USB Coax Converter

One would think that introducing a convert would be simply one more thing in the way of the signal. But maybe the converter could help to block out some computer generated noise the coax is unable to do by itself.

If the quality of the coax output of the board is poor (more than likely) and you have a good DAC, then it can make an improvement.  Rather than use USB to coax if you get the DI though, try coax to coax.

USB is supposedly very poor too.  The idea of using something like the DI is that it rectifies this.

You'll have to spend a lot of money to get a good USB-SPDIF converter. If your motherboard coax is not good, why not buy a good PCI card to use for coax or TOS-link? Any of the pci cards with Envy24 audio chip and good clocks will work well, and you should be able to find one for cheap.

Don't waste your money mate.

 

Why go USB > S/PDIF, co-ax > S/PDIF or even co-ax > co-ax when for the same cash you can buy an excellent stand alone, semi pro audio interface using Firewire or USB 2.0? Look at products from the Focusrite (Sapphire 6 is excellent and inexpensive), TC-Konnect or  MOTU ranges. RME is the best if you can afford it. Even M-Audio make some decent stuff if you are really skint.

 

The reason the 'S/PDIF is better than USB' meme got started was because the first generation audiophile grade DACs had poor clocks and even worse USB. Good USB 2.0 and DAC chips were more expensive than the audiophile equivalents and required software. The audio pro community is served by companies that need to write software so it's a breeze for them to do consumer grade stuff cheap now because they did all the R&D and got their money back already.

 

Really! Don't spend $150 dollars now simply to extend the life of your old DAC when for very little more you can get something much superior to both and also get some extra facilities free. Once you have experienced multi channel audio in and out you will not want to be without again.   

 

Fair enough. You seem to know what you want.

 

In order to provide clarification for the benefit of anyone else reading this thread.

 

 

 

 

That wasn't what i meant I'm afraid. I don't use surround sound myself except sometimes with games. Perhaps I should have said multi program rather than multi channel. For example you can stream high quality audio, in stereo, to your hi-fi and simultaneously be browsing youtube or talking to your friends using a headse on another stereo channel pair. Or be having a party sound tracked by a Spotify playlist and cue up tracks to add on headphonres, Or stream Radio 4 via iPlayer to the kitchen, watch telly in another and play a game at your desk. The possibilities are endless and whilst it may seem esoteric at first I found it became very useful very fast.

 

 

 

Well that is a little odd. An ideal DAC should be transparent. You shouldn't know it's there. So if you can easily distinguish one from another at least one of them is poor.  Audio-GD specialises in DACs ranges which are distinguished by their colouration. 'warm', 'musical', 'detailed' 'analogue sounding' etc, etc  If that's what you want then fine but you might be better advised to buy a transparent DAC and add EQ as a separate (and optional) step.

 

Finally. You may well be aware of this but other readers may not. When you use any form of S/PDIF container to route audio you are including the timing data in with the signal. That's why Firewire or USB are superior. It obviously makes sense to buffer the data then reclock and DAC it in one place rather than clock on your PC and DAC somewhere else. By not using the clock on your DAC you are acknowledging that the clock on the DAC is inferior to the one on your mobo (or a gadget like the Hi-Face. If the clocks no good why trust the DAC implementation?

 

Anyway. Best of luck with whatever you decide. I hope this information proves to be of use to someone if not yourself on this occasion.

Maybe I also have "defective hearing" but I agree with the above, my old DAC also destroys new ones I tried in the same price range (mind you, I got it for a very good price). My amp is cheap but it still made all the difference. So yes, now I say source is everything, although headphones do matter a lot too.

 

Next week I am supposedly getting a HiFace USB coax converter for test so I can tell how it sounds in comparison with an old Philips transport, I might be surprised if the $50 CD player sounds better as a transport.

Edited by padam - 11/8/10 at 5:05am

It might be worth your while to read through this page...

 

Actually, lack of colouration. Ignoring the low-end gear, the DACs are just listed as "neutral" and "musical" on their web site, which is the designers perception of the very slight differences the amplification circuits used have on the sound, that part of a DAC having the most effect.   I guess you've mis-perceived what this refers to as it's not common for a manufacturer to point out even the subtly audible effects of their design decisions in their literature.  How this relates to the Digital Interface -- I haven't noticed any change in tone using it between a transport and DAC, which is certainly something that I wouldn't agree with. 
 

Since you're not far away, want to borrow my DI? That would save you having to take a chance and would only cost you a bit in postage.

Seems to me the new Creative Sound Blaster X-FI HD is the interface folks have been waiting for.

sterling1: Not here they haven't.