Why was optical audio even made? Digital coaxial is literally the exact same thing, except the cables are less fragile and less prone to dust and transceiver failure. ... Yet optical is still the standard, and it's still more expensive.
Literally why was this meme pushed? Was it yet another moneygrab?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.m.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Digital coaxial still grounds two systems together. More problems than necessary.
Optical in the other hand is perfect.
Stop being a manchild who can't handle his cables, that's your own fault, this isn't meant to be a daily use hardware, you plug it in once and leave it.
Bought a TOSLINK cable a month ago, 1.5 meters for 4€, how is that even expensive?
>he doesnt have a 300 meter run between his source and amp
sad.
Optical is perfect data transmission without any voltage issues.
why is your amp 1/3 of a kilometer away?
1/3 kilometer is actually 333 meters and not 300.
its not perfect but its pretty fucking close
km/3 is actually 333.3333333333333333333... m and not 333
optical is the perfect cable for data transmission, you literally never need another cable, and you just upgrade the receivers when technology improves.
>not having a small concert setup on your land
Do you even into snake?
lmao, autists and the absolute state of Sup Forums
my sides have just passed Musk's rocket on an escape trajectory, well played.
Electrical isolation so you don't have deal with issues like ground loops.
In my home studio i run a 10m optical from my soundcard to a rackmount ADAT with 8 extra audio inputs.
One fuckin tiny cable for 8 extra audio in feeds from the other side of the room, shits cash.
>what is a pulse transformer
>it's still more expensive
I'm not sure what you mean. I didn't pay much for any of my optical cables, they were basically the same price as a RCA cable. And they are generally cheaper than HDMI cables.
If you mean equipment then perhaps that's true, I have no idea what the cost of implementing TOSLINK vs something else would be.
Regardless, this whole discussion is pretty darn silly. TOSLINK isn't relevant unless you're using a 20 year old hifi receiver anyway. My surround receiver is from 2004 or something like that and I've been using TOSLINK since that time.
>its not perfect
It's not remotely close to prefect. This is why we have to (ab)use something like AC3 and compress the audio signal in order to carry more than two channels.
Not bad for a 20 year old standard, tho.
Too bad there isn't and won't be any updated version, HDMI's the go-to for more than two channels today and I really don't like that cable.
Because optical doesn't have any worries about interference.
>what is interference
basically
Yeah, and its a fucking shame. HDMI is hot garbage. HDBaseT maybe, but thats just HDMI and a bunch of other shit over eithernet
Some kind of toslink 2.0 would be dope.
Toslink is like 15 meters max.
>he doesnt know that "digital still relies on a phsyical electronic medium
hdmi for example can be snooped on with RF gear to be viewed remotely
so can ethernet cables...
(which is why people use shielded twisted pair)
thats also why people use spreadspectrum in their bios/eufi
even your keyboard gives off electronic pulses and can be read
this is why we must move over to optical devices because IR light cant be read from a distance if contained within a farraday cage.
this is how they transfer data in secure environments are required.
(two ir transcievers contained within a block of lead) the package itself which is under a inch could be used to replace keyboards/NICs and even on board DMA interconnects
if you dont care about security/privacy then optical is still superior because it doesnt collect static buildup which will distort image or sound over time.
>Was it yet another moneygrab?
Yes, like 90% of home theater equipment. It's a terrible standard, too slow to even send 5.1 PCM, and with terrible plastic fiber. But "FIBER OPTIC" marketing!
>grounds two systems together
Huh? But it's a digital signal.
>too slow to even send 5.1 PCM
FUCKING THIS! If only it could do PCM. Why can't it? Is the cable standard to thin? Something else?
Digital coax has a much limited bandwidth AFAIK. For surround sound you need to transfer compressed audio data, it cannot handle uncompressed/lossless/high bandwidth surround.
>light
>faraday cage
are you fucking retarded? take a bunch of chicken wire, make a box, attach a wire to it and run the wire to a stake in the ground. you've now made a faraday cage. Can you see inside it? well shit son, looks like lights leaking through your faraday cage
How do I replace my ethernet cables with shielded twisted pair?
When you connect two devices together, with a wire, and apply a charge to one, that charge will propagate to the other.
With MOST optical carriers, this cannot happen, as MOST optical carriers are not conductive
>this is the state of Sup Forums
Buy shielded twisted pair and crimp on your own plugs
What's bad about grounding?
But the ISP's ethernet comes up from the ground into my apartment window, into my router.
Grounding is fine, but you don't want the ground of your amp to connect to the ground of your dac. If the two grounds have a different charge, a current will start flowing and distorts your signal (if signal is relative to ground).
How exactly do you think that this digital signal is transmitted? That's right, as a voltage referenced to GROUND.
then you're fucked
But ground goes to ground, what's the problem?
Poorly grounded circuits can loop and cause interference if interconnected, potentially lowering the data rate, which may cause data loss in the transmission of digital audio.
fuck off phoneposter
wow thanks
coax is good. works with normal rca cables unlike the light thing that has multiple standards
>it's a digital signal
It doesn't really matter what kind of signal is carried if the cable carries voltage.
Perhaps you haven't experienced this yourself, or perhaps you have - if you have a hifi amplifier or receiver connected to a bunch of things and you're not listening to anything and you turn up the volume a bit you tend to get some buzzing, more depending on how many and what kind of things are connected and if they are on or off (computer/xbox/tv/whatever).
This is caused by ground loop(s) and you avoid this with optical cables.
It's simply because SPDIF is an ancient standard. It's actually from 1983. That's 35 years ago. There's been some progress in DACs, computer chips and other areas since 1983 but SPDIF from that time is still the best common optical connector we've got.
As others in this thread had pointed out: A TOSLINK 2.0 which could do 8 channels of PCM would be .. welcome. But this isn't going to happen, the industry is hell-bent on pushing audio over HDMI as the "way to do things". Like.. playing movies with a dedicated player device instead of just streaming it over the Internet.
Small last note: Why oh why don't surround receivers have a usable USB port you could use to connect it to a computer and have it show up as a USB sound card device? I've got a pair of Bluedio headphones that do this (micro-USB) but I've yet to see a surround receiver. A USB DAC/AMP is like $20 on AliExpress, it can't be that hard.
Yeah, I had this with my monitors, since my monitor and my PC's power cables were grounded, it caused the display of the monitor to be grainy and noisy. I just taped over the grounding contacts of the plug and that fixed it. It was a fun task trying to find out wtf was causing it though.
How is it expensive?
i got a TOSLINK cable for a few bucks that works fine.
And everything supports it, including my 20 year old stereo.
Galvanic isolation by default.
Don't use it then.
It doesn't even support 5.1 lossless, nor does it support 7.1 lossy or lossless.
Exactly, ground goes to ground, this way you will have ground loops.
Yeah, signal shielding should only be grounded on one side. Signal ground is usually find as it's handled appropriately.
does same cable work on spdif and toslink or do i need the expensive cable for spdif?
>Why oh why don't surround receivers have a usable USB port you could use to connect it to a computer and have it show up as a USB sound card device?
They do. There's plenty of them.
Coxial is latency because copper. HDMI is the worst for sound and slow as fuck. Fiber optics is fast as fuck and lossless
Fuck you toslink is great. Surround sound is meme that only big budget hollywood productions do properly and hollyjew movies are all capeshit/social justice garbage or so old that surround sound standards din't exist back then.
For starters I think my tube amp (two prong plug) is adding a subtle buzz in my tweeter based on my three prong DAC transferring a bit over the RCA cables. I heard I can actually possibly run the DAC without a ground cable.