Author Topic: I2s Cables  (Read 5895 times)

Offline vitavoxdude

  • Beauty is in the ear of the beholder
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
  • Liked: 71
  • Caring and sharing
I2s Cables
« on: May 24, 2012, 10:16:35 AM »
 ;D Does anyone have any real experiance with I2s cables using the mini DIN connectors or other?  Please no replies about Cat 4 5 6 types I am talking proper jobbies.
As length would appear to be an issue, does anyone out there have any recommendations other than as short as possible?

Thanks
V
We all like different things so lets all agree to disagree and if any common ground is found then worship it.  Mine is the KD hence being present on this forum.

Offline treblid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 391
  • Liked: 15
Re: I2s Cables
« Reply #1 on: May 24, 2012, 12:08:38 PM »
DIY? I like XLRs.. 3pin, 4pin or 5pin... And the connection is solid and will never work it's way loose.

Personally I'm game to try network cables myself, but mainly STP types (like cat7) instead of the usual 4/5/6 (UTP)...

Offline stevenvalve

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1689
  • Liked: 351
Re: I2s Cables
« Reply #2 on: May 24, 2012, 02:14:28 PM »
;D Does anyone have any real experiance with I2s cables using the mini DIN connectors or other?  Please no replies about Cat 4 5 6 types I am talking proper jobbies.
As length would appear to be an issue, does anyone out there have any recommendations other than as short as possible?

Thanks
V
That is an area i am really interested in, what i use, and how i use it turned out to be very good, so i have not tried any other setup with the I2S. I am a believer in less is more, I suspect that todays mini DIN connectors are made out of whatever and will have a poor effect on the sound.  V you nut it out, and i will give your solution a try.

Offline ozcal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 466
  • Liked: 2
Re: I2s Cables
« Reply #3 on: May 24, 2012, 07:54:32 PM »
Hi Steven , the less is more or KISS principle is certainly something I have persued over the last 30 yrs in this hobby and it seems to work well with analogue electronics. I do however wonder if that approach can be directly translated to the digital world?
Any thoughts ?
Listening with my ears :)

Offline kajak12

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2468
  • Liked: 78
    • http://killerdac.com/forum/index.php
Re: I2s Cables
« Reply #4 on: May 24, 2012, 11:27:13 PM »
;D Does anyone have any real experiance with I2s cables using the mini DIN connectors or other?  Please no replies about Cat 4 5 6 types I am talking proper jobbies.
As length would appear to be an issue, does anyone out there have any recommendations other than as short as possible?

Thanks
V
good question
zenelectro got any ideas?????? from a technical point of view :-*
still discovering the link between electronics and audio reproduction.so much to learn and so little time

Offline rawl99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
  • Liked: 2
Re: I2s Cables
« Reply #5 on: February 22, 2014, 08:00:22 AM »
Hi Steven , the less is more or KISS principle is certainly something I have persued over the last 30 yrs in this hobby and it seems to work well with analogue electronics. I do however wonder if that approach can be directly translated to the digital world?
Any thoughts ?

Oz,
From my extensive experimentation with I2s cables I can vouch that for me the same principal seems th translate to digital.
I contemplated for some time over what nature of standard connector to adopt for I2S out of the killer dacs.  As several guys were wanting to use the empirical audio offramp as a source I ended up going with an RJ45 socket as the standardized I2S input on the dacs.  I use the same pin config as the empirical.
I tried cat5, cat 6, cat 7 in shielded, unshielded, I tried cat 5/6 as 'naked' twisted pairs with the sheath removed and then ala Mario and Steve I tried cat wire as 4 individual strands just gently splayed apart in space and found this last approach to be the best that I had tried. 
I showed Mike Lenehan the difference between the 4 individual wire strands and a cat5 patch cable and he was astounded at how much more open the 4 individual strands sounded.
In the beginning I tried 75 ohm coax on bncs and found it OK but rather cumbersome and prone to easy hookup error......and it sounded no better than cat5, and not as good as my last and adopted approach.

C

Offline zenelectro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 825
  • Liked: 177
Re: I2s Cables
« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2014, 06:27:37 PM »
;D Does anyone have any real experiance with I2s cables using the mini DIN connectors or other?  Please no replies about Cat 4 5 6 types I am talking proper jobbies.
As length would appear to be an issue, does anyone out there have any recommendations other than as short as possible?

Thanks
V
good question
zenelectro got any ideas?????? from a technical point of view :-*

Yep - but I gotta shoot out for dinner at the local Thai with my girlfriend so tomorrow. 8) 8)

Offline ozcal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 466
  • Liked: 2
Re: I2s Cables
« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2014, 06:33:23 PM »
Hi Steven , the less is more or KISS principle is certainly something I have persued over the last 30 yrs in this hobby and it seems to work well with analogue electronics. I do however wonder if that approach can be directly translated to the digital world?
Any thoughts ?

Oz,
From my extensive experimentation with I2s cables I can vouch that for me the same principal seems th translate to digital.
I contemplated for some time over what nature of standard connector to adopt for I2S out of the killer dacs.  As several guys were wanting to use the empirical audio offramp as a source I ended up going with an RJ45 socket as the standardized I2S input on the dacs.  I use the same pin config as the empirical.
I tried cat5, cat 6, cat 7 in shielded, unshielded, I tried cat 5/6 as 'naked' twisted pairs with the sheath removed and then ala Mario and Steve I tried cat wire as 4 individual strands just gently splayed apart in space and found this last approach to be the best that I had tried. 
I showed Mike Lenehan the difference between the 4 individual wire strands and a cat5 patch cable and he was astounded at how much more open the 4 individual strands sounded.
In the beginning I tried 75 ohm coax on bncs and found it OK but rather cumbersome and prone to easy hookup error......and it sounded no better than cat5, and not as good as my last and adopted approach.

C
Thanks C, just made things more difficult for myself by purchasing a SATA to I2S board that uses a standard dvd rom to form a transport. Board has SPIDF output also , which I am using at the moment and performance is truly  most excellent.
The difficult part is that I2S is over HDMI using LVDS. I have also purchased an HDMI RECIVER that converts LVDS back to TTL so am hoping I won't loose to much of the benefit of I2S with this added complexity. :)
Listening with my ears :)

Offline zenelectro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 825
  • Liked: 177
Re: I2s Cables
« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2014, 09:14:37 PM »
Hi Steven , the less is more or KISS principle is certainly something I have persued over the last 30 yrs in this hobby and it seems to work well with analogue electronics. I do however wonder if that approach can be directly translated to the digital world?
Any thoughts ?

Oz,
From my extensive experimentation with I2s cables I can vouch that for me the same principal seems th translate to digital.
I contemplated for some time over what nature of standard connector to adopt for I2S out of the killer dacs.  As several guys were wanting to use the empirical audio offramp as a source I ended up going with an RJ45 socket as the standardized I2S input on the dacs.  I use the same pin config as the empirical.
I tried cat5, cat 6, cat 7 in shielded, unshielded, I tried cat 5/6 as 'naked' twisted pairs with the sheath removed and then ala Mario and Steve I tried cat wire as 4 individual strands just gently splayed apart in space and found this last approach to be the best that I had tried. 
I showed Mike Lenehan the difference between the 4 individual wire strands and a cat5 patch cable and he was astounded at how much more open the 4 individual strands sounded.
In the beginning I tried 75 ohm coax on bncs and found it OK but rather cumbersome and prone to easy hookup error......and it sounded no better than cat5, and not as good as my last and adopted approach.

C

The best signal integrity should occur with a proper 75 or 50 ohm termination and any RF connectors.

Then there's the question of is that 75 (or 50) ohm termination a/ driven correctly b/ terminated correctly.

I2S was never meant to be for transmission between devices so it's a pretty safe assumption that the usual chips in transport cant drive a 75 ohm termination.

The reality seems to be the transports transmitter chip cant drive anything more than loose cat5.

So - it's easy to say less is more - but if you think it through, there's more going on.


There is also the question of: 

Is 'More Open' a subjective product of noise / jitter / gnd bounce.

This is where you need to start **really** using your ears to hear what is going on. Is 'more open' additive or subtractive, IOW is it adding something to the mix or
is it reducing something, ie making it cleaner. Often cleaning things up sounds worse than adding something (noise jitter).

Food for thought.

Z