Jump to content
IGNORED

New Dichotomy - Async vs. Non-async DACs


cfmsp

Recommended Posts

The problem here, and elsewhere, is that trying to deconstruct the various products out there with the hopes of finding one that just fits your own interests is kind of futile. All the advertising description in the world will not adequately tell you how a product sounds, especially in your own system. There's just far too many details to consider, many of which cannot be really conveyed well.

 

For example, even if each manufacturer were to provide a schematic diagram and a copy of the source code for whatever firmware they're using, that would only give you a start. The circuit board layout has a huge effect with this. How the various external components work with the internals of the DAC chip, as well as others, has probably even a larger effect. That's just two areas that can't be described well in advertising.

 

Just how can you get this from a description of the product? About all the manufacturers can do is tell you what technology they are using. That might give you an idea of the raw potential of that product. That could help narrow down your selection process, which really should be made by actually listening to the products you might like. You can then make your own decision about how the technology was converted into an actual product you can buy and bring home.

 

Despite what some people would like you to believe (I'll leave their motives out of it, although I'll say most are NOT underhanded or devious), interpretation and enjoyment of music is not an objective process. People have different genetic make-up and have learned different things along the way. (I'd prefer not to get into a debate over that, so if you disagree I'll accept your POV and leave it at that - this is my POV.) Arguing about the merits of this technology or that does not make it sound any better to you. And you are the one who wants to listen to it in the end.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment

I agree with you but discussing the technologies (& their implementation) isn't a fruitless excercise - it allows one to narrow the down the number of products that have the right technologies to achieve excellence - the it's down to implementation. For instance low jitter local clocks is one such technology checkbox but a non-optimised implementation can completely nullify this advantage. You see what I'm getting at?

 

Link to comment

CG, and it bears repeating. Expecting a single set of design features to result in good sound, and basing purchasing decisions solely on those features would be a big mistake. The implementation and fine points of design/engineering will make significant differences in performance, and listening in one's own system should be the only, final, step, in making a purchasing decision. Of course, most people do not have the time and resources to audition every possible product, so, as you suggest, using design features to narrow the field is done by most people before the home audition.

Additionally, for some here, I think it is interesting to discuss the various design features, and their possible influence on performance, just as an intellectual exercise, out of a general interest in the different design possibilities.

Personally, having been partially involved in the design process of a handful of audio products, including DACs, I have developed some opinions on certain design features like: I prefer a well designed linear power supply as opposed to a cheap switching supply (although I do know that a well designed switcher can also offer high performance (see Linn, Chord, but few designers really understand how to build a low noise switching supply). I dislike the use of the SPDIF/AES interface, and prefer interfaces that allow the use of a fixed frequency crystal oscillator (Async USB, Firewire, Networked players, single box disc players) without needing a PLL. I do not believe that ASRCs as used in many DACs for jitter reduction are good for sound. And I also like the idea of the recent availability of digital filters which trade off perfectly linear phase and high frequency extension, for a reduction of pre-ringing. I believe that current output DACs with well designed, discrete, I to V conversion have an advantage over voltage output DACs, and I also believe that a well designed, discrete FET analog output stage will outperform an output stage based on IC opamps.

I am more interested in auditioning DACs that have my preferred features, but I certainly have heard products that do not conform to my preferences, that sound very good, and I do not limit my auditioning to DACs with the features listed above.

 

SO/ROON/HQPe: DSD 512-Sonore opticalModuleDeluxe-Signature Rendu optical with Well Tempered Clock--DIY DSC-2 DAC with SC Pure Clock--DIY Purifi Amplifier-Focus Audio FS888 speakers-JL E 112 sub-Nordost Tyr USB, DIY EventHorizon AC cables, Iconoclast XLR & speaker cables, Synergistic Purple Fuses, Spacetime system clarifiers.  ISOAcoustics Oreas footers.                                                       

                                                                                           SONORE computer audio

Link to comment

Yeah - see third paragraph in my posting.

 

Low jitter clocks are a very important ingredient, but how that clock is applied is at least half the battle. As one of the manufacturers of an async USB solution said somewhere, a bad implementation of an async USB clock solution can sound worse than a really good implementation of a solution that doesn't have as much raw potential.

 

I guess I'm saying that unless you're designing and building one of these yourself, then the theory is but am interesting sidebar. You really need to listen for yourself.

 

A mediocre chef can turn the best ingredients into something you won't want to eat. A good chef can make a really good meal from modest ingredients. A good chef can do even better with the best ingredients. But that doesn't mean you'll like the meal yourself. (I'll take a cheeseburger over the world's best escargot or caviar any and every day...)

 

Link to comment

agreement. Except I love good Caviar!

 

SO/ROON/HQPe: DSD 512-Sonore opticalModuleDeluxe-Signature Rendu optical with Well Tempered Clock--DIY DSC-2 DAC with SC Pure Clock--DIY Purifi Amplifier-Focus Audio FS888 speakers-JL E 112 sub-Nordost Tyr USB, DIY EventHorizon AC cables, Iconoclast XLR & speaker cables, Synergistic Purple Fuses, Spacetime system clarifiers.  ISOAcoustics Oreas footers.                                                       

                                                                                           SONORE computer audio

Link to comment

Jkeny,

 

I agree with you but discussing the technologies (& their implementation) isn't a fruitless excercise - it allows one to narrow the down the number of products that have the right technologies to achieve excellence - the it's down to implementation.

 

I would have to agree with CG here. There are going to be a lot of async implementations now that it is widely accepted. Even the use of my code and reasonable oscillators are not going to yield excellent performance.

 

This is a system and everything as we have found out effects it. Heck even USB cables effect it.

 

I will tell you even more... I have like 30 years experience in Computer Protocol. So when I got the first async implementation working I sent it to a number of Crimson users. They all thought it was a lot better than the Adaptive code I had done which was drastically different than some of the other Adaptive implementations that I have. But then I thought of something changed the code and sent it out... and users were like what the heck did you do??? it upped the performance a ton.

 

There's more to this than just checking boxes. You should listen to people like CG who work with jitter daily, Charlie too but even more so you should be out there listening to this stuff.

 

Thanks

Gordon

 

Link to comment

I know Gordon, that it's a system but so is the amplifier, cables, speakers, room, listener, etc (what am I leaving out? oh I know recording studio, recording engineer, mics, A?D, etc) all part of the system. Oh yeh and don't forget the temperature & humidity of the day, etc.

 

In order to deal with this complexity (or fool ourselves that we have control over at least some of this) we regularly shortlist our products based on technical and other criteria & then, if possible, listen to them in our own listening environment. The same applies here. As I see it, it's not different in any way to the rest of our music playback cycle.

 

I'm not advocating choosing by checkboxes but rather seeking out those products that demonstrate that the designer has some semblance of a grasp on the technical aspects necessary to deliver better sound. Whether the product does or does not deliver this will be judged at audition.

 

I hope this explains my position adequately?

 

Link to comment

Last weekend, I just had a chance to audition the dCS Scarlatti stack demo. The Async Usb Scarlatti Upsampler was paired with the Scarlatti CD/SACD Transport, for comparison. The amp and preamp were from Boulder. Wave files were ripped from 16/44.1 CDs and played from a NetBook computer with the Foobar2000. There were some high resolution materials.

 

The results were stunning. There were marginal differences between the two transport mechanisms. 24/96 materials sounded the best due to their higher dynamic constrast and lower noise floor !

 

We also listened to upsampling by the Upsampler. Some titles sounded better through this mean. The DSD upsampling didn't sound right to my ears. Well mastered 16/44.1 materials sound fantastic and shouldn't require any furture digital signal processing. Just feed them into a low-jitter DAC.

 

My conclusion is that the async usb transport is a real answer for us. :-)

 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...