I'm looking at the Synergistic Research Galileo UEF Digital BNC. As well as the Wave High Fidelity Cable and the High Fidelity Reveal BNC and the Black Cat Tron Ditial Cables, respectively. What do you consider the best Digital BNC cable under $4K?
mzkmxcv777 posts @geoffkait Still, you believe data cables can alter tonal balance, stereo separation, etc.? If so, I ask for an explanation as to how it can actively alter a digital transmission.
Data cables DO alter tonal balance and separation. How ..? I don't care! Message to mzkmxcv .... If your ears or system (or both) are inadequate, do not disagree with people who have both performing far higher than you can possible perceive, or understand. It is beyond you - just accept it, and do not advertise your inadequacies to the world and his dog.
You lost me at "I'm an electrical engineer" but my eyes were too fast and caught "please" which is begging and "trust me" which my brain automatically inserts "and the last thing you want to do is" in front of, ditto "the best", because it knows the only way this can be true is if the guy first established his listening chops by having laid out all the great wire he's compared. Which never happened. So it really is begging after all. And trust, that's faith. So what are we talking here? Engineering? Or faith??
What's truly amazing is my brain does all this way faster than it takes to explain. So virtually all the time wasted here was writing up this critique of why engineering has so very little to do with listening.
I’m an electric engineer and please trust me, the best Digital BNC cable what you can get is the Canare BNC cables (Japan). It is the best cable under 4000$, for about 30$-40$. If you buy something else for more money the best what you will get a Canare with different label and outer skin.
Please don’t think there is correlation between prices and cable quality over 40$.
If your Streamer and DAC has USB input as well, please use that instead of SPDIF Coax/BNC. USB is asynchronous by standard, it means your DAC will resync the incoming digital signal, so USB is not sensitive for incoming jitter from the streamer.
SPDIF Coax/BNC is synchronous in theory (DAC will use what arrived, when arrived), but best DACs resync it like at the USB.
Anyone who thinks a digital cable sends ones and zeros down a wire has no idea how digital audio works. A digital cable carries an analog wave which is an imperfect representation of a digital square wave, and carries a bunch of noise.
When I was comparing many RCA digital cables years ago the High Fidelity Cables were substantially better than anything else. I would get one of their RCA models and put BNC adapters on them.
Also, I am not talking about the new HFC 'Reveal' cheapo line, which does not even compete with the original CT-1. Try to get a CT-1 Ultimate or above. I use a CT-1 Ultimate Reference.
Here is a reply to skeptics of digital cable improvements by a Wave Fidelity representative:
---------
This is not about ones and noughts. Specifically with the dual BNC connectors between the Chord Blu Mk2 MScaler and the Dave DAC it is about using the cables to filter out RF common mode noise produced by the MScaler. The Blu Mk2 MScaler and Dave are awesome with just standard BNC cables but when the RF noise is removed it really produces the ‘icing on the cake’.
My WAVE STORM Reference cables remove all the RF noise and the resulting darkness and depth of sound is so obvious that can be almost too much for some listeners who crave the false detail and shimmer produced by the RF noise. Hence I think the comments in the review where some slightly brighter cables are preferred but what you get with my cables is 100% of the digital signal and nothing else. If the sound is too dark then that is because that is on the master tape. Keep listening and the ear / brain will adjust and reveal the true fine detail which was being masked by the RF noise.
Many other devices have RF noise and that is why cables which filter the RF are so beneficial within a system, not only between Blu Mk2 / Dave but also elsewhere.
i use my own brand canibefrank digital the secret sauce? you get bit perfect 1s and 0s and a few random select 2s to warm it up a rare 3 to keep it exciting
I've heard the Black Cat TRON users say that it has a deeper soundstage than the SilverStar 75 or Digit 75. Has anyone here used the Synergistic Research Digital BNC cables before?
I have tried many digital cables and the MIT Oracle MA-X always comes out as the top performer. Another AGON member has the BNC version for sale. They seem pricy, but after you hear what they are capable of relative to other cables the decision will be obvious.
I used a Belden 1694A digital cable for a few years between my streamer (raspberry pi, HIFIBERRY DIGI+ PRO,
iFi iPower DC Power Supply) and dac (sim audio 380 DSD). I was very happy with its sound and you can't beat the cost.
I've been able to hear differences between interconnects and speaker cables since I got into this hobby many many years ago, but never bothered with any expensive digital cables as I just assumed it wouldn't make a difference carrying a digital signal.
After being
enamored with the magic of Shunyata ZTRON ICs, Speaker, and Power cables in my system, I decided to try their cheapest at the time digital cable the Cobra (purchased used knowing I could flip it pretty easy if I heard no difference), and I was amazed at the difference I could hear compared to the Belden. I then flipped the Cobra to try the Python, and again I could hear a difference; maybe a little smaller this time. I then flipped it to buy the Anaconda, and again I could hear a difference; small but there. I've settled on the Anaconda and am very happy with it relative to the price I paid for it, and relative to what I paid for the other cables in my system based on the improvements I could detect.
It would be interesting to know if I had a much more expensive streamer (i.e. something inline with my DAC price wise) if I would hear the same differences I did between the digital cables.
Observation: since digital cables are directional just like any other cable or power cord or fuse it’s probably rational to assume that it’s the quality of the voltage and current traveling through the digital cable that’s the case, not 1s and 0s. You know, 1s and 0s would be still 1s and 0s no matter which direction the digital cable was connected.
The
Sablon Panetta BNC is one that I'm strongly considering. I have the Black Cat SilverStar 75 MKII and love it! But I was recently given that recommendation as well. I'm thinking about going with the TRON.
So would you mind expounding on the Sablon a bit more, especially compared to the SilverStar?
I wouldn't spend $4K on any digital cable. But I don't need to.
The best digital cable I've heard (I have the RCA version, but BNC is easily available) is the Oyaide 1.3 meter DR-510 coax cable. It's silver and sounded so much better than others here that I put it IMS & haven't touched it in 3+ yrs.
The BNC version is 1.3 meter DB-510. You can find it on eBay for under $200.
Maybe those who can hear changes in quality data cables, sending binary have superior hearing to the guy who spends $50 for cable..
If you can hear a difference and have the extra $1000s laying around for cables, that also means you are a real audiophile with superior senses.
How good an audiophile can you afford to be? How good can you afford to hear?
Hate to be sarcastic but the hobby is not served well by all the BS..
Some of the decline since the 1980s is due to this ridiculousness, imho..
Its a really strange new science.. The deeper the pockets, the better the ability to hear fine details in digital cables. Who would have guessed there is a relationship?
axeis1 To the several folks that say it’s only carrying ones and zeroes please cut open the cable and tell me if 1’s and 0’s fall out. Digital cable is carrying analog electrical pulses that represent digital.
>>>>That’s so true. CDs don’t contain 1s and 0s either. The laser reading process is strictly analog. I.e., it’s not only the sequence of reflections and non reflections that’s important but also the length of each, which varies, both of which are predetermined. It’s a little complicated. The conversion to a digital stream occurs downstream. So, whoever said timing is critical is correct.
To the OP, I would move up to Digit 75. To the several folks that say it’s only carrying ones and zeroes please cut open the cable and tell me if 1’s and 0’s fall out. Digital cable is carrying analog electrical pulses that represent digital.
Mzkmxcv765 has indicated that to his ears, the Belden cable is the best. I have compared belden cables to other brands and belden has been on the bottom of my list. Belden is usually priced on the low side, so if $$$ are a big concern, by all means, audition them. If you have $400 to $4000 to spend, there are many other cables that will be better, sonically and physically (IMO). I haven’t seen WBT connectors on Belden or on other cheaper cables and connectors can/do make a difference. In fact, wbt cable ends probably will cost much more than the Belden cable itself.
Sighted listening tests are useless data unless combined with double-blind, quick-switching, and level-matched, as a way to demonstrate bias.
@pokey77
An answer to OP was pretty much given by others (who believe in differences), in that it is so heavily a system/personal dependent, that one cannot say which is best, only giving their testimonials on what they have heard, or simply listing everything that is available and telling OP to audition.
There is no actual answer to which digital BNC cable is the “best” for <$4000.
My recommendation would be the BJC Belden 1694A BNC cables.
@mzkmxcv - please stop with the "that's not proof though". The only proof needed is for you to hear a difference that is worth paying for. See @geoffkait comment above.
Agreed, please, please stop with all this off-track discussion and get back to the OPs question. I did address this with my last post and hope it was in some way helpful to the OP. Let's be helpful to the OP, not hi-jack therir
So far "pro-audio", "confirmation bias" and the Mona Lisa have been mentioned in this thread. I ask you fellow ’goners, has "expectation bias" slipped through the cracks? Someone needs to cite "expectation bias" soon or it will feel left out.
There is no proof of anything in audio. There is evidence, though. Empirical evidence such as listening tests appear to support the proposition that there are differences between all types of cables. Speaker cables, interconnects, digital cables, power cords, Ethernet cables, HDMI cables. And there are audible difference in plain old wires, too. If someone can’t hear differences in any of those things he’s in the very small minority and is therefore an outlier. And thus can be thrown out. We’re all quite familiar with the Juror no. 3 from 12 Angry Men, “You can’t prove it!”
Can this thread go back to the ops original question, meaning folks giving their views on specific cables instead of this current line of measurements blah blah blah blah.
well, seems this has turned into the devolving topic of "prove it works to me". Well, the only way it can be proved to anyone is to listen with your own ears. A few have suggested that in a polite manner.
That’s not proof though, that’s a subjective evaluation. It shouldn’t be that hard to explain if a digital cable can sound different than another other than “You have to hear it to believe it.” I don’t have to see televisions in person to know which is better, resources like Rtings take the guesswork and faith/belief out.
The factor of electrical noise has been given, and I agree different digital cables have varying levels of noise rejection, but if for normal length even Amazon Basics puts the noise well below audible thresholds, then we kind of have an answer.
It does appear this topic stirs passions? I would like to say I never claimed to have paid $4K for a cable, but if I decided to that would be my personal business. My quest is to find one that is considered the best based on others experiences. For those who believe there isn't a difference, I don't begrudge them of their beliefs but it seems a bit counterproductive to come on a thread and assume others do not based on data that they believe is the gospel.
With that stated, I hope we can get back on topic and leave the point-counterpoint banter and simply give helpful advice (and ignore it altogether if you can't).
@mzkmxcv - well, seems this has turned into the devolving topic of "prove it works to me". Well, the only way it can be proved to anyone is to listen with your own ears. A few have suggested that in a polite manner.
@mrc4u - I'd suggest you talk to Steve at Empirical Audio. He makes several BNC cables including his reference cable at $510 and a lesser cable to for $285; so they are well within your budget. Though I've not heard either one, Steve has a deep understanding in the digital realm. See this page. http://www.empiricalaudio.com/products/synchro-mesh
As I’ve continually asked, what contradicting data, other than testimonial?
Testimonials are subjective, so I would like quick-switching and double-bling testing of such digital cables if one suggests the objective data (measurements) are incorrect.
I’ll use the same analogy, what makes such a claim by those that have heard differences in digital cables any different than testimonials for Balance Bracelets? Our brains are easily tricked, visually (what color is the dress), audibly (Yanny vs Laurel), physically (hammer on the fake hand), and mentally (pharmaceuticals and homeopathy).
Why would I need to do such testing when measurements can be done ...
You don’t need to do anything at all. You’re free to embrace some data collected by others while ignoring other data that conflicts with your blind Faith. There's absolutely no need for you to actually listen to the product under discussion here, or to perform your own measurements. No problem, I respect your Faith.
What’s odd - other than the fact that you don’t seem to much care for listening - is this proclamation that you insist others observe:
Unless it was double-blind and quick-switching, one cannot make factual statements, only subjective.
Why would I need to do such testing when measurements can be done? Listening tests for audibility thresholds are one thing, but as the data hasn’t shown the differences to be anywhere near audibility thresholds, it would be mostly a worthless exercise as the results can be accurately predicted.
It’s like saying one television looks better than another, yet measurements show near identical performance, and yet you say I can’t claim they look identical if I haven’t personally seen both.
Just like how one digital audio cable can’t widen the soundstage or music, one HDMI cable can’t have a more vivid image than another. The quality of the HDMI can’t effect pixel data, so visual testing is unnecessary, unless one claims differences do exist.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
