[matheusmoreira]

> For some reason audiophiles will use darn massive gold (or silver) RCA connectors instead of something like a balanced connection that would actually make sense.

Is there a reason why they don't just use digital audio everywhere and convert to analog as late as possible? Inside the speakers for example? I mean, digital audio is pretty much perfect. Why are analog audio signals still a thing? People actually pay thousands of dollars for magical analog audio cables and it boggles my mind.

[atoav]

Good question, this is what most modern studio engineers would do, especially given that more and more speakers (like the Neumann KH120 II) feature internal FIR filters so you can calibrate them using measurement microphones.

Many modern Studios run some form of digital audio network as well (Dante, Ravenna, etc) so you can go digital as early and close to the source as possible and do all the routing using network switches and some sort of managment software (e.g. Dante Domain Manager). So if you do that it makes sense to go digital all the way to the speakers and convert directly to analog there after running through a DSP that allows you to correct for the speakers position in the room.

Cables can matter. But more for mechanical reliability, good shielding and perfect handling after years of use than any other magical properties. If you want to run balanced audio signals at miniscule loss for a few thousand meters it turns out that you can just use CAT6 for that. These cable are made for far more challenging (speak: higher frequency) signals and they have a track record of working.

[matheusmoreira]

That makes perfect sense. Thanks for clarifying.

[klodolph]

My speakers convert digital to analog. They have ethernet jacks in the back. Maybe you bought the wrong speakers?

Stepping back for a moment… you see digital interconnects in high-end pro audio gear, using systems like Dante. These systems are NOT simple. When you have multiple digital audio systems connected together, you have to worry about whether they are all running from the same clock, or whether you can convert from one clock to another. Systems like AES solved this by having “word clock” running on separate coax cables with BNC connectors.

If you look at consumer digital audio stuff, like Bluetooth speakers, you find all sorts of weird problems. It turns out that for cheap consumer gear, you get better quality audio from simple analog connections anyway.

If you want speakers with digital inputs, you also need to power those speakers. That uses up more power outlets.

[galaxyLogic]

Right and isn't it the case that good quality D/A-converters still cost much money. So if you want every speaker to have them, and you want many speakers to get an immersive sound then "digital loudspeakers" can become expensive?

[klodolph]

Eh, not so fast.

There are a lot of different parts involved—D/A converters, crossover networks, and amplifiers. Back in the day, good D/A converters were expensive, but they have gotten really cheap. If you have amplifiers that are cheap enough, you can put them after the crossover network and save money on the crossover network. If you have D/A converters that are cheap enough, you can eliminate the crossover network entirely and do it in DSP.

At that point you are comparing the cost of one more channel of D/A against the cost of an electronic crossover. It’s super easy to just buy a D/A with more channels. If you get to completely eliminate an analog crossover network, maybe that’s a win in terms of BOM cost.

[galaxyLogic]

> digital audio is pretty much perfect.

It can be. But standard Bluetooth connections for audio can be terrible. Streaming from the internet, that is digital, and there can be delays and gaps in the sound.

[matheusmoreira]

By "perfect" I just meant that digital audio perfectly reproduces the recorded analog signals. https://youtu.be/cIQ9IXSUzuM

I didn't mean to indirectly praise Bluetooth in my post. Bluetooth anything pretty much sucks. Bluetooth audio in particular is pretty bad and full of usability issues. It doesn't seem to have the bandwidth required since the audio gets transcoded to some lossy format.

I once set up an mpd music server on my local network and audio quality was perfect. However I encountered significant latency issues. Play and pause had a latency of one second which made it unusable. That was true even for uncompressed audio streams over the network.

I got bored before I was able to resolve the problem. Maybe the problem was my network. I should try it again now that I have a much higher performance router running OpenWRT which is capable of traffic shaping.

[alright2565]

Not much reason to use aggressive compression when wires have many orders of magnitude more bandwidth than bluetooth. And inconsistent latency is also not an issue when you control the whole network & don't need to share it with anyone else.