Is USB straight from a Mac computer to a DAC really that bad?

[The Computer Audiophile]

7 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

Interestingly, my new DAC has a Roon Bridge built in, however I find the sound to be better coming from the USB output of a Sonore Signature Rendu SE via Roon and HQPlayer than using the Roon Bridge directly.

If found this to be true in several cases. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

none of that speaks to what the actual sound difference is...i vaguely remember (but i may be wrong), that someone (archimago maybe?) that shared what "jitter" sounds like, and if i recall it was like hiss.  If i hear ticks or hiss, then i would be concerned, but I do not.   my point is that i believe that "modern day dacs" should compensate for any noise on usb line, and my current belief is that they do.  Provided they have what "unsion" has or better which includes, use their own 5v reference, isolating the usb's 5v reference, galvanic isolation, and reclocking.  I am sure there are other modern day dacs that do this as well, and some are now using LPS's as well.

In my experience jitter can round the edges of transients and make music sound soft. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

13 minutes ago, davide256 said:

If you want not to be years behind in where computer audio has gone, you need to devote a weekend to reading the thread below. A lot of research by many different CA members with converging results and some key findings linked/ summarized up front. I ignored it in 2017-18 only to find out I had spent time and money duplicating results/conclusions already reached

in the thread and needed to catch up.

 

 

 

While a very cool thread and very cool findings contained within, I would never characterize it with the sentence, "If you want not to be years behind in where computer audio has gone." There are many paths to Rome. I enjoy many of them equally.

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

but that a well designed dac should be able to compensate for this noise

This is a popular thing to say, mainly by objectivists, with respect to digital audio. However, I've never seen anyone put specifics to the "well designed" DAC. What is considered well designed to the level that it's immune to external issues and the cure to these issues isn't worse than the issue(s) itself?

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I am not a dac engineer, but Schiit thinks he has something with his unison, and it is the first thing I have heard that compares to my experience streaming dsd via dlna.

 

What he markets is complete electro mechanical galvanic isolation, removing and using his own 5v ref, and reclocking.

 

I reported this on another thread at another site, and someone made the remark that all good dacs should do that and they believe that schiit is just catching up to other more highend dacs....I don't know if that is true or not, but it is the first time i have experienced what I am experiencing now...again, i have never tried any usb "toys", instead suggesting that i would wait until DAC engineers got their act together, and stick with dsd via dlna until then.

Which Sony device are you using as DLNA endpoint that receives your DSD?

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, beerandmusic said:

I don't have it anymore...I got rid of it when i found the marantz sr6013 is equal in dsd dlna.  I will search the threads from 5 years ago or so and see if i can find it.  It was a BDP something and was llike $100 used....but my marantz sr6013 streams dsd just fine now so i use it instead....i also like using a marantz as a preamp for purpose of audyssee and just have used different amps to drive my fronts...i will find the model and let you know....

Ah, no worries. I thought you were still using it. I'll look at that Marantz. I like Marantz stuff and have had good success with it over the years. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

14 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

I really wouldn't expect someone that can afford wilsons to use marantz stuff, but it can be a great preamp for audyssee eq and alexa compatibility....i don't know if it would degrade a levinson amp or whatever you use for your amps (probably), but it sounds great driving a mcintosh amp for fronts (smile)...it also works great for multi-channel home video (smile)....

 

btw, the sony s790 if i recall correctly could also be used as a "quiet" usb thumb drive player to play native dsd files....sounded great....a bargain for $60 today.

Marantz makes great stuff! Another brand that makes stuff with incredible value is Parasound. 

 

I currently use Constellation Audio for amps and preamp (when needed). Given my income (I'm not wealthy by any means), If I had to pay full price for audio gear, Parasound would be my first stop. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

32 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

There will never be more audible music in high rate dsd compared to a clean 192K pcm signal, which is much easier to keep clean.

Can you explain this one?

[The Computer Audiophile]

8 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

which part....

a) no audible music above 192k

b) 192K easier to keep clean

 

B. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

8 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

i just edited answer above, and as you know I just echo others input... i am not a dac engineer, but from what I understand, the only purpose of upsampling is::

 

to quote PKANE::

The point of upsampling is to move the reconstruction/anti-aliasing filter well above audible frequencies, where it can be more gentle and not affect the audible spectrum. A high-quality filter at 22khz is hard to make in hardware without distorting phase and without cutting into frequencies below 20khz. A gentle filter at 88khz is much easier, and it can distort there all it wants without affecting the audible range. It's a simple engineering solution to a problem that could otherwise become audible... at least to some of us (not to me, not for a while )

to quote MONTY MONTGOMERY::

Monty Montgomery https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM&feature=youtu.be

If the ADC/DAC obeys the Nyquist rules (bandlimited) then your waveform will be perfectly reconstructed without additional interpolation. As mentioned its about making filtering easier, but that has become a bit of a moot point with current DACs.

----

these i would have to look up reliable sources, but i "believe" is universally accepted

Upsampling requires processing power and power which can introduce it's own noise if you have don't have quality power supplies.

All upsampling adds artifacts and changes the signal that has to be compensated for.

Is there any logical reasoning to upsample higher than 192K?

I will find reliable sources stating such if there is any problem you have with anything in this post?

I "believe" Miska would be best to answer what upsampling past 192K PCM actually improves on, and what are potential issues?  But without a logical explanation from him, that I am free to debate, I would have a hard time accepting.

 

I just don’t see how any of that explains your comment here:

 

1 hour ago, beerandmusic said:

There will never be more audible music in high rate dsd compared to a clean 192K pcm signal, which is much easier to keep clean.

 

Perhaps you should ask @Miska, who actually designs filters, about this stuff. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

5 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I edited post above and added MISKA would be the best to answer before you did (smile).  I agree, but even you answered it yourself...you have to design filters to clean up the mess....why create the mess in the first place, when it doesn't give you any more than 192K PCM...again, he could probably answer, and if he was honest, he would likely say that it is subjective (at best) whether it sounds better than 192K PCM without the additional upsampling and filtering.

Oh boy. I kindly suggest you hold up on offering any more "information" about filters etc... It isn't in your wheelhouse. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

TO quote mojo-audio::

 

DSD has significantly higher quantization noise than PCM, and the noise is much closer to audible frequencies, requiring significantly more sophisticated digital filters, as well as noise-shaping and upsampling algorithms. The algorithms native DSD DACs use often result in an overly smoothed over sound without the same immediacy, articulation, and harmonic coherency R-2R ladder DACs are known for.

 

Granted he does suggest using hqplayer to do quad dsd if you are going to do DSD at all, but he also suggest playing music in it's native format.

 

Again, why go from 44.1K PCM to quad rate DSD and all the expense and process power just to play something that was recorded at 44.1K....when that rate encompasses our hearing spectrum.

 

He also states::

The truth is that in recent blind studies they've proved that high-resolution PCM and DSD are statistically indistinguishable from one another.

i would never quote Mojo Audio on anything. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

15 minutes ago, audiophile911 said:

It's been interesting following my thread but except for a couple of posts most have not addressed the fundamental question from my original post.  Is it a bad idea to connect a mac mini directly to my DAC via usb?  I think it sounds good or am I missing something??

I don’t do it, I wouldn’t recommend it, but it isn’t a horrible idea. I say, don’t worry, be happy. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Love Monty's videos. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

8 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

Actually this is a better one for this thread imho....or at least in my desire of understanding in moving forward...

 

I really don't think his videos have anything to do with this thread, but they are good. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

7 minutes ago, jacques_racine said:

I can wholeheartedly confirm that HQPlayer is an absolute must.

I have tested DCS Bridge, AquaLinQ (currently in my system) and my system plays way better with HQPlayer than with Roon alone. Also tried Zenith MKIII and Statement - no HQP again.

Huge, difference. My ears bleed without HQP.

Weeks of experience with this. Aqua says they are adding NAA. If not, there will be a LinQ for sale. And even with LinQ-Formula connected via I2S or AES/EBU. 

Not sure how I missed the AquaLinQ!

 

https://www.aquahifi.com/linq.html

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, jacques_racine said:

You can see it on the top shelf in my system photo. 

Nice. I love the V2 speakers as well.