0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 14024 times.
TOSLINK should have audible inferiority to coax because (a) TOSLINK imposes another layer of dual signal conversion (converting electrical to optical S/PDIF at the transmitter then converting optical back to electrical at the receiver and (b) the majority of optical interfaces measure significantly (and in some cases massively) higher jitter.Subjectively listening without measurements revealed to me that coax sounded better than optical in every component I tried, except for one inexpensive DVD player where I couldn't detect any difference.If noise is present in a coax S/PDIF connection, then TOSLINK will obviously be superior, but noise is somewhat rare with a decent quality component and coax S/PDIF cable. Otherwise coax sounds clearer and more focused to me than TOSLINK.
Anybody know why a PC would cause the right side of the optical to go "static/white noise"?It did that on a old DAC (thought it was the DAC/firmware) and did not go away. Did it on a newer DAC but can be corrected.
I don’t think that has anything to do with optical. It’s either the transport or the DAC itself. If it doesn’t happen on a different DAC, it’s the old DAC. If it happens on both DACs, it’s the transport. Something’s amiss, and it’s not because of the cable or format itself.
Thanks for the point. I should’ve said “in theory”, and I was paraphrasing what McGowan had said. I’m not going to argue as it’s like talking about elections. You’re voting for bad #1 or bad # 2. But Toslink indeed seems to finish dead last amongst the three...Just to be clear, I’ve never listened to Toslink critically nor do I plan on it. I’m frankly surprised that it continues to be offered in manufacturers products as it is bandwidth limited.Unfortunately, it appears that Toslink, SPDIF/Coax and USB all try to consolidate I2S signals into one single block for the sake of making a “single cable”, ie convenience (?!), and the attendant noise that ensues from the various conversions. With regards to USB, I feel that more resources have been thrown at that method over the years, so improvements have arrived. But we still have to resort to microRendus, expensive USB cables,USB Disruptors/Filters/Jitterbugs and the like to achieve “acceptable” performance imho. And don’t forget the plethora of linear supplies and “supercharged” capacitor supplies that have to support these additional doohickeys.It’s really best for us as an industry to avoid all three. I often wonder WHY I2S isn’t more universally used, it’s not like it is brand new. I mean even look at AC manufacturers. We’ve got Leo’s Orchard Audio offering the GALA (and Raspberry Pi/USB version called ApplePi) and Tommy O., offering his DAC DAC and touting all sorts of delusions of sonic grandeur. All 3 I am guessing have similar hardware/DNA, dac chip and analog output stages. And then there is CI Audio, Bryston, Modwright, etc...I’m not trying to single them out but perhaps they build what sells, and therefore it’s time for us to demand better? Or is it too expensive to offer native I2S and ethernet based transports + compatible dacs?Best,Anand.
It's an Asus motherboard, not a transport.
I often wonder WHY I2S isn’t more universally used
I use “transport” as anything that’s sending the digital stream to the DAC - computer, disc spinner, streamer, etc. I think that’s the right way to use it, but I could quite possibly be wrong.
