[computerparts]

   
I don't know where your handle name came from and I am no computer expert, but one thing I can tell you is that a computer differs slightly from a sausage maker as far as throughput regulation and there's more to it than the speed at which the motor spins lol!!
 
Now, I understand you still live in 1995 where non computer drive type transports were the rule and think a 1x spinning CD is really good at jitter. But in case one wants a practical alternative and still has worries about jitter and other noise due to connected computer, here's a $99 solution that deals with it on the USB side: http://schiit.com/products/wyrd . It actually did not make squat difference in my system, probably because I already have a reclocker downstream (was using USB power through), so it's more for the OCD checkbox than anything else atm...
 
I'd love more DAC comparison talk and less rethoric if there's any contributor available! Still waiting for my dac so it will be a while until I post...
 
arnaud

 
And yet isn't it ironic that to this day some of the best sounding dacs date back to the 90's?  By the way, I never said anything about a cd player being good at jitter. I never even said anything about jitter to begin with so I'm not sure where you conjured that up. Back to dac talk. Weren't you the guy having trouble finding a good dac in Japan? If so, have you looked at 47 Labs, Kondo, and Accuphase? If you get lucky you might even find a Stax DAC-X1T.

 

[Chris J]

Asynchronous USB refers to how the data is transferred. Noise is electrical and will be transmitted regardless. Rob Watts made an interesting post in the Hugo thread yesterday stating that he reckons that optical is the best transport (for the Hugo) as the jitter will be eliminated and it wont transmit any noise at all. Given that modern DAC designs are supposed to eliminate jitter, what he said about people mistaking the effects of noise as better clarity may explain a lot.

As for S/PDIF transports I consider this required reading: http://lampizator.eu/LAMPIZATOR/TRANSPORT/CD_transport_DIY.html

I'd consider my Audiophilleo 1 to effect the same thing as a high-end transport, but without the issue of having to get music off a disc, which, if you know how they work, are full of errors!

I'd bet strongly that the best transport is a well-made streaming server with suitable electrical isolation at the digital outputs. 

OK.
I read it.
Is there a quiz? :confused_face_2:

 

[ciphercomplete]

 
Try finding a hard drive with an rpm of 500 which is the fastest at which a cd will spin. Typical laptop drives are 5200 rpm. An SSD's performance is far faster. If you throw data at a dac at these insane speeds (which I don't even know if dacs are made for) shouldn't there be some repercussions?

 
This is just not how things work.  
 
 

 Maybe you could buffer it but how would you know what to set the buffer at?

 
This is exactly what happens in a sense and it is done automatically no need to set a buffer.  The data gets clocked by the computer or usb/spdif solution (outside or inside the dac) before it reaches the actual conversion step.  The same thing happens inside a cd player, data is read, hopefully error corrected, clocked and sent to the dac (internal or external).  A computer can in no way bombard the dac with the information like you seem to suggest as it simply would not work.  The information gets there at the same pace as it would had it came from a cd transport.  Hard drive speed only refers to how fast the computer pulls data off of the hard drive.

 

[ciphercomplete]

   
Asynchronous USB refers to how the data is transferred. Noise is electrical and will be transmitted regardless. Rob Watts made an interesting post in the Hugo thread yesterday stating that he reckons that optical is the best transport (for the Hugo) as the jitter will be eliminated and it wont transmit any noise at all. Given that modern DAC designs are supposed to eliminate jitter, what he said about people mistaking the effects of noise as better clarity may explain a lot.
 

  Back in the day (2008 lol) the only way I would even consider connecting my pc to my headphone rig was by optical.  I had a external soundcard with optical output ran into a Monarchy audio DIP with AES into a Monarch NM24 dac.  I've always thought optical was overlooked especially in computer audio.  I read somewhere many years ago that the only reason optical is limited to 96khz is that no one has bothered to update the send and recieve connectors to something more robust.  
 
I think a optical solution that somehow spoofs usb would be awesome.  You would have to have a add on pci express card with a optical data output or software that can re-purpose the computer's toslink optical output to output data then a separate external box can either convert this to spdif or send it on in usb form over standard usb cables to your usb dac.  At least there would be no hard line for any noise to travel to the dac.  

 

[computerparts]

   
This is just not how things work.  
 
 
 
This is exactly what happens in a sense and it is done automatically no need to set a buffer.  The data gets clocked by the computer or usb/spdif solution (outside or inside the dac) before it reaches the actual conversion step.  The same thing happens inside a cd player, data is read, hopefully error corrected, clocked and sent to the dac (internal or external).  A computer can in no way bombard the dac with the information like you seem to suggest as it simply would not work.  The information gets there at the same pace as it would had it came from a cd transport.  Hard drive speed only refers to how fast the computer pulls data off of the hard drive.

 
I see I was mistaken. Thank you for the explanation. This is interesting. So it is not the dac that is being bombarded but rather the clock in the pc. With this bombarding in the pc, would it be possible for the clock to produce extra errors or maybe I should say noise on the clock? I understand not all clocks are created equal. So shouldn't there be some limitation to a cheap factory clock in a pc receiving data at 10 times the speed a cheap factory clock in a cd based transport would receive? 

 

[bfreedma]

  
This is just not how things work.  
 
 
 
This is exactly what happens in a sense and it is done automatically no need to set a buffer.  The data gets clocked by the computer or usb/spdif solution (outside or inside the dac) before it reaches the actual conversion step.  The same thing happens inside a cd player, data is read, hopefully error corrected, clocked and sent to the dac (internal or external).  A computer can in no way bombard the dac with the information like you seem to suggest as it simply would not work.  The information gets there at the same pace as it would had it came from a cd transport.  Hard drive speed only refers to how fast the computer pulls data off of the hard drive.

 
I see I was mistaken. Thank you for the explanation. This is interesting. So it is not the dac that is being bombarded but rather the clock in the pc. With this bombarding in the pc, would it be possible for the clock to produce extra errors or maybe I should say noise on the clock? I understand not all clocks are created equal. So shouldn't there be some limitation to a cheap factory clock in a pc receiving data at 10 times the speed a clock in a cd based transport would receive? 

Not going to be an issue. Handling audio isn't an issue for any recent PC.

 

[estreeter]

@computerparts, if you're prepared to wade through the conflicting opinions at Computer Audiophile, you'll find a few of the regulars do know their stuff. If I had to nominate a 'turnkey' solution without having actually heard it, try to find a used Bryston BDP-1 : I'm still messing around with DiY toys but Bryston know a thing or two about audio. Good luck. 

 

[kazsud]

Has anyone here tried the audio-gd usb to i2s converters?
 
http://www.audio-gd.com/Pro/dac/DI2014/DI2014EN.htm

 

[conquerator2]

  Has anyone here tried the audio-gd usb to i2s converters?
 
http://www.audio-gd.com/Pro/dac/DI2014/DI2014EN.htm

I have it. What of it? 

I also ordered the Gustard U12 to compare and see how the two 'budget' converters fare 

 

[Hansotek]

Two part question:

1. Is the sound from the Bifrost Uber's optical input as good as the sound from the gen 2 USB input?

2. Would a Bifrost Uber (optical only) be a noticeable upgrade from an ODAC?

(Source would be a MacBook Pro. Amp is a Schiit Lyr.)

 

[papa kief]

Asynchronous USB refers to how the data is transferred. Noise is electrical and will be transmitted regardless. Rob Watts made an interesting post in the Hugo thread yesterday stating that he reckons that optical is the best transport (for the Hugo) as the jitter will be eliminated and it wont transmit any noise at all. Given that modern DAC designs are supposed to eliminate jitter, what he said about people mistaking the effects of noise as better clarity may explain a lot.

As for S/PDIF transports I consider this required reading: http://lampizator.eu/LAMPIZATOR/TRANSPORT/CD_transport_DIY.html

I'd consider my Audiophilleo 1 to effect the same thing as a high-end transport, but without the issue of having to get music off a disc, which, if you know how they work, are full of errors!

I'd bet strongly that the best transport is a well-made streaming server with suitable electrical isolation at the digital outputs. 

+1 for Audiophilleo.

i am using a MBP (with jriver) feeding an Audiophilleo AP2 SE (Special Edition) thru an upgraded, custom power supply and then feeding the 24bit 384k/ DSD128 source into my Chord Hugo via coax from the ap2. This connection versus a simple high quality silver usb cable (32bit 384k to the Hugo) was the icing on the cake for me. My sound now has much more depth, air, deep rich bass (but not too much). Much more of a full, 3d holographic feeling sound that I was looking for. Almost sold my Hugo and purchased another DAC, glad I didn't. I tried a few other usb spdif converters but nothing touches the AP in my setup.

Very very happy with the Audiophilleo.

 

[Stillhart]

So 142 pages and I know I'm going to come in here and noob it up... but I gotta ask.
 
I heard the Chord Hugo this week at CES and was REALLY impressed by the sound quality.  Based on your review on the first page, It seems I have much to learn.  I brought my cheap portables along (SoundMAGIC HP100) so I could have a baseline for testing other headphones and listening through the Chord just made my jaw drop.  I didn't realize those headphones could do that!
 
So now I'm thinking I need to drop some money on a real DAC and amp.  I feel like there's a lot of potential for obvious sonic gain by moving up the DAC+Amp ladder now.  Especially with my new LCD-2.
 
My first choice was the NFB-28 (I like Audio-GD!) but I worry that maybe that's a baby step when I should just go all in and get something like the Gungnir and Mjolnir, wife-aggro be damned!  I'm not a fan of the Modi, didn't find it much better than the DAC in my Sound Blaster, so I'm worried that all the Schiit gear is equally over-hyped and over-rated.  But you guys seem to love the Gungnir and the price is really competitive.
 
I'm rambling.  I guess, I just need a nudge in the right direction so I can get my research rolling.  Can you guys recommend a good desktop DAC and Amp combo (I don't care if it's all-in-one or not) that's cheaper than the Chord Hugo but sounds as good or better?
 
Thanks!

 

[tonykaz]

Mr.Stillhart,
 
You gotta be major careful about Shows, these presentations are set-up by people that know how to do a Dog & Pony show, you probably heard the best possible music and carefully chosen electronics devices.   
 
If you had a glimpse of the behind the scenes view of how these Shows are done you'd be careful not to put much credence in your observations and impressions.  
 
The Chord is reviewed to be a nice sounding device but not a magical device. 
 
Find a local group of Headphone people and try their stuff, you can expect this path to be representatve of what you can realistically expect from any purchase you make.  
 
I've done CES and other shows over the last 4 decades as a Purchasing Agent, Retailer and Manufacturer,  all the stops are pulled out for the Big Show.  
 
If you are a consumer, you are a babe in the woods. 
 
Tony in Michigan

 

[judmarc]

Can you guys recommend a good desktop DAC and Amp combo (I don't care if it's all-in-one or not) that's cheaper than the Chord Hugo but sounds as good or better?
 
Thanks!

 
The thing is that the Hugo has a deserved reputation for sounding as good as DACs many times *its* price.  As you learned, it's an excellent DAC.  Gungnir is a heck of a DAC - Schiit builds great stuff - but that's quite a load of expectation to put on it.  Laudable goal to come out with something better but lots cheaper than the Hugo, but you may be better served by having a more realistic view: What level of performance will make you happy?  If it's nothing less than the Hugo, start saving!  If it's something in line with your current budget, then the question isn't what will sound as good as or better than the Hugo, but what the best sounding contenders are in your price range.

 

[Clemmaster]

At least wait for the Chord 2Qute and pair it with a decent headphone amp. Would get much better result than the Hugo, no doubt.