garym wrote: > Correct. I was trying to find one of Sean's posts on this. Can't locate > the exact one I'm thinking of (that says the above), but here's some > examples: > http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?71464-SPDIF-is-evil&p=486277&viewfull=1#post486277 > > Highly suspect on the grounds that other equal or superior authorities > say otherwise (i.e. standards groups) and no evidence or reason is given > for the exceptional claim. > > http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?71464-SPDIF-is-evil&p=486501&viewfull=1#post486501 > > > > edit: I personally use s/pdif over BNC connector on my Transporter.
The balanced connection over shielded twisted pair has the advantage of improved rejection of environmental noise as compared to unbalanced coax. However the basic digital signal that is common to all is very robust in actual use and reliable connections using wetted fingertips and cooked noodles have been reported. ;-) Over the years it has been common to find high end audio gear with obviously defective by design line receivers on their inputs, so just because one's favorite designer says something is no proof of anything. For example Toslink has the oblivious advantage of being free of a galvanic connection between the equipment so connected, yet it is judged inferior in one of the posts, again for no stated reason. Fact is that all three methodologies have their strong points that can be critical in some situations. None is fatally flawed and all can work with sonic transparency with common but merely competently designed equipment. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=106519 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
