USB to i2s please, which sounds best?

Jump to Latest
#25
museguy said:
Thank you Raj1.

Have you heard the JLSounds ?

It seems the options are the
JLSounds with Oscillator board
Amanero with ACKO

Or either with Ian's FIFO

Been very interested in Statman's thread on No Dac, No USB thinking to start with either the JLSounds or Amanero USB input than upgrading to I2S. Some people prefer the Amanero to the JLSounds. Planning AD1865 or TDA1541 Dac.

Suggestions ? Thank you !
Click to expand...

Never heard the JLSounds, so cannot comment.

I've only used the Amanero with the ACKO SKL-03. In that scenario, it outperforms the other two solutions (subjectively).

-Raja
 
#26
Well, if any reclocker in the chain you can not compare Apfles & tomatoes !

One has to ask oneself :

which Frequencies clock are involved in each board used alone (without Fifo/reclocker)
what are the quality of the ourput link (impedance matching with uf-l connectors for instance if high speed are involved : so separated coaxials wires with gnd sheilding and return signal path for each.... look for the docs Marce linked on DIYAUDIO on the digital Line Forum) !
What are the supplies : sometimes guys benchmarks boards with different supplies !!!!!

I bet each time when a reclocker and Fifo are involved after an USB to I2S pcb : this combo winns !

(PS : I use myself USB Wave I/O + Ian's FIFO + Ian's Clock board 2 with sota Crystek crystals)

AMareno, Wave I/O, JL Sound boards have made their proves. I favored the Wave I/O following advice of a friend, and it's true the seller has a great support if needed and the board has uf-l output connectors if needed (without isolator chip) or conventional output plug after an isolator chip (so two I2S output choices + a third with spidf). Many boards use NDK crystals which are goods. IIRC AMARENO sounds good while having no NDK crystals chips but for the last edition iirc... so follow the white rabbit : advices of members whom can benchmark these boards but with the same wires and supplies 😉

Some advices above are Strange ! FIFO from Ian is not an embeded USB/I2S board ! It needs an USB to I2S board before from any vendor (but one with uf-l outplugs is advised for best results while some sats not hearin any difference - because the FIFO job itself !

If A Pi or an Odroid is choosed as a source, IanCanada sells I2S-uf-l plug adapter to have a matched impedance link between these boards and his FIFO (reclocker after advised!)
 
Last edited:
#28
No you can't : boards alone or boards + FIFO are not the same !

And the link in between can be heared as the different suppies ! (to be clearer : the best usb to I2S with the best Fifo is not necessarilly the best subjective result in your conf : it becomes more complicate to benchmark because the combinations ! At least my empiric experience !

In the case the usb to I2S board + following Fifo board (or embeded on one board) are involved :

SO if you can it means you have to make 2 factor n tests where n is the number interactions : number of FIFO (if two Fifo tested) + the links (n+n+ ....number of links) + the number of "source to I2S" + their different supplies + the subjective tonal balance result (variable) !

ANd I made also some tests with I2S vs simultaneous data link (R+L separated with TDA1541A)

Ah, because the variable : with ears and no scope, so.... can be talked as personal taste and final hi-fi are involved by final hearings 🙂 )

....
 
Last edited:
#29
Eldam said:
No you can't : boards alone or boards + FIFO are not the same !

...
Click to expand...


Exactly, and in my experience the reclocker works well enough for me not to use the other boards.

Like you said:

Eldam said:
I bet each time when a reclocker and Fifo are involved after an USB to I2S pcb : this combo winns !

(PS : I use myself USB Wave I/O + Ian's FIFO + Ian's Clock board 2 with sota Crystek crystals)
Click to expand...
 
#31
Not sure I understood what you mean ?!

there can be 3 different board :

-usb to I2S or Pi like to I2S
- then Fifo
- then reclocker

= Ian's solution

If I remember Acko's solution is embeded in a standalone where there is a unique clock on a standalone pcb.

There is also the programation of the FPGA or its older brother fastier chip... a lot of parameters ! One can scope at end, having no scope and don't play to swap speakers and amps I just "benchmark" at ears... but my experience is a FIFO and a good clock is important !

When 3 boards there is a first asynchronous reclocking then a fifo which is slaved bu a sota clock which is said to be better than the one of the USB to I2S board !

Not sure about what Acko is doing with his usb/fifo board !

So what do you mean ? Fifo is not the best because a reclocker (embeded or outside) is enouGH ?

@TNT : you favor NDK over Crystek ? (when I said sota, I meaned Crystek was better than NDK cause I know there are far better crystals like Ian or ANdrea Mori showed...and many others as well! And in my case I assume the layout is more the subjective factor (I use TDA1541 s1) than the crystals....and all its passive parts around)
 
Last edited:
#33
DId you benchmark the NDK and the Crystek on the same pcb ?

I have as well the first pcbs set from Andrea but with the simpliest Laptech unfornatuly!
the noise floor of my TDA 1541 S chip is above the NDK or the Crystek... while I'm sure because the supplies, passive parts, etc, one can hear a difference ! I even gave up A123 cell cause had subjectivly better result with the TS7A reg on the Ian Clock II board !
 
#34
Last edited:
#36
I just received my F-1 a couple days ago. US shipper too, which is nice for me. Anyway the sound...It has been a long time since I added a peripheral to my system that really made me stand back and say WOW. This thing is nice. I really notice the most on the ends of the spectrum. Feels like much clearer highs, and the low, low bass is just effortless. Heck normally I wouldn't even comment on one of these as I've tried quite a bit of similar things, all having similar results. They're nice, they sound good, but this really stood out to me. Right now I'm using it to play PCM files as an SPDIF converter for my 😛arasound P5. Everything I'm listening to is 24/96, because that was the max rate that the P5 was capable of over USB. Well, it's really walking all over what I had thought this P5 was capable of. Finally, I'm getting to enjoy it again (I used to like it a lot when I ran a Mac into it at 24/192, but now I'm running PC).

So, just my .02. For what it's worth, the F-1 gives fantastic sound, simple hookup, and should future proof me for many years even if I want to really start playing with DSD or...

There's a fantastic thread on it over at Head-Fi if you want to check it out:

XMOS XU208 USB BRIDGES - THE LATEST GEN HAS ARRIVED!
 
#37
TNT said:
Ian don't do any oscs. Mr Mori - yes. SOTA = State Of The Art. This means the best one can obtain. You know...

//
Click to expand...

Ian was using OCXO from Pulsar.. which are about as SOTA as you might find. To the point where they were deemed "Dual Use" and now are not for sale anymore - pending. Basically, they are so accurate as to be licensed for military use.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/vendors-bazaar/258789-pulsar-clock-ultra-low-noise-ocxo.html

"The official definition of "Dual Use" Goods ad Technologies comes from the Wassenaar Arrangement and is reserved to "State of the Art" goods and technologies that are subjected to export restrictions, tracking and control.
Here is the link to the web page: The Wassenaar Arrangement | Homepage"

In addition, these 'clocks' have phase noise performance tested (individually) at 0.1Hz - something which you will not find very often, if at all.

There is a lot of useful information at www.diyhifi.org regarding selection of crystals, phase noise performance wrt frequencies, even to the shape of the cans which house the crystals... all before discussion about 'clock' architecture and power supply etc becomes a consideration.


LH/S
 
Last edited:
#38
kb2wyl said:
I just received my F-1 a couple days ago. US shipper too, which is nice for me. Anyway the sound...It has been a long time since I added a peripheral to my system that really made me stand back and say WOW. This thing is nice. I really notice the most on the ends of the spectrum. Feels like much clearer highs, and the low, low bass is just effortless. Heck normally I wouldn't even comment on one of these as I've tried quite a bit of similar things, all having similar results. They're nice, they sound good, but this really stood out to me. Right now I'm using it to play PCM files as an SPDIF converter for my 😛arasound P5. Everything I'm listening to is 24/96, because that was the max rate that the P5 was capable of over USB. Well, it's really walking all over what I had thought this P5 was capable of. Finally, I'm getting to enjoy it again (I used to like it a lot when I ran a Mac into it at 24/192, but now I'm running PC).

So, just my .02. For what it's worth, the F-1 gives fantastic sound, simple hookup, and should future proof me for many years even if I want to really start playing with DSD or...

There's a fantastic thread on it over at Head-Fi if you want to check it out:

XMOS XU208 USB BRIDGES - THE LATEST GEN HAS ARRIVED!
Click to expand...

It's a real pity the F1 is so expensive, a lot more than my AK4396 complete DAC board. It might take a long time, if ever, for prices to come down on it.
 
#40
Eldam said:
DId you benchmark the NDK and the Crystek on the same pcb ?

I have as well the first pcbs set from Andrea but with the simpliest Laptech unfornatuly!
the noise floor of my TDA 1541 S chip is above the NDK or the Crystek... while I'm sure because the supplies, passive parts, etc, one can hear a difference ! I even gave up A123 cell cause had subjectivly better result with the TS7A reg on the Ian Clock II board !
Click to expand...

No, I compared the published phase noise plots. The first Andrea clocks are superior to Crystek no doubt and also betters NDK.

//
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom