Jitter. We all have it , how does it sound when we make it better ?

[ALRAINBOW]

First off thanks all for the responses and open debate on this topic. I mean to take no critisem in my views of various companies and the dacs they make. I presently own two USB converter products. One being the AP1/PP. cost about 1400. And the other is a more expensive offramp 5. It to has a seperate power supply . I have used them with almost any dac I have had in my possession . It made a marked easy to hear improvements in every one of them. As I only use USB or network with my DACS , I cAnnot speak of the sweet spot of inputs for dacs. I own a MSB platinum dac, when I purchased this dac and begain to use it I could clearly hear a large improvement over anything else I owned . This gave me the idea to try and use the USB converters to see how much better they could be improved in comparison to the MSB . The MSB has it's own power supply base , as the UMT has it's own too. It is a 4 PC setup . The dac has the galaxy clock as well.

now given this dac is many times more than all the rest I never did a head to head. But I do use it as a reference .

For my listening I use a audio quest diamond USB cable.

j river 19

and three different CPU,s

two towers and one surface pro.

They all showed marked improvements with the USB converters . Win 7 ultimate and 8.1 was running on all CPU,s

a Sanology ds213+ with two SS samsung hardrives stored and was used to play music.

I also can add that only a few years ago there were some really hi end dacs that had no USB inputs Just spidif coax and optical , I am sure there is some people, here who remember this .

On this forum there a review from someone I think I can trust and he did shoot out of 15 of these units.

This post is not a witch hunt but it does point to makers of our dacs. Now maybe all of my CPU,s need help , but ask anyone who owns one of these units and they to will tell you the benefits of using one. As for the sound change being in accurate , making details become more focused cannot be wrong. I do understand the friction this post does produce , but this is supposed to be a forum to improve our musical reproduction.

Now if you do not own one or have never tried one how can you tell someone it makes no improvement . As for other ways to improve our CPU audio reproduction , I am not saying I have tried I use no specialized USB card . The purpose was for me to see if the improvements claimed by theses companies claim is real. And for me they actually perform just as advertised. Ps I also use power regeneration as well this too I proves the sound

but that is another topic for another day.

 

Thanks all and please continue

 

al

[kdoot]

Al, some people *like* the sound produced by a more jittery transport. I've been in A/B comparisons with a couple of them. One said that there was more "flow" to the music with the CD transport than with the computer/Audiophilleo combination.

 

I don't understand it, but I'm OK with it. To each their own.

[ALRAINBOW]

Now that does make sense to me. And I know spending 3 k on one USB converter is even more crazy and I know that. But hearing the sound become so much more musical and detailed makes me feel it was worth it. We all are looking for something to improve what hear and I know at some point I too will get off the madness express train. I say this as I a shopping for power cables LOL. What can I say ..... But thanks for replying

 

al

[tranz]

Cleaning up electrical noise upstream in the transport and even before will all help in lowering the noise. From linear PSU feeding the various computer components, power conditioners, clean USB power (e.g. IFI USB), minimizing cable interference and even cutting background processes from running on the computer, it all seems to make a difference.

 

But it is very system dependent, and there are so many different ways to go. Trust your ears and enjoyment level.

[ALRAINBOW]

I agree , as I try end a host of stuff first. I have a ps audio P10 x2 for the office rig that helped as well. But the offramp or AP1/PP is a jump in level easy.

Al

[hifitubes]

Hi Chodi,

 

Fair point. And they become subtle improvements in some setups, and inaudible ones in others. Only go that route if you are able to taste test and it makes a personal difference worth the money.

 

A slightly different way of looking at it is that it is easy to throw in an xmos chip to provide an USB input, but not that easy to isolate it from electrical noise coming from the computer and avoid increase in jitter. Pin 1 brings in horrible 5v from the computer and the shell and pin 4 a ground path for noise. Using an AM radio or EMI meter will show how noisy an USB connection is. Often there are cost and physical space limitations in a DAC design along with market/marketing pressures as well, which do not allow for the optimal isolation.

 

Berkeley Audio is a good example where even in their reference $14K DAC they chose to have the USB connection in another box. Was this purely to save cost and not cannibalize on their Alpha USB converter? I guess it is possible, but I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

Cheers

 

One can buy an iFi USB, or Adnaco S3B to isolate. IF you used the iFi, you could than decide to use another reasonable priced USB card like PPA Studio, SoTM, or JPLAY for a low jitter source.

 

To me, external converters are more and more likely highly obsolete, especially given their cost. The Hydra-X and AP, two I would consider, are still about $1K USD!

 

Furthermore, you are really depending on the converter given the conversion is now in the chain, and the assumption that the USB implementation is inferior. I think the choice is rather obvious.

 

But, Al makes some good points. There is more than one way to achieve jitter reduction....and it was interesting to see the Vega report on Millers Audio Research regarding S/PDIF vs. USB performance.

[ALRAINBOW]

Words are not music.if you go back to the beginning of the thread I did this comparison

to my msb stack. As it did not have all the qualities of the msb it was clear to me that it improved that dac in many ways. And there is at least one person on this forum that has remarked it improved there msb too. It is easy to pick at something you have not heard the improvements from. Like interconnects or spikes for speakers , power cords. However we all have our opinions and I respect that.

Al

[bhobba]

Are we to believe that the designers of upscale dac's are devoid of the knowledge necessary to build a decent usb input for their dac?

 

They have the knowledge, but do they have the will?

 

Remember, for any commercial product every cent you scrimp and save on gets multiplied at every stage of the retail chain. They would have to charge a BOMB for a retail product that includes what a boutique product such as the Off-Ramp retails for.

 

And then their is the issue of exactly how skilled an engineer they are. The Off-Ramp is designed by one of the most knowledgeable digital engineers on the planet who is now doing this for fun. He was the team leader of the team that designed the Pentium and still holds a number of key patents.

 

That said, you perhaps are misconstruing some of the comments I have made. Yes the Off-Ramp makes a difference with even expensive DAC's like the Playback Designs - but it is not chalk and cheese like it is with lower priced DAC's such as the NAD M51. The higher priced products are built to a higher standard exactly as you would expect - but they still fall short of what a no holds barred device like the Off-Ramp does.

 

Thanks

Bill

[ALRAINBOW]

Yes a totally agree , and it does not make that much a difference with my msb if set all.

My point to this was what do other people hear . And the answer is most don't . For this I have no real answer . For hobby that is based on hearing results , I was a amazed how little people acnknolwledge of improvements. I do not know Steve other than his products nor his qualifications , but I do know all of his products improved my listening experience .

 

and thanks for rlply I only wish there where more that did understand.

 

l