Better converting usb or spdif? - Page 2 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > PC Based

PC Based Computer music servers, crossovers, and equalization

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 18th July 2012, 06:11 AM   #11
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 100
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Not to mention less CPU work to do means less power drawn, less power means lower noise = better sound.
__________________
When you design something for other people you don't have as much motivation to make it beyond excellent - Woz
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2012, 06:38 AM   #12
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
The quality of a digital system is only dependant on the quality of the converters nothing else.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2012, 07:00 AM   #13
erin is offline erin  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: http://www.makeitpossible.com/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk95100 View Post
The quality of a digital system is only dependant on the quality of the converters nothing else.
OK, if you say so.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2012, 07:04 AM   #14
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 100
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Rejection of common-mode noise counts as a quality of a converter.
__________________
When you design something for other people you don't have as much motivation to make it beyond excellent - Woz
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2012, 07:11 AM   #15
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito View Post
Rejection of common-mode noise counts as a quality of a converter.
That only goes for the AD part of a digital system.
Because its the receiver that determines the CMRR.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2012, 07:12 AM   #16
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 100
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
I wasn't talking about CMRR, so no, it doesn't.
__________________
When you design something for other people you don't have as much motivation to make it beyond excellent - Woz
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2012, 07:31 AM   #17
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Then what were you talking about?
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2012, 07:35 AM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 100
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
My subject was a DAC with an unbalanced input (SPDIF). Do you think CMRR applies to unbalanced inputs? For a USB DAC, CMRR would only apply to the signal pair, but the grounds are where the problems are with digital systems.

I was talking about what I said - ability to reject CM noise is a desirable quality in a DAC. If you're not clear what CM noise is, Google can be your friend. Here's a link to get you started :

SoundStage! Pete's Place - JPS Labs Superconductor Interconnects: A Technical Discussion (09/1998)
__________________
When you design something for other people you don't have as much motivation to make it beyond excellent - Woz

Last edited by abraxalito; 18th July 2012 at 07:39 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2012, 07:39 AM   #19
Account disabled at member's request
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Multiple...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk95100 View Post
The quality of a digital system is only dependant on the quality of the converters nothing else.
Are you sure

If it was as easy as that we all had been listening to music and not bothered to read or write any postings on forums like this
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2012, 07:42 AM   #20
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 100
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
I'm fairly sure its down to the DAC, but there are qualities of DACs which don't get measured and specified in marketing materials. CM noise rejection is one such, but its nevertheless a crucial parameter. I've seen no DAC that has a measurement to date.
__________________
When you design something for other people you don't have as much motivation to make it beyond excellent - Woz
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Better converting usb or spdif? Sandor PC Based 0 17th July 2012 01:28 PM
SPDIF S/P-DIF DOBM resp. Digital Input Selector include USB-SPDIF Converter tiefbassuebertr Digital Source 6 21st February 2012 08:00 PM
Converting Toslink to SPDIF needlz Digital Source 4 15th May 2005 02:27 AM
Usb To Spdif etalon90 Digital Source 2 7th June 2004 09:40 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:20 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2