CHORD ELECTRONICS DAVE
Feb 4, 2021 at 11:20 PM Post #16,669 of 18,194

ra990

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Posts
1,503
Likes
2,057
Location
Virginia, USA
Feb 4, 2021 at 11:51 PM Post #16,671 of 18,194

sm60

Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 14, 2020
Posts
86
Likes
161
Location
Morgan Hill California
On a dac of this caliber.
Is usb or optical better in sound quality fed from laptop?
I would never use the optical TOSLINK connection as it is inherently flawed at transmission of high Rez content above 24-bit 96khz. For 192khz and DSD content USB is far more reliable. If you are only transmitting 44.1khz 16 bit content then optical TOSLINK connection is fine. Note I’m referring primarily to the TOSLINK connector not to any inherent limitations of optical connections. Matter of fact, optical connections can reliably transmit very high resolution information over great distances, e.g., optical fiber can transmit terabytes per second across oceans. But this uses far more sophisticated cabling than the cheap TOSLINK cable.
 
Last edited:
Feb 4, 2021 at 11:52 PM Post #16,672 of 18,194

InstantSilence

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 1, 2020
Posts
1,139
Likes
512
Location
usa
I would never use the optical TOSLINK connection as it is inherently flawed at transmission of high Rez content above 24-bit 96khz. For 192khz and DSD content USB is far more reliable. If you are only transmitting 44.1khz 16 bit content then optical TOSLINK connection is fine. Note I’m referring primarily to the TOSLINK connector not to any inherent limitations of optical connections. Matter of fact, optical connections can reliably transmit very high resolution information over great distances, e.g., optical fiber can transmit terabytes oer second across oceans. But this uses far more sophisticated cabling than the cheap TOSLINK cable.
So one cannot upsample the 44khz files to 192khz?
 
Feb 5, 2021 at 7:34 AM Post #16,673 of 18,194

Jawed

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Posts
855
Likes
367
So one cannot upsample the 44khz files to 192khz?
If you do that, don't bother with a Chord DAC.

A good optical cable works fine at 192KHz, but I don't think DSD can be transmitted from a computer over optical, so you would be forced to use USB in that case.

Optical is the reference for sound quality with Chord DACs as RF noise transmitted via electrical cables is the biggest problem when connecting any DAC, not just a Chord DAC.

EDIT: Oh, and when you are comparing the sound quality of optical and USB, the optical cable must be the only cable connected to the DAC. If USB is also connected, then the RF noise will infect the sound quality of the optical connection.
 
Last edited:
Feb 5, 2021 at 8:34 AM Post #16,675 of 18,194

Progisus

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 28, 2018
Posts
1,333
Likes
1,401
Location
Canada
If you do that, don't bother with a Chord DAC.

A good optical cable works fine at 192KHz, but I don't think DSD can be transmitted from a computer over optical, so you would be forced to use USB in that case.

Optical is the reference for sound quality with Chord DACs as RF noise transmitted via electrical cables is the biggest problem when connecting any DAC, not just a Chord DAC.

EDIT: Oh, and when you are comparing the sound quality of optical and USB, the optical cable must be the only cable connected to the DAC. If USB is also connected, then the RF noise will infect the sound quality of the optical connection.
Are not Chord TT, Dave usb galvanically isolated?
 
Feb 5, 2021 at 9:20 AM Post #16,676 of 18,194

Jawed

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Posts
855
Likes
367
Are not Chord TT, Dave usb galvanically isolated?
Yes. But galvanic isolation is far from perfect - small amounts of noise leak through regardless.
 
Feb 5, 2021 at 9:47 AM Post #16,677 of 18,194

118900

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Posts
1,016
Likes
886
Yes. But galvanic isolation is far from perfect - small amounts of noise leak through regardless.
I don’t think that offsets the problems optical has in converting the electrical signal to optical and vice versa. I’m pretty sure from what I have read that optical is far from being the optimal solution but to each their own.
 
Feb 5, 2021 at 9:55 AM Post #16,678 of 18,194

Progisus

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 28, 2018
Posts
1,333
Likes
1,401
Location
Canada
I don’t feel the minute possibility of some noise jumping the Chord isolation is anything to be concerned with. Now the digital to optical conversion at the transmitter is another thing. Chord’s handling of the conversion at the receiving end is exemplary.
 
Feb 5, 2021 at 10:15 AM Post #16,680 of 18,194

GreenBow

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Feb 6, 2015
Posts
4,099
Likes
1,510
Are not Chord TT, Dave usb galvanically isolated?

Yes. But galvanic isolation is far from perfect - small amounts of noise leak through regardless.


Galvanic isolation is to prevent current flow between devices with different ground planes. It can enter a device on any ground linked connection. Like RCA or coaxial.

The noise that travels from USB is noise along the power rails from e.g. a laptop or PC. The simple solution to effectively almost completely curing that noise is the Audioquest Jitterbug. Some don't like the Jitterbug or believe it works, but it makes USB sound like optical. (Optical being reference.) If you search Head-Fi, you will find Rob Watts take on the Jitterbug. He effectively endorsed it.

I noticed the effect of the Jitterbug with the Chord Mojo, which doesn't have a noise filtered USB input. It was immediate.

The Hugo 2, Qutest, and TT2 have incorporated that sort of USB noise filtration. Meaning you don't need the Jitterbug with those DACs. (I leave a Jitterbug on with those DACs though, because I am a plant.) I don't know if the DAVE USB input is filtered.

EDIT: I think this is the right explanation. (99% sure.) However do your own reading on it, if you want to be sure.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top