Jump to content
  • The Computer Audiophile
    The Computer Audiophile

    M2Tech hiFace Asynchronous USB To S/PDIF Converter Review

    <img src="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/hiface-thumb.jpg" style="padding: 5pt 10pt 5pt 5pt;" align="left">The M2Tech hiFace has received a lot of press this year. It was one of the first very inexpensive asynchronous USB to S/PDIF converters to support all sample rates from 16/44.1 kHz through 24/192 kHz. The hiFace's good specs, good technical design, support for high resolution sample rates, and $150 price tag has had users from all over the world going gaga. While there is no such thing as bad press too much good press can make it very hard for a product to live up to expectations. Such is the case with the M2Tech hiFace. I tried for several months to pull every ounce of sound quality out of the hiFace. I began to wonder if I was the only person on Earth unsatisfied with this converter. I have no qualms about saying the hiFace, through no fault of M2Tech, is overrated. Fortunately this has nothing to do with value. At $150 it's well worth the price and has a very high price to performance ratio.

    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]

     

     

     

     

    <b>Preliminary Notes</b>

     

    There is no sense in writing a confusing review that interweaves terms like good performance, disappointment, overrated, and great value only to leave readers wondering what I really think. Let me lay some groundwork before going deeper into the hiFace review. As many Computer Audiophile readers know terms like overrated and good performance are not mutually exclusive. Neither are the terms great value and disappointment. Also the conclusions reached by me in my listening room with my components don't say anything about another individual's conclusion reached in his home or even in my listening room. There are so many variables involved when judging an audio component. Readers should only use reviews and others' comments as single data points that have nothing to do with their individual opinions and conclusions.

     

     

     

    <b>Got A Lot Going For It ...</b>

     

    <a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/3.jpg" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace"><img src="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/3-small.jpg" style="padding: 5pt 10pt 5pt 5pt;" align="left"></a>Designed and assembled by M2Tech in Italy the hiFace asynchronous USB to S/PDIF converter looks unbeatable on paper or screen. Async USB with dual crystal oscillators and support of sample rates up through 24/192 kHz are more than many manufacturers can say about their converters. Add the $150 price to this list and most of the competition falls to the wayside. On paper.

     

    The hiFace is nearly a self explanatory device. One end has a USB connector that can only fit into a computer's USB port. The other end has either a coaxial RCA or a BNC digital output. There are no switches or power cables to contemplate while physically connecting the hiFace to a computer and audio system. A single electrical digital cable connects the hiFace to an external DAC completing the physical setup.

     

    Asynchronous is currently the buzzword of all buzzwords. If a component does anything asynchronously manufactures frequently label it with the async buzzword. The hiFace is a true async USB device as it operates in asynchronous USB transfer mode. Async USB transfer mode has nothing to do with asynchronous sample rate conversion (ASRC) even though some manufacturers would like listeners to believe ASRC is an equivalent competing technology addressing jitter reduction. Some manufacturers just use the plain asynchronous label and let consumers try to decipher what that means with regard to the component in question. The bottom line is these two technologies are vastly different and can have a major impact on sound quality.

     

    M2Tech's async USB implementation is pretty solid on paper. The hiFace uses two separate quartz precision oscillators instead of a PLL with a single oscillator and synthesized frequency. This enables very accurate clocking with less jitter or timing errors. Two oscillators allow the hiFace to have separate clock generators for 44.1 kHz and 48 kHz sample rate families. The 44.1 kHz family consists of 44.1, 88.2, and 176.4 kHz and the 48 kHz family consists of 48, 96, and 192 kHz. Nearly every engineer I talk to about this area of HiFi suggests a PLL with synthesized frequency based on a single oscillator that cannot be a multiple of 44.1 kHz and 48 KHz will result in much higher jitter. Since high end audio components shoot for extremely low jitter measurements in the single digit picoseconds many engineers will only opt for dual oscillator configurations similar to the hiFace. One notable exception is the Weiss Engineering DAC202. It uses the Jet PLL and synthesized clock frequencies to produce excellent results.

     

    In addition to this very good technical design the hiFace supports every relevant sample rate. It wasn't long ago that extracting quad speed sample rates of 176.4 and 192 kHz from a laptop was nearly impossible because there weren't any acceptable devices like the hiFace. If listeners wanted the higher sample rates they had to install a card like the Lynx AES16(e) or RME 9632 into a desktop computer. The hiFace was one of the first widely accepted devices in the audiophile community to free listeners from the unsightly and frequently noisy desktop computer.

     

    There's no denying the hiFace has a lot going for it with its async USB transfer mode, support of all sample rates, and very inexpensive price tag. If it wasn't for the music and the fact that I want to listen to said music at the highest quality possible the M2Tech hiFace would certainly make the Olympic podium (gold, silver, or bronze).

     

     

     

    <b>... But Far From Ideal</b>

     

    - Software

     

    Driver: Noun

    <ul>

    <li>the operator of a motor vehicle

    <li>someone who drives animals that pull a vehicle

    <li>driver (a golfer who hits the golf ball with a driver

    <li><b>a program that determines how a computer will communicate with a peripheral device</b>

    <li>number one wood (a golf club (a wood) with a near vertical face that is used for hitting long shots from the tee)

    </ul>

    Source [<a href="http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=driver">Princeton University</a>]

     

    <a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/5.jpg" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace"><img src="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/5-small.jpg" style="padding: 5pt 10pt 5pt 5pt;" align="left"></a>Until the recent release of Apple's OS X 10.6.4 proprietary drivers were necessary to reach the highest sample rates via USB audio devices like the hiFace. Windows based computers still require proprietary drivers for playback of high sample rates (176.4 and 192) because Windows does not support Class 2 Audio. When the hiFace was released proprietary drivers were required by all operating systems and USB hardware to reach these sample rates. M2Tech had no choice but to use its own drivers for the hiFace to function with Windows and Apple's OS X. In addition M2tech designed the hiFace with specific hardware that requires proprietary drivers even if the operating system supports Class 2 Audio. For example the hiFace will not work on a Mac running OS X 10.6.4 without installation of M2Tech's driver. Whereas devices like the Wavelength Audio WaveLink work as designed on OS X 10.6.4 without proprietary drivers at all sample rates.

     

    M2Tech's proprietary driver is necessary but not sufficient. Several of the first iterations of the driver required the use of Foobar2000 and manually placing specific files (dll) in a certain location on the computer. Each release has drastically improved the ease of use and eventually added options like WASAPI support. Now a simple double-click -> Next -> Next -> Reboot routine is all that's required. The insufficient part of the M2Tech driver comes from two fronts. Lack of an easy uninstall without contacting M2Tech for a special command run via the Terminal application and the confusing nature of M2Tech's driver delivery.

     

    It's entirely possible to use a Mac without uninstalling the hiFace driver. It's benign as far as I know. But when troubleshooting an audio issue it's very nice to rule out possible causes by uninstalling software. M2Tech's current hiFace driver removal process is unacceptable.

     

    On several occasions hiFace users have installed the incorrect version of the hiFace driver only to suffer frustrating and time consuming consequences. Just because most people haven't had an issue with this doesn't make it OK. Identifying the correct driver on the M2Tech website isn't rocket science and has been made easier over time. However, a simple line of code in the installation process could let users know if the downloaded driver was incorrect for their operating system. For example if someone downloads the Apple OS X 10.4 version of the software when they really need the OS X 10.6 version this operating system "pre-flight" check would remove the possibility of such frustrating issues before they happened. The last thing computer based audio needs to deliver is frustration to end users. Especially when it could easily be avoided.

     

    The fact that drivers are required, the inability to easily remove the driver easily, and the unneeded driver confusion have caused real world problems as evidenced by the users at CA and other sites. These users have sought help with installation, uninstallation, and related issues frequently after several hours of attempting to solve the issue themselves.

     

    Note: The vast majority of hiFace users have not experienced the aforementioned issues. I raise the issues only because they've appeared several times in the real world and they could be avoided altogether.

     

    - Hardware

     

    <a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/13.jpg" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace"><img src="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/13-small.jpg" style="padding: 5pt 10pt 5pt 5pt;" align="left"></a>The hiFace asynchronous USB to S/PDIF converter uses the Cypress Semiconductor ezUSB design. ezUSB provides the component designer (M2Tech) a Windows, OS X, and Linux base driver that operates in bulk mode. The designer then plugs in code for each operating system that creates whatever device is needed. Devices like the Wavelength Audio WaveLink and Halide Design Bridge require no proprietary device driver. These units use the driver supplied by the operating system in a true plug n' play fashion. Although the Bridge does not support quad speed sample rates and the WaveLink currently does not support quad speed on the Windows operating system. As the saying goes, there's no free lunch.

     

    <i>Correction: I was just informed a Windows driver is available on the Wavelength Audio website that enables the WaveLink to support quad speed sample rates.</i>

     

    Internally the hiFace uses three DCDC converters to power the Cypress USB controller, the dual oscillators, and the SPDIF converter. Unfortunately the ground of the digital output is connected via 1 kOhm to the USB ground instead of being galvanically isolated which is highly preferable on the S/PDIF output. If the digital input on a listener's DAC is not galvanically isolated either then computer's power supply will be connected to the audio system via the 1 kOhm on the digital input ground pin. This is a very good reason to use a MacBook Pro or different laptop running on battery power eliminating the direct connection to a noisy and cheap switching power supply.

     

     

    The build quality is nothing to write home about and is probably what most audiophiles expect for a $150 device that offers quite a bit of functionality. I recommend using a little USB extension cable that connects between the computer and the hiFace. The hiFace is much wider than a USB port and may block or interfere with a neighboring USB port. Also, the extension reduces strain on the USB port and hiFace itself when heavier S/PDIF cables are used or when cables must be routed awkwardly to the audio component. Frequently pulling on the hiFace isn't a good idea. Especially if connected directly to the computer's USB port.

     

    It's hard to definitively say if using the operating system's built-in USB drivers or different hardware design decisions would have a big impact on sound quality from the hiFace. I can say the async USB to S/PDIF converters I've used, that don't require proprietary drivers, sound better and more accurate. More on sound quality a bit later.

     

     

     

    <b>Music Servers</b>

     

    During the review period I used several different music servers. The two main configurations used were based on a Mac Pro and the C.A.P.S. server [<a href="http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Computer-Audiophile-Pocket-Server-CAPS">Link</a>].

     

    The C.A.P.S. server runs Windows 7 32-bit and J River Media Center v15. The server accesses music on a NAS drive stored in WAV, AIFF, and FLAC formats. I used the Kernel Streaming and WASAPI output modes in J River. ASIO was unavailable with the hiFace and ASIO4ALL doesn't currently support quad speed sample rates of 176.4 kHz and 192 kHz. The hiFace Windows driver in use at the end of the review period was version 1.0.3.

     

    The Mac Pro runs OS X 10.6.4 and iTunes with and without Amarra version 2.1 (4244). It also access music on the same NAS drive as the C.A.P.S. server and accesses some music stored locally. The hiFace OS X driver in use at the end of the review period was version 1.0.45.

     

    I compared the hiFace to several components. The components range from a couple hundred dollars more expensive than the hiFace to several thousand dollars more expensive. These are the asynchronous USB to S/PDOF converters on hand during the review:

     

    <ul>

    <li>M2Tech hiFace

    <li>Halide Design Bridge

    <li>Wavelength Audio WaveLink

    <li>dCS U-Clock

    </ul>

     

     

     

    <b>Sound Quality</b>

     

    <a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/10.jpg" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace"><img src="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/10-small.jpg" style="padding: 5pt 10pt 5pt 5pt;" align="left"></a>I had the M2Tech hiFace here for several months. Quite a bit longer than normal component review periods. The only reason for such an extended period of time was so I could try every way I knew to squeeze the last ounce of sound quality out of the unit. Upon its arrival I immediately noticed substantial sonic differences between the hiFace and the Lynx AES16e internal digital audio output card I was using at the time. With over $500 difference between the two components, major design differences, and the fact I had just added the hiFace to my system I simply added this experience to my <a href="http://www.circusponies.com/">digital notebook</a> as a single data point among many I would gather throughout the review period.

     

    A couple weeks went by and I'd used the hiFace off and on in addition to using the Halide Design Bridge. The hiFace just didn't sound as good as everyone online and in personal conversations was claiming. Since I had already tested to make sure the digital output was bit transparent I knew I wasn't' altering the bits before entering the hiFace. I wondered what was going on so I emailed a few first rate engineers with decades of high end digital audio experience. CA readers would be surprised at how many engineers from top high end audio companies purchased the hiFace to test in their own systems. I was not interested in using their opinions to influence mine whatsoever. I just wanted to compare some external data points to my personal experience. (If many groups of people are claiming a color is red but I see it as blue it's never a bad idea to talk to some people who've reached their own independent conclusion). The possibility of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink">groupthink</a> was ever so present in my mind. Without revealing the details of private conversations these engineers told me a bit about how the hiFace was designed and what they thought about the device. Each one of them said the hiFace sounded pretty good for $150. If I gained anything from these conversations it was a bit of knowledge about the hiFace from sources outside of M2Tech and some data points from independent thinking engineers.

     

     

    In addition to several async USB to S/PDIF converters I used a few different DACs during the review period. I used my main DAC, Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC, as well as the Weiss Engineering DAC202 (now sent on to the next reviewer) and the Esoteric D-07.

     

     

    Through the Alpha DAC and DAC202 the sound quality via the hiFace was lackluster and uninspiring compared to the other converters on hand. After listening to something very good it's hard to take a step down in quality. The differences tend to be accentuated. If I didn't have the other units on hand I likely would have said the hiFace sounds a bit too dark for my taste but in general offers good performance. It certainly is not a bad sounding component by any means. It just doesn't match the level of the competition in my listening room.

     

     

    A week after the Esoteric D-07 arrived, and I had listened through the DAC enough to get a handle on its sonic signature, I began comparing the converters through the galvanically isolated RCA digital inputs of the D-07. Using the hiFace did not yield positive results at all. The sound I heard was really veiled and really dead. This was evident after long term listening sessions and A/B comparisons. I usually don't gain much from quick A/B comparisons and but I tried the method anyway because the D-07 and J River made it very easy. Using the hiFace and Halide Design Bridge configured as separate zones in J River MC I synchronized both zones and sent the output to two different coaxial S/PDIF inputs on the D-07. The d-07 doesn't offer BNC digital inputs. This worked well since the hiFace I reviewed was the RCA version. Once playback commenced I was able to switch inputs on the D-07 and hear the same audio stream as the previous input. Pretty cool, but ultimately not the best or most revealing way to review components in my opinion.

     

    I performed much more extended listening using all the S/PDIF converts and the Esoteric D-07. In every case music through the hiFace was much more veiled and dead. No matter what type of music I played from Reference Recordings HRx 24/176.4 material (via WaveLink only) to the new single mic'd John Mellencamp album produced by T-Bone Burnet as soon as I started using a non-M2Tech converter the sound opened up and the level of clarity was wonderful. Almost like I removed cotton from my ears. At the end of the review period I really concentrated on comparing the Halide Design Bridge to the M2Tech hiFace. I used Windows, OS X, iTunes, Amarra, J River etc... to make sure I reached an accurate conclusion. Every comparison ended the same way. Using the Bridge was like removing cotton from my ears as the greater level of clarity and detail were readily apparent. I try very hard not to make unsubstantiated mountains of difference out of realistic mole hills of difference as can be the case in so many audiophile conversations. I admit I am just as guilty of hyping a component as the next guy when we are sitting around chatting. When it comes to publishing a review, that is part of my permanent record :~), I never want to mislead a reader by making a big deal out of nothing. It's bad for both of us and the manufacturers involved. That said, with the components used during this review in my listening room I state unequivocally that the hiFace did not match the performance of the other asynchronous USB to S/PDIF converters. The difference was not subtle. I urge everyone considering the purchase of a converter like the ones used in this review to give them all a shot in a familiar environment.

     

    <i>Note: As shown in the measurements below the hiFace's output voltage is 2.328 Vpp. This is higher than the standard 0.5 Vpp. It is possible the D-07 does not handle higher voltages as well as the Alpha DAC or DAC202. The bottom line is readers should look at the specs of their DAC and test components in person before purchasing.</i>

     

     

     

     

    <b>Conclusion</b>

     

    The M2Tech hiFace entered the audiophile scene as a little known device from Italy. It soon surged to the top of several recommended lists. Groups of audiophiles on the Internet couldn't get enough hiFace-time. None of these hiFace users are wrong. It's a good component if it sounds good to the individual listener. Period. The hiFace does offer good specs and features on paper. There's no doubt the M2Tech design team had the right idea. After several months of listening and comparing I think M2Tech's implementation is a bit underwhelming. The hiFace offers good stand-alone performance and value while simultaneously disappointing me. The fact that I believe it's overrated has just as much to do with hiFace users' opinions as it does the hiFace's performance.

     

    I'm going to end on a positive note. I wish no ill will to M2Tech or any manufacturer. We are all part of the same industry and wonderful hobby. I hope M2Tech continues the success of the hiFace with its new upscale Evo product. At $150 the price to performance ratio of the hiFace has got to be at the top of the charts. Audiophiles used to spending tens of thousands of dollars for an extra 0.01% of performance may be a bit disoriented by the hiFace's value.

     

    One more time, don't take my word or anyone else's word to be the final answer. When in doubt check it out.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    <center><b>________________________________________________________________</b></center>

     

    Product Measurements (Using BNC version of hiFace):

     

    Output Voltage [<a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/HiFaceLoadVoltage.jpg" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace-measurements">Image Link</a>]

    The output voltage with a 75 Ohm load is 2.328 Vpp. This is a lot higher than the nominal 0.5 Vpp desired at the digital input of most DACs. Sound quality may vary depending on how well a DAC handles this higher voltage. Some digital inputs can be over driven by this 2.328 Voltage PP when they amplify the digital signal, with an HC04UB inverter, that is the regular SPDIF recommendation for an input device.

     

    Output Resistance [<a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/HiFaceOpenVoltage.jpg" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace-measurements">Image Link</a>]

    An approximate 73 Ohm output resistance can be calculated using the hiFace's 4.684 Vpp (without 75 Ohm load) and 2.328 Vpp (with 75 Ohm load). This is close enough to 75 Ohm for most engineers.

     

    Status Bit Information [<a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/HiFaceStatusBits.jpg" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace-measurements">Image Link</a>]

    The transmitter in the HiFace always sends 48 kHz sample rate information in the Status Bits, no matter what sample rate is really playing. This is not really as big of problem to consumers as it is in the professional audio world. Consumer DACs by Theta, some by Mark Levinson, and others with a frequency synthesizer as a secondary PLL or those using use what is called slaving the SPDIF receiver could have issues with this status bit error. When reading the channel bit status area to find out what the frequency is the DACs sets the frequency synthesizer and uses either a digital PLL or analog one to determine if the synthesizer should be increased or decreased. Without the correct status bit as a foundation for this method problems will likely arise.

     

     

    Jitter (Bi-Phase Signal)

    The average jitter measured on the Bi-Phase Signal from 700 Hz up to 100 kHz is about 284 picoseconds. [<a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/HiFaceBiPhaseJitterAVG.jpg" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace-measurements">Image Link</a>]

    The peak jitter measured on the Bi-Phase Signal from 50 Hz up to 100 kHz is about 1.246 nanoseconds. [<a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/HiFaceBiPhaseJitterPK.jpg" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace-measurements">Image Link</a>]

     

    Jitter (Bit Cell) [<a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/bit-cell.png" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace-measurements">Image Link</a>]

    Measuring the Bi-Phase jitter over time shows about 1.2 nanoseconds peak (Blue line) in the data area and rises to about 2.1 nanoseconds peak, in the Staturs Bits and Frame Sync area. Thus, jitter is greatest at the Sync signals which is shown clearly in the J-Test.

     

    Assumed Analog Jitter FFT [<a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/fft-hiface.png" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace-measurements">hiFace Image Link</a>] | [<a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/fft-belcanto.png" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace-measurements">Bel Canto USB-Link Image Link</a>]

    Here a 16 Bit J-Test Signal (Julian Dunn) is sent. The frequency modulation of the carrier is analyzed via FFT in the audio band and compared to a PLL slave clock. This measurement has a limitation in resolution because the PLL also has its own phase noise characteristics. But, this is the only way to evaluate this without an actual DA converter. This is in principal an assumption of what it could look like after a DA converter. The jitter in the bass area is about 100 picoseconds. This is the measurement limit of the Audio Precision. From 1 kHz on, it is about 1 picosecond. This is also the measurement limit of the AP (similar behavior as the sensitivity of the ear to detect jitter). From 100 Hz to 1 kHz it drops slowly. Clearly visible is the frame sync signal at 229 Hz and multiples of that (44.1 kHz / 192).

     

     

    This is what really happens, when you connect the HiFace to good, but typical 96 kHz PLL DAC (with a 192 kHz DAC, it would be worse, because 192 kHz PLL Receivers have higher Jitter than 96 kHz PLL Receivers). Every good design, based on the Crystal CS8414 Receiver (96 K PLL) will have similar numbers. (This is just a typical graph, every DAC acts different, regarding suppression of jitter, but for comparison, one must use a “typical” PLL receiver, in order to get some graph). Here you can see that mostly the jitter that is correlated with the sync signal, creates the most variation compared, to what the signal should look like (red line).

     

     

    [<a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/hiface-real.png" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace-measurements">hiFace Image Link</a>] | [<a href="http://images.computeraudiophile.com/graphics/2010/0822/belcanto-real.png" class="thickbox" rel="hiFace-measurements">Bel Canto USB-Link Image Link</a>]

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Product Information

    <ul>

    <li>Price - RCA $150, BNC $180.00

    <li>hiFace Product Page - <a href="http://www.m2tech.biz/hiFace.asp">Link</a>

    <li>hiFace FAQs - <a href="http://www.m2tech.biz/public/pdf/FAQ_eng.pdf">Link</a> (PDF)

    <li>hiFace White Paper - <a href="http://www.m2tech.biz/public/pdf/White%20Paper%20on%20hiFace.pdf">Link</a> (PDF)

    <li>Purchase hiFace (USA Only) - <a href="http://www.tweekgeek.com/_e/Portable_Computer_Audio/product/HiFace/M2Tech_HiFace.htm">Link</a>

     

     

    </ul>

     

     

     

    Associated Equipment:

     

    <a href="http://files.computeraudiophile.com/2010/0418/Brochure_Fidelio.pdf">Verity Audio Fidelio loudspeakers</a>, <a href="http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/products/mcintosh-mc275-vacuum-tube-power-amplifier.asp">McIntosh MC275 amplification</a>, <a href="http://www.richardgrayspowercompany.com/products.aspx?type=accessories">Richard Gray's Power Company High Tension Wires</a>, <a href="http://www.berkeleyaudiodesign.com/">Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC</a>, <a href="http://www.usbdacs.com/Products/Products.html">Wavelength Audio Proton</a>, <a href="http://esoteric.teac.com/dacs/d-07">Esoteric D-07 DAC</a>, <a href="http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Computer-Audiophile-Pocket-Server-CAPS">C.A.P.S. server</a>, <a href="http://www.belcantodesign.com/Product_USBlink.html">Bel Canto USB Link</a>, <a href="http://www.halidedesign.com/bridge/">Halide Design Bridge</a>, <a href="http://www.dcsltd.co.uk/product/debussy-dac"><i>d</i>CS Debussy DAC</a>, <a href="http://www.dcsltd.co.uk/product/puccini-u-clock"><i>d</i>CS Puccini U-Clock</a>, <a href="http://www.kimber.com/products/interconnects/digital/usb/bbus/cu/">Kimber USB Cu</a>, <a href="http://www.kimber.com/products/interconnects/digital/usb/bbus/ag/">Kimber USB Ag</a>, <a href="http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/system1/digital-analog-converter/dac1-pre">Benchmark DAC1 PRE</a>, <a href="http://www.kimber.com/products/interconnects/analog/select/singleended/ks1011/">Kimber Select KS1011 Analog Cables</a>, <a href="http://www.kimber.com/products/interconnects/digital/select/ks2020/">Kimber Select KS2020 Digital Cable</a>, <a href="http://www.kimber.com/products/loudspeakercables/monocle/x/">Kimber Monocle X Loudspeaker Cable</a>, <a href="http://usa.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=SPZfqXDJvadmFPoh&templete=2">ASUS Xonar HDAV 1.3 Slim</a>, <a href="http://www.apple.com/ipad/">Apple iPad</a>, <a href="http://www.amarraaudio.com/">Sonic Studio's Amarra</a>, <a href="http://www.m2tech.biz/products.html">M2Tech hiFace</a>, <a href="http://www.weiss-highend.ch/dac202/index.html">Weiss Engineering DAC202</a>, <a href="http://www.lynxstudio.com/product_detail.asp?i=13">Lynx Studio AES16 Digital I/O Card</a>.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    I thought you did a fine(beautiful?) job with the review. No doubt it was a tough one, with all the anticipation from others.<br />

    <br />

    I purchased a HiFace to compare with my Halide Bridge. I tried it for 2 weeks. Maybe I did not give it enough time, but I was left wanting more. My perspective will not be the same as another listener, who will have different tastes and equipment, as well as exposure to different levels of equipment(or lack thereof in my case).<br />

    <br />

    If it were my forum, and I was doing the reviewing, I would want to be known as the one to go to for an honest review. <br />

    <br />

    If I were a manufacturer who just created the latest audio product, I would want to submit it for review by a reviewer who is known for honesty.<br />

    <br />

    Of course, this is in a perfect world, and I am sure I live just down the street from Pat. :-p

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I must agree with Gordon on issue of poorly understood specs and phenomena creating unwarranted firestorms. <br />

    <br />

    If the output of he HiFace is excessive it will cause problems with input receivers. However different receivers will react differently. in te receiver the time to propagate from the input to the output is dependent on the magnitude of overdrive. This is not spec'd for the Crystal receivers but a scan of general purpose comparators will show the influence of overdrive. Its probably not symmetrical either so alternate edges will pass through at different times. Whether this will have a significant influence on the output jitter or anything else is difficult to quantify. Each dac will respond differently based on a slew of factors including the input isolation (if any) the nature of the termination and even the layout of the traces from the connector to the input pins of the chip. The very high speed comparators degrade rapidly with overdrive but the more general purpose ones get better.<br />

    <br />

    If there is a reflection from the input circuit (and there will most likely be one) the next question is will it be absorbed by the attenuator (not 100%), will it affect the receiver (comparator) and how? If the cable is long enough the reflection will not get back to the receiver at a time where it can influence the switching. A very short link with a big mismatch COULD influence the transition but may not. Some systems have been designed to use the mismatch to boost the signal going into the receiver. <br />

    <br />

    I looked for the "kick back" you mentioned on a receiver and could not find evidence of it. One could speculate that the hysteresis could couple through the input transistor pair and kick a minute charge back through the input but I couldn't find it. Perhaps you can provide more details of how to see it?<br />

    <br />

    My experience with the HiFace was very similar to Chris's. Further no Linux support made it uninteresting for my efforts. But it may provide a good experience for others. <br />

    <br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm pretty sure Lexicon was "In it for the money" when they slapped a nice faceplate on the $500 Oppo BDP-83 and charged $3500.<br />

    <br />

    All manufacturers are in it for the money. If they weren't they would be producing the gear for personal use only. Just like the guy that loves to home brew beer or the artist that never sells his paintings. <br />

    <br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I didn't want to be dragged back into this thread but feel I have to based on this post.<br />

    <br />

    Firstly should your sig not read "Auraliti, vendor of USB DAC" I've been told that is what all commercial bodies should do - like I had tagged to my sig? So now that we have established that you have a commercial interest in selling your USB DAC it will give us a reference point.<br />

    <br />

    Secondly can you say what your qualifications are? Chris believes that we need to evaluate your technical abilities in order that we can judge your statements or as Chris puts it "Can you share a bit of your technical background so we can put some of your comments into perspective?"<br />

    <br />

    <i>If the output of he HiFace is excessive it will cause problems with input receivers.</i><br />

    <b>Can you specify what you consider excessive?</b><br />

    <br />

    <i>However different receivers will react differently. in te receiver<br />

    the time to propagate from the input to the output is dependent on the magnitude of overdrive. This is not spec'd for the Crystal receivers but a scan of general purpose comparators will show the influence of overdrive. Its probably not symmetrical either so alternate edges will pass through at different times.</i><br />

    <b>So your surmising here - the correct formulation of your statement should be " Its probably not symmetrical either so alternate edges <i></b>might</i><b> pass through at different times." </b><br />

    <br />

    <i>Whether this will have a significant influence on the output<br />

    jitter or anything else is difficult to quantify. Each dac will respond differently based on a slew of factors including the input isolation (if any)the nature of the termination and even the layout of the traces from the connector to the input pins of the chip. The very high speed comparators degrade rapidly with overdrive but the more general purpose ones get better.<br />

    <br />

    <i>If there is a reflection from the input circuit (and there will most likely be one) the next question is will it be absorbed by the attenuator (not 100%), will it affect the receiver (comparator) and how?</i><br />

    <b>The attenuator will absorb it somewhat close to twice the dB speced so if you are using a 10dB the reflections will be attenuated by 20dB (a power ratio of 100). This is significantly better than 0dB.</b><br />

    <br />

    <i>If the cable is long enough the reflection will not get back to the receiver at a time where it can influence the switching.</i><br />

    <b>So what length do I need? Oh, yes this has to be calculated based on the various parameters. I can't do this myself so let's go to a cable vendor who knows how to do this. OK, Mr cable vendor "What price did you say again?" "Oh, OK, it's so expensive because I need 16 feet of cable, I see" "It has to be 75ohm without impedance variations, I see, so that's why it's so expensive per metre". "Jeez, it's beginning to cost more for the cable than for the devices connected to it!" "Can you tell me if I need a different length of cable for different data rates" "Why? Because I was told that if I have cables of certain lengths it will avoid the issue of reflections which I was told are on all digital lines" "Ok so I'll get a cable length of 20 feet, that way I can put my DAC where I want to" "What, I can't use 20 feet because now the reflections will hit the DAC at the next transition window & cause jitter?" "So it's only certain discrete cable lengths that work?" "My head has melted, I think I'll just buy an attenuator, I heard they work great & I'll save a bundle :)" "What's that you say, you want me to prove that they work?" "I think I'll risk it" :) </B> <br />

    <br />

    <i>A very short link with a big mismatch COULD influence the transition but may not.</i><br />

    <b>"Huh, what's that you say? Hold on, a minute ago you told me I needed 16 feet of cable, so why are you trying to sell me a long cable, if the reflections are of no consequence, Mr cable vendor?" "My brain is truly melted now - I'm off before you do it any more damage"</b><br />

    <br />

    <i>Some systems have been designed to use the mismatch to boost the signal going into the receiver.</i><br />

    <b>"Huh! what are you telling me this for? I'm already confused by the cable scenarios" <br />

    <br />

    <i>I looked for the "kick back" you mentioned on a receiver and could not find evidence of it. One could speculate that the hysteresis could couple through the input transistor pair and kick a minute charge back through the input but I couldn't find it. Perhaps you can provide more details of how to see it?</i><br />

    <b>Don't believe me, Ask Jocko he knows all about it - he posts here as Pat from ART - look here http://www.diyhifi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=5879#p5879<br />

    "In case you have not heard me before..........Schmitt trigger inputs are no bueno. Hysteresis couples energy back to the input. <br />

    Yes, it screws up the timing by adding some anomalies that could occur at the decision point. " <br />

    or here http://www.diyhifi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=5727#p5727<br />

    "This is due to the presence of a schmitt trigger on its input, which according to Jocko Homo and others will tend to inject trash back into the transmission line."</b><br />

    <br />

    <i>My experience with the HiFace was very similar to Chris's. Further no Linux support made it uninteresting for my efforts. But it may provide a good experience for others.</i><br />

    Great thanks for your opinion! <br />

    <br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wow John, as my law school professors used to say, you shouldn't ask a question to which you don't have the answer. Many people in this hobby know Damien as one of the brightest and most talented engineers/designers around. He's been at this at an incredibly high level longer than most people. I won't defend him or list his accomplishments as I'm sure he can do this if he wants. <br />

    <br />

    That said, your combative tone and unwillingness to let things go or stop beating a dead horse have turned many a thread into a pissing match. Please take a break from Computer Audiophile in an effort to "sleep on it" and let things subside for a few weeks.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I guess you need some more history on me. I do work for several companies including Monster Cable and for a few more accepted high end guys, NuForce (who do make USB DAC's) where I designed a preamp, Auraliti (who does NOT make a USB DAC) where I designed a Linux PC for playing high definition audio and a few other manufacturers for different projects. I am well equipped to both discuss the analog side of transmission and to measure it. However, I'm not here to sell stuff, that's a responsibility I aggressively avoid. I’m trying to shine a little light on some technical issues. <br />

    <br />

    If the transition takes 1.5 nS (rise time of the HiFace) then a reflection 2+ nS later will not affect the transition at a time when the comparator is near its threshold. A rule of thumb is 1 nS per foot of transmission line (air lines are quicker but totally impractical and many cables will be slower). However the connector and adapters are going to be the worst offenders and they are very close to the receiver chip.<br />

    <br />

    Here are some pictures of the input Z on a few of the available DAC's I have to illustrate this and what happens with a fast transition on the input. The source is a Tek s-52 pulse generator (25 pS rise time) and the monitor is a Tek s-3a probe (350 pS rise time). The signal comes through a GR 50-75 Ohm matching network and a GR 75 Ohm air line so the source is as close to a perfect 75 Ohms source as possible. <br />

    Berkeley Audio:<br />

    http://www.4shared.com/photo/TI9YqwKE/BADA.html<br />

    Apogee MiniDAC:<br />

    http://www.4shared.com/photo/NMxnM8ke/Apogee.html<br />

    Anagram demo board:<br />

    http://www.4shared.com/photo/HC9V4LJy/Anagram.html<br />

    This is the output of the HiFace using a slower preamp than the above system. (Syncing a sampling scope on an SPDIF signal is a real challenge).<br />

    HiFace output unterminated (5 nS/division):<br />

    http://www.4shared.com/photo/TorUWoJM/HiFace_unterminated.html<br />

    HiFace output terminated in 75 Ohms (5 nS/division):<br />

    http://www.4shared.com/photo/RtRknr6n/HiFace_terminated.html<br />

    <br />

    <br />

    The level of hysteresis on the Crystal data sheet is specified as 50 mV so there is evidence of its presence in the data sheet but I can't see it on the input of the DAC. Saying it must be there is not enough. If you don't have the actual circuit of the chip it is all speculation. It is quite possible to design a receiver where the hysteresis does not interact with the input. I waded through some of the thread you linked me to but it wasn't focused or illuminating to me. There were interesting but misguided ideas for low phase noise line receivers and lots of talk about compensation networks for transformers. I looked very carefully at the input pins on a crystal receiver fed with a fast edge and say nothing coming back from the input.<br />

    Here is the image with the two conditions overlayed. There is a little difference but mostly due to the difference capacitance of the circuit with power off.<br />

    http://www.4shared.com/photo/1kde2Ri4/Crystal_receiver.html<br />

    <br />

    However while the attenuator may not affect the line receivers ability to decode the audio signal perfectly it may well reduce the RFI rattling around in the DAC affecting something else. A lot of these discussions get lost in details like this without considering the other possible influences on the end sound. For example if we say adding an attenuator leads to better sound as evidenced by several listeners its legitimate to say it is doing something useful. However the extension that it sounds better because its reducing reflections or the reduced overdrive of the input receiver is not something that can be drawn from the first evidence. They are just possible causes. <br />

    <br />

    If the real underlying story of the technology is too hard for customers and other interested parties to comprehend then the task is education not avoidance.<br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hi Folks, Can someone please give me some help! I have been sitting in the back ground studying and trying to learn how to upgrade my audio computer. So I went out and bought M2 high face used for 100.00 for my laptop. After downloading new drivers I plugged it in And it hick- upps every 15 to 30 seconds. I tried it on four different computers one with xp 2 with vista 32 bit and 1 win 7 32bit. I used Foobar, Winamp, J Rivers and I Tunes.<br />

    Please Help!!! Thanks, Chuck<br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    <br />

    Hi Chuck<br />

    <br />

    Knowing a bit more about your setups … drivers… plug ins and output formats might help. <br />

    <br />

    Assuming all is right on there, and you have the exact same or near same thing happening regardless the pc you use… well the common denominator then is the Hiface itself. …. Or the DAC the Hiface is feeding. Or the connections downstream from the Hiface…. Or, the pins on the Hiface USB side are out of wack. … ??<br />

    <br />

    On my laptop recently, following a reload of the vista OS, I was getting some intermittent drop outs. I found the issue was in my wireless setup in the Vista OS. I connected an Ethernet cable and all was well immediately. Consequently I reconfigured my wireless NIC.<br />

    <br />

    I also had an issue with using the Hiface and it’s latest driver with JRiver MC…. And WASAPI. No other app gave me problems, Fubar, Winamp, or itunes. Just JRiver MC 14.<br />

    <br />

    I rolled back the driver to a previous iteration with a few mouse clicks and a reinstall of the Hiface and all now works like a charm. Beforehand JRiver only worked in the Direct Sound mode… not with WASAPI.<br />

    <br />

    So having the right driver is important with the Hiface unit… BUT EXCHANGING ONE DRIVER FOR SOME OTHER ONE IS NOT a big deal, as some here would lead one to think.<br />

    <br />

    I’ve found out as well, configurations in Windows can add junk to the mix and streamlining the OS for or during playback sessions is a good thing. Eliminating background services, shutting down Antivirus apps, halting uneeded software from operating, etc.<br />

    <br />

    Setting Vista & Win 7 audio setup to exclusive mode operation. Helps too. <br />

    <br />

    If connectivity via wireless, or some downstream config issue isn’t it, and the software is setup well, you’ve enough pc resources to function adequately with, it must be what is in common… the converter, and/or DAC.<br />

    <br />

    If you have a receiver around try feeding it instead of the DAC from the Hiface and see what happens.<br />

    <br />

    Given your input so far, there’s myriad reasons on hand for your problem. It could be the fault too of a combination of things… please be more explicit, as to your particular configs, drivers, players output formats, settings, etc. <br />

    <br />

    I’ve used mine and one other on a few machines myself…. With no likewise issues. Either it worked and both mostly did, or as said, with JRiver MC 14 & WASAPI ONLY, an earlier driver was required to fix it. Maybe only a reinstall of the unit is needed.<br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thanks for the reply blindjim,<br />

    I didn’t no I had to set up drivers… pluggins and output formats. I down loaded J Rivers mc,foobar,winamp and installed them with auto setup. My laptop that I want to use is a Dell studio 2 core T 9300 with 4 gigs mem vista 32. I went to High face web site and down loaded new drivers and installed them. My D/A is Musical Fidelity A3-24 I also go through a Genesis digital lens.<br />

    I tried system without digital lens it made no difference, I don’t have another d/a to try.<br />

    <br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    A few basic troubleshooting steps. First, can you play those files flawlessly using the native internal sound system? If you are getting glitches at this level it is an issue of optimizing your computer. You may need to remove or suspend some apps that are running ,in the background. Further things like mouse clicks will pop through the audio interface. That can be controlled but takes a bit of effort to figure out. Vista's sound system is quite different from XP but there should be info available on cleaning it for this use.<br />

    <br />

    You will get better results with one of the programs optimized for the high quality audio (Foobar or J River). They should also work as well with the internal sound system. Again I would verify they are working right.<br />

    <br />

    If the main audio is working right then add the HiFace. Stick to 44.1 content and make sure that works first. Other possible causes may be shared USB controllers in the PC, which means other activity could blast the HiFace off line or out of sync intermittently. A second possibility is that either the HiFace or the DAC are too far out of tolerance on their clock range and the DAC is having a lock problem. This seems unlikely but I have seen it happen with some hardware.<br />

    <br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I would like to thank Blind Jim for the several hours he spent on the phone with me Monday night. We did everything imaginable to my laptop and the HiFace still would not perform is it should, well I realized that my surround sound system in the house had coaxial inputs. Well much to my surprise the HiFace works fine and the problem was with my Musical Fidelity A3 24 DAC! It’s not compatible with HiFace M2TECH, so I either buy a new USB adapter or a new DAC. Thanks again Blind Jim

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I might know of a fix for you. The hiface is known to have an unusually high voltage SPDIF output. Most DACs can handle it, but it appears your cannot. There is a product mentioned elsewhere in this thread, an RF attenuator, that can be plugged in series with the SPDIF cable which will lower the voltage without creating any problems (these are impedance matched). I actually picked one up to try just to see if it would improive sound (they can, in some cases, reduce jitter caused by signal reflections). These are cheap at around $12.00 and worth a try. The company is Mini Circuits, I do not have their url, but google should work. I got a 6 dB, but you shoudl go for 10 dB with the Hiface. Make sure you get the ones for 75 ohm impedance, and rated to 2 GHz. <br />

    Just found the url: minicircuits.com and the product is: RF Attenuators-I am 95% sure one of these will get the Hiface working with your DAC.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'll be interested to hear if reducing the SPDIF level fixes the problem.<br />

    <br />

    This sounds more like a clock frequency problem than an input drive problem from the symptoms. Input overdrive would cause a continuous error rather than a periodic error. The fact that it works fine with the surround system suggests that the output is free of intermittent dropouts. <br />

    <br />

    Some DACs (ones that use voltage controlled crystal oscillators) have a limited lock range and may not be able to lock to another source if the two are too far apart. Another issue may be that it just isn't locking but they are close enough to work. I have had that experience with the Pacific Microsonics (its easy to forget to switch the clock source) and it works with an occasional click.<br />

    <br />

    Or its possible that the receiver is hiding the stream error in the spdif stream that causes the click. Figuring this stuff out is challenging to say the least. Good luck. <br />

    <br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There is one more possibility, which is close to what Demian describes.<br />

    <br />

    The TI chip, used in that transport, always sends data, in the Channel Status block, that claims the TX rate is 48 kHz. Even when it isn't. We did experience this problem, not too long ago. A certain DAC had trouble deciding whether to believe its PLL stage, which provided a 44 kHz rate clock, whereas the status bits claimed it was 48 kHz. The secondary PLL, in the DAC, had trouble picking the right one. As a result, it just refused to work. Once we found a way to trick the TI chip into transmitting 44 kHz data, all was fine.<br />

    <br />

    (Our trick will not work with this unit, as I am sure most everyone knows ours only does 44 kHz. Turns out it is easy to trick it into sending 44 kHz data.)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hey Barrows, <br />

    Is this what you are talking about?<br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    That is it. After re-reading your post, and Demian and Pat's responses, I tend to believe that Demian may be right in that the attenuator may not help-your issues could be caused by another problem. It is a little hard for me to believe that the timing output of the Hiface is so far off that your DAC cannot stay locked on though... most measurements of the Hiface I am aware of just are not really that bad? Maybe Demian could attempt to make what he is saying a little clearer in regards to the measured performance of the Hiface's clocking.<br />

    In any case, the attenuator is not too much of a financial risk to give it a try, as it will pad down the overly high output voltage of the Hiface (some have reported the attenuators can lower jitter...this will be dependent on the entire system though, and how the Hiface, SPDIF cable, and SPDIF receiver all interact).

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yep, that is what it does! Don't ask what we went through, trying to extract that info, without that nifty gizmo the Prism/Dscope people make.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Doesn't it just irk ya that they cannot get this stuff right? And Pat, you say this is a fault of the TI SPDIF chip. Why not just build it to the spec...really. I mean, the folks at TI are not incompetant.<br />

    <br />

    All these problems people are reporting with the Hiface and the Evo really are turning me off to these devices-although I give the Hiface a bit of a pass 'cause of the value it offers (if it works with one's DAC).

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This is not a comment directed at any one in particular, just a general observation.<br />

    <br />

    It's not reasonable to expect every USB interface to work out of the box with every DAC out there (and there are a lot out there). I hold on to my Theta Generation Va which was hot stuff in 1995. Because it's Red Book, it still makes great music and benefits in a stunning way when used with an asynch USB->SPDIF converter.<br />

    <br />

    However, if I were to assume that every USB interface out there will work or sound good with it, I'd be a moron. A lot has happened in electronic interfacing since 1993. A lot. There have been a lot of changes in standards, copy protection, etc, etc.<br />

    <br />

    That suggests there are going to be differences in what DACs expect -- most of them were engineered to go with the manufacturer's transports. Back before computer audio, mixing a transport from one mfgr with a DAC from another was asking for trouble. Makes me wonder if the all-in-one players didn't sound the best after all.<br />

    <br />

    The bottom line is the more that technology changes, the more the need to use our ears remains. Nothing is a silver bullet and almost anything can be made to sound lousy under the right conditions.<br />

    <br />

    It took me years of experience before I could trust that what I hear from my system is 'good enough.' It happened when I began to trust my own sense of enjoyment. If I enjoy the music, then I think my system sounds great.<br />

    <br />

    Despite the goals of the "Absolute Sound," almost anything can mess up the best sound out there. Just set it all up in the garage and have a listen.<br />

    <br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    players when properly designed did/do sound best (because they do not have to rely on SPDIF, and good ones slave the transport to the DAC clock internally). That's why high end companies just about stopped making DACs for awhile. The resurgance in popularity of stand alone DACs owes alot to the popularity of using computers as a source.<br />

    There is a standard for SPDIF, it includes the parameters required for one device to communicate with another. It is not difficult to engineer products that work within the standard. I really do not find it acceptable that there are some products that are so far outside the parameters of the standard that problems occur. Occasional problems, with very unusual components I can handle, but the volume of reported problems with both the Hiface and the Evo seems a little high to me. Like I said, I'll give the Hiface a bit of a pass on this, due to its very modest cost, but the amount of reports of problems with Evo as well really bothers me. It is hard not to come to the conclusion that these products need more refinement, and perhaps were rushed into the market with insufficient testing.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You don't think TI is incompetent? Well, maybe they are not. But, here are the facts:<br />

    <br />

    The Hiface unit has an output level, that is too high. Why? Because the designer (obviously <i>not</i> an RF guy) copied the circuit, in the data sheet. Companies frequently give the "menial" jobs, of coming up with "typical application circuits" to junior engineers. Who, are only junior engineers, for a reason. (Inexperience, and time on the job, being key factors. Some will get it together, but most will find some way to hang on, just out of sheer luck.) As a result, we have generated a cottage industry, of learning how attenuators can reduce reflections. (This is old hat, to RF guys. Older even than we are.)<br />

    <br />

    Second, the "It's not a bug, it is a feature!" is mentioned <b>nowhere</b> in the data sheet. Indeed, calling TI tech support, almost none of them are aware of it. I ended up teaching quite a few of them, about this problem. After I found the right person, who knew all about it.<br />

    <br />

    "If you want the data in the Channel Status Block to be correct, you will have to serially enter it in. There is no way we can have the chip transmit the right data, for all sampling rates."<br />

    <br />

    "Well, if I had read that in the data sheet, I would have known about it. And if I wanted to go to all the trouble to use a chip that required a micro interface, I would have gone with the Wolfson, instead."<br />

    <br />

    So, you decide: incompetent, lazy, or too unconcerned to mention it, up front. The only good thing to come out of all of that is their marketing weenies (in Atlanta) have finally gotten the message, that we don't want to have them calling us all the time. (Or ever, from now on.) They didn't get the hint, when we (and lots of their other customers) pointed out that telling us about what great products they have is a waste of time, if they have lead-times >18 weeks, on damn near every part in the catalog.<br />

    <br />

    Moral of the story: I have lived and worked in the Dallas area, for almost 40 years. I should have known better than to go with a TI chip, but on the surface, it looked like the fastest way to get a product to market.<br />

    <br />

    Answer your question?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It sounds like they suffer from the problem of being a big company, where the details of how things work often get lost in all the BS.<br />

    When I worked for PS Audio I spent about a half hour chatting with a TI senior design engineer (during CES) who was all hot about their new receiver/ASRC chip. <br />

    Later I tried contacting him as I had some questions about what happens to the data, exactly, when it gets received by one of these chips (I also asked about the 4192 ASRC only chip) but you tell the chip to output the same data rate as is received. It appeared that no one could get me the answer-was the data re-sampled, did it just pass through with "no" processing... I never did get the answer.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Two more informations:<br />

    <br />

    The clock of my measured HiFace has a accuracy of – 6.8 ppm, so from this point of view, every analog PLL and even VCXO will lock in. This could not be the problem.<br />

    <br />

    And by the way, the status bit of the Bel Canto USB 24/96 Link is always sending 44.1 kHz, no matter what sample rate is really on the output.<br />

    <br />

    The same with every Burr Brown TI 16/48 USB interface. There sending all time a 44.1 kHz status bit, no matter what sample rate is really on.<br />

    <br />

    Juergen<br />

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Guest
    This is now closed for further comments




×
×
  • Create New...