It eliminates jitter contribution by USB totally. Downstream from the USB you still have a challenge with clocks and whatever...
//
I suggest you learn how a USB signal is in reality represented and travels on a cable if you are ignorant about it.
Maybe a dictionary or spell-checker is also in order for you.
Read the USB standard or ask someone who knows how a USB signal travels on a normal cable.
Then do come back and let us know what you found out...
I wouldn't conclude it's a totally bad choice, because at least we were provided with a great number of DACs ding high rates/high-res especially DSD, but it's just that it's quite hard to do it well since the initial USB was only concerned with peripherals and file transfer.
The asynch version helped a lot thanks to the work of Gordon Rankin, but as you can see, people are still improving SQ even with DACs which already have Asynch USB.
Now, it will take some time for some of the technology to be integrated DAC-side. One thing you can do is use the shortest analogue USB cable as possible. If not, use a Corning optical or else look for alternate interfaces.
In the meantime, some people are stringing many devices along the USB path, and I'm not a big fan of that either, because then you have multiple power supplies, possibilities of ground loops and/or noise injected back into the mains for those with noise power supplies, etc...
This is bound to take some time.
So the alternative of Ethernet is appealing. So far though, I just don't see many devices (or as affordable as USB ones) for DIYers. I am hoping more Ethernet DACs with the Ravenna protocol become available and affordable.
Hi and thanks again for the very helpful advice.
What i really do not understand is why adopt it. There was nothing else better ? ok for sick audiophiles but for professionals ... they live on their work.
it was important to me to understand if all these people are hearing things and they are not.
The benefits are for real because the standard is flawed.
Even just starting from the connector this standard looks much more serious.
I have deeply usb connectors. rj45 are so much better that is unbelievable that they are not used also for usb.
Again if i were happy with the sound i am getting i would stop worrying.
Unfortunately i am very far from happy. Actually i am quite disappointed.
And now i understand that my disappointment have basis.
I have decided to stop for a moment and wait the new Ethernet units.
I have read of high rez with minimal latency.
Pretty soon cheaper units will appear. Hopefully that is an open standard.
Thanks a lot again.
Regards, gino
Last edited:
Because it was readily available on computers and easy to put on devices. This has an incidence on the number of libraries as well as availability of people knowing how to write drivers if necessary.
Now, you're an audiophile and that's why you're demanding, but remember most people aren't, most people are still listening to heavily compressed lossy.
It isn't flawed, it's just we are still improving the DACs and the use of USB for the specific use case which is bugging you, i.e. high-end/audiophile SQ.
Ultimately, that is a good thing: better USB DACs are coming (some are already out), and better alternate interface (Ethernet) DACs (Merging+NADAC) or devices (like the Sonore microRendu which is out) too.
All these competing equipment will bring down prices for consumers.
Yep, patience is key here. Ravenna is open, but I don't see a lot of highly available OEM integration boards. I guess one could build one's own solely from the specs.
USB is really problematic. When I try to print documents, the words get scrambled or typos suddenly appear. My photos lack the emotional impact that one gets when sending them over more sophisticated systems. The PC-controlled spectrometer I use keeps telling me that acetone is actually xylene.
For every audiophile neurosis, there's plenty of story-tellers delighted to feed it.
Hi again ! i swear i listen some differences in the sound with and without the extender. Like i hear difference using an external power supply instead of relying only on the usb bus power.
I always look also at the professional sector.
The news is ethernet for audio interfaces. It is called Dante something i did not understand completely.
The latency in particular is very low.
I think that this is important only for the recording ?
But i like everything of Ethernet starting from the connector with locking mechanism. I will wait for development.
In the meantime i will study this usb standard.
Thanks a lot again, gino
Hi and thanks again for the very helpful reply.
But i have a question.
If i understand well the usb signal reaching the usb receiver chip has usually a certain amount of jitter.
Is it possible that the receiver chip is sensitive to the amount of the jitter and in presence of high value of jitter it works badly ?
Because i swear i hear difference in sound even just replacing the usb bus power with an external +5VDC power supply.
The sound is more robust and cleaner.
I mean, something that in theory is not possible but in reality when we have to deal with real components just happen. No component is ideal.
Thanks a lot again, gino
So the microrendu is a linux PC in a box with ethernet in and USB out. whoop de doo.
The data is sent in packets.
If you're getting dropouts and pops, you have an interface issue. If you don't, any actual problems you might have are elsewhere.
Sorry, I wish I had a fanciful story to spin for you, but this is some of the most cut and dried stuff in all of audio.
Thanks again. But at least an external power supply that could be beneficial i guess.
If i have a usb with headphone amp like in most audio interfaces i think that to power the unit with the weak and dirty usb bus power
or with a stronger and cleaner power supply must have an impact on sound.
A usb port can source 0.5A at maximum typically.
This is very little.
Thanks again, gino
Thanks for the advice. I have to listen better than.
Probably i am too anxious. I will listen better.
Still i would like to get an usb extender for some reasons.
I have started another thread on this subject to gather recommendations of a suitable device.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/parts/290881-usb-extenders-over-rj45-cables.html#post4709055
Thanks a lot again.
Kind regards, gino
Asynchronous has also become the last selling argument for usb audio stuff and we audiophiles use to be picky and snobish enough to prefer asynchronous to iso or adaptative mode, basically because of all that buzzzz...
Now, i personnaly think that the rest of the circuit, especially the dac, analog output, psu also matter if not more important. But for some the only problem with digital will be jitter and only jitter. What else...
I would not swear that an under 100$ usb dac based on an xmos chip will necessarily sound better than another one based on a Tenor TE7022 ...
But of course, if it costs only 20$ and is asynchronous...
Now, i personnaly think that the rest of the circuit, especially the dac, analog output, psu also matter if not more important. But for some the only problem with digital will be jitter and only jitter. What else...
I would not swear that an under 100$ usb dac based on an xmos chip will necessarily sound better than another one based on a Tenor TE7022 ...
But of course, if it costs only 20$ and is asynchronous...
Btw, some seem to have specific needs that require sync mode, and fortunately enough their needs can be satisfied.
Fine *** sync guys will apreciate...
Amanero Technologies
Fine *** sync guys will apreciate...
Amanero Technologies
If you are using USB to transfer just data (which is all you should be using it for) then provided the jitter is not too huge (and it won't be) you will get at the receiver the same bits which were sent from the transmitter. In theory and in practice bits really are bits.ginetto61 said:
It is different if you are using USB to send timing information too (which you should not be, as USB and PC operating systems are not designed to do real-time stuff in real-time).
I don't know; there were too many TLAs, but it appears to be something which sends audio data to a computer via USB. If so, completely irrelevant to this discussion - which I believe is about audio data coming out from a PC.GDO said:
My understanding is that there is some sort of audio standard for USB, but it is too weak for serious use. That will not stop people from using it, of course. In another thread on here, a few years ago, I got shouted at for even suggesting that USB might be useable for any audio purposes. Now it seems I am being shouted at for suggesting that USB might not be usable for critical audio purposes. Perhaps I should stand quietly on the sidelines and leave the experts, and those who think they are experts, to argue amongst themselves.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.