Originally Posted by Roc Mixwell
I think its a bandwidth issue......ADAT optical is a format riddled with problems. Think about those 1's and 0's and how the converter deals with the given information on a very small incremental level.
I have noted that a direct FW connection does seem to be preserving the transfer better [hence the stereo imaging and depth of field perception] as opposed to over ADAT in many listening tests.
Which bits in a digital transfer define imaging and "depth"? How can a failure to "preserve the transfer" specifically change such parameters of sound quality? And wouldn't a change of the digital signal simply mean data corruption?
Besides, FW is not a digital audio format, as is ADAT.
Even though there should be NO CHANGE in transferring 1's and 0's, there most certainly can be.
Such a change would mean data corruption, and ADAT transfers do not corrupt data, they are bit by bit identical to the original.
Sorry, you're not making a great lot of sense...
Originally Posted by Brian Lee
It is pretty well known that lightpipe (ADAT and SMUX) have worse jitter than AES and SPDIF. This most likely accounts for the differences.
Hope Bob Katz won't mind if I quote him (taken from Digido
): "My answer is that the apparent sonic differences between interface technologies such as Toslink, glass, and copper are IRRELEVANT when doing transfers or when passing signal from one processor to another. You can forget about that question with COMPLETE CONFIDENCE--since all of the technologies are capable of passing perfectly good data, within their specified cable lengths. Remember: the clock is not transferred along with the data. Only the data is transferred to the processor's circuits."