PCIe interface vs usb interface/converter vs network streamer vs network server

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

2 hours ago, jabbr said:

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

An option I should also note, that I was reminded of by Ed Meitner via Skype last week, is optical isolation between the PC and DAC. He is a huge fan of this. One of his guys sent me links to optical USB cables that I’d long forgotten about. I may get a couple in to test. 

 

Be sure its a true optical only cable -- the Corning fiber USB cable from several years ago was powered from the source, so a hybrid fiber/copper. There are new fiber thunderbolt cables that use the USB-C connector -- I don't know if they can do USB also -- each end powers its own end.

 

Corning appears to still offer the hybrid copper fiber cable looking at their website and FAQ "Do USB 3.Optical™ Cables by Corning contain copper conductors?
Yes, two copper conductors transmit power from the host for the optical to electrical conversion and back again. All data is transmitted over the optical fibers"

 

This may be a possibility 10 meters USB 3.0 Active Optical Cables, USB AOC

 

 

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

When looking at now possible usb-c connector types and/ or thunderbolt on usb-c I needed to refresh my understanding of the various USB  iterations. There has been confusing changes to the naming conventions as the USB spec has been upgraded. USB 3.2 retrospectively changed names of previous USB iterations. Feel free to correct.....

 

USB 3.2 Gen 1, is USB 3.0.

maximum throughput of 5Gbps (625 MB/s), aka SS for SuperSpeed, about 10 times faster than the USB 2.0. 

For a while it was renamed USB 3.1 Gen1 (naming no longer used). These would be considered more recently manufactured USB 3.0

Distinguished from USB 2.0 counterparts by using blue color for the Standard-A receptacles and plugs, and by the initials SS.

USB 3.2 Gen 2, is USB 3.1 (2013)

 maximum throughput of 10Gbps (SuperSpeed+) 1250 MB/s, twice the rate of USB 3.0

For a while it was renamed USB 3.1 Gen2 (naming no longer used)

over the existing USB-type-A [blue] and USB-C connectors

USB 3.2 Gen 2×2, is USB 3.2 (2017)

maximum throughput of 20Gbps.

two new SuperSpeed+ transfer modes over the USB-C connector using two-lane operation, with data rates of 10 and 20 Gbit/s (1250 and 2500 MB/s).

Summary

USB generation	Previous name	New name	Speed	Type	Brand name
USB 3.0	USB 3.1 Gen 1	USB 3.2 Gen 1	5Gbps	USB-A/C	SuperSpeed USB
USB 3.1	USB 3.1 Gen 2	USB 3.2 Gen 2	10Gbps	USB-A/C	SuperSpeed USB 10Gbps
USB 3.2	None	USB 3.2 Gen 2x2	20Gbps	USB-C	SuperSpeed USB 20Gbps

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

18 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Have you guys seen these optical USB cables?

 

https://www.cosemi.com/product_category/usb-comm/

They also appear to be hybrid copper/fiber

USB-3.1-G2-AA-Product-Brief-032020.1.pdf

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

3 hours ago, jabbr said:

There are new fiber thunderbolt cables that use the USB-C connector -- I don't know if they can do USB also -- each end powers its own end.

 

 

A bit hard to know from the Corning diagram and unlike the USB optical cables they don't say if copper is used between transmitter and receiver.

 

 

 

One would assume they can do usb?, at least the usb-c thunderbolt connector should be compatible...

 

quote

"Many USB-C ports don’t have Thunderbolt 3 capabilities. Ports must explicitly state, “USB-C Thunderbolt 3” . However, note that the reverse is not true; A Thunderbolt 3 port, by design, can also function as a USB-C port. There is no separate, special Thunderbolt 3 port, as there was for past versions of the Thunderbolt connection. However, there are special Thunderbolt 3 cables that are used to access the full capabilities of the connection,

From <https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/usb-c-vs-thunderbolt-3/>

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

3 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

darn...i almost was reaching orgasm...

not that I want to further that image but 😵.......a possibility 10 meters USB 3.0 Active Optical Cables, USB AOC,

I have left a message on their site asking if copper carries the power or if separately powered at each end (I think it may be the latter).

 

There is also the optical Thunderbolt possibility raised by @jabbr

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

8 hours ago, smodtactical said:

In my search for a replacement of my SOTM 200 ultra setup I have come across many different directions to go. I wanted to just ask for feedback and thoughts on different approaches to PC audio  and especially with respect to these options.

 

0. baseline: PC -> USB -> dac.

1. PC (RMEME PCI express card) -> spdif -> DAC

2. PC -> usb -> USB to AES converter -> DAC

3. PC -> ethernet -> streamer -> usb -> DAC

4. PC -> ethernet -> streamer -> usb -> USB to AES converter -> DAC

5. Server instead of PC -> option 3,4 or 5.

 

And to these chains I can add various external PSU or external clocks. Previously I had option 4 and really enjoyed the SQ I got over just PC -> dac via usb. But now I have option 2 and still its a increase in SQ over my pc->dac baseline. But  do wonder if I should go back to either a streamer or maybe another approach. Some people argue adding certain key devices and external clocks yield incredible results equivalent to more expensive one box solutions. Others argue that more boxes and all these complexities degrade SQ and move you away from the music or add colour and the simplest option that gets away from USB is best.

 

Any thoughts? Thanks.

 

I have a pc server > usb > DAC based system /local storage but have also been exploring ethernet based audio for its 'interface' technical advatages.Does ethernet offer something better than USB? Not terribly surprising but the feedback thus far is really it depends.

 

Mostly it depends on implementation and what your DAC is optimized for. Obviously if you stream from a NAS 50 feet away or from an internet service, then ethernet seems like a necessary step, preferably over fiber.

 

Of all the interface advantages of ethernet, like bandwidth and so fourth, the one relevant thing for me is the galvanic isolation. Now my DAC is particularly well isolated and so is my server setup + clean power, so its questionable whether ethernet would have any significant advantage if at all.Current sound is stunning, I can play DSD512, experiment with HQP, play any kind of PCM already. There is never any drop-outs, stutter, or issues with the network or internet going down.

 

Still, usb over an optical inter-connect would seem to be theoretically sensible, elegant and worth experimenting with.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

9 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

i am sure all the fiber usb cables have copper for the 5v...bummer...i wonder though if even a fiber usb cable connected to a schiit unisom usb might be the answer since they "advertise" electrical isolation and self powered dac, that between using the unison usb and a fiber usb cable if we can effectively claim noise isolation up to the dac?  I am thinking about trying another schiit since they are now advertising the unison usb input.

 

 

I think I have something like that now with my DAC separately powering the USB input with a 12.5F Supercap. It needs no "handshake" from the pc either and is totally isolated from the 5v bus.Adding optical isolation would be a neat experiment

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

11 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

looking at the diagram it looks like only fiber (no power) is interfaced between devices??? its hard to believe that the conversion though can happen inside the usb cable like shown without power?  especially like from high dsd rates??  sounds way too good to be true.

Dunno. If the optical transmitter and receiver is separately powered at each end I would think the copper connection for power from host would not be required? Data via optical, power at each end

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

 

8 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

there is the argument that there is no such thing as noise-free, but i believe you can get "closer" with fiber.

the "hans channel" likes the sonore optical rendu over the previously highest praised sotm ultra solution.    I was looking at using fiber over ethernet a couple years ago, when i got sidelined...i still think it is the best way to go....not paying $2k for streamer though that the sonore will set you back with power supply and xceiver.  I am not convinced that it would be that much better than just using a cisco switch with fiber to a network dac.   For someone with money though, it would be a good solution especially if you want to use the roon/hqplayer interface that it provides...it's just over my budget....and i am not a roon lover.

 

Yes, I am always willing to try something that might further eliminate noise

 

5 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

you may need to lean on the optical usb cable link that you shared...the thunderbolt doesn't even use a usb connector so i am sure it is not compatible.

 

Thunderbolt3 now on usb-c so use adapter to usb-A which I do now on laptop

6 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

can you clarify this 5v isolation design (pic?)

would it work with any dac? 

Is this a diy or store bought device?

 

It is an expensive Gryphon DAC, so yes one expects the engineering to be OTT.

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

6 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I just looked at your system...you clearly have the money...if i were you, i would get the sonore optical solution...that or even get the lumin x1 with fiber....wish i had your money!

 

Fiber over ethernet is the way to go if you can afford it...look no further.

 

It's the first time i have recommended sonore product, but right now there aren't any other fiber over ethernet options that i could find short of the lumin x1 at $13k...

 

 

Yeh I started looking at the optical Rendu and network bridges also. Thanks for the link

 

I am pretty attached to the Kalliope dac. The sound of the system is stunning. I think there is more to a DAC than its digital interface and also depending on how it implements the interface. The kalliope has room for an optical upgrade such as network renderer / digital module like AVB audio over Ethernet

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

3 hours ago, sb6 said:

Curious if anyone considered any inherent noise/jitter associated with the 2x optical conversion and whether this might reduce or adversely affect sonics versus the benefit of optical isolation?  

 

I acknowledge that jitter levels may well be perishingly low but I also do have concerns about additional processing in general.

 

If you look for example at an ethernet bridge solution to introduce optical into the pathway between pc and DAC it is fairly convoluted, let alone the cost.

 

.

 

This is from HB's video and in which he later proclaims USB audio is the best sound but not all DACS have USB.

 

I suspect in my current pc >usb audio setup/implementation I have achieved perishingly low noise and very high galvanic isolation (given my server design, use of Ultracaps, DAC design, isoregen etc). Being open to experiment I have no problem adding an optical step to theoretically achieve further isolation. At the same time I don't want to 'cut off my nose to spite my face'.

 

Also, any optical receiver has to be powered from somewhere and galvanic isolation at this point has to be considered.

 

 

An elegant and relatively inexpensive experiment is to try, if available, an optical usb cable or optical thunderbolt /usb cable.

 

People will say spif is best, ethernet is best, usb is best......basically whatever they feel works for them.Back in the days when I used Mark Levinson transport and DAC I had the option between spdif, AES/EBU, tolink optical and optical over ST connector (no usb). I chose AES/EBU purely on subjective SQ.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

23 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

This may be a possibility 10 meters USB 3.0 Active Optical Cables, USB AOC

 

Unfortunately the product manager informs me that it is a hybrid design...but adds "could support remote power supply". Not sure how one would implement that and would still have the copper connection/conduit

 

Edit - further reply....."Yes,The hybrid vision USB AOC could provide power by one side

If the distance is more than 50M,then have to use pure optical cable powered by each sude

Or add a USB hub to provide power"