Jump to content
IGNORED

Do I need clean USB power when using DAC with its own power supply?


Recommended Posts

On 7/18/2021 at 5:41 AM, audiobomber said:

I don't have a Jitterbug, but I have the somewhat similar iPurifier2, and it is beneficial with some DAC's. A common setup I've used is the iPurifier to clean the USB signal and the iPower with dual head USB cable to provide a cleaner 5V supply. This has made a significant improvement with several inexpensive DAC's. However the iPurifier2 degraded the sound when used downstream of an sMS-200.

 

The linear power supplies I own all beat the basic iFi iPower SMPS. I have never heard any effect from proximity to the laptop, and I cannot hear any difference in the sound of a DAC whether the laptop is running on battery power, or the SMPS. I also did not notice any difference when I used an iPower on a Raspberry instead of the freebie wall wart. 
 

Digital noise and jitter do not cause hiss or hum, nor do they show up in SNR or frequency response graphs. They show up as high frequency blur and constricted soundstage, and affect PRaT. I bought and returned a Topping D50S, which has damn near perfect measurements. It was the worst DAC I've ever used, worse than cheap dongle DAC's, because it sucked the life out of the music. 

 

I have never claimed that LPS is superior to SMPS. It depends on the implementation. My listening tests with the new iPower X show it to be equal to a similarly priced Zero-Zone LPS, and to the Welborne Labs PS-REG I use on my sMS-200. I've heard a couple of manufacturers say that SMPS is better than LPS for some digital gear. I found this myself when I tried an LPS on my TP-Link switch. It actually degraded the sound of my system. The iPower X was an improvement over the stock wall wart, and the LPS. 

 

People should listen for themselves and decide what works for them. I like to see measurements of audio gear, but unfortunately static measurements of digital gear do not correlate with sound quality.  

I can highly recommend reading and watching Rob Watt's from Chord Electronics talk about this in his DAC design. He goes into how a change in sound to you doesnt mean its better.  Infact he proves how people are actually wrong when they think a DAc sounds brighter, clearer etc when it actually doesnt.  He also touches on Galvanic Isolation in relation to cutting USB noise.

 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, fas42 said:

 

All right, I've got Google here ... what do I feed it, to find " Infact he proves how people are actually wrong when they think a DAc sounds brighter, clearer etc when it actually doesnt"?

Im not your personal secretary but Im sure if you were to look properly instead of a smarty pant reply you'll find it in no time 👍

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

That’s a rich statement in many ways 🙂

Hahahaha Very true 😆, although I suppose it depends what side your bread is buttered.  I suspect Google  is more of an associate to most and an un wanted friend to many others. 😆

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Summit said:

 

First of all he is an independent design consultant, and not employee of Chord. Have been for very long time :D.

 

Second of all he have never said that the sound can't be bright. The truth is he often says that if the DAC and source sound bright it's because of RFI (which btw is his SQ enemy number 1). Rob even state that if a digital sounds more detailed and brighter it's because of noise and we should seek a smooth and darker sound. 

I didnt say he was an employee, i simply stated the info for the purpose of someone searching it online, even then they expected me to do it for them.  Secondly thats the same thing I was trying to explain but thought its much better to point in the right direction for someone else.  Im sure your aware of the near 300 page if not more topic on another site where he regularly answers all question put too him. He explains to folk that what they perceive as bright or airy when changing power supply's is actually signal degradtion not better sound. Im merely repeating what he has said himself.

Link to comment
10 hours ago, Iving said:

 

I'd happily sit blind tests. For the hell of it. For fun. And to see what I could learn.

 

We'd need an impartial experimenter who wouldn't misinterpret the results. Especially if she or he held that any performance failure on my part, in laboratory conditions, could be taken as proof inerrant of no factual difference between conditions (cf. knowledge, familiarity, training, practice). Or proof inerrant that I might not succeed also in "field" conditions (domestic, my system, my music, my control over my mental and emotional state). Or proof inerrant that I couldn't hear the kinds of SQ deltas I thought I could, tweaking this and that, just because I failed to pass a test at p<0.05 when experimental control (= good) had reduced the non-criterion factors under test to one or two at most. We'd need to take into account the extent to which the equipment and its assembly and its power source were unfamiliar to me - that's one heck of a set of nuisance variables right there. We'd need listening and evaluation test conditions that as closely as possible (i.e. subject to isolation of independent variables) mapped to what I do when I think I can hear a difference.

 

That is - an experimenter who understood the logic behind probability and weight of evidence.

 

We'd need to concur about the design of the test so that we could concur equally about the interpretation of its results.

 

We'd need to make sure that undue influence (especially of the social kind) had been ruled out. Let alone, of course, any financial incentive either way.

 

My travel and subsistence costs excepted ... assuming a non-domestic design satisfying the curiosity and pre-requisites of all parties.

I would happily sit and do one also.  Infact Ive always wanted to try with a large selection and the ability to do instant blind A/B switching.  

Link to comment
14 hours ago, audiobomber said:

Objectivist websites and bloggers say that digital noise and jitter don't exist, or don't matter. Audiophile manufacturers say they do matter, and design accordingly. I have not found any correlation between what Objectivists say, and my personal experience. I have found that what certain designers (e.g. John Westlake, Ed Meitner, George Klissarov, etc.) say, is valid in my listening experience. 

Blind testing is an artificial construct, and short-term testing leads to error. Reality is listening in my room, to my system, with my music, for an extended period of time. If the equipment has a failing, I will notice eventually, and once I do, it will nag me until I fix it with a tweak oIr replace it.

 


The problem is, what Archi and Amir say I can't hear, I say I can hear. I have faith in my extended listening method ahead of any third party, manufacturer, blogger, reviewer or audiophile.

 

 

There are plenty of people on ASR who believe a $200 Topping is as good as a $2000 Mytek because of Amir's bullshit. I replaced the D50S with a Modi 3 that lists for half the price and got better sound. None of the measurements answer either of these two situations, so what good are they to me? The answer is... not much. Yet I do read them, just as I read the manufacturer's website and every review I can find, pro and amateur when researching gear.

 

 

My goal is to enjoy music. Anything that adds to my enjoyment is good. I've heard plenty of gear that would be reviled by objectivists, yet sounded awesome. Here's a recent example where I chose musicality over accuracy: 


A friend loaned me a pair of PMC DB1 Gold mini-monitors ($2500 in Canada). I tried them in three of my systems. They were not good enough to last more than a few minutes in my main or desktop systems due to a closed-in top end and obvious dynamic compression.

 

I thought they might replace the $500 Raw-1F speakers in my small system. Both are small standmounts, 8-ohms, the RAW-1F slightly more sensitive. The main difference, other than 5X price, is that the PCM is a two-way, whereas the Raw uses a single full-range driver. Everyone knows that a single driver entails technical compromise, fans believe there are advantages. At first I didn't notice much to sway me one way or the other; the PMC was more detailed, the Raw was livelier. My wife preferred the Raw immediately. After a week, I was desperate to change back. I was missing the life and dynamics of the Raw. The PMC made music less engaging, less interesting which to me is the cardinal sin in audio.  

With all due respect you tried an old and small model from their range and still it all boils down to personal preference. Maybe you could try a pair of PMC BB5 XBD Active or something in that range before you make a rash decision. 100's, literally hundreds of some of the biggest selling albums have been produced mastered etc on them.  I think youll struggle to find a brand that has so many accolades from hugely respected artists/  studios from around the world.  Try a pair of them then you might be getting close to how it should should . Once again it seems people like to judge only the  things they listened too

 

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

The DB1 Gold is a current PMC offering.

https://pmc-speakers.com/products/consumer/gold-series/db1-gold

 

Furthermore, I made no comment on any other PMC model, nor PMC in general, so I don't see what you are protesting. Have you compared a DB1 Gold to any other speakers? 

 

I am aware that PMC is well respected by audiophiles and the pro market. I believe the DB1 Gold would  be a fine choice in some systems, but IMO it is seriously overpriced.

My mistake however the DB1 has been going since 2002 so easily done. Some one else mentioned it and I thought you were joining in but obviously not.  The price is irrelevant in all honest and is one of the cheapest that they produce. 

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

The DB1 Gold is a current PMC offering.

https://pmc-speakers.com/products/consumer/gold-series/db1-gold

 

Furthermore, I made no comment on any other PMC model, nor PMC in general, so I don't see what you are protesting. Have you compared a DB1 Gold to any other speakers? 

 

I am aware that PMC is well respected by audiophiles and the pro market. I believe the DB1 Gold would be fine in some systems, but IMO it is seriously overpriced.

 

BTW, pros have different needs than audiophiles. They need to master for everyone, not just themselves. The Yamaha NS-10 was used in mastering for decades. That doesn't mean I should like them or use them at home.

The Yamaha is awful. Truely awful hence the cheap price and miss use over the years.   My point stands in regards proper decent models like the BB5/BB6.   Get yourself a set of them, a half decent room and your half way there 2 hearing what you are supposed to. What they wanted the track to sound like. Then you can get your other speakers that you Love and find out they actually sound nothing like the really should although you still like them.  I fully understand peoples different tastes opinions but its a good reference in a world of few.  And BTW i dont need any info on Pro v Audiophile thanks other than no wonder Pros turn off in our droves on sites like these.  That previous video of Harry Enfield sums it up in a nut shell. 👍

Link to comment
6 hours ago, fas42 said:

The pro market is certainly different ... some years ago I did an exercise of spending the day going to every pro shop in Sydney, and listening to every model that people would call near field units - irrespective of cost. They were almost universally awful, and tended to fall apart as soon as some volume was called for - umm, any engineering done on these, boys ... ? 😉

 

The best performer on the day were almost the cheapest, a Behringer model - it actually had a good measure of clarity and detail in the sound; something most of the others could only dream of 🙂 .. so I bought them ...

With all due respect your talking about budget speakers.(Again).  I can take a guess that what you think or consider pro is bottom of the range.  I very much doubt you were able to go round every (Pretend Pro Shop) in Sydney and listen to all models irrespective of cost.   The fact you mention the Behringer would also suggest youve never actually listened to good pro monitors only the usual commercially readily available speakers in the usual City music stores.  My point stands, your still listening to poor bottom of the budget speakers. Like ive repeatedly said. Try listening to some decent models.   For you to ague the point then quote " The best performer on the day were almost the cheapest, a Behringer model - it actually had a good measure of clarity and detail in the sound; something most of the others could only dream of 🙂 .. so I bought them ..."  Is laughable,  sorry if your offended but its true.   You have no idea is my guess for the 2nd time.

 

Link to comment
7 hours ago, fas42 said:

The pro market is certainly different ... some years ago I did an exercise of spending the day going to every pro shop in Sydney, and listening to every model that people would call near field units - irrespective of cost. They were almost universally awful, and tended to fall apart as soon as some volume was called for - umm, any engineering done on these, boys ... ? 😉

 

The best performer on the day were almost the cheapest, a Behringer model - it actually had a good measure of clarity and detail in the sound; something most of the others could only dream of 🙂 .. so I bought them ...

Have you ever listened to some Ex Machina? Genelic 1238's?  Nuemann KH420?  PMC BB6S XBD-A?   Strauus Elektroakustik?  Adam S5V? ATC SCM models?  All used regularly and highly respected.   Slightly better than the Behringers and Classic Bedroom KRK Rokits that I think and suspect your confusing for Pro one might say.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

That's an interesting reflection. Actually the target of the "Only me!" jibe is a "pro" - in business as a manufacturer if I'm not mistaken. I have Pro Audio gear (RedNet/DAC) and like to visit gearslutz and the like occasionally. Truly, you get just as many "Only me!"s on those Forums, and they are just as prone to diasagreement and flaming. Audiophile Style actually is a very civilised place as hobby Forums go. My impression is that the difference is mainly one of agenda. Whereas we hobbyists account to our own hedonistic ways, the piper calling the tune on Pro Forums - on, but especially between the lines - is employment/self-employment/making a living etc. Hence a mighty cultural divide.

Surely its occurred to you people do both.   Pro's can be Audiophiles also.   Isnt a Pro and Audiophile after all? Both strive for the best sound dont they.....................   Its been clear for years the snobbery between both Factions

Link to comment
1 minute ago, fas42 said:

 

I'm sure that there are models, especially now,  that would do better, much better, than what I heard on that day - interestingly, a pretty expensive Mackie - not sure the model now - blew one channel while we were auditioning - not very reassuring, 🙂. I was curious whether the actives of the day would show up conventional hifi stuff, as many suggest - but it appears that one has to venture into the pricey gear to obtain credible results.

Mackies are not considered decent just to inform you. Cheap Party/PA's at best  same with their bargain basement (i use the term loosely) montiors.   My point still stands, they are not good equipment.  Cheap Budget at best. So how on earth you can draw any kind of reference or opinion from that baffles me.  Like I said, from what youve said all youve ever tried is cheap commercially available bedroom stuff.   

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, acg said:

 

It is interesting.  I looked up a couple of those monitors you mentioned and they are quite large three ways which are in a pricier league than many here would bother to spend on their system.  Not knocking that of course, but I must say that the smaller 2-way Genelecs I listened to ran into problems at relatively low volumes that I expect is to do with topology and size...no way around that.  At least the larger 3-ways should be more capable in larger spaces and at higher volumes but judging by the specs of say the Genelec 1238's I reckon they would fall short in some, not all, audiophiles spaces.  Personally, I tend to listen at fortissmo volumes, say 105dB peaks, and I reckon those 1238's will struggle a little to cleanly project those volumes at the listening chair in a larger space.  It is horses-for-courses and the pro monitors will not work in all situations, which is why there is such diversity of systems in this venture.  My giant horn speakers, for instance, will not be worth a damn in the studio environment but they project 105dB at my listening chair from 18Hz-47kHz using a fraction of a watt...definitely a different horse and a different course. Surrounds are JBL708P which I have never bothered to listen to properly set up in the room for stereo because to me small speakers always seem disappointing...but they are the right tool for the task.     

The Genelecs would naturally be better paired with a subwoofer due to size restraint.  Theres no reason why your speakers would not sound good though. A good room is a good room .  Im sure your speakers would sound just fine as long as its not too small.    As would be the importance of a room with a decent degree of treatment.   Id take a guess a few others have googled the few examples of models I have provided as they have probably never ever heard of them, let alone know how many great albums from great artists theyve listened to over the years them that have been made on them.  

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, One and a half said:

Most of nearfield pro speakers are active types with DSP and some have built in DACs.  I fail to understand how good all that inaccessible electronics is pounded by sledgehammer sound waves at ear splitting levels. No wonder modern pro mastering, mixing remains at rock bottom quality designed for the lowest cost.

There's division for you 🙂

Majority of the brands I quoted also have the Passive Model available, so that would expel that logic surely.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, One and a half said:

Most of nearfield pro speakers are active types with DSP and some have built in DACs.  I fail to understand how good all that inaccessible electronics is pounded by sledgehammer sound waves at ear splitting levels. No wonder modern pro mastering, mixing remains at rock bottom quality designed for the lowest cost.

There's division for you 🙂

As with all things in life you get what you pay for. Same with studios unfortunately. Some are awful but they will try tell you otherwise also.

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, One and a half said:

Most of nearfield pro speakers are active types with DSP and some have built in DACs.  I fail to understand how good all that inaccessible electronics is pounded by sledgehammer sound waves at ear splitting levels. No wonder modern pro mastering, mixing remains at rock bottom quality designed for the lowest cost.

There's division for you 🙂

I wouldnt say that's division, more that you have limited knowledge of Pro speakers. 🙂

Link to comment
50 minutes ago, One and a half said:

Now the distinction is clear. Never mind, there's a whole thread on why audiophiles prefer passive speakers here.

Like other posts, this is way off topic.

Im merely replying to some of the ridiculous claims people have been chucking at me. Im happy to answer any however you seem to exhausted yours of any substance and have now gone to default mode and stating its off topic.

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, One and a half said:

The topic is USB quiet supply not Pro speakers,  to be blunt.

With respect I didnt take it off topic,  someone else started with the PMC comments as did someone else about room's and hearing what was meant to be heard. Sorry for trying to correct them.  Ignoring their replies would just be plain rude. 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...