Subjective evaluation of digital cables' performance

Do tell us in explicit detail how various digital cables have affected your system’s perceived performance!
If you have experience with a multitude of digital cables, a comparison would be intriguing.
Do digital cables impart a “signature” or are their qualities more quantitative?

Of course, various gadgets allow digital cabling to perform at best potential - for example I have a Schiit Eitr which galvanically isolates incoming USB signal, thus eliminating shared ground and noise from the source, then converts to coaxial. A device like this is a must-have if a computer is used as source.
An AQ Jitterbug in series before this might improve further…

I personally can’t say anything about perceived digital cabling performance - I have a reputable AQ loom and I simply trust it improves the signal - how couln’t it?

1 Like

This is assumably relatively difficult to evaluate, but those with truly high-end systems surely have say on this.

From my brief but new experience with my new DS dac being fed by my Oppo 205.

My first shot at this was with a Bluejeans coax rca 1694a Belden wire.
The BJC 1694a cable very dynamic immediate transparent detailed, not brtight
allows body bloom…great value super inexpensive…

Next was a Pangea XL rca coax with Cardas Grade 1 copper plated with 6% silver.
Richer body fuller sounding but lacking the dynamics and detail of the BJC…
was returned.

Lastly highly recommended by a good friend is DH Labs Silver Sonic D750
rca coax solid copper silver coated. The sound quality exceeds by far the
dynamics of the already wonderful BJC 1694a Belden rca coax,. Dynamics, detail
transparency soundstage bloom blossom all in proportion…

Highly recommend the DH Labs Silver Sonic D750…

Hope this helps some.

Best wishes

1 Like

It’s interesting to note that yes, really, digital cables can be evaluated as precisely as analog ones!
The truth is of course that digital transmission is a complex beast and it’s not clear yet what materials, etc, are the absolute best for transmitting these HF ones and zeroes, or which connectors… Then again here also we get to the aspect of taste.

1 Like

Hey Arenith…

Exactly, who would have thought that there is such a big difference amongst

While this topic has been discussed in various threads…the conjecture is that indeed
digital cable architecture does make a sonic difference…

Who would have thought that transmitting 1s and 0s through a cable would make
such a difference…when by the numbers at first glance would say otherwise.

Best wishes

What about the BNC connector? I’ve somehow understood it to be a better digital connector.

From what I gather …yes…but just how much better if at all…

Best wishes

Make it robust with solid silver and rhodium plating. Might b gud

About rhodium… It’s an exceptional conductor for HF (beyond audio) so perhaps even a rhodium plated cable. Maybe.

Oh and solid rhodium for the millionaire audiophiles!

Let me know when yo wish to buy me an rca 1.5 meter length :innocent:

Ha ha

BNC is better as it avoids impedance mismatching. BNC on both ends using 75 ohm coax cable will get you a true 75 ohm connection. RCA connectors cannot be made to be 75 ohms and thus their use creates an impedance mismatch with possible signal reflections.

In an ideal world all of the connections between a 75 ohm transmitter and a 75 ohm receiver would be 75 ohms. Then any reflections of the signal would be perfectly canceled and would not interfere with the wanted signal.


Thanks Elk, now I know.

Is it feasibly possible to modify my DAC with a BNC connector?

I do not know.

They do connect the same way at the interface, no? Will my DAC’s input still determine to ohmage or will the connector itself provide it?
If this is feasible I’d invest to provide my USB-Coax galvanic isolator with a BNC out too.

I’ll second the DH Labs D-750 ! It’s just the best digital coax I’ve heard , tonal balance from top to bottom with a very,very natural organic nature that doesn’t compromise dynamics.

Hmm, in what proportion, technically speaking, is the importance of the all-important dielectric vs the conductor materials and their crystalline quality?
In speaker cables according to commentary on ICONOCLAST, differing “grade” copper affects the time arrival coherence in unknown ways, but for digital coax, the curve in question is practically linear for the intended band. Right?

Is it so that for coax it’s not about propagation coherency (since we easily have good dielectric) but rather… Well, what, in exact terms? There’s the point of digital cable being necessarily resistive to point as I’ve heard but I don’t really understand.
Exact impedance integrity through the guide? Exact and structurally rigid radial symmetry, of course… Would a fully straight, unbendable, impractical coax always perform better?
The connectors and terminals in unison obviously determine a lot, here I’m guessing we seek absolutely matched surface area and most nil resistivity. Or do we?

…an “organic” sounding digital cable piques my interest. Could we consider that it’s actually the better digital cable since we are (usually) after an authentic, analogue, “organic=earthly=real” sound?
Then again if it makes certain definitely non-organic, technical synthetic music sound “organic”, it would be a type of harmonically pleasing distortion…

Then again, as I understand, a digital cable is incapable of doing such a trick. Implying the organic - realistic sounding coaxial cable really is “better”…
A trick as I call it, with analog cables this mellowy smearing is easily achieved. Not necessarily that it’s EVIL, I’d personally like to have 24k gold conductor RCA cabling for my system.