[mac336]

I was thinking about upgrading my DAC. 
 
First off, is it safe to assume that all 32 bit DACS technically will sound better than 24 bit dacs?
 
And if usb is currently my only means of connecting my dac to the computer, is it even worth upgrading the DAC or should I wait until I have optical/coaxial capabilities?
 
I'm under the impression that USB would limit the DAC performance--thus making it not a good investment for my case

 

[NA Blur]

It of course depends on the DAC and what USB type it is.  My m903 is USB 2 capable and a 24-bit device.  With a proper USB2 port and my PC software set to 24-bit I can see that it can run 24-bit / 96kHz.  This is better than CD quality.
 
I think standard USB1 is limited to 16-bit / 44.1kHz without special drivers for your OS.
 
I could not find a source for 32-bit music so the questions is what does having a 32-bit DAC do?  It should process the 24-bit and below slightly faster, but I doubt you are going to hear and notice the difference.
 
Stereophile comments about the 32-bit DAC here:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/whats-point-32bit-dac
 
For me I look for two things with a DAC.
 
1.)  Signal to noise ration ( heard ) and measured
I want a dead quiet DAC with no noise and no distortion
 
2.)  I do not want to have data loss running at 24-bit / 96kHz or espcially 16-bit /44.1kHz.
Honestly with most DAC units running USB and playing say wav files you will get a stutter every now and then.  I have not tested this effect with a true USB2 port yet, but I have noticed it on a few DAC units I have.
 
I USB1 port may limit you to 16-bit / 44.1 khz ( CD ) and USB2 limits you to 24-bit / 96kHz.  What do you want to listen to that is higher quality that 96kHz?  Note this is kHz not kbps.  96 kHz is much faster!
 
I think in the end a 32-bit DAC may give you a lower noise floor and that is it.

 

[colinharding]

It doesn't so much as limit the performance as take the sound in a different direction.  People will argue this point all day but the fact of the matter is usb was not built for audio and because of this does not function as well as an optical or coaxial connection.  usb is best for printers and the like, not really great for audio.  That said you won't suffer a huge depreciation in sound quality, I would personally rather run coaxial the entire time for maximum audio quality.  
 
For your second question, no it is certainly not safe to assume that 32bit dacs will be better than 24bit dacs.  Bits are cheap, you could have a 96bit dac and it still won't sound any better than a 16bit.  Think of it this way, you can have as many bits as you would like, but if that chip isn't properly employed within the schematic of the dac...it will sound terrible.  Just because you have a ton of bits means nothing, everything has to be implemented properly in order to get proper performance.  If you like more bits than fine, but most high end dacs are not reliant on more bits.  For example, the Audio Note DAC 5 silver is only 18 bits and will beat anything else out there.  The money is in the capacitors, the transformers, the resistors, the dac is old and by most people's standards here obsolete.  Don't be fooled by the newest tech out there, most of it isn't worth it.  Close your eyes, listen to the gear and if you like it then buy it.  But don't purchase something based on specs or looks, it will almost certainly lead you in the wrong direction every time.  If it sounds good then who cares what it costs or what it looks like?

 

[kiteki]

 
I think computers and peripherals like 32-bit better than 24-bit for certain hardware/software reasons.  For me 32-bit/16-bit output in KS sounds very slightly different/superior than 24-bit output.
 
For USB to Coax/Optical connections check out Teralink X2 and Musiland Monitor 01 USD.
 

 

[kiteki]

Quote:

People will argue this point all day but the fact of the matter is usb was not built for audio and because of this does not function as well as an optical or coaxial connection.  usb is best for printers and the like, not really great for audio.

 
USB is better than optical.
 

 

[nullstring]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac336 /img/forum/go_quote.gif

First off, is it safe to assume that all 32 bit DACS technically will sound better than 24 bit dacs?

 
No, this is completely wrong. It's quite possible that a 16bit DAC will sound better than a 32bit DAC.
There are a very large number of factors that play into this.
 
Consider a $4000 DAC from back in the day compared to a $200 DAC 32bit DAC created recently
In all likely-hood the old DAC will sound better.
 
Obviously the cash value of a DAC is not a cause for something to sound better. This is just to illustrate there are many other things that matter than bit resolution.
 
EDIT: colinharding x2. He's trying to get at the same thing I am.
 
Quote:

And if usb is currently my only means of connecting my dac to the computer, is it even worth upgrading the DAC or should I wait until I have optical/coaxial capabilities?  
I'm under the impression that USB would limit the DAC performance--thus making it not a good investment for my case

 
This very much depends on what USB interface you use. They are not all created equal.
SPDIF doesn't have a clock with it, so it's jitter can be quite high.
 
That said, USB interfaces are notorious for being poor, which is why you get that impression.
However, there are many new 24/32bit async and isolated usb interfaces that might actually sound better than SPDIF.
 
 

 

[mac336]

Quote:

 
USB is better than optical.
 

I thought that optical was supposed to be the best.  SO I should use USB as opposed to optical?
 
Does that make coaxial the best?
 
 

 

[Bojamijams]

What the hell are you people spewing on these boards these days?
 
USB better then optical? Yeah thats why audio companies sell dedicated USB to SPDIF converters.. because USB is better.. Please

 
Also 32bit is USELESS. Nothing can take advantage of it and 99% of the things you people listen to on here doesn't even take advantage of 24bit.
 
What the hell happened to this forum? Uninformed newbs spewing uninformed crap all over.

 

[kiteki]

 
32 bit isn't about 32 bit music.
 
If optical was better than USB, a USB->SPDIF converter wouldn't take advantage of that, since the signal would have travelled through USB, before it hit optical.
 
USB->COAX/SPDIF converters are for DAC's which don't support USB, or don't have a sophisticated USB connection, so users will rather use a coax or optical connection, however optical receivers are often lacking and not "intended for hi-fi".
 
In post #4 I recommended two USB->COAX/SPDIF converters, even the HA Info U2 for $30 or so will fulfill it's task.  As an aside I think audiophile USB and HDMI cables are nonsense, it's just data transmission, not an analog signal.  If you want a high-end USB cable just make it as short as possible, will cost around $1.
 

 

[FSonicSmith]

 
Quote:

What the hell are you people spewing on these boards these days?
 
USB better then optical? Yeah thats why audio companies sell dedicated USB to SPDIF converters.. because USB is better.. Please

 
Also 32bit is USELESS. Nothing can take advantage of it and 99% of the things you people listen to on here doesn't even take advantage of 24bit.
 
What the hell happened to this forum? Uninformed newbs spewing uninformed crap all over.

 
 
Funny, as I agree with your sentiment (too much uninformed spewing) and not with your conclusion (USB is inherently inferior). Gordon Rankin of Wavelength Audio is among the top four or five digital audio minds in the World. He has collaborated on many top DACs not only from his own company, but for Ayre and Belle Canto (if memory serves). Gordon's Wavelength Audio DACs implement USB almost exclusively. At present, I think most top digital audio engineers would agree that AES/SBU and Firewire are better than S/PDIF and Toslink and USB is difficult, but given the right engineering can be right up there with the balanced connection and Firewire. The truth is that every form of connectivity presents it's own obstacles. For example, AES/SBU is great in terms of the inherent mechanical connection, but in real life an optimum AES/SBU cable is very expensive to manufacture. So if one is on a budget of say $250 for the source to DAC cable, he or she is just as well off going S/PDIF than AES/SBU. And when it comes to USB, going the budget route is a non-starter. At present. AMR/Abbingdon Research is about to come out with a $350 USB DAC. That ought to be interesting!

 

[MorbidToaster]

I prefer USB and Coax over Optical as well.
 
It's all about implementation. Most of the time USB is not as good as a Coax connection for your DAC. This is because the companies don't take the time to make a great USB section. Take Simaudio for example. Some of my favorite gear, but they pretty much say on their website that the USB connection on their DACs is a throw away. They recommend USB to Coax converters. 
 
My new Calyx 24/192 actually sounds better from the USB option than it does from the Coax. I was blown away by this, and now I know it's possible. 
 
Depending on your price range I'd recommend a DAC you know has a good Coax in and a converter because on every sub 1800 USD DAC (since the Calyx is the only one I've heard where USB was better) I've heard the Coax was better.

 

[colinharding]

 
 

If optical was better than USB, a USB->SPDIF converter wouldn't take advantage of that, since the signal would have travelled through USB, before it hit optical.

 
So you're saying that the signal quality is better just because it has traveled through USB first and then optical?  Mmmm not sure about that, you're just adding more to the transmission line which never helps.  I agree with you that the USB should be as short as possible if employed, but the same is true of any connection.  I'm not sure what you mean by the USB to SPDIF converter "taking advantage" of the signal as a cursory glance would say otherwise.  I mean if USB is the end all be all, then why would you want to convert it to SPDIF other than for the sake of making the USB connection backwards compatible?  You wouldn't, it runs on the same principle as using a $5000 interconnect between your DAC and preamp and then a $2 one between your preamp and amp.  It will only sound as good as your weakest link.  This new technology is all well and good, and maybe it comes down to the fact that I've yet to hear a properly implemented USB connection, but optical doesn't sound as cold and lifeless and coaxial (with a good 75 ohm connection) sounds much more natural than either of them.  I couldn't agree with your aside more!

 

[FSonicSmith]

 
Quote:

So you're saying that the signal quality is better just because it has traveled through USB first and then optical?  Mmmm not sure about that, you're just adding more to the transmission line which never helps.  I agree with you that the USB should be as short as possible if employed, but the same is true of any connection.  I'm not sure what you mean by the USB to SPDIF converter "taking advantage" of the signal as a cursory glance would say otherwise.  I mean if USB is the end all be all, then why would you want to convert it to SPDIF other than for the sake of making the USB connection backwards compatible?  You wouldn't, it runs on the same principle as using a $5000 interconnect between your DAC and preamp and then a $2 one between your preamp and amp.  It will only sound as good as your weakest link.  This new technology is all well and good, and maybe it comes down to the fact that I've yet to hear a properly implemented USB connection, but optical doesn't sound as cold and lifeless and coaxial (with a good 75 ohm connection) sounds much more natural than either of them.  I couldn't agree with your aside more!

 
 
The answer here, too, is that it all depends. A very good USB/S/PDIF converter can also re-clock the data and elminate much of USB-related jitter. I must admit that I essentially agree with your main point, but the problem with digital is that there are inherent compromises that must be made right and left. At present, it's primarily a medium of convenience, and of emerging engineering secondarily, and certainly not a perfect solution to the reproduction of recorded sound. When John Atkinson shows us a graph of a sine wave reproduced through a digital medium that resembles a true sine wave (no squaring/step-offs of shoulders) than the medium will be close to where it needs to be.

 

[kiteki]

 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kiteki /img/forum/go_quote.gif  
If optical was better than USB, a USB->SPDIF converter wouldn't take advantage of that, since the signal would have travelled through USB, before it hit optical.

 
So you're saying that the signal quality is better just because it has traveled through USB first and then optical?

 
That's not what I'm saying.
 
 
 
Quote:

 
It will only sound as good as your weakest link.

Yes, pretty much.  IF optical was superior to USB, then connecting a data stream via a USB cable to optical would only make it sound as good "as USB", pretty much.
 
Signals should be pure, and kept as short as possible.
 
I don't believe there is any definitive answer whether USB, optical or COAX is better, since it all depends on the sender and receiver, not so much the photons versus electrons in the cable.
 
So, it all depends on the USB receiver module inside the DAC, and the method of data transmission from your computer, Asio, KernelStreaming, etc.
 
Likewise if you're using a good external USB->COAX/SPDIF device, it will still depend on the Coax or optical receiver inside your DAC.
 
As an aside, I think USB->COAX/SPDIF devices have become a bit expensive and overrated recently.
 
Now, as for the opening question of the thread "how much does USB limit DAC performance?", the answer is it doesn't, unless you have an internal sound-card which has a high-end COAX sender, and a DAC with a high-end COAX receiver, surpassing current USB systems.
 
As for 32 bit, like I said it's not about the music, it's the fact... how many good or popular 16/44.1 DAC's are there out there?  The designers of DAC chips like Asahi Kasei Microsystems, Sabre ESS and Wolfson will usually have a 24 or 32 bit DAC as their flagship design, best sounding DAC's.
 
So in fact, the best sounding DAC's out there are most likely 32 bit.  Saying 32 bit is "completely useless" (in post #8) since 0.001% of music is 32 bit doesn't make any sense.  Plus I believe computer systems may likely handle 32 bit better than 24 bit from what I've read in a couple places.
 
The only popular 16/44.1 DAC chips I can personally think of are NOS, like the TDA1543 used in the Hifiman HM-601.
 
 
Anyway, mac336, I think the realistic answer is a Teralink X2 or Musiland Monitor 01 USD will serve you just as well as an average internal sound-card with COAX out, and that 24 bit versus 32 bit is not very important.
 
Imho the sound-quality of a DAC is determined by
 
- power supply
- circuit design
- capacitors
- op-amps
- DAC chip used
- USB / COAX / SPDIF receiver chip/s used
- length of cable
- clock precision
- software drivers (ASIO / KernelStreaming, output bit depth etc.).
 
In reality, all of these can reach complete hi-fi standards for less than $300 total, imho.
 
 
 

 

[silversurfer616]

My Eastern Electric Mini Max DAC Plus sounds better(it is actually a stunning sound) via USB(24/192) compared to coax or optical.
Really happy about this as I mostly play music computerbased and use a CD player only as transport for SHM SACDs.
So,USB is the way for me to go!