What did you end up with here?
Looking for a Giant Killer Digital cable
Hello all,
I’m looking for a Budget ‘Giant Killer’ RCA coaxial cable to connect my Oppo 203 to a DAC for music playback.
Can someone suggest something currently available in the $50 to $150 price range?
If however your experience says some new Optical cable in that range is as good or better, please, by all means do mention it as I could go either way of course!
A 1M to 1.5M will be sufficient.
Huge thanks!
66 responses Add your response
Thanks to all. Especially teo_audio & Steve N. Furthermore, many thanks to those whose comparisons have been included so far. I’m sorry I’ve not been paying more strick or timely attention of late. I’ve been learning the UDP 203 and thus far am pleasantly impressed. I’m bringing in two wires next week to begin the trials. Figured it a decent idea to get the 203 a bit of time spinning discs and integrating . it into the present bare bones outfit. Everything has been sitting idle for months as I’ve been leaning on the personal confuser and headphones or a pair of so soLogitech desktop speakers for any listening. That is, of course, in between Dr visits and Atty visits, and as well I’ve been learning to play my new/used Kurzweil Model Pc88 88 key and controller keyboard. The keyboard needs a better powered speaker for sure, but for now its good enough. BTW.. any and all anecdotal info is welcome regarding RCA or TOS links. As well, subjective user accounts in terms of A ‘versus’ B comparisons are quite welcome too! Ya simply don’t know what ya don’t know! Until you do. End user input always helps. Consequently so does maker feedback! Many many thanks. |
Then one is left with figuring out if the reclocking on board the given device ...is substandard or not. And whether that given reclocking is messing up cable qualities analysis, or not. Or by what degree, is the usual reality. An unfortunate state of affairs IMO. If the DAC S/PDIF input would only go to a good S/PDIF receiver like the AK4114, many DAC’s would at least have the capacity to sound a lot better with a low-jitter input source and a good S/PDIF cable. Instead, you mostly hear the Master Clock of the reclocker inside the DAC, which is usually of dubious quality. A reclocker or a good S/PDIF cable before the DAC can still be beneficial because the PLL of the reclocker in the DAC is usually still sensitive to incoming jitter (the filter of the PLL). BTW, many modern DAC’s do not have reclockers on the S/PDIF inputs, but some do use older receiver technology, so their ability to reduce or maintain low jitter is compromised. Steve N. Empirical Audio |
The glass optical cable has the standard ends of a inexpensive toslink, but are highly polished on the Wireworld. Standard cheap toslink ($15 to $30 variety) usually comes with one thick plastic line to transmit the signal. OTOH, a high quality glass optical is made up of hundreds of small glass threads to carry signal. I have compared good glass Toslink cables to a high-quality plastic one and this plastic one beat the glass: https://btpa.com/TOSLINK-XXX.html Steve N. Empirical Audio |
When looking at dac cabling one has to also look at the given reclocking scenario that may be in play. Quite a bit of the modern gear reclocks at one end of the transmission chain, or both. this will narrow the differences in cables to some degree. Then one is left with figuring out if the reclocking on board the given device ...is substandard or not. And whether that given reclocking is messing up cable qualities analysis, or not. Or by what degree, is the usual reality. This is why one has to be careful in what one thinks they hear with a given cable/dac/source combination which is in play. Beside the issue of whether the given listener has the mental/physical wherewithal to have discernment or preference for the given scenario that is at hand. traditionally, relocking is not there, so older dacs with lower resolution can many times have more of the given cable’s intrinsic qualities come shining through. This is due to the external coaxial cabling and system of transfer, was originally intended to never leave the confines of the given CD player. It was meant to be an internal hardware method of moving the bits off the cd proper and into the DAC chipset proper. It was never meant to be externalized into what it is today. Most importantly, the clocking data was embedded into the signal and transferred by the internal cable. Which is now an external coaxial cable. so the jitter of the transport/read... became the jitter of the dac. bit-word timing was determined by the cd read hardware and the spinning disc system itself. Coaxial is legacy hardware from the literal first days of digital audio on the CD format. Modern implementation has re-clocking at the DAC receiver end of things. If you read carefully, you see that the jitter of the cable, it's complex set of overall characteristics... comes into play in such a system of signal transfer. Just...sort of ...restating the argument of the whole process, with regard to fundamentals. |
BlindJim Like some I prefer physical ownership of my music and I guess I could rip my CDs and store my collection away however I don’t mind plopping a disc in a tray. When it comes DSD , Sacd and jacked up music files sold as Hi-res music I’m highly sceptical of it well most anything the industry pushes I’m weary of . Back to the subject I did manage to borrow a DH silver sonic coax cable and compared it to the I2s and found little difference with the I2s I’m hearing it in low level information and perhaps a bit more realistic sounding human voice and vocalist however that was just one evening of listening . |
Blindjim, The glass optical cable has the standard ends of a inexpensive toslink, but are highly polished on the Wireworld. Standard cheap toslink ($15 to $30 variety) usually comes with one thick plastic line to transmit the signal. OTOH, a high quality glass optical is made up of hundreds of small glass threads to carry signal. The Wireworld has approx. 330 of these minute glass cables bundled into one. This makes for a much more expensive interconnect, but is vastly superior to a standard cheap toslink. I have done extensive comparisons with both. YMMV. |
@in_shore My curiosity grows on the PSA WAVE setup. Albeit, given the biz with DSD vs all other formats, I believe I’ll aim for merely Red Book playback DACs. If they have more attributes or support more BR and SR then fine. Have you found via comparison sake, between two identical titles, one off SACD disc, one streamed via the I2S one is best on all accounts? That question seems loaded, as there are a few variables, but generally speaking if the I2 and USB cables in play are the exact same level from the same maker, it should be a close enough experiment I would suspect. LowRider RE “its great with video” At $700, it ought to be. I’ve found too merely adding a nice upscale Power Cord on the rendering device vastly improved the video. Good to very good will suffice for my needs, its mostly for company or a date night anyhow. I tend to use the Narrative Audio track now on many BR discs. Using this optional audio track, it is almost like old time radio. Most things are verbally explained during the film by a separate voice. Even in the chasing, combat, and fighting scenes. Description rests in between the standard dialog. It’s a brave new world sports fans! . . . . . . @mr_m Thanks. Yeah. I did not mention optical on purpose. Although I’ve had somewhat similar results to your own with various low end TOS links. One issue arises in what your post says… ‘glass’. It is my understanding the glass refers to a different connector or interface than simpler TOS cables. Is this your own EXP with the one you mention? Did it come with adapters if so? With various iterations of el cheapo TOS links from the early ‘s, $20 - $40, the sound was hard on most discs, and from CATV boxes via bit stream except for greater sampling rates above 44K. Surprisingly, a 6ft TOS I picked up at Wally World in a pinch eased up the stern presentations of the shorter thinner 1M links from Best buy or online outlets. In fact that wally cable became my go to TOS for CATV boxes and Megga CD changers. $15 I think. |
blindjim, I skimmed though this thread and didn't see any mention of a optical cable. I know there are many people out there that don't like optical, BUT I found one I use in my system (connects my streamer to my Ayre Codex dac) that I found that sounded incredibly good. It's the Wireworld Super Nova 7 glass optical. It retails for $200. I got mine new for $150 for a 1 meter length. Not sure how it compares with the better coax cables out there, but this one impressed the heck out of me. IMO. Worth a try??? |
LowRider I never did use any other cable with the PS Audio player and PS Audio dac senior except the factory supplied I2s cable then later changing over to the WireWorld platinum starlight which btw is exceptional with video . As you most likely know users of PS Audio components are well aware SACD playback via the I2s outputs the DSD signal with licensing agreements though some discs I have are detailed , smooth and inviting I have a pile of red-book CDs that rival sacd playback including DVD Audio and so called hi-res downloads that I listened to . Changing dacs is a long story however currently with playback I’m getting a downsampled PCM version using the PS Audio DMP and Denafrips Dac at 88.2KHz 24 bit and with direct comparison between the two dacs the Denafrips easily surpassed the PS Audio dac for a much , much more enjoyable playback presentation , well that’s what I hear,.. Finally Im just curious to listen to a very good coax cable in direct comparison to the I2s . |
I haven't tried i2s interface. However, I think the Wireworld HDMI cables are probably the best design overall. Many have touted how good USB is and several are of the opinion that USB is the best digital audio connection. Of course, you can only do DSD audio over USB (or i2s). In my experience, digital COAX performed much better than USB, but I was just using the USB straight from my motherboard with a poor USB DAC. I have not tried any of the upgraded USB cards (SOTM, JCAT, Paul Pang). I'm sure the quality of the USB receiver in the DAC has a lot to do with it as well (the better ones being like Amanero or Singxer). |
@auxinput Impressive. Certainly appreciated. Thanks. . . . .. . . . . . @in_shore > Anyway I find this cable subject interesting especially Audioengr comments and test results which got me to order his reference coax cable . Blindjim > I’ll echo the need for you to clue us in on your subjective appraisals of the reference wire. Plese. Thanks. . . . . . . . . . .. @lowrider57 Thoughtful. Many Thanks. . . . . . . . .. . . . . @teo_audio Thanks for the input. Jim will need something else…. 10 – 4! . . . . .. . . . . Yep. I’m still here. I’ve decided to get a couple wires and some BNC to RCA adapters for my Oyaide BNC cable and do a wee comparison test among the three. One of the new wires is decided. The other one is still a question mark, but the dust is settling. Although the Oyaide BNC on site is a 1.3M (4.27ft) cable, I’ll shoot for lengths of 1.5M (4.92ft). the application in this case simply does not warrant more investment IMHO. Stay tuned for feedback on things going forward. Hopefully this will not turn out to be a matter of preferred differences, rather than improved performance given the constraints of the associated gear at this interval. We’ll see. |
A variable cap and variable resistor on the input termination of the dac, and then use a scope to look..and tune a perfect edge on the input waveform. I used to do that in hardwired video installs for custom built CRT projection systems. tuned both ends of the transmission line. cheap as all get out, best signal quality. slightly outside of the capabilities of most but definitely doable. other than that, it is the liquid metal cables, where the impedance is not a set aspect and dynamically adjusts to the signal and the termination in all given potential points of the line itself, in any given microsecond. Besides being capable of handling DC to MHz-GHz range signals. No other digital S/PDIF cable can come close to those specs. It's a honey badger cable ---as honey badger doesn't care. Although, not so inexpensive. Jim will need something extra. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL-3eU67wOc |
I found I2S when used with PS Audio devices to be superior to all...S/PDIF, USB, Optical. With I2S. the power and data stream travel thru different conductors thereby reducing noise and interference. USB is susceptible to noise since the data and power source are combined and travel thru the same conductor. Noise may be from a computer, the type of power supply, or grounding issue. That's why some sort of decrapifier like the Schiit Wyrd or an Empirical Audio device is needed. |
This is a subject I am naive to and up until now my understanding was that data transfer using I2s and USB are the bases for superior data performance. Currently I use I2s output from a PS Audio Direct Stream Memory Player to a Denafrips Terminator dac and speaking for myself to date I am experiencing the best most enjoyable digital playback in my home so far . The I2s cable I use is WireWorlds platinum starlight their top HDMI cable which I found to outperform by a good margin PS Audios supplied Kimbercable I2s cable , is the WireWorld cable worth $700.00 I couldn’t say . Anyway I find this cable subject interesting especially Audioengr comments and test results which got me to order his reference coax cable . |
Analog cable does not have the "reflection issue" because it is transmitting analog waveforms (which are very curvy/ragged). Analog also does not transmit at digital speeds. Analog pretty much maxes out at 20 kilohertz to 30 kilohertz. But digital transmission pulses can be in the megahertz range. With analog cables, it is my opinion that shorter is better (but you can do a long length analog cable if you wish). |
Jitter correction really doesn't have anything to do with the length of the cable. Jitter can be caused by different things, but mostly it is cause by poor clocks or translating audio data back and forth between different digital transmission clock rates. A good example of this is transmitting S/PDIF over HDMI signal data. Jitter can also be caused by a "store-and-forward" mechanism of transferring digital data between data bus sections. The minimum length of cable recommended is generally 1.5M (which is just over 4 1/2 feet). I always go 6 feet / 2 meter just to be safe. A short cable can cause reflections. This happens when the square wave pulse generated at the source hits the target receiver, but the pulse is actually reflected or echoed back down the wire to the source transmitter - which then can cause interference with the next generated pulses (sometimes cancelling out the pulses enough so that it comes across as a NULL pulse). This doesn't just relate to digital SPDIF coax. The cable length / reflection issue occurs with all digital cables, including USB and HDMI as well. There are times where you have a very strong transmitter (such as an HDMI transmitter chip). I have seen cases where equipment manufacturers actually recommend long HDMI cables. Sometimes short cables just won't work because of the reflection problems. Lumagen Radiance video processors is a good example here. |
@tom_hankins Hmmm. Did not know the Carbon was available as a SPDIF. Thought it was just a USB wire. Good. Do you feel the Carbon is similar in either respect, USB or SPDIF, acoustically or sonically speaking of course? Thanks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . aolprodj thank you for your input. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Some time back, there was much to do about the length of digital cables. The upshot of it all was that 1.5M (6ft) cables were the prime choice for ANY likewise application. In fact, this desired or presumed length of 6ft. began expressing itself as the golden rule length for analog cables too. Does this still hold true? Or has the current advancements in jitter correction within the devices addressed this to the point of making one particular length vs another, irrelevant to the conversation? Thanks. |
@folkfreak Appreciate the thoughtful insights and personal EXP accounts. Very cool. ULTIMATELY I FOUND THRU THESE PAGES AND OTHERS, bnc AND aes WERE BETTER INTERFACES. SOME INTERESTING GEAR HOWEVER DID NOT ALWAYS provide both or either. Then many digital devices began hanging their hats onto USB conversion to get past or beyond PC Sound cards. Albeit I had quite good results using the likes of Lynx or a Hammer (??). I still enjoy what the Lynx AES 16 express brings to the what ever DAC it feeds, even though the AES cable is quite low on the food chain. Gotham. Presently it seems the streaming fascination has exploded in my absence and much press says the inherent bug a boos of USB have been soundly addressed to the point USB has once more become a solid avenue for data transference. I’m still residing in the camp of Ethernet to the streamer thingy but would then prefer the conduit du jour either be AES or BNC at the what ever dAC side. RE directional cable Every cable I’ve ever owned is directional. Each one goes DIRECTLY from one conection to another. No stops in between. No detours. Picture taking. No Autograph seeking. No Chucky Cheese and definitely no loitering. With luck, we’ll see first hand on several accounts in due time. Thanks. . . . . . . . . . . . @lowrider57 lol blindjim > organics are key. Thereafter, imaging. Is the Aren't we looking for these attributes in the rest of our system? Thank you. yes. Of course. That brief insight on tones and presentation is the bar I hold for any thing entering and remaining in my main audio system. Albeit, the usual arbiter is its affordability and just as with any long term relationship compromises eventually find their way into the equation due to financial constraints. Fortunately, I’ve been able to put together outfits which demonstrate loads of ‘they are here’ or I am there events, without inordinately reducing the on hand listening catalog. Music listening for me is a devotion, not a discipline. Music making? That is where discipline is unavoidable. … and yep. It do take a while some times. . . . . . . . . . tommylion fascinating. Many thanks. . . . . . . . . . . . . wloeb I am very grateful. Tanks. . . . . . . . . . roxy54 OK. I’m thinking I’m sold. Actually on a couple two or three wires mentioned here. Very nice. Huge thanks. |
Hi All, Sorry to be late in responding. I certainly don't want to represent myself as an expert regarding digital cables, but I have used for long periods of time 5 different brands, and when I bought the Cerious Graphene Extreme, I just felt that it had everything I was looking for with no negatives (for me). I think that it is dynamic, smooth, detailed in a natural way, excellent focus and very good at revealing timbre. That's about it. |
“For my concerns, organics are key. Thereafter, imaging. Is the note being propelled more by the steel strings of the banjo or guitar and the resonance of the instrument itself? Is the sound of brass all about its leading edge demonstration or is the timber of its notes honest and musical? Is there note development and decay? Does it simply feel right sounding or off, or exaggerated??” blindjim, “Organic” is a word I would use to describe the sound of the Cerious GE digital cable. From my experience with it, I would answer all these questions positively. |
Regular S/PDIF COAX digital cable is actually not a bad system, though using BNC connectors is best. Only a true i2s digital connection is better because the DAC/source does not have to encode the stereo digital signals into a single wire signal. That is the S/PDIF method. I2S is not necessarily a panacea either, although its a good start. Most of my products have I2S interfaces, both SE and differential (HDMI connector), so I know how they behave. Galvanic isolation of I2S is a non-starter because it adds too much jitter. Because S/PDIF is a zero-crossing signal, at least it’s easy to add a high-quality pulse transformer and get isolation. I have compare with my own DAC the difference between S/PDIF input (on BNC) to I2S input (on RJ-45). The difference is actually really small, almost audibly undetectable. This is partly because I use a AK4114 receiver, which reduces S/PDIF jitter significantly. As for differential I2S, the problem there IMO is the LVDS driver and receiver that add jitter. I think the SE I2S on RJ-45 is better. The other advantage of S/PDIF over I2S is that a world-class cable for SPDIF is a lot less expensive than a world-class cable for I2S. Steve N. Empirical Audio |
if we assume you cannot get a true 75ohm out of an RCA ... I wonder why more manufacturers don't get it right, maybe as those that care that much are including S/PDIF on RCA as a convenience and prefer you use AES3 or some other method? Simple. They don't have the expertise/experience to execute these designs correctly. After seeing many of these designs in my modding days, I came to the conclusion that they just copy each other, not really understanding how the interface really behaves. The bad designs just get replicated over and over. Steve N. Empirical Audio |
S/PDIF TOSLINK fiberoptic is actually a very horrible cable. The reason is that the LED or light generating source just cannot light up fast enough to transmit the digital square waves properly. It comes across as a very squirly looking wave (not square at all). The result is lost resolution and information - possible problems from signal reflections, ability for target to properly read in the light signals, etc. Regular S/PDIF COAX digital cable is actually not a bad system, though using BNC connectors is best. Only a true i2s digital connection is better because the DAC/source does not have to encode the stereo digital signals into a single wire signal. That is the S/PDIF method. Keep in mind that i2s connections will typically use an HDMI cable. This does not mean it’s an HDMI interface. It just uses the cable/connectors as the physical medium for transmitting the i2s signals (which are completely different from normal HDMI audio/video). |
@audioengr I have no reason to disagree with you that S/PDIF cannot perform well if properly implemented -- but my comment related to consumer implementations with RCA or TOS termination, not a true 75ohm BNC -- if we assume you cannot get a true 75ohm out of an RCA ... I wonder why more manufacturers don't get it right, maybe as those that care that much are including S/PDIF on RCA as a convenience and prefer you use AES3 or some other method? |
@blindjim organics are key. Thereafter, imaging. Is the note being propelled more by the steel strings of the banjo or guitar and the resonance of the instrument itself? Is the sound of brass all about its leading edge demonstration or is the timber of its notes honest and musical? Is there note development and decay? Does it simply feel right sounding or off, or exaggerated?? Very well articulated statement. Aren't we looking for these attributes in the rest of our system? There is no reason to accept less performance when it comes to digital, but it seems to take longer to reach this goal. |
This is your experience with your particular equipment, not something that you can make broad conclusions from. There is nothing fundamentally flawed with S/PDIF as a transmission medium. There is no reason why it cannot be as good or better than any others, except perhaps lack of error correction. It is double-terminated, so if the interfaces are properly designed, it will have superb signal integrity and very low jitter. I routinely get ~15psec at the end of the cable across 75 ohm terminator. This is the rub. Very few designers get the driver right. Wrong impedance and wrong voltage. I used to mod a lot of CD players/transports and computer audio equipment. Not one of them was designed right, even from Sony. Steve N. Empirical Audio |
@blindjim thanks for the good summary of your experience Through 30 years experience in digital my realization has been that while cables do make a big difference the initial and dominant factor is choice of interface itself. S/PDIF is about the worse possible platform for carrying digital data. In my experience (most recently with dCS stacks) there is a clear hierarchy (assume here we are carrying 16/44.1, of course the latter several formats can also carry DSD and higher rate PCM) S/PDIF (TOS) -> S/PDIF (RCA)->AES3->FireWire (presumably also other similar proprietary HDMI based formats)->Dual AES/EBU In any configuration a step up in cables will bring benefit but generally lesser cables in a better interface will outperform better cables on a less stable interface. Of course with your Oppo you only have S/PDIF so this is moot but even so changing the cable will make a difference. I do wonder however if there is any way of using the HDMI out (audio only) - presumably this is primarily provided for multi-channel but I suspect this may be a superior stereo interface, it could be worth exploring. .... Also as you are no doubt aware the cable itself will be directional The only 75Ohm cables in my current setup are those carrying the clocks -- which is actually a tough proposition and very cable sensitive. Going from AQ Eagle Eye to Transparent Ref XL was a substantial step up. For my most recent addition of a 10MHz master I used a Marigo 75Ohm cable and was a) again amazed at the step up from a generic BNC but b) most surprised at how different it sounded one way round rather than another |
@carmenc Agreed. Tanks. . . . . . . . . . . . . @audioengr Wow. Good to know. Got any compunction to explain why? Your input is always valued and appreciated. Tanks much. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . @uberwaltz Thanks. I agree on some wires not palying well with various setups. Funny how that works. I refer to when a certain thing is either working or not working out well as the FM circuit. F*****g Mystery ckt. It do happen! Tanks a lot. . . . . . . . . … @roxy54 Certainly exciting news!? I would echo other comments asking for subjective or anecdotal appraisals of the cable’s sonic and presentation attributes if you please. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . @auxinput Great info! Very thoughtful! Definitely interested. Big thanks. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . Sorry if I missed anyone. Its odd that something of a consensus seems to be materializing on the disparity between modest or moderately priced SPDIF conducting cables and those costing far, far, more. It is in fact my own EXP as well. In years past, I auditioned some SOTA wires costing upwards of $1200 vs those of $100, to $500. Naturally it was system dependant in that all were rolled into and out of one particular point for data transference, Sony XA 777 to Bel Canto DAC 3. Later on as the link from sound upper end cards and or Hiface to the same BC D3. In each instance tone, musicality and special cue disparities were readily observed. However, those beyond or above the then modest cost of $200 and under were tuff to totally beat in overall performance.. For my concerns, organics are key. Thereafter, imaging. Is the note being propelled more by the steel strings of the banjo or guitar and the resonance of the instrument itself? Is the sound of brass all about its leading edge demonstration or is the timber of its notes honest and musical? Is there note development and decay? Does it simply feel right sounding or off, or exaggerated?? That said, I regularly prefer as transparent a reproduction as possible so long as it is not fatiguing. I feel things are right when my head quits questioning this or that all the time a tune plays and my knee is bobing up and down, or a smile gets plastered on my face during the listening session.. Although…. I have unerringly experienced in a very familiar system owned by a friend, that one unobtainium cable ($2K plus) can unquestionably place itself way above many when auditioning several dACs in a casual DAC comparison some time ago. I wrote about this instance in a former review I posted on these pages 5 or 6 years back. the SPDIF link fed from a Wavelength USB to SPDIF converter and it handed data off to the then most recent iteration of the Bel Canto D3.1 or .2. can’t recall exactly now. Without controversy from the crowd, that array once feeding the audio system was simply and utterly goose bumpy impressive playing the same well known files all were familiarized with during the session. Whoa. The degree of virtual ‘reality’ was not even close. It must be said too, the Wavelength, BC D3.1, arrangement overall was the most expensive setup of the three DACs being auditioned. Was it indeed the SPDIF link? Gordon’s USB to SPDIF Brick? The BC D3.1? whatever carried the day, hauled it off without regrets! The other DACS were Mitner USB DSD DAC, and a Berkley USB DAC. See account for more details. Naturally then I’ve been convinced there is something to the notion of cabling expenses contributing to increasing system performance. And certainly, the setup itself really, really does matter. This bottom line remains, is it justifiable? Further, is it in your world, then doable? |
Few things I have learned about digital coax cables: - BNC connectors are best, but need to get closest to a true 75 ohm RCA connector as possible. - For cable composition, solid-core is best with silver-plated or pure silver being the desired for digital signals. - Watch cable length. I always get 2M / 6 foot digital cables because I have experienced the reflection problems on short cables - this comes across as slightly smeared sound with a loss of resolution. So, that being said, there are a couple of ideas: 1. Blue Jeans - Beldon 1694A with the Canare RCAP connectors. It's very cheap at $21 for a 6 foot, but I have been very impressed with this digital cable. It has beat other cables that were actually a lot more expensive. 2. DH Labs D-750. A solid-core silver plated conductor with RCA connectors that I think are closest to 75 ohm. About $200 for 1.5M or $235 for 2M. I haven't really looked at other cables because I really cannot see spending more than $300 on a coax digital. But I've thought about building a digital cable using 2 meters of the VH Audio Pulsar Ag silver cable with DH Labs RCA-750 plugs. This is way down on my priority list because there are many other priorities - and the Beldon 1694A cable performs so well in my systems. |
Been very happy with my Nordost Silver Shadow digital coax, it is terminated in bnc both ends and i use bnc to rca adapters both ends. Some NOS around for between 150 to 200 i believe Have to admit though that Nordost does not suit every system, works well in mine and i preferred the sq over a couple much more spendy audioquest and wireworld cables i tried. |
folkfreak got it. cool. Many thanks. …. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . @audioengr That’s better. Wasn’t able to see exactly which wire you refered to in the previous Link. Can’t RCA termination maintain the 75Ohm protocol? The flexibility from B.. to R.. is attractive, but I’d prefer the most stable, better performer per se, than a one size fits all solution. Usually. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . soix excellent. Huge thanks. Having something is better than having not something. It breeds freedom and nonchalance, making the hunt a stroll rather than a gallop.. that’s the one! I had the v2 as well. Cool. . . . . . . . . . . .. . yping considerable thanks. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . As this particular item gets dedicated for RCA to RCA digital 75 ohm use, it should be self evident the proposition leans heavily onto convenience with performance attributes being slightly less important. For one, its merely an Oppo universal format player and used in an HT array where audio is a supportive element more so than the star. Only streaming audio and CDs with 16/44 is getting passed out via SPDIF anyhow. Unless it will as well pass higher sampling rates with HD audio files. Hmmm. Dunno. Consequently, throwing wads of dough into this bucket just makes little sense to me. There is little sense in putting a $4,000 trailer hitch on a 1980 F 150 300 cid Pickup that hauls around bee hives, lawn debris and the occasional building supplies. Right? Right. Although, YRMV. |
also noticed these ones ... Mad Scientist Heretical Digital Cable (HDC) Mad Scientist Flexible Carbon/Graphene Digital Interconnects |