive to odd variations in its associated
components, then it is perceived by some as being "more revealing".

Thus a power amp that can't handle some speaker loads is "More revealing of
differences in speakers"

A speaker that is poorly designed and has a very low and/or reactive
impedance curve is "More revealing of differences in amplifiers"

A DAC that is unduly sensitive to RF, and grounding situations is "More
revealing of digital sources"

...and so on.

"mc" wrote in message
. ..

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

In the service manuals for certain digital preamps, Sony
instructs that the adjustment for harmonic distortion
must be performed with a signal source delivered by the
coaxial input. This shows that in some cases, the digital
input receiver can suffer with an optical connection, in
a measurable way.

No excuse for this kind of flaw at all.

Indeed, because of the elimination of EMI with optical, if anything Sony
should be recommending the use of the optical input for critical
adjustments.

I was wondering the same thing. If it's digital, why isn't it absolutely
bit-for-bit identical both ways?

Every digital signal is received as an analog signal. The conversion to
digital can be a point where difficulties arise. An ideal digital receiver
is immune to noise and timing problems with its input signals, but nothing's
perfect.

The optical input would be immune to electromagnetic noise, and that
should be the only difference.

Agreed. In fact any grounding problems that may exist can be exagerated by
common kinds of tests that are done on power amps.

Normally they should be indistinguishable because electromagnetic noise
strong enough to disrupt a digital signal is rare.

The digital signal in question is not as robust as it might be. It's in the
1-2 volt peak-to-peak range. Really bad grounding problems can add noise in
the same voltage range.

"mc" wrote in message
...
You *can* have the exact same datastream with audible differences.

What is the cause of the differences, then?

That's like saying, "You can hit the exact same keys and not type the same
words."



I ddo that alle the time!



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

mc wrote:

You *can* have the exact same datastream with audible differences.

What is the cause of the differences, then?

The timing of the edges of the data. As a coax cable gets longer, the edges
'slow down' and the consequence of this is slightly 'mistimed' data. If the
receiveing equipment doesn't have a good phase locked loop for bitclock
recovery, that timing error - ( equivalent to jitter ) may impose a
consequence on the recovered audio.

Graham

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...

AZ Nomad wrote:

Yeah. Your equipment can be such a piece of crap that it hasn't
a stable local clock.

Usually you have to go out of your way to find such garbage.

Oh wait, I almost forgot. If you pay big bucks for such garbage,
its "better".

Because it's purer it picks up the timing 'imperfections' ! ;-)

In fact there is a marketing strategy buried in this. If a piece of
equipment is excessively sensitive to odd variations in its associated
components, then it is perceived by some as being "more revealing".

Thus a power amp that can't handle some speaker loads is "More revealing of
differences in speakers"

A speaker that is poorly designed and has a very low and/or reactive
impedance curve is "More revealing of differences in amplifiers"

A DAC that is unduly sensitive to RF, and grounding situations is "More
revealing of digital sources"

..and so on.

Neatly put.

Graham

mc wrote:

You *can* have the exact same datastream with audible differences.

What is the cause of the differences, then?

That's like saying, "You can hit the exact same keys and not type the same
words."

I always though that it was a missed marketing opputunity that disk drive
manufacturers didn't claim that *their* magnetic coatings could make your
letters read better.

Graham

That's like saying, "You can hit the exact same keys and not type the
same
words."

I always though that it was a missed marketing opputunity that disk drive
manufacturers didn't claim that *their* magnetic coatings could make your
letters read better.

Most office workers aren't audiophiles.

mc wrote:

That's like saying, "You can hit the exact same keys and not type the
same
words."

I always though that it was a missed marketing opputunity that disk drive
manufacturers didn't claim that *their* magnetic coatings could make your
letters read better.

Most office workers aren't audiophiles.

You mean audiophools surely ? ;-)

Graham