Fiber Optic cables, do they make a difference?

[MegaDrive20XX]

I'm curious on how much better the sound quality of your system (360 or PS3) makes when you attach a fiber optic cable. I recently discovered that my HDTV has the input for an Optic cable. Is it worth it?

[RPG_Fanatic]

I have both my PS3 and 360 running through fiber optic to my digital reciever, 5.1 is awesome with it.

[Nesmaster]

Fiber Optic to my ears over stereo is like the difference between an interlaced and progressive picture to my eyes. Worth it for sure, especially considering how cheap you can get the cable for on monoprice.com.

Remember that great sound is just as important as a nice tv in completing your home theatre experience.

[RyanMurf]

Yes, big difference!

[Vectorman0]

Don't worry about cable quality if you decided to go fiber optic. The cheapest ones you can find will have no discernible difference in quality over Monster or other expensive brands.

[agbulls]

Don't worry about cable quality if you decided to go fiber optic. The cheapest ones you can find will have no discernible difference in quality over Monster or other expensive brands.

Absolutely correct. With fiber, either the light gets from one end to the other, or it doesn't.

[Anthony1]

You really should be running the optical cable to a receiver, rather than a TV, if at all possible. The speakers in a TV would negate just about any sound improvement that optical provides. From a video game standpoint, optical is huge for Xbox 1, Xbox 360 and PS3. You can use optical for a PS2, but it's not that crucial, at least from a game standpoint. If you are looking for a good receiver to use with your equipment, for the money, I couldn't recommend anything better than the Panasonic SA-XR55. The only downside with the SA-XR55 is that it doesn't do lossless sound. But that's a whole nuther ball of wax. But other than the fact that it doesn't do lossless sound, the XR55 can't be beat for the price. Check out this review of it:

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/1/168741.html

J & R has it for $179.99 with no tax. Shipping is about $14.51, so it's $194.50 out the door. You can't touch this kind of sound quality for anywhere near that price. It's the centerpiece of my 7.1 Theater setup in my garage. You would think I'm out of my mind to be using a $200 amp with such other expensive top of the line equipment, but the sound is truly amazing. Trust me.


The next step up, if you want to go with something that can handle lossless, then it's all about the Yamaha 661. It retails for $499.99, but can be found for $399.99 from an authorized dealer (you want an authorized dealer so that the warranty is valid). Of course, it's double the price of the Panny XR55. And I honestly think that the pure sound quality of the Panny is actually better, it's just the panny doesn't do lossless. There is also the Panny XR57, and it does do lossless, but it has a problem with bass management when used with lossless sources. Therefore, it's to be avoided, unless you really know how to make the correct adjustments to compensate, and quite honestly, I would just avoid it, and go with the Yamaha instead.

[MegaDrive20XX]

Well call me crazy, but I found Monster Cables for Xbox 360 brand new for $10 at Wal-Mart on clearence. I see it has the adapter, but you have to buy their own brand adapter I guess in order to use the fiber optic cable.

[TheDomesticInstitution]

That the optical "input" on your TV is an "input" and doesn't say digital optical "out". Most new HDTV's have a fiber optic "out" because they have built-in digital tuner that can send 5.1 signals to an digital ready audio receiver (Just like a PS2 or XBOX). It's really rare to find an optical "input" on a TV. And just to re-iterate what others have said... hooking up fiber to a digital ready receiver makes a world of difference. You can't get true 5.1 Dolby Digital without it... just analog Dolby Pro-Logic Surround.

[Trebuken]

It rallt does seem likely you have optical out on the HDTV and not in, but if you do i would suggest using it.

[smokehouse]

You really should be running the optical cable to a receiver, rather than a TV, if at all possible. The speakers in a TV would negate just about any sound improvement that optical provides. From a video game standpoint, optical is huge for Xbox 1, Xbox 360 and PS3. You can use optical for a PS2, but it's not that crucial, at least from a game standpoint. If you are looking for a good receiver to use with your equipment, for the money, I couldn't recommend anything better than the x. The only downside with the SA-XR55 is that it doesn't do lossless sound. But that's a whole nuther ball of wax. But other than the fact that it doesn't do lossless sound, the XR55 can't be beat for the price. Check out this review of it:

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/1/168741.html

J & R has it for $179.99 with no tax. Shipping is about $14.51, so it's $194.50 out the door. You can't touch this kind of sound quality for anywhere near that price. It's the centerpiece of my 7.1 Theater setup in my garage. You would think I'm out of my mind to be using a $200 amp with such other expensive top of the line equipment, but the sound is truly amazing. Trust me.

Beauty is in the ear of the beholder…I’m not so sure I would recommend that unit. Here’s another viewpoint on that receiver:

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/1/179531.html

For $200 I would recommending getting a used receiver as they often last for years…you’d get better quality for the $$ that way.


BTW, what kind of speakers/sub are you running off of that receiver? I’m just curious.

[TheDomesticInstitution]

I have a Pioneer vsx-d912 hooked up to Polk Rti-8s, a Csi-1 Center Channel, and Psw-202 sub... and 3 crappy Pioneer rear surrounds for a 6.1 set-up... And of course an XBOX (which is my most modern system) hooked up with a fiber optic and Component cables. All my other systems are pre-Wii Nintendo Systems. All hooked into my sound systm... Zelda Sounds great with a Subwoofer. A decent 5.1, 6.1, or 7.1 system is a good investment. It makes your games so much more immersive... I will say though the system that suffers the most visually is the N64 which looks way worse on my HD set than it did on any analog set of seen one hooked up to. All other systems look the same or better on the HD set. But audio from all systems is top notch, and I don't even have a super-deluxe set-up. I would recommend seperate compnent systems rather than a Home Theater in a Box. Audio is way better, and although it costs more, you can upgrade piece by piece and have better quality in the long run. Unless you're not tech-literate... then a Home Theater in a Box may be an option.

[Anthony1]

Beauty is in the ear of the beholder…I’m not so sure I would recommend that unit. Here’s another viewpoint on that receiver:

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/1/179531.html

For $200 I would recommending getting a used receiver as they often last for years…you’d get better quality for the $$ that way.


BTW, what kind of speakers/sub are you running off of that receiver? I’m just curious.

Here is another thread on the XR-55

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...highlight=xr55


It's 116 pages. knock yourself out.


I'm using 2 Energy C8's as mains, an Energy AC300 center, Energy C2's as rear surrounds and Energy C1's as side surrounds. the sub is an Energy ES-12.

[Cornelius]

I'm not a sound or tech geek enough to know for sure, but isn't digital coax just as good? I'm severely limited on ports so I use that as well as optical, and I don't notice a difference. Both do true 5.1 according to my receiver. Now the OP might not have the option, I'm just curious if I'm right.

Oh, and I'm sure as with almost anything if your system is high-end enough it does make a difference, but I'm just using solid affordable equipment.

[TheDomesticInstitution]

Not much difference at all... the way the signal is sent is different mind you... but both can send the same types of signals... Now there are always gonna people out there that say one is better than the other... but there are enough threads and articles that say that no matter how expensive their equipment is, they can't tell an audible difference. I have never heard a difference personally. And I haven't kept up with the new HD formats enough to know if there is a certain difference in what one cable can do over another... and a lot of those formats actually transmit over HDMI cables now or by discreet seperate analog outs... Basically it comes down to what works with your equipment, and availability of inputs.

[smokehouse]

I'm not a sound or tech geek enough to know for sure, but isn't digital coax just as good? I'm severely limited on ports so I use that as well as optical, and I don't notice a difference. Both do true 5.1 according to my receiver. Now the OP might not have the option, I'm just curious if I'm right.

Oh, and I'm sure as with almost anything if your system is high-end enough it does make a difference, but I'm just using solid affordable equipment.

I don’t think digital coaxial is an option with many game systems but I too prefer it when the runs are short. Using digital coaxial over Toslink cuts one more step out of the process. To take a digital, electronic signal and convert it to light pulses, a transceiver is needed. The quality of these devices varies from player to player. A $50 DVD player is not going to be the same quality lever as a $5000 DVD player…

Using Digital coaxial over Toslink, you cut that step out and any problems associated with it. You do have to run a good, heavily shielded cable though, even in short runs. Take that in mine.

I’m not saying digital coaxial is better, it’s just that in most cases, I find it to be more reliable in shorter runs. Fiber is meant to be a longer run type of application where digital coaxial is not possible.

[smokehouse]

I'm using 2 Energy C8's as mains, an Energy AC300 center, Energy C2's as rear surrounds and Energy C1's as side surrounds. the sub is an Energy ES-12.

I’m actually shocked you’re running those speakers off such a bottom-end receiver.

You should find a local high end store and do an in home demo…I bet your system would really come to life with a better receiver or better yet, separates.

[Cornelius]

Sorry to hijack, but since this conversation is going on anyway...

Is s/pdif analagous to 'digital coax'? I ask because I've always used the multi-channel quasi-surround out of my computer in deference to my HD tuner than uses the digital coax input on the receiver. Since I've upgraded PCs I now have a digital tuner in it and find I'm using it more and more for watching TV (DVRs are just damn cool). Can I switch out the multi-channel for s/pdif?

[TheDomesticInstitution]

I'm not entirely sure if they're the same, because honestly I haven't had much experience using that connection. Hopefully someone will help you out on that one.