I know this is an extremely elementry question. For 2 channel stereo is there a difference between analogue cables and digital cables (coax or optic)? If I am only using 2 speakers why use digital audio cables.

For what? If you are speaking of the interconnects between player and pre/pro (or AVR), it depends on which does better D/A conversion. So, no definite answer.

In some (most?) receivers, you can record from only the analog in / out. So if use the stereo analog cables chances are you can record from the stereo / analog VCR/Tape out. However if you use digital cables, you may not be able to use the stereo / analog out from the Tape / VCR loop. One possible reason to use the analog cables in addition to what Kal mentions above.

t depends on which does better D/A conversion With most CDs' (not mp3 transfers), is there really a noticeable difference? Not one that can be measured, but an average listerner could hear with average speakers (not $2k a pair either)?

All RCA cables are the same '75 ohm" , as for the digital info going thru the cables that can't be recorded only an analog 2 channel mix can.

I was referring to the end result from your speakers using a digital connection vs analog from the player to the receiver.

All RCA cables are the same '75 ohm"

Only in your world, lou.

I didn't know 'audio' cables were ever rated for any 'ohm'?? Coxial cables are.

BTW, the tern "RCA" usually means the type of the connector, not the cable. You can put a RCA 'phono' connector on 'twinlead' if you really wanted to.

My first stereo used RCA for speaker connections. The pin was the positive and the collar was the negative. It was functional, but I can't attest for the performance on anything better than a beginner system.

Doug

I didn't know 'audio' cables were ever rated for any 'ohm'?? Coxial cables are. In general, there are no fixed specs for line-level analog audio cables but the vast majority of such have RCA connectors and are, in fact, coaxial. Digital and video cables, due to the need to carry wider bandwidth and higher frequency signals are usually specified for a particular impedance to insure good signal transfer. They, too, are usually coaxial, regardless of the connector.

BTW, the tern "RCA" usually means the type of the connector, not the cable. You can put a RCA 'phono' connector on 'twinlead' if you really wanted to.Yup. That's often a source of confusion for beginners.

So is there a difference between a digital coaxial audio RCA cable and a composite video cable.

Can't seem to locate the one I purchased as a digital coaxial cable but have a few of the ones I purchased for video.

Colin

So is there a difference between a digital coaxial audio RCA cable and a composite video cable.If they are both 75ohm spec, no.

The thickness of the cable has nothing to do with the impedence of the cable, but the shielding, correct?

The thickness of the cable has nothing to do with the impedence of the cable, but the shielding, correct?

The thickness of the cable has nothing to do with anything. Characteristic impedance is determined by the materials used, and the cable geometry.
A shield is inherent to coax cable, without it, it wouldn't be coax.

"For 2 channel stereo is there a difference between analogue cables and digital cables (coax or optic)? "

OK I'll try to answer.

1) COAX (75 Ohm) cables flow highest band width and are best for Digital.
2) Optic has avantage of No EMC interferance but in my opion is not as good as COAX.
3) RCA Analog are 50 Ohm and thay make a diffrence in high end. To get a system that really makes a diffrence to all this stuff takes some time and money but when you get there its worth it.

Hope this Helps
Ron
2 Channel System Intergrated into HTS
California Audio Alpha DAC with 1961 Raytheon 12AX7 Tubes
Lat International Digital Coax
Monster 1000i Anaolg Interconnects
Solid State Sony TAP with 2 Channel ByPass tp Pre/Pro
Does the trick for me

Optic has avantage of No EMC interferance

What is EMC, did you just make it up?

RCA Analog are 50 Ohm and thay make a diffrence in high end.

RCA is the name of a manufacturer. Cinch connectors, (what everyone calls RCA connectors) are neither 50 Ohm or 75 Ohm.
There is no need for an audio cable to have a characteristic imedance of 50 or 75 Ohms, because there is no impedance matching taking place.
The only commonly available 50 Ohm coax cable is RG58...and it's generally not used in consumer audio applications.


Hope this Helps

nah, it just adds more material to the myths that a lot of you subscribe to.

For what? If you are speaking of the interconnects between player and pre/pro (or AVR), it depends on which does better D/A conversion.
Even that's not really true - the first thing the receiver will normally do with the analogue input is convert it back to digital for bass management, Dolby Pro Logic processing etc, then convert it back to analogue. All a bit pointless - you might as well transport it digitally to save the pointless D->A->D conversions.

The exception would be if you were intending to run in "pure direct" mode; in that case the receiver would pass it through untouched, so you'd be working purely from the player DACs.

Does anyone want to comment on what KMO has posted?

Aren't the effects of conversion for bass management minimal?

Even that's not really true - the first thing the receiver will normally do with the analogue input is convert it back to digital for bass management, Dolby Pro Logic processing etc, then convert it back to analogue. All a bit pointless - you might as well transport it digitally to save the pointless D->A->D conversions.

The exception would be if you were intending to run in "pure direct" mode; in that case the receiver would pass it through untouched, so you'd be working purely from the player DACs.Of course. If one uses the analog outs of the player, it only makes sense to use the BM in the player and the "pure direct" mode in the receiver.

OTOH, one needs to do the comparison with the specific equipment. For example, the A/D in my Meridian 861 is good enough so that the redundant A/D/A can be justified for the processing advantages. Of course, I only do that for SACD/DVD-A as regular CD/DVD goes in digital anyway.

Aren't the effects of conversion for bass management minimal?Again. It depends on the specific equipment and the listener.

Because you used the words "average listener," I would have to assume the answer is "no, there should be no difference."

If the question is instead "the average AVS forum die-hard," the answer would be what you see in the thread above :-)

The thickness of the cable has nothing to do with anything. Except how much some companies charge for their cables. As in; bigger is better. ;) 1) COAX (75 Ohm) cables flow highest band width Please enlighten us where that came from??
Bandwidth is limited to the electronics. Length of cable will increase high frequency loss.

I want to know if it will make a difference if when using analog output to amplifiers if the type of cable will make any difference. i.e. can I use interchangeably without degradation of sound 1) "analog audio" cable (cheap to expensive available) , "analog video" cable (like component video cables everywhere) or "digital audio" cable (like coaxial used for digital transfer of bitstream)? The reason I ask is I have lots of those video cables around, but can't seem to find out if there is a good reason not to use them for analog audio

There are so many 'marketing' gimmicks courtesy of the CEA, it's hard to keep up with them.

Unless you are a high end purist, almost any cable will do, especially if it is a length less than two feet. Except for the cheapeset of cheapest audio cables that are about as thick as your computer mouse cable, use what you have. Longer lengths (over 8-10 feet) will require something better. I wouldn't use actual 'coxial' cables (RG59 or RG6) though.

Problem is, a thick layer of inexpensive insulation does wonders to cover up thin inner conductors giving the illusion of a 'better' cable.

There are so many 'marketing' gimmicks courtesy of the CEA, it's hard to keep up with them.

Unless you are a high end purist, almost any cable will do, especially if it is a length less than two feet. Except for the cheapeset of cheapest audio cables that are about as thick as your computer mouse cable, use what you have. Longer lengths (over 8-10 feet) will require something better. I wouldn't use actual 'coxial' cables (RG59 or RG6) though.

Problem is, a thick layer of inexpensive insulation does wonders to cover up thin inner conductors giving the illusion of a 'better' cable.

I was using really cheap Python audio cables as interconnects for 5.1 DVD-Audio analog output to my pre/pro. I just switched to relatively inexpensive set of Acoustic Research audio cables (Pro series SACD5.1) that have twisted pair construction and 100% foil sheilding, but lack the extra 95% braiding sheild of the Master's series cables. They did make a + difference in the dynamics of the mid-high end sound IMO. You can get this set of 6 cables on Buy.com for $13 (list price is $45).

What's the reason not to use a good digital coaxial cable for analog audio? tin in the metal? lack of twisted pair construction? not enough bandwidth? I'm using a long run of Rg-6 quad-sheild to my subwoofers now . Do you think I would get better cleaner base if i switched to an audio interconnect?


UPDATE: I just found you can get the Master Series 5.1 audio cables (six, 6-foot cables online for great price ($30 for $125 list), so I bought these, but haven't tried them yet. They have the nicer (locking ends) and extra 95% braided sheilding added.