[It Hz]

I want to connect the USB cable from my Burson Playmate 2 which has a USB C input directly to an internal USB on the Motherboard

There is no USB C connector anywhere on this MB, it only has headers and that funny looking USB type E connector which the manual calls "USB Type-C Header with USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Support" which is a bit confusing.

From what I've seen I have (2) options

This (USB type E)

Or this

The type E connection would be a cleaner install for me than the header but I'm a little nervous as I don't want to blow-up and expensive MB or the DAC if they aren't wired correctly

Does anyone have an experience with either type of connector who can give me some advice?

 

[castleofargh]

Just use a USB A to C cable(the most common USB cables nowadays). It looks like that on the A side and you surely have some of those ports on your PC.

 

[OCC7N]

What does this(attachmen) even mean? They dont list anything on bus speed.

Wow. This I have never seen before. Every company I have looked for either specifies USB 2.0 or higher. My soundcard also has USB C “FORM-FACTOR” but it is running at 2.0

Im guessing strongly on what @castleofargh told you. Get a USB A to C.

 

[neyurt]

Just use a USB A to C cable(the most common USB cables nowadays). It looks like that on the A side and you surely have some of those ports on your PC.

Yeah, I think this is also fine and the easiest. Don't believe you get any extra fidelity or jitter/noise rejection from going usb-c <-> usb3 etcs. Good dac on usb2 input should reject noise/jitter just fine.

 

[It Hz]

Just use a USB A to C cable(the most common USB cables nowadays). It looks like that on the A side and you surely have some of those ports on your PC.

My apologies for the late response

The problem is I need an internal connection to the computer rig. If not, I have to cut hole in the real panel and route the cable outside the chassis where it needs to make a U-turn and to plug into the I/O panel on the back of the motherboard which would be somewhat "kludgy"

 

[It Hz]

Yeah, I think this is also fine and the easiest. Don't believe you get any extra fidelity or jitter/noise rejection from going usb-c <-> usb3 etcs. Good dac on usb2 input should reject noise/jitter just fine.

I actually prefer the USB 3.1 which is a 10Mb connection due to the higher data rate and lower noise. "Overkill"? ........ perhaps. But I went through a lot of trouble optimizing the audio and don't want to cut corners on a $15 cable. I ordered the USB type E to type C adapter cable pictured above which is the "cleanest" solution. The company states it fully conforms to the USB 3.1 standards, but I want to confirm the pinout before plugging it into a very expensive MB and DAC. I asked the vendor to send me a schematic of the cable wiring, but they did not respond. I will need to get a breakout board for both ends so I can "buzz it out" to confirm the connections are correct.

 

[m-i-c-k-e-y]

- You can also buy a HUB extention. A powered HUB. And later, if allows, feed it with cleaner power.
- If your M/B has a Toslink output you could also go that route. Provided your materials are not above 24/192.
- If your M/B doesn't have a Toslink connection and your music files does not go beyond 24/192, I do advice to go to Toslink insted. Much cleaner sounding.
Invest on a USB to Toslink converter. Does not cost much.

 

[It Hz]

- You can also buy a HUB extention. A powered HUB. And later, if allows, feed it with cleaner power.
- If your M/B has a Toslink output you could also go that route. Provided your materials are not above 24/192.
- If your M/B doesn't have a Toslink connection and your music files does not go beyond 24/192, I do advice to go to Toslink insted. Much cleaner sounding.
Invest on a USB to Toslink converter. Does not cost much.

Same issue. The Toslink connection is located on the I/O panel outside the chassis

I'm not 100% certain, but my understanding is the USB C is a better connection compared to Toslink for audio. Perhaps someone can chime in and confirm or deny that claim. Personally I don't see many people using it

 

[m-i-c-k-e-y]

IME, that is not the case. You see USB cables has two big draw backs 1. wired - susceptible to EMI/RFI noise 2. carries power - electrical noise. Going optical wiill curb down/eliminate those things while your data travels on the cable. But also it depends on implimentation (the chips). However I have better experiences w/ Toslink SPDIF/AES-EBU SQ wise.

Drawback is they can go only at a certain bit rate and depth. If it does not bother you, I do suggest to try to experiment w/ your ears and not only follow what you read/believe. A Toslink cable does not cost much.

 

[It Hz]

IME, that is not the case. You see USB cables has two big draw backs 1. wired - susceptible to EMI/RFI noise 2. carries power - electrical noise. Going optical wiill curb down/eliminate those things while your data travels on the cable. But also it depends on implimentation (the chips). However I have better experiences w/ Toslink SPDIF/AES-EBU SQ wise.

Drawback is they can go only at a certain bit rate and depth. If it does not bother you, I do suggest to try to experiment w/ your ears and not only follow what you read/believe. A Toslink cable does not cost much.

Agree

As a person who has worked with fiberoptic communication equipment for 40 years you would think that would be the case. The real downside to fiber is its fragility but other than that it's the best method for signal transmission. You would think it would be utilized more often but apparently it has issues. I think I'm going to stick with the internal connection. The good thing is it's a digital connection, so EMI is not as much of an issue

 

[Ghoostknight]

i tried this a while back with a internal usb 2.0 connector and it worked just fine, tho for convenience and cleaner install i would get a header panel like this one: https://www.reichelt.de/slotblech-usb-3-0-intern-2x-usb-3-0-a-extern-delock-84836-p182361.html

you can also use something like this: https://www.amazon.de/Akasa-USB3-0-internal-adapter-cable-schwarz/dp/B005LDY0SO

the usb E ones i couldnt find tho

generally i would say there is no problem with using the internal usb connectors, but i wouldnt get my hopes up that 3.2 sounds better since usb 3.0/3.2 hubs just use the 2.0 datalines if the device just supports 2.0, i think it has more todo with the usb hub chip itself than the 3.2 standard

personally i found that each and every usb hub has some influence on SQ (just like usb cables) the difference is small but its there

Edit: https://www.amazon.de/AKasa-ak-cbub37-CBSA05-50BK-3-1-Gen2-10-Gbit-interner-Adapter/dp/B07F233Q6Z/

i wouldnt worry with pinout from these cables, either usb 3.1 works or it doesnt the wiring setup is quite straightforward and i expect the internal connectors to comply with some kind of standard about it

 

[It Hz]

i tried this a while back with a internal usb 2.0 connector and it worked just fine, tho for convenience and cleaner install i would get a header panel like this one: https://www.reichelt.de/slotblech-usb-3-0-intern-2x-usb-3-0-a-extern-delock-84836-p182361.html

you can also use something like this: https://www.amazon.de/Akasa-USB3-0-internal-adapter-cable-schwarz/dp/B005LDY0SO

the usb E ones i couldnt find tho

generally i would say there is no problem with using the internal usb connectors, but i wouldnt get my hopes up that 3.2 sounds better since usb 3.0/3.2 hubs just use the 2.0 datalines if the device just supports 2.0, i think it has more todo with the usb hub chip itself than the 3.2 standard

personally i found that each and every usb hub has some influence on SQ (just like usb cables) the difference is small but its there

Edit: https://www.amazon.de/AKasa-ak-cbub37-CBSA05-50BK-3-1-Gen2-10-Gbit-interner-Adapter/dp/B07F233Q6Z/

i wouldnt worry with pinout from these cables, either usb 3.1 works or it doesnt the wiring setup is quite straightforward and i expect the internal connectors to comply with some kind of standard about it

Thanks for the input. Unfortunately, none of those items linked will work for me

Here is what I have on order

I bought it off Aliexpress

https://www.aliexpress.us/item/2255...2wf1x85&gatewayAdapt=glo2usa&_randl_shipto=US

This is the cleanest solution for an internal connection between the MB and the DAC. It was very hard finding this cable (they also have a right angle version at the Type E end)

My concern right now is making sure it's wired correctly. Perhaps I'm being overly cautious but I have a $1000 MB at one end and a $500 DAC at the other I don't want to destroy them with an unknown cable assembly. I sent the vendor an inquiry regarding getting the wiring diagram for this cable where they responded "We don't have a wiring diagram, the product is standard wiring". I have the pinout for both the MB and the type C. I and get a breakout cable for both ends to confirm they are wired correctly.

The type E connector is pretty common on MB's these days and they are shielded. If this works out it's probably the best way to internally connect a DAC. I'll post my finding

Here is the pinout on the Gigabyte 690 Extreme USB type E connection on the MB

Here is the USB C connector pinout

 

[Ghoostknight]

Thanks for the input. Unfortunately, none of those items linked will work for me

whats the reason nothing else will work than a straight cable? do you think this will sound the best? or do you have your dac in one case with your motherboard/pc ?

if its sound quality wise =
in my expierence (and i tried quite a few things with usb) the best route to go is some kind of isolation/reclocking (testing is required tho) with the shortest cable possible after the isolation/reclocking stage, if you do this additional connectors/cables/usbhubs before isolation/reclocking are somewhat/mostly negligable

i wouldnt get my hopes up that a 0815 cable which probably doesnt comply 100% with the usb specifications will sound better than my approach even if its a straight cable with no connectors inbetween

and finally, also the internal usb headers will most probably go through the same usb hub than the external usb slots, but i dig your approach of testing things out good luck and let us know how it turned out

--

one thing which still stands on my list is trying out the usb otg port on the RPI4 which is directly connected to the CPU/Chip without usb hub inbetween if you are really lucky the internal usb ports are also connected without usb hub

 

[It Hz]

whats the reason nothing else will work than a straight cable? do you think this will sound the best? or do you have your dac in one case with your motherboard/pc ?

if its sound quality wise =
in my expierence (and i tried quite a few things with usb) the best route to go is some kind of isolation/reclocking (testing is required tho) with the shortest cable possible after the isolation/reclocking stage, if you do this additional connectors/cables/usbhubs before isolation/reclocking are somewhat/mostly negligable

i wouldnt get my hopes up that a 0815 cable which probably doesnt comply 100% with the usb specifications will sound better than my approach even if its a straight cable with no connectors inbetween

and finally, also the internal usb headers will most probably go through the same usb hub than the external usb slots, but i dig your approach of testing things out good luck and let us know how it turned out

--

one thing which still stands on my list is trying out the usb otg port on the RPI4 which is directly connected to the CPU/Chip without usb hub inbetween if you are really lucky the internal usb ports are also connected without usb hub

I'm surprised by the lack of high-quality type E USB cables and the fact they are widely employed on MB's. For an internal connection it's either that or a fat 20 pin header. As stated, the MB type E connector is shielded but I'm not 100% certain its tied to the shield on this cable. I get more than a bit suspicious of inexpensive cables from China but it's the best one I've seen for my application. Then again not many people mount their DAC inside the computer chassis

I noted your reference to the 0815 cable which is basically a foil shield with a drain wire which is not as effective as a copper braid. I can easily add a copper braid over this cable and have a drain wire with a ring lug tied to ground on the chassis.

Another option while not as "clean" is this adapter cable with a small pcb at either end. This particular adapter from China also has discrete components soldered to it which are there for a purpose, but they give no technical information what it does. It looks a bit hoaky but that is all I can go on as I'm not an expert here.

Yea, I'm not sure how all the UBS signals are routed through the MB but I suspect they're all routed through the same controller circuit. This is a very high-end MB so I suspect they are using premium components and circuit design. The pcb is 14 layers and is layed out very well

I suppose if worst-comes-to-worst I can route a cable out of the computer chassis and loop it back to the I/O panel which should allow me to get a better cable which would be a USB A 3.2 to a USB C connection. There are also 2 thunderbolt connections and a Toslink

It would be a bit silly to use a compromised adapter cable on a high-end auto system. Then again, I'm not sure how much it will matter here. My philosophy is: when in doubt "OVERKILL"

 

[It Hz]

If anyone is interested in seeing my computer build I'm posting it here

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/assembling-my-first-dac-headphone-amp-system-need-advice.966078/