New Mac Mini is stutterng on playback

[wgscott]

I have no bias towards any operating system. I use both. But for computer audio ASIO sounds best. If you come up with a better USB interface and driver to go along with it, then right on good for you. You'll make a pile of money selling it to DAC manufacturers. Till then we will have to deal with the reality that ASIO is the superior method for USB computer audio.

 

Or just use Audirvana direct mode, or just use coreaudio without mixing.

 

Yawn.

[Blizzard]

Or just use Audirvana direct mode, or just use coreaudio without mixing.

 

Yawn.

 

Who makes the USB interface in your DAC and why does it sound better with core audio?

 

Personally I'll stick with the recommendations made by the manufacturers of the USB interface. Better yet the engineers behind the USB interfaces.

 

Sometimes even the manufacturers don't want to expose the absolute truth because they don't want people who are biased to one operating system of another to think their DAC won't work as well on both.

 

Often people who have minds clouded by bias's will prefer what their biased to even if it's inferior.

[Blizzard]

Even George at Exasound didn't say to everyone before they developed their OSX ASIO driver "Hey all MAC users, our core audio driver sucks, use Windows until our ASIO driver is ready!" Do you think that would have been a good marketing strategy?

 

Well guess what, news flash! Chances are the manufacturer of the USB interface in your DAC doesn't even have plans on making a OSX ASIO driver. Reason being development costs are too expensive and people are buying their interfaces as they are anyways.

[wgscott]

Who makes the USB interface in your DAC and why does it sound better with core audio?

 

Personally I'll stick with the recommendations made by the manufacturers of the USB interface. Better yet the engineers behind the USB interfaces.

 

Sometimes even the manufacturers don't want to expose the absolute truth because they don't want people who are biased to one operating system of another to think their DAC won't work as well on both.

 

Often people who have minds clouded by bias's will prefer what their biased to even if it's inferior.

 

I use a Halide Bridge, together with Audirvana direct mode. I avoid the problem altogether.

 

I really don't think you are even remotely qualified to pass judgement on whether or not I have a closed mind, or anything else about me. You just make yourself look like a pompous clown.

[Blizzard]

If you think using a Interface to convert USB audio to a more inferior jitter causing interface such as SPDIF is superior to a properly implemented USB interface, I think that answers the questions anyone may have that knows better.

 

Resorting to cutting me down because of clearly explaining the truth about computer audio interfaces clearly shows anyone who's reading who the idiot is.

 

Typical answer for someone who is clearly clueless and knows it.

[YashN]

Well guess what, news flash! Chances are the manufacturer of the USB interface in your DAC doesn't even have plans on making a OSX ASIO driver. Reason being development costs are too expensive and people are buying their interfaces as they are anyways.

 

Not sure why you're going on with the USB interface. An easy way for a manufacturer to make an OS X ASIO driver for higher rate DSD would be to contact George and get the sample source code. I don't know the particulars, i.e. if there are costs for licensing involved, since they didn't reply to my email about this when I was developing my own player prototype.

 

Another way of proceeding would be to start from Steinberg's own original ASIO source code and adapt it to OS X, i.e. do what exaSound did.

 

None of this is wildly expensive, and none of this has a lot to do with the interface: ASIO + additional Mac programming abstracts the interface.

 

This said, it isn't easy to code at that level for Mac.

[Blizzard]

Not sure why you're going on with the USB interface. An easy way for a manufacturer to make an OS X ASIO driver for higher rate DSD would be to contact George and get the sample source code. I don't know the particulars, i.e. if there are costs for licensing involved, since they didn't reply to my email about this when I was developing my own player prototype.

 

Another way of proceeding would be to start from Steinberg's own original ASIO source code and adapt it to OS X, i.e. do what exaSound did.

 

None of this is wildly expensive, and none of this has a lot to do with the interface: ASIO + additional Mac programming abstracts the interface.

 

This said, it isn't easy to code at that level for Mac.

 

Good luck getting George to give out the key to their bread and butter. If you think it's easy you may be just the man everyone's looking for. Come up with the next best USB interface and you'll have a lot of manufacturers beating down your door.

[wgscott]

[YashN]

Good luck getting George to give out the key to their bread and butter. If you think it's easy you may be just the man everyone's looking for. Come up with the next best USB interface and you'll have a lot of manufacturers beating down your door.

 

Here again, you're still too fixated on the interface. My last post isn't about that at all, it's about the documentation and sample source code for ASIO on OS X (or alternately the CoreAudio DoP256 driver), that any DAC manufacturer can ask George @ exaSound for. Here's the relevant extract from the official exaSound announce post:

 

Most Mac users will be completely satisfied with the performance and ease of use of the new exaSound Core Audio DoP256 driver. For enthusiasts interested in pushing the technology even further, exaSound announces a new ASIO driver technology for OS X. We are working with leading player developers to enable ASIO support in their programs. Documentation and sample code is available to interested third parties.

 

Hope that clear it up for you. Nobody is asking George to give up his FPGA implementation here. There's no need to.

 

Canadians are nice.

[YashN]

The reason for this is custom FPGA programming is extremely expensive.

 

Only expenses are initially about getting dev boards and the learning curve as 'programming' new hardware behaviour in a parallel descriptive language requires a paradigm shift from conventional software coding.

 

Once this is done, and the cost of manufacturing PCB with the FPGA chips and concomitant circuits factored in, the costs of further tweaks to the software-defined hardware architecture are minimal. In other words, the hardware can be upgraded literally nearly for free (for the end-user, as well as to some extent for the manufacturer - there is still R &D for the latter).

 

Even if they did chances are the guys who are already ahead will come up with something better which will render all of your investment wasted.

 

It isn't wasted at all: since enhancements to the 'hardware' can be software-defined, it's rather easy to do subsequent enhancements provided some modularity is planned in the pure concomitant hardware, compared to having to usually change the whole hardware board in the case of Amanero or XMOS or similar. So, the FPGA implementation is strategically better in that sense. It's a win-win for both manufacturers and end users, and something both PS Audio and Chord have been doing to great effect as well.

 

Exasound realized they accomplished something special with the time and effort they put into their development . So they decided it would be more lucrative making complete DAC solutions rather than just selling their USB interface.

 

This is more a case of not having the DIY business line cannibalise the very successful DAC business line. Makes more business sense to me.

[Blizzard]

Here again, you're still too fixated on the interface. My last post isn't about that at all, it's about the documentation and sample source code for ASIO on OS X (or alternately the CoreAudio DoP256 driver), that any DAC manufacturer can ask George @ exaSound for. Here's the relevant extract from the official exaSound announce post:

 

 

 

Hope that clear it up for you. Nobody is asking George to give up his FPGA implementation here. There's no need to.

 

Canadians are nice.

 

When I mention USB interface I'm talking about the FPGA/ASIO driver combination.

[Blizzard]

Only expenses are initially about getting dev boards and the learning curve as 'programming' new hardware behaviour in a parallel descriptive language requires a paradigm shift from conventional software coding.

 

Once this is done, and the cost of manufacturing PCB with the FPGA chips and concomitant circuits factored in, the costs of further tweaks to the software-defined hardware architecture are minimal. In other words, the hardware can be upgraded literally nearly for free (for the end-user, as well as to some extent for the manufacturer - there is still R &D for the latter).

 

 

 

It isn't wasted at all: since enhancements to the 'hardware' can be software-defined, it's rather easy to do subsequent enhancements provided some modularity is planned in the pure concomitant hardware, compared to having to usually change the whole hardware board in the case of Amanero or XMOS or similar. So, the FPGA implementation is strategically better in that sense. It's a win-win for both manufacturers and end users, and something both PS Audio and Chord have been doing to great effect as well.

 

 

 

This is more a case of not having the DIY business line cannibalise the very successful DAC business line. Makes more business sense to me.

 

Yes it's all great if your capable of building a better system than is already out there. Most don't bother and opt for 3rd party solutions for hardware and drivers.

 

Even companies like Resonessence who did their own programming in the FPGA still use the Thesycon USB drivers. Why? Because it's much easier than making their own from scratch.

 

 

Anyways USB based interfaces are going to be dead in the near future. Far superior "Audio over IP" solutions are going to replace USB. I wouldn't invest a penny into USB technology.

[Blizzard]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19636[/ATTACH]

 

My heart is broken

[YashN]

Even companies like Resonessence who did their own programming in the FPGA still use the Thesycon USB drivers. Why? Because it's much easier than making their own from scratch.

 

Goes without saying. Which is why a manufacturer who has an XMOS board for instance, could ask exaSound for their own ASIO or CoreAudio DSP256 for Mac OS X documentation + source code and save a bunch of time.

[YashN]

Yes it's all great if your capable of building a better system than is already out there. Most don't bother and opt for 3rd party solutions for hardware and drivers.

 

True in the Windows world, but a little different in Mac OS X:

 

Up to DSD128, there isn't a need for any driver: Mac OS X can support DoP by default. Hence, a Mac OS X user does not need to be bothered with any driver installation to enjoy DSD64 and DSD128: just take the DAC and plug it in.

 

For DSD256 and above, it's another story on Mac OS X as Apple crippled CoreAudio in that respect (I don't think they purposefully did it, but there is an incidence on higher-rate DSD that they didn't foresee). This is where the exaSound driver tech can come into use, provided the manufacturer contacts them and customises the technology.

 

In the Linux world, things are yet different: some seminal work to integrate higher-rate DSD for XMOS boards (Denon, Marantz, iFi/AMR) has already been done and incorporated in the latest kernels, ALSA thanks to kernel quirks mechanisms and can be accessed though a properly configured MPD.

[YashN]

When I mention USB interface I'm talking about the FPGA/ASIO driver combination.

 

As if all DACs use FPGAs?

 

In reality, they don't, only a handful do.

[Blizzard]

Goes without saying. Which is why a manufacturer who has an XMOS board for instance, could ask exaSound for their own ASIO or CoreAudio DSP256 for Mac OS X documentation + source code and save a bunch of time.

 

XMOS provides everything required for their USB interface system. Even they use the Thesycon drivers for high sample rate applications. Guys who use XMOS based interfaces do because it makes it easy. Chip costs under $4 in volume and the drivers are free.

 

I highly doubt Exasound is going to give away their documentation and source code.

[Blizzard]

As if all DACs use FPGAs?

 

In reality, they don't, only a handful do.

 

The USB interfaces I know of either use FPGA's or Xmos chips. If you know of other systems share them

[Blizzard]

As if all DACs use FPGAs?

 

In reality, they don't, only a handful do.

 

I have 3 right here 1 is XMOS based and other 2 use FPGA's

[YashN]

I have 3 right here 1 is XMOS based and other 2 use FPGA's[ATTACH]19643[/ATTACH]

 

What makes you think your case is everybody's case?

[Blizzard]

I have 3 right here 1 is XMOS based and other 2 use FPGA's[ATTACH]19643[/ATTACH]

 

And here's a 4th and 5th the Exasound and Resonessence.

[YashN]

I highly doubt Exasound is going to give away their documentation and source code.

 

Wrong. Read post 57 more carefully, and go to exaSound's linked page and read their own words about doing exactly that to third parties and manufacturers.

[YashN]

And here's a 4th and 5th the Exasound and Resonessence. [ATTACH]19644[/ATTACH][ATTACH]19645[/ATTACH]

 

So, to you, if you buy several exaSounds and Resonessences for your own setup, this means that statistically most people's setups are FPGA based?

[Blizzard]

Wrong. Read post 57 more carefully, and go to exaSound's linked page and read their own words about doing exactly that to third parties and manufacturers.

 

I'm guessing your referring to this:

 

 

Most Mac users will be completely satisfied with the performance and ease of use of the new exaSound Core Audio DoP256 driver. For enthusiasts interested in pushing the technology even further, exaSound announces a new ASIO driver technology for OS X. We are working with leading player developers to enable ASIO support in their programs. Documentation and sample code is available to interested third parties.

 

 

 

They are talking about third parties who make software media players. This is so they can make them work good with their DAC's.

 

Not DAC or USB interface manufacturers. Those guys are the competition.

[YashN]

XMOS provides everything required for their USB interface system. Even they use the Thesycon drivers for high sample rate applications. Guys who use XMOS based interfaces do because it makes it easy. Chip costs under $4 in volume and the drivers are free.

 

Which explains why there are more DACs with the usual XMOS or Amanero boards (or similar) in existence compared to FPGA implementations.

 

It appears you contradict yourself in the space of a couple of posts and don't even realise it.

 

So far, I have seen XMOS provide Tech Notes to do higher rate DSD(256) with their boards, but you still need to realise that on Mac OS X, its is the software/library/driver levels that preclude this unless either one gets the exaSound technology and customise it or alternately re-develop from the basic Steinberg source code for ASIO or re-develop something similar to CoreAudio256 by exaSound.