Preferred aes/ebu 110 ohm digital cable you have tried

[Orb]

Thanks Micro,
much appreciated and yeah great point about WW, sure it brings back memories for many
Cheers
Orb

 

[nexans]

Back in the 90`s I developed some asymetric 4-way using no absorbers what so ever, any kind of absorbers eats energy=reduces dynamics and kills ported output.

At the same time I discovered how to make absolutely inaudible audiocables, unlike any cable-manufacturer

 

[ar-t]

As an old diy`er I`ve came upun some interesting alternatives. To those of you who has Access to the European marked; try to get tour hands on a piece of Vivanco KX-710 tv-coax and a pair of decent rca-plugs. This is the only digital coax I`ve ever heard outperform a optical AT&T

Do I also have to explain why AT&T fiber is probably the worst thing to use?

 

[ar-t]

That was I. And it was only directed at people who try to use the radio frequency formula at audio frequencies.

My point was people who try to use audio measurements of radio frequency cables is just as flawed.

One of the Ocos cables made an attemp, but it's a moving target.

I only mentioned OCOS to short-circuit an attempt to get things out in the weeds, on how low in frequency a transmission line works. Or more like that I am incompetent, and unaware of any of that.

Cyril Bateman in his "Measuring Speaker Cables" showed just how much work it is to measure Characteristic Impedance at audio frequencies. You have to measure all the parameters at each frequency of interest.

Yes, and it isn't fun. And the parameters are different, at RF. Which is why audio measurements on digital interconnects is bogus. Which is what most RLC measurements are.

 

[ar-t]

In case anyone cares.............

I made several measurements of cables supplied by various folks. We did not get a chance to make a video of those measurements. I did make plots of them. If any one is interested, I'll start a new thread, and we can discuss the results there. If not, no skin off of my back.

None of the balanced cables measured 110 ohms. I think the lowest was 90 ohms. The highest was a bit over 121 ohms. Not counting the log "Perry Mason" initially brought over.

Someone was also kind enough to supply two SPDIF cables. Both were 75 ohms. One BNC, and one RCA. The results didn't surprise me, but some here may find them interesting.

Send me a PM if you are interested. I am out of this thread. Too much work to do, and no interest in participating in a high school debate tournament. (I've been a spectator at a fair number of them. We'll leave it at that.)

 

[nexans]

Do I also have to explain why AT&T fiber is probably the worst thing to use?

Yeah please Mr. Troll, please explain. Why do I get the feeling that you will come draggin with some low-fi Toslink-bs

 

[ar-t]

An insult like that does not deserve a reply, but for other parties who may be interested.

AT&T fiber was never intended to be used in links less than 1 km. There is a good reason for that. The hint is that is the distance where copper is no longer the best choice for high-speed data transmission.

If you ever saw the output of one, on an optical spectrum analyzer, the reason would be obvious. A further detailed response, in light of your attitude, will not be forthcoming.

Interested parties may inquire via PM. Other interested parties. Go troll yourself.

 

[adamaley]

So, I am new to this forum, although I have lurked for quite a while. It is rather unfortunate that the one thread in all the interwebz that has comparisons of the most comprehensive collection of AES/EBU cables was sidetracked over non-related shenanigans. Anyway, I am in need of an AES/EBU cable that is mid-centric first of all, and also doesn't attenuate the bass, nor drop details. I got an Audience AU24 SE AES/EBU cable this week, but I am underwhelmed by it midrange reproduction, it seems to recess them in my system. So much so that I am preferring the mid presentation of a Stereovox XV2 (BNC) over the Audience's even though the Audience beats it out in all other departments. Any thoughts/suggestions are welcome.

Thanks

 

[jfrech]

So, I am new to this forum, although I have lurked for quite a while. It is rather unfortunate that the one thread in all the interwebz that has comparisons of the most comprehensive collection of AES/EBU cables was sidetracked over non-related shenanigans. Anyway, I am in need of an AES/EBU cable that is mid-centric first of all, and also doesn't attenuate the bass, nor drop details. I got an Audience AU24 SE AES/EBU cable this week, but I am underwhelmed by it midrange reproduction, it seems to recess them in my system. So much so that I am preferring the mid presentation of a Stereovox XV2 (BNC) over the Audience's even though the Audience beats it out in all other departments. Any thoughts/suggestions are welcome.

Thanks

I've tried 2 AES/EBU cables. A Van den hul and Transparent Reference XL. I have tried several bnc to bnc 75 ohm digital cables (mostly in clock applications) and think my experiences translates rather directly to your question.

If you're into reviews, the absolute sound has something out on the Transparent Ref XL also.

As far as clock cables, I've tried stock, Cardas Lightning 15, Purist Proteus Provectus and Transparent Ref XL. They are all improvements over stock. The Cardas, while clearly better than stock in all areas, was darker and a bit warmer everywhere. The Purist is much more even handed...pretty in the mids. The Transparent excels everywhere to the point you can never ever go backwards. It's pricey but it's worth it in a higher end digital setup. The transparent elevates my digital (both AES/EBU and BNC cables) significantly.

If you can a find a dealer nearby, it's pretty easy to demo one of these in your system...let the results speak for themselves...Hope this helps.

 

[rockitman]

Mark Levinson MDC-1..I know...nostalgic.

 

[edorr]

I tried quite a few. The only one's that I believe made a difference were Transparent Reference and Tara Labs - I had one with the outboard ISM.

 

[microstrip]

I've tried 2 AES/EBU cables. A Van den hul and Transparent Reference XL. I have tried several bnc to bnc 75 ohm digital cables (mostly in clock applications) and think my experiences translates rather directly to your question.

If you're into reviews, the absolute sound has something out on the Transparent Ref XL also.

As far as clock cables, I've tried stock, Cardas Lightning 15, Purist Proteus Provectus and Transparent Ref XL. They are all improvements over stock. The Cardas, while clearly better than stock in all areas, was darker and a bit warmer everywhere. The Purist is much more even handed...pretty in the mids. The Transparent excels everywhere to the point you can never ever go backwards. It's pricey but it's worth it in a higher end digital setup. The transparent elevates my digital (both AES/EBU and BNC cables) significantly.

If you can a find a dealer nearby, it's pretty easy to demo one of these in your system...let the results speak for themselves...Hope this helps.

I also use one AES/EBU Transparent REF XL cable between the Metronome CD transport and DAC. I tried it with the Devialet and it sounded significantly better that the Madrigal MDC1 - more full bodied and with better bass.

 

[adamaley]

The Transparent Reference XL appears to be the consensus preference. However, if you had to settle for a lower-priced cable, that didn't sacrifice the mids, what would it be? For context, this will be going from a Mutec 3+USB converter to a Schiit Yggdrasil.

 

[Ronm1]

The Transparent Reference XL appears to be the consensus preference. However, if you had to settle for a lower-priced cable, that didn't sacrifice the mids, what would it be? For context, this will be going from a Mutec 3+USB converter to a Schiit Yggdrasil.

I would give revelationaudiolabs.com a try.
I have used their aes/ebu and I2s cables for years. Never looked further. They are around 400-500 now days. Depending on length. Not sure if that price window is what you have in mind.

 

[jfrech]

The Transparent Reference XL appears to be the consensus preference. However, if you had to settle for a lower-priced cable, that didn't sacrifice the mids, what would it be? For context, this will be going from a Mutec 3+USB converter to a Schiit Yggdrasil.

The Purist was very good. 1/2 the money. I suspect, but I haven't tried, the Transparent Ref (non XL) is also killer good for ~1/2 the money...I did use a Transparent Premium USB cable...it was surprisingly good...vs a Cardas Clear USB...

 

[adamaley]

Thanks for the recommendations, guys. I stuck with the Audience AU24 SE, and rather than switching it out, I generated the necessary changes by switching out the power cord. There were elements of the AU24 SE that I realized were a substantial improvement over what it replaced - namely detail, soundstage, and air. My only critique of it is that it was significantly way too even-handed with the mids, which was a problem, since my headphones, Hifinam HE-1000s are quite recessed in that area. Swapping power cords did the trick.

 

[SCAudiophile]

Given my use of Esoteric separate transport and DAC with 'dual AES' capability for separate L and R channel routing between transport and DAC, I've gone through a lot of AES/EBU cable choices since 2006 both owned and a few more demo'ed (but not purchased). I've been using Kubala-Sosna "ELATION" level AES/EBU 110-ohm cables between my P-02/D-02 (and prior to that my P-03U/D-03). To my ears, they are best of all that I have owned and tried. There were many other good ones over the years that I liked in many ways multiple manufacturers but a few years ago I picked up the ELATIONS and have left them in place ever since with no desire to upgrade (a rare thing). I will provide more detail and other brands owned/tried over the years on private in-mail for anyone who is interested...

BTW...same is true for 75-ohm digital cables...Kubala-Sosna "EMOTION" level 75-ohm cables have been with me for a while now and unless I come up with a lot of spare cash and decide to upgrade to ELATION, the EMOTION cables I own will be with for a long time to come...

 

[pessoa00]

I find it interesting that in such a long and comprehensive thread I couldn't find a single Nordost recommendation. Nobody has any experience with those or are just not preferred comparing to Transparent? I had a Transparent Ref 75Ohm on order but changed it for the new Nordost Tyr2.
It was a blind call as I heard the Transparent (previous version) but haven't tried the Nordost, however for the 500€ price difference it seemed a more reasonable choice.
Also there is a lot of technical talk in this thread but there is no mention about what the ideal length this kind of cable should have. I read in other places some technical reasoning that one shouldn't go bellow 1,5mt to avoid a "reflection" effect. Any takers here of this rule?
Thanks,
António

 

[ar-t]

Now I know why folks I have not heard from in a long time are deciding today is the day to bug us...............

As for the first part of your question...............

That is beyond our job description.

As for the second part of your question....................

OK, since we are probably the guys who started that, let me try to answer as best I can, without starting another food fight..............

A bit of history, which might help you to understand..........

1992. We build a DAC. It takes less than 1/2 hour to decide every cable in the shop sounds very different. Very annoying.

One of the first things we noticed was that very short (meaning 50 cm or so) sounded worse than their longer counterparts, made with the same cable. What we found was the reflections, coming back to the source, from the load (aka "receiver"/DAC) landed in the point in the waveform where it was going through a "zero transition". (IOW, the midpoint.)

So, we made a 4 m cable, the reflection arrived well past the transition point, and the rest is history. Or infamy, you decide.

That number was chosen based on the rise time of the signal source. Today, the sources are faster. As a result, the cable can be shorter. Personally, I go with 2 m. You can probably get by with 1.5 m. But, it will depend on the source's rise time.

Actually, there is no "ideal" length. Since wire is cheap (at least for us), we can use 2 m, and it doesn't harm anything.

Unless you don't like paying >$5/foot, for cable. Which we do. (I'll let someone else decide the rationale of paying more for the wire than the connectors. Which is why we no longer use Trompeter connectors, but I digress. $48 for something that used to cost $6.............insanity. Anyway.) If you end up paying $50/foot, for a fancy (audiophile) cable.................yeah, I might go with 1.5 m! Your choice.

Just remember: whatever they charge for it, it is still just wire.

 

[ar-t]

Anyway, I am in need of an AES/EBU cable that is mid-centric first of all, and also doesn't attenuate the bass, nor drop details.

Probably should stay out of this one, but since I am here...............

There is no way to predict how any digital cable will sound, in any system. Yes, they all have one very significant parameter, that should be adhered to, but there is no way to cross-correlate how it will sound.

Even if there was...............

Any system has 3 parts: transmitter (source/transport), cable, and receiver (DAC). All three must have the same impedance. Does not matter what that value is, as long as all 3 are identical. (SPDIF is 75R, AES/EBU is 110R.)

So, what sounds bright in one system can sound dull and/or bass-heavy, in the next. Who knows? No one does. Yes, dorky nerds like me can measure something, and say "It is 'x'", but that is all it is worth. Unless you are the guy who sells it, calling it "x" when it is really "q". Which they have been known to do.

Hope you found something to your liking.