Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Waldo Pepper wrote: > Then you learned alot but understood nothing. They are represented down > a piece of wire as zero volts and probably 5v. It would have to be a > pretty long and noisy wire for there to be any discrepency. At bit rates > encountered in baseband digital audio, characteristic impedance. group > delay, reflections and phase issues don't even come into it over > practical lengths encountered in home audio systems. If you think signal reflections have no effect over short lengths where there is no proper termination at either end then it sounds to me like you are the one who understands nothing. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
I won't touch the audibility of differences between optical and coax cables. The advantage of using a toslink is that there's no electrical connection between the source and the DAC, so there won't be any grounding issues (if the components were designed without galvanic isolation). Where this has come into play for me is I can connect my universal player via toslink to my DAC to watch videos without worrying about the hum from my cable feed. So, I just connect all my digital sources (including my TOUCH) with toslink to my DAC. cwon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52118 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Viventis wrote: > Wow! I am so sorry to disagree, but what I have just read sounds like a > bunch of techno-babble published by the manufacturers of high end cables > to attempt to justify their exorbitant prices. > > Digital is binary. Binary is a sequence of 0's and 1's. If 100 > different cables transmit the exact same sequence of 0's and 1's to your > DAC, I guarantee that each will sound 100% the same. There is no such > thing as a flat 0, a sharp 1, a warm 0 or a harsh 1. They are nothing > more than numbers that are decoded by your DAC! > > If a cable is so poorly made that it is incapable of transmitting the > proper sequence, the result will be different. But that is the only > variable. > > This takes me back to the question of the OP. If a toslink or spdif > cable transmits the same sequence of 0's and 1's to the DAC, there will > be no difference in the output. Spot on! I have read there are cold and hot zeros though :) Waldo Pepper's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39029 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
lovejoy wrote: > it is an analogue carrier modulating small changes in voltages > representing binary information), No it's not. There is not an analogue carrier. There would be no advantage whatsoever of imposing a digital signal on a carrier on 2 foot of wire. It's simply ones and noughts represented by a voltage. Too much reading Hi-Fi magazine articles written by art students. Waldo Pepper's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39029 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
lovejoy wrote: > > Technobable? Maybe to you.. To me, transmission lines studied to MEng > level. And I ask you.. If it is just 0s and 1s, how do you think are > they represented down the length of a piece of cable? > ! Then you learned alot but understood nothing. They are represented down a piece of wire as zero volts and probably 5v. It would have to be a pretty long and noisy wire for there to be any discrepency. At bit rates encountered in baseband digital audio, characteristic impedance. group delay, reflections and phase issues don't even come into it over practical lengths encountered in home audio systems. Waldo Pepper's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39029 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Lo, At 00:35 31/07/2012, you wrote: trott3r wrote: > But with a bit of googling consumers are realising that they can get a > 24bit > 96khz high res rip from vinyl that hasn't been butchered by the > loudness > wars. Thus the monopoly falls (at least for older music). > > Martin Luckily I still have most of my old (and some new) vinyl and a very good vinyl front end. Nowhere near as handy as good hi-rez digital versions (whatever their source - vinyl rip or studio master) but vinyl can often sound very good indeed. I have a fair amount of well looked after vinyl as well. Also my turntable the pretty decent project perspective but only a 16bit 44khz PCM HiMD recorder so limited to CD quality for my vinyl rips. But at least i avoid the loudness wars mix of a modern "remastered" CD. Martin Running MorphOS v3.1 (July 2012) on a PowerPC Powerbook, Moderator of MiniDisc,amithlonopen,bwfc Yahoogroups ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
ralphpnj wrote: > Luckily I still have most of my old (and some new) vinyl and a very good > vinyl front end. Nowhere near as handy as good hi-rez digital versions > (whatever their source - vinyl rip or studio master) but vinyl can often > sound very good indeed. My buddy who turned me onto Squeezebox and has downloaded a lot of music generally thinks the Vinyl rips to high res from someone with a very high end system sound the best. I guess the dynamic range issues can explain much of that preference. saeyedoc's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56705 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
trott3r wrote: > But with a bit of googling consumers are realising that they can get a > 24bit > 96khz high res rip from vinyl that hasn't been butchered by the > loudness > wars. Thus the monopoly falls (at least for older music). > > Martin Luckily I still have most of my old (and some new) vinyl and a very good vinyl front end. Nowhere near as handy as good hi-rez digital versions (whatever their source - vinyl rip or studio master) but vinyl can often sound very good indeed. ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Lo, At 23:03 30/07/2012, you wrote: trott3r wrote: > They still are holding on to the 80s and early 90s model of them acting > as a monopoly. I think at this point it is the iTunes store that is closer to a monopoly than any of the record companies. Yes I suppose so. I tend to forget about Apples ecosystem since i dont like lock-ins ; thus Apple never appealed to me. But i was thinking more along the lines of Hi Resolution music. The record companies believe they are the only source for a band and so they can shovel us poor sound quality and we will swallow it. But with a bit of googling consumers are realising that they can get a 24bit 96khz high res rip from vinyl that hasn't been butchered by the loudness wars. Thus the monopoly falls (at least for older music). Martin Running MorphOS v3.1 (July 2012) on a PowerPC Powerbook, Moderator of MiniDisc,amithlonopen,bwfc Yahoogroups ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
trott3r wrote: > They still are holding on to the 80s and early 90s model of them acting > as a monopoly. I think at this point it is the iTunes store that is closer to a monopoly than any of the record companies. trott3r wrote: > Yes that was my point it will sound just as bad. > My point is i would expect the record company to go with what is > cheapest > which would be to reduce the loudness to make it work on vinyl. > > anyhow we agree despite more poor choice of words. > > Martin No problem and I am very glad that you were not offended my somewhat preachy tone. My years of writing as an engineer has led me to be as exact as possible in my choice of words. ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Lo, At 19:28 30/07/2012, you wrote: lovejoy wrote: > I tend to avoid the vast majority of stuff that carries the word > 'remastered' as it seems to be an excuse just to make everything LOUD > and completely sap the life and dynamics out of a recording - the only > exception to this I can think of has been the Nick Drake albums which > were lovingly restored from the master tapes with little tweaking. Last > years re-issue of Nirvana's Nevermind was a good case in point. The > original never had a problem so why remaster it anyway - Loudness wars, > that's why! It's crazy, and these remasters are so completely fatiguing > to listen to as there is never any let up in the volume pinning you > against the wall. The last Foo Fighters album was another bad example on > CD. It's actually a good reason for buying vinyl these days as the > mastering tends to be more sympathetic. The Foos album on vinyl is a > different beast altogether and can be enjoyed all the way through > without feeling like someone is hitting you over the head with a hammer. > It has been pretty well documented but I keep mentioning the Red Hot > Chilli Peppers output. Take the CD and vinyl of Stadium Arcadium. > Absolutely sublime on vinyl having received a sympathetic mastering from > Steve Hoffman, but the CD is right up against the ceiling all the way > through having been mastered by Vlado Meller, and if I see this guys > name on anything I now refuse to buy it. He did even worse with the > latest Chilli Peppers CD and it's not only up against the ceiling but > there's digital clipping in there too. It's horrible, and it completely > destroys the work that a band have done in creating an album. There was > a white paper done a little while back that concluded 'LOUDNESS does NOT > equal more sales', and for me that's most definitely true, so you wonder > why the message hasn't sunk in with so many people yet. Thankfully it's > not everyone. There's the odd album appearing here and there which bears > the words 'This recording may be a bit quieter than some of your other > new CDs, to enjoy it at it's best, just turn the volume up and enjoy the > full dynamic range this recording has to offer'. > > Amen to that. You wonder why the same morons who continue to try to sell 40 year old recordings on CD for twice the price of a 2 year old movie on DVD and yet refuse to make these recordings available as low priced lossless downloads (for fear that this will lead to pirated copies becoming available even though pirated copies of lossless digital rips of these CDs are already available) would understand that the Loudness War is actually hurting business I believe that the best word most present day record company executives would be "clueless". They still are holding on to the 80s and early 90s model of them acting as a monopoly. trott3r wrote: > I didn't realise different formats had different people mastering them. > I thought the record companies would do things on the cheap and shoe > horn > the same master onto vinyl but reduce the dynamic range so the stylus > doesn't > jump out of the groove. You are confusing dynamic range with overall loudness. Yes you are correct i used the wrong word there. The problem with most modern remasters of popular music recordings (I say "popular music" since jazz and classical music have so far mostly been spared from adverse affects of the Loudness War) is that there is way too little dynamic range and too much overall loudness. Dynamic range is the difference between the loudest and quietest passages on a recording. A recording with little dynamic range means that all music is at almost the same loudness and becomes the musical equivalent of TYPING EVERYTHING IN CAPITALS! The use of dynamic range compression (which is what the Loudness War is all about) has been going on for many, many years in television and radio broadcasting for various different reasons (quiet passages can sound like silence while listening to a car radio or a loud advertisement will stand out from the quieter levels of the program audio) but it only relatively recently that this type of dynamic range compression has been applied to the actual recordings themselves. Back to your statement all the record companies would need to do to use the overly compressed CD master for a vinyl issue is lower the overall volume so that "the stylus doesn't jump out of the groove". However the record would then sound as horrible as the CD and the dynamic range would still be almost nonexistent, i.e. there would be little volume difference between the loud and quiet passages. Yes that was my point it will sound just as bad. My point is i would expect the record company to go with what is cheapest which would be to reduce the loudness to make it work on vinyl. anyhow we agree despite more poor choice of words. Martin Running MorphOS v3.1 (July 2012) on a PowerPC Powerbook, Moderator of MiniDisc,amithlonopen,bwfc Yahoogroups
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
lovejoy wrote: > I tend to avoid the vast majority of stuff that carries the word > 'remastered' as it seems to be an excuse just to make everything LOUD > and completely sap the life and dynamics out of a recording - the only > exception to this I can think of has been the Nick Drake albums which > were lovingly restored from the master tapes with little tweaking. Last > years re-issue of Nirvana's Nevermind was a good case in point. The > original never had a problem so why remaster it anyway - Loudness wars, > that's why! It's crazy, and these remasters are so completely fatiguing > to listen to as there is never any let up in the volume pinning you > against the wall. The last Foo Fighters album was another bad example on > CD. It's actually a good reason for buying vinyl these days as the > mastering tends to be more sympathetic. The Foos album on vinyl is a > different beast altogether and can be enjoyed all the way through > without feeling like someone is hitting you over the head with a hammer. > It has been pretty well documented but I keep mentioning the Red Hot > Chilli Peppers output. Take the CD and vinyl of Stadium Arcadium. > Absolutely sublime on vinyl having received a sympathetic mastering from > Steve Hoffman, but the CD is right up against the ceiling all the way > through having been mastered by Vlado Meller, and if I see this guys > name on anything I now refuse to buy it. He did even worse with the > latest Chilli Peppers CD and it's not only up against the ceiling but > there's digital clipping in there too. It's horrible, and it completely > destroys the work that a band have done in creating an album. There was > a white paper done a little while back that concluded 'LOUDNESS does NOT > equal more sales', and for me that's most definitely true, so you wonder > why the message hasn't sunk in with so many people yet. Thankfully it's > not everyone. There's the odd album appearing here and there which bears > the words 'This recording may be a bit quieter than some of your other > new CDs, to enjoy it at it's best, just turn the volume up and enjoy the > full dynamic range this recording has to offer'. > > Amen to that. You wonder why the same morons who continue to try to sell 40 year old recordings on CD for twice the price of a 2 year old movie on DVD and yet refuse to make these recordings available as low priced lossless downloads (for fear that this will lead to pirated copies becoming available even though pirated copies of lossless digital rips of these CDs are already available) would understand that the Loudness War is actually hurting business I believe that the best word most present day record company executives would be "clueless". trott3r wrote: > I didn't realise different formats had different people mastering them. > I thought the record companies would do things on the cheap and shoe > horn > the same master onto vinyl but reduce the dynamic range so the stylus > doesn't > jump out of the groove. You are confusing dynamic range with overall loudness. The problem with most modern remasters of popular music recordings (I say "popular music" since jazz and classical music have so far mostly been spared from adverse affects of the Loudness War) is that there is way too little dynamic range and too much overall loudness. Dynamic range is the difference between the loudest and quietest passages on a recording. A recording with little dynamic range means that all music is at almost the same loudness and becomes the musical equivalent of TYPING EVERYTHING IN CAPITALS! The use of dynamic range compression (which is what the Loudness War is all about) has been going on for many, many years in television and radio broadcasting for various different reasons (quiet passages can sound like silence while listening to a car radio or a loud advertisement will stand out from the quieter levels of the program audio) but it only relatively recently that this type of dynamic range compression has been applied to the actual recordings themselves. Back to your statement all the record companies would need to do to use the overly compressed CD master for a vinyl issue is lower the overall volume so that "the stylus doesn't jump out of the groove". However the record would then sound as horrible as the CD and the dynamic range would still be almost nonexistent, i.e. there would be little volume difference between the loud and quiet passages. ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Lo, At 14:13 27/07/2012, you wrote: > > > The "loudness wars" (look on youtube if you are not aware of it) also > ruins music. > > I got hold of a dvd audio copy of suedes eponymous album and it was > heavily > compressed with a lower dynamic range rating than the original CD > release (dr9). > > stupid! > > Martin N > > Running MorphOS v3.1 (July 2012) on a PowerPC Powerbook, Moderator of > MiniDisc,amithlonopen,bwfc Yahoogroups I tend to avoid the vast majority of stuff that carries the word 'remastered' as it seems to be an excuse just to make everything LOUD and completely sap the life and dynamics out of a recording Yes that has been my experience as well. Sadly some albums are is hard to find which hasnt been ruined by stupid record companies. Queens of the stone age songs for the death album is pretty poor on CD. I see from dr.loudness-war.info that the vinyl version is a lot better so I suppose I need to buy the album again :( snip >The original never had a problem so why remaster it anyway - Loudness wars, that's why! It's crazy, and these remasters are so completely fatiguing to listen to as there is never any let up in the volume pinning you against the wall. The last Foo Fighters album was another bad example on CD. It's actually a good reason for buying vinyl these days as the mastering tends to be more sympathetic. The Foos album on vinyl is a different beast altogether and can be enjoyed all the way through without feeling like someone is hitting you over the head with a hammer. It has been pretty well documented but I keep mentioning the Red Hot Chilli Peppers output. Take the CD and vinyl of Stadium Arcadium. Absolutely sublime on vinyl having received a sympathetic mastering from Steve Hoffman, but the CD is right up against the ceiling all the way through having been mastered by Vlado Meller, and if I see this guys name on anything I now refuse to buy it. I didn't realise different formats had different people mastering them. I thought the record companies would do things on the cheap and shoe horn the same master onto vinyl but reduce the dynamic range so the stylus doesn't jump out of the groove. There was a white paper done a little while back that concluded 'LOUDNESS does NOT equal more sales', and for me that's most definitely true, so you wonder why the message hasn't sunk in with so many people yet. Thankfully it's not everyone. There's the odd album appearing here and there which bears the words 'This recording may be a bit quieter than some of your other new CDs, to enjoy it at it's best, just turn the volume up and enjoy the full dynamic range this recording has to offer'. Amen to that. Not seen that wording over here but then the whole loudness wars has pretty much made me stop buying new music. Martin N Running MorphOS v3.1 (July 2012) on a PowerPC Powerbook, Moderator of MiniDisc,amithlonopen,bwfc Yahoogroups ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
> > > The "loudness wars" (look on youtube if you are not aware of it) also > ruins music. > > I got hold of a dvd audio copy of suedes eponymous album and it was > heavily > compressed with a lower dynamic range rating than the original CD > release (dr9). > > stupid! > > Martin N > > Running MorphOS v3.1 (July 2012) on a PowerPC Powerbook, Moderator of > MiniDisc,amithlonopen,bwfc Yahoogroups I tend to avoid the vast majority of stuff that carries the word 'remastered' as it seems to be an excuse just to make everything LOUD and completely sap the life and dynamics out of a recording - the only exception to this I can think of has been the Nick Drake albums which were lovingly restored from the master tapes with little tweaking. Last years re-issue of Nirvana's Nevermind was a good case in point. The original never had a problem so why remaster it anyway - Loudness wars, that's why! It's crazy, and these remasters are so completely fatiguing to listen to as there is never any let up in the volume pinning you against the wall. The last Foo Fighters album was another bad example on CD. It's actually a good reason for buying vinyl these days as the mastering tends to be more sympathetic. The Foos album on vinyl is a different beast altogether and can be enjoyed all the way through without feeling like someone is hitting you over the head with a hammer. It has been pretty well documented but I keep mentioning the Red Hot Chilli Peppers output. Take the CD and vinyl of Stadium Arcadium. Absolutely sublime on vinyl having received a sympathetic mastering from Steve Hoffman, but the CD is right up against the ceiling all the way through having been mastered by Vlado Meller, and if I see this guys name on anything I now refuse to buy it. He did even worse with the latest Chilli Peppers CD and it's not only up against the ceiling but there's digital clipping in there too. It's horrible, and it completely destroys the work that a band have done in creating an album. There was a white paper done a little while back that concluded 'LOUDNESS does NOT equal more sales', and for me that's most definitely true, so you wonder why the message hasn't sunk in with so many people yet. Thankfully it's not everyone. There's the odd album appearing here and there which bears the words 'This recording may be a bit quieter than some of your other new CDs, to enjoy it at it's best, just turn the volume up and enjoy the full dynamic range this recording has to offer'. Amen to that. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Lo, At 10:25 27/07/2012, you wrote: lovejoy wrote: > Will it do 24/192 over USB? My Audiolab will only do up to 24/96 over > USB as it's a class 1 USB device, but will do 24/192 over coax. The main > problem at the moment is having anything meaningful to listen to at > 24/192 - The only recording I currently have at this rate is Fleetwood > Mac's Tusk - Great album, but comparing the waveform with the standard > Red Book rip shows it to be pretty much identical. Turns out that Tusk > was an early digital recording, so there's nothing above 22KHz anyway, > so whoever's clever decision it was to release this was either being > deliberately misleading or just didn't know what they were doing. Kind > of puts you off even bothering with high res content. Excellent post! I agree that the main drawbacks to 24/192 (and at times even 24/96) are lack of available and worthwhile recordings, excessively high prices and the "wtf" factor of trying to make something which is standard resolution into high resolution by simply up-converting (which is exactly what was done with the "Tusk" recording). Agreed its not just high res formats that we want but high res done correctly. The "loudness wars" (look on youtube if you are not aware of it) also ruins music. I got hold of a dvd audio copy of suedes eponymous album and it was heavily compressed with a lower dynamic range rating than the original CD release (dr9). stupid! Martin N Running MorphOS v3.1 (July 2012) on a PowerPC Powerbook, Moderator of MiniDisc,amithlonopen,bwfc Yahoogroups ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
lovejoy wrote: > Will it do 24/192 over USB? My Audiolab will only do up to 24/96 over > USB as it's a class 1 USB device, but will do 24/192 over coax. The main > problem at the moment is having anything meaningful to listen to at > 24/192 - The only recording I currently have at this rate is Fleetwood > Mac's Tusk - Great album, but comparing the waveform with the standard > Red Book rip shows it to be pretty much identical. Turns out that Tusk > was an early digital recording, so there's nothing above 22KHz anyway, > so whoever's clever decision it was to release this was either being > deliberately misleading or just didn't know what they were doing. Kind > of puts you off even bothering with high res content. Excellent post! I agree that the main drawbacks to 24/192 (and at times even 24/96) are lack of available and worthwhile recordings, excessively high prices and the "wtf" factor of trying to make something which is standard resolution into high resolution by simply up-converting (which is exactly what was done with the "Tusk" recording). ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Viventis wrote: > I asked a question in the Triode, Digital Enhancement App thread as to > whether the app would allow the transmission of 24bit/192kHz through > toslink or spdif cables. The response I received is that it would, so > long as my receiver's DAC could handle it. Fortunately, my Onkyo 809 > has a DAC that does handle 24bit/192kHz. Will it do 24/192 over USB? My Audiolab will only do up to 24/96 over USB as it's a class 1 USB device, but will do 24/192 over coax. The main problem at the moment is having anything meaningful to listen to at 24/192 - The only recording I currently have at this rate is Fleetwood Mac's Tusk - Great album, but comparing the waveform with the standard Red Book rip shows it to be pretty much identical. Turns out that Tusk was an early digital recording, so there's nothing above 22KHz anyway, so whoever's clever decision it was to release this was either being deliberately misleading or just didn't know what they were doing. Kind of puts you off even bothering with high res content. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
saeyedoc wrote: > It's reasonable to assume that there may be measurable differences, but > are they audible? That's the real question. It's different in a pro > setting where you don't want to propagate those small errors, they could > add up to something audible eventually. Here is something else to consider. I understand that transmitting any signal through almost any cable can result in attenuation of the signal that is measurable. But the cool part about the digital vs anaolg format is that you have a DAC at the receiving end that interprets the signal before decoding it. The DAC does not need a pristene wave form to interpret 0's and 1's! Think of it like this: My daughter can't find her swim goggles so I check the swimming pool. Whether or not I can see the goggles on the bottom of the pool is a function of the clarity of the water and the depth of the pool. However, if the pool isn't so murky or so deep that I can make out the goggles, I can get the net and fetch them. I don't have to see the googles with perfect clarity, I just need to see tham well enough to identify them. Viventis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56717 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
I asked a question in the Triode, Digital Enhancement App thread as to whether the app would allow the transmission of 24bit/192kHz through toslink or spdif cables. The response I received is that it would, so long as my receiver's DAC could handle it. Fortunately, my Onkyo 809 has a DAC that does handle 24bit/192kHz. Viventis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56717 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
ralphpnj wrote: > > > On my other Squeezebox to external DAC setups I've simply learned to > live with these less than perfect means of digital data transmission. Same here, I love my Squeezebox and for a good session discovering new music via Spotify or some internet radio, nothing comes close. I keep all of my music ripped losslessly on a NAS drive connected via Cat6 to the SBT, but if I'm in the mood to listen to my CD collection with the best possible audio quality, then the CD goes in the Audiolab's draw every time and the SBT gets switched off. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
saeyedoc wrote: > It's reasonable to assume that there may be measurable differences, but > are they audible? That's the real question. It's different in a pro > setting where you don't want to propagate those small errors, they could > add up to something audible eventually. Is it audible in the pro environment, that's the $64,000,000 question. Difficult to hear in the environment that I work in, but when the opportunity arises, I'll do my best to get a good listening session done. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
lovejoy wrote: > It's a curse. Oh to be able to enjoy music as much from a tinny micro > system ;-). That's is the rub! Music can be enjoyed using an iPod boombox but if one wants to immerse oneself fully into the music then a somewhat nicer playback system is needed. lovejoy wrote: > I agree with the vast majority of what you say except for the > transmission method. This is where the *BIG* differences happen. > SPDIF/TOSLINK are both a massive fudge - always have been and all the > manufacturers know this. The problem, before all of the transmission > line reflections and impedance mismatches are that data and clock are > interleaved down the same cable. Interleaving will always cause jitter > issues, so this alone makes these formats less than desirable. No-one > outside of a domestic environment uses TOSLINK/SPDIF, using balanced > 110Ohm AES. I work every day with 110Ohm balanced and 75Ohm unbalanced > digital audio connections and you can quite easily measure errors in > going from one to the other without using balancing transformers. > Shielded cables certainly make a difference if you're trying to get away > with it, so it's not unreasonale to think that the same thing is > happening with different grades of SPDIF/COAX cable - I'm not saying you > have to spend silly money on esoteric cables. In fact, I'm positively > against it, especially when you know that most of this stuff is just > marketing and can be made up at home given some soldering skills and the > knowledge of the right cables and plugs to use. USB of course avoids all > of the transmission line problems and gives you separate clock lines, > even better if you have an Asynchronous DAC connection It's a good thing that I have a Transporter connected to my preamp via the balanced analog outputs in my main stereo since this completely avoids having to use any nasty coax or toslink connections :). On my other Squeezebox to external DAC setups I've simply learned to live with these less than perfect means of digital data transmission. ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
lovejoy wrote: > It's a curse. Oh to be able to enjoy music as much from a tinny micro > system ;-). > > > > I agree with the vast majority of what you say except for the > transmission method. This is where the *BIG* differences happen. > SPDIF/TOSLINK are both a massive fudge - always have been and all the > manufacturers know this. The problem, before all of the transmission > line reflections and impedance mismatches are that data and clock are > interleaved down the same cable. Interleaving will always cause jitter > issues, so this alone makes these formats less than desirable. No-one > outside of a domestic environment uses TOSLINK/SPDIF, using balanced > 110Ohm AES. I work every day with 110Ohm balanced and 75Ohm unbalanced > digital audio connections and you can quite easily measure errors in > going from one to the other without using balancing transformers. > Shielded cables certainly make a difference if you're trying to get away > with it, so it's not unreasonale to think that the same thing is > happening with different grades of SPDIF/COAX cable - I'm not saying you > have to spend silly money on esoteric cables. In fact, I'm positively > against it, especially when you know that most of this stuff is just > marketing and can be made up at home given some soldering skills and the > knowledge of the right cables and plugs to use. It's reasonable to assume that there may be measurable differences, but are they audible? That's the real question. It's different in a pro setting where you don't want to propagate those small errors, they could add up to something audible eventually. saeyedoc's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56705 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
ralphpnj wrote: > Oh my what an awful burden it must be to be born with a pair of golden > ears. Just thinking about it makes me want to weep. It's a curse. Oh to be able to enjoy music as much from a tinny micro system ;-). > Look I consider myself somewhat of an audiophile but that does not mean > that I am willing to swallow each and every audiophile myth hook, line > and sinker. What audiophiles seems to have forgotten is that the digital > storage method, whether it is used for music, video, words or pictures, > was developed as a means to overcome many of the limitations of the > analog storage method. Sure digital introduces some limitations of its > own but those limitations are not the same as the old analog > limitations. And one of the old analog limitations that digital DOES NOT > share is that digital is NOT dependent on the storage media and the > method of data transmission. By this I mean that it makes no difference > how the digital data is stored, be it on a hard drive, a tape, a flash > drive or optical disc, nor does it make any difference how it is > transmitted, be it via toslink, usb or coax. This feature was "built > into" digital from the very beginning and is very well understood > (outside of the audiophile world) and is the reason why a youtube video > uploaded from China will play back perfectly on a computer located in > Texas even though the digital data will passed through countless wires > and relays along the way - because ones are ones and zeros are zeros. > > Now don't get me completely wrong since I do believe in many of the > basic ideas of high end audio, such as vibration control in > loudspeakers, proper speaker placement, proper power amp and speaker > matching, etc. But all of these ideas have one important thing in > common: they are all based on good scientific reasoning and can easily > be tested and measured. In addition, the previous paragraph does not > mean that there is no room for improvement in digital audio, rather it > means the areas for improvement lie somewhere other than the means and > method of digital data storage and transmission. I agree with the vast majority of what you say except for the transmission method. This is where the *BIG* differences happen. SPDIF/TOSLINK are both a massive fudge - always have been and all the manufacturers know this. The problem, before all of the transmission line reflections and impedance mismatches are that data and clock are interleaved down the same cable. Interleaving will always cause jitter issues, so this alone makes these formats less than desirable. No-one outside of a domestic environment uses TOSLINK/SPDIF, using balanced 110Ohm AES. I work every day with 110Ohm balanced and 75Ohm unbalanced digital audio connections and you can quite easily measure errors in going from one to the other without using balancing transformers. Shielded cables certainly make a difference if you're trying to get away with it, so it's not unreasonale to think that the same thing is happening with different grades of SPDIF/COAX cable - I'm not saying you have to spend silly money on esoteric cables. In fact, I'm positively against it, especially when you know that most of this stuff is just marketing and can be made up at home given some soldering skills and the knowledge of the right cables and plugs to use. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
ralphpnj wrote: > I take by the above quote that your setup is something like this: > > Server running LMS > wifi > router > ethernet (cat 5) > Touch > coax > > Anthem MRX300 > > Yes? > > Since everything is working fine and sounds great - congratulations! > Should you start to experience any problems, especially when streaming > 24bit/88.2 or 96kHZ material, then the first thing you should look at > would be the server > wifi > router link since this the most important > link and an changing to an ethernet link would most likely resolve any > problems. Again, this is if and only if you start to experience trouble. Exactly. Running ethernet from the server to the router would be a big job, it's in another room. Ran it for a few hours last night, no issues at all. I suppose it could be more of an issue if I run multiple zones off the server. saeyedoc's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56705 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
saeyedoc wrote: > Due to where I wanted to located the Touch, I ended up using coax since > that's all I had around that was long enough. Because of the location of > the router, I have the touch hooked up with ethernet and the server > using wifi. I take by the above quote that your setup is something like this: Server running LMS > wifi > router > ethernet (cat 5) > Touch > coax > Anthem MRX300 Yes? Since everything is working fine and sounds great - congratulations! Should you start to experience any problems, especially when streaming 24bit/88.2 or 96kHZ material, then the first thing you should look at would be the server > wifi > router link since this the most important link and an changing to an ethernet link would most likely resolve any problems. Again, this is if and only if you start to experience trouble. ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
lovejoy wrote: > As I said at the bottom of my message, just posting my *EXPERIENCE* > based upon many hours of listening and enjoying or not enjoying music. > If you can't hear any difference then all the best to you, you've > achieved the best sound for your system and I'm jealous and wish you all > the best. But don't think that you know everything when you're just > spouting all the stuff we've already read and either see the logic in > (which I do) or disagree with and know that there must be something more > to it (a something which as yet, has not been measured or documented, > which I also do). > > Humans are not measuring devices, so why should a piece of electrical > measuring equipment or a law on sampling theory or transmission lines > provide all of the answers on why digital music reproduction > communicates with us emotionally or not? I suggest you think about that > one! Oh my what an awful burden it must be to be born with a pair of golden ears. Just thinking about it makes me want to weep. Look I consider myself somewhat of an audiophile but that does not mean that I am willing to swallow each and every audiophile myth hook, line and sinker. What audiophiles seems to have forgotten is that the digital storage method, whether it is used for music, video, words or pictures, was developed as a means to overcome many of the limitations of the analog storage method. Sure digital introduces some limitations of its own but those limitations are not the same as the old analog limitations. And one of the old analog limitations that digital DOES NOT share is that digital is NOT dependent on the storage media and the method of data transmission. By this I mean that it makes no difference how the digital data is stored, be it on a hard drive, a tape, a flash drive or optical disc, nor does it make any difference how it is transmitted, be it via toslink, usb or coax. This feature was "built into" digital from the very beginning and is very well understood (outside of the audiophile world) and is the reason why a youtube video uploaded from China will play back perfectly on a computer located in Texas even though the digital data will passed through countless wires and relays along the way - because ones are ones and zeros are zeros. Now don't get me completely wrong since I do believe in many of the basic ideas of high end audio, such as vibration control in loudspeakers, proper speaker placement, proper power amp and speaker matching, etc. But all of these ideas have one important thing in common: they are all based on good scientific reasoning and can easily be tested and measured. In addition, the previous paragraph does not mean that there is no room for improvement in digital audio, rather it means the areas for improvement lie somewhere other than the means and method of digital data storage and transmission. ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Well I got my Touch yesterday. Had already setup LMS over the weekend and was able to get to it from the web browser, all indexing had been done. Due to where I wanted to located the Touch, I ended up using coax since that's all I had around that was long enough. Because of the location of the router, I have the touch hooked up with ethernet and the server using wifi. Piece of cake getting it to work. The longest thing was having to get the latest ios on the ipad we have so I could use ipeng. ipeng is great, everything working well, sounds great. I doubt I'd be able to hear the difference between 24/94 and 24/192 in a DBT, I have very little material in that format right now anyway. Can always stream with DLNA to my Oppo for those few tracks. Doesn't seem worth it to use USB, would have to use a USB to s/pdif converter. No point in using an external DAC as my Anthem would just AD it anyway. Love it so far! saeyedoc's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56705 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
ralphpnj wrote: > Double WOW - you are making way too much sense and common sense and > science are most definitely NOT welcome in any modern audio forum. Plus > my post should be number 8 and so far no one has told the OP that the > USB modification is the ONLY way to go, after all with this mod one can > stream 24bit/192kHz and there are just so many reasonably priced (as in > less than the price of a new car) 24bit/192kHz recordings available that > going with coax or toslink makes absolutely no sense at all. Agreed, except that you need a newer Class 2 device if you want to stream 24/192. Most (especially cheaper) USB equipped DACs are USB class 1 and so 24/96 is the highest rate you can stream at. The USB mod is most definitely worth a try though. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
As I said at the bottom of my message, just posting my *EXPERIENCE* based upon many hours of listening and enjoying or not enjoying music. If you can't hear any difference then all the best to you, you've achieved the best sound for your system and I'm jealous and wish you all the best. But don't think that you know everything when you're just spouting all the stuff we've already read and either see the logic in (which I do) or disagree with and know that there must be something more to it (a something which as yet, has not been measured or documented, which I also do). Humans are not measuring devices, so why should a piece of electrical measuring equipment or a law on sampling theory or transmission lines provide all of the answers. I suggest you think about that one! lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Viventis wrote: > Wow! I am so sorry to disagree, but what I have just read sounds like a > bunch of techno-babble published by the manufacturers of high end cables > to attempt to justify their exorbitant prices. > > Digital is binary. Binary is a sequence of 0's and 1's. If 100 > different cables transmit the exact same sequence of 0's and 1's to your > DAC, I guarantee that each will sound 100% the same. There is no such > thing as a flat 0, a sharp 1, a warm 0 or a harsh 1. They are nothing > more than numbers that are decoded by your DAC! > > If a cable is so poorly made that it is incapable of transmitting the > proper sequence, the result will be different. But that is the only > variable. > > This takes me back to the question of the OP. If a toslink or spdif > cable transmits the same sequence of 0's and 1's to the DAC, there will > be no difference in the output. Double WOW - you are making way too much sense and common sense and science are most definitely NOT welcome in any modern audio forum. Plus my post should be number 8 and so far no one has told the OP that the USB modification is the ONLY way to go, after all with this mod one can stream 24bit/192kHz and there are just so many reasonably priced (as in less than the price of a new car) 24bit/192kHz recordings available that going with coax or toslink makes absolutely no sense at all. ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Wow! I am so sorry to disagree, but what I have just read sounds like a bunch of techno-babble published by the manufacturers of high end cables to attempt to justify their exorbitant prices. Binary is 0's and 1's. If 100 different cables transmit the exact same sequence of 0's and 1's to your DAC, I guarantee you that each stream will sound 100% the same. There is no such thing as a flat 0, a sharp 1, a warm 0 or a harsh 1. They are numbers that are decoded by your DAC! If a cable is so poorly made that it is incapable of transmitting the proper sequence, the result will be different. But that is the only variable. Viventis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56717 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
> Viventis wrote: >> There should be no difference at all. Digital is digital. Your >> receiver's DAC will decode each the same. On 24 July 2012 17:21, lovejoy wrote: > > I beg to differ. Getting the 1s and 0s from your Touch to your DAC is > quite a challenge [...] over the poorly designed interfaces that are TOSLINK > and SPDIF. I'll give you the poorly designed part, but on the whole the bits get from here to there just fine. If they didn't, the various encoded multi-channel formats wouldn't work at all. The only remotely tricky part is the timing, which does not matter that much in a pure playback context since the receiver can and usually does a small amount of buffering. If the digital signal should become corrupted for any reason, the sound will do something drastic like drop out for a half a second. Believe me, you'd notice. Optical will get you electrical isolation between the components, which can definitely be a plus, if you have problems with RF interference or noisy power. The downside is that you need optical-electrical converters at both ends, which may or may not make the practically irrelevant timing issues a little worse in theory. > [...] It's not something I could pick up quickly in an A/B test, Exactly. C. ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Viventis wrote: > There should be no difference at all. Digital is digital. Your > receiver's DAC will decode each the same. The big difference is in the > Touch's analog output. The DAC in the Touch is excellent, even better > than that found in many receivers. I beg to differ. Getting the 1s and 0s from your Touch to your DAC is quite a challenge (there is no such thing as a digital *SIGNAL*, it is an analogue carrier modulating small changes in voltages representing binary information), especially over the poorly designed interfaces that are TOSLINK and SPDIF. One will be better than the other depending on the implementation and your cabling. TOSLINK optical cables come in two flavours, plastic and glass. The outer sheath will also make a difference, the light path is affected by the reflective and refractive indicies of the cable - take a glass and a plastic cable and listen - easily demonstrable difference in audio quality. No need to spend silly money on a glass cable though - Stan Beresford sells a very good one for example. In my system TOSLINK comes a poor second to a coax connection. I am using a Touch connected to an Audiolab 8200CDQ and the optical connection sounds flat, dull and lifeless. The SPDIF path is crippled by the fact that it SHOULD be a 75Ohm impedance connection, but considering that RCA plugs are not 75ohms and neither is the circuit up to the RCAs, there's not much chance of avoiding signal reflections between one end and the other. Using different lengths of cable will go some way to alleviating the problems this causes - A lot of people report 1.5m as being the optimum length of coax cable, but again, the cable you use will make a difference. I've tried various coax cables from the likes of Chord, Kontak Link and QED, but so far, my home brewed cable using Belden satellite coax at 0.5 metres has worked best for me. It's not something I could pick up quickly in an A/B test, but certainly, over the course of an evenings listening, the Belden has had me enjoying my music louder and for longer. Just my experiences - YMMV of course, but keep your ears and mind open. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
There should be no difference at all. Digital is digital. Your receiver's DAC will decode each the same. The big difference is in the Touch's analog output. The DAC in the Touch is excellent, even better than that found in many receivers. Viventis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56717 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
saeyedoc wrote: > > My plan is to hook it up via digital to my Anthem MRX300 and use the > analog output to eventually run a second zone outdoors. > Is there any difference in quality between the Toslink and coax digital > outputs? > > Thanks As garym suggested, trying both with your equipment is the best way to find out. In my system, Toslink is more quiet and (slightly) more detailed, possibly because of no ground connection. But it may or may not be so in your system. Regards, Guido F. guidof's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=40448 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
saeyedoc wrote: > I searched but couldn't find anything on this. > Have been lurking for a few months, looking for a better solution to > play a 2TB HD with mostly Flac, have been using my Oppo 93. > Jumped on the sale at Vann's the other day, ordered a Touch. > My plan is to hook it up via digital to my Anthem MRX300 and use the > analog output to eventually run a second zone outdoors. > Is there any difference in quality between the Toslink and coax digital > outputs? I have no idea whether the input is better for one vs the other > on the Anthem, I've only been using HDMI to this point. > I know another option would be to mod it to use the USB output and then > use an asynchronous USB to s/pdif converter, but I want to try this > first. > > Thanks both are active at the same time. try both and see which you like better. I would predict no detectible difference. garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
[SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
I searched but couldn't find anything on this. Have been lurking for a few months, looking for a better solution to play a 2TB HD with mostly Flac, have been using my Oppo 93. Jumped on the sale at Vann's the other day, ordered a Touch. My plan is to hook it up via digital to my Anthem MRX300 and use the analog output to eventually run a second zone outdoors. Is there any difference in quality between the Toslink and coax digital outputs? I have no idea whether the input is better for one vs the other on the Anthem, I've only been using HDMI to this point. I know another option would be to mod it to use the USB output and then use an asynchronous USB to s/pdif converter, but I want to try this first. Thanks saeyedoc's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56705 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
