expensive toslinks, are they worth it?

[oldson]

sorry if this has already been discussed on here.

i recently joined another popular forum and was drawn to a thread by someone who had a very similar setup to mine.

his issue was harsh high frequencies causing a tiring listening experience.

the first reply he had was to ditch the "freebie" toslink from his system for an expensive one.
it was also recommended that the cable "dangled freely" as opposed to being coiled, as the light would supposedly travel more easily!!!

i was wondering if someone who "knows there onions" regading fibre optics could comment.

i was always lead to believe that the only advantage of a more expensive toslink, was build quality! meaning if you were forever unplugging it and moving it from source to source, it would last longer.
but as for sound quality, no difference whatsoever.

any views?

[oldson]

just realised i have put this in wrong forum.
Mods please move.

[Stratmangler]

it was also recommended that the cable "dangled freely" as opposed to being coiled, as the light would supposedly travel more easily!!!

Some folks come out with the most unbelievable bollocks :doh:

The more expensive optical stuff is usually glass, the cheaper stuff tends to be resin or plastic.
There shouldn't be any noticeable differences switching from one type to another in theory, but I recollect an afternoon at an audio show in Manchester, listening to a Tube Technologies setup, and there were issues with the system behaving erratically - it turned out to be that the optical inputs on the DAC in the system didn't have shuttered inputs, and the Sun shining in through the window was causing all sorts of problems.

Anyway, the fitted optical cable (a very expensive one) ended up being temporarily swapped out for a cheapy.
I commented that the system actually sounded better, and the chap there stopped, listened intently, then agreed with me.
So the temporary fault finding swap out cable became the permanent one in the setup.

Moral of the story ?
Unfortunately anything definitive you hear about optical cables on the internet is hearsay, and personal experience is the only thing that counts.

I have my TV connected to my DAC using one of the Nikkai optical cables from Maplin with good results.
I believe that the Nikkai optical stuff is resin.
I haven't tried anything else, so I can't really comment further.

[Butuz]

I have a nice Mark grant glass optical a whole £23 worth and my dad had a plastic £10 maplins jobbie and neither of us could tell which was which.

I would like to try a much more expensive one out of interest but I won't be buying one any time soon.

Butuz

[keiths]

AFAIK, The main disadvantage of the cheap plastic ones is that they degrade over time loosing their transparency. So the glass ones last longer.

[StanleyB]

it was also recommended that the cable "dangled freely" as opposed to being coiled, as the light would supposedly travel more easily!!!
Absolutely true.
Optical leads have a maximum recommended bending radius, below which next to no light transmission will take place. Light travels in a straight line. It will deteriorate when subjected to refraction. This will increase jitter in an optical lead.

Thin, single fibre plastic optical cables are worse.
Thick, multi fibre glass optical cables are best.

Price is not a real guide. I have seen U$2 TOSLINK cables from Chinese manufacturers on sale for U$50.

[tubehunter]

Absolutely true.
Optical leads have a maximum recommended bending radius, below which next to no light transmission will take place. Light travels in a straight line. It will deteriorate when subjected to refraction. This will increase jitter in an optical lead.

Thin, single fibre plastic optical cables are worse.
Thick, multi fibre glass optical cables are best.

Price is not a real guide. I have seen U$2 TOSLINK cables from Chinese manufacturers on sale for U$50.

i worked for 18 years at optical fibres making optical waveguides and i can assure you this is bollocks.
do you mean singlemode or multimode?
just for interest the single longest length we producted was 25kms, yes kilometers. wrapped on a small 100mm reel, measured fine.

[StanleyB]

I don't question where you have worked, but I actually had to design optical cables, and measure the light output strength. The thickness of the optical cable, as used by the communication companies, as far thicker than the skinny ones used in the home. The communication cables also have repeaters to compensate for signal losses.

There is a short write up HERE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bend_radius), which describes microbending and macrobending in opticla cables, and the problems that can develop when an optical cable is bent.

[tubehunter]

the fibre we produced was for the telecommunication industry.
singlemode was 7microns and multimode was 125microns and that was it.
the primary and secondary coatings added extra thickness but the actual core remained the same.

[jantheman]

Out of curiosity and reading a lot about Lifatec multi fibre Toslinks, I thought I would give one a go. These have over 400 optical strands in them, well made and finished but definately not eye candy. Not too expensive at around 50 squids + the inevitable import taxes etc etc.
Can I tell the difference to the ones I had previously, a resounding 'yes'...every time. In all instances of trying it in different kit I can pick it out right away.
Lifatec (http://www.lifatec.com/toslink2.html) website

[tubehunter]

why would you need over 400 stands when you only use one?

[jantheman]

You dont use one..the optical signal is sent down all of them. As has already said, multistrand even at the small diameters of each strand is better than one single thick strand.

[oldson]

well that opened a can of worms.
and i am none the wiser.

[pwood]

oldson the main difference I have found is the connectors. I had a baffling time trying to work out why my mates new blueray player would not put any sound out the optical cable despite it clearly being active (no hdmi and no 6 channel before anyone points that out;)). Now normally I would swap leads but as it was fairly new QED one that had worked fine with their TV out to the amp i never gave it a though. Well an hour later and a switch to a cheap one plugged in elsewhere made me wish I had:doh:

If I ever need a new one I'll plump for a Mark Grant one as his connectors are always top notch.

[oldson]

oldson the main difference I have found is the connectors. I had a baffling time trying to work out why my mates new blueray player would not put any sound out the optical cable despite it clearly being active (no hdmi and no 6 channel before anyone points that out;)). Now normally I would swap leads but as it was fairly new QED one that had worked fine with their TV out to the amp i never gave it a though. Well an hour later and a switch to a cheap one plugged in elsewhere made me wish I had:doh:

If I ever need a new one I'll plump for a Mark Grant one as his connectors are always top notch.

i am hoping this wont be an issue , for me, in the near future.
my current dac's usb aint up to much!
so i am using coax from my pc and toslink from cdp (occaisional use only)

am waiting on a home trial of the m2tech young dac.
if the usb is as good as people say it is, then i will use that for pc and coax for cdp.

thanks for all the replies folks

[Peter Stockwell]

If I ever need a new one I'll plump for a Mark Grant one as his connectors are always top notch.

As far as the Optical cable goes, I think he buys them in, identical cables are available else where.

But, in general, in 100% agreement, excellent connections on MG cables.