[drphoto]

Hey all, I've got a stock SB2. I'm using a regular IC from the digial output into my DAC. Do I need one of those special 75 ohm digital cables?

Seems to work ok, but would it sound 'extra special' with the correct cable? 

[tanchiro58]

Hey all, I've got a stock SB2. I'm using a regular IC from the digial output into my DAC. Do I need one of those special 75 ohm digital cables?

Seems to work ok, but would it sound 'extra special' with the correct cable? 

You will need to modify your stock SB2 in order to match with any decent (with reasonable price) digital cable to connect to your DAC which also needs some modifications at least.

[woodsyi]

From what I understand, digital cables perform the best when impedance is right.  S/PDIF would be 75 ohms.  Here is an explanation from Blue Jeans Cable. http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/impedance.htm  I am not endorsing one company or another but I use Bolder digital cable with digital out on one of my SB2's. My take is that bad digital cable will mess your S/PDIF signals further, but even the best pure 75 ohm digital connection will not give you "extra special" sound without first improving the digital signal stream like Tanchiro said.

[mcullinan]

Different Digital cables make your system sound different. Why? I have no clue. I have a stereovox XV2 that I purchased and put in my system and this cable has gotten many great reviews... it was aweful.  This made me go back to my Morrow Dig-1 cable which is great! Synergy baby!
Mike

[kbuzz3]

Im also mystified by the change in sound of dig cable-even lower cost cable. I recently swapped out a pair of similarly priced models and the sound did change for the better. Go figure.

Good advice above, fix the stream first then experiment with cable

[art]

We have posted some info on our site that may give some insight as to why they in fact do sound different.

I am not giving a link since I have received enough flak for one day from certain segments here. If you are interested, I'll let you seek it out without any bloviating from me.

PAt

[Bob in St. Louis]

We have posted some info on our site that may give some insight as to why they in fact do sound different.

I am not giving a link since I have received enough flak for one day from certain segments here. If you are interested, I'll let you seek it out without any bloviating from me.

I haven't received much flak recently, so I'll do it.
Is this the article?:
http://www.analogresearch-technology.net/ubyte.html

Bob

[Blackmore]

Hey Bob:
If you want to compare some digital cable, I'm using Pat's 16 footer.  Let me know.

[Bob in St. Louis]

Hey Mark, that would be cool. I'd very much like to take you up on that offer. Thanks! 

Bob

[woodsyi]

We have posted some info on our site that may give some insight as to why they in fact do sound different.

I am not giving a link since I have received enough flak for one day from certain segments here. If you are interested, I'll let you seek it out without any bloviating from me.

PAt

Pat,

You are encouraged share your knowledge in this circle.  What you cannot do per site regulation, is to introduce your product without someone specifically inviting you to present it.  If you had a white page link on you site, it would be perfectly alright to link it.  You are, however, right in that you cannot link your own item for sale even if it has very good technical information on it.  It is perfectly fine, however, for Bob to link it since he is not affiliated with you or your company. 

I hope you will continue to participate and share your knowledge with us in this circle and thanks for your understanding.

P.S.  Now I have a question for you.  Why 16ft?  I have heard 1.5m being the optimum or something like that.  Any reason for 16ft?

[art]

A cynical person may say it is because we can make 6 of them from a 100' roll.

Some people think that 1.5 m is sufficient, but I don't see how they can say that it is "optimum". They point to additional loss and some other mumbo-jumbo (that probably is not worth the space) to justify their view of optimum. The additional loss and pulse dispersion (spreading of the pulse) is insignificant at 6m, compared to 1.5 m. The additional loss may in fact be a benefit. Provided, of course, that is doesn't alter the waveform greatly.

I would consider 2 m to be a minimum, if you believe the way we do. The extra 4 m or so.............well, if the thought of getting an extra 4 m thrown in for free troubles you, then don't buy ours. Think of it as a bonus to assure that reflections won't muck things up.

Pat