15 USB/SPDIF converters shootout

[mayhem13]

No Pat - you are not rotten.

 

And there is a very well known guy out here in Australia, Joe Rasmussen, preaching exactly the same thing - its very low frequency jitter that is the thing.

 

I dont have any problem with this - the problem I have is this dismissiveness of subjective listening tests as worthless with statements like:

 

'Another thread down the mystical sewer pipe. At some point, reasonable people will draw correlation with magnetic fatigue fighting jewelry and the like.'

 

Thanks

Bill

 

So what the reviewer is saying, and you are agreeing to is that the $23000 state of the art DAC and SotM/USB card aren't enough to get the audible effects of jitter below audible levels? You didn't find it confusing that he was able to resolve some level of difference between FIFTEEN converters?, even though he used such high end gear on either end? There's debates where 'mere mortals' have a difficult time with CD vs MP3 yet this review finds clear audible differences all in the digital realm? Might you have also wondered why the reviewers results matched the units selling price ladder so closely? Should one expect such a close value to performance ratio in all consumer goods?.....as put somewhere earlier that ' you get what you pay for'?

[bhobba]

So what the reviewer is saying, and you are agreeing to is that the $23000 state of the art DAC and SotM/USB card aren't enough to get the audible effects of jitter below audible levels? You didn't find it confusing that he was able to resolve some level of difference between FIFTEEN converters?, even though he used such high end gear on either end? There's debates where 'mere mortals' have a difficult time with CD vs MP3 yet this review finds clear audible differences all in the digital realm? Might you have also wondered why the reviewers results matched the units selling price ladder so closely? Should one expect such a close value to performance ratio in all consumer goods?.....as put somewhere earlier that ' you get what you pay for'?

 

Having heard many of these USB converters myself into all sorts of DAC's, some of which are supposedly SOTA, I can verify they often make big differences. My conjecture is except in a few cases the care taken by the manufacturer with USB is not good. My Playback Designs is one of those cases - it is a SOTA DAC with a SOTA USB input and on that DAC it doesn't make much of a difference - but a difference it still makes.

 

Doesn't the number of people (and I am among them) who independently have conducted listening tests with very similar results, at least suggest there may be something to it?

 

Why do you think, for example, the Audiophellio always comes near the top even though it is far from the most expensive?

 

Thanks

Bill

[bhobba]

So what the reviewer is saying, and you are agreeing to is that the $23000 state of the art DAC and SotM/USB card aren't enough to get the audible effects of jitter below audible levels?

 

The Phasure DAC claims jitter of 0.2 ps and people say they can hear differences even at that level.

 

Check out the review:

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/xxhighend/1.html

 

Whats so hard in accepting even current SOTA has audible differences?

 

Thanks

Bill

[mayhem13]

Thanx.....you've clarified my point. Verification comes from subjective listening evaluations in uncontrolled environments. The one measurement tool that we can rely on being consistently calibrated and unbiased in its evaluations....the human ear.

[Purite Audio]

I findperceived ' differences ' tend to disappear when equipment is level matched and tested 'blind'.

Keith.

[bhobba]

I findperceived ' differences ' tend to disappear when equipment is level matched and tested 'blind'.

Keith.

 

Yes we have the DBT guys like Peter Aczel

http://theaudiocritic.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=30

'I would gladly have set up a double-blind listening comparison of the CD player’s analog outputs versus the DAC1, but then I realized that it would be an apples-and-oranges situation. Red-book 16-bit/44.1-kHz PCM against a 24-bit/192-kHz converter? It’s not very meaningful. I’d have to scare up a late-model DVD-Audio player for a valid ABX test. I’ll do it, soon, but you know something? I don’t think I’ll hear a difference. Even so, I’ll take electronic perfection, any day of the week, if it costs $975 instead of $17,500'

 

The benchmark digital perfection? No difference between it and a late model DVD player? To be blunt that makes guys that actually listen to gear want to vomit.

 

But thats what you get when you carry this blind listening stuff to an extreme.

 

And yes I have done blind listening tests and seen them done between stuff some guys claim is inaudible like USB cables and computer players with it being able to be picked.

 

If blind testing guys really had the courage of their convictions they would go down to their local Hi-Fi store and challenge the sales people to blind tests and expose them if they are unable to pass. Despite me suggesting that innumerable times I haven't heard of any of them doing it. It makes you wonder it really does.

 

Thanks

Bill

[mav52]

Its not speculation - verified by listening tests. Got the gear to measure jitter that low? If so Steve Nugent would like to hear from you.

 

Thanks

Bill

 

Just a question, we measured jitter at Bell Labs and Lucent using available equipment from Tektronix and Agilent so what's the difference ?

[bhobba]

Just a question, we measured jitter at Bell Labs and Lucent using available equipment from Tektronix and Agilent so what's the difference ?

 

You are missing the point. Is your typical small audio manufacturer setup with the equipment you had at Lucent and Bell Labs? The exact issue was the quote I gave from Steve that I will repeat:

 

'IMO jitter measurements that are meaningful cannot be made without special measurement techniques and expensive equipment. It is a non-trivial measurement with lots of dimensions. I have a customer that is a retired Tektronix engineer that pioneered jitter measurement equipment at Tek. I am planning to enlist him to do measurements for me. Correlating these to audibility is another thing entirely. At least if I have the measurements, I can do A/B's and determine what is audible to me and the relative levels and try to correlate this to the measurements. To do really meaningful correlation, one would have to simulate a range of jitter characteristics using test signals, including amplitude, spectrum and linearity, and then perform some ABX testing with several listeners using a high-quality system. Big undertaking.'

 

But even beyond that expecting your typical audio enthusiast who managed to get a heap of converters together for a listening test to do it is - well ridiculous. Comments such as 'Another thread down the mystical sewer pipe. At some point, reasonable people will draw correlation with magnetic fatigue fighting jewelry and the like.' - well I think reasonable people understand a thread devoted to listening comparisons is not the province of measurements with lab equipment.

 

Thanks

Bill

[guydebord]

To Elberoth and those who own the Berkeley,

 

Did you test the BNC output vs the AES? Any observations?

 

Thanks!

[ar-t]

Not always comparing apples to apples.

 

In the case of the Berleley, the AES input, on their DAC, sounds better, than the SPDIF. This seems to be common knowledge, among folks familiar with them, and their products.

 

The reason for this is obvious, to someone like me, on inspection. I will leave it at that.

 

As far as the source is concerned, there is no reason the output jitter, of the two outputs, to be any different. In real life, any differences will be what DAC they are connected to. While some of us feel both styles of inputs should be virtually the same, not all manufacturers think that way.

 

So, a reliable comparison may not be as easy as one would hope.

[mayhem13]

You are missing the point. Is your typical small audio manufacturer setup with the equipment you had at Lucent and Bell Labs? The exact issue was the quote I gave from Steve that I will repeat:

 

'IMO jitter measurements that are meaningful cannot be made without special measurement techniques and expensive equipment. It is a non-trivial measurement with lots of dimensions. I have a customer that is a retired Tektronix engineer that pioneered jitter measurement equipment at Tek. I am planning to enlist him to do measurements for me. Correlating these to audibility is another thing entirely. At least if I have the measurements, I can do A/B's and determine what is audible to me and the relative levels and try to correlate this to the measurements. To do really meaningful correlation, one would have to simulate a range of jitter characteristics using test signals, including amplitude, spectrum and linearity, and then perform some ABX testing with several listeners using a high-quality system. Big undertaking.'

 

But even beyond that expecting your typical audio enthusiast who managed to get a heap of converters together for a listening test to do it is - well ridiculous. Comments such as 'Another thread down the mystical sewer pipe. At some point, reasonable people will draw correlation with magnetic fatigue fighting jewelry and the like.' - well I think reasonable people understand a thread devoted to listening comparisons is not the province of measurements with lab equipment.

 

Thanks

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks again, as you're furthering my point. These smaller audio gear mfgrs you speak of, who base their products capabilities on the reduction of audible jitter and noise....they don't have the measuring capabilities to prove their designs?......and that's acceptable for such a high price point as a tradeoff?....to who?

 

And yes, it is ridiculous for the OP to perform such testing....equally ridiculous for the mfgr to NOT perform the testing and publish the results for such gear.

 

Whether you care or not, this hobby and industry is shrinking at an alarming rate, and IMO partly because of these mystical claims and practices. People are much more technically knowledgable these days and aren't easily manipulated. And the majority of those that purchase music and playback devices actually could care less about SQ issues, but instead rely on availability and ease of use as the driving purchasing indicator. You can either continue to be part of the problem and watch your hobby evaporate or conduct yourself responsibly in the public domain to help further your own and the hobbie's credibility.

 

Thank you.

[dallasjustice]

Got it. Please just don't take away my 64oz soda. :-)

[spdif-usb]

I forgot to mention, that M2Tech webpage I linked earlier in the thread states even HDMI has the same "unfair advantage" as I2S. Listening to my Emotiva UMC-200 over HDMI right now...

[ar-t]

And yes, it is ridiculous for the OP to perform such testing....equally ridiculous for the mfgr to NOT perform the testing and publish the results for such gear.

 

Really?

 

So, you have no idea how much the gear costs, yet you seem upset that "we" don't do these measurements, and publish them.

 

How 'bout the other guys don't want to publish it. Ever think of that? You can draw your own conclusions, since it is a free country. Even if they are not 100% accurate.

 

Whether you care or not, this hobby and industry is shrinking at an alarming rate, and IMO partly because of these mystical claims and practices. People are much more technically knowledgable these days and aren't easily manipulated. And the majority of those that purchase music and playback devices actually could care less about SQ issues, but instead rely on availability and ease of use as the driving purchasing indicator. You can either continue to be part of the problem and watch your hobby evaporate or conduct yourself responsibly in the public domain to help further your own and the hobbie's credibility.

 

Thank you.

 

So, you have no problem paying $4k, for a cable, that has no technical data, and just a lot of marketing hype.

 

Yet, we are supposed to spend $xx,xxx, to buy expensive gear, and make products that don't cost several $k. Which one is it?

[ar-t]

Got it. Please just don't take away my 64oz soda. :-)

 

Hey.......I pay your health care bills. (Yet another inside joke.)

[mayhem13]

Really?

 

So, you have no idea how much the gear costs, yet you seem upset that "we" don't do these measurements, and publish them.

 

How 'bout the other guys don't want to publish it. Ever think of that? You can draw your own conclusions, since it is a free country. Even if they are not 100% accurate.

 

 

 

So, you have no problem paying $4k, for a cable, that has no technical data, and just a lot of marketing hype.

 

Yet, we are supposed to spend $xx,xxx, to buy expensive gear, and make products that don't cost several $k. Which one is it?

 

You must have me confused with someone else.......I'm on the other end of every cable flame war here!

 

As to the gear......it's a cost of doing business in this market......and I'm even more surprised that you responded as such....unless you doubt the audible effects of jitter and this level of testing isn't neccessary?

 

At these price points, to not prove a design using extensive analysis is borderline fraud IMO. As an alternative to purchasing, there's lease and finance options as well as independent lab analysis. If a mfgr can't afford to prove it's designs, then it's time rethink the business model.

[ar-t]

You crack me up. I have been preaching the "evils" of jitter, for over 20 years.

 

As to the cost..................you seem to be clueless.

 

I see no reason why any manufacturer should have to provide that data, possibly at great cost, unless they make jitter part of their schtick.

 

We have been, so we spent the money. Next person that complains about our prices, I am going to send them to your house. And let you deal with them.

 

Maybe you should direct your wrath to the people that spend more for a USB, or SPDIF cable, than the cost of the converter. Talk about schtick, with no data, and outrageous prices..............

[Elberoth]

I findperceived ' differences ' tend to disappear when equipment is level matched and tested 'blind'.

Keith.

 

There is no need to level match USB/SPDIF converters.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Mayhem - Enough industry and manufacture bashing in a thread about converters. We've all heard it way too many times before and I'm pretty sure you've preached it to the same audience previously.

 

Im cool with many if your contributions here on CA but make sure you ask yourself, "Am I helping increase others' enjoyment of our wonderful hobby" when leaving comments.

[Superdad]

THANK YOU Chris.

[Elberoth]

mayhem13 - you belive that $23k Scarlatti DAC is immune to any incomming jitter, even though you haven't tried one. I would rather see people talk about their first hand experiences than beliefs, but I'm ok with that. It is a free world and anyone can belive in whatever he wants to belive.

 

I would like to get some facts straight though. You sugested that 'results matched the units selling price ladder too closely', which is another way of saying that the reviewer doesn't know what he is talking about.

 

Your statement is inacurate and quite simply - insulting.

 

Contrary to what you have said, there were three converters that were considerably more expensive than the Berkeley Alpha USB (U-Clock was almost 3x more than Berkeley) and yet, I felt that it was the cheaper Berkeley that offered (by far) the best sound quality. And Berkeley is not the only example on that list, where a cheaper converter turned out to perform better.

[Elberoth]

I'm sorry, I started writing and posted my comment to Mayhem before I have noticed Chris response.

[mayhem13]

mayhem13 - you belive that $23k Scarlatti DAC is immune to any incomming jitter, even though you haven't tried one. I would rather see people talk about their first hand experiences than beliefs, but I'm ok with that. It is a free world and anyone can belive in whatever he wants to belive.

 

I would like to get some facts straight though. You sugested that 'results matched the units selling price ladder too closely', which is another way of saying that the reviewer doesn't know what he is talking about.

 

Your statement is inacurate and quite simply - insulting.

 

Contrary to what you have said, there were three converters that were considerably more expensive than the Berkeley Alpha USB (U-Clock was almost 3x more than Berkeley) and yet, I felt that it was the cheaper Berkeley that offered (by far) the best sound quality. And Berkeley is not the only example on that list, where a cheaper converter turned out to perform better.

 

........sorry if you took it that way.....my point was to suggest that you may have fallen victim to expectation bias......a very real and powerful phenomena that frankly accounts partly IMO for our humanity. Quite natural and part of being alive. If you had suggested subtle differences in your revelations, I would have never bothered to even reply to this thread. But having such a device stand out 'by far' where there's no analog conversion demanded a response. I would be surprised if you posted such an extensive, time consuming thread without inciting some level of controversy.....just maybe not my flavor!

 

And as to trying the Scarlatti...or hearing such music in a system of that caliber, I must admit I'm a bit spoiled as to have spent many years in recording and production studios hearing some of my favorite music as it was laid down on tape or performed live in sound studios and arenas across the country. In a quest to recapture those aural memories, I've been a devout DIY speaker builder closely studying acoustic properties and cutting edge methodology in speaker design. Given the choice, my $$$ is always going to go towards speakers and room treatments long before searching for small signal gains where there's little to be had......IMO of course.

[mayhem13]

You crack me up. I have been preaching the "evils" of jitter, for over 20 years.

 

As to the cost..................you seem to be clueless.

 

I see no reason why any manufacturer should have to provide that data, possibly at great cost, unless they make jitter part of their schtick.

 

We have been, so we spent the money. Next person that complains about our prices, I am going to send them to your house. And let you deal with them.

 

Maybe you should direct your wrath to the people that spend more for a USB, or SPDIF cable, than the cost of the converter. Talk about schtick, with no data, and outrageous prices..............

 

Maybe we both misunderstood each other then.....as carefully hidden in your posts is some rhetoric that suggests you might agree with some of my assertions.

 

Clueless?......I don't think so. Jaded maybe, but not clueless. I'll chalk the insult up to frustration and move on.

[bhobba]

At these price points, to not prove a design using extensive analysis is borderline fraud IMO.

 

I know an audio manufacturer pretty well who makes cables, DAC's and speakers. I know exactly how they are designed and built. Yea analysis is done but the real key is listening to gear - extensive listening. For example the designer of the DAC will think of some change, do it, and bring it to the factory of the maker. He will then put it in his reference system and he, his staff, and any customers who happen to be there at the time will listen to it. Its usually obvious instantaneously if its better or not. After many many such iterations you start to get a good product.

 

The real problem with this industry IMHO has nothing to do with taking measurements and publishing specs - most people cant disentangle them anyway and they don't tell the full story by a long shot. The real issue is the punters that get Absolute Sound, Stereophile or whatever and pour over them hoping they will guide them through this maze. When Absolute Sound proclaims the latest uber priced Magico is the best speaker on the planet they lust after it and actually believe it without ever questioning exactly what makes the pronouncement of such reviewers worth anything. What they should be doing is listening to gear - going over to friends places, attending GTG's, discussing what they hear with others. Over time they will start to understand what is out there and exactly what sounds good to them. Its a long hard slog that in itself will cost a bit - but nowhere near the cost of thinking what magazines say is the the way to do it - it aren't.

 

Thanks

Bill