Best (or worst) Digital Interface?

[esldude]

At $5k or less buy a Chord or Benchmark.  Those are effectively immune from jitter and most other effects on any input. 

 

As in terms of how they operate Toslink and SPDIF have to be the worst in regards to the interface itself.  Er well let me back up, HDMI is the worst.   Chances are none of them are audibly different with any decently made gear. 

[esldude]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

FWIW, I've tested 6 metres of cheap plastic Toslink for several hours without a single bit error.

I have done the same test.  No errors at 96 khz. I was using of course the tremendously well engineered exotic Monoprice Premium Toslink.  25 feet which is just short of 8 meters.  Currently $8.46 plus shipping.

 

Inexpensive Toslink cable improved while no one was looking.  If the gear has good transmitter and receivers it also is not high jitter like once was the case.  Plus if you have heard music recorded in the last 15 years there is fairly high probability it went over an ADAT interface at some point.  ADAT uses the same Toslink cable, and connectors. 

 

Doing the test with an early DVD player that still works you will get few errors at 48 khz.  But that is a device that is approaching 20 years old and was inexpensive at the time.  The errors are from the DVD unit not the modern cheap cabling.

[esldude]

1 hour ago, GUTB said:

 

How was this test conducted?

Windows computer using Foobar 2000 WASAPI for bit perfect transmission to a Tact RCS2.0 via USB to SPDIF converter.  The Tact also duplicates digital inputs as digital outputs.  25 ft Toslink cable connected the Tact to a TC IMpact Twin USB recording interface connected to a second computer.  I put together a 30 minute file of music.  Let it repeat play for several hours one evening.  Took the recorded file off the second computer and compared each file of 30 minutes with the original.  All copies were bit perfect copies of the original.  So no errors. 

 

I also did the test another time. I used the Toslink output from a Gigabyte computer motherboard.  That fed the TC IMpact Twin and was recorded to a second computer. Again no errors.  The same cable from Monoprice, but this one was only 6 ft long. 

 

[esldude]

59 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

Well, it sounds like they are all about the same (??)

It is very, very likely they are all audibly the same.  Technically and measurably those which let the clock in the DAC be the master have lower jitter whether you can hear it or not. So Wifi, ethernet and asynch USB are preferred.

[esldude]

46 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

 

I'm very tempted to audition the new Benchmark DAC.  After experiencing the quality of their amp it could be win win.

 

 

 

i2s has to be the most understated interface.  It doesn't have the frequency limitations of most other interfaces and is avoids higher levels of jitter by separating the word clock from the audio.  My Audio Alchemy DDP-1 has an i2s and I've been looking for a good way to go from my sMS-200/mR to it via i2s.  The Slingxer was almost a good option except it's i2s interface has an HDMI input, while the DDP-1 is a 5 pin DIN.  I also need to make sure the DDP-1 uses the LVDS standard which is what the Slingxer uses.

 

Peter Madnick wants me to try their DMP-1 with i2s, but at around $1800 for an endpoint I'm very hesitant. 

Well I2S wasn't meant for traveling along cables between boxes of gear.  Though it can work like that of course. Some recording gear allows Word Clock inputs.  Even then an on board clock at the ADC or DAC is going to offer superior timing.

 

Asycnh USB is better than I2S between boxes of gear.  This diagram should make that clear.  The buffering/processing will keep the data flowing and it will be clocked over an I2S bus to the DAC right next to the Master clock.  A free running master clock is always preferable to slaving it to some other source.  Similar results would be obtained with ethernet or wifi.

 

 

[esldude]

9 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

That thread is on HiFi systems in general.

 

I am interested in music that specifically discriminates on SQ of different DACs.

In general simpler music allows human listeners to discriminate more finely among devices.  Jazz trios, chamber music, and solo singer musicians will allow you the finest discrimination.  That is counter to conventional wisdom where people want to point to complex music.  Nevertheless it is true.  Your ear has a tougher time with complex music which inhibits your ability to hear the finer aspects of reproduced quality. 

 

Jazz trios can work for loud high frequency sounds, and possibly human vocals if included.  Chamber music and solo signers with guitar included can inform on fine detail, texture, midrange qualities as can chamber music.  Odd pieces and piano can inform about bass performance, dynamics, power and transient transparency.  My definition of odd pieces are something like Dead Can Dance or highly processed simple pop music or kyoto drum recordings.  That sort of thing.