Berkeley Audio Design Announces The Alpha USB Asynchronous Interface

I agree with your comment Chris. To the other poster regarding the Lynx, my understanding is that it has a breakout cable that terminates in XLR which would feed the balanced input of the Berkeley DAC I'm interested in. Nobody has addressed my comment about the poor quality usb connectors on motherboards. I've been building computers for years and I've never been impressed with connector quality.<br />

<br />

I would also agree that the only sure way to know would be comparing them in my own system. I'm asking these questions ahead of time because I'm basically starting from scratch. I have considered getting a Meridian Sooloos, but have balked at the price. But considering the cost of a new computer plus a Berkely DAC, the price is somewhat close. I just know I love good sound quality and I'm not tied to one method or another. I'm trying to stay open minded. If digital can sound half as good as has been described possible with DACs like the Weiss and Berkeley, I'll be very happy.

I just wanted to say a few things/ I have no idea what converter is the best because no one in my area has any to try. I live in northeastern Ohio and short of in home trials the closest might be Columbus a 3 hour trip/ I would be willing to do that but I would like to hear more than one piece of gear. I long for the old days where there were probably 5 real high end stores that stocked gear in a hours drive. I would love to go listen to this stuff and make up my own mind like I used to all those years ago but it is not possible. I have the original HiFace and would like to get something better but in that list there are few things I can really try. I imagine somewhere in Cinci I could hear Gordon's converter which I am sure is good. I hate the fact that I can not go really hear not only converters but so much high end gear from amps to preamps to speakers. This is at in my area a real problem.

that the few dealers left are not up to speed on computer audio because it's a touch transition from selling a fool proof cd transport. Sure there are some really good ones out there, but most have trouble with e-mails let alone computer audio setup and trouble shooting. I recently did some research and called all the dealers of one manufacturer (no names) and asked each of them about there usb dacs. The results were pretty scary! We still have a long way to go at saturating dealers with the computer audio mind set and sites like this one are a blessing if you don't have someone you can count on. This is just my opinion of course...<br />

<br />

Jesus R<br />

www.sonore.us

The twists and turns of this thread are fascinating. I am looking forward to the opportunity to try out the BAD Alpha, though I am already exceptionally happy with my Audiophileo (and its screen is a nice feature). I want to try it out to see if it makes any more [aural] sense than the Audiophileo. There are many exceptionally musical DACs that could benefit from the capabilities that the Alpha brings to a computer-based audio system.<br />

<br />

I sympathize with folks who live in areas where it is difficult to find well-stocked, competent dealers. Like another poster here, I once lived in Northeast Ohio. We actually had a couple of decent dealers at the time, and from one of them, I bought my first CD player in 1982. I cringe to think how much I spent. That dealer had a full range of exceptionally high quality audio, properly set up and displayed in individual listening rooms, and they were willing to take the time with every customer. But times have changed. The net itself has a lot to do with that change, and the quality of prosumer and consumer grade devices has changed. The very beast we talk about here—the computer—has in many ways changed audio for the worse (I am a huge Apple fan, but what most people think sounds good through their iPods and earbuds is just sad, but let's be honest, that same group of folks weren't buying SOTA turntables before either), though I believe overall the computer has changed audio much for the better. The drive to make digital listenable, and in some ways better than spinning discs, benefits us all, and the Moore's Law processor power graph benefits audiophiles arguably more dramatically than any improvements we were seeing in audio before. But it also means casualties along the way.<br />

<br />

Not everything we want to hear is going to be available through Amazon or at the local dealer, if there even is a local dealer. But there are even small innovators who make their wares available at modest risk. My Audiophileo had full return privileges. My Decware Taboo amp arrives Monday, and it has a return privilege (with restocking fee, which seems reasonable). I have found that if one does enough research on enough forums, one can develop some reasonable conclusions with confidence about what one might like.<br />

<br />

But back to the BAD Alpha. At this price, if one is new to the hi-res files market, it could be a good investment, particularly for extending the life of an already-musical DAC. Is it worth the price? Only the buyer can make that decision. From my own perspective, I think the Audiophileo M-1 stretched the ROI calculus, and the BAD would probably break it for me. At that price, I would probably be more inclined to make the leap from my current rig to a Weiss Firewire setup or some of the USB choices starting with the W4S. IOW, for me, I would need to have the DAC so superb I could not imagine replacing it for several years, or the option of setting up a second system. But whichever, the ability I now have to listen to some superb 192/24 and 96/24 files has been ear-opening. <br />

<br />

I like the analogy to a Nakamichi Dragon. Yes, in a few years, this device may not be necessary, but whoever is still using it will be getting value, it will help extend the life of otherwise very musical equipment, and it will still look and (likely) sound sweet.

Oksana -<br />

<br />

"I have considered getting a Meridian Sooloos, but have balked at the price. But considering the cost of a new computer plus a Berkely DAC, the price is somewhat close. I just know I love good sound quality."<br />

<br />

Is sound quality your only concern? Other things that come to mind - user interface, flexibility, ease of installation. There's pros & cons for both of these choices. <br />

<br />

And everyone has different standards, but personally I don't think one needs to spend $5000 + to get "good sound quality". Unless I had a real killer hi-fi system (and maybe you do) I'd choose to put more of that money into speakers & amps, where it will have the most impact on SQ. <br />

<br />

Just my amateur .02<br />

<br />

rascal<br />

... they just didn't redesign the Alpha DAC with its own USB or FW in ...

Adding this interface brings the price up to the Weiss. I'd love to be able to compare sound quality of the Alpha and the Weiss with the Meridian Sooloos. I need to go and play with the Meridan and get an understanding of what is included with it.<br />

Ergonomicly, I like the large displays on both the Alpha and the Weiss.<br />

<br />

Just more proof that the high end industry is based on extracting money from people with more dollars than sense <br />

<br />

If you can convert USB to SPDIF with enough quality to justify spending $1800+ on the converter, then all the USB can't do the job discussions are just hot air. What it means is that given the ubiquity of USB, every DAC should include a USB interface. <br />

<br />

If converter can't convert USB to SPDIF with enough quality to justify spending $1800+ on a converter, it means that a respected high end vendor is just ripping off their customers.

Throughout this thread, it kreeps on to me that somehow USB is declared holy. That USB would be better than SPDIF. I don't think it is, even when USB operates in async mode.<br />

<br />

Weren't these converters made to connect PC's etc. without decent SPDIF output (or none at all) ?<br />

Do we actually compare with devices which take care of just that ?<br />

Do we really think that something like a HiFace will outperform such a device ?<br />

Or that an $1800 device will ?<br />

<br />

Well, I don't.<br />

<br />

So on that matter it could be bogus to begin with.<br />

But did anyone compare ? (I did not)<br />

<br />

Peter

PeterSt writes:<br />

<br />

<i>Throughout this thread, it kreeps on to me that somehow USB is declared holy. That USB would be better than SPDIF. I don't think it is, even when USB operates in async mode.</i><br />

<br />

At least according to what I've read and heard from audio people I'd consider knowledgeable, the USB interface is problematic for audio. If it can be successfully reclocked and electrically isolated, then perhaps the quality of USB and a well-implemented S/PDIF interface (which of course is itself not free of problems) can be roughly comparable. Then there is I2S, about which I've read excellent things but don't yet understand enough to know what the potential problems might be.<br />

<br />

Anyway, I don't think the reason for USB-to-S/PDIF converters is audio quality, it's convenience. For non-technical folks who aren't going to build their own systems running from sound cards to DACs, it's mighty convenient to run a USB cable (available everywhere) from your computer's USB port (available on pretty much any computer these days) to some magic box or other, and run an S/PDIF cable to the DAC (which are things many, perhaps most, audiophiles have).<br />

<br />

Of course USB direct to DAC is even more convenient, but perhaps there are audio considerations that may favor a separate box (electrical isolation and shielding, not having to have one huge box with all the components, many audiophiles owning high quality DACs with S/PDIF but not USB inputs).

>> Now my personal opinion is that asynchronous firewire or asynchronous USB is best capable to offer the better sound <<<br />

<br />

That is also my personal opinion. However please be aware that the only asynchronous FireWire DACs on the market today are the Metric Halo units:<br />

<br />

http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/HW/Firewire.htm<br />

<br />

The Well Tempered Computer is maintained by Vincent Kars in Holland. He does a very good job, especially considering that he just does it in his spare time for fun and it is an ad-free site. I have learned several things from Vincent myself.

>> That USB would be better than SPDIF. I don't think it is, even when USB operates in async mode. <<<br />

<br />

If everything else is equal, then asynchronous USB will always have less jitter than S/PDIF.<br />

<br />

That is because async USB puts the clock in the only place that jitter matters -- at the DAC chip itself. With S/PDIF the clock must be extracted from a biphase-mark encoded signal that contains the bit clock, the word clock, and the data.<br />

<br />

It is a fact that mixing these signals together will ALWAYS create data-related jitter as the rise-time of the signal is not infinitely fast:<br />

<br />

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=6773<br />

<br />

The only thing that can be done with this jitter is to try to filter it out. The more money you throw at it and the more complex the filter, the more jitter you can filter out. But it is much better to start with an interface that introduces zero jitter.

Charles, thanks for an excellent post. This has been my view as well. Can you comment on the sonic trade-offs introduced, if any, when the receive-side USB (or FireWire) async processing is located in the same box as the DAC (I.e. As opposed to putting it in a separate box and interfacing to the DAC with i2S for example). Also, could you comment on the importance of galvanic isolation with USB/FireWire interfaces? Thanks again. <br />

@Charles<br />

<br />

Wasn't this point raised and refuted/explained by Weiss in the follow up to the review of the Weiss DAC202. Yet again you are disparaging a competitors products. <br />

<br />

Eloise<br />

<br />

<i>"Just more proof that the high end industry is based on extracting money from people with more dollars than sense"</i><br />

<br />

Hi DaveLew - Wow, that's one glass that's less than half empty. Nobody outside of Berkeley Audio Design has heard this converter and you are making conclusions about technologies and types of components. Do you frequently make the same generalizations about other industries with manufacturers such as Louis Vuitton, Ferrari, Rolex, Tiffany, etc...<br />

<br />

If you think these low volume manufacturers are getting rich from $1,695 components you are 100% incorrect. I suggest you start a small company, hire some of the best engineers available to design the product, pay another company to do the casework, build the component in the U.S.A., then see what price you need obtain to turn a profit an continue paying employees and business expenses. <br />

<br />

I have absolutely no problem with suggesting the price is too high. That's purely your opinion and I'm sure 99% of the world's population would agree with you. However, suggesting the whole industry is based on extracting money from people with more dollars than sense is a statement with no factual basis and actually an insult to all the consumers who've purchased components not on your OK'd list. People purchase good because they want the goods. At the 2006 Kentucky Durby people purchased all the $1000 Mint Julep alcoholic beverages available. I'm willing to bet the whole adult beverage industry is not based on extracting money from people who have more dollars than sense. Manufacturers produce what people want to purchase. This converter uses the best internal parts around and was designed by great engineers. This combination is desirable for many audiophiles who think the $1,695 price is well worth it.<br />

<br />

I'm not defending Berkeley Audio Design. It's a company that can defend itself without a problem. I'm simply providing a different view.<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Well stated Chris. Thanks for some sanity on this issue.

"<em>If you think these low volume manufacturers are getting rich from $1,695 components you are 100% incorrect. I suggest you start a small company, hire some of the best engineers available to design the product, pay another company to do the casework, build the component in the U.S.A., then see what price you need obtain to turn a profit an continue paying employees and business expenses.</a>"<br />

<br />

... and this is the simple version. <br />

<br />

Well said, Chris.

I <i>think</i> I disagree on the basis that USB is more controllable in software than S/PDIF, and allows the use of more robust communications protocols.<br />

<br />

But actually, I think gigabit Ethernet is a much more appropriate media for transferring audio data around. RTSP or some new protocol. <br />

<br />

Wait, that sounds a bit like HDMI does it not?! (grin)<br />

<br />

-Paul<br />

...check this out.<br />

<br />

http://www.idealo.co.uk/cat/12554F1137000/audio-interfaces.html?param.resultlist.count=50<br />

<br />

I can't afford to spend €1500 for a piece of electronics while a €600 MacMini (or a €300 PC) and a simple chain of cheap components (€200 interface, €200V-Dac) can do the job.<br />

<br />

HiEnd HiFi is like luxury cars: utter nonsense if you aren't a millionaire. Even if the performance can be genuinely and clearly better than any other product (which is not necessarily the case, as all manufacturers obviously claim their products are the sh*t and yet a new one, oh soooo much better, always come along , the old merchant's trick), is it worth it?<br />

<br />

<br />

Chris, <br />

<br />

Between a 2 meter Vs. 1m USB cable length, what do u recommend with these type of things? Does the audio quality drop as u go from 1m to 2m to 3m etc. between the computer and the DAC or USB converter devices? ive selected a cable brand but not sure what length to order. Please advise. Thanks.

Hi James - I used 2 and 3 meter USB cables in my system.

<cite>But actually, I think gigabit Ethernet is a much more appropriate media for transferring audio data around. RTSP or some new protocol. Wait, that sounds a bit like HDMI does it not?! (grin)</cite><br />

<br />

Ethernet with TCP/IP streaming and HDMI are technically roughly as close to each other as S/PDIF and old relay-based analog telephone line...<br />

<br />

HDMI is OK'ish design for transferring video data to low resolution monitor. Everything else is really ugly hack on top of it. Switched Ethernet with some TCP/IP based streaming protocol is way more sophisticated. The fact that someone decided to put Ethernet signals on the HDMI cable doesn't make it any better, since these are not used for any of the normal tasks.<br />

<br />

But actually, I think there is a lot more similarity between HDMI and data communciations networks than not. <br />

<br />

Perhaps a bit more like ATM over ethernet. In any case, a lot of potential there. <br />

<br />

-Paul<br />

Chris, <br />

<br />

Any word if the alpha USB will be available in silver finish in the future? I wonder if that would increase the price of production for them. I liked the silver they used on the alpha DAC.

<i> "Any word if the alpha USB will be available in silver finish in the future? I wonder if that would increase the price of production for them"<br />

</i><br />

<br />

I wonder how many they'll actually produce?