Optical Cable in Car Audio

[Sencheezy 689]

I was just wondering if this is possible, or even worth it? I have never seen any manufacture attempt this, but I believe that it would improve the quality of the sound as well as be cost effective in the aspect of less material/weight/mass that three sets of RCAs use. I'm not sure if anybody will be able to answer this question, but I was just wondering what is the reason for manufactures pursuing this route. Any opinions are welcomed.

[Julian 641]

Checkout the bit 10 by audison

[Sencheezy 689]

Checkout the bit 10 by audison

I checked it out, but that is for computer hookup? You can't utilize it in a vehicle in the same way as RCAs. I'm sorry, maybe I should make myself clearer. I am speaking in regards to the role that RCAs currently play. Transmitting the data from the source(HU), to amplifier(s)/processor(s).

[Randal Johnson 544]

I know that Optical transmitters and recievers are VERY expensive in the broadband electronics world. They are primarily used for LONG distance cable runs. If it was just for cable Telivision, probably would never be a need for fiber optic cable ... But as communication develops, and signals change from analog to advance digital, addition of internet and phnone services, more and more companys are running fiber optic cable to handle these larger data transmitions ... but coax is still the primary in most cable companys. People are learning that fiber to the home is no better than hybrid coax systems ... just more expensive for the companies and the individual customer ...

I think some Alpine units used this technology from headunit to processor applications, but never to take the place of RCAs to amplifiers ... And if I remember correctly, those units were / are really expensive and only sought out by true audiophiles ... I think most advance systems like this use CAT5 data cables or something similar to transmit data. I almost positive that this is ALOT cheaper than fiber optic runs and just as effective, possibly better depending on applications ...

My guess would be that people would not want to pay the prices it would be to have optical transmitters in the head units and have optical recievers in the amplifiers ... Maybe some VERY high end sponsored vehicles, but not for people wanting good deals on everyday headunits ...

I could see a use for it to transmit advance digital /data signals (definately something we may see in the future) but for a no longer than a 25 foot run of analog signal, Chances are you would not see any difference in signal improvement or degregation ...

If you look close to my head unit / amplifier installaiton, you will se that I use RG59 coax cable for my RCAs ... They work GREAT !!!

Edited May 3, 2012 by Cablguy184

[Julian 641]

Here it is

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D6y4YuePxzHQ&v=6y4YuePxzHQ&gl=US

[Sencheezy 689]

I know that Optical transmitters and recievers are VERY expensive in the broadband electronics world. They are primarily used for LONG distance cable runs. If it was just for cable Telivision, probably would never be a need for fiber optic cable ... But as communication develops, and signals change from analog to advance digital, addition of internet and phnone services, more and more companys are running fiber optic cable to handle these larger data transmitions ... but coax is still the primary in most cable companys. People are learning that fiber to the home is no better than hybrid coax systems ... just more expensive for the companies and the individual customer ...

I think some Alpine units used this technology from headunit to processor applications, but never to take the place of RCAs to amplifiers ... And if I remember correctly, those units were / are really expensive and only sought out by true audiophiles ... I think most advance systems like this use CAT5 data cables or something similar to transmit data. I almost positive that this is ALOT cheaper than fiber optic runs and just as effective, possibly better depending on applications ...

My guess would be that people would not want to pay the prices it would be to have optical transmitters in the head units and have optical recievers in the amplifiers ... Maybe some VERY high end sponsored vehicles, but not for people wanting good deals on everyday headunits ...

I could see a use for it to transmit advance digital /data signals (definately something we may see in the future) but for a no longer than a 25 foot run of analog signal, Chances are you would not see any difference in signal improvement or degregation ...

If you look close to my head unit / amplifier installaiton, you will se that I use RG59 coax cable for my RCAs ... They work GREAT !!!

Thanks for your input CableGuy. I never imagined that it would uber expensive to have Optical recievers since the cable itself can be had for a few dollars or less. At home, I have mixer/amp that I use for gaming that utilizes the optical input from my xbox and I can tell a HUGE difference in sound compared to normal RCAs. This cable is only 6ft long, and this mixer is nothing of SQ oriented to my knowledege. Can be had for less than 150$ and is designed for gaming, not Audiophiles.

Call me loco, but for some reason I was thinking there was a difference between "Fiber Cable", and "Optical Cable".

Notice images below.

Fiber Cable

Optical Cable

[Sencheezy 689]

Here it is

http://m.youtube.com...4YuePxzHQ&gl=US

You gave me a mobile link? lol, doesn't work for some reason. Top right corner of your phone, if android, the youtube app will have a drop down icon, select "copy url". But when I just researched it, it is intended to be used in park, connected to a computer to configure/tweak your system. I noticed there was still a few pairs of RCAs for the signal from source to amp/processor.

[Randal Johnson 544]

Trust me, I'm a certified Fiber optical cable splicer technician ... If I could have it in my truck, It would be there ... I think my Kenwood DNX9980HD has a optical output for something, But I sure they do not take the place of RCAs ... You can only have one / two wavelengths per cable ... So that would mean that you would need transmitters / recievers for all channels in the system ... Most things like X-box, PS3, etc only have one, maybe two optical outputs ...

Could get expensive !!!

[Optimus_Prime 30]

Optical to the amp from the knob still a way off meaning average user would fold or break it, although Bluetooth could be more of a reality, the only thing is interference and lag.,

Edited May 3, 2012 by Optimus_Prime

[Sencheezy 689]

Trust me, I'm a certified Fiber optical cable splicer technician ... If I could have it in my truck, It would be there ... I think my Kenwood DNX9980HD has a optical output for something, But I sure they do not take the place of RCAs ... You can only have one / two wavelengths per cable ... So that would mean that you would need transmitters / recievers for all channels in the system ... Most things like X-box, PS3, etc only have one, maybe two optical outputs ...

Could get expensive !!!

Oh ok, haha, I trust you now, but listened to your opinion anyways

So you say you would need transmitters/receivers for all channels, why is this? As I've stated, my mixamp takes the sound into my headphones in 5.1 surround. This is my confusion when you say that we would need a separate receiver for each channel.

But your correct, my X-box only has one output. My idea would be, From source, one output to lets just say a 5-channel amp. Thats one cable. Which obviously has many advantages over 3 RCAs would, IMO.

[Randal Johnson 544]

I know that Optical transmitters and recievers are VERY expensive in the broadband electronics world. They are primarily used for LONG distance cable runs. If it was just for cable Telivision, probably would never be a need for fiber optic cable ... But as communication develops, and signals change from analog to advance digital, addition of internet and phnone services, more and more companys are running fiber optic cable to handle these larger data transmitions ... but coax is still the primary in most cable companys. People are learning that fiber to the home is no better than hybrid coax systems ... just more expensive for the companies and the individual customer ...

I think some Alpine units used this technology from headunit to processor applications, but never to take the place of RCAs to amplifiers ... And if I remember correctly, those units were / are really expensive and only sought out by true audiophiles ... I think most advance systems like this use CAT5 data cables or something similar to transmit data. I almost positive that this is ALOT cheaper than fiber optic runs and just as effective, possibly better depending on applications ...

My guess would be that people would not want to pay the prices it would be to have optical transmitters in the head units and have optical recievers in the amplifiers ... Maybe some VERY high end sponsored vehicles, but not for people wanting good deals on everyday headunits ...

I could see a use for it to transmit advance digital /data signals (definately something we may see in the future) but for a no longer than a 25 foot run of analog signal, Chances are you would not see any difference in signal improvement or degregation ...

If you look close to my head unit / amplifier installaiton, you will se that I use RG59 coax cable for my RCAs ... They work GREAT !!!

Thanks for your input CableGuy. I never imagined that it would uber expensive to have Optical recievers since the cable itself can be had for a few dollars or less. At home, I have mixer/amp that I use for gaming that utilizes the optical input from my xbox and I can tell a HUGE difference in sound compared to normal RCAs. This cable is only 6ft long, and this mixer is nothing of SQ oriented to my knowledege. Can be had for less than 150$ and is designed for gaming, not Audiophiles.

Call me loco, but for some reason I was thinking there was a difference between "Fiber Cable", and "Optical Cable".

Notice images below.

Fiber Cable

Optical Cable

Fiber Optic Cable

The only "Technical" difference between these 2 cables is the top one has 2 cables and the bottom has only one ...

The top cable has the capability of "2 way" transmission of data ... The bottom is only capable of transmitting "one Way" just like a RCA cable ...

Transmitters change bandwidth/data information into light, and power voltage sends the light energy to the other end of the cable ... basic principle to any amplifier. Recievers at the other end of the cable change the light back into bandwidth/data information ...

[Randal Johnson 544]

Trust me, I'm a certified Fiber optical cable splicer technician ... If I could have it in my truck, It would be there ... I think my Kenwood DNX9980HD has a optical output for something, But I sure they do not take the place of RCAs ... You can only have one / two wavelengths per cable ... So that would mean that you would need transmitters / recievers for all channels in the system ... Most things like X-box, PS3, etc only have one, maybe two optical outputs ...

Could get expensive !!!

Oh ok, haha, I trust you now, but listened to your opinion anyways

So you say you would need transmitters/receivers for all channels, why is this? As I've stated, my mixamp takes the sound into my headphones in 5.1 surround. This is my confusion when you say that we would need a separate receiver for each channel.

But your correct, my X-box only has one output. My idea would be, From source, one output to lets just say a 5-channel amp. Thats one cable. Which obviously has many advantages over 3 RCAs would, IMO.

Your source unit (X-Box) sends out the data encoded information, then the recieving unit amplifier stage / processor device sends output the way the source unit tells it ...

Edited May 3, 2012 by Cablguy184

[Optimus_Prime 30]

You would have to be very careful from manufacturer to consumer first of all, then it would have to be run through some kind of conduit to make sure. and then and then and then, just too damn delicate.

[Optimus_Prime 30]

To be honest with you, keep it the way ti is. The more shit involved the more to go wrong.

[Randal Johnson 544]

Most home theatre recievers decode information from source units ... data ...

Then they "Process" the signal to the output stages ... Thats basically why they call them processors, the manipulate the signal for customer preference ...

Output signal from a primary "Source" will always be the same, X-box has two output stages ... Fiber optic data transmission and analog RF output ... Left, Right, and video ...

[Randal Johnson 544]

You would have to be very careful from manufacturer to consumer first of all, then it would have to be run through some kind of conduit to make sure. and then and then and then, just too damn delicate.

Yes Sir ... Not the easiest cable to work with ...

Most fiber lines we work with have 12 fibers per buffer ... with anywhere from 6 to 24 buffers around the messenger/strength member ... Have fun splicing back 3,456 fibers in one night when some drunk ass driver decides to swerve and take out a High Line Power transmission pole ... I've been stuck in a splicing trailer for 16 hours straight a few times ...

[Sencheezy 689]

Interesting... The Optic Cable I currently use, has NO wiring inside, it is simply a clear tube, where the light travels by reflecting from the interiors material. Its nothing fancy, just an Optic Cable from Wallmart. But I've dealt with better ones before, the image I posted actually. I do believe that it is rather easy to deal with. Don't see how one could mess it up, no different than running RCAs in the handle/care aspect of it.No conduit needed, as you can observe from the image I posted, it has its own shielding just as an RCA cable would, and is flexible. Not 90 degree flexible, but maybe that could be another draw back sure, for those who run zig zag wiring.

Cableguy, In my idea, the source would be the Head Unit, and then the processor would be the amplifier. So in this scenerio, there is no need for multiple transmitters as you described from earlier correct? Since the processor(in my case, the amplifier) would decode the signal, right? lol

[Optimus_Prime 30]

Interesting... The Optic Cable I currently use, has NO wiring inside, it is simply a clear tube, where the light travels by reflecting from the interiors material. Its nothing fancy, just an Optic Cable from Wallmart. But I've dealt with better ones before, the image I posted actually. I do believe that it is rather easy to deal with. Don't see how one could mess it up, no different than running RCAs in the handle/care aspect of it.No conduit needed, as you can observe from the image I posted, it has its own shielding just as an RCA cable would, and is flexible. Not 90 degree flexible, but maybe that could be another draw back sure, for those who run zig zag wiring.

Cableguy, In my idea, the source would be the Head Unit, and then the processor would be the amplifier. So in this scenerio, there is no need for multiple transmitters as you described from earlier correct? Since the processor(in my case, the amplifier) would decode the signal, right? lol

To put it simple, Im sure every serious car audio enthusiast has a so called OCD. And in response there will be way too many unnecessary tech and warranty issues.

[Randal Johnson 544]

That "tube" is glass and it will break ...

Now ... Getting back to car audio ...

If your headunit sends light to a processor, then you only need one transmission line ... the processor decodes the information and sends signal to the amps ... If you have fiber going from processor to amps, you need 2 fibers (left and right) to go to each amp cause there is no processor in the amplifier ...

If you go from your headunit straight to your amps ... then you need a left and right fiber going to each amp ... meaning multiple outputs and atleast 2 inputs per amp ... unless you go with the more expensive double wavelength transmitters and recievers ...

[Optimus_Prime 30]

But if there could be a relevance for this technology, it would and only be offered to competitors.

[Randal Johnson 544]

With evolving technology ... anything is possible in the future of car audio ...

I can see it happening ... just cost more money ...

[Optimus_Prime 30]

With evolving technology ... anything is possible in the future of car audio ...

I can see it happening ... just cost more money ...

/\

This!

[Optimus_Prime 30]

If this is to be controlled I would still like a wired manual control over amp output, but would like it to be controlled from the H/U.

[Randal Johnson 544]

Interesting... The Optic Cable I currently use, has NO wiring inside, it is simply a clear tube, where the light travels by reflecting from the interiors material. Its nothing fancy, just an Optic Cable from Wallmart. But I've dealt with better ones before, the image I posted actually. I do believe that it is rather easy to deal with. Don't see how one could mess it up, no different than running RCAs in the handle/care aspect of it.No conduit needed, as you can observe from the image I posted, it has its own shielding just as an RCA cable would, and is flexible. Not 90 degree flexible, but maybe that could be another draw back sure, for those who run zig zag wiring.

Cableguy, In my idea, the source would be the Head Unit, and then the processor would be the amplifier. So in this scenerio, there is no need for multiple transmitters as you described from earlier correct? Since the processor(in my case, the amplifier) would decode the signal, right? lol

ok ... I reread this post ... Sorry Sir, I was working on something (I'm actually at work at the moment) ...

Amplifiers do not have processors, The only amplify the input signnal ... they have a input for every output (often referred to as a 1-1 ratio) ... hence 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 channel amplifiers ...

In my case having multiple amplifiers with no external processor unit, I would need 8 optical outputs from the head unit and 2 optical inputs on each amplifier ...

If they did, like home audio recievers with built in amplifiers ... Yes, one Fiber cable input would work for that application ... If car audio amplifiers did have built in processors, can you imagine how much they would cost ??

Edited May 3, 2012 by Cablguy184

[Sencheezy 689]

Haha yes, if the amplifier did not gave onboard processing, then this would be a bad idea, but in my example/idea, it is built in.