LAN Input DACs

[YashN]

Which brings me to the question that is occupying my mind these days: will there be a driver provided for Mac OS X so that we can do DSD256?

 

That would be awesome.

 

Well that is the USB>Ethernet Audio Bridge solution that will be licensed to OEMs by UpTone/Swenson in 2015. No OS, no big processor, no DLNA, no IP addresses to fuss with; works with ALL player s/w (USB>Ethernet dongle is and appears as an XMOS async-USB sound card capable of 32/384 or DoP--without drivers under OS X, with standard XMOS/Thesycon drivers under Windows, etc.).

[tranz]

Which brings me to the question that is occupying my mind these days: will there be a driver provided for Mac OS X so that we can do DSD256?

 

That would be awesome.

 

Over USB I read that MSB has one.

[tranz]

Here is an interesting read on what Naim did for their top streamer/dac.

 

Even going as far as addressing mechanical isolation.

 

http://www.music-line.biz/cms/fileadmin/pdf/wp_nds_iss9.pdf

[Superdad]

Any pointers on why it is? There could be similar issues with extra noise because of packets processing requiring power during spikes, but maybe wireless is easier to isolate?

 

Well, both USB and Ethernet are packetized systems with a PHY chip (crazy things filled with PLLs and overlapping phase clocks) at both ends, so both can, depending upon quality of signal, make their PHYs work hard to recover data, thereby generating "packet noise" on the ground plane, PS, and I guess even data lines.

 

Potential advantages for Ethernet include:

a) every port has an isolation transformer at its input;

b) if you use unshielded cable (or at least don't tie the shield drain wire at more than one end of the cable), then there is true galvanic isolation between the computer and the DAC.

 

In addition, we hope that some upstream issues of the computer quality will make much less of a difference when Ethernet is used. Present Ethernet solutions (virtually all DLNA based except for Miska's NAA, Apple AirPlay, or LMS products like Sonore's, etc.) may be getting this benefit, but perhaps there is still too much other hardware and s/w stuff in the way for those to be a slam-dunk to knock out USB (sorry, mixing sports metaphors; I'm not much of a sports guy).

 

The prototype of our solution will have both Ethernet and USB inputs (we are using the same XMOS chip for both, and besides, John knows how to do a REALLY great async-USB input that takes clock from DAC and does best possible isolation), so there will be a very fair show-down between the two methods just before we start demonstrating to the licensees who are waiting for this. I am hoping/expecting that Ethernet input will match or exceed the equally carefully done USB input. Then we can worsen the computer at the other end and see how immune the solution is/isn't.

[tranz]

Hi Superdad,

 

Thanks for the continued updates. Not sure if you are already working with a company like MSB on this, but would it work with their I2S Pro input unit, or would it require something completely different. An Uptone LAN input module?

 

Cheers

[Superdad]

Which brings me to the question that is occupying my mind these days: will there be a driver provided for Mac OS X so that we can do DSD256?

 

That would be awesome.

 

YashN: If you mean for our XMOS-based USB>Ethernet Audio Bridge, then I doubt it at first. You already know that DSD256 via DoP does not fit within PCM 32/384 frames/rate due to DoP overhead. And I did spend some time (calling Germany and elsewhere) trying to figure out what it would take to produce an ASIO driver for XMOS under OS X. It would be a wonderful thing to offer (or license, depending upon development investment) to other XMOS developers, as well as have for our own products. But I hit several brick walls in the research. I'd like to call up George at exaSound to understand what route they took to produce their OS X ASIO driver (their inputs are of course not XMOS-based). They have the Steinberg GmbH logo on their driver's "about" screen, but I don't know that they actually have any sort of license with Steinberg (who of course dropped all ASIO for Mac things the moment Apple came our with OS X and CoreAudio).

 

Maybe I'll learn more in the future. But to start, up to 32/384Khz and DSD128 over DoP will be the natively supported maximums with OS X for the UpTone Swenson USB>EAB modules. Thesycon drivers under Windows and typical ASIO support and DSD will also be standard; should be fine with Linux, etc.

The whole purpose of the USB>Ethernet dongle is to be 100% compatible--it will look and basically be, an XMOS async-USB sound card. Use whatever OS and player s/w you like.

 

Oh, and that means ALL the music streaming services (Tidal, Spotify, Qobuz, etc.) will just work with NO fuss!

[YashN]

Yep, I know the limitations and they have been quite frustrating to me because:

 

1. I have a firmware-upgraded iFi iDSD Nano which can do native DSD256

2. I have been unsuccessful getting Linux installed (used to be easier!)

3. I have been unsuccessful in getting the Raspberry Pi with Raspbian to function as an NAA with HQ Player.

4. I am loathe to install Windows, I'd rather stick with Mac OS or Linux.

 

On the other hand, the way to do this at the firmware side is to change a flag for Max-rate to allow higher than DXD-rate PCM and a few other things to take care of afterwards. The XMOS application note provides the clever details.

 

It is necessary, however to build a driver for Mac OS X since the latter is restrictive when using CoreAudio.

 

Not that easy, unless, of course, you get the driver technology specs from George at exaSound. I did send a request but had no reply, which I'll ascribe to the fact that it's the holiday period.

[YashN]

Well, both USB and Ethernet are packetized systems with a PHY chip (crazy things filled with PLLs and overlapping phase clocks) at both ends....

 

Thanks for the additional info, Superdad, fascinating to see where this is going. The technology and product are on the right track IMO.

[prot]

That's funny, since a very good Ethernet>I2S box, the SONORE Signature Series Rendu, comes from a fellow named Jesus!

 

And that's exactly why I wrote it (the rendu is mentioned earlier in the thread) ... i like writing multilayered texts ... and like it even more when ppl go past the first one

So I just gonna ignore the actual purpose of your msg and thank you for bringun me a bit of multilayered joy

[prot]

Sorry Tranz, but I am not sure how much you have encountered of Mr. "prot" first hand in other threads. Sad to say, but since he has shown up, I have yet to see him contribute any information of any value to anyone here at CA on almost any topic. He just shows up in these threads to bait, taunt and tease. Best just ignore rather than engage him. Or at least, don't expect to get much from the exchange except a sour taste.

 

My msges have thick layers of irony & such ... doesnt mean they are useless.

 

There was huge missunderstanding here, some less exp ppl assumed that it is somehow possible to take the bits stored on a NAS on play them on a DAC without having a computer in the middle...understandable cause computers are complex and ppl want stuff that just works ... but *not* possible in this case ... not now, not ever. Sry guys, you need a computer...with Os, with settings, with bugs...like said: NoWayOut. Hope my *useless* post cleared that and stopped an useless discussion.

Also, that is exactly the type of confusion and wishful thinking that makes ppl pay thousands for $10 snakeoil ...like that msb "wonder device" which is a cheap $50 computer sold for $2000 to clueless ppl. Hope my msg did stop at least one person from covering himself in that snake oil.

 

But enough of prot... lets talk about how helpful Superdad's msges are. In this case I'm pretty sure you did understand all that confusion... you could have corrected it with a single sentence and avoid 2 pages of computer luddism ... but instead you prefered to take advantage and advertise one of your devices ... dubious one too in terms of soundQ gains because it only *adds* complexity ... plus, usb-ethernet bridges do exist already.

I thought the purpose of CA was to *clarify* things for unexperienced ppl, but it seems I was very wrong.

 

P.S. His constant use of the term "prolly" is his shorthand for the word probably--a savings of one letter.

Does that mean your math is 50% wong or 100% wrong? ... hopefully you do count your bits better than that.

And btw, in typographic terms 'prolly' is at least two times easier to write.

[Amar]

But enough of prot... lets talk about how helpful Superdad's msges are.

 

I'm quite sure 99,9% of the members here prefer reading his posts over yours...

[Jud]

My msges have thick layers of irony & such

 

* * *

 

understandable cause computers are complex and ppl want stuff that just works ... but *not* possible in this case ... not now, not ever. Sry guys, you need a computer...with Os, with settings, with bugs...like said: NoWayOut.

 

Was just wondering whether the fact that we're on a site called "Computer Audiophile," yet you persist in treating everyone here as if computers are something they are scared of and would prefer not to exist, is another "thick layer of irony," or a thick layer of something else?

[prot]

Was just wondering whether the fact that we're on a site called "Computer Audiophile," yet you persist in treating everyone here as if computers are something they are scared of and would prefer not to exist, is another "thick layer of irony," or a thick layer of something else?

 

Because they are?!?!

And I never treated *everyone* like that. But tranz above expressed *exactly* that wish: to get rid of the computer complexity, OSes, settings, etc...if possible, get rid of computers altogether

Reading helps, jud...it really does

[prot]

I'm quite sure 99,9% of the members here prefer reading his posts over yours...

 

De gustibus non est disputandum.

Especially since they are useless in a technical discussion.

[Superdad]

My msges have thick layers of irony & such ... doesnt mean they are useless.

 

There was huge missunderstanding here, some less exp ppl assumed that it is somehow possible to take the bits stored on a NAS on play them on a DAC without having a computer in the middle...understandable cause computers are complex and ppl want stuff that just works ... but *not* possible in this case ... not now, not ever. Sry guys, you need a computer...with Os, with settings, with bugs...like said: NoWayOut. Hope my *useless* post cleared that and stopped an useless discussion.

 

 

Of course one can have a NAS hooked directly to a DAC with no additional general purpose computer (processor with OS, I/O, etc.) in the middle. That's what a DLNA renderer module does (see Swiss ABC PCB for an example).

 

However, the NAS itself is a computer with OS, so in that sense a computer is still part of the chain.

[prot]

Arrogance + ignorance = prot

 

Of course one can have a NAS hooked directly to a DAC with no additional general purpose computer (processor with OS, I/O, etc.) in the middle. That's what a DLNA renderer module does (see Swiss ABC PCB for an example).

 

However, the NAS itself is a computer with OS, so in that sense a computer is still part of the chain.

 

OTOH, of course one cant

Whether you call it renderer, NAA, iphone or whatever, that is a computer...with OS, settings, electrical issues, software headaches and all.

 

Anyway... if trying to insult me sells your suspiciously oily stuff better, feel free to do it

[Jud]

4. A tweaked Mac running MinimServer DLNA server sounds best

 

 

Cheers

 

Because they are?!?!

But tranz above expressed *exactly* that wish: to get rid of the computer complexity, OSes, settings, etc...if possible, get rid of computers altogether

Reading helps, jud...it really does

 

Yep, it sure does. I didn't know a tweaked Mac wasn't a computer. Or is this more layers of irony?

[YashN]

Of course one can have a NAS hooked directly to a DAC with no additional general purpose computer (processor with OS, I/O, etc.) in the middle.

 

Superdad, don't feed this troll, please.

[prot]

Your lousy jabs dont change the fact that I'm right ... or the fact that your "hero" cant even count letters.

 

What saddens me though is that only two of my fans jumped ... you're gettin lazy and that's not acceptable

[YashN]

I'd like to call up George at exaSound to understand what route they took to produce their OS X ASIO driver (their inputs are of course not XMOS-based). They have the Steinberg GmbH logo on their driver's "about" screen, but I don't know that they actually have any sort of license with Steinberg (who of course dropped all ASIO for Mac things the moment Apple came our with OS X and CoreAudio).

 

I believe they did two things: one is write their own CoreAudio DoP256 driver/support, and two is do a Mac OS version of ASIO 2.2. They are probably licensed developers or at least registered.

 

The issue we are dealing with more generally is probably owing to Apple now owning and selling Logic, a competitor to Steinberg's Cubase, so I wonder if Apple making CoreAudio in such a way as to block ASIO on Mac OS was deliberate or not (unpleasant side-effect is that we can't do DoP256+ natively).

 

So my guess is that for ASIO, exaSound took the ASIO SDK and either ported it over to work with Mac OS X or wrote some wrappers. Maybe the two technologies can work together, i.e. the player uses CoreAudio DoP256, which itself communicates to OS X ASIO, or maybe they have made CoreAudio DoP256 stand-alone as well.

[Superdad]

Whether you call it renderer, NAA, iphone or whatever, that is a computer...with OS, settings, electrical issues, software headaches and all.

 

Renderers such as the Network Audio Renderer | ABC PCB do have dedicated processors, but they don't have an OS or any user settings. I won't argue about DLNA s/w headaches and limitations though. Fine for some, but I am trying to move in a different direction.

 

Was having a conversation last week with the chief engineer at the first major OEM waiting to license our USB>Ethernet Audio Bridge, and he told me a story--told to him by one of his engineers or a friend (I can't recall). The guy used to work or consult for Linn. He said that at one time they had almost 30 hardware engineers and 3 software developers--but now they have 30 software guys (including a big support staff) and just a handful of hardware designers. Our client says he does not want the extra overhead and support issues of a s/w company just so he can offer Ethernet input to his DACs.

 

I admire what Linn, Naim, Auralic, and many others have put into their interface and player app designs (as well as their fine hardware). But the head of Auralic recently said in Stereophile that they have over a million dollars invested in development and support of the Lightning DS app. That's crazy for modest hi-fi firms, and I also think users would rather have full freedom of choice as to what player, library manager, and remote apps they use.

[tranz]

Hi Prot,

 

When I used the word computer I meant it more in a general PC or Mac sense, as I realize that even my toaster has a chip in it and could therefore be considered a computer.

 

It is difficult (for me) to get non-fatiguing sound out of a 'computer' like a Mac or PC box and yet still have the convenience of all my music accessible through an iPad. The idea is to have as clean an electrical signal/power, fewest switching and high frequency (and its harmonics) sources connected as possible. RTR and vinyl have their own disadvantages, but that painful to the ears, fatiguing impact that most computer audio has to me, it does not have. And so the idea of a LAN input seemed ideal on paper as a means to communicate data. (bypassing SPDIF conversion and USB, inbuilt transformers, no ground). But I am finding that it is not that simple, which is something I am sure many already knew.

 

Cheers

[Jud]

Many thanks to Superdad and tranz for bringing some substantive interest back to the thread.

[prot]

Renderers such as the Network Audio Renderer | ABC PCB do have dedicated processors, but they don't have an OS or any user settings.

 

First thx for bringin the discussion back to where it should be.

 

I'll have to disagree about the "no OS" thing...if you have a chip, you have an OS ... however rudimentary, it is an OS ... not sure how many ppl know but even a credit-card chip has an OS. The fact that most of those embedded things do not offer any user settings isnt necessarily a plus.

 

I won't argue about DLNA s/w headaches and limitations though. Fine for some, but I am trying to move in a different direction.

Dlna is indeed a mess. Unfortunatelly it is the only standard nowadays. One can move in other directions but coming up with an alternative costs ... a lot.

 

Was having a conversation last week with the chief engineer at the first major OEM waiting to license our USB>Ethernet Audio Bridge, and he told me a story--told to him by one of his engineers or a friend (I can't recall). The guy used to work or consult for Linn. He said that at one time they had almost 30 hardware engineers and 3 software developers--but now they have 30 software guys (including a big support staff) and just a handful of hardware designers. Our client says he does not want the extra overhead and support issues of a s/w company just so he can offer Ethernet input to his DACs.

 

I admire what Linn, Naim, Auralic, and many others have put into their interface and player app designs (as well as their fine hardware). But the head of Auralic recently said in Stereophile that they have over a million dollars invested in development and support of the Lightning DS app. That's crazy for modest hi-fi firms, and I also think users would rather have full freedom of choice as to what player, library manager, and remote apps they use.

Software is indeed overly expensive nowadays... a good dev in US/UK costs well over 100K/year. It's also very hard to find good ppl because that kind of embedded programming is not considered "sexy" in the IT world...quite the contrary. Dont know where Linn&co do their development but Msb contracts in eastern EU. Btw, if you ever need devs I can recommend easternEU...ppl have solid math backgrounds there and are (somewhat) reliable...at least compared to indians & chinese. But I digress...and that's just my exp, YMMV.

[prot]

Hi Prot,

 

When I used the word computer I meant it more in a general PC or Mac sense, as I realize that even my toaster has a chip in it and could therefore be considered a computer.

 

It is difficult (for me) to get non-fatiguing sound out of a 'computer' like a Mac or PC box and yet still have the convenience of all my music accessible through an iPad. The idea is to have as clean an electrical signal/power, fewest switching and high frequency (and its harmonics) sources connected as possible. RTR and vinyl have their own disadvantages, but that painful to the ears, fatiguing impact that most computer audio has to me, it does not have. And so the idea of a LAN input seemed ideal on paper as a means to communicate data. (bypassing SPDIF conversion and USB, inbuilt transformers, no ground). But I am finding that it is not that simple, which is something I am sure many already knew.

 

Cheers

 

Computers are indeed too complex ... workin in IT for +10 years already and I still have wtf moments almost daily

Bypassing Usb is something I wanna see too...and some ppl are moving things there. But it's not particularly easy, especially for small shops.

 

Bypassing spdif is doable too ... but you cant bypass all ... you still need "something" cause there is no DAC chip that accpets Lan inputs.

Afaik, the leanest chain today would be

Nas > Lan > Lan-to-i2s converter > Dac chip....

That is much leaner than the today mess but there is nothing that clearly says it will offer better SQ. Your music player will be on Nas and will have all current issues related to players. And as soon as you do that the $1000 Lan cables will be big business . And superdad will test stray currents on Lan cables/chips . And afaik, there is no lan-to-i2s converter...prolly doable with a few millions and lots of work ...but again, there are no sure rewards waiting there.

Oh well, it's all very complex... and that's the tech side only ... the business side is even murkier and harder to navigate.

However, none of that means you cannot enjoy the current state of things ... and happily wait for the next big thing ... just make sure you dont buy the next big con