[Hitokiri]

In what ways NAS can impact your digital chain ? It can be noisy as hell, but it stores data over the network usually via smb/nfs/http protocols.

Yeah sure but the data will still be transferred over a cable to your streamer and any cable will function as an antenna for noise. I could be wrong tho.

 

[hakunamakaka]

Yeah sure but the data will still be transferred over a cable to your streamer and any cable will function as an antenna for noise. I could be wrong tho.

.
Nope, NAS is simply a storage over the network, no cables needed there. If there is a cable between storage and PC/Streamer than it's DAS, completely different topology and protocols being used in such scenario.

You need some sort of end point that talks with any of NAS protocols. Not sure if many streamers has such, but the signal coming from NAS is as pure as you could get for audio.

 

[Roseval]

If there is a cable between storage and PC/Streamer than it's DAS

Wonder what you are talking about.
Streaming audio is having a server, a renderer and a control point in a network. Of course all 3 of them should talk the same protocol e.g. UPnP. It makes no difference if you connect over Ethernet or over WiFi, the protocol is connection agnostic.

 

[Whazzzup]

Nothing gets between my music server and dac.

 

[hakunamakaka]

Wonder what you are talking about.
Streaming audio is having a server, a renderer and a control point in a network. Of course all 3 of them should talk the same protocol e.g. UPnP. It makes no difference if you connect over Ethernet or over WiFi, the protocol is connection agnostic.

I was talking about storage specifically. User above stated that NAS is noisy which is irrelevant as data is pushed over the wireless network.

In home use any device that has internal or wired attached storage uses some sort of DAS protocol. NAS/DAS on itself is not a server, it's just a storage solution

 

[gregorio]

“What is the best way to bypass/decrapify computer audio?”

You can’t. For 20 years or more, virtually all music recordings have been created on computers, either recorded, edited, mixed/processed, mastered or most commonly, all of the above. And, commercial recording studios do not use any of the audiophile products that supposedly “decrapify” computer audio. So, whatever “crap” is added by computers is already burnt into the recordings you’re reproducing and there’s nothing you can do about it.

However, there isn’t any added computer audio “crap”. If there were, we’d be able to hear it or at least measure it and then we’d either not use computers for music recording/production or have to use some measure to reduce/remove it, which we don’t. I can only assume some people here have some dodgy settings in their computers, a dodgy DAC or are “hearing” some sort of placebo effect.

G

 

[manueljenkin]

I don’t know of the “best” way, but the easiest and least expensive way is to reduce overall system activity (and hence overall switching noise going into the usb bus either as ground plane noise over the power/ground lines or as noise or timing deviations over the data line).

You can look into players like playpcmwin, wtfplay live, daphile, soundevil etc all of which are free (or look into paid software like xxhighend, audiophile optimizer, jplay etc). the paid software are generally better (and have additional fidelity oriented functionality), but the free ones are great as well.

For usb cables, if you are not bothered by limitations in size, I highly recommend uptone uspcb (but I recommend to try the free tweaks first then think about cables if required).

If your source is an android device then I highly recommend usb audio player pro (by default android audio subsystem in many cases doesn’t even support bit perfect audio natively, so usb audio player pro would be a must for decent fidelity in those cases)

 

[Hitokiri]

You can’t. For 20 years or more, virtually all music recordings have been created on computers, either recorded, edited, mixed/processed, mastered or most commonly, all of the above. And, commercial recording studios do not use any of the audiophile products that supposedly “decrapify” computer audio. So, whatever “crap” is added by computers is already burnt into the recordings you’re reproducing and there’s nothing you can do about it.

However, there isn’t any added computer audio “crap”. If there were, we’d be able to hear it or at least measure it and then we’d either not use computers for music recording/production or have to use some measure to reduce/remove it, which we don’t. I can only assume some people here have some dodgy settings in their computers, a dodgy DAC or are “hearing” some sort of placebo effect.

Sorry, but you are really misinformed. It has been proven a million times already that connecting your DAC directly to your PC is a really inefficient solution and deteriorates the sound quality.

There has been a lot of R&D on how to improve or circumvent this problem.

 

[Roseval]

It has been proven a million times

If that is the case it should be easy to provide measurements proving this to be true.
I bet you can't.

 

[gregorio]

Sorry, but you are really misinformed.

Misinformed by whom, the countless commercial recording studios and other engineers I’ve worked with for nearly 30 years, not to mention all the pro-audio research, forums, conferences and publications? Where have you got all your information?

It has been proven a million times already that connecting your DAC directly to your PC is a really inefficient solution and deteriorates the sound quality.

It obviously hasn’t be proven even once, let alone a million times. Again, I can guess where you got that! If it had been proven then obviously none of the worlds top studios would connect their ADCs and DACs directly to their PCs, but all of them do!

Ask yourself who benefits from you buying something to put between your computer and your DAC and where that false information originated? … It’s audiophile marketing!

G

 

[m-i-c-k-e-y]

No offense, but idk how you come with this stuff.

He posted this to me also, so UNWATCHED and IGNORED.

 

[gregorio]

He posted this to me also, so UNWATCHED and IGNORED.

Many commercial studios publish their equipment list on their websites. See how many you can find who use these so called audiophile “decrapifiers” and don’t just connect their ADC/DAC directly to their computer.

As the information I’ve presented is therefore verifiable, why on earth would you want to “ignore” actual facts and only “watch” false marketing? I can only think of one reason!

G

 

[Hitokiri]

First of all this thread hasn't been about discussing if USB interfaces make a difference or not, but which type of interface is the best.

It's not just about USB, it's about digital audio in general which is not as flawless as many think.

For starters, here is a good video about it with measurements.



I may do some more explaining myself if I feel like it because this thread hasn't been about discussing if USB interfaces make a difference or not, but which type of interface is the best.

Also Idk what M-I-C-K-E-Y is on about acting as if it can't possibly make a difference when he has a quite sophisticated chain with a Singxer SU-6 DDC and is willing to spend around $8000 to upgrade it.

I, personally once tried an entry-level USB isolator from Alldaq (galvanic isolation and reclocking), it's based on an old and outated design and primarily intended for industrial use. When connecting my chain (including the isolator) to my PC using the rear USB port (directly into the motherboard), the difference with and without the isolator was very noticeable. I blind tested it with 2 other people and we could all tell if the isolator was connected or not. However, when using a different USB port from the case of my PC (which doesn't go directly into the mobo) the difference was negligible. I personally, couldn't tell if the isolator was connected or not, the 2 others could but just barely. Apart from noise, jitter plays a big role as well.

This is already quite evidential.

You can always experiment and decide for yourself, we are in 2022 everyone offers free shipping and 30 days return.

 

[gregorio]

It's not just about USB, it's about digital audio in general which is not as flawless as many think.

That depends on what you mean by flawless. In an absolute, theoretical/mathematical sense it’s not flawless but in practice, as a medium used to record and reproduce sound, then it is. The noise floor/artefacts of digital audio are way below the noise floor/artefacts of the transducers and analogue equipment in either the recording or reproduction chain.

For starters, here is a good video about it with measurements.

Again, good in what sense? I’ve got no issue with most of it, except for arguably the two most important points(!):

1. The measurements are taken with the DAC’s PLL switched off. A PLL is a necessary component of a DAC, which exists to remove/reduce jitter. So, I presume he’s switched it off because otherwise there probably wouldn’t have been any measurable differences. However, as a PPL is a necessary component, I don’t know of any other DACs (consumer or pro-audio) which allow you to switch it off, because why would you want to? Therefore, these measurements are not applicable to any other DAC, or even to that same DAC unless you switch it’s PLL off, which I wouldn’t recommend!

2. The audible effect it has on the sound, is contradictory and in places false! Early on, the presenter states that none of it is audible and that’s not what the video is about but then later he states he can hear the difference. How can he hear what he (correctly) stated is not audible? The levels of noise/artefacts he measures are so low, they can’t even be converted (transduced) into sound. So obviously, if that noise/artefacts isn’t even in the sound being reproduced, there can’t possibly be any question of audibility. Not to mention that the levels he measured are about 1,000 times below the noise floor of even the most dynamic commercial music recordings and is even well below the noise produced just by the random collisions of air molecules! The part that is false regards human sensitivity to jitter and the testing of it. It is true that humans are very sensitive to jitter/timing issues. With music, sensitivity is around 200-500 billionths of a second (200-500ns). Compare that with the blink of an eye, which takes about 200-500 thousandths of a second (200-500ms), a million times more! And in an exceptional case, someone reliably detected jitter of just ~30ns. What’s false is the assertion that this hasn’t been well tested. It started being tested in the 1960’s, the first published paper I know of was in 1974 and it’s been tested extensively since then. Today, and in fact for more than 20 years, jitter is a non-issue for consumers. Although it makes a great (false) problem for audiophile equipment makers to supposedly “fix”! Even in the late 1990’s, cheapo OEM CD/DVD players and the DACs built in to digital TVs had jitter of just a couple of hundred trillionths of a second (~200ps), which is 100 - 1,000 times lower than audibility!

Again though, commercial studios connect their ADCs and DACs directly to their computer and with many/most commercial music recordings there’s more than one round trip through them. So that’s the jitter/noise/artefacts of the ADC plus the jitter/noise/artefacts of the DAC, all times 2 (or possibly more), that’s already burnt into the recordings you’re reproducing!

G

 

[hakunamakaka]

That depends on what you mean by flawless. In an absolute, theoretical/mathematical sense it’s not flawless but in practice, as a medium used to record and reproduce sound, then it is. The noise floor/artefacts of digital audio are way below the noise floor/artefacts of the transducers and analogue equipment in either the recording or reproduction chain.

Again, good in what sense? I’ve got no issue with most of it, except for arguably the two most important points(!):

1. The measurements are taken with the DAC’s PLL switched off. A PLL is a necessary component of a DAC, which exists to remove/reduce jitter. So, I presume he’s switched it off because otherwise there probably wouldn’t have been any measurable differences. However, as a PPL is a necessary component, I don’t know of any other DACs (consumer or pro-audio) which allow you to switch it off, because why would you want to? Therefore, these measurements are not applicable to any other DAC, or even to that same DAC unless you switch it’s PLL off, which I wouldn’t recommend!

2. The audible effect it has on the sound, is contradictory and in places false! Early on, the presenter states that none of it is audible and that’s not what the video is about but then later he states he can hear the difference. How can he hear what he (correctly) stated is not audible? The levels of noise/artefacts he measures are so low, they can’t even be converted (transduced) into sound. So obviously, if that noise/artefacts isn’t even in the sound being reproduced, there can’t possibly be any question of audibility. Not to mention that the levels he measured are about 1,000 times below the noise floor of even the most dynamic commercial music recordings and is even well below the noise produced just by the random collisions of air molecules! The part that is false regards human sensitivity to jitter and the testing of it. It is true that humans are very sensitive to jitter/timing issues. With music, sensitivity is around 200-500 billionths of a second (200-500ns). Compare that with the blink of an eye, which takes about 200-500 thousandths of a second (200-500ms), a million times more! And in an exceptional case, someone reliably detected jitter of just ~30ns. What’s false is the assertion that this hasn’t been well tested. It started being tested in the 1960’s, the first published paper I know of was in 1974 and it’s been tested extensively since then. Today, and in fact for more than 20 years, jitter is a non-issue for consumers. Although it makes a great (false) problem for audiophile equipment makers to supposedly “fix”! Even in the late 1990’s, cheapo OEM CD/DVD players and the DACs built in to digital TVs had jitter of just a couple of hundred trillionths of a second (~200ps), which is 100 - 1,000 times lower than audibility!

Again though, commercial studios connect their ADCs and DACs directly to their computer and with many/most commercial music recordings there’s more than one round trip through them. So that’s the jitter/noise/artefacts of the ADC plus the jitter/noise/artefacts of the DAC, all times 2 (or possibly more), that’s already burnt into the recordings you’re reproducing!

G

You spread your ideas like absolute and non deniable truth which fits all use cases, however it's not how it works in real world. I greatly benefited from DDC connected between my macbook and a DAC. Improvements were apparent with Qutest and even with toppings e30 dac. I can't even use Macbook's 3.5mm audio jack with sensitive IEM's as it gives me a buzzing noise once I connect it to the mains.

We tested few systems with macbook pro 2020/air 2019/hp notebook and all of them benefited from DDC.