Should I use digital cables?

[smglbrth]

I recently bought a used AVR for the living room and was wondering if any of you recommend/use digital optical/coax cables for hook-ups. The only thing I would use it for would be the DVD player. The CDP has better processing and I would just hook that up with the regular RCA's. Do I need to hook up the digital outputs on the DVD to the AVR to get the surround effects right (DTS, DD, etc...)? The player is a little older but does DTS/PCM outs.

Also, the DVD player recommends to use both the digital and regular coax cables for hook-up if the AVR is capable of that. Is this correct?

Sorry for the questions that probably seem REALLY mundane but I'm new into this whole "theater" thing and thought I'd give it a try. If you could point me to a link that would be fine as well.

(BTW-I'm not giving up my 2 channel!)

[TheMARPATNinja7]

In order to get true surround sound you need to have an optical/coax connection. You will get a modifed stereo (Prologic) if you go RCA. As long as your DVD player has an optical connection I'd go with that. Optical is actually a fiberoptic signal so you can't get as much signal interuption in the cable, which simply means better sound. People will argue that coax sounds better but in my opinion, I like optical. If you are hooking up and Ipod or CD player feel free to go with RCA because, Ipod and (most) Cds aren't mixed in 5.1 surround. Good Luck!!!

[comfortablycurt]

Yep. The only way to transfer digital sound modes(Dolby Digital, DTS Digital etc.) is over a digital cable, either coax or optical. There has been a lot of debate over which one of the two is better, and really neither one is better than the other. Both perform very well, and the only way to really decide which one you like more is to try both. Personally they both sound the same to me really...if anything the optical cable might have had a slightly brighter sound, but that could have been my imagination too.

As said earlier, if RF interference is a problem, go with the optical because it's immune to interference. You've gotta be careful with optical cables not to bend them to much though, if you bend it to sharply it can cause the fibers inside to crack.

Here's an interesting read comparing the two if you wanna check it out.

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/toslink/toslink.html

I don't see why you'd need to hook up the DVD player with both a digital cable and analog interconnects. I've read the same thing before, and their reasoning is that apparently certain movies won't transmit their soundtrack over a digital cable, but I've never had any problems with it, and all I have mine hooked up with is an optical cable.

[treitz3]

I'm gonna go ahead and chime in here. I admit, I am not an HT buff. Nor am I a fan but I have observed something. All that crap about different cables? The old technology works just as good. No difference and sometimes the new technology works worse with more complications than that of RCA cables.

This will be my last post on this thread.

convenience = compromise in sound.

[smglbrth]

Thanks for the replies!

I was hoping that I wouldn't have to purchase a new cable just for this, since it looks the same as other cables (RCA), but after doing a little reading looks like they're not the same. So..., need to do some shopping this weekend. The place where this needs to go will be "tight" with a few angles so looks like RCA is it. (Have to keep the WAF)

Thanks for the link, it was interesting. As far as I have read, in the DVD player manual, it stated "On DVD's that contain copy protection, the 96 kHz signal may only be output from the analog audio jacks", whatever that means.

treitz - Thanks for your "last post". I totally agree with your analogy, for lack of a better word, about the new not being necessarily better than the old. If that were true people wouldn't be still purchasing turntables and we'd all be using MP3's!

[smglbrth]

One question however - Is a video cable (the yellow one) essentially the same as a digital RCA (supposed to be orange)? If it is then that's one less to buy as I have an extra video cable laying around. From what I have read they might be but can't get a straight answer.

[TheMARPATNinja7]

No that is just a standard def video cable its pretty much like it's red and white counterpart except its video. You gotta buy a digital audio cable.

[Face]

The yellow cable will work since it should also be a 75ohm cable, but I would spring for something with a little more shielding. The yellow cable that's included with most DVD players, etc... usually is the size of a spaghetti string.

SignalCable.com and BlueJeansCables.com are both excellent sources for digital cables, Signal being a little better IMO. Plus, Signal offers a 5% discount to Club Polk members.

[Rivrrat]

I use optical for my dvd player/receiver HT connection, but I've found if I listen to a cd like that, it about makes my ears bleed (it's just too strident for my tastes). Because of that I have a separate cd/dvd changer that I hooked up analog just for audio, and it's much easier on the ears.

[Keiko]

The yellow cable will work since it should also be a 75ohm cable, but I would spring for something with a little more shielding. The yellow cable that's included with most DVD players, etc... usually is the size of a spaghetti string.

SignalCable.com and BlueJeansCables.com are both excellent sources for digital cables, Signal being a little better IMO. Plus, Signal offers a 5% discount to Club Polk members.

+1 Face. The yellow video cable will work fine. But consider getting something with better shielding than the OEM if that's what you plan on using. I have Blue Jeans-Belden 1694A and it works well. A 6 footer only cost me $15.00 and change. IMO, there's no difference between a well shielded digital coax vs. an optical. I prefer coax because it's a firmer connection.

http://bluejeanscable.com/store/digital-audio/index.htm

[ben62670]

Coax is better than optical. Two less conversions.
Ben

[comfortablycurt]

No that is just a standard def video cable its pretty much like it's red and white counterpart except its video. You gotta buy a digital audio cable.

Nope. A composite (yellow) video cable will work just fine as a coax. That comes in handy, cuz most people have a few of them lying around.

[smglbrth]

From what I have been able to gather 'round the net it appears there are a couple schools of thought when it comes to this digital/vs/regular RCA interconnects.

The first one is that you buy only specific "digital audio cables". It should not be a stranded wire, only solid wire inside the insulation (lots of insulation).
I do agree with the solid wire bit but many companies don't have solid wire in their digital coax cables.

Second - The cable companies, especially Monster, are out to get your cash and that you don't need all the brand new hoopla stuff that costs an arm and a leg.

The most interesting thing I read, and that makes the most sense to me, is that as long as it's a 3' length or less it really doesn't matter (I don't think they were talking about the "spaghetti string" cables). It's when you have bigger runs of cables that you need the nicer stuff since the signal loss gets pretty bad on cheaper cables. One guy even stated that he uses the el-cheapo cable that he got with a piece of equipment and it works fine for him. The DTS signal comes through on his receiver.

Since I already have a 3' section of the video cable I'm going to try that, yes, sometimes I'm a cheapo. Especially since it's laying in my closet doing absolutely nothing. It is an aftermarket and is thicker than the other "do nothing" cables I have laying around.

Please understand, however, I have no differing opinions when it comes to different kinds of cables for different purposes. Pretty much the only cables I have in my system that matter to me is a Signal Cable Analog II for the CDP and 10 gauge speaker wire (Sound King, OFC, blah, blah) made right here in the U.S., a rarity I know.

I only stated that since I know that discussions get interesting from time to time here...:D

[comfortablycurt]

As long as it's a thicker cable with a decent amount of insulation on it you'll be fine. The little crappy "spaghetti string" cables that you spoke of will work, and will still transfer the signal. They aren't going to do it efficiently. Those cables are included with your equipment for a reason, because they're incredibly cheap. They're a lot more prone to interference, due to lack of insulation, and really aren't going to be able to transfer the signal as efficiently as a good thick quality cable.

That being said, that composite video cable you have will work just fine.

[ben62670]

Composite = analog. Decent digital cables have much better shielding to ensure all the ones, and zeros make it from A to B. Most digital cables are solid core.
Ben

[smglbrth]

Not wanting to beleager the point but I was reading about the RCA connectors on digital coax cables. Pretty much what was stated was that RCA plugs were not designed with 75 Ohm ratings in mind and that they are practically non-existant. Most are designed around the 40-50 Ohm rating with maybe a few a little over 50. The wires in the cables are, more than likely, rated for 75 Ohm but with the RCA plugs not being able to handle the 75 Ohm rating it pretty much doesn't matter, as far as the digital/vs/regular coax goes as it pertains to RCA plugged cables. The difference, however, comes with the DVDP or TV boosting it's output signal to make up the difference, or the lack, of the impedence for the RCA plugs. The did state that good cables, no matter what, have solid cores. (I have a funny feeling that in order to get straight digital source to source I'm going to have to go with the Toslink)

Is this correct or is the person who wrote this high? I got it from the Audioholics website, article entitled "Component Video Cables - The Definitive Guide, Page 4".

[seebee700]

Any idea why my new cable box only provides signal thru the Component cables?

The HDMI port just gives me a "no signal"

thanx
Dan