A big arguement get when discussing cables (I often avoid this topic however) is that optical digital cables will all sound the same.

Now, on rare occasion I'll get a fella to consider that it's possible for RCA interconnects, or a Digital RCA interconnect can sound different.

I don't argue with them if they don't want to believe it. I'm admittedly still one to argue the benefits of cables, even after a -*test*-('")s myself, which seemed to indeed indicate a difference.


But even among the "cable" guys, many will pooh-pooh the idea an optical cable swap will make a difference.

"Light is light" they tell me.

"Yeah, but what about shielding? What if light is "bleeding in" to the cable?

"Doesn't make a difference"...

"Then, what about the end optical lenses? The precision of them?"

"Nominal at best"...

"And purity, quality, clearness or level of impurities that may cause some opaqueness of the optics?"

"If the light can reach the unit, it's doing it's job."


Maybe they're right. Maybe those elements aren't important or nominal.

But, my experience?

Using a PS Audio Superlink II and a Sony C85ES transport, I swapped in two unique and different cables, and against my perceived notions and skeptisizm, I have to say I feel did experience a difference.

Read on...


The first cable was of standard grade, using standard consumer optical-fiber materials made of plastics, and most likely the rougher hot-plate termination of the fiber, rather than a polished termination end.

Nonetheless, the sound was very nice. An instant leap in performance over the Sony' built-in DAC chips, music became instantly improved- as if someone had removed a smoky film from a windshield. Very nice!

But this spoke of the DAC, not the cable. The Sony employs only a Toslink/Optical out, not a digital coaxial, so I couldn't compare optical to coaxial.

I could, however, substitute an optical Toslink cable in- this one, a glass-core conductor equipped cable in place of the plastic core cable, and featuring a polished termination of the conductor strands and a polished self-aligning end lens.


To somewhat my surprise, I heard a difference- or at least I believe I did. After all, I made a good arguement for the difference in cables (see above), but always the skeptic, I went into the swap with my doubts.

The difference? Another increase in detail. Sustain and decay both were stretched out like a bungee cord around the waist of an overeater at a Country Kitchen buffet.

Clarity seemed to improve. Any remaining haze burned off by the improved bright light.

Attack- notes stood attention- from Golden Labrador Retreiver fetching a frisbee to a greyhound persuing and reaching that stuffed mechanical rabbit.

Pleased? Yes. Yes indeedy. however- one caveat...

The increased performance added a small level of harshness to the music. Not often an issue, but at times I get very sensitive to the music. All this added detail was also adding the occasional cringe from me, when a high note or complex passage, for a moment, gives me that old bit of "nails-on-the-chalkboard" feeling. not often, but on rare occasion. The added detail, clarity and overall enjoyment far outweighs any complaints, trust me.

And speaking of trust...

Some folk I now consider good friends told me the cables would make a difference, and it wasn't that I doubted them- I just wasn't willing to take them blindly at their word. I needed to see, or in this case, hear it for myself. I had full faith in them, but would it make a difference to me?

I think I did, indeedy.

It's a very good question you pose and i have to say yes. I used to work for a company called Fiber optic Technologies and designed network infrastructures for fiber runs. There were differences in fiber and we had to balance quality / price. In digital networks "packets" of information have a type of index so the equipment knows what it is supposed to receive, it is checked many times as there are packet losses and those get resent. I have no idea how audio gear is structured in this regard but I do know that some fiber is in deed better than others and hence causes less "packet" loss. That's all I got.

Cables...
No matter what kind of cables i use, optical, coaxial, ic's, power or speaker cables, i always find some sound differences between them.
I'm talking about cables in a price range of 10 to 150€, because i have a major rule about audio cables:
- I never buy a cable more expensive than the least expensive unity in my setup.

When talking about differences between them it leaves me to choose one instead of another, not because they were better than others but because they work better - have a better synergy - between all the other audio components.

It's funny, but when i change some component in my system - a preamp, an amp or a set of speakers, and i'll do that quite a lot... - i always end up changing cables to match the chamges i've made.

Of course, i have always in mind that different' isn't always an improvement.
A different sound is not synonymous of a better sound, but with that in mind if i can hear a little more detail and feel more comfortable and for that matter easier to enjoy the music and following the tune, than i can say for sure that sound is better than the other.

In resume i find cables a great influence in an audio setup and also IMHO all cables sound different.

Listen.

When I first started buying stereo gear, the manager at the local shop I frequented said that all amps and receivers sounded the same, and that they only changed the outside to add bells and whistles, to keep the sales people happy, and to make customers think they had "something new" each year.

Fast forward 30 years later and that's now revealed as bull$hit, as we all know. Even I've heard blatant differences in gear.

So if amps and receivers and every other piece of equipment has subtle and real differences, why SHOULDN'T optical cables have differences in sound?

Kelly, thanks for a great piece of information.

I couldn´t agree more with Alvaro, even tough, sometimes, I might strike you guys as a non-believer where cables are concerned. I do believe cables sound "different" and synergies apply here.

My most expensive cable is a half meter Audioquest Lapis silver interconnet that set me back 250€ over 10 years ago. It´s light years ahead of the usual "El cheapo" cables that come with most units, but, curiously, it is not "THAT" much better than the QED Qunex 1 and 2 that I fell in love with recently and that cost only a fraction of that today.
Having said that I could never justify to myself spending thousands of bucks on cables, no matter what kind of miracles are claimed by the gurus.

I have no experience with optical cables, but I can see no reason why they should be any different.

Jorge

Well, I have to sat that I noticed a difference when swapping a low budget optical cable for a more professional one. The differences are not comparably to other cables, but they are still there. I definately noticed more detail with the more epensive cable, so I have to agree.

Sometimes i wonder if my comp sound isn't better than my main audio system...?
I have a great comp sound... and that leaves me to wonder if one of the main reason lies on the signal transmission cables...?!

When computer guys need good signal integrity, low jitter digital transmission, they design SATA, USB, Gb Ethernet, FireWire, PCI Express, HyperTransport.
All those physical interfaces have one thing in common : LVDS (cables) - they are immune to all kinds of stuff including power supply noise - over controlled impedance transmission lines / twisted pairs.

3 Gbps pass without error through a few inches of microstrip trace, a 0,05 € plastic connector, 50 cm of 1,00 € SATA cable...

On the other hand we have the audio "engineers" who invented SPDIF...

- what do you think it happens when you put a few MHz through a RCA connector ? and when most digital cables are of unknown and unspecified impedance...?!

The SPDIF traces in the boxes aren't even routed as known impedance transmission lines anyway...

Many audiolovers talk about Rotel and Nad ( i have a Nad), but just opened a Rotel or a Nad player : the SPDIF output trace travels about 20 cm, unspecified impedance, nearly all its length just 1mm away from a trace that looks like a digital signal from the CPU/DAC to the servo control...

So in those cases, there's gonna be so much impedance mismatch and reflection and noise crap going on that anything that changes the characteristics will change the sonics...

With all this in mind, it's no "audio-heresy" that i say that i have a great comp sound.

Something better change...