Technically speaking, Fiber optics are less affected by interference than Digital Coaxial cables...however if you get decent cables with gold plating and shielding, you won't be able to tell a difference.
Lets cloud this issue a bit! I used an AR Toslink cable for about two years and then read that digital coax may be better as the signal does not have to be converted to light and vice versa, etc, etc.
I bought an Audioquest digital interconnect and it sounded much better than the toslink. Why? Simply because I wanted to justify spending the money!
I have not noticed any real difference, but the Audioquest cable does look flashier than the AR toslink!
The answer is probably that it is easier to find an inferior digital coax cable than to find an inferior toslink. Once again that is only my opinion!
"Engine" and "Phart" are reminding me why I stopped participating in this forum for so long. I thought maybe some of this had calmed down, but apparently not. Grow up guys. I teach 7th graders with more maturity.
engine giver
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Johnny come lately speak with poison tongue. Give forum bad name.
phart buster
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Johnny take some ex lax and chill. If you don't like the forum, don't come back.
I feel that coax is warmer but that too maybe justification for spending more money dunno, just sounds better too me and I know that scientifically they are probably too close for human ears to notice.
Relax Johnny, I don't take these two seriously. They are just having fun.
I am still using my coax interconnect and I am happy with it and gave the toslink to my daughter to use with their HT setup and they are happy.
As Joseph says there is probably such little difference that it does not matter.
Maybe it will be possible to hear an improvement if listening conditions were fixed i.e. The same source, the same temperature, the same humidity, the same phase of the moon - He, he, he!
I know that there are people who claim that they can hear the difference between speaker cables and interconnects, but after years of relentless ear-pounding I listen to what I enjoy regardless of how much it costs and if I miss the finer nuances, so be it.
passby
Unregistered guest
Posted on
coaxial is better than optical. go to audioholic.com, read some of the articles.
but it's all up to your ears. if you can tell the different between these 2, choose the best one. most of the time and most ppl actually cant tell the different...(including me...haaa)
audioquest is over pricey stuff, they look good, nice outlook, but simply over pricey with their peformance.. blue jeans sells cheaper and better cable......
engine giver
Unregistered guest
Posted on
I like um Abe. Good hombre. Johnny dumbo. Too bad he teaches papoose.
There are plenty of quality well shielded RCAs selling for $20 that will serve the coax purpose just as well as the most expensive boutique cable.
I personally think I overspent by spending $50 for a pair. I probably would have been just as well off had I kept using my old RCAs and used them for that purpose, but what fun is buying a new receiver if you dont replace your cables too??
A few days ago I bought a Wireworld SuperNova 5 glass optical cable for my HT. It souded great incredible detail. I heard things in movies that I never heard before. However I missed the sheer weight and low end slam that I was used to out of my home theater. I returned the Wireworld for a Tributaries Silver SVC 1.5 coax and bam the slam was back. I lost a little of the detail but regained the fun with my movies. Moral of the story: If you don't hear differences in cable then by all means don't bother buying special cables, if you do hear differences, you aren't nuts...buy what sounds good to you and enjoy.