I’m looking forward to this also. I’ve heard Mike Moffat of Schiit describe USB as sounding like ass, to the point that they developed a unique implementation that improves quality greatly. Many manufacturers seem to prefer USB, as this is often the only input that permits DSD or PCM 768 processing, while Coax and Optical are limited to 24/192.
I’m looking forward to this also. I’ve heard Mike Moffat of Schiit describe USB as sounding like ass, to the point that they developed a unique implementation that improves quality greatly. Many manufacturers seem to prefer USB, as this is often the only input that permits DSD or PCM 768 processing, while Coax and Optical are limited to 24/192.
Well, tha's Mike's opinion, and everybody has one. It's not Mike is the standard of what sounds like ass. I recommending everybody to formulate their own personal opinions not influenced by anybody, but themselves.
An obvious first is that SPDIF over coax or Toslink (SPDIF over optical) are typical audio protocols.
You will find them in the audio world but PC’s with this output are rare.
PC’s have USB.
10 years ago, a DAC with USB input was news, today a DAC without USB are news!
If you want to use a PC as a source, USB is almost mandatory.
Theoretical USB is to be preferred as it allows for async transmission by design. (isochronous mode with asynchronous synchronization)
This allows for a free running clock at the DAC.
It is of no use to have a femto clock driven DAC is it is tied to a inferior external clock.
Zero input jitter by design but you need a good galvanic isolation from the electrical noise generated by the PC. Well designed DAC’s do provide for it.
Even better is Ethernet/ WIFI.
Buffered as it is asynchronous and galvanic isolation by design.
SPDIF (and its professional big brother, AES/EBU) is a very weird digital bus.
Normally the speed of the bus is the trick to move the data from sender to receiver e.g. a 100 Mb/s Ethernet.
In case of SPDIF the speed is the sample rate. If the clock of the sender is jittery, you will have a lot of input jitter.
In principle the DAC is slaved to the clock of the source.
Toslink is perfect, 100% galvanic isolation by design.
The circuit is a bit slow (LED). Older implementations are notorious for the amount of input jitter they generate.
Over time, designers of DAC’s has taken countermeasures.
Galvanic isolation, PLL, async sample rate conversion are tricks allowing the DAC to do the DA as isolated as possible from the input.
In practice, with a well-designed DAC you probably will have a hard time to hear audible differences.
You will find tons of posts on the internet about the big differences between the protocols mentioned.
You will also have a very hard time to find any reliable blind test confirming this.
You can find measurements demonstrating differences in jitter level but these differences are often below -120 dBFS.
You will have a very hard time to make this audible as it is below the noise floor of a lot of gear.
Anyway, if you have the option to compare, do of course but do it blindfolded.
That's the topic, I've tried to hear the differences between the cables for a while ... crazy and the more I try,
i can almost hear the birds chirping
With the headphone cables, it's completely different, here I do it easier.
Unfortunately, it doesn't let go of me and when I suddenly spent hours doing it again, I think it would actually have been more sensible to enjoy the time and the music
For me I just don’t hear a difference in them could be my old ears but just don’t hear it. I’ve tried optical,coaxial and usb on my Yggdrasil and like I said before just do not hear a difference but to be honest I don’t spend too much time on it as I would rather just listen to music as I’ve got fairly decent gear and would just rather listen to music than worry about if I’m squeezing out that last little bit.
‘We have seen recently that life is too short to worry about things that really don’t matter that much and I would rather spend my time enjoying things that I enjoy.
Not saying that you should just get whatever but once you have something you enjoy just enjoy it and don’t worry about that last little bit as you will be listening to sound rather than music as was I thought this hobby was about. Just my opinion take it for what it’s worth.
An obvious first is that SPDIF over coax or Toslink (SPDIF over optical) are typical audio protocols.
You will find them in the audio world but PC’s with this output are rare.
PC’s have USB.
10 years ago, a DAC with USB input was news, today a DAC without USB are news!
If you want to use a PC as a source, USB is almost mandatory.
Theoretical USB is to be preferred as it allows for async transmission by design. (isochronous mode with asynchronous synchronization)
This allows for a free running clock at the DAC.
It is of no use to have a femto clock driven DAC is it is tied to a inferior external clock.
Zero input jitter by design but you need a good galvanic isolation from the electrical noise generated by the PC. Well designed DAC’s do provide for it.
Even better is Ethernet/ WIFI.
Buffered as it is asynchronous and galvanic isolation by design.
SPDIF (and its professional big brother, AES/EBU) is a very weird digital bus.
Normally the speed of the bus is the trick to move the data from sender to receiver e.g. a 100 Mb/s Ethernet.
In case of SPDIF the speed is the sample rate. If the clock of the sender is jittery, you will have a lot of input jitter.
In principle the DAC is slaved to the clock of the source.
Toslink is perfect, 100% galvanic isolation by design.
The circuit is a bit slow (LED). Older implementations are notorious for the amount of input jitter they generate.
Over time, designers of DAC’s has taken countermeasures.
Galvanic isolation, PLL, async sample rate conversion are tricks allowing the DAC to do the DA as isolated as possible from the input.
In practice, with a well-designed DAC you probably will have a hard time to hear audible differences.
You will find tons of posts on the internet about the big differences between the protocols mentioned.
You will also have a very hard time to find any reliable blind test confirming this.
You can find measurements demonstrating differences in jitter level but these differences are often below -120 dBFS.
You will have a very hard time to make this audible as it is below the noise floor of a lot of gear.
Anyway, if you have the option to compare, do of course but do it blindfolded.
I have a CHORD Hugo 2 and it sounds cleaner and has a "blacker background" with Toslink compared to USB (Source: Macbook Pro 2015)
Preventing electrical noise with a USB connection seems to be a real issue.
If you were to watch an older seasoned carpenter work, they display a methodology and have become to trust it. How they do stuff is simply their style. It’s not a science but some science and some art. It could be argued that the way they do stuff is wrong. Though tell them that and you’ll get a slight smile. They grin as they actually don’t give a moment of emotion to what you think. They simply have been doing what works for them. They will continue on until they retire doing things the way they see correct.
If someone shows them a new method they may try it and try and slowly understand the ramifications of how such a change would be, still it takes time to get respect in the new ways bettering the old ways.
We are met with expectation bias which is that old carpenter. We expect things and will not even hear improvements if they are there. Also we will fail to grasp the latest new idea and meet-up with it in a sarcastic grin.
What’s all this about again?
Oh yes, digital inputs.
If you have equipment that you’ve been using then you kind of know it. Hence the expectation bias is flowing smoothly. There are ways around USB noise but it’s difficult to prove an improvement and what (good) you hear could also be the suggested bias. So for many there are zero answers. Yet not all hope is lost as we have ideas. Still those ideas can be trouble as they give us also expectation bias. And blind tests are not always reliable either.
So what do we do? We live with ideas and enjoy life. I’m thinking that SPDIF optical gets me the same as a 1A with the Sony Walkman Cradle and AQCarbon to the Sony TA desktop? Why? I simply moved the TA to a smart TV and ran a file off the TV SPDIF Toslink optical into the TA. The issue is that optical has a bit-rate ceiling which USB does not have. I mainly play zero DSD files so I’m OK with that.
It’s really hard to judge if people are actually hearing their USB filters or are they hearing a suggested improvement. I seem to tolerate USB to a DAC but even guess I hear distortion when it seems the computer is getting overloaded? I mean that’s the total pinnacle of audiophile paranoias to think you hear a computer getting overloaded and lose timing accuracy.
The best thing to do is try and use your ears and just play with the options at hand. Typically some options will sound inferior time and time again, month in a month out. That’s what you learn and that’s the way you go. Using your ears is the better way than reading any advertising or some writers idea of truth.
In my uses I tend to think stuff is based on implementation. If try and use SPDIF Toslink (non-optical) RCA from a CD transport into my main Sony TA desktop, it’s inferior. It’s quieter even! Why all digital signals are not the same volume level even going into the same amplifier is also questionable? But I do know that timing stuff can be elusive and confusing. If anything the ideas of noise now are getting super esoteric and elaborate. People now believe they hear personalities of various micro SD cards. I do hear various implementation of inputs into the Sony 1A/1Z as a DAC. Internal files sound best, also there is a difference if you use one Walkman as a file server to another Walkman in DAC mode. So after a while every digital source sounds different. Is there a scientific logical explanation for this? I would bet there is a better psychological explanation? Yet if it’s true it’s able to be recreated and reconfirmed? Again confirmation bias at it’s best.
If it is in-fact USB noise then it’s doesn’t matter if it’s real or not, as if you hear it, then it’s real.
Unfortunately, my big topic is, the more I get started on optimizing and improving the system.
I get lost like a little child looking for the lollipop
You can't give much to advertising and test reports .. yes, the reports, as well as here, can give an idea of this. Whenever I think to be close to the goal ... endgame, then quite unexpectedly a new stranger comes into play. ....
On Friday a DX220 max moved in with me ......and how the government takes on this at home will also be
exciting
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
