advertisement


An epiphany as a result of using a USB / SPDIF converter

The way the term is often used it seems as if people expect all noise to be blocked by GI. Clearly all noise is not blocked - that's the point I was trying to make.

Fair enough - but what noise is not blocked by an optical connection?
 
ASRC / up-sampling is not bit perfect, and any form of sampling rate conversion does introduce additional artefacts.

ASRC is of course not, by definition, bit perfect - but does it introduce audible differences?
 
TOSLINK and coax are both S/PDIF - I guess one point is, if you're unhappy with your coax/USB and it's not galvanically isolated, you might try TOSLINK before spending any money. From measurements I've seen, that's likely the biggest win. In general, these days. But it depends on your DAC.

Of course that doesn't stop you getting one of these converters that galvanically isolates AND reduces jitter.
 
Depends on the type of jitter. Sometimes the impact can be a slight 'blurring' or softening of the sound, which some people might like, finding a clock upgrade to be 'bright' or 'etched'...

Very true and a good point. There are huge differences in converters and when mine was upgraded to the femto clock the biggest difference was exceptional speed and a very etched detailed sound. In the wrong system it could be seen as bright but it's not, it just shows up any weaknesses. The BPS's reign this in and compliment the femto clock well.

A lesson I've learned is that computer audio is like black magic...and what works well in one system might not in another. From the guys I deal with they all say that every part of the chain is affected by others like no other equipment in hifi and it's very difficult to explain or understand, it just does...
 
I find it very interesting that so many people claim all sorts of things about spdif, or USB, or async comms, linux vs windows, whether isolation is important, etc etc, whilst at the same time appearing to have not the faintest idea what digital audio is or how it works.
 
A lesson I've learned is that computer audio is like black magic

fv00255.gif
 
There's some good old fashioned wrong thing here, unlike an analogue signal, with digital it is possible to insert a piece of electronics in the digital signal path and have it improve the sound quality. You should just think of the Monarchy Audio DIP from eons ago, a digital signal can be cleaned up, most DACs do that internally these days.
 
There's some good old fashioned wrong thing here, unlike an analogue signal, with digital it is not possible to insert a piece of electronics in the digital signal path and have it improve the sound quality.

Fixed that for you.
 
I find it very interesting that so many people claim all sorts of things about spdif, or USB, or async comms, linux vs windows, whether isolation is important, etc etc, whilst at the same time appearing to have not the faintest idea what digital audio is or how it works.
Well yes. Two things really:
1) If you “learn” how digital audio works from the hifi industry, you are filling your brain with ordure;
2) If you insist that all fluctuations in your listening experience are attributable to changes in electrical signals, then you will conclude that electrical signals change in mysterious ways.

Get over these two and what do we have left to discuss as regards purchasing instalments of audio improvement pleasure in handy small aluminium boxes?
 
There is a trend here of praising an obsolete technology. SPDIF interface chips are no longer made, just like early DAC types
 
There is a trend here of praising an obsolete technology. SPDIF interface chips are no longer made, just like early DAC types

Out of interest what are TV manufacturers doing as just about every TV has a TOSLINK output? Is there a stockpile of chips they are using....surely these will be exhausted.
 
There are still LSI chips which have TOSLINK interfaces. It is the standalone interface chips that have all vanished
 
Really, the minidsp I've just inserted in the digital path most certainly makes the sound better.

You can of course do DSP to change the sound, and that might make it better. What I was referring to was straight-forward transmission and reproduction, not processing that actually changes the audio data on purpose.
 
No your statement was...

with digital it is not possible to insert a piece of electronics in the digital signal path and have it improve the sound quality.
 
No your statement was...

You have to remember that that statement was in response to "There's some good old fashioned wrong thing here, unlike an analogue signal, with digital it is possible to insert a piece of electronics in the digital signal path and have it improve the sound quality."

Adding a bunch of clarifying constraints would have spoiled the effect.
 


advertisement


Back
Top