W4S and other USB fixers (non curated)

[XP9433]

+1 also. Most curated threads are fine in my experience. I think the curated threads in question suffered from a combination of needless verbosity, an over controlling tone and an uncomfortable closeness to the supplier of the device being reviewed.

The best way to deal with this is to post all your comments about USB fixer devices on this thread. No off topic discussions about other threads will then be necessary.

[Allan F]

I think the curated threads in question suffered from a combination of needless verbosity, an over controlling tone and an uncomfortable closeness to the supplier of the device being reviewed.

I believe that you are echoing the exact same thoughts as many members who would never say this in a post that is highly likely to be removed. Add to that, a signature that is needlessly long with a long list of equipment being used that could be referred to by looking at the poster's Profile.

 

+1

[bogi]

Upsampling to DSD is an added processing stage that runs the risk of further degrading S/N unless your PC is much more electrically quiet than average.

 

Upsampling to DSD is not an added processing stage if it is used to avoid similar digital processing in DAC chip. Difference in quality of digital processing in HQPlayer vs. DAC chip is the main reason why people do so. If you are focused only on eliminating noise, you loose the sonic benefit of that difference. Approach of many people here is to use upsampling to DSD and also to do something to lower the noise.

 

What is possible is to markedly improve the Signal Integrity before it is exported by SPDIF. This can be done at both the ripping stages using markedly improved power to the Optical device, and at the storage stage when using SSDs, by improving the power supply to them , thus helping to isolate them from the rest of the PC's SMPS . One way to do this is to use the internal + 12V rail then regulate it down to a lower noise +5V using a voltage regulator .

 

I'm sure you know the sonic benefit of doing so, it's your area you are familiar with. Most of people don't do DYI, so the only solution for them is to buy some "boxes" and connect them with cables. For these people it seems to be much easier (and probably also cheaper) to buy something like Regen or RUR (< $200).

[sandyk]

Upsampling to DSD is not an added processing stage if it is used to avoid similar digital processing in DAC chip. Difference in quality of digital processing in HQPlayer vs. DAC chip is the main reason why people do so. If you are focused only on eliminating noise, you loose the sonic benefit of that difference. Approach of many people here is to use upsampling to DSD and also to do something to lower the noise.

 

 

I'm sure you know the sonic benefit of doing so, it's your area you are familiar with. Most of people don't do DYI, so the only solution for them is to buy some "boxes" and connect them with cables. For these people it seems to be much easier (and probably also cheaper) to buy something like Regen or RUR (< $200).

 

As an example, if you are using a desktop PC with adequate room inside , it's quite easy to fit completed low noise voltage regulators that are readily available on ebay for around $30 each , set the output to +5v,then use a cut in half 4pin Molex to SATA power lead to connect it up.

All you need is to be able to own or borrow a Digital meter to adjust it's output to +5V before connecting it to the SSD.

 

BTW, what makes you think that improving the Signal Integrity by methods that I have described, won't also result in a further audible improvement with a DSD conversion ?

[bogi]

As an example, if you are using a desktop PC with adequate room inside , it's quite easy to fit completed low noise voltage regulators that are readily available on ebay for around $30 each , set the output to +5v,then use a cut in half 4pin Molex to SATA power lead to connect it up.

All you need is to be able to own or borrow a Digital meter to adjust it's output to +5V before connecting it to the SSD.

 

I would be able to do so, although I am used to do soldering only with an old transformer based gear. Most people are not able to solder anything. Maybe soldering is not necessary for this thing.

From cost and convenience reasons, I am using a notebook. I am listening on headphones and often also browsing internet while listening. So my possibilities to improve power supplies are limited. But still, I am using at least something: The notebook power adaptor is 2 pole (not 3 pole) so if I well understand things, ground loop cannot happen with my DAC (I never heard any rattle of this type). I am using cheap power filter Weiduka AC2.2 | eBay I have connected notebook, DAC, preamp/headamp and STONTRONICS +5V LPS to this Weiduka power filter. A year ago I did listening comparison and I could hear a small improvement coming from that filter. The amount of improvement was ordered this way: DAC > preamp/headamp > notebook.

It is clearly lower level of improvement than I am getting by upsampling (that's really quite noticeable) and still lower than the improvement I get with feeding my DAC USB input with cleaner +5V from small 1A STONTRONICS linear power adapter.

 

People with dedicated audio PC can do more to lower noise from that PC. Maybe later I will build one. With my notebook, yet better USB isolation could help me.

 

BTW, what makes you think that improving the Signal Integrity by methods that I have described, won't also result in a further audible improvement with a DSD conversion ?

 

I am convinced that the answer is yes, because using higher quality of digital processing and lowering noise from PC are two different things. I read from more sources that the high frequency noise, coming to DAC through USB receiver, influences further processing and then affects sonic result we get in analog domain. My experiments with different USB cables and also using different +5V power supplies to feed my DAC show that this seem to be true - I could hear difference. As USB cable transfers bits, the difference could be IMO caused only by different amount and character of incoming noise.

 

Question: With a "perfect" USB isolator, which adds clean power, does galvanic isolation and does reclocking/regenerating of USB signal: Does in such a case depend on amount of noise from PC?? (assuming reliable USB data transfer from digital pointy of view). USB is really far from ideal from noise point of view, but is widely available on each PC/notebook/tablet/smartphone and inserting a Regen or RUR between PC and DAC is easy for everyone.

[4est]

As Bogi suggested, there is no/little "extra" processing going on. One is simply providing the the final signal instead of letting the DAC process it for you. Your ripping and power supply tweaks would only add to the quality, but are not as required when using the network capabilities of HQPlayer. SPDIF is generally not an option as few devices are capable of two wire. This is not at all like DRC btw.

What is possible is to markedly improve the Signal Integrity before it is exported by SPDIF. This can be done at both the ripping stages using markedly improved power to the Optical device, and at the storage stage when using SSDs, by improving the power supply to them , thus helping to isolate them from the rest of the PC's SMPS . One way to do this is to use the internal + 12V rail then regulate it down to a lower noise +5V using a voltage regulator .

Upsampling to DSD is an added processing stage that runs the risk of further degrading S/N unless your PC is much more electrically quiet than average. I don't doubt that members like Forrest do already have quieter than average PCs though.

Some members report a softening of upper HF detail/transients when converting to DSD. The additional software processing is also why I will never use digital room correction software.

[JW Audio]

This thread is off in the weeds.

[4est]

This non curated thread was started in so that others could talk about USB clean up devices as a whole without being censored. Maybe you should start your own in so that you can keep things on track to your liking. Your point is noted, and I'll refrain from discussing why I choose to USB over SPDIF/AES-EBU further.

This thread is off in the weeds.

[T-bar]

I have been listening to the W4S Recovery for a couple of weeks. I use an Ayre Codex and Audeze LCD-2 or Sennheiser 600 headphones, both with balanced cables. The Recovery provides enhanced resolution and detail. I recommend.

[TPiddy]

I had a chance to do comparisons between 1) just USB cable 2) Regen 3) W4S

 

System is Merlin VSM MXM Loudspeakers, Pass INT-60 Integrated, AURALiC Aries & Vega, Shunyata Power, Audience AU24SE signal cables and Curious .8 USB and Curious Link.

 

I started with just the USB cable and everything sounded good. I had not listened this way in a while, but noticed right away a bit of thickness or maybe congestion in the midrange - like on the upper edge of the female voice. Overall it did sound good and to describe anything else negative would just be to describe what the REGEN and W4S have improved (like I am a geek and read a lot of audio reviews, but accurately describing something on its own is not as easy as comparing to something else)

 

Next the Regen and the mid-range congestion was gone and image depth improved. Bass tightened up a bit and the overall presentation was more coherent and each instrument was more in its own space. Leading edges were very well defined and maybe a little hard.

 

Next the W4S and most notably was the overall better picture. Not dramatic, but noticeable and positive. I think it is better bass extension and definition that just allows other things like presence and tone to just work. Still a little hardness in the leading edge, but overall better that with the Regen and does not draw focus unless I am looking for it.

 

So the winner for me is the W4S - just works best here. I did not have any issues with the Regen or W4S - just plugged in and it worked, but the two AURALiC products get along pretty well so that is not surprising. Both Regen and W4S products produce easily noticeable differences for me...

[eganz]

I had a chance to do comparisons between 1) just USB cable 2) Regen 3) W4S

 

…

I think it would be helpful if everyone specified whether they are using the stock or Linear power supplies for these regenerator units.

 

E

[pipis2010]

I just wanted to add that during the last few days I have spoken with 2 engineers and audio manufacturers here in Athens and they both told me the same thing: the clock used is VERY important! The clock and the overall chip implementation as well, but the clock can make or break a DAC.

 

I am not a techie or an engineer, but I guess this must be important.

 

Furthermore, i was wondering how great most DACs would sound if they were connected to a rubidium clock with an insane stability of 0.00007 ppm or any such kind of clock. In this instance all these USB filters/conditioners/etc would become obsolete or am I wrong?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[T-bar]

I use stock W4S power supply. Music source is Intel DN2800MT motherboard USB port.

 

I have been listening to the W4S Recovery for a couple of weeks. I use an Ayre Codex and Audeze LCD-2 or Sennheiser 600 headphones, both with balanced cables. The Recovery provides enhanced resolution and detail. I recommend.

[TPiddy]

I think it would be helpful if everyone specified whether they are using the stock or Linear power supplies for these regenerator units.

 

E

 

Good point and meant to.

 

I used the included stock SMPS for both units.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[57gold]

My post on "curated thread" disappeared.

 

Kind of glad. Found the lengthly "musings" of the curator, and the endless W4S promotional activities impossible to read on this and other threads. FWIW, I am sure that W4S is a good company with high value products.

 

My censored post was an expression of disbelief in all the fixes required to address USB's shortcomings...boxes on boxes, wires to wires, filters, cleaners, power supplies...one would think that USB's faults would be addressed by DAC manufacturers?

 

Use FW and sad to see it fall into obsolescence.

[OldBigEars]

My post on "curated thread" disappeared.

 

Kind of glad. Found the lengthly "musings" of the curator, and the endless W4S promotional activities impossible to read on this and other threads. FWIW, I am sure that W4S is a good company with high value products.

 

My censored post was an expression of disbelief in all the fixes required to address USB's shortcomings...boxes on boxes, wires to wires, filters, cleaners, power supplies...one would think that USB's faults would be addressed by DAC manufacturers?

 

Use FW and sad to see it fall into obsolescence.

 

"Hello 57Gold - welcome to the thread..."

 

Great comment - glad you found a safe place where you could talk.

[YashN]

Linn has a few boxes and does up to 24/192, but does not believe in DSD. They use switching power supplies.

...

Another interesting option is Sonore with PS Audio DAC over I2S, but have never heard it. Handles DXD and double rate DSD.

 

Thanks a lot, tranz.

[YashN]

If it was done properly by experienced moderators instead , then that could be a different matter ?

 

The issue is more with the OP and his intentions as well as the very high noise-to-signal ratio in his posts.

[YashN]

It would be sweet if the HQPlayer filters would be licensed to DAC manufacturers and available as user selectable filter settings within the DAC.

 

Not sure that would be good: you'd want the least amount of processing at the DAC so that the DAC could do just the D/A as cleanly as possible.

 

The client-server mode for HQ PLayer + NAA is ideal in that respect.

[firedog]

It would be sweet if the HQPlayer filters would be licensed to DAC manufacturers and available as user selectable filter settings within the DAC.

 

Exactly the opposite of the reason for HQP. HQP is designed to be run by a much more powerful processor than any DAC (in a MAC or PC) and thus take the processing load off the DAC, enabling the DAC to just do the basic digital to analog conversion. Many of the filters in HQP would choke any DAC. The reason most like it is it enables results you can't get with a DAC.

[jamesg11]

My post on "curated thread" disappeared.

 

Kind of glad. Found the lengthly "musings" of the curator, and the endless W4S promotional activities impossible to read on this and other threads. FWIW, I am sure that W4S is a good company with high value products.

 

My censored post was an expression of disbelief in all the fixes required to address USB's shortcomings...boxes on boxes, wires to wires, filters, cleaners, power supplies...one would think that USB's faults would be addressed by DAC manufacturers?

 

Use FW and sad to see it fall into obsolescence.

 

Yes, breathe the open air - not straight-jacketed & stultified, not cribbed, cabined & confined ...!

[tranz]

Exactly the opposite of the reason for HQP. HQP is designed to be run by a much more powerful processor than any DAC (in a MAC or PC) and thus take the processing load off the DAC, enabling the DAC to just do the basic digital to analog conversion. Many of the filters in HQP would choke any DAC. The reason most like it is it enables results you can't get with a DAC.

 

Fair point. If, however, this chip is properly shielded and has its own power supply drop it might be feasible. Some DACs already have multiple rails to separate out various analog and digital pulls.

[tranz]

I just wanted to add that during the last few days I have spoken with 2 engineers and audio manufacturers here in Athens and they both told me the same thing: the clock used is VERY important! The clock and the overall chip implementation as well, but the clock can make or break a DAC.

 

I am not a techie or an engineer, but I guess this must be important.

 

Furthermore, i was wondering how great most DACs would sound if they were connected to a rubidium clock with an insane stability of 0.00007 ppm or any such kind of clock. In this instance all these USB filters/conditioners/etc would become obsolete or am I wrong...

 

Clock is amazingly important and you can hear the difference, but it does not solve the problems introduced by USB or spiky/dirty power supplies. Both are required.

[westy]

Not sure if I should post. Everytime I have posted my frank comments it's been deleted.

 

So, one more time.

 

Here is my list of usb devices I have tried.

 

Ifi iusb 3.0

Regens one then two of them

Intona

Wyred Recovery

 

I am using Curious usb cables and with the Regen and Recovery I am using a Linear power supply. My source is a Bryston BDP-2 and my Dac is the PS Audio Direct Stream.

 

I started with one Regen, boy was I impressed! Then, I added a linear power supply and then another Regen. Each change added incremental improvements.

 

I then tried the iFi iusb 3.0. Placing this device before the Regen added additional clarity.

 

Then came the Intona... Oh my! The soundstage depth, width and such a purity of sound. What A Fantastic Product!

I tried it with the Regens, with the iFi iusb 3.0 and with the Wyred Recovery. But, the Intona was so far ahead of the others in sound quality it was best used solo. All the other devices degraded the sound quality. That is, they decreased soundstage, or added grain.

 

So, I have now sold all the others and enjoying just the Intona. The Intona cost a little more but needs no additional power supply and was delivered from Germany in 2 days!

 

Highly recommended!

 

Better read this fast before it gets deleted.

[kilroy]

Not sure if I should post. Everytime I have posted my frank comments it's been deleted.

 

So, one more time.

 

Here is my list of usb devices I have tried.

 

Ifi iusb 3.0

Regens one then two of them

Intona

Wyred Recovery

 

I am using Curious usb cables and with the Regen and Recovery I am using a Linear power supply. My source is a Bryston BDP-2 and my Dac is the PS Audio Direct Stream.

 

I started with one Regen, boy was I impressed! Then, I added a linear power supply and then another Regen. Each change added incremental improvements.

 

I then tried the iFi iusb 3.0. Placing this device before the Regen added additional clarity.

 

Then came the Intona... Oh my! The soundstage depth, width and such a purity of sound. What A Fantastic Product!

I tried it with the Regens, with the iFi iusb 3.0 and with the Wyred Recovery. But, the Intona was so far ahead of the others in sound quality it was best used solo. All the other devices degraded the sound quality. That is, they decreased soundstage, or added grain.

 

So, I have now sold all the others and enjoying just the Intona. The Intona cost a little more but needs no additional power supply and was delivered from Germany in 2 days!

 

Highly recommended!

 

Better read this fast before it gets deleted.

 

Have no fear, RES has no power here.

 

This is exactly the kind of info I am looking for. Thanks.