stupid cable question

[Dire McCain]

Is there a true difference- resistance, rejection, whatever- between video connect cables and audio connect cables? I notice the video cables are usually thicker and beefier...if they make for better video would they necessarily make for better audio or not?

That is, can a video cable be successfully used for audio hookup? And what about the rgb cables...they're think and beefy and shielded...why wouldn't they make good audio connectors???

Just curious.

[OvenMaster]

I'd think that video cables would be capable of carrying a greater bandwidth than audio cables, and therefore theoretically better. Only way to be sure is to try it out. :D If I had some, I would.
Tom

[JimJ[VT]]

I'm running "digital coax" cables between my pre and the monoblocks.

A/B'ed them with regular RCA's and haven't noticed a difference.

[Geno]

They're interchangeable. Just make sure they're decent quality. The color-coding is just marketing hype.

[Dire McCain]

Marketing...yeah, should have known. That's what i do for a living...the occupation makes me suspicious of everything...it's all about new ways to get into your pocket.

[stuartk]

Marketing...yeah, should have known. That's what i do for a living...the occupation makes me suspicious of everything...it's all about new ways to get into your pocket.

I think Belden 1505F makes for a great audio cable, and it's actually a video cable.

There _are_ some differences between audio and video cables, at least when you're an engineer at Belden designing cable.

At the retail level, there is often no difference between "audio" and "video" cables, so it's marketing.

[stuartk]

']I'm running "digital coax" cables between my pre and the monoblocks.

A/B'ed them with regular RCA's and haven't noticed a difference.

"Digital" cables are often just BS. If a cable can handle video, it has the bandwidth for coax digital too.

What might be important for a digital cable is that it be 75 ohms, but given the short length needed in most systems, cable that isn't 75 ohms may perform just as well. For instance, I have a 2 foot run between my DVD player and my DAC. It can't hurt to use a true 75 ohm cable there, but it doesn't seem to make an audible difference.

For use with audio frequency interconnects like between your amp and preamp, "digital coax" isn't really necessary. Again, a true 75 ohm video cable probably can't hurt, but it may not perform better in any way you can actually hear.

[Doc Brown]

I've wondered about this very same thing.

The system that I brought to the Fest had cables that are labeled " Digital Audio", but they look just like coax cable? Real stiff too.

$1.00 ea. at Dollar Castle.

[JimJ[VT]]

"Digital" cables are often just BS. If a cable can handle video, it has the bandwidth for coax digital too.

What might be important for a digital cable is that it be 75 ohms, but given the short length needed in most systems, cable that isn't 75 ohms may perform just as well. For instance, I have a 2 foot run between my DVD player and my DAC. It can't hurt to use a true 75 ohm cable there, but it doesn't seem to make an audible difference.

For use with audio frequency interconnects like between your amp and preamp, "digital coax" isn't really necessary. Again, a true 75 ohm video cable probably can't hurt, but it may not perform better in any way you can actually hear.

I bought them because I needed mono cables, and I didn't need a full 4 meter subwoofer cable to do it :)

[hpsenicka]

There is a lot of speculation in this thread that may not be supported by fact.

Digital audio interconnects are intended to have an impedance of 75 Ohms, much like standard video coax cable.

Regular RCA stereo patch cables are not necessarily made with these requirements in mind, so you may can expect to get mixed results if experimenting with cables of different brands/types.

It is not always marketing hype, although there are likely cases where a manufacturer uses one type of cable interchangeably for both applications.