FORGETTING the Digital to Analog conversion part, what is BEST Digital source?

[jabbr]

9 hours ago, Superdad said:

The same XMOS chips popularly used for USB have full Ethernet capabilities built in.  The reasons Ethernet input DACs are not as ubiquitous as USB models mostly revolve around software issues.

 

Yes. I'm not sure what the fascination with XMOS is, actually. You loose the programmability of an ARM based device, for example. With an embedded ARM, you have the ability to run Linux on the interface and thus easily Roon and HQPlayer NAA or a custom interface (DLNA if you must).

 

The Amanero is such a two chip ARM M3 with Xilinx CPLD type interface for USB, but without the Ethernet input, nor to my knowledge a documented ability to load Linux.

 

The SoC's though, to your point, enable both USB and Ethernet. Given an ability to control the software on the interface I prefer Ethernet.

[Charente]

Or EITR ... USB Gen 5 TO S/PDIF 

[opus101]

16 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

so does galvanic isolation in the w4s dac1v2 do that or no?

would a schiit gungnir multibit do that with it's usbgen5 circuitry?

or should i just go with ethernet or s/pdif if i refuse to buy a "usb toy"?

 

 

I haven't a clue about the implementation details of those DACs - except I've seen a picture of the PCB for the Gen5 USB interface.  As marce has already pointed out, 'galvanic isolation' only tells you you've got isolation at DC, it tells you nothing about AC. So you'd do well to pay attention to the capacitance across the isolation barrier, this will tell you something about how much noise rejection you're likely to get. The picture of the Gen5 shows enough detail for the particular ethernet transformers being used to be identified, their specs might indicate the inter-winding capacitance.

[marce]

As Opus has stated the noise will find any capacitance and cross it, we are talking high frequency noise here, so the main coupling is via capacitive coupling.

That said all DACs should be tested for conducted immunity so this should not be a problem, it is pretty easy to engineer the interface to avoid the noise causing problems... if it does then the equipment is inadequately designed....

[opus101]

4 minutes ago, marce said:

 

That said all DACs should be tested for conducted immunity so this should not be a problem, it is pretty easy to engineer the interface to avoid the noise causing problems... if it does then the equipment is inadequately designed....

 

I find I disagree here - the engineering is only easy if the DAC's got balanced outputs. Unbalanced is a pain to engineer - unbalanced as a connection format is inherently flawed.

[marce]

Its conducted noise into the DAC, should be catered for, we do it all the time on a variety of things that are going to have wires plugged into them, audio and instrumentation and of course the mil stuff where the requirements are tighter. Though I do agree with unbalanced it can be a PITA, balanced for analogue, LVDS for digital is best.

[barrows]

1 hour ago, beerandmusic said:

I am pretty sure that I have configured foobar in past to work with dlna server (e.g. minim server)...so i would think could be used with Mirus Pro.  I really don't think finding any album or song in a couple seconds...on any size library would be an issue.

I was referring to using Foobar as a way of browsing/library management for the D card player built into the Mirus Pro.  You can only find a song/album anyway if the correct card is in the Mirus Pro as well.  but, like i said, if these are not issues for you, you might very much the SD card approach.

[barrows]

12 minutes ago, marce said:

Its conducted noise into the DAC, should be catered for, we do it all the time on a variety of things that are going to have wires plugged into them, audio and instrumentation and of course the mil stuff where the requirements are tighter. Though I do agree with unbalanced it can be a PITA, balanced for analogue, LVDS for digital is best.

Agreed.  Unfortunately most using the LVDS/I2S approach have the masterclock in the source, it can be done the other way, with the masterclock in the DAC, but that is not what is available in commercial products (with the only exception I ma aware of being MSB's proprietary I2S approach).

[wushuliu]

6 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

Just read your post after responding myself about an sdcard dac....looks like time to start another thread...need to wake up the engineers!

 

If you're serious about answers then I would also suggest hitting up the folks at diyhifi.org. Got some luminaries over there, including Thorsten of IFI/AMR. They are a prickly bunch though.

[wushuliu]

11 hours ago, Norton said:

Funnily enough, I was going  to suggest a minimalist SD card transport direct to DAC as likely the best digital source purely in  SQ terms.  The SD trans is still a bit too DIY for me, but I've had a loan  Mirus DAC  in my system for the last fortnight and the replay from SD card is really special.  If some innovative boutique audio company could turn out a professionally finished SOTA standalone SD card transport for under $1000, I'd certainly be first in line.  Know anyone who might consider taking on that project ? (nice case, decent PSU, USB+BNC+I2S outputs, built in screen, navigate by Apple physical remote, no network connection)?

 

There used to be some decent direct from China ones on ebay/aliexpress but it looks like they stopped selling them. They were around $600, well made.

 

[wushuliu]

5 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

do they make an english version?  where do i buy it (grin)!

 

You can find it HERE. Note the different configurations at bottom. Hm, replace the regulators with LT3045s shouldn't be too hard on that board.

 

Tempting...

[jabbr]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

 Unfortunately most using the LVDS/I2S approach have the masterclock in the source, it can be done the other way, with the masterclock in the DAC, but that is not what is available in commercial products (with the only exception I ma aware of being MSB's proprietary I2S approach).

 

and the DS. I would be surprised if DAC inputs using the Spartan-6 FPGA are source clocked ... possible but easy enough to re clock in the FPGA or otherwise.

[beerandmusic]

2 hours ago, barrows said:

Agreed.  Unfortunately most using the LVDS/I2S approach have the masterclock in the source, it can be done the other way, with the masterclock in the DAC, but that is not what is available in commercial products (with the only exception I ma aware of being MSB's proprietary I2S approach).

 

I am guessing this is masterclock in DAC you are referring to:

I don't know what any of this means, but my w4s dac says it has a femto clock upgrade.

 

=============

WFS marketing:

We now have an upgrade option to the internal clock...Implementation of this component optimizes audio quality by lowering phase jitter by over 80% as well as greatly reducing phase noise in the digital circuit.

=============

 

Regardless of that "masterclock?", my s/pdif out of my pc still sounds cleaner than my usb.  I am just tired of dickin with usb..  A usb toy may do the trick but i refuse to buy one because i believe it is just a band-aid for a poorly designed dac that should handle it.   I may try one more dac (schiit multibit with usbgen5 eitr circutiry) or go to a ethernet music server which will have both ethernet & dac....or I may try the rendu...  I already get satisfactory using either s/pdif or dlna through my sony,...but don't have dsd that way (and wouldn't if i went schiit route either)....i guess i should lean toward the rendu or network music server.

[beerandmusic]

2 hours ago, barrows said:

I was referring to using Foobar as a way of browsing/library management for the D card player built into the Mirus Pro.  You can only find a song/album anyway if the correct card is in the Mirus Pro as well.  but, like i said, if these are not issues for you, you might very much the SD card approach.

Oh, i thought the mirus pro sdcard player could be accessed as a dlna server...

[beerandmusic]

2 hours ago, wushuliu said:

 

If you're serious about answers then I would also suggest hitting up the folks at diyhifi.org. Got some luminaries over there, including Thorsten of IFI/AMR. They are a prickly bunch though.

This site use to be a prickly bunch, but i guess those guys put me on ignore (grin)....

Yea, i am not interested in DIY, I am too old and bad eyes..i just want to bitch to the engineers (grin).

I know eventually someone will eventually build the right box to make me happy, unfortunately, it probably won't come from this country, to meet my $1500 budget.

[beerandmusic]

1 hour ago, wushuliu said:

 

You can find it HERE. Note the different configurations at bottom. Hm, replace the regulators with LT3045s shouldn't be too hard on that board.

 

Tempting...

or finished product here...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Improved-FPGA-Lossless-digital-turntable-player-APE-FLAC-WAV-DSD-HIFI-192K-24bit-/251677634604?

 

Wish was on amazon so i could return...It would be nice to play with, but my main concern as burrows pointed out, is if it couldn't be controlled from DLNA control point, that it would be "no fun to browse"...plus no mention of it supporting large sd cards...

[Superdad]

3 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

Yes. I'm not sure what the fascination with XMOS is, actually. You loose the programmability of an ARM based device, for example. With an embedded ARM, you have the ability to run Linux on the interface and thus easily Roon and HQPlayer NAA or a custom interface (DLNA if you must).

 

The Amanero is such a two chip ARM M3 with Xilinx CPLD type interface for USB, but without the Ethernet input, nor to my knowledge a documented ability to load Linux.

 

The SoC's though, to your point, enable both USB and Ethernet. Given an ability to control the software on the interface I prefer Ethernet.

 

Not too much argument there.  Despite being facile with the XMOS tools, John has really lost all appetite for developing for their parts (for a host of reasons I won't go into here).  But he also really does not want to be writing custom USB drivers or crating USB cores for FPGA implementations, and XMOS's inclusion of Thesycon drivers for Windows is what really drove the use of their chips (that and price).

For Ethernet, sure there are licensable cores for Xilinx and Altera--or as you say, just pick an ARM platform and go from there.  But the whole point of our (currently abandoned) project was to offer a low cost Ethernet solution for DAC designers which leveraged universal (i.e. built into most OSs) support of USB audio--allowing users to use whatever player s/w they want and not requiring any support (of Linux platform in their DAC) from the DAC maker. 

I still think it was a elegant and cost-effective solution (even allowed for multiple pairings and used MAC addresses instead of IP addresses for pairing), but if we restarted, dev time from now would likely have it arriving past the window of opportunity.

 

So many ways to skin the cat...

But most all come back to software.  Right now, only Merging is beginning to offer multi-platform VSC--in support of its just launched Zman Ravenna module (sorry Dante folks, too many limitations in that direction).  Nothing particularly ideal for home audio about Ravenna/AES67, but "player freedom" and low inclusion and support cost may be positive factors.  We'll see.

[beerandmusic]

On 9/18/2017 at 8:06 AM, barrows said:

In the very early days of USB audio there were actual data transmission problems, but these result in very audible tics, clicks, or even short dropouts of sound

 

Very infrequently, but once in a great while, i hear a "hiccup" (perhaps what you refer to as "dropout of sound").

Like i said, i very rarely here it, and if I play the same song over, there usually isn't any hiccup, and it seems like it happens when i am playing DSD DLNA song, but out 48k coax....could this be an intermittent clock problem or ?

[barrows]

3 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

I am just tired of dickin with usb.

For the third, (or fourth?) time:  You are not going to get great results out of USB by using a commercial computer as your source!

A well made audiophile source is in order here.  Like a good custom server, or good Ethernet renderer, etc...

 

The problem is not USB audio, it is using a noisy commercial grade computer as your source.  There is not anything wrong with USB audio in and of itself.

[beerandmusic]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

For the third, (or fourth?) time:  You are not going to get great results out of USB by using a commercial computer as your source!

A well made audiophile source is in order here.  Like a good custom server, or good Ethernet renderer, etc...

 

The problem is not USB audio, it is using a noisy commercial grade computer as your source.  There is not anything wrong with USB audio in and of itself.

 

This is the "first" time i heard and understood that.  It was my understanding that the pc will transfer the binary file perfectly and that usb toys, cables, or isolation, would resolve any noise problems.  It doesn't sound "bad", just not as clean as s/pdif does....but if that is the case, then i will just forget about using a pc with usb dac, and look at DLNA or network server for my main system....I never understood before this posting that the noise wasn't able to be managed by dac circuitry.

[marce]

I would like to see some proof of the differences in noise outputs between standard equipment and some audiophile stuff, as this is the only way to determine how good or bad a device is regarding EMC compliance.

All this talk of noise but NO measurements, the only way to control noise, is know what noise there is, then you can design the correct filters, that's the only way, anything else is guessing.

[marce]

11 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

This is the "first" time i heard and understood that.  It was my understanding that the pc will transfer the binary file perfectly and that usb toys, cables, or isolation, would resolve any noise problems.  It doesn't sound "bad", just not as clean as s/pdif does....but if that is the case, then i will just forget about using a pc with usb dac, and look at DLNA or network server for my main system....I never understood before this posting that the noise wasn't able to be managed by dac circuitry.

Again, do some research on how quite internal PC sound cards can be.

And again USB DACs should be able to handle the noise, otherwise their design is flawed, the whole point is plugging a USB port in.

[Dr Tone]

20 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

Oh, i thought the mirus pro sdcard player could be accessed as a dlna server...

 

It has it’s own interface that can be navigated by it’s own apple remote.  Rudementary but functional.  The DAC has a HDMI output which helps improve the browsing experience a bit I assume.

 

I’ve never tried it personally as I have over 6TB of music and a SOTM sMS-200.

[barrows]

3 hours ago, marce said:

I would like to see some proof of the differences in noise outputs between standard equipment and some audiophile stuff, as this is the only way to determine how good or bad a device is regarding EMC compliance.

All this talk of noise but NO measurements, the only way to control noise, is know what noise there is, then you can design the correct filters, that's the only way, anything else is guessing.

@marce,  I respect your experience and always appreciate your posts, both here and at diyaudio.  I know you have a lot to offer the community on high speed circuit design, and thank you for participating here.  I am referring to the difference between the USB output of a regular commercial computer, and a high end audio source such as Sonore's Signature Rendu SE.  I do not know the best place, or method to measure noise on the USB output, but I do know that John Swenson looks at this.  If you have any tips I would appreciate that.

What I do know is that the sonic differences are not subtle at all, and everything is, of course, bit perfect in any case.  So the only plausible explanation for me is noise.  JS has a lot of information on USB noise, and some theories, although mostly unproven as to what is going on technically (and he is trying to verify those theories).

For proof of some kind of differences, even just between two commercial computer sources, I believe John Atkinson measured some significant differences in the output of a Chord Mojo between two sources: his laptop computer, and an iPad.  You can find those at stereophile.com in the digital processor reviews for the Chord Mojo.  Just one example.

I understand there is some controversy amongst some engineers about this, but listening to the difference on a good system will end the controversy immediately for anyone with any audiophile tendencies at all.  Certainly it would be nice to confirm exactly what is going on, and I welcome any help you might offer in that area.

 

I remember at the early days of high end computer audio playback, when Amarra first came out.  I could not believe that a playback software program could make a difference in SQ, as long as one confirmed things were set up to be bit perfect, but the sonic evidence was not questionable at all.  Then I learned about the engineers responsible for Sound Blade (pro audio software) and all their efforts to make better sounding software, and the opinions of recording engineers who all accept that different softwares sound different, even in bit perfect applications.

[marce]

Hi Barrows

(I don't just do high speed, I actually do more analogue/digital stuff mainly aerospace/mil these days.

If there are all these differences between systems and it is noise (as I put forward on another thread) then it could be an EMC problem, this would also explain the many differences between systems with different cables, components etc.

What do we do:

Cry...

If you have been involved with any EMC testing  you will know what a pain it is, little things make a difference, the wrong length cable can suddenly become a 1/20th wavelength antenna if the system noise has the correct frequency content. So to solve it we will have to measure every system and permeation of every system we can configure, with every possible cable....

I do think that this could be the only cause, as the previous paragraph shows we are in a bit of a dilemma, what I would look at though is more robust front ends on USB DACs, I do think that many would not pass a conducted immunity test from some of the boards I have seen.

I will have a look at John measurements.