Home Theater Cords

[rowech]

Since I got so much help with my first question...in looking at all the multitude of cords there are...I keep reading there's not a difference in the fancy monster cords compared to others. Is this the case?

In addition, what kind of cords do I need???

I have:

PS2
DVD
Reciever
Sony 50" HDTV
HD DVR Box

From what I can gather I need:

PS2 (game component cords)
DVD (component cords...no HD outputs on DVD)
HD DVR Box (DVI to HDMI cord...no HDMI connection on the box. Would component cords be just as good though?)

What kind of cords do I go with from the TV to the receiver? I have a pair of monster L/R cords...is this good enough? Or is optical sound better?

[cartman]

There is a difference in the cords, but most people can't hear a difference. As for analog vs. optical, the optical is by far the way to go if you have the ability.

As for TV to the receiver, you shouldn't have to worry about that, unless you are planning to pipe sound through the TV speakers. If you have surround sound already, the PS2, DVD and DVR will connect to the receiver, and the receiver will send the sound to the surround sound speakers.

[rowech]

DVR can't connect to the receiver unfortunately as it doesn't have any HD connections. Unless I use the component cords?

so you're saying component cords for everything, PS2, DVD, and DVR all hooked into the receiver? Don't I need cords sending the TV sound into the receiver as well?

[Daimyo]

Don't buy cables at a big box store... they totally rip you off on cables and accessories.

[cartman]

DVR can't connect to the receiver unfortunately as it doesn't have any HD connections. Unless I use the component cords?

so you're saying component cords for everything, PS2, DVD, and DVR all hooked into the receiver? Don't I need cords sending the TV sound into the receiver as well?

If there is component out from the DVR, then sure, that would be better than analog (coax, S-video, RCA).

As for sound, there shouldn't be any from the TV to the receiver. If I understand correctly, you have either cable or satellite that feeds into your DVR box. The sound should only go from the DVR device to the receiver. It shouldn't go from DVR to TV to receiver.

[rowech]

If there is component out from the DVR, then sure, that would be better than analog (coax, S-video, RCA).

As for sound, there shouldn't be any from the TV to the receiver. If I understand correctly, you have either cable or satellite that feeds into your DVR box. The sound should only go from the DVR device to the receiver. It shouldn't go from DVR to TV to receiver.

First...let me say I appreciate your help. I just don't feel like paying someone to do this if I can get it right.



Well, I didn't realize the component cables were video only and I needed separate audio cords as well. So now I think I see what you're saying...

I need component cords from the DVD and HDDVR feeding into the receiver. In addition, both things need optical audio cords running into the receiver as well. (this takes care of these two items)

Then, I need a component video cord going from the out on the receiver to the TV input.

I believe this is all okay (please confirm)...doesn't address the PS2 but want to make sure those things would be correct.

[cartman]

First...let me say I appreciate your help. I just don't feel like paying someone to do this if I can get it right.



Well, I didn't realize the component cables were video only and I needed separate audio cords as well. So now I think I see what you're saying...

I need component cords from the DVD and HDDVR feeding into the receiver. In addition, both things need optical audio cords running into the receiver as well. (this takes care of these two items)

Then, I need a component video cord going from the out on the receiver to the TV input.

I believe this is all okay (please confirm)...doesn't address the PS2 but want to make sure those things would be correct.

Yep, that sounds about right. That should get you set for the DVD and DVR. Sorry, I didn't realize the confusion about the composite cables being video only. That can be a point of confusion, since HDMI does carry both video and sound.

All this can be a bit confusing, but if you sketch it down on paper, it helps to figure out exactly which cables you need. I guess the next questions/things to look at concern your receiver. First off, make sure it has enough inputs and outputs to handle all of these connections. :) Secondly, if the receiver handles video upconversion, then any video source you plug into the back of the receiver will go over the composite out to the TV, regardless of the original source. That helps cut down the number of wires running around.

[ISiddiqui]

HD DVR Box (DVI to HDMI cord...no HDMI connection on the box. Would component cords be just as good though?)
Get a DVI to HDMI cable and connect the audio L R to your reciever (DVI only carries picture). DVI and HDMI are the only fully digital connections. Component is actually an analog connection. It may not that much worse to your eye, but I always thought, why not go for the best connection on something like that.

I have a DVI to HDMI cord from my HD DVR box to my TV and audio L and R cables to the back of my TV. My DVD player and XBox 360 are connected using component cables.

I don't have a reciever.

[rowech]

Yep, that sounds about right. That should get you set for the DVD and DVR. Sorry, I didn't realize the confusion about the composite cables being video only. That can be a point of confusion, since HDMI does carry both video and sound.

All this can be a bit confusing, but if you sketch it down on paper, it helps to figure out exactly which cables you need. I guess the next questions/things to look at concern your receiver. First off, make sure it has enough inputs and outputs to handle all of these connections. :) Secondly, if the receiver handles video upconversion, then any video source you plug into the back of the receiver will go over the composite out to the TV, regardless of the original source. That helps cut down the number of wires running around.

The receiver has enough connections...checked that out for sure. I'll have to hook up PS2 through the TV is the only problem. Not a huge deal probably.

[Pyser]

buy your cables at monoprice.com. youll thank me later when you see their prices

[Bee]

I also get my cables at monoprice.com and recommend them.

[rowech]

Wow! Are these cables just as good as the ones in the stores?

[Bee]

A year or so ago, I moved my projector in the media room and had to buy new cables. I had Monster cables that I had bought at Best Buy but they were too short for the new location. Because of the price I decided to buy the new cables from monoprice.com and I couldn't tell any difference in quality. Since then whenever I buy any cables, I get them from monoprice.com. I do tend to buy the higher quality cables they offer which are still just a fraction of the cost of cables from local stores.

[ISiddiqui]

Though I have to say that usually the inexpensive cables in radio shack (or whatnot), NOT the cheap ones (cheap meaning poorly made) are usually as good as the big names. Now, I do have a Monster DVI-D to HDMI cable, but if I got my setup nowadays, I most likely would not have gotten it.

[rowech]

Bee,

Would you consider these their high quality?

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10235&cs_id=1023502&p_id=2769&seq=1&format=2&style=

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10236&cs_id=1023602&p_id=2680&seq=1&format=2&style=

[ISiddiqui]

Btw, rowech, they seem to have some good choice with DVI to HDMI cables on that site as well for a good price.

[Bee]

Yep, I get the ones that have the gold connectors like those do and haven't had any issues.

[rowech]

Cool.

[rowech]

Btw, rowech, they seem to have some good choice with DVI to HDMI cables on that site as well for a good price.

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10231&cs_id=1023102&p_id=2218&seq=1&format=2&style=


Will this do the trick? Now to make sure, this has no audio. I can send this as the video from HDDVR to TV. I can then do an audio sound from HDDVR to the receiver. It sounds stupid, but we like the music channels we get but we hate having the TV on while listening to them and I want to make sure I get it setup so we can still do that.

[ISiddiqui]

Yeah, that should be fine. And yes, DVI cables do not include audio, so you'd sent it as video to the TV and then get audio cables to connect the HD DVR to the reciever.

I believe that that setup will allow you to change your cable box to a music channel and listen to it from your reciever/speakers without turning on your TV. I don't have a reciever, but I know I can change channels on my HD DVR cable box (which I keep on all the time) without turning on the TV (I don't know what I changed it to until the TV comes on ;)).

[rowech]

Sounds good...I appreciate everyone's help on this. Just such a major purchase I really don't want to screw it up.

[Hurst2112]

don't be fooled by 'gold connectors'.

Of the 3 studios I work at, there isn't a speck of gold on any of the cords. Only gold records...;)

Seriously, if you stick with the cheap audio cables, you will be fine.

[Hurst2112]

dola:

I would suggest getting shielded cables for anything digital. Those are the 75 Ohm ones.

with short runs, you may not notice a difference but RF can play tricks with a digital signal sent down cables.

[rowech]

I guess one more question...what kind of audio connections do I want. I thought digital and optical were the same but it appears not. I have optical hookups on my receiver. Is that what I should get and if so, are these the cords I should use?

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10229&cs_id=1022901&p_id=2764&seq=1&format=2&style=

[Hurst2112]

tosslink is for multi-channel audio (more than stereo).

Digital RCA-style cords are for left and right audio. Tosslink (lightpipe, optical, etc) allow more than 2 channels to be sent.

[Hurst2112]

dola: if you want your receiver to play something in 5.1 or higher, you will need an optical cable. that explains it better.

[Bee]

I guess one more question...what kind of audio connections do I want. I thought digital and optical were the same but it appears not. I have optical hookups on my receiver. Is that what I should get and if so, are these the cords I should use?

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10229&cs_id=1022901&p_id=2764&seq=1&format=2&style=

Optical and digital are both very good and either would be fine. If it matches your hookup, that cable looks good to me.


edit: I would recommend optical for long runs though, but that doesn't look like an issue with your setup based on the cable lengths you've been linking .

[rowech]

I believe it does....what a mess this is. Guess I'm learning all of it though.

[cartman]

Even if you don't buy from them, crutchfield.com has a lot of good info explaining all of the different kinds of connections and what kind of cables you need. They have lots of pics, and I find that it is a good resource for getting the needed info.

[Bee]

tosslink is for multi-channel audio (more than stereo).

Digital RCA-style cords are for left and right audio. Tosslink (lightpipe, optical, etc) allow more than 2 channels to be sent.

I'm assuming he's talking about the digital coax cable, not the rca cords...but I could be wrong.

[moriarty]

Joining late, but piling on ...

I've personally noticed a difference (improvement) on my 50" TV by going to DVI vs. component. In theory it's better as well since it's digital - digital.

I don't have HDMI so I can't comment on sound, but amongst the other options I prefer an optical cable.

As far as whether to buy expensive cables vs. cheap ones, I've experimented with the "high end" monster types and the low end types and haven't been able to tell a difference. I've been told by others though if you're cable lengths are longer than 8', then you will start to notice a difference but otherwise it's hard to tell.

As always though, if you buy a more expensive cable - get it from somewhere you can return it, and swap it back and forth with the cheaper one to see if you can tell the difference, since you are the primary viewer. If you can't, just return it.

[Hurst2112]

I'm assuming he's talking about the digital coax cable, not the rca cords...but I could be wrong.

Digital coax S/Pdif is essentially RCA (or 'cinch' cable). 2 connector, sending 2 channel digital or 1 channel analog.

[Bee]

Digital coax S/Pdif is essentially RCA (or 'cinch' cable). 2 connector, sending 2 channel digital or 1 channel analog.

you can send 5.1 through digital coax.

[Hurst2112]

I claim to be no wiz in the A/V world, but I would ask how you can send more than 2 channels of digital signal on a 2 conductor cable.

[Bee]

Here's a link explaining it better than I could:

http://www.samspublishing.com/articles/article.asp?p=349880&seqNum=2&rl=1

[moriarty]

I claim to be no wiz in the A/V world, but I would ask how you can send more than 2 channels of digital signal on a 2 conductor cable.

I've received surround sound with a digital coax before, so it can be done.

[Hurst2112]

A single digital coaxial cable carries all available audio channels. You only need a single cable to carry right and left stereo signals, or the 5.1-channel surround sound signals.

this statement kinda contradicts itself.

I don't believe that a single digital cable can handle the amount of information for 5 channels of digital signal, esp when you are dealing with HD audio. With some audio being as high as 192K and 24 bit, that is a ton of info to stream over 1 conductor.

I will ask over on gearslutz.com. I ain't trying to be a brain about it, I just have some knowledge that is being questioned (by my own thinker).

[Bee]

I'm not familiar with gearslutz.com, but there have been many threads on the subject in the past on avsforum and ecoustics.com.

[moriarty]

this statement kinda contradicts itself.

I don't believe that a single digital cable can handle the amount of information for 5 channels of digital signal, esp when you are dealing with HD audio. With some audio being as high as 192K and 24 bit, that is a ton of info to stream over 1 conductor.

I will ask over on gearslutz.com. I ain't trying to be a brain about it, I just have some knowledge that is being questioned (by my own thinker).

I'm not an audio engineer, but I would suspect the digital signal (0's and 1's) is a lot easier to use compression algorithms with the signal than it is w/ analog, so you can crank more info through a similar pipeline.

[Hurst2112]

I'm not an audio engineer, but I would suspect the digital signal (0's and 1's) is a lot easier to use compression algorithms with the signal than it is w/ analog, so you can crank more info through a similar pipeline.

Therein may lie my ignorance about the matter.

In a pure audio world, we don't use compression. A 192K/24 bit signal stays that way up until the pre master phase.

When I was in school, there wasn't near the amount of compression forms as there are now.

Still, with compression comes rarefaction and the ability to uncompress the signal. Receivers have probably come along way since 2001.

[moriarty]

Therein may lie my ignorance about the matter.

In a pure audio world, we don't use compression. A 192K/24 bit signal stays that way up until the pre master phase.

When I was in school, there wasn't near the amount of compression forms as there are now.

Still, with compression comes rarefaction and the ability to uncompress the signal. Receivers have probably come along way since 2001.

I seem to recall this being part of the debate with DTS vs. Dolby in that DTS was a cleaner / less lost on compresson. While not completely addressing the issue here's a blurb from audioholics.com

"In order to minimize the limited space allocated on a DVD for audio soundtracks, DD and DTS utilize lossy data reduction algorithms, which reduce the number of bits needed to encode an audio signal. DD compresses a 5.1 channel surround track to 384 kbps to 448 kbps (DVD Standard limited, DD has the potential of up to 640 kbps) while DTS uses much higher bit rates up to 1.4 Mbps for CD's / LD's and 1.5 Mbps for DVD. A higher bit rate must imply DTS will be superior sounding right? In theory, the less compression used in the encoding process, the more realistic the sound will be, as it will better represent the original source. DD tends to boast that its encoding method is more efficient than DTS and thus does not require the extra bit rates. However, even if DD is slightly more efficient, it is still not 1.5 / .448 = 3.35 times more efficient.. However, both DD & DTS will boast data rates, efficiency, etc, but what actually translates to better sound is a very ambiguous matter as there are more factors involved here that goes beyond the scope of this article. "

[Daimyo]

I don't think you even need compression. The bandwidth required for CD quality audio is actually pretty small comparted to the available bandwidth of a coax cable.

[Daimyo]

DOLA, compression comes into play more in fitting the signal onto the storage medium.

[Hurst2112]

I don't think you even need compression. The bandwidth required for CD quality audio is actually pretty small comparted to the available bandwidth of a coax cable.

yeah, but my take was that DVD are sometimes authored with hi res audio. That information needs to be sent to the receiver and then converted. You aren't always getting 44.1/16 audio from a DVD.

A 1 minute stereo file at 44/16 is about 10 megs. A 1 minute stereo file at 192/24 is about 60 megs.

This is what somebody posted on gearslutz. I was wrong and promptly admit it. Well, I wasn't wrong, just behind the times. \m/

I used to install home theatre/plasma tv's/ whole house audio and automation/ boutique audio crap for a living. The whole industry disgusted me so I got the hell out. Anyway, to answer your question, one digital coaxial cable can send 5.1 surround information from say a DVD player or high def cable/satellite box to a sourround sound reciever. A digital optical cable does the exact same thing. Its all digital, its all 1's and 0's. They used to have to connect one RCA cable per surround sound channel before digital connections became popular. Most recently, I think SACD had to be connected this way for 5.1... SACD was not compatible with digital audio connections. This may have changed however, its been a while since I worked in the consumer electronics world.

But thats for home theatre setups. It has little relation to recording and pro audio.

[rowech]

Just wanted to say thanks guys as I did make the purchase today getting the cords from the site that was recommended. Appreciate it.