[JazzAudioDog]

The SRC-DX is made to be able to feed a 705.6/768k signal into a Chord DAC with a dual BNC data input and to take processing load off the USB chip of the DAC. (so it will generate less internal noise)

It has few use as an input device for Mscaler as the scaler becomes redundant if you feed it 705.6/768k.

Better is to use toslink into the scaler to isolate electrically from your streamer.

My sources input to the MScaler are up to 192 kHz on streaming services Qobuz, Tidal and JazzRadio. Most of it is 44k. The 24bit/44k and 24bit/48k songs sound very good!

Would the double galvanic isolated USB ports on my streamer and the MScaler take care of most of the electric isolation? I was considering use of the SRC-DX to allow the Aurender streamer clock to be in control rather than the Qutest clock.

 

[LeeJB1970]

My sources input to the MScaler are up to 192 kHz on streaming services Qobuz, Tidal and JazzRadio. Most of it is 44k. The 24bit/44k and 24bit/48k songs sound very good!

Would the double galvanic isolated USB ports on my streamer and the MScaler take care of most of the electric isolation? I was considering use of the SRC-DX to allow the Aurender streamer clock to be in control rather than the Qutest clock.

SRC-DX will do nothing for electrical isolation. You need a Bixpower BP90 powerbank and optical input into the Mscaler. You'll also have the added benefit of not needing expensive bnc cables.

 

[JazzAudioDog]

SRC-DX will do nothing for electrical isolation. You need a Bixpower BP90 powerbank and optical input into the Mscaler. You'll also have the added benefit of not needing expensive bnc cables.

I wasn’t looking for electrical isolation. I want the controlling clock to be the Aurender N150’s clock rather than the Qutest’s clock. Doesn’t the streamer’s clock become “the clock” when a coax interface is used? Doesn’t the DAC clock become the controlling clock when USB is used? My understanding of clock control may be wrong.

 

[muski]

I bet Ghent Audio could make you a cable like that if you explain carefully what you want to do. https://ghentaudio.com/.

I just ordered a pair of DC power cables from Ghent to connect to the unregulated Port II of the Bixpower BP-90. One end will have a 3.5mm x 1.3mm for the tiny port on the Bix, and the other a 5.5mm x 2.1mm connector (for Audiowise OPTO-DX units). I‘ve used their DC cables in the past and always liked them.

My Ghent Audio DC cables (DC-7N16C) just arrived. The 3.5mm x 1.3mm fits perfectly in the unregulated Port II of the Bixpower BP-90.

Great service—ordered them late Sunday night and delivered four days later. Well made, well-shielded and they sound great.

 

[muski]

take processing load off the USB chip of the DAC. (so it will generate less internal noise)

I used a SRC-DX between my streamer and the M Scaler precisely for the reason @Reactcore points out—avoiding the USB chip of the M Scaler. It did slightly reduce RF noise. I later swapped it for a Sonora ultraDigital which further reduced RF noise—noticeably to my ears . Note that the ultraDigital is a single BNC cable and limited to 192kHz and also DSD DoP, which is fine for me—it's in my chain before the M Scaler. People also use the ultraDigital to do USB to LVDS i2s.

 

[Meridian7]

I wasn’t looking for electrical isolation. I want the controlling clock to be the Aurender N150’s clock rather than the Qutest’s clock. Doesn’t the streamer’s clock become “the clock” when a coax interface is used? Doesn’t the DAC clock become the controlling clock when USB is used? My understanding of clock control may be wrong.

I had this question here too few days back: who's the clock boss with spdif, you gave it a 'like' (thanks).
Member ecwl gave a good answer (thanks ecwl):

Most DACs nowadays have some way to reclock the incoming S/PDIF or USB signals to significantly lower jitter.

However, ultimately, it’s the DAC architecture that determines how much jitter your DAC actually outputs in the music.

Chord‘s Pulse Array DAC architecture is jitter-immune so it doesn’t really matter how much incoming jitter you feed a Chord DAC (although incoming RF noise can affect the sound as with all other DAC architectures)

Other DAC architecture are not as immune to jitter as Pulse Array DAC so despite the re-clocking, incoming USB jitter or incoming S/PDIF jitter would still affect the level of jitter the DAC outputs.

So as I understand it, even with spdif, it's still the DAC bossing the jitter (which is clock related).

 

[Reactcore]

I had this question here too few days back: who's the clock boss with spdif, you gave it a 'like' (thanks).
Member ecwl gave a good answer (thanks ecwl):

So as I understand it, even with spdif, it's still the DAC bossing the jitter (which is clock related).

The source clock wont matter with Chord Dac's. Ill try to explain how i see it.

First step:
With SPDIF by nature of the protocol the source masters the clocking of the bits into the DAC's data buffer.
In case of USB the DAC's USB driver chip masters the clock to get the bits into the same data buffer.

Second step:
The DAC's own clock always clocks the data bits from the buffer to the noiseshapers and pulse array.


See the data buffer as a bath tub. It can be filled with a non steady flow of water (jitter)

But the drain (DAC's clock) lets the water flow steady constant out nomatter the jittery income.

 

[FunkyBassMan]

The source clock wont matter with Chord Dac's. Ill try to explain how i see it.

First step:
With SPDIF by nature of the protocol the source masters the clocking of the bits into the DAC's data buffer.
In case of USB the DAC's USB driver chip masters the clock to get the bits into the same data buffer.

Second step:
The DAC's own clock always clocks the data bits from the buffer to the noiseshapers and pulse array.


See the data buffer as a bath tub. It can be filled with a non steady flow of water (jitter)

But the drain (DAC's clock) lets the water flow steady constant out nomatter the jittery income.

Nice analogy!

 

[JazzAudioDog]

I had this question here too few days back: who's the clock boss with spdif, you gave it a 'like' (thanks).
Member ecwl gave a good answer (thanks ecwl):

So as I understand it, even with spdif, it's still the DAC bossing the jitter (which is clock related).

I posted my question before I saw your post. Then I read farther back in this thread and voila!

 

[JazzAudioDog]

The source clock wont matter with Chord Dac's. Ill try to explain how i see it.

First step:
With SPDIF by nature of the protocol the source masters the clocking of the bits into the DAC's data buffer.
In case of USB the DAC's USB driver chip masters the clock to get the bits into the same data buffer.

Second step:
The DAC's own clock always clocks the data bits from the buffer to the noiseshapers and pulse array.


See the data buffer as a bath tub. It can be filled with a non steady flow of water (jitter)

But the drain (DAC's clock) lets the water flow steady constant out nomatter the jittery income.

So if I understand correctly, the only benefit a SRC-DX would provide to a Chord DAC & MScaler system would be to remove the USB receiver chip’s contribution to RF contamination. Maybe that’s enough for a cost-effective performance gain, yes?

 

[JazzAudioDog]

My sources are up to 192kHz sample rates Using mostly Qobuz, Tidal and JazzRadio streams. So no DSD. How much improvement did you get using it (SRC-DX) with a MScaler? Especially for these “lower” sample rates. What improved? Any advice regarding set-up? Also, what DAC are you using? Thanks!

>Hell yes! What would you like to know?<

@GhiAB Any input?

 

[Reactcore]

So if I understand correctly, the only benefit a SRC-DX would provide to a Chord DAC & MScaler system would be to remove the USB receiver chip’s contribution to RF contamination. Maybe that’s enough for a cost-effective performance gain, yes?

I think theres more to gain by using the Opto-DX instead of SRC-DX to electrically isolate your scaler's dual BNC link to your DAC.
But keep the DAC side on a battery.

 

[LeeJB1970]

So if I understand correctly, the only benefit a SRC-DX would provide to a Chord DAC & MScaler system would be to remove the USB receiver chip’s contribution to RF contamination. Maybe that’s enough for a cost-effective performance gain, yes?

That's right. Not a cost effective performance gain though. You'll get that using the Bixpower BP90. It'll cost you a lot less than I paid for it too! Rob Watts has stated that the only way to optimise noise both in and out of the Scaler is to use the battery pack and use optical in to feed the Scaler from source. You don't need the SRC-DX or Opto-DX. More boxes and additional cost which you don't need to accrue.

 

[Reactcore]

is to use the battery pack and use optical in to feed the Scaler from source. You don't need the SRC-DX or Opto-DX. More boxes and additional cost which you don't need to accrue.

Thats why Opto-DX is useful.. optical in.. and getting 1M noise isolated taps to the DAC.

 

[GhiAB]

>Hell yes! What would you like to know?<

@GhiAB Any input?

I started by using the USB input of the MScaler from the PC. Than I bought a Nod2i and connected to the MScaler using Coax (with an adaptor RCA-BNC). The digital connection was much more natural sounding to me. Then I bought an Innuos server and returned to the USB connection into the MScaler; found it better the the PC but it still had a little glare, "artificial" kind of sound so then I tried the SrcDX with Wave Ref. cables and that changed everything for the good. I then tried the Singer SU-6 (with the included power supply or with the SBooster LPS) in place of the SrcDx and I preferred the SrcDx and that is what I use currently. I tried both the BNC and the optical output from the SU-6 and found zero difference between them. But the Src-Dx sounded better to me. My DAC is the Chord TT2 (connected by dual BNC Wave Ref cables to the MScaler). I preferred to invest in the Wave BNC cables to avoid the dual box plus 2 power supplies plus all the cable mess for the OptoDx.