Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: AES Cable recommendations

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » AES Cable recommendations

Author

Topic: AES Cable recommendations

Danial Simmonds
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 107
From: Kota Damansara, Selangor, Malaysia
Registered: Jan 2008

posted 06-02-2010 11:13 PM

Hi Everyone!

Just want to look at your opinions on what type of belden cable is best used for the AES out from the server to the audio processor.

I have been looking at Belden 1800B and 9729...

Does each pair (channel) needs a ground? I think it does but remain uncertain.

Take Care
Danial.

| IP: Logged

Chase Taylor
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 175
From: Troy, Alabama, USA
Registered: Mar 2001

posted 06-03-2010 06:03 AM

Belden 1803F is what I use, I use the drain on each pair and then put the drain for the cable to the metal housing on the terminations.

Chase

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 06-03-2010 06:55 AM

1803F is also what I use (1800B is just a single pair, 1803F is a 4-pair snake).

Just remember true 110-Ohm cable is FAT as compared to its analog cousins so it is a tight fit into a DB25 Hood even though it is 24awg (1803F). There is a 26awg version that we are looking into. Especially, if the industry does go beyond the 8-channels already (and they sort of have since the VI/HI channel has been defined as 15/16)...getting 8 pairs in a DB25 is going to be REALLY tight.

Steve

| IP: Logged

Bruce Hansen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 847
From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 06-04-2010 04:57 PM

I have used Belden 9180 for short runs, like wiring patch panels, and DAs, with no problems. 9180 is the 26 AWG version of AES digital audio cable. It is about the same size as 8451. Trying to get 96 pieces of 1800 type cable into a patch panel is near impossible, it's just too big a wad of cable.

| IP: Logged

Stephen Furley
Film God

Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002

posted 06-05-2010 03:16 AM

quote: Steve Guttag
Just remember true 110-Ohm cable is FAT as compared to its analog cousins so it is a tight fit into a DB25 Hood even though it is 24awg (1803F). There is a 26awg version that we are looking into. Especially, if the industry does go beyond the 8-channels already (and they sort of have since the VI/HI channel has been defined as 15/16)

Do you have a list of all channels so far defined? In some special circumstances you might need even more channels; multiple languages for example.

quote: Steve Guttag
...getting 8 pairs in a DB25 is going to be REALLY tight.

And I still think it's totally unnecessary. If all of the channels are going to and from the same place, e.g. digital server to processor, it could easily all go down a single strand of co-ax as a single bitstream. If only the AES had defined a proper standard for the transmission of multi-channel digital audio.

| IP: Logged

Josh Jones
Redhat

Posts: 1207
From: Plano, TX
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 06-29-2010 03:19 PM

quote: Stephen Furley
And I still think it's totally unnecessary. If all of the channels are going to and from the same place, e.g. digital server to processor, it could easily all go down a single strand of co-ax as a single bitstream. If only the AES had defined a proper standard for the transmission of multi-channel digital audio.

You have to keep in mind that when the current AES protocol was defined, around the time of digital mastering and recording I imagine, the most that was needed was two channels. Its also a well established standard, used in the fields of recording and broadcast, as well as film.

FWIW, using Beldin 9728 here.

JJ

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 06-29-2010 10:22 PM

quote: Josh Jones
FWIW, using Beldin 9728 here.

Ahhh...ignorance is bliss...I guess. 9728 is not proper AES cable. Instead of 110-Ohm, it is 100-Ohm. It also has the extra "joy" of having deal with the individual foils. There is also no overall shield

I'm curious as to its performance on longer runs though I don't doubt that it will do okay on shorter runs. It has to be better than what I see too much of...1510C...which is 4-pair analog snake...impedance is only 50-Ohms

I'll stick with the correct stuff...1803F but I'm looking into 7880A for 8 pair and 7890A for 4-pair to cut down on the size a bit. Most of our digital runs are 50-feet or less...at least it is 110-Ohm cable. I don't know if I would want to go over 100-feet with it.

Steve

| IP: Logged

Josh Jones
Redhat

Posts: 1207
From: Plano, TX
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 07-01-2010 12:20 PM

Interesting as that cable is listed as a digital audio snake. I can't find any info on any standard that uses 100 ohm interfaces. If it isn't a true digital cable, what would it be used for?

JJ

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-01-2010 08:01 PM

Yeah...it is odd...in the catalog it is listed as a digital audio snake (AES/EBU even) but in the actual spec sheet...it neither has the AES/EBU listing nor the traditional attenuation specs for 100-feet.

Steve

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.