[JaZZ]

I was perhaps not clear enough in the way I said it. The noise does not travel down the Toslink (optical) cable but can be created within the receiving equipment by the circuitry which converts the optical signal back into an electrical digital signal. I was told their are other issues which lead them to prefer USB over optical for ultimate performance. Innuos have therefore concentrated on designing servers with USB outputs with low levels of noise rather than using optical. Whilst their lower level servers do have a choice of outputs their top range ones (including the Statement) have USB only.

Some might say "well they would say that wouldn't they" but Innuos were adamant that they had decided to go the USB only route after comparing measurements with the optical option so this is not just a seat of the pants guesswork thing. It would be a trivial thing for them to include an optical output on all servers (after all they do it with their lower level ones) so it must be a deliberate decision rather than something else.

That seems to make (some) sense. Not sure if it's something everybody has to care about, though, considering that optical is the cheapest way of achieving a passably clean signal transfer. Also, the positive reports about Dan's OptoDX system (sorry to mention it!) indicate that the problem isn't of a worldshaking kind.

 

[audio_1]

Interesting.

There is also this thread which discusses the Chord Cable Company Sarum T digital Super Aray usb cable. The Signature aray cable is also mentioned.

www.head-fi.org/threads/the-chord-company-sarum-t-digital-super-aray-usb-cable.884705/

My 5 metre long SUPRA USB 2.0 Cable was also much smoother sounding than the USB cable that came supplied with the Blu2

 

[audio_1]

The Blu2 only has usb input.

It also has a BNC input. Originally it was only going to have the BNC input. Chord added the USB input at the last minute as it was requested by potential customers

 

[burbster]

I was perhaps not clear enough in the way I said it. The noise does not travel down the Toslink (optical) cable but can be created within the receiving equipment by the circuitry which converts the optical signal back into an electrical digital signal. I was told their are other issues which lead them to prefer USB over optical for ultimate performance. Innuos have therefore concentrated on designing servers with USB outputs with low levels of noise rather than using optical. Whilst their lower level servers do have a choice of outputs their top range ones (including the Statement) have USB only.

Some might say "well they would say that wouldn't they" but Innuos were adamant that they had decided to go the USB only route after comparing measurements with the optical option so this is not just a seat of the pants guesswork thing. It would be a trivial thing for them to include an optical output on all servers (after all they do it with their lower level ones) so it must be a deliberate decision rather than something else.

Just thought I would add that if you look at another high end audio server company, Aurender, (its in the write up on their website for their N10 model.) They state the exact opposite, they feel USB is a compromised interface and that is why all their servers come with all the SPDIF options as well, which they recommend you use over USB for a superior listening experience!! I must admit from my own experience I ditched USB (AQ Diamond) in favour of fibre, but I also admit I seem to be in a minority with this preference.

 

[burbster]

Feeding Blu Mk2 Clean Roon Data

I home demoed an Auralic Aries G1 connecting to my QNAP TS-473 running Roon server feeding my Blu to as a replacement for my Logitech Squeezebox.

Depending on perspective fortunately I heard no discernible improvement in sound quality, which was surprising as I heard a definite difference when I connected to my old Squeezebox, more body and musicality, or was that distortion. I expereienced something similar when I first upgraded to the Chord DAVE, and ran it in DAC mode through my Music First Audio Magnetic passive preamplifier.

For background I have extensive isolation of my system, ferrites on the dual BNC DAVE/Blu Mk2 connection, all plugged intot he Shunyata Research Denali 6000.

Has anyone tried the iFi iUSB3, https://ifi-audio.com/products/micro-iusb3-0/ infront of the Blu, as I can imagine all sorts of electromagnetic junk being pumped out of NAS and polluting the feed to the Blu?

I recently purchased a G1 as an upgrade from an Aries. I too was a little disappointed that I initially heard very little improvement. I then purchased a Melco N1A/2 but used this as the source via etherenet to the G1. I then heard a significant improvement over using my SSD NAS via the G1. The next thing I then tried was the Melco direct to the Mscaler, bypassing the G1 entirely and using the Melco as both source and streamer. Quality dropped off. So I guess what I am saying is that in my set up I found that my synology NAS must have been the limiting factor holding back the G1.

 

[Triode User]

It also has a BNC input. Originally it was only going to have the BNC input. Chord added the USB input at the last minute as it was requested by potential customers

Well corrected. i had forgotten about that.

 

[jonstatt]

I recently purchased a G1 as an upgrade from an Aries. I too was a little disappointed that I initially heard very little improvement. I then purchased a Melco N1A/2 but used this as the source via etherenet to the G1. I then heard a significant improvement over using my SSD NAS via the G1. The next thing I then tried was the Melco direct to the Mscaler, bypassing the G1 entirely and using the Melco as both source and streamer. Quality dropped off. So I guess what I am saying is that in my set up I found that my synology NAS must have been the limiting factor holding back the G1.

Only the G2 has galvanic isolation to its USB output which likely would have reduced/eliminated the negative effects from the NAS. Did you ever try the G2?

 

[burbster]

Only the G2 has galvanic isolation to its USB output which likely would have reduced/eliminated the negative effects from the NAS. Did you ever try the G2?

No I have not tried the G2. I probably should have but apart from the gorgeous one piece case, the only differences internally are the galvanic isolation on the USB and the anti vibration feet. My rationale (or excuse for being so tight!) was that I now only use an optical lead to the MScaler, which obviously provides total electrical isolation, and I bough some iso accoustic oreas to go underneath it.
Also, do you think that even if there was some form of noise pollution coming from the NAS via the ethernet connection into the G1, the fact that it was connected to a galvanically isolated USB port on the MScaler should have prevented it doing any harm anyway. Does doubling up on galvanic isolation at each end of the cable have a cumulative effect?

 

[watermad]

I recently purchased a G1 as an upgrade from an Aries. I too was a little disappointed that I initially heard very little improvement. I then purchased a Melco N1A/2 but used this as the source via etherenet to the G1. I then heard a significant improvement over using my SSD NAS via the G1. The next thing I then tried was the Melco direct to the Mscaler, bypassing the G1 entirely and using the Melco as both source and streamer. Quality dropped off. So I guess what I am saying is that in my set up I found that my synology NAS must have been the limiting factor holding back the G1.

Thanks for the feedback, however I have come to a different conclusion than yourself.

The G1 would appear to be sensitive to the data feed/noise? The whole point of having my data on a NAS and I do mean data, e.g. PC back-up, movies and music is that it is a centalised and backed up secure repository of all my data. I monthly backu-up my data whic is on a RAID configuration to an external back-up drive, you cannot have too many frequent back-ups

Your findings correlate with mine regaridng the music playback with the G1, I guess it take it out of the running, as I am not about to introduce an additional box into my system for music data and thus will look for a more data insensitive streamer.

 

[HeeBroG]

I have Blu2 connected via BNC to DAVE inputs 3 and 4.
When I switch input via remote to BNC 3 I get the DBNC3 705.6/768kHz which I assume is full upscaling.
When I switch to BNC 4 I get BNC4 352.8/384kHz depending on the recording. I assume this is partial upscaling.
Is this similar to "pass-through" and various other modes on the stand alone M-Scaler?
Just curious to see if Blu2 owners have an easy way of demonstrating the M-scaler effect.
Just surprised to read several people reporting not hearing much difference with M-scaler on the other thread.

G

 

[6aardvark9]

I have Blu2 connected via BNC to DAVE inputs 3 and 4.
When I switch input via remote to BNC 3 I get the DBNC3 705.6/768kHz which I assume is full upscaling.
When I switch to BNC 4 I get BNC4 352.8/384kHz depending on the recording. I assume this is partial upscaling.
Is this similar to "pass-through" and various other modes on the stand alone M-Scaler?
Just curious to see if Blu2 owners have an easy way of demonstrating the M-scaler effect.
Just surprised to read several people reporting not hearing much difference with M-scaler on the other thread.

G

As I understand it, selecting BNC3 when dual wired between Blu2 and Dave will enable data transfer using both cables... if you select BNC4, only one cable will actively transfer data, limiting the transfer rate by 50%

 

[HeeBroG]

Even with 50% transfer rate, which upscales 16/44.1kHz to 352.8kHz, it sounds "broken" compared to full upscaling.
Unless this configuration does something else to the bit-stream that is not supposed to be activated.
I can't believe I used to enjoy DAVE without M-scaling!

 

[JaZZ]

When I switch to BNC 4 I get BNC4 352.8/384kHz depending on the recording. I assume this is partial upscaling.
Is this similar to "pass-through" and various other modes on the stand alone M-Scaler?

Even with 50% transfer rate, which upscales 16/44.1kHz to 352.8kHz, it sounds "broken" compared to full upscaling.
Unless this configuration does something else to the bit-stream that is not supposed to be activated.
I can't believe I used to enjoy DAVE without M-scaling!

With input 4 the sound from my Hugo M Scaler is mono. Maybe that's the reason for the «broken sound»?

 

[HeeBroG]

That makes more sense as I don’t remember DAVE sounding so bad.
I suppose there is no quick switch option for Blu2 then.
Have to unplug USB from Blu2 and connect to Dave and switch the input to USB.

 

[nomad777]

I have Blu2 connected via BNC to DAVE inputs 3 and 4.
When I switch input via remote to BNC 3 I get the DBNC3 705.6/768kHz which I assume is full upscaling.
When I switch to BNC 4 I get BNC4 352.8/384kHz depending on the recording. I assume this is partial upscaling.
Is this similar to "pass-through" and various other modes on the stand alone M-Scaler?
Just curious to see if Blu2 owners have an easy way of demonstrating the M-scaler effect.
Just surprised to read several people reporting not hearing much difference with M-scaler on the other thread.

G

The Mscaler does sound better. I have owned both the mk2 blu and mscaler..... I got rid of the blu2 and now have the mscaler... in the mscaler thread you will see Rob Watts himself saying the sound quality of the m scaler is better as it has galvanic isolation built in to the bnc's and usb