DAC Manufacturer Aversion To External DSP

[4est]

1 hour ago, R1200CL said:

Maybe save the server discussion and HQPlayer requirements to CAPS Twenty part 2, or continue on the HQPlayer  tread 😀

Perhaps you should read the original post. HQPlayer is precisely what this thread is about, and by extension the hardware requirements seem on topic. Regardless, it the OP's call.

[Summit]

19 hours ago, barrows said:

When I say HDMI, I mean HDMI.  It is compromised for audio, if you do not believe me, do a little research.  Charlie Hansen (RIP) has explained why fairly well and his thoughts on this are available somewhere on the Internet, a Google search will find it.

My opinions are formed from technical facts, these are not things I am just making up.  HDMI was developed in order to provide a simple, easy to use, interface for home theater use, it was not designed to deliver the best audio performance possible.

I would suggest that anytime one combines a Television with an audio, one is making a compromise on audio performance, unless one unplugs all TV from the wall and connections between it and the audio system before listening to music.   

 

HDMI doesn’t sucks for audio and is in fact the best connection for AV. All manufacturer use HDMI for AV because it’s much better than USB for TV and movies, and R1200CL asked for HDMI for AV.

 

“Will HMDI as transfer technology be a better option than USB ? Or shouldn’t manufacturers at least incorporate a HMDI interface from your TV or player.”

[R1200CL]

On 7/10/2020 at 4:03 PM, barrows said:

HDMI sucks for audio,

 

No doubt that was the case at some point, but maybe good engineering and better clocks etc has overcome some of the problems. Maybe there will be an HMDIregen 😀

HMDI should probably be an option in an idealistic build DAC, as not everybody needs it. 

 

C. Hanson from 2010
https://www.audioasylum.com/messages/pcaudio/82566/hdmi-has-the-highest-jitter-of-any-interface
 

Amir with interesting measurements:

https://www.audio “science” review/forum/index.php?threads/a-deep-dive-into-hdmi-audio-performance.56/

(Chris, are you blocking links to specific sites) ?
 

http://www.oppodigital.co.uk/Understanding-the-HDMI-Audio-Jitter-Reduction-Circuit-OPPO-UDP-205.html
 

Maybe HMDI discussion can continue here:

 

I wish some DAC manufacturers could enter this tread, as Chris is addressing them, but I guess it won’t happen.

 

But I’m learning at least what technology seems to be good, some input on which manufacturers that may have good product. 
 

It also seems quite clear that any DSP, as long as done right is good for SQ. (Including RC). 

 

I’m also wondering if there some dark forces out there that prevents good engineers/engineering/formats/etc to be fully developed. But that can be a topic for a new tread. 
 

[Summit]

4 hours ago, R1200CL said:

 

No doubt that was the case at some point, but maybe good engineering and better clocks etc has overcome some of the problems. Maybe there will be an HMDIregen 😀

HMDI should probably be an option in an idealistic build DAC, as not everybody needs it. 

 

C. Hanson from 2010
https://www.audioasylum.com/messages/pcaudio/82566/hdmi-has-the-highest-jitter-of-any-interface
 

Amir with interesting measurements:

https://www.audio “science” review/forum/index.php?threads/a-deep-dive-into-hdmi-audio-performance.56/

(Chris, are you blocking links to specific sites) ?
 

http://www.oppodigital.co.uk/Understanding-the-HDMI-Audio-Jitter-Reduction-Circuit-OPPO-UDP-205.html
 

Maybe HMDI discussion can continue here:

 

I wish some DAC manufacturers could enter this tread, as Chris is addressing them, but I guess it won’t happen.

 

But I’m learning at least what technology seems to be good, some input on which manufacturers that may have good product. 
 

It also seems quite clear that any DSP, as long as done right is good for SQ. (Including RC). 

 

I’m also wondering if there some dark forces out there that prevents good engineers/engineering/formats/etc to be fully developed. But that can be a topic for a new tread. 
 

 

When it comes to this kind of stuff it’s better to test it yourself. Please don’t forget that the audio quality of most AV gear is lower than the gear we audiophiles normally use in our 2 channel system. The difference between protocols is only one aspect and other AV aspects and devices may limiting the SQ more in the grand scheme of things.  

[Albrecht]

On 7/11/2020 at 3:20 AM, R1200CL said:

A standard or preferred DAC interface for external DSP is important. 
 

Both USB and HMDI requires the noisy processing computer close to the DAC. 
It’s my understanding we like to have that PC far away from our DAC. 
 

John S design with Sonore’s Redus is one of few products that solves this. 
 

It seems quite clear to me that only Ethernet with fiber can be the future way for DAC manufacturers that like to allow for external DSP. 

 

I would still like to understand why HMDI shouldn’t be implemented as an interface for DACs, as I like my DAC to be used in conjunction with TV or TV boxes. I would prefer HMDI in and out, so after my DAC has collected sound, the signal can go to TV. (Or even another multichannel DAC). 

Also it’s my understanding that HMDI will allow for SACD transports.

 

Can the SACD be up sampled in the external PC, and signal sent over Ethernet?

(Not ripping, but you insert it in the drive of your PC, assuming there is SACD drives on the marked). 

Both USB and HMDI requires the noisy processing computer close to the DAC. 
It’s my understanding we like to have that PC far away from our DAC. 

 

that is 100% not true, - in any way whatsover....

 

there are at least 5 to 10 products that one can purchase right now that make that statement almost silly...

 

HDMI connectors can be used for many things. HDMI is not a protocol but a piece of hardware. 

 

[Miska]

8 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

HDMI connectors can be used for many things. HDMI is not a protocol but a piece of hardware. 

 

HDMI is pretty strictly defined standard for transporting video and piggybacking audio on top of video (in vertical refresh isles in the data stream). It defines exactly how audio clocking is done, what audio formats are supported and how much audio data can be sent with certain video resolutions. And how to calculate audio clocks from the video pixel clock. I have HDMI specification documents and I have read through those.

 

Use of HDMI connectors and cabling for LVDS I2S has nothing to do with HDMI whatsoever.

 

[Albrecht]

On 7/11/2020 at 11:31 AM, 4est said:

Perhaps you should read the original post. HQPlayer is precisely what this thread is about, and by extension the hardware requirements seem on topic. Regardless, it the OP's call.

With respect, - I must be confused, - as I thought that the topic was "manufacturers aversion to external DSP" 

 

this would include, - in my mind, - how I took it as a hardware discussion, - about why manufacturers don't build in things like galvanic isolation "moats" into their USB inputs. I recognize that this include USB processing software like exists with HQPlayer. 

 

(It seems like I am cray, didn't read carefully, or made a grossly wrong assumption about this being primarily a hardware discussion). 

 

the ONLY reason to ever use HQPlayer in my mind is to get DSD, - and some people don't have that capability or the recordings to do so. If I want DSD level performance, - I am going to go get it from APL, - who is the expert on this stuff. I have had the DirectStream DAC in my system, - and well.... it's not a product that "belongs" with the rest of my system. 

 

I have no experience with HQ Player. So, - it would be wrong to comment on it in any way. Just like hardware, (which is prolly something like 80 to 90% of any final product), that should be addressed first IMO.

 

I don't know how many folks are or are not comparing $2K Schiit DACs to $2K Audio Aero Prima's with a Singxer SU-1 from 20 years ago: but i bet that many people would be very very surprised.....

[Albrecht]

4 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

HDMI is pretty strictly defined standard for transporting video and piggybacking audio on top of video (in vertical refresh isles in the data stream). It defines exactly how audio clocking is done, what audio formats are supported and how much audio data can be sent with certain video resolutions. And how to calculate audio clocks from the video pixel clock. I have HDMI specification documents and I have read through those.

 

Use of HDMI connectors and cabling for LVDS I2S has nothing to do with HDMI whatsoever.

 

As i wrote....

[Miska]

Just now, Albrecht said:

As i wrote....

 

But it is certainly a protocol over data transport link, with handshakes and everything. I would say more complex than for example USB.

 

[Miska]

6 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

Just like hardware, (which is prolly something like 80 to 90% of any SQ), that should be addressed first IMO.

 

With modern delta-sigma converters, DSP side plays major part of the performance. The whole idea is to simplify hardware side by moving as much as possible to digital domain processing where you are not restricted similar way as hardware/analog world is. By doing DSP in software using computer you already have, the hardware money can be spent on parts where it really matters instead of putting major part of it into building a resource constrained computer into a DAC.

 

[R1200CL]

47 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

that is 100% not true, - in any way whatsover....

 

there are at least 5 to 10 products that one can purchase right now that make that statement almost silly...

Can you give at least 3 examples. I like to see DSD 512. But u choose. 
 

Or do you mean we can have a 20 meter usb or HMDI cable ?

 

Or do you say it’s ok to have a PC doing DSD 512 via usb next to your audio system isn’t problematic. 
 

Fell free to include DSD 512 or 1024 over HMDI 😀

[Albrecht]

1 minute ago, Miska said:

 

With modern delta-sigma converters, DSP side plays major part of the performance. The whole idea is to simplify hardware side by moving as much as possible to digital domain processing where you are not restricted similar way as hardware/analog world is.

 

FWIW, - I think that you make a valid point that is well worth considering.

 

I do have to say that a DAC is not only digital to analog conversion, - or digital FPGA processing that is so close to analog that it "works" without a traditional analog output stage.

 

Most DACs that do not have "convert everything imputed to DSD have much more going on than digital conversion..... It is an analog stage and pre-amp/volume control, it is the power supply(s) it is the design, - case, - vibration control etc. 

 

On this earth, - there's no way to make a Schiit sound like a Meitner, - (even 25 year old Meitners), - unless you go waaaaaaay down into BoomBox-style associated equipment.

 

Because of the above, IME, - this does go down to DAC processing too, - (i guess in a little contradiction to what I said above). In that, - I've never heard any Sabre DAC implementation sound "right." And, - I do believe that it is possible to make a Sabre chip(s) sound right with processing and really good output stages, and power supplies, - all things being equal, - DACs with Sabre chips don't sound right compared to AKM and other implementations. 

 

A Mac Mini was designed for purposes other than high performance audio. One can't say that a MacMini sucks. That would be unfair. But what you can say that a MacMini sucks for high-performance audio. The shitty (for HP audio) USB bus is just one factor. The hard drive motors, the CD Rom drive, (if there is one), the hard drive bus, the video stage, all contribute to making the noise ridiculous. THat's why everyone is putting Sonore/SoTM/Aurilic, etc. (quieter mini-Linux-music-processing-computers) on their audio rack and moving their computers to Cleveland. 

 

All the above being said, - I have a certain amount of experience with certain aspects of all the stuff that I hear, and endeavor to keep an open mind. I wish that I could try stuff like i used to be able to do in the mid 2000s when there were things like a CES. So many people that i respect on here, respect you and use your products. So, - if my Universal player/DAC ever dies, - I am hoping that I may get a chance to try HQPlayer: especially if it works outside of Roon.

[R1200CL]

34 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

$2K Schiit DACs to $2K Audio Aero Prima's with a Singxer SU-1 from 20 years ago

Do you actually know what a Singxer SU-1 is ?

 

I don’t know what a APL is. How old is it ? Does it have filters, or do it only up sample ?

How do you use it ?

[Albrecht]

6 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

Can you give at least 3 examples. I like to see DSD 512. But u choose. 
 

Or do you mean we can have a 20 meter usb or HMDI cable ?

 

Or do you say it’s ok to have a PC doing DSD 512 via usb next to your audio system isn’t problematic. 
 

Fell free to include DSD 512 or 1024 over HMDI 😀

ICron USB to TCP/IP converters.

 

Micro/ultra/optical Rendu

 

SotM SMS 200 series...

 

Rednet Ravenna

 

Lumin...

 

NAS to Rendu or SoTM series.

 

Gustard, Audiophelio, Berkeley, SingXer, Denafrips, etc USB to i2s converters....

[R1200CL]

1 minute ago, Albrecht said:

ICron USB to TCP/IP converters.

 

Micro/ultra/optical Rendu

 

SotM SMS 200 series...

 

Rednet Ravenna

 

Lumin...

 

NAS to Rendu or SoTM series.

 

Gustard, Audiophelio, Berkeley, SingXer, Denafrips, etc USB to i2s converters....

That is not DSD up sampling devices. We must misunderstand each other. 

[Albrecht]

2 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

Do you actually know what a Singxer SU-1 is ?

 

I don’t know what a APL is. How old is it ? Does it have filters, or do it only up sample ?

How do you use it ?

"Do you actually know what a Singxer SU-1 is ?"

 

I've had one in my system for more than 3 years. Currently I use the Gustard U-16 with a Cardas USB cable from my ultra-Rendu... (Debating going to an Audio-GD i20 at 5 times the price, - but not sure). 

 

Sounds GRREAAAAT....  

[Albrecht]

2 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

That is not DSD up sampling devices. We must misunderstand each other. 

Correct, - the job of the DAC....

 

 

[4est]

2 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

Correct, - the job of the DAC....

 

 

What specifically do you mean by this?

[Albrecht]

1 hour ago, Miska said:

 

With modern delta-sigma converters, DSP side plays major part of the performance. The whole idea is to simplify hardware side by moving as much as possible to digital domain processing where you are not restricted similar way as hardware/analog world is. By doing DSP in software using computer you already have, the hardware money can be spent on parts where it really matters instead of putting major part of it into building a resource constrained computer into a DAC.

 

Sorry it took me so long to see this good point. 

 

And to that. I think that it's even more critical to have this occur in the DAC, - such as APL, PS Audio, and (somewhat Chord), are doing..... Instead of relying on external devices, (computer software outside the DAC), - Some of folks use a NAS computer and an endpoint. (I do understand that NAS's are computers, - but is HQPlayer available for a NAS? And, ---- what about those people who have SPDIF 24/192 max receivers/inputs on their (older) DACs. 

For those that are utilizing PSAudio DirectStream products, - the DAC takes any signal and converts it to DSD on the fly, - so you might as well use SPDIF 24/192 as that takes care of everything...  or so their owners believe. 

[Albrecht]

47 minutes ago, 4est said:

What specifically do you mean by this?

APL and PSAudio DACs.

[Miska]

2 hours ago, Albrecht said:

On this earth, - there's no way to make a Schiit sound like a Meitner, - (even 25 year old Meitners), - unless you go waaaaaaay down into BoomBox-style associated equipment.

 

Because of the above, IME, - this does go down to DAC processing too, - (i guess in a little contradiction to what I said above). In that, - I've never heard any Sabre DAC implementation sound "right." And, - I do believe that it is possible to make a Sabre chip(s) sound right with processing and really good output stages, and power supplies, - all things being equal, - DACs with Sabre chips don't sound right compared to AKM and other implementations. 

 

And AKM, or TI/BB chip works soo much better when you bypass it's DSP section and run it straight as plain converter with external processing.

 

But then again you can go for DAC implementation that doesn't have a DSP section. Meitner could be much better for the same price, or much cheaper, if the DSP section is omitted and only D/A section left.

 

1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

And to that. I think that it's even more critical to have this occur in the DAC, - such as APL, PS Audio, and (somewhat Chord), are doing..... Instead of relying on external devices, (computer software outside the DAC)

 

Those devices have so tiny bit of processing power compared to what you can do with modern CPU + GPU combination. And it is much better done external to the DAC, so not putting the electrically noisy processing near the sensitive analog parts. On hardware side dCS has been doing that for long time and now Chord too with MScaler. But they are still very resource constrained compared to what I can do with something like Core i9-10900K and GeForce RTX2080Ti.

 

So, it is critical to have this happen outside of the DAC and have DAC be just that, bit-perfect digital to analog converter without any processing. Just converting digital samples from input to analog as well as possible. Nothing else.

 

Now I can run the heavy processing in a different room and then the processed data is sent to the DAC over network.

 

Quote

the DAC takes any signal and converts it to DSD on the fly, - so you might as well use SPDIF 24/192 as that takes care of everything...  or so their owners believe.

 

I just do the same in a computer, in the player application. I can also deal with S/PDIF inputs, or even analog inputs from vinyl and such. And perform digital room correction and such too on the same processing pipeline.

 

[4est]

1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

APL and PSAudio DACs.

As in DACs that us FPGAs or hardware upsampling?

[Albrecht]

1 minute ago, 4est said:

As in DACs that us FPGAs or hardware upsampling?

Yes....

[4est]

1 minute ago, Albrecht said:

Yes....

Then Miska's reply above is very applicable. We use his software and feed the highest native rate. In most modern DAC chips there is already a conversion to DSD and so many pursue that over PCM.

[Albrecht]

16 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

And AKM, or TI/BB chip works soo much better when you bypass it's DSP section and run it straight as plain converter with external processing.

 

But then again you can go for DAC implementation that doesn't have a DSP section. Meitner could be much better for the same price, or much cheaper, if the DSP section is omitted and only D/A section left.

 

 

Those devices have so tiny bit of processing power compared to what you can do with modern CPU + GPU combination. And it is much better done external to the DAC, so not putting the electrically noisy processing near the sensitive analog parts. On hardware side dCS has been doing that for long time and now Chord too with MScaler. But they are still very resource constrained compared to what I can do with something like Core i9-10900K and GeForce RTX2080Ti.

 

So, it is critical to have this happen outside of the DAC and have DAC be just that, bit-perfect digital to analog converter without any processing. Just converting digital samples from input to analog as well as possible. Nothing else.

 

Now I can run the heavy processing in a different room and then the processed data is sent to the DAC over network.

 

 

I just do the same in a computer, in the player application. I can also deal with S/PDIF inputs, or even analog inputs from vinyl and such. And perform digital room correction and such too on the same processing pipeline.

 

Hi,

I see your point. But one definitely needs a DAC that will accept DSD signal as an input. 

 

I guess where I was confused was the difference between DSP and Digital Signal Conversion....???

 

I would love to hear a demonstration of what you're doing vs what is going on in a well implemented DAC that does the conversion there.... (every appropriate DAC is well north of $12K). 

 

Too bad that that is so difficult in these times. And for me to actually buy a new DAC, another PC or MAC server, - (if HQPlayer doesn't run on a NAS), - would be beyond whack right now....