CeNET or Fiber Optic
Thread Starter
I=X - optomos
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,171
Likes: 2
From: ATL
CeNET or Fiber Optic
I bought a clarion dcz625 changer. What would be the SQ difference if I were to use a fiber optic cable over the cenet cable? The fiber cable runs about 80 bucks.
In computer world I know that the fiber cable is much faster then the serial, but would there be a big difference in SQ worth the extra $80.
In computer world I know that the fiber cable is much faster then the serial, but would there be a big difference in SQ worth the extra $80.
Instructor
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
From: Gilbert, Arizona
I had a Clarion 9375R with a DPH9300 processor and had Clarion's optic cable from the changer to the processor and Highend streewire 3.0 cables from the deck to the processor. The sound 'seemed' alot cleaner and I was able to go a few notches louder without distortion. I would get them, but that's my 
VP Electricity
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,617
Likes: 8
From: Portland OR US
You need BOTH, optomos.
The fiber optic ONLY takes the SPDIF digital signal from the changer and runs it into the 9255 DACs (which as you know are very good). The CeNET then runs only control signals. The optical does NONE of the clarion control bus signals.
So TECHNICALLY if you assume that the changer transport has better vibration isolation than the 9255 transport, and you're now using the same DAC's, the changer should sound as good or sometimes better than the 9255 (inasmuch as the Reed-Solomon error correction should be kicking in less often off of the changer, and the error correction audibly degrades perfomance.)
The fiber optic ONLY takes the SPDIF digital signal from the changer and runs it into the 9255 DACs (which as you know are very good). The CeNET then runs only control signals. The optical does NONE of the clarion control bus signals.
So TECHNICALLY if you assume that the changer transport has better vibration isolation than the 9255 transport, and you're now using the same DAC's, the changer should sound as good or sometimes better than the 9255 (inasmuch as the Reed-Solomon error correction should be kicking in less often off of the changer, and the error correction audibly degrades perfomance.)
Thread Starter
I=X - optomos
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,171
Likes: 2
From: ATL
Originally Posted by elduderino
You need BOTH, optomos.
The fiber optic ONLY takes the SPDIF digital signal from the changer and runs it into the 9255 DACs (which as you know are very good). The CeNET then runs only control signals. The optical does NONE of the clarion control bus signals.
So TECHNICALLY if you assume that the changer transport has better vibration isolation than the 9255 transport, and you're now using the same DAC's, the changer should sound as good or sometimes better than the 9255 (inasmuch as the Reed-Solomon error correction should be kicking in less often off of the changer, and the error correction audibly degrades perfomance.)
The fiber optic ONLY takes the SPDIF digital signal from the changer and runs it into the 9255 DACs (which as you know are very good). The CeNET then runs only control signals. The optical does NONE of the clarion control bus signals.
So TECHNICALLY if you assume that the changer transport has better vibration isolation than the 9255 transport, and you're now using the same DAC's, the changer should sound as good or sometimes better than the 9255 (inasmuch as the Reed-Solomon error correction should be kicking in less often off of the changer, and the error correction audibly degrades perfomance.)
Thnx
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Yumcha
Automotive News
4
Sep 15, 2015 06:44 PM
