Quick Audioquest Jitterbug review

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Member
Joined 2014
Paid Member
Ah, the search only found a post by you on another piece of prime BS.

I have never stayed annoyed long enough to get an account on there as you are entering into a lions den of believers who hang on every words of the idiot. And as its on line they can do what they want unlike articles for stereophile. I think the power and fawning gets to them!
 
Member
Joined 2014
Paid Member
ML is really most amusing in that respect. He misreferences text books and science to try and divert attention and the falls back to 'I can hear it nah nah'. His latest missive which I linked where he basically says he ignores everyone who cannot hear a difference is a remarkable piece of flat earthism.
 
Nope, if you actually read what is spread over the internet, including computer audiophile, you will find that there are numerous cases of the device causing problems, not every situation but numerous ones.....

I have not seen such reports. I have seen that some people report significant SQ improvement while others (quite a few) report hearing no significant improvement at all. Then there are those who report that the improvement is there but that it is subtle.

But the first time I have read about compatibility problems has been in these posts written by Sjef. I have encountered no posts reporting such issues.

But I will do more research on the net to see if there are more post/threads which reflect Sjef's experience.
 
Read all the posts in some of the threads spread about out there, in certain cases the USB is not being recognised...
If you read some early posts I have explained what is in the jitterbug, basically a common mode choke on the data lines and a bit of filtering on the power, adding the device into a USB line is going to have some effect on the signals, not that the manufacturer is about to release any measurements, just adding extra connectors will have an effect....
As some have pointed out Stereophile could measure no real difference yet applaud its effect on the sound quality, just another audiophile joke component.
 
I have been tested LTM2884 in a simple quick board.
Mac OSX platform.
I tryed with USB power and external power.
The power isolator working good all test poins showing right value from datasheet. BUT.
.
Flash USB drive 32Gb WORKING. Detected on the desktop.
Usb mouse - NOT.
Amanero usb audio - NOT
(I will try with USB HD)
.
So I can say that LTM2884 is not working with audio usb interfaces.
On OSX it is not detected as present device in audio-midi settings panel... :(
.
I dont know why these USB isolators simply does not want recognize USB audio interfaces?
 

Attachments

  • LTM2884 test 04.JPG
    LTM2884 test 04.JPG
    307.2 KB · Views: 260
  • LTM2884 test 01.JPG
    LTM2884 test 01.JPG
    260.3 KB · Views: 257
According to Torq here:

AQ Jitterbug Impressions | Super Best Audio Friends

"It's essentially just a passive filter (caps, common mode chokes). Oddly it is applied to the data lines as well as the power lines ... which, in theory, would smooth out the differential levels of the signaling voltage ... and that's not something, as an engineer, I'd really want to be doing."

To me it does make sense to clean also the data lines of electrical noise.

As I understand the wyrd doesn't do that. That will explain why AQ suggest using the wyrd or another usb hub that reclocks the signal and can be powered with clean energy.
 
Common mode USB choke on data lines, often added in PCs so having two on a USB connection is not the best idea.
As the device is not isolated properly, look at my initial post how can it clean the noise, and it would only work for signals going through it. Putting one in a USB socket on its own will do nothing.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.