[boodi]

I mean ... my pc has got an onboard sound chip with onboard digital out (!) can it be it's the very same of any digital out I can put it Vs for comparison..
:skeptic: ..

 

[jefemeister]

it's one of those things that possible (most likely probable) but not necessarily true. The only way to be sure is to measure it using a soundcard that's known to have a 100% perfect digital input and then actually comparing the data sample-by-sample to a reference EAC rip. Some folks say you can also just try to pass a DTS signal which will only sound like music is every bit is perfect. Never tried it, but it seems a little over-simplified to me. Also, remember that getting all the bits out perfectly is only half the battle--you still have to have good clocks for low jitter.

 

[boodi]

bump ^?

 

[boodi]

I'll put an example,
these two chains will sound *exactly* the same ?
( please leave humidity of wheather , planet conjuction and influence of moon phases off the game

iriver ihp 120 -> DAC x -> AMP y -> HEADPHONES z
emu 0404 optical out -> DAC x -> AMP y -> HEADPHONES z

 

[jefemeister]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boodi I'll put an example, these two chains will sound *exactly* the same ? ( please leave humidity of wheather , planet conjuction and influence of moon phases off the game iriver ihp 120 -> DACx -> AMPy -> HEADPHONESz emu 0404 optical out -> DACx -> AMPv -> HEADPHONESz

Probably. The only mechanisms of difference would be:

1. It's not bit perfect. I know the emu is. I don't know about the ihp, but I have to assume it is.

2. Jitter. The E-mu will be much better in this regard. Not sure if you'll be able to hear the difference. Depends on your ears and your other equipment.

3. Power issues. if you're using metal digital cables (as opposed to optical) it's possible that you could get some electrical junk from your computer's power supply in your amp. The ihp, of course, runs on batteries so is probably better in this regard.

 

[Kurt]

boodi:

My Iriver IHP140 sounded not as good as the 0404 through Benchmark DAC1 or Dodson DA-217 MK2 -> various amps -> HD650.
But it doesn’t sound bad either.

 

[boodi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kurt boodi: My Iriver IHP140 sounded not as good as the 0404 through Benchmark DAC1 or Dodson DA-217 MK2 -> various amps -> HD650. But it doesn’t sound bad either.

aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh

what i wanted ( didn't want really ) to know!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

this is bad new.

 

[dknightd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kurt boodi: My Iriver IHP140 sounded not as good as the 0404 through Benchmark DAC1 or Dodson DA-217 MK2 -> various amps -> HD650. But it doesn’t sound bad either.

That surprises me. That is not to say you are wrong.
Isn't the benchmark supposed to be pretty much imune to jitter.
I assume you were playing the same lossless file on both.
I don't know the Iriver, but assume if it has optical out
it is bit perfect. Bit perfect out into a jitter imune DAC should
sound the same - obviously if there is a difference something
is not "perfect".
What do you think was the cause of the difference?

 

[jefemeister]

does the volume control on the iRiver effect the digital out? If this is the case, anything less than 100% full volume will effect the quality of the digital out.

Also, I've been reading on audioasylum lately too that people are noticing differences with transports and cables with their DAC1. It was always my contention that the "absolute immunity" claims of Benchmark were bogus, I think people are perhaps finally starting to get over the inital gee-wiz factor of an ASRC.

 

[loveheadphones]

I have had the same experience with the iriver ihp-120 and m-audio sonica. My cheap cd player coax digital out beats them both handily, and ihp-120 is worse than the sonica. In my experience, digital outs do differ from one another.

edit: i don't use a DAC1 but I've tried using a monarchy DIP in the signal path (with both Shigaraki DAC and M22B DAC) with the same conclusions.

 

[Kurt]

Jitter immunity is a marketing myth. Less prone to jitter would be a fairer description. Even DACs that do real reclocking and, in theory, should be independent of the transport, sound different with different transports. As almost everybody who owns one reports.

The Iriver volume affects the line out and should be at 100% when used. Luckily they were also clever enough to implement a fade in. I forgot more than once to adjust the volume after using the line out and the one or two seconds it takes to come to full volume are enough to panicky turn it down when wearing IEMs or headphones.

 

[Twombly]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kurt Jitter immunity is a marketing myth. Less prone to jitter would be a fairer description. Even DACs that do real reclocking and, in theory, should be independent of the transport, sound different with different transports. As almost everybody who owns one reports.

Who is everybody? What testing methodology was used to determine an audible difference? Why would differences in such tiny fractions of a second matter? Who shot the sheriff?

 

[Jon L]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twombly Who is everybody? What testing methodology was used to determine an audible difference? Why would differences in such tiny fractions of a second matter? Who shot the sheriff?

Sony and Philips shot the sheriff!! SPDIF (Sony Philips Digital InterFace) is the worst possible solution imaginable for transferring digital data. The lazy-a## Sony and Philips engineers rigged it up real quick to try to get some test data off of their digital gear in early 1980's. SPDIF was never designed to be high-fidelity musical interface and was never meant to be.

The fact SPDIF HAS become the de Facto standard for digital music transfer speaks volumes about the sad reality that nobody gives a sh^&% about us consumers who care about quality of music.

Anyone, and I mean anyone (no golden ears necessary), will have no trouble whatsoever hearing the obvious huge differences transports and even digital cables make IF they sit in front of a resolving system and pay half-way attention. If you compare a crappy $90 DVD player with another crappy $200 DVD player as transport using poorly made digital cable, yes you may not hear much difference b/c they will sound similarly crappy. But if you move from the DVD player to something that actually was designed for good sound, say an oldie like Micromega Trio transport or a new Wadia "neo" transport, it'll be like being hit with a sledgehammer. And yes, you'd be cussing the Sony/Philips engineers, too, for coming up with SPDIF which requires $$$ and Herculean efforts to sound even half-way decent. There, there's my SPDIF rant for the day...

 

[Kurt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twombly Who is everybody? What testing methodology was used to determine an audible difference? Why would differences in such tiny fractions of a second matter? Who shot the sheriff?

Do your own search for words like DAC, Buffer, RAM, transport and Reclocking.
Products I still remember are Chord DAC64 and DCC2 from EMM Labs with the CDSD transport compared to the earlier used one.
At these Forums:
http://www.audioasylum.com/index.html

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl

http://www.audiocircle.com/

 

[Twombly]

To Kurt: Those tests were done sighted, no? Shouldn't reclocking DACs reclock(duh) any digital signal to their own crystal's frequency anyway, negating the effect of any jitter upwards in the playback chain?

To Jon: Is there mathematical evidence of SPDIF producing statistically higher error or jitter rates? If so, how big is the difference? I'd certainly like to test your conclusion that boutique transports make a difference, but the local hifi store probably wouldn't cotton to my testing their equipment with the possible conclusion that the cheaper one is just as good. I know a family with a $10k Krell/Musical Fidelity/Dynaudio system, but we don't see them that often.