[Anaxilus]

Quote:

is there any reason why it should not be the best in another persons system?

 
Implementation in each system and piece of kit.  How various implementations handle USB/SPDIF are quite varied and not at all consistent.  The idea of perfect binary consistency translating across all platforms is one of the biggest fallacies I can think of in audio.  Digital audio has been something of a disappointment in this regard IME and seems barely more certain than picking the right tube sad to say.

 

[Defiant00]

Quote:

 
Implementation in each system and piece of kit.  How various implementations handle USB/SPDIF are quite varied and not at all consistent.  The idea of perfect binary consistency translating across all platforms is one of the biggest fallacies I can think of in audio.  Digital audio has been something of a disappointment in this regard IME and seems barely more certain than picking the right tube sad to say.

 
As an example, apparently the optical out on some of the mac laptops isn't that great, in which case USB might be better.
 
And a disclaimer, I don't own a Mac laptop, it's just what I've heard here on the forums.

 

[ninjikiran]

Tbh there isn't much difference with digital transports, in my experience transports are the 1% of the audio experience.  Unless its one of those old cheapo 16-bit USB modules which have a bit of an effect on output(could of also been the dac as well).
 
One of the advantages of optical is being completely isolated in its own world, with its disadvantage not being very efficient jitter wise
 
Usb is much like spdif for most people, one of the  hidden advantages of USB is you can get part of the advantage of optical by not using the PC ground, and replacing the power lines with a separate power supply.  Its plug and play most of the time, you buy it, plug it in and your good to go.  Some of the most advanced standalone transports are USB!!!
 
coaxial is just old school, everything oldschool just works perfectly.  I personally prefer it but I also use a dedicated sound card for it... which takes effort.  If your on head-fi you are smart enough.
 
That is my opinion, it is neither right nor wrong just  a different point of view.

 

[Yuceka]

Quote:

 
As an example, apparently the optical out on some of the mac laptops isn't that great, in which case USB might be better.
 
And a disclaimer, I don't own a Mac laptop, it's just what I've heard here on the forums.

As a Mac and a Bifrost owner, the difference between the USB and the optical is quite discernible for me. Optical is clearer and more life like to my ears. 

 

[preproman]

Reserved 

 

[jman06]

Quote:

 
As an example, apparently the optical out on some of the mac laptops isn't that great, in which case USB might be better.
 
And a disclaimer, I don't own a Mac laptop, it's just what I've heard here on the forums.

 
I found this to be true as well.  On occasion I use my MacBook Pro as my source.  I have used both optical and USB and to me the optical sounded just plain dull and the USB was clearly better.  I thought it was my optical cable, but then I used it with my Oppo, PC, and Squeezebox Touch (feeding the Bifrost) and they sounded much better.  Now I am using optical from my PC and USB from Mac.  For cables I used the Audioquest Forest for optical and Audioquest Coffee for USB.  My MacBook Pro is a 2010 model if that makes any difference.  

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

 
I found this to be true as well.  On occasion I use my MacBook Pro as my source.  I have used both optical and USB and to me the optical sounded just plain dull and the USB was clearly better.  I thought it was my optical cable, but then I used it with my Oppo, PC, and Squeezebox Touch (feeding the Bifrost) and they sounded much better.  Now I am using optical from my PC and USB from Mac.  For cables I used the Audioquest Forest for optical and Audioquest Coffee for USB.  My MacBook Pro is a 2010 model if that makes any difference.  

 
x3 using my mother's Macbook.  Wanted to compare to my Thinkpad using an XFi Xpress card and it was not pretty.  Thought it too was the cable w/ the 1/8" but it sounded fine from the QA350.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 
I found this to be true as well.  On occasion I use my MacBook Pro as my source.  I have used both optical and USB and to me the optical sounded just plain dull and the USB was clearly better.  I thought it was my optical cable, but then I used it with my Oppo, PC, and Squeezebox Touch (feeding the Bifrost) and they sounded much better.  Now I am using optical from my PC and USB from Mac.  For cables I used the Audioquest Forest for optical and Audioquest Coffee for USB.  My MacBook Pro is a 2010 model if that makes any difference.  

 
jman06,
 
I see you have the Mjolnir and BHA-1, care to do a compassion on both?

 

[grokit]

My humble HP tx2 laptop/tablet came with an Altec Lansing sound card, and its optical out sounds better than any Mac I've tried including my Mac Pro. Unfortunately the jack is on the front

 

[sridhar3]

Are there any tablets with optical out?

 

[olor1n]

The Mjolnir/HD800 pairing exposes a noticeable difference between usb and optical for me. Not sure if it's due to implementation on my late 2011 MBP, or just the differences inherent in the Bifrost's inputs. Usb (Furutech Formula 2 fwiw) has more bite, with a hint of grain and dryness in some recordings. Optical is smoother and more laid-back, clearer despite the less distinct edges giving the overall presentation a slightly smeared quality.
 
I caught a glimpse of this when I previously had the Lyr between the Bifrost and headphone. The Mjolnir lays it bare. I prefer optical in my system.

 

[PelPix]

*******.  After all this hype, this statement DAC better be like a 32-bit, ultraprecise, completely ringless binary thermometer dac with 3d transistors using a 32nm fab process or some ****.

 

[.Sup]

The Mjolnir/HD800 pairing exposes a noticeable difference between usb and optical for me. Not sure if it's due to implementation on my late 2011 MBP, or just the differences inherent in the Bifrost's inputs. Usb (Furutech Formula 2 fwiw) has more bite, with a hint of grain and dryness in some recordings. Optical is smoother and more laid-back, clearer despite the less distinct edges giving the overall presentation a slightly smeared quality.

I caught a glimpse of this when I previously had the Lyr between the Bifrost and headphone. The Mjolnir lays it bare. I prefer optical in my system.

Most of my experiences with optical vs USB have been that optical was smoother, blacker, laid back as you said while USB has been brighter and more aggressive. Almost as if optical went through slightly excessive power conditioning.

 

[Meoow]

Quote:

The Mjolnir/HD800 pairing exposes a noticeable difference between usb and optical for me. Not sure if it's due to implementation on my late 2011 MBP, or just the differences inherent in the Bifrost's inputs. Usb (Furutech Formula 2 fwiw) has more bite, with a hint of grain and dryness in some recordings. Optical is smoother and more laid-back, clearer despite the less distinct edges giving the overall presentation a slightly smeared quality.
 
I caught a glimpse of this when I previously had the Lyr between the Bifrost and headphone. The Mjolnir lays it bare. I prefer optical in my system.

 
Wow, that is the exact experience I got from testing USB vs Optical through my E17. I am glad that I am not the only one 

. That is why I didn't waste the extra $100 for USB support when I bought the Bifrost as I prefer Optical sounding more than USB.

 

[shaunybaby]

I can,t seem to dig up much on the new MJOLNIR amp by schiit can anyone link my to a article about people taking about them?