[whitedragem]

That's true, a CD player and DAC were considered as one, but in recent years streamers took over and now are considered by many as no less important than DACs. In that sense the audio history repeats itself

I feel that we are missing what I was posting about, with the above comment…
What I was pushing for is how important a ‘good transport’ was for ANY DAC.
There was a time (nineties) when we knew this to be true; it was not ’taken for granted’.

Streamers is the present trend for ‘where we get our audio from’ (arguably a replacement to CDs, to ‘stay on track’ with the premise), they are essentially the ‘transport’ component, and, like most CD players ever built, also include a DAC.
They can of course have sound improved by feeding out to an ‘offboard’ DAC. (the same as what I was saying regarding CD players).

Better quality units will generally do a better job of the ‘transport’ function to output the ‘zeros and ones’. In this regard ‘history repeats itself’, yes; but not anything specific to ‘new technology’ or fads; just the nature of HiFi separates generally yielding higher sound quality.
I understand iFi make great DACs and, I am guessing iFi are moving heavily into making Streamers now as well.
The benefit of typical iFi strengths in each of the aspects of hardware design and technology, no doubt lead to a price to performance ratio that is outstanding value for parts in question.

What IS important to everyone, be it this thread or ‘head-fi’ as a whole, is a need to understand just how important QUALITY passing of the zeros and ones really is.
Entry level equipment is generally ‘digital compatible’; it takes the zeros and ones and will guesstimate a sound from what it has to work with/what it is capable of.

Most ’stuff’ built to service entry level parts have to have ‘very wide tolerances’.
I generally find it a ‘turn off’ in reviews when the part ‘plays well‘ with everything. (not true for ALL product types, necessarily)

I don’t mind owning GREAT TRANSPORTS and feeding DACs that like true/‘highly accurate’ passing to them of the zeros and ones.
It is true about gear matching, then, and that quite often a ‘poor fit’ will compromise the output quality.

Synergy isn’t just a cool sounding word!

 

[Rafinnnnnn15]

Hello friends, could someone give me a comparison between the Dx160 vs the M11 Plus ESS or the LTD????

Since I am thinking of making the leap from my M11, since its sound is very cold, lifeless, and I want to know the opinions to have a better idea. Greetings

The iems I have are: Ibasso it01, Imr R2 Red, Imr New Aten, Timeless, Tri i3 Pro

The music I listen to mainly is Epica, rhapsody of fire, Disturbed, Avenged Sevenfold, Fife Finger Death Punch, Megadeth, Trivium, Korn, DragonForce, among many more.

 

[andjayik]

Why are some songs displaying mega karaoke tracks and lyrics displaying when playing music after update? never had this before?

 

[SRKRAM]

I feel that we are missing what I was posting about, with the above comment…
What I was pushing for is how important a ‘good transport’ was for ANY DAC.
There was a time (nineties) when we knew this to be true; it was not ’taken for granted’.

Streamers is the present trend for ‘where we get our audio from’ (arguably a replacement to CDs, to ‘stay on track’ with the premise), they are essentially the ‘transport’ component, and, like most CD players ever built, also include a DAC.
They can of course have sound improved by feeding out to an ‘offboard’ DAC. (the same as what I was saying regarding CD players).

Better quality units will generally do a better job of the ‘transport’ function to output the ‘zeros and ones’. In this regard ‘history repeats itself’, yes; but not anything specific to ‘new technology’ or fads; just the nature of HiFi separates generally yielding higher sound quality.
I understand iFi make great DACs and, I am guessing iFi are moving heavily into making Streamers now as well.
The benefit of typical iFi strengths in each of the aspects of hardware design and technology, no doubt lead to a price to performance ratio that is outstanding value for parts in question.

What IS important to everyone, be it this thread or ‘head-fi’ as a whole, is a need to understand just how important QUALITY passing of the zeros and ones really is.
Entry level equipment is generally ‘digital compatible’; it takes the zeros and ones and will guesstimate a sound from what it has to work with/what it is capable of.

Most ’stuff’ built to service entry level parts have to have ‘very wide tolerances’.
I generally find it a ‘turn off’ in reviews when the part ‘plays well‘ with everything. (not true for ALL product types, necessarily)

I don’t mind owning GREAT TRANSPORTS and feeding DACs that like true/‘highly accurate’ passing to them of the zeros and ones.
It is true about gear matching, then, and that quite often a ‘poor fit’ will compromise the output quality.

Synergy isn’t just a cool sounding word!

Jitter is a time domain issue, so files won't have jitter, as you mentioned previously. Imagine if you were transcribing text from one document to another, it wouldn't matter if you sped up and slowed as you were doing it, the resultant document would still be the same.
You blame a lot of things on jitter, but it's probably something else. CDs have pretty amazing error recovery, but any unrecoverable or unmaskable errors may be audible.
The data (music, probably) you end up playing on your system could have been stored and transmitted and retransmitted across all kinds of media and links before it got to you. These would have had various error detection and recovery / retransmission mechanisms to ensure the reliability of the data.
The difference once you send it to your dac is that although there are error detection mechanisms, there isn't any retransmission or error recovery (either on USB or spdif).
However, this shouldn't be an issue with USB. I used to be product manager for x-ray imaging systems. The smaller systems utilised USB (the larger ones used lvds or GigE - search for CT XXL if you want to see an example). These devices sent real-time data (just like audio is), and should have used Isochronous transfer mode which does not support retransmission in case of errors since there is no time for this with real-time data. Some were incorrectly implemented to use bulk transfer mode. What this meant was that, when there was any error in the USB transmission the receiver would request a retransmit, the sender wouldn't be able to do this, and the system would freeze. In some systems this would never happen. In others it would happen every few days or weeks at the most, and with long cable runs in often harsh environments.
It shows that USB is pretty robust. Furthermore, modern USB DACs should be asynchronous, and have their own clocks and don't rely on timing from the USB interface, making them totally immune to any timing variation in the source. The prococol even includes flow control, so buffer under/overruns aren't an issue.
In isochronous mode, bandwidth is also reserved in the USB interface, so that isn't an issue, although some hardware implementations may have issues with internal bus bandwidth when there multiple high bandwidth devices.
TLDR: jitter probably isn't the problem.

I do wonder about the synergy between your HDVD800 and headphones, as doesn't that amp have an output impedance of 43ohms, and isn't that higher than the headphones' impedance?

 

[FiiO]

Why are some songs displaying mega karaoke tracks and lyrics displaying when playing music after update? never had this before?

Did you enable the auto search for lyrices and album option in the FiiO Music app?

Best regards

 

[whitedragem]

Jitter is a time domain issue, so files won't have jitter, as you mentioned previously. Imagine if you were transcribing text from one document to another, it wouldn't matter if you sped up and slowed as you were doing it, the resultant document would still be the same.
You blame a lot of things on jitter, but it's probably something else. CDs have pretty amazing error recovery, but any unrecoverable or unmaskable errors may be audible.
The data (music, probably) you end up playing on your system could have been stored and transmitted and retransmitted across all kinds of media and links before it got to you. These would have had various error detection and recovery / retransmission mechanisms to ensure the reliability of the data.
The difference once you send it to your dac is that although there are error detection mechanisms, there isn't any retransmission or error recovery (either on USB or spdif).
However, this shouldn't be an issue with USB. I used to be product manager for x-ray imaging systems. The smaller systems utilised USB (the larger ones used lvds or GigE - search for CT XXL if you want to see an example). These devices sent real-time data (just like audio is), and should have used Isochronous transfer mode which does not support retransmission in case of errors since there is no time for this with real-time data. Some were incorrectly implemented to use bulk transfer mode. What this meant was that, when there was any error in the USB transmission the receiver would request a retransmit, the sender wouldn't be able to do this, and the system would freeze. In some systems this would never happen. In others it would happen every few days or weeks at the most, and with long cable runs in often harsh environments.
It shows that USB is pretty robust. Furthermore, modern USB DACs should be asynchronous, and have their own clocks and don't rely on timing from the USB interface, making them totally immune to any timing variation in the source. The prococol even includes flow control, so buffer under/overruns aren't an issue.
In isochronous mode, bandwidth is also reserved in the USB interface, so that isn't an issue, although some hardware implementations may have issues with internal bus bandwidth when there multiple high bandwidth devices.
TLDR: jitter probably isn't the problem.

I do wonder about the synergy between your HDVD800 and headphones, as doesn't that amp have an output impedance of 43ohms, and isn't that higher than the headphones' impedance?

I see your *points; I will believe that they are to further a discussion, and I see them mostly as to reassure me, or convince others that ‘jitter’ as I described doesn’t do the things I say it does.

Not getting into the semantics of whether equipment that isn’t made to be portable (and run off small batteries), and sell in a supermarket for $29 will have the same sorts of correction processes or ‘transmit quality’ being ‘bargain basement parts‘ built for a mass consumer world, as high end medical systems.
My takeaway from that discussion re: medical kit- is that USB ‘can’ be a solid performing method for data.
I have no awareness about bandwidth used (might be 10bit colour for all I know), but I wouldn’t use an understanding and experience with one system or product to attempt to ‘know about all others’. (things can be witnessed, yes… but I would never place any individual experience over the combined learnings (from multiple examples) of another system.. hence why I believe this MAY be a discussion).

Jitter as I have experienced it, for decades, regarding audio, has a range of effects, most of what I described, in terms of audio ‘change’, is due to the ‘goes hand in hand’ nature of WHEN DIGITAL ISN’T READ/TRANSMITTED WELL.

We all assume it is. (digital is perfect on/off signal, hence perfect ‘zeros and ones’).
Sadly in the world beyond engineering documents, digital has ‘shades of grey’ they have to be resolved as black or white… and this is where error happens.
Actual errors.. that can affect the leading edge location (yes, in the ‘time domain’) of a note, through to the quality of bass notes…
The reasons, whilst not belonging to this thread, as they are a discussion that has been argued for aeons, mostly with regards to ‘digital cables’ passing an analogue wavelength that can lead to ‘misreads’; is beyond a ‘short post’, and isn’t something I feel is right to discuss here.

I could go to length to list my history with audio equipment and setups (spanning back to the eighties), or my expertise regarding many things digital (since the nineties), but feel that my ego doesn’t change the real world properties of which we speak.
Much of the basis isn’t ‘theory’ and is well understood by many, but the nature of observation bias, and humans ‘finding evidence to support any belief’ (it IS a large world we exist on!), is such that we have the potential for billions of different opinions.

Regarding ‘digital‘ audio, jitter exists. It exists for a range of reasons and is contributed to by a range of aspects of a digital playback chain.
And it is NOT DESIRABLE.
Maybe there is merit to most transports quoting their ‘jitter rate’ (usually as a sales point to convince pundits to invest in them, sure.)

For any who have learned to ‘see’ jitter and the undesirable effects that a high jitter rate playback can lead to, this is something useful to talk about.
For most people it is of ‘no concern’. (No reason to buy expensive kit that works hard to feed accurate digital, save the money… and, yes there is a reason flagship surround amps advertise ‘low jitter’ HDMI connections etc)

@SRKSRM thankyou for taking time to research the audio chain I was using yesterday.
I was using it to ‘learn’ about the output impedance and the effect it might have on those headphones. It required recabling my headphones back from 4.4mm ‘balanced’ etc.
I literally set the rig up to ‘check‘ whether the typical ‘bass bloat’ that comes by not following the 1/8th rule (for output impedance/headphone impedance), and, just like how the ‘real world’ does not always follow ‘engineering logic’, was actually a ‘great pairing’.
it is something I have learned to ‘stick to’ based on some Bowers and Wilkins P5 and P7 headphones that took years to ‘control’ (right).
The usual ‘good amp’, a Burson Conductor V2+ is on loan, so toying with the HDVD800 and Edition 5 combo was something to try..
Those headphones took nearly 1500 hours to truly settle (finish burn-in); never owned a set that required burn in so much.. (From hours 300-800 they were *unlistenable* due to high frequency screech), but they DO pair magically on the HDVD800.
That being said, a bass boost doesn’t hurt them, and the amp is deathly quiet, the resultant sound makes the Sony PHA3/MDRZ7 combo seem like unlistenable junk (never thought I’d say that).
I stand by my comment of the resultant sound from that chain being smooth (maybe the proof of the pudding IS in the eating!).
Given I could have simply plugged the headphones into the Diablo (it is a ‘nice’ amp, as well as being an excellent DAC), or even straight into the M11+ (those THX amp modules many people think are the ‘best there is’ (engineering and ‘white sheet docs’ no doubt!)..
I learned from Hans Van Beekhuyzen to ‘never judge a setup I have not listened too’. (for legitimate reasons).
Clearly your opinion on USB as a transport method is giving it much more credit than I do, hence why I do my absolute best to avoid it, as consistently COAX at 1/8th the price point betters the sound.. (USB ‘for audio’ has proven to require big investment to equal budget cables using ‘antiquated’ systems). Of course it depends on whether the parts are built to favour one input/over another. Most budget DACs serve the USB input as the highest performing part. So I can see how it would be easy to ‘test and see’ that USB is the ‘better method’, many pundits have no doubt experienced this.
The Diablo fed via COAX, means I have to give up on the ‘GTO filter’ (a reason to own an iFi DAC for those listening to redbook audio (16bit 44khz)), and I think DSD may not work either…
The organic sound that the temporary rig I setup yesterday offered was ’truly exceptional sound quality’. No matter what the math and rulebook says.

tl:dr jitter is the bane of good digital transmission. less jitter can make a big difference to some DAC/clock chip designs. YMMV (your mileage may vary)
I hope my observations have use for ^some^ head-fiers.

 

[andjayik]

Did you enable the auto search for lyrices and album option in the FiiO Music app?

Best regards

where is this under?

 

[123peter]

In FiiO M11 Plus Ltd
"Blue Indicator Light Control" - have 3 settings:

"Brightness" - works fine
"Charging" - works properly (pulsation during charging and turns off after night charging)
"Action" - unfortunately it cannot be turned off, while listening to music I want to turn it off).
I think the last update broke this "Action" setting -previously I could turn off this Blue LED

 

[SRKRAM]

I see your *points; I will believe that they are to further a discussion, and I see them mostly as to reassure me, or convince others that ‘jitter’ as I described doesn’t do the things I say it does.

Not getting into the semantics of whether equipment that isn’t made to be portable (and run off small batteries), and sell in a supermarket for $29 will have the same sorts of correction processes or ‘transmit quality’ being ‘bargain basement parts‘ built for a mass consumer world, as high end medical systems.
My takeaway from that discussion re: medical kit- is that USB ‘can’ be a solid performing method for data.
I have no awareness about bandwidth used (might be 10bit colour for all I know), but I wouldn’t use an understanding and experience with one system or product to attempt to ‘know about all others’. (things can be witnessed, yes… but I would never place any individual experience over the combined learnings (from multiple examples) of another system.. hence why I believe this MAY be a discussion).

Jitter as I have experienced it, for decades, regarding audio, has a range of effects, most of what I described, in terms of audio ‘change’, is due to the ‘goes hand in hand’ nature of WHEN DIGITAL ISN’T READ/TRANSMITTED WELL.

We all assume it is. (digital is perfect on/off signal, hence perfect ‘zeros and ones’).
Sadly in the world beyond engineering documents, digital has ‘shades of grey’ they have to be resolved as black or white… and this is where error happens.
Actual errors.. that can affect the leading edge location (yes, in the ‘time domain’) of a note, through to the quality of bass notes…
The reasons, whilst not belonging to this thread, as they are a discussion that has been argued for aeons, mostly with regards to ‘digital cables’ passing an analogue wavelength that can lead to ‘misreads’; is beyond a ‘short post’, and isn’t something I feel is right to discuss here.

I could go to length to list my history with audio equipment and setups (spanning back to the eighties), or my expertise regarding many things digital (since the nineties), but feel that my ego doesn’t change the real world properties of which we speak.
Much of the basis isn’t ‘theory’ and is well understood by many, but the nature of observation bias, and humans ‘finding evidence to support any belief’ (it IS a large world we exist on!), is such that we have the potential for billions of different opinions.

Regarding ‘digital‘ audio, jitter exists. It exists for a range of reasons and is contributed to by a range of aspects of a digital playback chain.
And it is NOT DESIRABLE.
Maybe there is merit to most transports quoting their ‘jitter rate’ (usually as a sales point to convince pundits to invest in them, sure.)

For any who have learned to ‘see’ jitter and the undesirable effects that a high jitter rate playback can lead to, this is something useful to talk about.
For most people it is of ‘no concern’. (No reason to buy expensive kit that works hard to feed accurate digital, save the money… and, yes there is a reason flagship surround amps advertise ‘low jitter’ HDMI connections etc)

@SRKSRM thankyou for taking time to research the audio chain I was using yesterday.
I was using it to ‘learn’ about the output impedance and the effect it might have on those headphones. It required recabling my headphones back from 4.4mm ‘balanced’ etc.
I literally set the rig up to ‘check‘ whether the typical ‘bass bloat’ that comes by not following the 1/8th rule (for output impedance/headphone impedance), and, just like how the ‘real world’ does not always follow ‘engineering logic’, was actually a ‘great pairing’.
it is something I have learned to ‘stick to’ based on some Bowers and Wilkins P5 and P7 headphones that took years to ‘control’ (right).
The usual ‘good amp’, a Burson Conductor V2+ is on loan, so toying with the HDVD800 and Edition 5 combo was something to try..
Those headphones took nearly 1500 hours to truly settle (finish burn-in); never owned a set that required burn in so much.. (From hours 300-800 they were *unlistenable* due to high frequency screech), but they DO pair magically on the HDVD800.
That being said, a bass boost doesn’t hurt them, and the amp is deathly quiet, the resultant sound makes the Sony PHA3/MDRZ7 combo seem like unlistenable junk (never thought I’d say that).
I stand by my comment of the resultant sound from that chain being smooth (maybe the proof of the pudding IS in the eating!).
Given I could have simply plugged the headphones into the Diablo (it is a ‘nice’ amp, as well as being an excellent DAC), or even straight into the M11+ (those THX amp modules many people think are the ‘best there is’ (engineering and ‘white sheet docs’ no doubt!)..
I learned from Hans Van Beekhuyzen to ‘never judge a setup I have not listened too’. (for legitimate reasons).
Clearly your opinion on USB as a transport method is giving it much more credit than I do, hence why I do my absolute best to avoid it, as consistently COAX at 1/8th the price point betters the sound.. (USB ‘for audio’ has proven to require big investment to equal budget cables using ‘antiquated’ systems). Of course it depends on whether the parts are built to favour one input/over another. Most budget DACs serve the USB input as the highest performing part. So I can see how it would be easy to ‘test and see’ that USB is the ‘better method’, many pundits have no doubt experienced this.
The Diablo fed via COAX, means I have to give up on the ‘GTO filter’ (a reason to own an iFi DAC for those listening to redbook audio (16bit 44khz)), and I think DSD may not work either…
The organic sound that the temporary rig I setup yesterday offered was ’truly exceptional sound quality’. No matter what the math and rulebook says.

tl:dr jitter is the bane of good digital transmission. less jitter can make a big difference to some DAC/clock chip designs. YMMV (your mileage may vary)
I hope my observations have use for ^some^ head-fiers.

I don't dispute that jitter is undesirable, however it should only be an issue at the point at which the D/A conversation takes place. If you perceive some issues with the sound of your system, jitter won't always be to blame, and your files certainly won't contain jitter. Most modern USB DACs should be asynchronous and will buffer/reclock the data, so any jitter on the USB interface will be eliminated. As for the USB interface itself, it's actually quite resilient to jitter. Especially USB 2, due to the type of line coding used. USB 3 uses a different type of line code which reduces the channel coding overhead at the expense of a theoretical reduction in immunity to jitter, but not to the extent that it would result in data loss.
The example I gave of small xray imaging systems with an incorrectly implemented USB protocol was valid as it's still just a USB device connected to a pretty standard PC with a cheap beige USB cable. It just happens the the incorrect hardware implementation enabled us to see when any data loss happened on the USB interface bacause the system would freeze when that happened. And even with hundreds or thousands of systems installed, these types of event were quite rare, showing how reliable raw USB data transmission is, even in isochronous mode.
I stated that I wasn't comparing to larger imaging systems as they don't use USB due to bandwidth constraints. I haven't ever worked on medical CT machines (different department), but they certainly don't use USB. Getting data off a 256 slice CT gantry spinning at 250 rpm is quite a feat.
I don't follow AV stuff at all - don't even have a TV - and haven't ever worked with it, but I would expect that the reason that low jitter hdmi is a thing is due to latency and sync (between audio and video) requirements. This may mean that async mode cannot be used to buffer and reclock the data.

 

[whitedragem]

I don't dispute that jitter is undesirable, however it should only be an issue at the point at which the D/A conversation takes place. If you perceive some issues with the sound of your system, jitter won't always be to blame, and your files certainly won't contain jitter. Most modern USB DACs should be asynchronous and will buffer/reclock the data, so any jitter on the USB interface will be eliminated. As for the USB interface itself, it's actually quite resilient to jitter. Especially USB 2, due to the type of line coding used. USB 3 uses a different type of line code which reduces the channel coding overhead at the expense of a theoretical reduction in immunity to jitter, but not to the extent that it would result in data loss.
The example I gave of small xray imaging systems with an incorrectly implemented USB protocol was valid as it's still just a USB device connected to a pretty standard PC with a cheap beige USB cable. It just happens the the incorrect hardware implementation enabled us to see when any data loss happened on the USB interface bacause the system would freeze when that happened. And even with hundreds or thousands of systems installed, these types of event were quite rare, showing how reliable raw USB data transmission is, even in isochronous mode.
I stated that I wasn't comparing to larger imaging systems as they don't use USB due to bandwidth constraints. I haven't ever worked on medical CT machines (different department), but they certainly don't use USB. Getting data off a 256 slice CT gantry spinning at 250 rpm is quite a feat.
I don't follow AV stuff at all - don't even have a TV - and haven't ever worked with it, but I would expect that the reason that low jitter hdmi is a thing is due to latency and sync (between audio and video) requirements. This may mean that async mode cannot be used to buffer and reclock the data.

Yes -everything you restate about USB is ‘great’.
AV likes ‘low jitter’ rates for the same reason that any audio likes ‘less‘ jitter.
It can easily improve the sound.

Writing technical stuff that ‘disproves’ this might be better kept to audio science threads.
In the real world, quite simply it does…

Regarding much modern ripping software, it does a horrible job of lifting the redbook data from CDs (I believe this is intentional), and using default ripping software (at non default settings=optimised for better sound) will lead to horrible audio files that will have very obvious sound that sounds ‘very jitter laden’.
This is across the two largest desktop operating systems, on a range of optical drives (not the hardware).
This has become an issue in later years.. it never used to be such an issue.
Perhaps Apple (etc) have a reason to want to let iTunes downloads ‘sound better’ than CD rips (^^^probably this!)

The redundant code on a CD that can be stripped off allowing for smaller files is largely in part to error correction (redundancy when not spinning from a CD and being read ‘on the fly’ by a laser that has to constantly track and ever changing rotation speed;CDs are ‘complex’); lifting files from a harddrive is easier, and using a temporary ‘scratchpad in RAM’ would be ideal for a couple of reasons, but this only leads to small contributions that affect sound quality.

Jitter (and any false data) will affect sound quality.
(and to save this going around and around on this thread which has little to do with discussing ‘theories’, lets move the discussion “for others who might be interested” somewhere else. SRKRAM, I am well versed on jitter, as apparently you are too. The difference between us is ‘I am listening’. If you were listening to ME, you’d back down on ‘selling me USB’. I do not enjoy the USB method of digital as much as I do ‘other methods’. The reason for that is ‘sound quality’- and USB may theoretically be “all that” and I can only surmise that is why most people are content/happy/faithful that their $2 USB cable ‘does the trick’. Good for them/you/and budget USB DACs convincing us this is all true)

 

[alexeyi]

Yes -everything you restate about USB is ‘great’.
AV likes ‘low jitter’ rates for the same reason that any audio likes ‘less‘ jitter.
It can easily improve the sound.

Writing technical stuff that ‘disproves’ this might be better kept to audio science threads.
In the real world, quite simply it does…

Regarding much modern ripping software, it does a horrible job of lifting the redbook data from CDs (I believe this is intentional), and using default ripping software (at non default settings=optimised for better sound) will lead to horrible audio files that will have very obvious sound that sounds ‘very jitter laden’.
This is across the two largest desktop operating systems, on a range of optical drives (not the hardware).
This has become an issue in later years.. it never used to be such an issue.
Perhaps Apple (etc) have a reason to want to let iTunes downloads ‘sound better’ than CD rips (^^^probably this!)

The redundant code on a CD that can be stripped off allowing for smaller files is largely in part to error correction (redundancy when not spinning from a CD and being read ‘on the fly’ by a laser that has to constantly track and ever changing rotation speed;CDs are ‘complex’); lifting files from a harddrive is easier, and using a temporary ‘scratchpad in RAM’ would be ideal for a couple of reasons, but this only leads to small contributions that affect sound quality.

Jitter (and any false data) will affect sound quality.
(and to save this going around and around on this thread which has little to do with discussing ‘theories’, lets move the discussion “for others who might be interested” somewhere else. SRKRAM, I am well versed on jitter, as apparently you are too. The difference between us is ‘I am listening’. If you were listening to ME, you’d back down on ‘selling me USB’. I do not enjoy the USB method of digital as much as I do ‘other methods’. The reason for that is ‘sound quality’- and USB may theoretically be “all that” and I can only surmise that is why most people are content/happy/faithful that their $2 USB cable ‘does the trick’. Good for them/you/and budget USB DACs convincing us this is all true)

You are true to the cause, but there is also a reason why some of the interfaces are limited, just for example:
TOSLINK – 44.1kHz to 192kHz
USB Type B – 44.1kHz to 768kHz

This discussion you can find on almost all the audio topics forums and in a way or another, it is a very complicated and subjective topic. I don’t think that people try to “sell” the USB implementation or the other way around, but it is more about what you want to have available.

 

[whitedragem]

yes; I like USB for a range of reasons, and a big fan of ‘educate the user’.
Truth is USB is only way to lift audio from some products, eg Playstation 5 if using the HRTF using 3D Audio that tempest can render..

As for many of those frequencies, for ‘consumer audio’, probably not so necessary.
Even upscaling to DSD levels the Diablo is ‘capable of’ is crazy hard to do (‘on the fly’, certainly), and 768/1536khz is probably pushing the limits so much that ot typically degrades ultimate performance if white doc spec sheets are given a glance (most DAC chips perform ‘better’ when not running on their ‘bleeding edge’)..

the best thing about usb audio is to do with usb2 async modes and fast/powerful controller chips- this has done wonders for ‘entry level’ DACs and therefore modern ‘consumer’ sound.

DACs are affordable, and benchmark well.
certainly to ‘great measurements’ on expensive measuring kit.

of course audio, like many fields, will have future breakthroughs- some of which will likely lead to paradigm shifts with our understanding.
in the meantime, audio is an often confusing, often ‘unscientific’ “game” that many pundits are keen to master.

likely is why we come to hobby dens like head-fi.
as a user, when I post about experienced phenomena, I feel my voice deserves ‘fair weight’.
being informed that ‘i don’t know what i’m doing/don’t know what I am talking about’, I do not take as hostility directed at me, necessarily.
if we are here to discuss, finding weaknesses with others’ points of view needs to be evaluated; is it to aid them/others?

My comments based on experienced audio ‘artifacts’ (resulting from ‘jitter’ as I claimed) are not worthless.
but to move away from swimming into ‘off topic territory’ (the incredible FiiO M11+, a part I consider an EXCEPTIONAL transport); if anyone wants to discuss what ‘artifacts’ I was hearing, that would build up to ‘higher levels’ in reoccurrence, (the ones I’ve known as ‘jitter’, for decades), can take a punt at discussing that.

I do not feel ANY of this is necessary as the present firmware, freshly flashed, has removed all reoccurences from happening.. I have had the player on loop for days now and it is perfect.
Previously it could barely play five songs before ‘needing’ a reboot.

problem is sorted. why anyone needs denounce my findings (/me) I am not sure.

 

[whitedragem]

cheers people (thx for the likes); I am not being grumpy or sensitive, I promise.
I respect the members here more than my posts will ever show. I love our forum BECAUSE of the members.
I come from an age when people had 'thick skin' (or were certainly belted enough until we developed it).

When I go toe to toe with experienced forum members it is out of respect for them, mostly.
I trust in their capability to stay true, and am more often humbled by the incredible interpersonal skills shown.
Basically confirming, more often than not, that the people who post are business owners and experts in many fields.
What we do not see are the 'ten times' more traffic that reads many threads and NEVER POSTS ONCE. (not having an account even)

The most important reason to resolve conflict to logical ends is for the 'timeless' nature of the internet.
As is the reason to keep forums filled with relevant posts.

I know my posts are typically longwinded, but that is a style I choose to give, so generally as to not be misquoted or misread, by being unclear or not giving founding basis as to the topic at hand.
Quite simply, when we read looking for specific information, we do not always skim through a thousand posts, but find what we are looking for and leave.
I find when I read page upon page of text, the posts that might hold truth might be fleeting, and not represented by the chorus of voices.
It is true that we all come from different backgrounds and have differing opinions on many and varied topics.

As an example I feel USB cables matter.
I would feel a 'great test' for any USB cable would be to record its output (after going through a DAC) ten times, say play it and record, play it and record, play it and record.. (Each time playing back the last recording); that would allow for cumulative errors to build up and be more evident.
A couple of cables could then be compared for how they pass audio.

The difference between this test and most of the present 'tests' is that it is more real world, and 'a little exaggerated' - so that the differences can be EASILY seen.
IF two cables gave a different say 'cymbal decay' (in a complex piece of music) or one cable gave a 'flatter' final track, then we would know that small amounts of information that contributes to the whole (musical) sound is being lost.
Sure we could then argue the subtleties as to how much is lost in any given pass, but that to me would be semantics.. as someone who wants the best audio possible, because I have heard some stellar examples of 'good transports' doing a terrific job at passing exemplary digital (either my TEAC P700 or the highly modified Denon DCD-S10 (with twenty blackgate capacitor upgrades and a superclock II mod)); good digital transportation makes a HUGE difference to a capable DAC.

IT is why I totally stand by the FiiO M11+ as an exceptional transport. It is good enough to 'pick out the jitter' easily- not all transports do a good job, and so most DACs are not 'tight' with their tolerances to actually care.
It is why I say many parts are 'digital compatible', and the FiiO M11+ is digital capable: it is the cheapest good transport I have found in the modern world, and can nearly equal/holds it own against the QP1R (my previous favorite, but a 'much higher price bracket' when we consider its evolutions all jacked up in price substantially).

The M11+ is an audiofool bargain, and a product that can be a stepping stone to 'really high end sound'. (ie upgrading to outboard amp, and upgrading to outboard DACs etc).
Bargain.

(and 'cheers' to everyone!)

 

[Ichos]

Hey guys, after updating the M11 Plus LTD to the 1.0.7 the volume touch panel is not working.
Any ideas??!?

 

[ron spencer]

Hey guys, after updating the M11 Plus LTD to the 1.0.7 the volume touch panel is not working.
Any ideas??!?

Works for me on 1.0.7...check that it is turned on in settings:

Settings-Global-Volume touch panel settings and see if it is disabled.