Toslink audio digital fiber optic cable for reciever

digitalvideo

I have Mediabridge HDMI cables, I'm all set with that. I'd like to get a better quality Toslink fiber optic digital audio cable to connect my reciever to my tv. I bought this Toslink cable off of Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/Fiber-Optical-Toslink-Digital-Interface/dp/B0002MQGOK and not too happy with the quality as it's very loose fitting and I just don't have much confidence in it. I have no idea what company made it. Do any of you know who makes a good quality Toslink fiber optic digital audio cable? I looked at Bluejeans, Mediabridge, bestdealscables.com and just wanting a 2nd or 3rd opinion from you guys.

jacob.simpson

digitalvideo wrote: »

I have Mediabridge HDMI cables, I'm all set with that. I'd like to get a better quality Toslink fiber optic digital audio cable to connect my reciever to my tv. I bought this Toslink cable off of Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/Fiber-Optical-Toslink-Digital-Interface/dp/B0002MQGOK and not too happy with the quality as it's very loose fitting and I just don't have much confidence in it. I have no idea what company made it. Do any of you know who makes a good quality Toslink fiber optic digital audio cable? I looked at Bluejeans, Mediabridge, bestdealscables.com and just wanting a 2nd or 3rd opinion from you guys.

Bought lot of cables from Monoprice.com including TL very good quality for the price, fits really snug. And costs way less than others you can try them and they have a return policy which is very customer oriented.

TNRabbit

You can get actual GLASS TOSLINK from amazon.com....supposed to be very good. Search GLASS TOSLINK.

digitalvideo

TNRabbit wrote: »

You can get actual GLASS TOSLINK from amazon.com....supposed to be very good. Search GLASS TOSLINK.

hmmmm, bluejeans has Toslink cables, and they say:

"For these applications, we build our optical cables using the finest high-performance Plastic Optical Fiber (POF), Mitsubishi's ESKA Fiber. While POF is in general rather lossy stuff compared to glass optical fiber, we prefer it for optical digital audio use because it's much more physically durable and because its aperture matches the spec for optical digital audio use, unlike glass fiber which is too small and must be used in bundles."

Should I go with a Glass Toslink or Bluejeans' (POF) Toslink and do you guys know if there is a difference in quality and performance?

digitalvideo

Also if I can add, it also says at bluejeans website about their optical digital audio cable that they prefer to run digital audio in coax, they say it's more robust over distance, and the cable is interchangeable with cable used for certain other applications (e.g., composite video).

steveinaz

Impact Acoustics sells a quartz-glass Toslink---very nice. I have owned 2 of them.

wutadumsn23

digitalvideo wrote: »

Also if I can add, it also says at bluejeans website about their optical digital audio cable that they prefer to run digital audio in coax, they say it's more robust over distance, and the cable is interchangeable with cable used for certain other applications (e.g., composite video).

This is also a hot debate here on the forum. Some people prefer Coax over Optical, but I think it is also a matter of personal preference. I have run both Digital Coax and Digital Optical, and I prefer Digital Optical myself. I run all my audio to my receiver though HDMI now and IMO it is the best of the three. I use my receiver for most audio duties and only use HDMI to my TV for my Comcast (actually it's for my wife so she doesn't have to turn my receiver on to hear the TV) Try to audition both first and see what you prefer, in the end it is you who will be listening to your system most.

steveinaz

I like Optical's take too depending on source--it can be extremely neutral if the interfaces are of high quality. Toslink is definitely DEAD quiet....

I use toslink for my direct tv high def reciever audio and my BluRay; I have never been disappointed.

Mike21

I use a Sonic Wave glass optical for TV to receiver:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=184-172

I also have a plastic optical that cost twice as much as the glass - they sound the same to me, but the Sonic Wave glass has a tighter connection on my components.

Mike

ben62670

Keiko wrote: »

I use both in my system and really can't tell any difference between the two (Coax/Toslink).
Although it's been pointed out that with Toslink there is an additional conversion rather than using a coax connection. I use the MonoPrice premium Toslink cable on my PS3. It's quality built and like all MP cables, nicely priced.

http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10229

Two additional conversions;) Electrical to light pulses, and then light to electrical. There is no gain by using optical. Coax is the same exact signal with two less conversion. I prefer not to put extra pieces in the signal path.
Ben

wutadumsn23

ben62670 wrote: »

Two additional conversions;) Electrical to light pulses, and then light to electrical. There is no gain by using optical. Coax is the same exact signal with two less conversion. I prefer not to put extra pieces in the signal path.
Ben

See, I knew someone would have a no frills, no BS answer with the reasons why. Thanks Ben. So are you saying that Coax is better Ben, since it has two less conversions in the signal path?

ben62670

wutadumsn23 wrote: »

See, I knew someone would have a no frills, no BS answer with the reasons why. Thanks Ben. So are you saying that Coax is better Ben, since it has two less conversions in the signal path?

Without a doubt. K.I.S.S. applies in audio too. The only time I would use optical is if you have no choice, or for some weird(haven't run into this yet) reason you were getting some ground loop issues with COAX.

wutadumsn23

ben62670 wrote: »

Without a doubt. K.I.S.S. applies in audio too. The only time I would use optical is if you have no choice, or for some weird(haven't run into this yet) reason you were getting some ground loop issues with COAX.

Looks like I'm going to have to dig out my old Coax cable and swap out my Optical cable, lol. In all honesty though, I don't use either for anything anymore since I went to HDMI.

digitalvideo

So I can run everything through HDMI cable connections with no need for any Toslink fiber optic digital audio cables? I had my entertainment room setup by a friend who did all the wiring and adjustments. I just want to know if I'm getting everything out of my system that I paid for.

My home entertainment system includes:

Pioneer Elite Kuro Pro-111fd plasma
Pioneer SC-05 reciever
Pioneer Elite BDP-05FD bluray (soon to be Pioneer Elite BDP-23fd)
Onkyo 7.1 surround speaker system

Are there any advantages or disadvantages to using just HDMI cables or Toslink fiber optic digital audio cables performance wise with sound/audio and picture quality?

disneyjoe7

digitalvideo wrote: »

hmmmm, bluejeans has Toslink cables, and they say:

"For these applications, we build our optical cables using the finest high-performance Plastic Optical Fiber (POF), Mitsubishi's ESKA Fiber. While POF is in general rather lossy stuff compared to glass optical fiber, we prefer it for optical digital audio use because it's much more physically durable and because its aperture matches the spec for optical digital audio use, unlike glass fiber which is too small and must be used in bundles."

Should I go with a Glass Toslink or Bluejeans' (POF) Toslink and do you guys know if there is a difference in quality and performance?

I have 1 Toslink cable by BlueJean Cables. I like the cable, and they are tight, don't know what to say about it but I can say it seems to be built nice. I plan to buy more of them as I need to replace some other cables.

steveinaz

After running Toslink, AES-EBU, and Coaxial for a length of time, I'll have to respectfully disagree. Like any cable swap, it's a matter of tonal character. I have seen no evidence (nor have I heard any) that one is better than the other--or that any of the 3 aren't capable of full digital data transmission. In my system, AES-EBU had the most analog sound to it; Toslink the most neutral, and coaxial fell somewhere right in between the two. YMMV.

AES-EBU: Smooth, warm sound. Not the last word on neutrality.
Toslink: Very smooth treble, solid bass, dead quiet background; can sound a little too sterile.
Coaxial: Does alot of things well, but lacks the smoothness of AES/EBU, and treble, bass control of the Toslink.

These are my observations.

WilliamM2

So I can run everything through HDMI cable connections with no need for any Toslink fiber optic digital audio cables?

Yes, with the equipment you listed you can.

Are there any advantages or disadvantages to using just HDMI cables or Toslink fiber optic digital audio cables performance wise with sound/audio and picture quality?

Yes, for audio, you can only get the new lossless codecs through HDMI, not optical or coax. Also, the BDP-05FD does not internally decode DTS-MA, so analog 5.1 won't work either. For video, you can only get 1080p over HDMI, same with upconversion of standard DVD's.

ben62670

steveinaz wrote: »

After running Toslink, AES-EBU, and Coaxial for a length of time, I'll have to respectfully disagree. Like any cable swap, it's a matter of tonal character. I have seen no evidence (nor have I heard any) that one is better than the other--or that any of the 3 aren't capable of full digital data transmission. In my system, AES-EBU had the most analog sound to it; Toslink the most neutral, and coaxial fell somewhere right in between the two. YMMV.

That's cool. Synergy is a ****. Tastes are different, and gear. Just one little thing to add for the toslink is that jitter can affect SQ. With the 2 extra conversions you stand a chance of introducing jitter at either end, or both. In the end try both. Use your ears. I am using toslink with very good results on my CD changer:), and COAX is being used on my Denon 2900.

TNRabbit

FYI: One thing that TOSLINK will do is isolate any hum/ground issues which are VERY common with cable boxes. I use it exclusively for my cable box for just that reason. No ground loop possible with optical transmission....

ben62670

TNRabbit wrote: »

FYI: One thing that TOSLINK will do is isolate any hum/ground issues which are VERY common with cable boxes. I use it exclusively for my cable box for just that reason. No ground loop possible with optical transmission....

Excellent point on toslink for cable boxes. The cable boxes are know for noise.

digitalvideo

WilliamM2 wrote: »

Yes, with the equipment you listed you can.



Yes, for audio, you can only get the new lossless codecs through HDMI, not optical or coax. Also, the BDP-05FD does not internally decode DTS-MA, so analog 5.1 won't work either. For video, you can only get 1080p over HDMI, same with upconversion of standard DVD's.

Thanks, that's why I'm going to replace my Pioneer BDP-05FD and look into the new 2009 Pioneer Elite BDP-23fd or Panasonic or Oppo.

WilliamM2

digitalvideo wrote: »

Thanks, that's why I'm going to replace my Pioneer BDP-05FD and look into the new 2009 Pioneer Elite BDP-23fd or Panasonic or Oppo.

Why? It will still bitstream all of the new codecs so they can be decoded by your reciever. You will have better bass management that way anyways, no fixed crossover like all the players available.

Besides, Pioneer is releasing new firmware to enable decoding in the player next month.

digitalvideo

WilliamM2 wrote: »

Why? It will still bitstream all of the new codecs so they can be decoded by your reciever. You will have better bass management that way anyways, no fixed crossover like all the players available.

Besides, Pioneer is releasing new firmware to enable decoding in the player next month.

For an Elite player like this, I'd at least like to have some enthusiast-friendly features such as SACD and DVD-Audio support, DivX compatibility, or even networking functionality, x.v. color, 48-Bit Deep color, faster loading times. For newer AVRs and pre/pros with onboard decoding of Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD MA, the Pioneer bdp-05fd can send raw bitstreams from its HDMI 1.3a output. If you choose this option, you lose the secondary audio with PIP. DVD playback on this machine is not that good in standard-definition DVD, the player failed every jaggies test my friends and I put it through, there was some shimmering in the three-bar test, and it took nearly a second for the player to lock onto the 3:2 cadence in some movie sequence scenes. The performance with Blu-ray titles was a mixed bag. I experienced many lip-sync errors on some movies, and playing the extended versions of some movies froze the player completely and required a power cycle. I ran into numerous issues. Accessing menu items was painfully slow, and within 30 minutes of starting the movie, the audio and video were out of sync. When the layer change happened, the player froze for nearly four seconds! When I reported these problems to Pioneer, I was told that it was likely a firmware issue. I'm not sure what the current release version is, but the company sent me a beta of version 1.07, which I loaded into the player. Unfortunately, it didn't do much to improve the situation. I do NOT believe a simple firmwire update will fix all of this, if this was the case then why put out new players? Why not just keep sending firmwire updates for people to keep updating their old machines? There are some things that can't be fixed when there are inherent problems to begin with. That's one of the reasons why Oppo is delaying it's release of it's bluray machine to work out everything and put it through the ringer to make sure they don't experience these problems.

That's why I'm looking at a few bluray players like the PS3 and the new 2009 stand alone bd players from Oppo, Panasonic, Pioneer.

digitalvideo

I know we're getting off topic here, this was suppose to be about HDMI versus Toslink thread.

But from what I've seen and experienced so far with "stand-alone" bluray players is the best ones out there IMO is the Panasonic DMP-BD55 and Pioneer BDP-09fd. I just won't want to spend $2000+ for the BDP-09fd though

WilliamM2

You are running very old firmware, and a beta version at that. The issues you list have been fixed with newer firmware. SD upscaling improved dramatically with 1.17 last fall. Speed was increased greatly with 1.21 months ago. The current version is 1.25a, available for download on their site.

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Support/HomeEntertainment/Blu-rayDisc+DVD/EliteBlu-rayDiscPlayers/ci.BDP-05FD.Support?tab=B

If you don't like firmware updates, Blu-Ray is not for you. I started with 1.21, and have not had a single one of the issues you listed.

digitalvideo

The firmware update feature debate I think is kind of misleading and a little disingenuous to consumers and companies not being totally honest. If simple firmware updates were all it needs to keep bluray players up to date with current technology then why to companies make new models every year with new features and more advanced technology? Why not just keep releasing new firmware updates and keep producing the same models out of the factory? Can firmware updates turn my Pioneer 05fd into a Pioneer 09fd performance and feature wise? So why doesn't Pioneer offer firmware updates to make the 05fd much closer or on par with the 09fd? See where I'm getting at?

William have you seen with your own eyes and ears the Panasonic DMP-BD55 perform. I seen it and there is a difference in picture quality and sound to me and are you saying the latest firmware update from Pioneer will bring the 05fd up to the DMP-BD55's standards and 09fd's standards?

What I do know is Pioneer was late getting into the bluray market and they made a lot of mistakes and dropped the ball on their 05fd model and to have to keep dowloading firmware updates to keep it up to date is silly when both of Panasonic's two bluray players that came out the same year as the 05fd are really heads and shoulders above the Pioneer 05fd and the two Panasonic players don't need any firmware updates, their both set with the latest features ready to go right out of the box, and this is also according to cnet.com and ultimateAVmag.com

WilliamM2

the two Panasonic players don't need any firmware updates, their both set with the latest features ready to go right out of the box, and this is also according to cnet.com and ultimateAVmag.com

Then why has Panasonic released firmware updates for the players? ALL BLU-RAY PLAYERS REQUIRE FIRMWARE UPDATES TO PLAY NEW DISCS. It sucks, but that is the way it is. Thank the studios.

BTW, please stop replying to every post through PM's, it's a waste of time to type everything twice.

digitalvideo

WilliamM2 wrote: »

Then why has Panasonic released firmware updates for the players? ALL BLU-RAY PLAYERS REQUIRE FIRMWARE UPDATES TO PLAY NEW DISCS. It sucks, but that is the way it is. Thank the studios.

BTW, please stop replying to every post through PM's, it's a waste of time to type everything twice.

My friend has the Panasonic DMP-BD55 and is building quite a collection of bluray movies, he hasn't had to download any firmware updates yet to watch any of the movies. If he wants to waste his time downloading extra trailers and commentaroy from the director and those little extra things then he can, but he doesn't have to, he's been able to watch all bluray movies he's bought.

And on 2.0 Profile bd players you don't need CD disk to download the updates on and create a folder in your computer and all that, it has an ethernet port right on the machine so you just connect your machine to the computer and bam.

WilliamM2

And I haven't had to update the Pioneer to watch any disks either, but I didn't start with beta firmware.

And on 2.0 Profile bd players you don't need CD disk to download the updates on and create a folder in your computer and all that, it has an ethernet port right on the machine so you just connect your machine to the computer and bam.

You don't need to create a folder on your computer for the update, it's an ISO, you just double click it, and it burns the disc. Although creating a new folder is a simple task that takes less than 2 seconds, not sure what the difficulty is there.

As far as 2.0, the ability to update over the internet is great, if you have a network connection at the player. I find it much easier to take 2 minutes and burn a disc, than to run a cable or buy a wireless access point and wireless router to connect to the BD player. You don't connect it to the computer, you need a network connection.

But if you are unhappy with the Pioneer, by all means, get a new player. seems like a waste not to at least try the new firmware first though.

digitalvideo

WilliamM2 wrote: »

And I haven't had to update the Pioneer to watch any disks either, but I didn't start with beta firmware.



You don't need to create a folder on your computer for the update, it's an ISO, you just double click it, and it burns the disc. Although creating a new folder is a simple task that takes less than 2 seconds, not sure what the difficulty is there.

As far as 2.0, the ability to update over the internet is great, if you have a network connection at the player. I find it much easier to take 2 minutes and burn a disc, than to run a cable or buy a wireless access point and wireless router to connect to the BD player. You don't connect it to the computer, you need a network connection.

But if you are unhappy with the Pioneer, by all means, get a new player. seems like a waste not to at least try the new firmware first though.

I am unhappy with my Pioneer, but it could have something wrong with it, I'll have someone at Best Buy check it out, I know someone who works there and he said he'd check it out and he said he'll update it with the latest firmware and then I'll see how it is, if it fixed all the problems then I'll keep it.