USB audio transmission isn’t bit true

[esldude]

8 minutes ago, mansr said:

The error rate of USB is actually very low in normal circumstances. This can be trivially tested by capturing the output of a USB to S/PDIF converter.

Which I have done for hours and hours and hours never once getting an error.

[esldude]

2 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

You can believe Rankin would do that, i don't...

When it's something I can test for myself I need not believe anyone.  If Rankin has decided USB bit errors are a sound quality problem he is wrong. 

[esldude]

So dacs get the bits in completely accurate order more than 99.999999999999% of the time. Apparently more often than that some human has the mal conceived idea this rate of reliable performance is a problem. 

[esldude]

1 hour ago, beerandmusic said:

snippage.............

 

Curious why people believe one enet solution sounds different than a usb solution at all...shouldn't all enet and usb solutions sound the same given same os, same power, same everything else?  So no matter what the os settings are, no matter what power supply you use, no matter what OS or how many processes you have, the music is always recieved 99.99999999999999999999% accurate...and this mysterious noise signature that makes every usb and every enet solution unique can affect the DAC processing, but cannot affect the music...yet it is consistent...like more bass, more detail, more soundstage, not in a malfunctioning way, but all the time...I guess that is logical to some people.

snippage..........

Everything, every idea of how something might be better with audiophiles has this consistent description of more bass, firmer bass, more soundstage, more space, more there there etc. etc. etc. etc. 

 

Analog cables, power supplies, digital improvements like oversampling, like Non oversampling, like sigma delta, like multi-bit and on and on and on.  It is all in everyone's head.  So yeah, it is logical to me. 

 

Your random and rarely encountered bit errors, your killed processes, your OS differences, all of that aren't the explanation.  The human in the loop is the explanation.  

[esldude]

1 hour ago, beerandmusic said:

 

THe darko audio in link above is very close to my beliefs...but i wasn't trying to get anything out of this thread other than for people to stop saying the data is always received at the DAC with 100% accuracy....Never bought it, never will....you guys may not understand why it was important to me..it was just i had difficult time that everyone seemed to accept that as fact, when it wasn't true.  Not that these "bits" make a dramatic difference, but the fact that there is any difference whatsoever reinforces my other thoughts....example...if i have to accept that 2 pennies = 3 cents then i can't accept that 3 pennies = 3 cents....I don't care since it's only one penny, but it makes all other logic fail....too hard to explain, let's just say it was mind settling for me to come to truth.

You are not even aware of how much you are embarrassing yourself.  That makes it all the more embarrassing because you'll not understand this.  

 

My apologies.  

[esldude]

8 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

 

did you see/hear this happen or read about it?

 

Also, as stated,  different dac can interpolate, so no matter what, no one can suggest one digital input is superior to another...it just depends on how the dac processes the errors which ultimately matters...which goes to my point, about why worry about accuracy at all in the digital end, because DACs interpolate, use algorithms, etc...you can never 100% accuracy. so why sweat it.  Why worry about fancy cables...any differences are subjective and are system dependent....might as well go the cheap route without usb cables...besides people wouldn't know accuracy compared to desired sound if it hit them in the face.

Why worry about facts that don't fit the inaccurate ideas.  Why not go on without using the brain. Facts are too confusing.

[esldude]

3 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

Gordon Rankin: What we have here is an explanation with screenshot proof that USB audio transmission isn’t bit true

Continued quoting indicates you still don't get it. But you never intended to get it.

[esldude]

15 minutes ago, JohnSwenson said:

There actually IS a difference. Music uses isochronous transmission which has NO error correction. Most other forms of data use transmission protocols which DO have error correction, thus transmission errors get corrected so the end user never sees an error. With music there is no correction so transmission errors DO show up at the DAC.

 

Per my previous post transmission errors are very rare with shorter cables, but do happen a LOT with longer cables.

 

So while in some sense data is data, how music data gets sent over USB is very different.

 

John S.

Well I don't think that is surprising.  Use short enough USB, and quality USB cables (and I don't mean expensive audiophoolery cable), and it will work as it should.  I've seen where other people tested DACs with poor cable cobbled together overly long with DACs to see which can handle it with less trouble than others.  Keep cables short.  What an idea.  I've not found errors with 5 meter cables which is the suggested max.  That was at the slower speed.  

 

I've also used some of those active extenders and found they can reliably with no errors for hours send the signal up to 50 ft.  They make longer extenders, but I've not tested those for hours. 

 

 

[esldude]

You'll intentionally not understand it of course.  Interference of noisy devices thru the air are not much of a problem.  Even a little distance helps tremendously, and that is assuming the noise is of a type picked up and harmful anyway.  If there is a noise issue the problems are magnitudes greater over wired connections. 

 

I've done this before, which you say doesn't apply to your exact situation.  Which is only an embarrassment to you which you won't understand.  I took a large PC supply out of its case, had the PC doing intensive power hungry video processing, and ran some RCA cables once around the supply.  You do get noise, noise you can hear.  I unwrap and move it 6 inches away, and you can measure some noise, but not hear it.  Move it two feet away and that noise is at such a low level it is swamped by thermal noise. 

 

Did the same thing with balanced XLR cable.  Nothing above the thermal noise floor even wrapped a few times right around the switching PC supply.  

 

With PS inside a metal case, and some distance you just aren't getting much irradiated noise that will effect something else several feet away.  Not from random OS actions and noise that isn't tuned to what anything else is doing.  Making a problem of something that is not one. Just because you can imagine it would be. 

 

Take a nice DAC, feed it from USB of 3 meters or less directly and you don't need anything else.  

 

It's funny the current digital fashion vs audiophile fashions of yesteryear.  Back then less was more and simplicity of high quality was sought after.  Like removing tone controls from preamps.  Now, more is more.  Instead of doing something of good quality everyone introduces fixes, and fixes for fixes and you get the idea the more widgets between A and B the better it will be. Rather bizarre.  

 

A good ethernet protocol would be fine too, but it is going to be the same story all over again.  You'll need a dozen boxes to condition things for that because  soon enough......somebody ........will hear.............. something.............

[esldude]

5 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

Ok thanks...i went back and re-read...and i will even re-read again....

 

I downloaded one of the recordings and it was horrid...if high error rate can cause that, i do not want any error rate (grin)....

 

Most notably, he stated:

 

====

The first few seconds of the recording are fine. When errors start showing up, it's as an occasional skip which is clearly audible. The thing is, as soon as a single bit is wrong, an entire packet is discarded, and this causes a huge error in the recovered data stream.

====

 

So in conclusion, i do not want even a single bit wrong, right?

 

To me, if if error rate can cause that which is not even listenable, there are many possibilities of what small error rates can do on different gear.

But note what mansr said.  If a single bit is wrong, an entire packet is discarded.  A huge error ensues.  If you aren't hearing the huge errors, then a bit has not been wrong. It isn't like analog where a little bit of low error causes a little bit of less good digital sound.  You get it, and its fine or OOPS, there was an error.  The errors are not a sound quality problem because they aren't happening for all practical purposes.  

[esldude]

25 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

Just curious, do you use a fancy usb cable?

 

Either way, To be honest, I do believe you can have a "near perfect" usb solution provided dedicated quality pc, standard usb cable, and I do not believe in any OMG MASSIVE Improvement enet solution unless they had a crappy USB solution when they started.

 

I did have a crappy usb solution when i first started, and i jumped on enet within a month and noticed a good subtle difference, but easily notable.  I do believe usb toys work for noisy comptuers or older generation dacs, but it makes more sense to fix it before its broke imho.    I stuck with ENET but tried several usb solutions but always went back to enet.  Again most of this was even before advent of usb toys and fancy cables (or at least popularity of fancy usb cables)...i am talking 7-8 years ago...and after giving USB a chance several times, i have stuck with enet ever since (for my main system), i still use both USB and spdif for my office system.  I am not here to say that you can't have an optimal usb solution, because i believe you can....but on the other hand, i do not see any purpose in using an inferior transmission medium, and no reason to go back to it....you can build (as demonstrated) a very cheap enet solution, that no one can suggest will be weaker for any reason, or if they can, i would love their input. 

 

None of this was relative to why i started this thread though....I was just happy to learn the term Isochronous, and that the DAC does not get its data perfectly as many suggested....For me it was a stumbling block...regardless if it can or cannot affect SQ....I just kept hypothesizing different solutions and just couldn't accept that the dac always gets its data with 100% accuracy...and i was right.  I don't understand why people couldn't get that it was just a stumbling block for me and why people are so sensitive.  Regardless, i still think it can cause issues besides just clicks, and even MANSR and ARCHMAGO stated so as well (even if very unlikely with a PROPERLY tuned system).  To me,  it's irrelevant anymore, even if it couldnt' cause anyything more than clicks...I just don't need usb..it's unnecessary.

I don't use fancy USB cables.  Unless you consider a Belden fancy.  I've heard no problems using a netbook for basic music playback thru a USB to SPDIF converter.  I normally use a Lenovo laptop, or Macbook pro for music playback.  Or a low energy Lenovo desktop server.  

[esldude]

2 hours ago, Sonicularity said:

I wonder what the special mechanism might be and how the RME device goes about correcting a drop-out.   Maybe they are repeating the last known bit?  I suppose with a large enough buffer that other options would be available.

 

 

http://www.rme-audio.de/download/adi2dac_e.pdf

If it displays errors, I wonder if it ever has any to show?

[esldude]

51 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

MANSR>> Damaged packets are detected and reported by the host controller. It probably depends on the hardware... The XMOS based DAC I tested clearly drops bad packets without padding or interpolating.

 

+1

I would rather a DAC drops errors so the errors are more obvious rather than interpolate, where you may not know...I don't want a DAC to interpolate... I say get it right first, without trying to fix...

 

I am glad that both sides agree that DACS get errors, that USB is subject to error rate because of isosynchronous transmission , and the errors can be a result of a number of different reasons...and it appears even in a very stable environment, that a dac can interpolate such that it would be difficult to hear....either way, a USB interface  is unnecessary, and enet may be preferred by many, including LUMIN, who now even offer a network player with fiber input....now we are talking!

Yes, we are glad you agree we all agree even though we don't just so you will feel okay about having a useless and wrong-headed conception about USB.  This way you can rationalize (to use the word loosely) your idea ethernet will be superior.  

[esldude]

1 hour ago, Superdad said:

 

No, olestra causes one to loose their sh*ts, not their bits.  

He's talking about audiophile grade olestra.  Added for smoothness, but also may cause some coloration. 

[esldude]

5 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

People keep misunderstanding what my premise is.  The premise is merely that which Rankin stated....that USB transmission (e.g. isosynchronous) isn't bit true.  Nothing more, nothing less.  I never suggested that someone can't create a stable USB solution. Anyway, i have updated the subject to reflect what Rankin stated.

USB can have errors.  Almost never does. Why you think this is important is quite the mystery. And no one is rejecting enet audio. I wish equipment for it were more common.

 

But there is no reason to call enet audio a solution to USB audio. USB audio needs no solution as it works fine and isn't broken.

[esldude]

10 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

Forget about noise for a moment and pretend all there is, is music being transferred. 

Tone, harmonics, bass, treble, everything that is music is represented by the digital data.

If all of these musical attributes are represented by this digital data, how can losing a bit here or there just cause a drop out and not a difference in tone?  If tone is represented by data, and data is lost how can tone not be incorrect?

Sure, you can say if it recieves too many errors it drops the entire packet, which would result in a dropout....but what is the case in interpolation, where it interpolates rather than drops the entire packet? If the dac never interpolates, why even have the interpolation circuitry.  I mean is there one DAC engineer in the bunch here that can explain this?  Just curious is there a DAC engineer that reads these threads?  Not just a hobbyist, but a professional of a known company?

Well the real case is what you're talking about doesn't happen.  Nothing gets dropped.

[esldude]

1 minute ago, beerandmusic said:

Mansr stated when there are errors it is either dropped or interpolated.

And that it happened about one time every 30 hrs of listening maybe.

[esldude]

2 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

What is the theory that 100 different usb cables can give 100 different SQ?

There are decades of solid science behind that issue.  But it isn't very popular.  

 

There are other theories that don't really hold up.  But they are very, very popular among a certain subset of people.  

[esldude]

1 hour ago, yamamoto2002 said:

 

USB speed increased and bulk transfer becomes a new option for audio transfer. I'm not sure if it is ideal or not but there is a drawback, bulk transfer audio dac needs its proprietary device driver to be installed while operating system supplies stock device driver for isochronous USB audio devices.

 

Quad DSD(23Mbps to 45Mbps) on USB 2.0(480Mbps) should not be an issue. I've tested it and it runs fine.

 

I'm just another layman and a fan of optical link from 1990s S/PDIF because optical gear looks cool and futuristic, and long waiting the fibre version of thunderbolt. Sound quality may not changed very much but it has galvanic isolation as its advantage.

 

https://www.corning.com/optical-cables-by-corning/worldwide/en/products/thunderbolt-optical-cables.html

 

https://www.amazon.com/Thunderbolt-Optical-Self-Powered-Peripherals-AOC-MMS4CTP060M20/dp/B00JMKG7TM

 

A bit pricy, but there it is. 

 

These are a bit cheaper for 10 meters, but reviews indicate limited reliability.

https://www.amazon.com/Optical-Cables-CorningTM-AOC-MMS4CVP010M20-ThunderboltTM/dp/B00HSTC496

 

[esldude]

41 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

in re-reading this article, IFI says EXACTLY what i was saying...that i am not convinced that errors will only cause a dropout, that i can understand that if an entire packet was dropped, you may hear a click or drop... but not if occasional bits....that i suspect distortion.....here they suggest exactly as i guessed....

 

 

==

Isochronous transfer mode uses error-checking but includes no re-transmission in case of Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC) errors. Electrical noise on USB signals causes CRC errors and thus data loss, as does poor signal integrity.   In mild cases, this leads to audio signal distortions. In the worst cases, clicks and dropouts.

===

 

....i suppose IFI doesn't know what they are talking about also....

 

They also say that noise causes errors and data loss...something else i said but that was rejected....and i deduced both of these FACTS by logical reasoning...never read it before, and it went against everything that most people here claimed....whatever...i am done with this thread....

 

when you get errors, and you will (more if noise, or interrupts, buffer settings, many things can affect) and You will either have distortion, interpolation (possibly incorrect), or dropouts if too many errors (and entire packet is dropped).  It is very feasible that you will have distortion (or unnatural music) and not even know it....but people can believe whatever they want...i know differently....finally done with this topic...CLOSED.

 

none of these facts suggest you can't have a good usb solution.  I do believe one can have a stable optimized USB solution, and that some dacs will do a better job than others....

 

 

You of course didn't learn anything.  Anyone who tells you data loss is a problem slight or severe in USB connected DACs is selling you a bill of goods.  You shouldn't trust them, and you have enough information to understand that.  But you didn't want to because of your prior deductions which are more important to you than any evidence to the contrary.  

[esldude]

56 minutes ago, Superdad said:

 

Dennis, while you were above suggesting the Corning cable in response to someone looking for Thunderbolt galvanic isolation, the Corning optical cables include copper wires and do not provide any galvanic isolation.

Same goes for the Corning optical USB cable.

Thanks. I'd not realized that until you pointed it out.

[esldude]

1 minute ago, beerandmusic said:

If someone has something professional to add or share in regard to above statement, please share in a professional and learning manner.  No more troll posts please...it is against TOS.

I've seen nothing to indicate you'd recognize a professional comment when you read it. 

[esldude]

5 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

 

 

interesting read here...albeit dated 2012 (smile).

 

 

To qualify as an asynchronous DAC, ... the designer would throw away the source clock and rely only on the DAC’S internal clock. There are scarce few of these around.  scarce in 2012, how about now?  do all dacs "throw away source clock" and use dac's clock?

 

https://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/myth-asynchronous-dac/

 

I also read, but don't know if true or not, the question of if host(computer) transmittting in isochronus mode, it doesn't matter if dac is asynchronous or not....

 

Perhaps the driver would indicate if you use the DAC driver vs an os supplied driver?

You might be almost on the verge of nearly possibly maybe getting somewhere.  That part where you say don't know. 

 

Yes, asynch USB's main purpose and advantage was to completely divorce the sample rate clock from the USB input. The clock on the DAC chips of USB DACs is a free running crystal which is the best, lowest jitter way to time out samples.  The rest of the system adapts to keep a small buffer at the right level so this is possible.  This is no longer rare at all, but pretty much the norm.   Combine this fine clocking situation with USB rarely ever getting single bit error and you have a nice solution for digital audio sourced from a computer or other digital devices. 

[esldude]

2 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

 Is there any argument that is capable of defending Censorship of opposing viewpoints, unless the people posting opposing viewpoints who are doing this, deliberately set out to disrupt the thread(s), which is in itself a form of Censorship ?

Let us go with the related shouting fire in a crowded theater version of abridging free speech which would be related to censorship.

 

Rabble rouser Ray shouts fire in a crowded theater everyone goes nuts runs out.  RR Ray gets arrested for the no shouting fire in a non on fire theater ordinance.   

 

RR Ray's defense is fire is oxidation.  Everything in the theater is oxidizing, so RR Ray says it is on fire.  

 

The opposing view is fire is RAPID oxidation that can cause the building to fall, smoke, and fumes to kill people and burn people from the excess heat.  The theater isn't on fire, there isn't even any smoke and the fire fighters have done nothing as nothing was needed. 

 

RR Ray says speed has no bearing.  Oxidation is fire and the theater is on fire.  He is being persecuted unfairly.  The oxidation if unchecked will in time cause the building to fall and kill people.  It may happen later, but getting everyone out now saves lives.  

 

What should we do with RR Ray?  

 

Sorry, I felt a reasoned unreasonable meandering response was called for in this case. 

 

Now back to our regular thread pollution.  

[esldude]

23 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I can only speak for myself, but i only considered spdif until i found out it does not support native dsd which is my preferred listening format...i do however use spdif for my 2nd system which includes the computer i am typing on...it sounds very decent to me for a $250 system (minus pc).   I admit my very low budget may be reason for the method i have chosen, not able to budget high end pc or LPS or costly enet->usb type interface (e.g. rendu or sotm), and dsd to me has always sounded better via enet than usb, why i don't know, it just does, but i don't have any usb toys, fancy cables or fancy lps....this is why i always ask if generic pc with stock ps upsampling have any issues with DSD and USB, because i think DSD sounds better over enet with my cheap hardware.

USB sounds fine.  Use Enet if you wish.  You don't need a gargantuan budget for either if you are sensible.