Addons, i.e. regen, reclock, isolate - are they needed?

[4est]

13 hours ago, creativepart said:

Before going for a whole new dac I was thinking of one of the addons - like iFi Micro or similar. Or maybe go with the whole SoTM 200 kind of network device. Are these addons a must to consider before even thinking of a new dac... or is it just a fad if you've got a good dac in the first place?

 

PS. I'm not sure if I'd ever get rid of the Benchmark. It seems like one of those statement pieces you hang on to for a long time. But I may add another ~$2000 dac. Sometimes I wish I still had my Ack! Dac!. Anyway, I'm digressing.

Having owned the BM DAC1 for a couple of years when they first came out and also owning NOS DACs similar to the Ack, as Mansr suggested, there might be little difference with many of these add on devices with the BM. The BM resamples everything on input which helps poor sources, but holds back better ones. It tends to homogenize the inputs for better or worse depending on taste and quality. I'd try a different DAC using different tech if you are looking to experiment. If you are looking at keeping the BM and want to improve it, I remember mine being sensitive to power. As a caveat, something like the Uptone Regen might help if for no other reason than it replaces the USB input power. I replaced my BM with a Berkeley and then a Weiss. I am now back into DIY bettering all of them. I have never regretted selling it. The BM is a statement piece only because they say it is so. Despite the PRaT and punch, it had a "whiteness/greyness" to it that obscured inner detail. If I had to go back, I'd get another Weiss, but I have no Firewire. It took quite a lot of work to better Weiss' digital out. I kept it quite awhile for that alone. I'd love to hear their present USB devices.

[4est]

1 minute ago, semente said:

 

I've seen mention by reasonably credible sources of I2S' inadequacy as an box-connecting interface.

 

This is from the LavryEngineering wiki:

 

I2S
Overview

The I²S interface format, pronounced as "I squared S" stands for "Inter-IC Sound" or alternatively, "Integrated Interchip Sound." Frequently, because of limitations in the text formatting it may appear written as "I2S." The primary application of this interface is to connect digital audio IC's located on the same printed circuit board.
Basics

Once the digital information is generated by the AD converter; it must be transmitted to the next device for storage or processing. Internal to the AD converter system; the I2S format is commonly used to connect the AD converter IC to a digital audio interface IC; and typically consists of three signals:

• The Bit Clock which has one cycle for each "bit" in the serial data output of the AD converter.
• The Word Clock which is at the sample frequency, and each half cycle is used to define whether the serial data is the left channel or right channel data (most contemporary converters are "stereo" two channel units). Sometimes referred to as "Left-Right Clock."
• The Serial Data which is the digital code containing each sample's voltage level information. The information alternates between left and right channel data.

This format is not intended for (external) transmission between digital audio devices and is subject to the same jitter and noise considerations as any other high frequency interface. Please see bit clock and AES for more details. Digital audio formats designed explicitly for transmission between pieces of equipment have an "embedded" bit clock as part of the electrical waveform, and the coding of the electrical waveform allows for these very high frequency signals to be transmitted with signal transformers; which allows them to work properly. Formats like I2s do not have the means to address serious issues that arise when transmitting very high frequency signals more than short distance because it requires DC transmission. The discussion of these issues is beyond the scope of this subject.

 

 

You are quoting Lavry? Despite the inherent problems with transferring data and clocking at these rates, there appears to still be sonic advantages in using external i2s devices in some(many) situations. Some of those advantages MAY even be because they are external. This is off topic though.

[4est]

31 minutes ago, Melvin said:

For $179 the Schiit Eitr might be worth a shot. It's garnered some great reviews and you can return it if it doesn't suit you.

Please do not take this wrong, but it is a mixed up world 'cause of Lola if this does sound better. And it very well may! The BM ASRC is supposed to negate any/all differences in it's inputs. It didn't IME with my BM. Even cables made a difference, but the BM always retained its "house sound". Love it or hate it, there is different.

[4est]

3 minutes ago, Melvin said:

 

I didn't .. love the reference!

 

 

I was thinking along these lines as well (with the added reclocking and USB/SPDIF conversion). 

 

LOL And I am not trying to disparage the Benchmark, but suggesting that the inputs are likely to be less responsive to these sort of devices as suggested by the manufacturer. The drawback being that they seem to only take you about as far as they are already in performance.

[4est]

1 minute ago, look&listen said:

Update. Not well known is BM DAC2 series (prob. DAC3 to) not use ASRC for USB input only.

 

"House sound" you hear is of DAC1 series. Lived with two BM DAC1s, now have DAC2 with (USB in) different, better sound. Happy to stop rolling DACs now.

Maybe non-ASRC is difference, maybe other ?

And responsive to USB add-ons also.

I believe you, but have no first hand knowledge DAC2/3 and the OP has the DAC1.

[4est]

42 minutes ago, plissken said:

You may be confused. As USB standards have increased in throughput it looks like Benchmark is speaking to the part of their jitter suppression system which is being able to ASRC to higher and higher sampling rates. 

 

Back in the day it was 24/96, now we can do 32/768. 

 

For those of us that know what we are talking about, we know that the USB dongles have nothing to do with clock recovery. They simply are making attempts as isolation of the ground plane of the computer/source (i.e. the Moat every one talks about). It's all about AGND and DGND design (Henry Ott has some good technical write ups about this including the math for calculating the zip trace impedance values).  

 

Everyone is welcome to their opinion. It could be that the 'worst sounding' part of it has nothing to do with it's inputs. 

 

I believe it was on the DAC1 where Benchmark midwifed a 100' digital line just flooded with errors and timing issues. But they still showed the measured output of their DAC unaffected and showed 100% reconstruction of the input signal. 

 

That's what I mean by they designed proper inputs that are robust to dealing with downstream issues.

 

I look forward to others who up-vote your post so I also know who else suffers from an information and knowledge deficit 

 

 

Those of us that know...? How pathetically pompous of you. I hope that works on some kids at least, and pray your partner never learns how long an inch really is.

 

About all that test really proves is that it sounds just as shitty with 100' as it does 3'. But it was a lie anyway. It locked on though, I have to give them that.  We (meaning myself and a few others) could readily hear the difference in sources, inputs and input cabling although they all did have that signature white-ish grey-ness to them. Ultralock should have been called Ultrabrite/Ultrawhite or something...

[4est]

2 minutes ago, kennyb123 said:

 

You mean there are some who don't have information and knowledge deficits?  There are some who have perfect knowledge and a perfect understanding of what's involved here?  

 

I'd rather be counted amongst those with the humility to acknowledge that I don't have it all figured out - instead of among those with the hubris to think their information is complete such that they can state with absolute certainty that USB add-ons can't improve the sound quality of a particular DAC.

 

I wonder what those with perfect knowledge do in their spare time?  I guess while I'm listening to music they must be creating new life on other planets using their spare mental capacity?       

LOL No, they come here to extol their virtues...

[4est]

1 minute ago, plissken said:

 

Anyone that reads our back and forth, that has any technical understanding, knows you've exceeded yours. 

And you have continually over stated yours...

[4est]

12 minutes ago, kennyb123 said:

 

You're right.  I could care less about the red herrings you throw out to avoid having to acknowledge the flaws in your logic and reasoning.  You always introduce new information when busted.  That's exactly what you're doing in the text I quoted.  

 

Last I'll say.  I apologize to everyone on this thread for my contribution to making this thread unproductive.  I deleted my comments above, but Plissken got there before it took.

Smart of you. I apologize as well. Plissken is a self important bully, and it was silly for me to engage him. I should have learned my lesson by now...

[4est]

4 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

... lack of support for high resolution DSD.

Then why did you recommend optical?