How crucial is the quality of a digital cable?


I recently purchased a Cambridge Audio CX 81 integrated amp. The analog inputs sound great, but I find the internal DAC to be a disappointment. It uses the ESS Sabre ES9016K2M chip. I use a mid-level Rotel RCD 951 CD deck as a transport via the digital coax. I also hooked the deck via the analog out, just to compare. The analog interconnects are entry level AQ's. The digital coax is an Amazon purchase in the $15 range. I find the internal DAC of the 20 year old Rotel to be superior to the new AX 81, when doing an A/B.

What then confuses me is that the Blue Tooth streaming from the amp is quite good. It is HD aptX,  24-bit/84kHz capable. But, wouldn't that also go through the same internal DAC? Could it be the mediocre Amazon digital coax cable? I always assumed that digital cable quality was less significant than analog cables. Just bits and bites, right?

If someone knows of a decent digital coax for under $50, I would be very grateful. I would also appreciate any advice on an entry level power cord for the amp. Can a decent power cord be had for under $100? 

 

motown-l

Clock error is the bane of digital audio and cannot be properly fixed.

If that’s true, how do you account for the many extraordinary recordings that have been made directly to digital?

Analogue has its own clock because the signal is transmitted in real time and never leaves real time.

I’m an analog guy, but you’re not making sense. Wow & flutter affects both time and pitch. No analog system is completely immune from speed errors that are many times greater than the errors in any decent digital clock. In a sense, analog systems are never quite in "real time."

Don't get me wrong - I prefer analog. But there's nothing to be gained by pretending it's better than it is, or that digital is worse than it is.

Don’t get me wrong - I prefer analog. But there’s nothing to be gained by pretending it’s better than it is, or that digital is worse than it is.

@cleeds Very wise words. And I’m encouraged by members here who have many more $$$ than I invested in both their vinyl and streaming sources have found streaming, properly implemented, can give vinyl a run for its money and possibly more. I reference several posts by @ghdprentice whose posts and experience I find to be very level-headed and experience based. As improvements in digital technology continue to improve at a fast pace and costs for digital processing continue to drop, I can only surmise it won’t be too long before one can create a near state-of-the-art digital source that rivals even the best vinyl rigs for pennies on the dollar. In any event, let’s not lose sight of that, whatever your choice of source material, it’s a very exciting time to be an audiophile!

You can spend $10 or $10k for digital cable, but which one will sound better, you never know if not looking directly onto those point blank. It means that those saying that there are no differences are 99.999% correct leaving 0.0001% for wrong so do your math. It helps to test and bust science and assumptions.

Reproducing sound digitally is like trying to draw a circle with an Etch-A-Sketch. But, we are getting pretty good at rendering those digital images.

Digital cables matter. Power cables make a difference, too. Personally, I find it interesting how much more "analog" things sound with less "digititus" when power delivery to an audio component is improved. Warmer. Less edgy. Less fatiguing.

I'd do both -- digital cable AND power if you want the best digital sound with what you own.

+1 @waytoomuchstuff Power supplies and conditioners can make a huge difference in digital audio as noise is the arch enemy of better digital sound (all sound really, but I find it particularly impactful in digital setups).