2. digital
  3. 1011511884

Someone should kick me in the keester

No matter how much I know and learn about audio, I can still be completely oblivious to some of the most basic things. Today I discovered a new dimension to that fact.

For quite a long time I've been complaining (privately) about the lack of detail, imaging, and overall clarity my system had, in spite of the quality of its components. I spent a bit of time swapping tubes, changing interconnects, and adjusting the speaker position without a great deal of success at cleaning up the sound or providing a solid soundstage to my satisfaction. While most of my friends couldn't hear the problems I described, I certainly did and it lead me to think that this might be as good as it gets.

A few weeks ago I decided to order some parts to build the Max Rochlin memorial digital cable, partly because I needed a project to keep me busy, and because it was the only cable in my system I had not yet replaced. I finally got around to building it this morning (for those that are thinking about trying it, it took me about an hour or so) and discovered after installing it that I had an entirely new audio system. The soundstage was right on the money and rock solid, the music was clean as a whistle (even through Moussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition), the bass tight, the midrange a thing of beauty, ... I could go on.

Anyway, it turns out that my suffering for the past year or so was due entirely to an inferior digital cable and nothing else. I had been very skeptical in the past about the differences a digital cable could make (bits is bits?), but I now stand both red faced and enlightened. I'm not entirely sure that I understand the physics behind the change I made, but it does seem that there are things about digital transmission that I need to brush up on.

Anyway, if confession is good for the soul, then let me be the first to give my spirit a lift :-).

For the record, the system is mostly CJ (17LS, Premier 12's, DA2-B DAC) with a Pioneer DVD as a transport.

-- Ken
kjg
mzn50
180 posts
 
So true, yes EVERYONE says digital is digital

the signal is
10101010 10101011

Sometimes you get a digital cable that is put together and you get the same signal but like :
101010?0 10?01011

The transfer..suffers .. I always say for digital, it more the quality of the cable then anything else, actually that applies to everything ...can't go wrong with quality!
chelillingworth
309 posts
 
Take a look at www.modwright.com for his mods on the 525 as a transport. If think the cable makes a difference wait to you here what the mods can do!
whatjd
1,139 posts
 
I have mentioned this before...but another overlooked item that can cause serious sonic problems..is DC voltage on the ground pin of your AC outlets..usually caused by the cable TV feed into your home being grounded to the same earth ground as your electrical feed. Get a VTVM and measure the ground pin of an AC outlet(better yet have someone do it that knows what ther're doing)... Way put so much effort into having "clean power",..meaning the AC into your system, if the ground of that same AC is poluted with a DC voltage.

You can prove this to yourself, by going outside your home and disconnecting the 75 ohm coax comming into you home,...and the green ground wire that the cable company has strapped to that pipe....Then re-listen to your system..about 50% of you will be very surprised.

Check out some of the prior posts that deal with "ground or
grounding".

Best, Jim
sean
6,231 posts
 
Welcome to the "wire DOES make a difference with digital" club. I found this out simply out of necessity and kind of by mistake. I had purchased a DAC & Transport and thought i had a spare digital cable or two laying around. Well, when the gear showed up, i didn't have any spares. As such, i temporarily had to resort to using standard "non-digital" interconnects. Those i did have tons of, so i began to experiment.

I quickly found out that cables that had a definite "sonic signature" in the analogue realm carried that over to the digital realm. Taking this a step further, i began experimenting with different digital cables to find the same thing. 75 ohms or not, each had a slightly different flavor with various high and low points. I think that this may have more to do with reflected energy / vswr than anything else though. Just a guess though.

While i normally don't play "devil's advocate", i will on this one. Are you sure that "personal pride" is not playing any part of your "increase in system performance ? Have any of your buddies been able to tell a difference ? It's always nice to have an outside source verify your observations, especially if they have not been tainted with what to listen for. Sean
>
dekay's avatar
dekay
5,695 posts
 
Ezmerelda: A 75 ohm cable (true or otherwise:-) is not always needed for quality digital. My two best sounding digital IC's are neither. I am not quite certain as to how to measure the length of one of them as the Hot lead is 60" long and the Cold 30" (figure 90" or approx. 2.0 meters in the signal path). One IC is a Mapleshade Double Helix (this one is 1.0 meter) and the other is fabricated out of the 47 Labs OTA cable. Both are superior, IMO, to 75 ohm cables that I have tried (with some of these being very popular and costing a great deal more). I have never had decent results, for instance, taking a single standard analog IC and using it in this application, so there is something more involved in making a good digital IC, but I do not feel that it being 75 ohm is necessarily a part of it.
More to discover