I acquired this wisdom through reading the datasheet of that particular USB receiver. It stinks. USB audio in general stinks, unless you find a manufacturer that did their homework. USB typically requires you to slave to the computer clock, and very few devices actually sync up to a high-precision external master clock. Also see
http://www.diyhifi.org/forums/viewto...r=asc&start=30
for a thread that explores various receiver chips, and discusses the many problems with USB audio. The USB interface is not well-suited to audio compared to an internal soundcard. All of this rubbish about it being better is just that, rubbish. That said, I don't know what Emu is doing in their latest 24/192 devices, because I haven't looked into it yet.
That HeadRoom thing is basically an overpriced version of the $30 POS Behringer sells as the UCA202, if you're using the USB interface. Sure it, has some better parts, but gold plating on a turd still leaves you with a turb underneath.
Until manufacturers start publishing jitter specs for USB devices, you're just rolling the dice and gambling.. Note: I'm not blaming HeadRoom, or anyone else, I'm just saying that as long as they're using that receiver chip, they're producing a subpar product. I have no idea about their higher end stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnOYiN /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Where did you acquire this wisdom? As far as I know USB is better because of the digital path it follows from source to DAC. The latency which is causing jitter can be prevented using hardware buffers and setting it high enough. I am elaborating on this subject here. I don't know what technology Headroom is using to get the digital signal to the DAC. This might be the weak part in their set up. But, like I said, I would like to read an article about this. I am still willing to learn.
In the meantime I am voting for USB.
|
