[canali]

http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/03/fighting-fit-usb-audio-from-wyred4sounds-recovery
 
for those of us using our computers/laptops as our music sources
that we should be also be considering usb conditioners to further enhance our listening enjoyment...seems like
the area of usb and signal conditioning is a growing one.
Audioquest at the recent Jan CES show, for example, noted they're now
looking into this area as well.
 
Am I the only one, however who feels they almost need an electronics degree to fully understand this area
esp when there is discussion/comments on various forums?
it's not black and white: even on here and other threads (computer audiophile etc) 
you'll find some heated debate on the efficacy of these products' claims in the audio chain.
(ie see the audioquest jitterbug discussion
http://www.head-fi.org/t/777003/review-of-audioquest-jitterbug-usb-data-power-noise-filter/225
....even in the comments n john darko's article (top) there are arguments on the efficacy of such.
 
I have no problem supporting any said company listed below, and I'd like to believe they're 
all trying to stay in business and come out with new, validly researched products to enhance our audio enjoyment,
esp as our laptops/computers are more and more becoming popular music sources.
they want to continue to make money and further their good reputations.
and i have no problem spending my $$, if the product can live up to its claims
(objectively live up to its claims, that is: just not anecdotaly or in some
marketing/sales generalizations) 
 
among the ones out there i'm looking at the iFi nano iusb3.0
http://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/nano-iusb3-0/
 
or it's bigger brother, the micro iusb 3.0 to add to my laptop to iDSD daisychain.
http://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/micro-iusb3-0/
 
then there is the uptone regen
http://uptoneaudio.com/products/usb-regen 
 
now the latest 'flavour of the month'...the wyred recovery
https://wyred4sound.com/products/digital-converters/recovery
 
intona
http://intona.eu/en/products
 
of course there are others, too.
 
hope we can have some good civil debate and discussion here.
 
lastly, if anything: this thread at the very bottom below proves just how nebulous
and frustrating this area can be to try to wade through, esp for a neophyte like me.
what starts at first like a simple science project having device testing against their claims goes a bit sideways
with clashing opinions as to the proper testing methods used,
the criteria evaluated and then it quickly at times goes sideways into bickering.....leaves me a bit jaded .... but still confused.
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?18580-Science-Thread-Review-of-Audioquest-Jitterbug-and-Uptone-Regen-USB-Conditioners/page101&s=6726a08ea5f4b01215f16eb73fe74e59  

 

 

[DDF]

By far the best usb treament is to isolate the ground between the source (eg pc), and the dac.

Cleaning power and reclocking are nice, but are an order of magnitude less effective than true isolation, including the ground. The ground is a power supply feed as well.

Isolation comes in several forms, galvanic (tranformer based, solutions I've seen tap out at 92 khz), optical (pricey), silicon.

In my system in lowered the noise floor (quite audibly), and significantly cleaned up the audio quality. Theyre especially effective if the source is safety grounded (3 prong ac plug)

 

[krumley7882]

Thanks for starting this thread!  I am interested to learn more and hear peoples inputs.

 

[krumley7882]

  Thanks for starting this thread!  I am interested to learn more and hear peoples inputs.

conditioned inputs, of course

 

[leaky74]

The only example of these that I've tried is the Jitterbug. I've posted my comments on that in the Jitterbug thread but I'll paraphrase here.....
 
There's no denying they have an effect on sound; the impact is undeniable & since the device is passive, I can only assume it's doing what it says in the marketing bumpf. The 'science' behind it is beyond my feeble reckoning! What I wasn't certain on at first is whether I liked the change it introduced. I perhaps mistook what it was doing as robbing my HD600's of their signature sound. After repeated listening I must admit, I've grown to prefer the sound with Jitterbug present. In fact, I've gone & added a second! With the second, it's not 'doubly' noticeable but, again, noticeable it is; it adds a little more of what the first one does (apologies, that's the best way I can describe it!), and for another £38 I can't really fault it.      

 

[canali]

I have a feeling were going to see more comprehensive solutions coming out shortly, also addressing ground issues, with affordable prices, too.

 

[AudioMan2013]

I have been using the Schiit Wyrd for about 6-8 months now and it made an audible difference.  Before this, I had a direct USB connection from my pc to the dac.  It did clean things up for me and made everything sound a bit tighter.  It worked so well that I went ahead and purchased a second one for my office.

 

[canali]

also related discussion going on below at computer audiophile, as i've ref'd this thread.
 
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/comparison-thread-recovery-universal-serial-bus-industry-standard-cables-connectors-and-communications-protocols-between-computers-and-electronic-devices-reclocker-regen-and-similar-devices-curated-thread-27465/index5.html#post525545

 

[leaky74]

Would I be right in assuming that if the Wyrd is doing what it says, then the use of 'audiophile grade USB' cables is unnecessary? i.e. the Wyrd is 'cleaning' up the signal from source and what's passed forward to & through the DAC renders ferrite jackets etc pointless?

 

[canali]

Would I be right in assuming that if the Wyrd is doing what it says, then the use of 'audiophile grade USB' cables is unnecessary? i.e. the Wyrd is 'cleaning' up the signal from source and what's passed forward to & through the DAC renders ferrite jackets etc pointless?

maybe be best to reach out to wyrd directly on this good question: i emailed him this link
and the gentleman who replied agrees more discussion needs to made around this area,
for clarity, too.....and if you get a reply kindly share it here, please.

 

[AudioMan2013]

  maybe be best to reach out to wyrd directly on this good question: i emailed him this link and he agrees more discussion needs to made around this area,
for clarity, too.....and if you get a reply kindly share it here, please.

I can verify that Wyrd is cleaning up the USB signal but it also depends on how noisy your USB ports are.  I have huge computer tower with multiple drives including 4 optical drives and a hand full of hard drives.  It is a noisy computer and the Wyrd box really did help clean things up.  I also run a long USB cable from this computer to my dac.  I would occasionally get drop outs and pops when using this cable.  The Wyrd was able to eliminate those.  One engineering technique Wyrd uses is that the AC Wall wart is really an AC transformer.  Inside the Wyrd box it converts it into DC by using a linear power supply.  
 
Regarding digital cables, an expensive audiophile USB cables are made better with better shielding/materials and probably has less errors so packets don't have to be re-transmitted.  When compared to a normal  USB cable that works, I really don't think how an audiophile digital USB cable can improve the sound.  I haven't noticed this but perhaps my audio system is not sensitive enough to tell.  Now analog cables are a completely different story.  They do make a difference but there are a lot of snake oil sellers out there.  I've made my own interconnect and headphone cables using just normal Belden/Alpha silver plated copper stranded wire that can be purchased in 100ft spools using medium grade connectors and they actually sounded better than $200 audiophile cables.

 

[leaky74]

Word back from Schiit:

"The Wyrd provides a clean 5VDC output and a reclocked data output.

It doesn’t necessarily replace ferret cores"

On the subject of cables; I was sceptical but there was a noticeable difference with the QED reference cable I bought. Unfortunately, it was too stiff to be practical so I've returned it.

 

[SirIsaac]

I've been very interested in these devices as well. A lot of people are saying that separating the data and the power lines of the usb cable yields the best results. Probably for noise isolation as Audioman2013 stated.
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/701900/schiit-happened-the-story-of-the-worlds-most-improbable-start-up/3810#post_11058782
 
http://www.musicdirect.com/p-161058-ifi-gemini-usb-cable.aspx

 

[Rizlaw]

A suggestion for those who own or contemplate purchasing the Wyred 4 Sound Recovery USB. The Recovery comes with a perfectly good short 6" USB cable. EJ Sarmento recommends a very short cable between the Recovery and the DAC. However, IMO, using no cable to connect the Recovery to your DAC is even better. All you need do is purchase an inexpensive ($0.50) USB male A to male B adapter like the one in the link below (postage will set you back, for the U.S., an additional $3.50 for expedited delivery):
 
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002B9AR8I/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
 
Replace the supplied USB cable the goes between the Recovery and your DAC with the USB adapter and see if you don't get a better sonic result. BTW, this is how Audiophilleo does it with their USB to SPDIF Audiophilleo 1 and 2, except they use a BNC to RCA adapter. This could save you the cost of an overpriced USB cable and I believe the result is worth the $4.00 investment before you go the uber expensive USB cable route. The Recovery is very light and, with a little care in cable dressing, I have no problem with it remaining securely connected to my W4S DAC-2 DSDse USB input.
 
Also, Wyred recommends between 100 - 200 hours burn-in before making any judgments. Reluctantly, I have to agree that it does get better with time.
Try it, you may thank me saving you a few hard earned bucks.