Digital, Analog, Processing, or "Source Direct"?
cokewithvanilla
Posts: 1,777
Ok, but my question for now is, well first lemme tell you my choices:
1. Soundblaster audigy 2 zs Digital output > Mini to RCA Adapter (cost, $1.99) > Monster Cable (cost, $30-something, ten years ago) > Digital port on DMC-1 running as "Digital, Stereo"
2. Soundblaster audigy 2 z Analog output 1 (front speakers) > Cheap mini to rca cable (cost, $2.99) > Left and right analog in on DMC-1 set as "Analog, Source Direct"
Source direct has no processing at all and "the shortest signal path". Stereo has some processing, that includes distances other stuff.
The question is what should give me the better sound in this situation? A good digital cable with processing, or a crappy analog cable with no processing?
Whats the difference in sound to me? Well, I keep doing a/b tests and the only difference I can really hear is the Analog is louder. I don't think I hear a difference in quality.... and according to everyone who buys expensive cable, my 30 dollar cable should sound better than my 3 dollar cable
I guess I could buy a better analog cable to keep everything constant, but whats better for music, digital or analog, keeping in mind that you can ONLY have no processing if you use analog?
Oh by the way, for all you that have heard my complaining about my 25s, I am getting new crossovers from polk
1. Soundblaster audigy 2 zs Digital output > Mini to RCA Adapter (cost, $1.99) > Monster Cable (cost, $30-something, ten years ago) > Digital port on DMC-1 running as "Digital, Stereo"
2. Soundblaster audigy 2 z Analog output 1 (front speakers) > Cheap mini to rca cable (cost, $2.99) > Left and right analog in on DMC-1 set as "Analog, Source Direct"
Source direct has no processing at all and "the shortest signal path". Stereo has some processing, that includes distances other stuff.
The question is what should give me the better sound in this situation? A good digital cable with processing, or a crappy analog cable with no processing?
Whats the difference in sound to me? Well, I keep doing a/b tests and the only difference I can really hear is the Analog is louder. I don't think I hear a difference in quality.... and according to everyone who buys expensive cable, my 30 dollar cable should sound better than my 3 dollar cable
I guess I could buy a better analog cable to keep everything constant, but whats better for music, digital or analog, keeping in mind that you can ONLY have no processing if you use analog?
Oh by the way, for all you that have heard my complaining about my 25s, I am getting new crossovers from polk
Post edited by cokewithvanilla on
Comments
-
cokewithvanilla wrote: »Ok, but my question for now is, well first lemme tell you my choices:
1. Soundblaster audigy 2 zs Digital output > Mini to RCA Adapter (cost, $1.99) > Monster Cable (cost, $30-something, ten years ago) > Digital port on DMC-1 running as "Digital, Stereo"
I don't understand how you're digital after going through a mini-RCA adapter. Or how that even works. Doesn't the soundblaster have a regular S/PDIF output?The question is what should give me the better sound in this situation? A good digital cable with processing, or a crappy analog cable with no processing?
If the source is good all the way up to the DMC-1, then analog would have better sound. If the source was originally digital which was run through a marginal DAC and output on crappy cable up to the DMC-1, then I think staying digital as far as possible would be a better way to go. Though I don't think it's known to have great D/A itself. -
Here: http://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/digital-audio/index.htm
3rd field down, you can purchase a digital cable with a 1/8" adapter on one end, RCA on the other, it will be far better than what you're using now, and it's cheap too(IMO). This is what I'm using on my media server."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche -
I don't understand how you're digital after going through a mini-RCA adapter. Or how that even works. Doesn't the soundblaster have a regular S/PDIF output?
The audigy only has one digital out... and its a mini jack. Dunno how it works. I know it recognizes it as digital on my preamp, and when I had 5 speakers hooked up a long time ago they worked as surround sound if I played a game.....3rd field down, you can purchase a digital cable with a 1/8" adapter on one end, RCA on the other, it will be far better than what you're using now, and it's cheap too(IMO). This is what I'm using on my media server.
Digital cable? so you think digital offers better sound quality? I was wondering about an analog cable with a mini on one side.
Ah, they do sell it. Mini to Analog RCA is $35 for 5 feet, Mini to Digital RCA is $23... the price isn't going to be a factor in my decision, but what do you think will sound better? -
I would let the receiver/pre pro do the processing instead of that card."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche
-
so if I use digital the soundcard isn't doing any processing?
-
Correct."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche