USB interface with S/PDIF and digital XLR output ?

Jan 27, 2006 at 7:25 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 31

Daroid

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 17, 2003
Posts
1,147
Likes
30
Hi, i'm currently looking into making a digital output on a laptop, so it has to be rather small. Guzzler's design looks good (PCM2902 reference ?), but i', thinking that having a balanced digital output through XLR would be nice.... Does such a design for USB exist ? Does anyone have a hint of what this would take - e.g. what needs to be modified on Guzzler's digital output to allow this ?

tia.
 
Jan 27, 2006 at 8:16 PM Post #2 of 31
The acronym you're looking for is AES/EBU . . . what's confusing is that you'd know that if you had something to plug it into.
 
Jan 27, 2006 at 9:11 PM Post #3 of 31
Confusing ? Sure... AES/EBU are the organisations behind the standards of it. All in all it's still at digital output compatible with a three-pin XLR connector.

Now let's get this thread back on track.
 
Jan 27, 2006 at 10:41 PM Post #6 of 31
Mostly on topic...
I've been looking for a device that does that (digital from USB or Firewire) but avoids S/PDIF. I just want AES thru an XLR cable. There are a few things that I've found... but they are GROSSLY overkill. with 56 channels and MIDI and video and microphone inputs with AD conversion @ 24-bit... etc. they cost over $1000. There are a few $500-600 PCI sound cards that will do it, but I want it external from my CPU (like the original poster).

Is this an unusual request? Or is it much more difficult than I realize? (to convert USB or firewire to AES/EBU)

thanks people.
 
Jan 28, 2006 at 12:06 AM Post #7 of 31
AES/EBU is nearly(!) identical in format to S/PDIF, with a different (and curiously inferior) electrical interface. So any chip that delivers S/PDIF could be used. PCM2706 etc. You need an external pulse transformer, or high frequency balanced line driver to convert the single ended S/PDIF to the balanced AES/EBU. Not everything is happy with S/PDIF if it expects AES/EBU. AES/EBU is limited to 20 bits sample depth, and has other format issues that can cause problems.

If you do need absolutely perfect AES/EBU format - you will need to use one of the format conversion chips. Crystal do some - try the CS8416. (If you need sample rate conversion CS8420.) They will suck I2S and spit AES/EBU - although you still need the balanced output driver. So a PCM2706 and CS8416 will get you bit perfect AES/EBU.
 
Jan 28, 2006 at 1:32 AM Post #8 of 31
Thanks for the reply, it was very helpful
smily_headphones1.gif

If it must be the ideal AES/EBU output.
I firstly will need the PCM2702 (or similar) to transmit S/PDIF to RXP and RXN of the Cirrus CS8420 (for example)... datasheet: http://www.cirrus.com/en/pubs/proDat.../CS8420_F3.pdf page 57, i expect that RXP is Receive Positive, and RXN is Receive Neutral ? To be honest i'm not sure what i have to do with the rest of the connections, since this must run without a microcontroller.
Not sure where an S/PDIF input should be connected since it's not mentioned, but maybe it's under the AES3 ?
 
Jan 28, 2006 at 1:33 AM Post #9 of 31
The CS8416 is an S/PDIF receiver. I'm using it in a DAC application currently. From what i remember on the datasheet it has a 5:2 input mux, but other then that no conversion ability. You may be able to output AES/EBU taking an S/PDIF input but not I2S, that was strictly and output only IIRC.

One could always modify the S/PDIF to include pulse transformers. There are some very interesting examples on DIYAudio's Digital forum where by people take the S/PDIF input run it into a transformer, buffer it, correct the impedance and then run it into the CS8416 differentially.
 
Jan 28, 2006 at 1:40 AM Post #10 of 31
Quote:

Originally Posted by Francis_Vaughan
AES/EBU is nearly(!) identical in format to S/PDIF, with a different (and curiously inferior) electrical interface. So any chip that delivers S/PDIF could be used. PCM2706 etc. You need an external pulse transformer, or high frequency balanced line driver to convert the single ended S/PDIF to the balanced AES/EBU. Not everything is happy with S/PDIF if it expects AES/EBU. AES/EBU is limited to 20 bits sample depth, and has other format issues that can cause problems.

If you do need absolutely perfect AES/EBU format - you will need to use one of the format conversion chips. Crystal do some - try the CS8416. (If you need sample rate conversion CS8420.) They will suck I2S and spit AES/EBU - although you still need the balanced output driver. So a PCM2706 and CS8416 will get you bit perfect AES/EBU.



Hmmm. Thanks for that.
So, AES/EBU is not better than S/PDIF in regard to jitter? Or CAN it be better? I know very little about it and was under the impression that AES/EBU is "better" if you can use it.

My idea (and I think the one of the OP) was to find something as a go between from a laptop to a DAC that accepts AES/EBU thru a single XLR. I don't need it balanced at that point - I don't think.

Is this a waste of time or a bad idea?
I just keep reading about how sucky S/PDIF is.
 
Jan 28, 2006 at 1:42 AM Post #11 of 31
The impression I get is that 75ohm bnc coax is far better than the 110ohm xlr and you should use the standard 75ohm if you have the choice, but 99% of manufactures get it wrong as well on the input or output spdif circuits so to really get it right will require modding them too

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showt...threadid=67247

http://www.diyhifi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=284

http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=156978

Just a pity the man with the most knowledge on spdif transmission, Jocko Homo, loves to throw out little bits of information here and there having to 'splain it again
biggrin.gif
 
Jan 28, 2006 at 2:20 AM Post #12 of 31
The problems with S/PDIF are intrinsic to the data format - in that it carries the clock with the data, and it is impossible to recover the clock without some data correlated jitter artefacts - which yields jitter related distortion components of a peculiarly horrible nature.

Jocko Homo's experience seems to suggest that the difficulty in reducing these artefacts is greatly under-appreciated and that jitter in the clock recovery is influenced by an astonishing range of issues - many related to the RF performance of the link. So much so that even very small reflection artefacts due to impedance glitches - even as simple as a slight crushing of the coax cable - is detectable. Now an XLR connector was never designed with the transmission of RF in mind - it has no guaranteed characteristic impedance - and the same is true for the balanced cable. AES/EBU was really designed with the idea that studios could use existing patch cables. The RF performance of this is at best undefined, and almost universally rotten. So why does music recorded under such circumstances survive? Mostly because in a professional setting the clock is not recovered from the AES/EBU signal - it is only used as a digital interconnect - and the audio stays in digital form - with the ADC clock signal derived from a master clock that runs the entire studio. Distribution of that clock is critical - but if it is done with a signal that has no other data on it, one can avoid the worst of the data related jitter issues and recover a pretty clean clock.

In a domestic setting, or indeed anywhere where you need to recover the clock, AES/EBU is demonstrably inferior to S/PDIF, and that is starting at a pretty low base.
 
Jan 28, 2006 at 2:34 AM Post #13 of 31
Quote:

Originally Posted by Francis_Vaughan
The problems with S/PDIF are intrinsic to the data format - in that it carries the clock with the data, and it is impossible to recover the clock without some data correlated jitter artefacts - which yields jitter related distortion components of a peculiarly horrible nature.

Jocko Homo's experience seems to suggest that the difficulty in reducing these artefacts is greatly under-appreciated and that jitter in the clock recovery is influenced by an astonishing range of issues - many related to the RF performance of the link. So much so that even very small reflection artefacts due to impedance glitches - even as simple as a slight crushing of the coax cable - is detectable. Now an XLR connector was never designed with the transmission of RF in mind - it has no guaranteed characteristic impedance - and the same is true for the balanced cable. AES/EBU was really designed with the idea that studios could use existing patch cables. The RF performance of this is at best undefined, and almost universally rotten. So why does music recorded under such circumstances survive? Mostly because in a professional setting the clock is not recovered from the AES/EBU signal - it is only used as a digital interconnect - and the audio stays in digital form - with the ADC clock signal derived from a master clock that runs the entire studio. Distribution of that clock is critical - but if it is done with a signal that has no other data on it, one can avoid the worst of the data related jitter issues and recover a pretty clean clock.

In a domestic setting, or indeed anywhere where you need to recover the clock, AES/EBU is demonstrably inferior to S/PDIF, and that is starting at a pretty low base.



wow.
thanks! My brain is slightly bigger now!
I'll have to adjust my headphones.
plainface.gif


Is tackling the 75ohm problem an all-or-nothing deal? Can I shop and pay for a good cable and forget about what it hooks into? (I am not a Do-it-Myselfer) - as if you couldn't tell.
 
Jan 28, 2006 at 7:00 AM Post #14 of 31
Quote:

Is tackling the 75ohm problem an all-or-nothing deal? Can I shop and pay for a good cable and forget about what it hooks into? (I am not a Do-it-Myselfer) - as if you couldn't tell.


Everything matters. And no - simply getting a good cable is not going to help a great deal. The endpoints matter more. It is not a happy technology. Slaving the data source from a DAC clock is the right answer - and is often implemented for CD sources in high end solutions.

So the right answer for computer sources is a new USB sound protocol that allows for the source speed to be controlled, so that the clock can stay in the DAC - where it belongs. In principle, this would not be hard.
 
Jan 29, 2006 at 1:58 PM Post #15 of 31
If you are DIY enclined enough to remove the RCA jacks and put in some 75ohm BNC jacks. Then the best cable you can make is a standard coax lead termianted with BNCs. $10 and outclasses the most expensive crap out there as the proper termination reduces reflections and thus improves clock recovery.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top