Looking For a Digital Coaxial and have ££ ?

Just tried a Virtual Dynamics Master in place of my Chord Signature Coax, with zero quids in my hifi budget, what a booboo

Anyone with enough cash in the hifi budget, would definatly suggest a demo.

Now understand, a hell of a lot more, the word 'soundstage'

 

:cowboy:

 

What is a 'soundstage'? ( in hifi terms )

 

ooops thought a little hint as to what to give a go if you were looking for a coax may be handy..sharing what I thought was rather an amazing find...all be it a bit pricy, maybe there is someone who has found one that does not cost too much, that performs as well...?

 

hmmm, I would say that each sound was much more clearly set into its own area, wether it back, front, left, right, up, or down, all layed out, like on a stage in front of you. Not really hearing anything directly from the speakers, just a stage of instruments/sounds.

But, ho hum, back to the somewhat not so good 'sound stage'

 

if you ever decide to go toslink route instead of coax, you might save a few pence if you tried toshiba plastic cable, around $5 or so. it perfectly does the job!

 

try the missing link cryo ref digital... i have yet to hear a coaxial digital that can better it... for ANY sum of money. For the level of performance on offer, its a bargain, and cheaper than even a chord signature digital.

 

i'd suggest trying to DIY it. there are numerous types of co-ax out there you can get off the shelf and then if you still aren;t satisfied there are people out there who will sell you more specialist cable made of all sorts of exotic stuff. you'll get far more bang for your buck with this approach.
if that's not your kind of thing then take a look at coherent cables or just do loads of demos til you find what you want.

 

Try VanDamme plasma grade, does the job for me and at a laughable £12 to boot

 

I second this - an excellent interconnect at any price. But to really hear a difference if you have the facility try an AT&T optical connection available on some CD transports and DACs- the only place I know that supplies these are Audio Syntheis.

 

Coax

THE THING ABOUT RCA DIGITAL INTERCONECTS IS A MITH, HENCE THE DIGIAL OUTPUT OF ANY TRANSPORT TO DAC THE CABLE "OR CONDUCTOR" MAY MEAUSURE AS 75 OHM, VIA TERMINATION OF BNC ENDS, BUT ONCE TERMINATED BY RCA IT IS 60 OHMS, HENCE ANY SINGLE INTERCONNECT WILL DO.

 

Using 0,4mm solid core OFC...sounds great.

 

while in theory what you say is true... listening test prove that there can be a very marked difference from one digital cable to the next. Therefore i would say let your ears guide you, and not the science. yes using any interconnect will produce a sound between digital sources, the impedance of the connection doesnt have everything to do with the sound produced.

I recently had a bakeoff at which point several digital interconnects were tested back to back.

Kimber D60
Chord Signature
Missing Link Cryo Reference
Missing Link Digit (their cheapest digital cable)

once we had run through the set, it was clear that there were often surprising differences between the cables. The chord sounding sharp and edgy and adding too much emphasis to the leading edge of notes.

The kimber by comparison sounded soft and rather lacking in attack. It was almost dull to listen to.

The cheap missing link was to all our ears better than either of the above and its only about £20

The cryo reference was head and shoulders above, offering a clean balanced and natural sound that we all found preferable.

In fact two of us subjected to blind listening while the other one changed inputs could readilly identify which cable was being used. Even at complete random i could tell which cable was being played through. That points to easilly identifiable and noticeable differences in each cable.

Im not sure what the scientific reasons for those differences are, and to be honest i dont really care. But it shows that dismissing all digital cables as sounding the same is a dangerous generalisation.

Get a few, even cheap ones and try listening to them. It will be quite an eye opener... It was for me. I was a firm (and i do mean very firm) believer that digital cables could make no difference to the sound whatsoever... I was wrong.

p.s. TURN CAPS LOCK OFF

 

This is Wikipidia def - Soundstage refers to the depth and richness of an audio recording (usually referring to the playback process). According to audiophiles, the quality of the playback is very much dependent on how one is able to pick out different instruments, voices, vocal parts, etc. exactly where they are located on an imaginary 2D or 3D field. This can enhance not only the listener's involvement in the recording but also their overall perception of the stage.

I would disagree the soundstage is a word that has come to be used to refer to the apparent size and shape (HW&D) of the musical presentation. This soundstage can be big small wide deep high lozenge shaped diamond shaped etc. A large part of the determination of the soundstage of a system is about room acoustics and speaker positioning.

Being able to pick out differences in the position of instruments in the soundstage is the spatial resolution.

As wide generalisation better systems have bigger and better defined soundstages. But beware when choosing , it is very easy to place too much emphasis on soundstage and less on the music. I can recall quite a few systems I have heard with massive soundstages that musically were very disspointing.

 

Was that a test question ? just had a look at your web site

 

Interesting stuff, how did you find the bass response of the chord and cryo?
I found the VD seemed to tighten it up wonderfully well in comparison to the somewhat boomy chord, where as, previously I found the chord fab

 

No not a test, 'soundstage' is often banded about, but isn't it just an audio engineering artifact, nearly everything is multi miked. What I think is important are dynamics and timbre or 'tone' equipment which makes the instruments sound more real., Keith.

 

Coop's 'quipment don't image...

It's a fundamental flaw, BTW.

Paul

 

What do you mean Paul?