[nsk1]

Tell me name of the motherboard, what PSU do you have and do you need upsampling, and also what is you DAC?

 

[J@CKY]

Quote:

Tell me name of the motherboard, what PSU do you have and do you need upsampling, and also what is you DAC?

My MB is not from big manufacturer like ASUS.  It's a Taiwanese brand, model MP-A3GM-GT3
 
http://www.magic-pro.com/product/socketAM3/A3GM-GT3.htm (in Chinese)
 
I dun have any audio use PSU or DAC.
 
My question is as follow if I didn't make it clear enough.
 
Are there any difference in sound quality if rigs are connect the following ways?
1.  Desktop computer ► USB to S/PDIF converter (no brand, cheap one, or on-board sound card with S/PDIF out) ► DAC ► Head-Amp ► Headphone
 
2.  Desktop computer ► costly USB to S/PDIF converter (say M2tech hiFACE) ► DAC ► Head-amp ► Headphone.
 
Assumptions:
1. same track of music being played in both cases (say 24b/48k)
2. the cheap USB to S/PDIF converter support the sampling rate and depth of the music being played without upsampling. (i.e. native 24b/48k in this example)
3. DAC, Head-amp and headphone are the same in both cases.
 
 

 

[nsk1]

I would say it mostly depends on what kind of s/pdif receiver you have in your DAC. But in my opinion don't buy converter if you do have desktop computer. 

 

[J@CKY]

My on-board sound card already got S/PDIF out, so I do not need a converter.  
 
I am only interested in how to justify the price difference among those USD to S/PDIF converters... as you said, the SQ should be determine by the component in the DAC, theoretically.  So what is the extra money buying from those high priced converters? (e.g. M2tech hiFACE, or Firestone-Audio's Bravo?)

 

[upstateguy]

Quote:

<snip>  
Are there any difference in sound quality if rigs are connect the following ways?
1.  Desktop computer ► USB to S/PDIF converter (no brand, cheap one, or on-board sound card with S/PDIF out) ► DAC ► Head-Amp ► Headphone
 
2.  Desktop computer ► costly USB to S/PDIF converter (say M2tech hiFACE) ► DAC ► Head-amp ► Headphone.
 
Assumptions:
1. same track of music being played in both cases (say 24b/48k)
2. the cheap USB to S/PDIF converter support the sampling rate and depth of the music being played without upsampling. (i.e. native 24b/48k in this example)
3. DAC, Head-amp and headphone are the same in both cases.
 
 

I like to know the answer to this also. 
 
My Dell laptop has coax out through what looks like the S-Video connection.  It sounds the same as USB to my Blue Circle Thingee transport (PCM2707), but my USB HiFace transport sounds noticeably cleaner and is currently the preferred way to get music out of that laptop.
 
Opinions?
 

 

[nsk1]

It is very simple. If if would have laptop/netbook I would make sure that I was using converter. You have pretty poor coax output from the laptop if it is the same as USB and that USB chip isn't good anymore. If you use converter the signal goes through better USB chip + S/PDIF receiver from DAC.
 

 

[Happy Camper]

The converter sounds noticeably better to my dac than the optical out on a laptop designed for multi-media. Both sound better than the RCA outs of the docking station. Computers are multitasking machines that gives a taste of everything but nothing perfect.

 

[J@CKY]

Quote:

The converter sounds noticeably better to my dac than the optical out on a laptop designed for multi-media. Both sound better than the RCA outs of the docking station. Computers are multitasking machines that gives a taste of everything but nothing perfect.

Thanks for telling me the fact.
 
So what's the science behind it?  My impression was that the built-in digital converter (i.e. built-in or on-board S/PDIF out) should deliver somewhat the same result as any other external converter (e.g. hiFACE or whatever it is) because in both case it should be simply converting 1010 digital signals to another interface only, theoretically there should not have any data lost.  But apparently, there must be something more than that behind it as many of the above replies has stated that there IS in fact some difference in terms of SQ.  So, could someone please kindly explain?  I have seen enough examples saying that external is better than built in one.  But WHY? 
 
Cheers
J@CKY
 

 

[Happy Camper]

Sorry to not put IMO in my statement. Fact is based on proof, I've made my statement based on my/me/mine.

 

[J@CKY]

Sorry to not put IMO in my statement. Fact is based on proof, I've made my statement based on my/me/mine.

Sorry mate, didn't mean it that way.

I Understand what u said and take yr point. I just try to understand the science behind. May be I had something fundamentally wrong in my concept.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

........
 
My question is as follow if I didn't make it clear enough.
 
Are there any difference in sound quality if rigs are connect the following ways?
1.  Desktop computer ► USB to S/PDIF converter (no brand, cheap one, or on-board sound card with S/PDIF out) ► DAC ► Head-Amp ► Headphone
 
2.  Desktop computer ► costly USB to S/PDIF converter (say M2tech hiFACE) ► DAC ► Head-amp ► Headphone.
 
Assumptions:
1. same track of music being played in both cases (say 24b/48k)
2. the cheap USB to S/PDIF converter support the sampling rate and depth of the music being played without upsampling. (i.e. native 24b/48k in this example)
3. DAC, Head-amp and headphone are the same in both cases.
 
 

I would say no because
 
 - I have yet to see any evidence based on repeatable experiments that show how music when it is a digital signal of 1s, 0s and a means to time the signal can vary sound quality.
 
 - I have instead read a lot of psuedoscience which suggests such, but cannot explain how it works, which makes me suspicious.
 
 - my own experience of various different computers as sources which have made no difference to sound quality.
 
 - evidence shown by Ethan Winer and others at an AES workshop, where the likes of noise are introduced to tracks and then reduced in vloume to what any well implemented digital source does easily, showing that such is inaudible.
 
 -  evidence from jitter comparison tests on the HDD forum, where again any well made digital source has jitter at levels of inaudiblity.
 
 - blind testing of digital components has found no correlation between product and performance, which suggests image, price etc play a part in sound quality.
 
 - ABX testing of digital components finds no difference between them.
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

[Happy Camper]

I have a universal player as a meet source.(maybe $200) I was trying some 701s vs 702s on the same gear. When we put the player through my DAC, the sound was better to all listening to the comparisons. If digital is the same, why so many stand alone DACs and soundcards on the market? The analog output implementation will have an impact on the sonic characteristics. So will the filtering, power supply used, quality of components, materials etc. It isn't about the 1s & 0s, it's about how it's produced to the amp. Cheaper circuits will have a bad sound compared to well designed, quality outputs.

 

[J@CKY]

Quote:

I have a universal player as a meet source.(maybe $200) I was trying some 701s vs 702s on the same gear. When we put the player through my DAC, the sound was better to all listening to the comparisons. If digital is the same, why so many stand alone DACs and soundcards on the market? The analog output implementation will have an impact on the sonic characteristics. So will the filtering, power supply used, quality of components, materials etc. It isn't about the 1s & 0s, it's about how it's produced to the amp. Cheaper circuits will have a bad sound compared to well designed, quality outputs.

Mate, I think you have misunderstood my question.
 
I understand why and believe that better DACs and better standalone sound card could product better sound quality.  The example you used is entirely different matter that I am raising up here. 
 
My concern is the lying in the digital signal before going into the DAC/standalone soundcard.  The digital converters that convert 1s & 0s output from USB or whatever interface to another DIGITAL output, such as optical output (which is another 1s & 0s, not analog)
 

 

[Willakan]

There isn't a whole lot of science behind a lot of claims for digital sources and how they improve audio.
Jitter is a pretty big red herring. No semi-competent piece of digital gear (incompetent gear including pieces such as certain Nuforce CD players and the HifiMan DAPs) has anything approaching amounts of jitter that should be audible. Besides, as mentioned earlier DACs use all kinds of tricks to "dispose" of jitter anyway.
Aside from that, there isn't a huge amount to get wrong with digital transmission - assuming there is not such a problem with the signal, from either the digital source or originating during transmission, that the receiver cannot actually reconstruct data with any certainty (which would involve truly terribly designed equipment or cables that don't come within a thousand miles of the relevant specification).
The only other thing I can think of that might occasionally be useful is galvanic isolation - achieved with fibre-optic connections as opposed to standard coax (glass obviously being not known for its conductive properties)

 

[upstateguy]

Quote:

I have a universal player as a meet source.(maybe $200) I was trying some 701s vs 702s on the same gear. When we put the player through my DAC, the sound was better to all listening to the comparisons. If digital is the same, why so many stand alone DACs and soundcards on the market? The analog output implementation will have an impact on the sonic characteristics. So will the filtering, power supply used, quality of components, materials etc. It isn't about the 1s & 0s, it's about how it's produced to the amp. Cheaper circuits will have a bad sound compared to well designed, quality output

 
Quote:

Mate, I think you have misunderstood my question.
 
I understand why and believe that better DACs and better standalone sound card could product better sound quality.  The example you used is entirely different matter that I am raising up here. 
 
My concern is the lying in the digital signal before going into the DAC/standalone soundcard.  The digital converters that convert 1s & 0s output from USB or whatever interface to another DIGITAL output, such as optical output (which is another 1s & 0s, not analog)
 

 
Quote:

There isn't a whole lot of science behind a lot of claims for digital sources and how they improve audio.
Jitter is a pretty big red herring. No semi-competent piece of digital gear (incompetent gear including pieces such as certain Nuforce CD players and the HifiMan DAPs) has anything approaching amounts of jitter that should be audible. Besides, as mentioned earlier DACs use all kinds of tricks to "dispose" of jitter anyway.
Aside from that, there isn't a huge amount to get wrong with digital transmission - assuming there is not such a problem with the signal, from either the digital source or originating during transmission, that the receiver cannot actually reconstruct data with any certainty (which would involve truly terribly designed equipment or cables that don't come within a thousand miles of the relevant specification).
The only other thing I can think of that might occasionally be useful is galvanic isolation - achieved with fibre-optic connections as opposed to standard coax (glass obviously being not known for its conductive properties)

 
I can only report these anecdotes.
 
The C-media usb transport integrated into my Constantine+ is noticeably inferior to optical from my dedicated music computer.
 
The USB, Blue Thingee Transport (PCM2707), using either the optical (for isolation) or coaxial outputs sounds like the optical input from the music computer.
 
My Stello DA100 uses a PMC2707 implementation for USB transport but sounds noticeably leaner than the PMC2707 implementation in the BCT, and again, the Thingee manages to sound indistinguishable from optical out of the music computer.
 
The HiFace USB transport sounds noticeably cleaner than the other digital converters. 
 
It is also worthwhile to mention that the stock HiFace doesn't play well with upsampling DACs.