rofl @ the buyers

It’s a pity a highly rated company like Denon has stooped to such lows.  Monster has been hawking it’s garbage on the unsuspecting but now we have Denon.  Really sad.

Dear Audio Evangelist,

I find it ironic that you label my computer-cable : Denon-cable analogy as “silly”, and you think a car analogy is not silly?

Let’s forget the analogies for a minute, and look at the Denon link. Either the Denon link works correctly with a standard CAT 5 cable, or it only works correctly with a $500 proprietary cable. If the former is true, then the proprietary cable is a waste of money. If the latter is true, then it is only true because Denon designed this proprietary interface so it would only work correctly with their proprietary cable, and they are charging $500 extra, after you have already bought all the Denon equipment, to get your suite of Denon equipment to talk to each other. In-other-words, for being a loyal Denon customer, they are taxing you $500.

Oh, BTW, to correct your understanding of computer hardware, there are no error-correcting algorithms in the vast majority of computer signals. TCP-IP protocol is an exception, because these signals travel for miles through thunderstorms, other servers, and whatever else. All the signals traveling around your computer, for instance from your hard drive to your motherboard, go through $2 cables without error, and the data rates are generally higher than Denon cable.

I am not completely familiar with Denon’s proprietary audio connection named the “Denon-Link”. Based off what people here are saying, it uses an Ethernet patch cable to transmit Hi-Rez audio from a source device to the pre/pro or AVR. To me this is a wonderful idea and I really wish the “Denon-Link” or something very similar would have been adopted by the entire A/V electronics industry.

Combining Hi-Rez audio and video into one cable was a HUGE mistake (HDMI) in my opinion. This has created many headaches for everyone from the engineers down to the end user. Great concept to progress beyond the analog Component Video and SPDIF digital audio connections but they should have still kept the audio and video signals separate.

They could have easily used an existing digital video connection technology, SDI. These connections are much better for long runs as well as easier for installers and DIYers to cut and terminate their own cables to length because it uses high quality coax cables with a BNC connector, both of which have been around for quite some time.

Then for our Hi-Rez audio, we have the “Denon-Link”. It uses existing cat-5 (or cat-5e?) cabling and there is more than enough bandwidth for its application. Again, easy to cut and terminate to length and been in use for years.

This is the opposite of HDMI which is much more difficult to terminate so must be done in a factory. It has also been proved to be unreliable on longer runs (along with a host of other compatibility issues and confusion).

I mean would it be SO bad to have two cable connections for each source device? One for audio and one for video. Of course not! I believe our A/V world would be a much easier and peaceful place for all parties involved had the industry gone a route similar to the one described.

Now I like some of Denon’s products and am not a “hater”. I do believe they make some over the top, outrageously priced products like this cable to cater to a certain customer base with deep pockets. They also make some more reasonably priced/strong performing gear as well. In fact, I own a Denon DVD-2910 that I still enjoy today.

Don’t hate Denon.  There are morons out there demanding this.  Don’t hate the player, hate the game.  Moster Audio is mostly at fault for making people thiink that certain cables make a difference.  Ok, hate the player if it’s MA.