Latest Thread Images

Schiit Happened: The Story of the World's Most Improbable Start-Up
May 24, 2016 at 6:32 PM Post #10,762 of 149,685
skraggy1981 said:
   
Keeping my fingers crossed for a schiitty tube phono pre amp...
Click to expand...

 
Hehe, I was thinking about the same yesterday. For no reason at all I'm convinced the new amps will be 100% solid state, hence... IMO a pre amp capable to work with both "traditional" or LISST tubes is not unlikely at all, so the schitters (us) can pick different "sound signatures" according to our taste/mood/whatever.
 
May 25, 2016 at 10:40 AM Post #10,764 of 149,685
2016, Chapter 8:
A Perspective On This Moment in Digital
 
Or, what we have our eye on, as things keep changing.
 
Someone new to digital might ask, “Why this subject? Can’t I get everything I need to know from the various forums and press out there?”
 
To be brief: maybe. If you’re looking for something to buy this second, sure, there are a ton of hypemeisters…er, I mean, seasoned and rational press and bloggers out there. There are a ton of people who’ll try to convince you that (insert buzzword here) is absolutely critical to enjoying digital audio, and there’s no way you should be without it.
 
But if you’re looking for some perspective on what might be a real change in digital audio, rather than just another flash in the pan, you may want to look a little deeper.
 
And so, since the world has changed since the last time I dedicated a chapter to digital audio (in those ancient days when DSD was the rage), I figured it might be time to look at what’s happening, from streamers to formats, and give you our perspective on it.
 
And yeah, this is our perspective. It’s a perspective that comes from being in digital audio literally from the start. Read Baldr’s blog for some really, really early stuff. Mike’s seen the rise of digital recording (prior to CD), the rise of CD, the rise and fall of DAT, DCC, HDCD, and SACD, the beginnings of high-res, the start of portable players, the first beginnings of computer audio, the ongoing domination of streaming, the rise and not-going-much-anywhere of DSD, and now, the emergence of MQA. And he’s been involved in quite a bit of the above on the design level. I’ve seen pretty much all of the above except the rise of digital recording, since CDs were my first “serious” medium.
 
And, if that above paragraph isn’t a great illustration of why many of our DACs are upgradable, I don’t know what is.
 
In fact, let’s recap:
 
  1. Digital Audio Pre-Physical Media Era (late 1970s-on)
    1. Digital recording prior to LP pressing
  2. Digital Audio Physical Media Era (1982-on)
    1. Compact Disc
    2. Digital Audio Tape
    3. HDCD
    4. Digital Compact Cassette (compressed)
    5. MiniDisc (compressed)
    6. SACD
    7. Blu-ray Audio
    8. CD Computer Audio
  3. Digital Audio File Era (Late 1990s-on)
    1. iPods/DAPs
    2. MP3
    3. Lossless
    4. High Res (24/96, 24/192, etc)
    5. USB Computer Audio
    6. DSD
  4. Digital Audio Streaming Era (2005-ish on)
    1. Spotify
    2. Tidal
    3. MQA
 
And yeah, it’s a messy sum-up, because I’ve merged formats and delivery methods and stuff like that into a whole bunch of bullet points. But note the four eras. Most listeners are squarely in the streaming era, but many of us krazee audiophiles are still using files.
 

Aside: I certainly am, most of them 16/44.1 CD rips. And Tidal.
 

But yes, that’s a lot of change. And so, I thought, why not take a look at the things that are changing, what we’re paying attention to, what we’re playing with, and where it might take us.
 
With a side order of perspective.
 
 
Change the First: Computer Audio, and the USB Decrapification Wars
 
In the 18 months or so that have passed since I last bemoaned the state of computer audio and the USB interface, how much has changed? Is it better or worse? What’s going to shape computer audio going forward?
 
In short, not much and quite a bit, no and yes, and the USB interface.
 
To elaborate on change, things look about the same on the surface. You can still buy a computer and use it as a digital audio source to feed a DAC, connecting typically via USB.
 
But:
 
  1. Operating systems have changed. Whether you’re using Mac, PC, or Linux, you’re probably looking at a new OS. And the bad news is that the OSes are worse than ever when it comes to streaming audio.
    1. On the Mac side, El Crapitan has earned the loathing of many audiophiles that found problems with audio dropouts via USB…all the way up to the .4 release.
    2. On the PC side, Windows 10 tries much harder to make all this USB audio stuff automatic…while sometimes installing the wrong drivers, or having even more draconian power management that makes USB unusable. Some systems even re-write the registry to re-enable power management after you’ve edited it to turn off power management! And if you think you’re safe because you’re on Windows 7 or 8, be careful, because Windows gargles donkey balls: http://www.pcworld.com/article/3073457/windows/how-microsofts-nasty-new-windows-10-pop-up-tricks-you-into-upgrading.html
    3. On the Linux side, things are a lot better, but even then, early “modern” Linux variants could sometimes cause fits.
  2. USB itself has changed. As mentioned, USB port power management has only gotten worse on the Windows side. On the Mac side, things go in phases. Most new Macs don’t seem to have a problem. On Linux, most users are sophisticated enough to deal with it. USB is, unfortunately, not 100% plug and play, thanks to systems that throttle power to the USB port (to save battery life, or be “green.”) We would have exactly zero problems if USB actually met its spec. And more:
    1. The USB decrapification revolution has become a flood. Holy heck, I don’t know if we would have ever introduced the Wyrd if we knew it would cause such a flood of decrapifiers on the market. Now, there’s at least a half-dozen devices (hilariously, all more expensive than Wyrd) vying for the crown of Decrapifier du Jour. Some people are using 2, 3, or even more of these devices in series…and reporting sonic differences. My only comment is that with a half-dozen devices, some used multiple times in a single system, how do you know when to stop? Or is it better never to start?
    2. USB 3.1 changes everything…eventually. USB 3.1 is making its way onto computers as we speak. It has the potential to change literally everything, with the ability to deliver up to 20V at 5A (100W) of power. Now, of course, that will probably be throttled, especially since a constant 100W draw would deplete a laptop battery in short order. But, with that kind of power available, you could think about serious, serious headphone amps (and even speaker amps) being powered via USB 3.1.
  3. Wireless connectivity is now a much more viable option. No, not Bluetooth. Leave that off. It’s not lossless, and until it’s lossless, we will spend exactly zero time on it. But if you’re talking WiFi, then yes, it’s quite possible to send your computer’s output to a streamer—either commercial or DIY—and lose the wires. Some of these, especially the DIY options, are pretty “beta-like,” and some might have you wishing for the comfort of good old reliable USB.
 
So what do we think is important about all of this? Well, to sum up, “OSes will continue to suck, USB will continue to be throttled (on some systems) and this wireless thing is pretty interesting.”
 
So what are we doing?
 
OSes? There’s nothing we can do about OSes, other than to make sure Microsoft has the right driver for our devices, and hope it detects and installs correctly. It seems to be better these days, but we still have problems from time to time.
 
USB? As far as USB goes, well, we have to look at ways to make sure that the maximum number of systems can simply “plug and go” with our DACs. Although it’s convenient to blame the computer manufacturers for throttling USB power, the reality is, nobody cares when they just got their shiny new DAC and it doesn’t work. So, expect to see internally-powered USB inputs in at least some of our products—that is, USB that does not draw power from the USB bus in order to work.
 

Aside: “So why didn’t you dumbasses do this from the start?” some are asking. Well, for two reasons. One, not all of our DACs can have self-powered USB. Consider Modi and Fulla, which are USB-powered. Two, it has been our experience that keeping the internal power away from the USB input has sounded better. However, as we continue experimenting, this may change.
 

So what about an uber-Wyrd to crush the other decrapifiers? Well, uh, probably no. Because Wyrd is still the least expensive decrapifier, and we think it succeeds admirably at its primary job. That’s never to say never, of course, but it’s not like we’ve felt a need to talk about such a thing.
 
WiFi Streaming? Well, don’t expect to see a wireless device from us soon. We’re playing with some of the DIY options, and some of them are very good. However, they’re also all a bit buggy. They’re certainly nothing we’d want to make the investment in to develop and maintain. But they are a good option for people who want to send music losslessly from a remote computer, or pull music from a network drive through a tablet interface.
 
Wireless streamers are definitely one of the hottest areas in audio right now…and I’m sure we’ll end up seeing more of these, and less traditional computers, as time goes on.
 
And with that, let’s devote a whole section to them…
 
 
Change the Second: WiFi Streamers, and the DIY Revolution
 
As mentioned above, it seems that almost every day, some new kind of small WiFi audio streaming interface is being written about, talked about, reviewed, or introduced.
 
And yes, there are some commercial WiFi streamers—products that connect to your DAC and allow you to send music from your computer wirelessly, or play your music from a network-connected drive. But I think it’s much more interesting what’s happening on the DIY side, specifically amongst the small Linux computers out there today.
 
“Computers?” you might ask. “I thought you said this was a streamer, not a computer.”
 
Well, here’s the thing. All WiFi streamers are computers, even the commercial ones. They pretty much have to be. After all, how else would you get it onto your wireless network? It’s not like Bluetooth, with its relatively simple pairing.
 
So, here’s a recipe for a typical WiFi streamer:
 
  1. One small Linux-capable computer (Raspberry Pi, CuBox, Beaglebone, etc)
  2. One audio OS (Volumio, Rune Audio, I’m sure there are others…)
  3. Some kinda storage (usually an SD card or micro SD card)
  4. Some kinda power supply
  5. If you want to get fancy, some kinda case
 
Get your credit-card computer, download the OS, stick it on an SD card, install it on the computer, set it up on your WiFi network, plug it into your DAC, and control it via its web interface from your tablet or phone. Done.
 
Total cost? Under $100, easy.
 
And you can add fancy audio stuff, if you’d like. Add a SPDIF output. Or add a whole DAC, if you don’t already have one.
 
The point is, WiFi streaming is really taking off, and if you don’t feel like having a computer sitting atop your audio system, it’s not difficult to have a setup where it doesn’t matter where your music is, and you can control everything via a tablet or phone. With the low cost of tablets these days, you could easily have a dedicated system for your listening room.
 
So why aren’t we doing our own streamer? Lots of reasons:
 
  • There are already commercial streamers out there for relatively reasonable prices.
  • There are already DIY streamers out there for insanely cheap prices.
  • Anything we do would have do add something to the space, not just be a Pi in a box with Volumio.
  • It would require too much of our resources to develop and support it.
 
So, sorry, guys…a streamer really isn’t in the cards. Well, unless we can think of something very, very compelling. What could we do that isn’t already being done? Can we make it reliable enough not to crush us in support? Can it be made at a price point lower than the other commercial offerings, but add enough value that it’s worth more than DIY? Lots of questions here.
 
 
Change the Third: Phones and DAPs and Tablets Oh My (USB Power Strikes Again)
 
One thing that hasn’t changed much is how many people want to use portable devices as sources. A decent percentage of our inquiries revolve around the question of “Hey, can I use my phone (or tablet) as a source?” Or, “Hey, is (insert name of DAP here) a good source?”
 
The answer, however, has changed a bit. Back when I last wrote, Android was just getting support for USB Audio 2.0. Now, it’s pretty much there, if you’re running Android 5 and above. (I say “pretty much there,” because it seems there are some device-specific glitches.) So, Android has the potential to be a good, plug-and-play source for USB-input DACs.
 
But…
 
(you knew this was coming)
 
But...USB power strikes again. In this case, USB power management is more important, since your phone’s battery life can be significantly affected by the 150-250mA power draw from a typical USB audio receiver.
 
This is why Apple devices automatically pop up the “this device draws too much current” warning when you plug in most USB-powered DACs. And then, of course, in typical Apple fashion, it simply shuts them down and doesn’t allow the DAC to work at all.
 
Some Android devices will supply that amount of power, and battery life will suffer. Some will not. We can’t test every Android phone on the planet, so we only know that you may get lucky, or you may not, or you may get lucky depending on how much battery you have left.
 
“Wow, sounds like self-powered USB inputs are the ticket here, too,” you say.
 
Well, maybe. Let’s look at this a bit more.
 
Self-powered USB and non-portable devices. Yep, you bet. Great idea. Plug into your Apple or Android device and everything’s cool. Except, well, you’re chained to your desk again. Which may be fine if you’re planning on using a tablet as a source. But it’s less than ideal if you want to be truly portable and use your phone.
 
Self-powered USB and portable devices. Typical USB audio receivers draw 150-250mA. That means you’re looking at a 1500-2500mAH battery…just to run the receiver for 10 hours. Well, more like 8, when you start getting into regulator losses, battery variation, etc. That’s a pretty dang big battery just to run the USB audio receiver…and you still haven’t provided power for the DAC or headphone amp! This is why you’re looking at big fat batteries…or long charge times…or both…on a lot of portable devices with self-powered USB ports.
 
But there’s a better answer. This one just showed up, pioneered by Audioquest:
 
Low-power USB audio receiver. Audioquest didn’t use a commercial chip from C-Media or XMOS. They developed their own code for a low-power general purpose microprocessor, and created a USB input receiver that (IIRC) draws only about 25mA. This means that they can plug and play into Apple stuff, and maximize battery life on all devices. To us, this seems like the way to go. But don’t get all excited—this takes a lot of investigation. Bottom line, we’re looking really hard at USB and how to make it better and more convenient across the line.
 
“Okay, so we know that USB is a pain, and that you’re paying attention to it,” someone asks. “What else are you working on? When do we get our portable DAC/amp? When do we see a DAP?”
 
I’ve answered these questions before, and I’m afraid not much has changed since we last talked about digital. A portable DAC/amp would require us coming up with something truly market-shaking, and something we really, really like. I’m not saying it won’t happen, but we haven’t come up with anything that doesn’t have significant downsides (like being HUGE or being “just another portable DAC/amp”). A DAP is just out of the question. There’s no way we’re going to spend engineering resources recreating player software, music management, and storage that have been amply worked to death in phones.
 
But yeah, we get it. Not everyone listens at home. Sometimes you have to be portable. So we keep looking at the problem….
 
 
Change the Fourth: Formats, and the Definition of Insanity
 
Deep breath. Okay, here’s the big change.
 
  1. First, the definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
  2. Second, this is where the Digital Audio Eras outlined above come into play.
  3. Third, yes, it’s still insane, even in a different era.
 
So here we go. Audiophilia is making the transition from the File Era to the Streaming Era. This is a huge change. It’s the first era where you may end up owning, well…exactly ZERO music. After all, if it’s on-demand, all-you-can-eat, and cheap-per-month, why buy anything at all?
 
Well, before Tidal, there was certainly a reason: if you wanted uncompressed music, you needed to buy files or physical media. Now, with Tidal, 16/44.1 uncompressed is on the RIAA Roundup’s All-You-Can-Eat Menu. At $20 per month. About the cost of a CD or two. And, let me tell you, it’s great! It’s amazing to be able to browse through a library bigger than anything I’d ever have at home, choose something completely uncanny, and click Play.
 
But I still have files.
 
Why? Because many hotel internet connections aren’t fast enough to stream Tidal. Most in-air internet, same problem. In-car? Not a chance unless you’re in the latest LTE environment…and lucky.
 
Hell, sometimes at home on a 100MBPS line, Tidal chokes. This makes you reminiscent for the days of CDs and files really, really fast.
 
And let’s talk Mike. Mike lives about 20 miles away from the Schiit office, and his internet options are exactly two:
 
  1. Dial-up
  2. Shared RF
 
So his data rates make Tidal a complete no-go.
 
But, you know what? Data rates will get faster. Hotels will pull their heads out of their butts. LTE coverage will be better and faster. And high-speed internet will eventually reach the hinterland. There’s no question that streaming is the long-term end-game. Heck, we already see it in the mainstream.
 
So what does this mean to audiophiles? Well, if the story ended at “Tidal offers 16/44.1 uncompressed streaming of XX million tracks,” then it would be pretty much all good.
 
Yes, you can say, “But I want high-res.” And that’s fine, you can buy tracks from HDTracks or Pono Music or whatever. But high-res streaming needs even more bandwidth, which means that it’s not going to happen—today, anyway—on Tidal.
 
Or you can say, “But I want DSD.” And that’s fine, you can buy tracks from the guys who sell DSD. But DSD streaming needs even more bandwidth, which means it’s not going to happen—today, anyway, on Tidal.
 
But you do end up with a solid win-win. A Tidal subscription in a high-bandwidth world would be enough for most audiophiles. Audiophiles that want high-res or DSD can simply purchase those files and enjoy them. And anyone who wants to own 16/44.1 could just buy CDs and rip them. Everyone’s happy.
 
But no. Now we have to do this insanity all over again. The biggest change: enter MQA. 
 
If you’re to believe (most of) the press, MQA is the greatest thing since sliced bread, an amazing new format that promises an even-more-crystal-clear-window-on-the-artist’s-intent. It fixes everything that’s wrong with digital! It’s a watershed moment for audiophiles!
 
The implication: everyone needs to get on board, posthaste! All DACs need to support it! Everyone should be gearing up for the revolution!
 
But wait. Didn’t we hear this, not too long ago? Kinda sounds like DSD, right? Because thousands of DSD titles were just around the corner (I mean, hey, DSD was a Sony thing, and they had, what, how many recordings they could release in DSD?) But 3+ years into the DSD revolution, all we have are a handful of recordings. Inquiries about DSD have dropped to nil on our side of the fence. Stick a fork in it, it’s done. Call it the last format of the File Era.
 
Now we’re barreling straight into the Streaming Era…and MQA is hailed as the answer to shoving high-res audio down a 16/44.1-sized stream, heralding the musical revolution for all devoted audiophiles.
 
Hence the definition of insanity. Here we go again.
 
“Well, but, MQA is totally different from DSD, and SACD, and HDCD, and all the other formats that wanted you to re-buy all of your stuff, because it doesn’t have a “D” in it at all, and it makes high-res streamable,” some might say. “That means you just gotta subscribe to Tidal, which (has promised to have at some unspecified time) MQA.”
 
Oh, okay. So you don’t have to re-buy it. You just have to subscribe to it. Yeah, in a way, this makes sense for the streaming era.
 
But even the assertion that MQA is the “easiest” new format to acquire has a lot of questions wrapped around it:
 
  • When will Tidal offer MQA?
  • How much will MQA cost? Still $20 a month? Or something else?
  • How much of Tidal will be MQA? Just a small percentage, or all of it? A lot of the heavy breathing has orbited around the idea of “all of it.”
  • How much are you going to spend on an MQA-enabled DAC? Should this be factored into the reaquisition cost? Hint: of course.
 
But wait! Now we hear that Warner Music has signed up with MQA. Oh my goodness, the vaults are gonna open wide! Surely this is a sign!
 
Well, no. This means there are even more questions:
 
  • How many titles will Warner Music release in the next year or so? Thousands, or a dozen? Remember, DSD was a Sony thing (as in, they paid NO royalties on it), and they had big vaults, and very little happened on the DSD front.
  • Will Warner Music be OK with Tidal streaming their MQA stuff on their all-you-can-eat menu?
  • Will the releases be remastered, and therefore not directly comparable to the old titles?
 
Remember, an LOI (letter of intent) doesn’t cost much. Reissuing a big library…when it might be available on streaming…hmm…
 
So, to me, it still looks like insanity. Because isn’t this what they’re saying?
 
“Hey, just turn over the entire industry to us, and we’ll make it all good.”
 
A little extreme? Consider that MQA wants:
 
  1. Licensing fees from the recording industry
  2. Licensing fees from the digital audio product manufacturers
  3. Hardware access into the DAC or player of your choice (because no software player)
  4. Subscription fees from every listener via Tidal, and/or
  5. re-buying a bunch of stuff re-released by the recording industry
 
If this isn’t turning over the whole industry, I don’t know what is.
 
And, you know what? Turning over the whole industry to accomplish a worthy goal might not be so bad. But it seems that MQA’s technical side generates more questions for each one that is answered (hat tip to Michael Lavorgna of Audiostream.) And, well, the measurements don’t seem to be very, well, high res:
 
http://archimago.blogspot.com/2016/01/measurements-mqa-master-quality.html
 
And that’s the big change in formats. Instead of everyone asking “when’re you gonna support DSD,” it’s changed to “when’re you gonna support MQA?” With the same level of hyperventilating and implied-“I ain’t gonna buy unless you absolutely guarantee you’ll support this format, even though there ain’t really no content for it yet.”
 
Well, excuse us if we (again) sit on our hands.
 
Let’s wait a bit, and see how this shakes out. If the entire Tidal library is MQA’d (at a reasonable price) within a year, and if Warner releases a few hundred good titles on MQA, then, hmm, maybe it’s going somewhere. And you guys can dig up this chapter from last year and say, “ha, you were wrong!”
 
But if it’s 3% of Tidal’s library at $40 per month and Warner has 7 great titles out within a year, then yeah, we’ll continue…
 
… to best support the 99.9% of music out there in 16/44.1 PCM.
 
Schiit Audio Stay updated on Schiit Audio at their sponsor profile on Head-Fi.
 
https://www.facebook.com/Schiit/ http://www.schiit.com/
May 25, 2016 at 12:46 PM Post #10,769 of 149,685
Another format change incoming, wow. I can't even hear the difference between 320 mp3 and various lossless formats on many albums so I'll continue to download from Bandcamp (where you still get FLAC files available for download) and give direct to artists rather than the pennies they would earn from my listening on a streaming service. Higher quality streams are really approaching the point of diminishing returns here.
 
Also I'm sure Tidal must have fixed this by now but their interface and apps were easily the worst of all streaming services in my experience. This was before the huge buyout though, I hope that money allowed them to fix weird things like only being able to find clean versions of an album on the mobile app but having access to the explicit one on a PC. I thought it sounded great though!
 
I just don't think I'm the target audience as they lacked a lot of material from metal bands I enjoy as well as the local bands that I'll play shows with. Also I don't really like never owning any of the music I listen to. I want to be able to use it however I want (with regards to copyright law obviously). For many people, these concerns aren't really a factor so I totally get it, it's wayyyy cheaper too but I just can't get in to it.
 
I'm generally gung-ho regarding adopting new tech and new ideas but in this case, count me out. I will die with my files! 
tongue.gif
 
 
May 25, 2016 at 12:55 PM Post #10,770 of 149,685
520ranchbro said:
  . . . Also I'm sure Tidal must have fixed this by now but their interface and apps were easily the worst of all streaming services in my experience. This was before the huge buyout though, I hope that money allowed them to fix weird things like only being able to find clean versions of an album on the mobile app but having access to the explicit one on a PC. I thought it sounded great though. . . . 
Click to expand...

 
They did fix the interface after the buyout. Now it's just plastered with Beyoncé's face everywhere and her "albums," whether her own, concepts, or remixes, are consistently featured for days (or weeks) longer than the typical release. 

The fact that the Beatles catalog is available makes up for that though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 3 more.
    • Total: 124 (members: 9, guests: 115)
    Back
    Top