Originally Posted by Akathriel
Considering that you don't know what i2s is, I am not surprised you havn't seen evidence its a superior technology.
Still, I'd appreciate your saving the sarcasm and simply providing a link to a reasoned argument. . I'd also like to know what products are commercially available that incorporate this technology. I have heard, I believe, mention of rewiring or customizing DACs (or input devices?) to incorporate i2s. I also recall seeing at least one post arguing that it was either unnecessary, or not great. It would be nice if I could just admit to needing information and then just receiving it?
|Which group argues that I2s is superior? The engineers.
Really. "The" engineers?
No dissent? No differing opinions? Great, then actually providing a link to some information should be easy. So Apogee, benchmark, ManleyLabs and anyone else who manufacturers DACS would agree? And that agreement would be that the transport should connect to the DAC with this technology, or that DACS should use it internally?
I may be confused. Why would this only work with a redbook CD player (by the way, do all high end CD players do this?) and not with a computer based system? There are plenty of stand alone CD transports, what output(s) do they generally provide? Isn't coax popular? Toslink? If it is superior technology, is there a reason I2s couldn't be incorporated into a computer based system?
Originally Posted by Akathriel
Oh wouldn't that be wonderful! Then we would not need expensive transports or digital cables.
Yes, it would be wonderful. Isn't that the question? Gosh, all those makers of $4000 and up CD units, losing sales and being replaced by equipment we already have. One hard drive sending five different songs to five different rooms. Very sad.
|Every DAC that you input with spdif or aes/ebu or usb, converts to I2s. I2s is the native interface of DACs, and subsequently has far lower jitter than SPDIF. THe worst digital inputs are USB-SPDIF-I2s, found in most usb dacs, although a trend has started to introduce USb-i2s converters into dacs without spdif in the middle. Far better than the former but it ain't clean i2s. So what's wrong with USB...?
So, accepting that it is the native interface, again I ask, do stand alone transports generally use i2s in their outputs?
I actually agree on USB. It doesn't sound as good to me The folks at Benchmark would agree. They don't seem to have the same problem with Toslink or Coax connectors. I use glass, but they argue that plastic is fine, and that either the connection works or it doesn't. But are we talking about USB or any computer based systems?
By the way, is the USB-SPIDF-I2s the system that Bel Canto is putting on the DAC-3? If so, what do you think?
As I said, I looking for information. It does seem to me that every time someone asks if using a hard drive and a distribution system is as good as a CD transport, the discussion gets hot. All I asked for was an explanation but it seems like someone's sacred cow is getting gored. I just want to hear both sides. I have no desire to spend megabucks on an unnecessary (doesn't change the sound) component if I don't need to. By the way, you don't have to be an engineeer to know what jitter is.
|And yes I'm well aware you can organize albums on hard drive but if music continues to be distributed throughout the internet, I'm afraid the concept of albums will dissappear w/o a physical need for it. Besides singles are more profitable
I'm glad you are well aware of the organizational capabilities of the computer.
Based on your post, I hadn't realized.
While I'm not an engineer, I do know quite a bit about the record, music publishing and movie businesses, and their history. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to let me share a few thoughts both specific to the business and general?
The concept of "Album" is derived from how much would fit on a particular distribution medium, and not, initially, on some artistic judgment. Before records, music was mainly sold in sheet form, composition by composition, (or sometines as compilations). This applies to both vinyl and CD. There is nothing necessarily "special" about the format in terms of art. At least one could argue that vinyl came close to reaching the limits of its technology, where digital is clearly not there yet.
The economics of singles versus "multiples" is a bit more complex. I don't want to argue about profitibility, but I would suggest you consider the following:
1)With CDs or Vinyl, the cost of raw materials, pressing, marketing and distribution of singles is not significantly lower than it is for albums. They are attractive to some buyers because they are cheaper, or because the buyer only wants one song, or with 45s because they were ideal for dancing and for small players. There was far more money to be made with albums.
2)Making a single recording is always equally or more expensive , on a per song basis, than making an album (or recording a number of songs). Once you have assembled all of your material and human recourses, it makes sense to keep them working. This won't change because of the internet.
3)The artists, publishers, composers, authors (lyrics) and record companies make far more with albums than singles. All the parties make money by the song. Albums have more songs.
As for the internet, it should turn out to be an ideal distribution method providing that the bandwidth becomes available to allow downloading of uncompressed (let's leave the lossless argument for someone else) media. It can't do that now.
I'm sorry if you worry about losing the "concept" of Albums. We all have our little habits and our little collections. OCD is a real issue in these times of stress.
But, the world tends to get what it asks for, and it isn't going to be CDs forever. Frankly, album cover "art" doesn't mean very much to me, but I respect your right to your own preferences. Sound quality being equal, I'll take convenience and the ability to assemble my own collections. I'm always happy to substitute my judgment for that of some marketing person, or even the performers, when my preferences are involved.