I can share my journey so far. Originally had Roon WIFI to stream to DAC. Bought higher end DAC. Rossini APEX with separate master clock. Had RJ45 then wired directly from DAC to main router at the panel so it was not SHARING resources anymore with desktop computer running tasks. Big improvement. Next I put in NRG Edison wall outlets from Audioquest. These things are beasts that hold in connections from the upgraded power chords. The cheap outlets for a few bucks typically crack from the weight of the plug going in. I had separate power breakers installed with 10 gage copper ROMEX to each 2 plug outlet. 1 is for mono amp right speaker, one is for mono amp left speaker, another for pre-amp, another for Niagara 3,000 handling the non-high current products (DAC, master clock, CD transport). The difference is music and clarity was phenomenal. I have about 2,000 into the RJ45 direct wire, the power breakers with ROMEX, and the outlet plugs. That is with labor and materials. So for instance if your budget is 10k don't spend it all on gear and do nothing for the source feeding the power and the signal. Get the foundation right first. Now it might not make sense if you are fixing to sell your house or live in a rental apartment. Yesterday I received my Audioquest silver power chords and it made a huge difference. Used to have Rocket 88 Audioquest speaker cables. Using older demo cables audio company has the RED series which are almost equivalent to Thunderbird which is one step below Dragon the topline for Audioquest. The sound stage from the upgrade in cables you have to just hear in your own room it is amazing. At least it was for me. They do make Dragon cables for the speakers but all silver instead of mix of copper and silver. I have heard from others that all silver on the speaker cables makes them too technical and bright versus the silver and copper combo lends more to the organic side of sound. So I am using silver for power chords and XLR signal and copper & silver combo for speaker cables. Keep having fun out there.
I also forgot to mention that some say upgraded cables are snake oil. I can only say from my experience that IS NOT the case. I can clearly hear a difference with the cables. It's not just whether it's copper or silver or a mix but the strand count and also the space and construction of the cable between wires that gives it a specific musicality. The differences heard can vary in systems due to quality of the components, room set up, and having good clean power to work with.
I put in a dedicated line from wall to my main panel with thick Romex, put in hospital grade outlets yadayadayada and dedicated grounds. The guy buying my house is gonna be "what's a 'stereo breaker' for?" Not sure exactly what you did but it sounds prohibitively expensive and somewhat exotic. I really can't imagine going to all that trouble. So while I hear you and am glad you hear a huge difference, it sounds a little over the top. And frankly with what you've invested you might consider that you have a vested interest in hearing those improvements. I hope your reported results are somewhat fanciful because I don't want to go any further down that (not fun) road. I have not heard a difference in my system, BTW.
Interesting you mention wall outlets, if one does not use the orange hospital grade 20A wall socket, PS audio does or at least did sell their own version, for which is currently the only PS Audio product that I use. Definitely always have a dedicated circuit(s) to the listening room if one can. It makes a huge difference.
@@kennixox262 Thanks Ken. I used the audioquest 15 amp power outlets and then 20 amp power breakers. I can definitely tell a difference. Those that believe it doesn't make a difference can keep believing so. I know different. I can't speak to their system only to mine.
instead of having a standardized system, they make their own, because then they don't have to pay anything to others to use their patent. I think it's mean and impractical. It will make a DAC. quickly become old and unusable. but several also have optical or coax spdif
Not to be picky, but … while RJ45 is now the ubiquitous connector for Ethernet, I’m old enough to remember Thinnet and Thicknet, which used coaxial cable and connectors for Ethernet implementation. There’s a difference between physical and data layers of transmission, which is pretty much what we’re talking about 😊
Seems that the audiophile community and audiophile manufacturers would most likely prefer to come up with their own standards for things instead of using, or even considering the specs from others. It's probably an ego thing fluffed up with a considerable amount of self-confidence in knowing what's "right". Even if a manufacturer "borrows" a set of tech specifications from another manufacturer, it would be "tweaked" and given another name to make it seem like they came up with the idea to begin with. That's happens a lot with tech in general but no one will admit to doing this.
The ego theory of manufacturers makes sense. They "tweak" it, so they can claim they created or improved it. They keep it proprietary so we can't mix brands of transport and DAC.
Accuphase RJ45 has a separate clock. If you have their integrated CD player and it has an RJ45 in and out so that you can add their room tunning, just connect them. It's a big upgrade for just a cheapcable. It gets very close to their two box players. Which is why they don't mention it!
instead of having a standardized system, they make their own, because then they don't have to pay anything to others to use their patent. think it's mean and impractical. it will make a DAC. quickly become old and unusable. but several also have optical or coax spdif
@@ford1546 I don’t have a Master’s degree in electrical engineering of any kind.😀 I am challenged enough with Dongle’s, cables as it is now and I live a simple life. Hi End Audio equipment is not on my radar in life..😀 I am keeping it that way. My iPhone and two laptops have built in DAC’s. Works fine for me..😎 I just listen to other people’s stuff.🤗 ua-cam.com/video/h68sbweBdzQ/v-deo.html
To my surprise, I just found out that an RJ 45 connected to a Cat 5 or 6 cable is not compatible to the same RJ-45 connector using the latest Cat 6 and Cat 7.
If you are mixing and matching brands, it is important to learn enough about how transports and DACs work that you know where things are processed and what is transmitted over each interface. SPDIF is a compromised interface which will produce a compromised sound. I2S has been around forever as an interface internal to a CD player. The TDA1541a chip that Philips introduced in their earliest CD players works perfectly with an I2S input. I2S contains the clock signal. That is key. But a connection that is longer than 3-4" will degrade. So, to move between boxes, designers take the signal and run it over HDMI. USB is something else. After the USB must be a USB-I2S conversion adding a clock signal. From there it will be I2S to the DAC.
It seems obvious that you'd want I2S connections from transport to DAC, as this is the native signal untouched by multiplexing. It's so ridiculous that there isn't yet a set standard for I2S/HDMI, and even more ridiculous that the industry hasn't yet accepted the free PS Audio set-up as standard. Maybe because PS Audio is small(ish) and doesn't have the clout, but who does? Sony? Philips? I say Sony and Philips because they were at the forefront of the CD, and because they have given standards to the audio industry in the past. They are no longer on the cutting edge of audio, but they still likely garner some respect in the industry. So too should PS Audio garner respect in the industry though, with their high quality audio products and especially with Paul McGowan and his great teaching videos.
It would seem obvious that using a PS Audio transport with a PS Audio DAC would solve the compatiblity issue but what if you prefer or have a R2R ladder DAC? What do you do then? By the way Paul, if you read the comments, when can we expect to see the new Direct Stream DAC. I'm interested in upgrading my basic R2R DAC but not sure whether to wait for your new Direct Stream or go for a better R2R DAC. A bit more detail on your new DAC would be useful.
I have a Denafrips Terminator Plus R2R DAC and a PS Audio transport using the I2S connection. Denafrips mentions PS Audio in their manual when talking about connections.
That's the issue. For example, if you have a dCS DAC, you won't be able to get DSD out from an SACD to the DAC using the new PS Audio Transport. Instead you either need to use something like the GeerFab D.BOB or buy the dCS transport that sends the data over dual AES/EBU.
Sony UBPX8000 player - HDMI - Sony receiver - Klipsch Cornwall speakers. Direct Stream to the Sony internal DAC on the receiver. No compatibility issues at least and it sound pretty damned good to me, which is all I'm worried about. 😁
Analogue; I think Krell have some weird pre/power connection? Digital; I don't think there are many transport/dac's devices that are incompatible as they 99% all have spdif. (odd budget DAC with USB only)
There is no such thing as digital on/off, 1 or 0, because it takes TIME for a 0 to change to a 1, so the so called square wave will not be truly square, but partly curved/analog.
"Technically," yes, but it can come close! In my studies: If you took an infinite frequency range, you'll have a, "perfect square wave." "OFF," is not zero volts - it's a voltage below 0.8 volts, or about .3 v, or something. I studied this, many years ago. A "1," is above this value. The front of a square wave is composed of many high frequencies; the back end, many lower frequencies. If you have a wide frequency range, the resulting square wave will be, "pretty square." If you have a low power output amp, probably cheap, & way overdrive its channels, the output stage will, "clip," & the output will start to resemble a square wave, the top of the excursions will flatten out. The sound from a speaker will begin to be strident, very distorted, with too much distorted, high frequency sound. This is likely to damage, destroy the tweeter, perhaps the mid range, speakers, because the tweeter is designed to handle much less wattage than the woofer. If you're paying attention, you should hear this; if you aren't, or are drunk / stoned, or are trying to turn your volume way up in your house, so that you can hear it outside while you're working in your garage ~
Toslink and Coax digital are simple.. It just works for PCM's. I2S over HDMI is the super messy one when it comes to DSD playback. So if there are no standards, what are the caveats of getting transport to work with 3rd party DSD DAC for playback ? Hate to spend thousands of $$$ and find it has compatibility issues.. Been asking this question for 2 years ! :( Unfortunately, all this video says is there are compatibility issues... No advise on how to navigate around it to be successful. This is first video from PS Audio that I find to be not too useful, unfortunately, Still batting 999 though...
Manufacturers agreeing on a single, standard connection protocol? (KHNHNHHHH!) One that would allow using different brands of equipment in combination? (KHNHNHHHH!) Such fantasies people have! It's a wonder (but a travesty) that they all use RCA jacks for analog signals...
Manufacturers seem to make little to no effort in explaining the pros and cons for the various inputs on their DACs. Even high-end models offer next to no information. Do you use USB, TOS, COAX, AES/EBU, etc? For which inputs will the design of the cable matter, and to what degree? For each input, what is the maximum cable length, before loss or sound degradation becomes an issue? The manufacturers spend $$ researching, designing, and implementing several input options, and then tell the customer (by their silence), go figure it out. The input matters, very much so, because not all inputs sound the same. The level of engineering that a specific input has, for a given DAC, can vary wildly, affecting sound quality. The input used can limit the sampling rate. It would be frustrating to choose a connection, and buy the associated cable and transport, only to find out that you cannot play 176.4 kHz files. A chart for each model DAC, listing each input, and its pros and cons, should be made available, and should not be something that you have to hunt down to find, assuming it exists. For high-end models, the sound quality for each input should be shown from best to worst. When a customer spends big $$ on a high-end DAC, it stands to reason that they want the best sound quality out of that DAC. So which input would that be? The customer should not have to guess or do research. It is a shame to spend $5,000 or $15,000 on a DAC, only to end up using an input that detracts from the DACs full potential.
Great idea to provide a chart of pros and cons for each input and rank them. You shouldn't have to call or email the company to get basic product information. Don't get me started on the absence of specifications and technical data on company websites. As you note, the R&D is high, but the documentation is low -- probably fear of competitors stealing their tech.
@@BruceCross The manufacturer does not need to publish their trade secrets. But if an interface maxes out at 96 kHz, then that should be made clear. We should not wait until we try to play a higher resolution file to find out that we can't, and not even know why we can't. All we would know is that the file will not play. If they know, for example, that their AES/EBU input provides the best sound quality, then they should make that clear. Perhaps not for a $100 DAC, because such a DAC has too many other limitations for it to make any difference. But for big $$ DACs, they should. This is an issue for me, because the audio store's owner did not know the answer. He said that he uses the USB port, and it sounds great. I then called the manufacturer, and spoke to the engineer that built the DAC (it was a rather small company with less than 10 employees). He told me that his customers generally use the USB port, and are very happy. So that is what I did, and I was happy. It did sound very good. Turn the clock forward a year or so, and I heard my same DAC via one of the other inputs, and it sounded better. But I already invested a good deal of $$ in a transport and USB cable, all of which I would not have done had I have know. It seems as though they gave me answers that they knew were the easiest for most customers to set-up (USB is simple). But why the heck do they design and add on the other inputs, and then tell your customers to use the USB input? And especially when the customer explained that they want to know which input will sound best. Not good.
Some companies like EMM Labs and Playback Designs use an ST fibre link between transport and DACs as a way to meet the Sony DSD copy protection requirements. In the past we also had FireWire interfaces for SACD/DSD formats to be sent from transport to DAC. And both Chord/DCS use a dual BNC protocol for DSD/DXD between transport and DAC
So...not only is the onboard DAC in your CD player not good enough, but now it has to be from the same manufacturer...yeah, my SACD player and my outboard dac connected though the optical connection is good enough for me. These manufacturers...smh...
I’ve had issues in the past where a computer machine has USB sockets on the motherboard, but they were basic 9600 serial (E.g. 9pin) interfaces but with an USB socket interface. The bus and hardware connected to that socket did not recognise USB devices outside of basic input (keyboard/mouse) serial devices. I’ve seen similar deviations with RJ45 being used as serial interface and power, not for network. The plugs and sockets do not necessarily indicate that the hardware supports that type of connection.
Compared to Toshiba Toslink (plastic), AT&T ST-Type optical (glass) is more expensive for the transceiver and fragile for the cable. The ST-Type has greater bandwidth, but both are limited by the S/PDIF standard to 192kHz/24bit. EMM Labs still offers it (EMM Optilink), but they are expensive. The interface has almost disappeared from the marketplace.
@@BruceCross To clarify, disappeared from the audio marketplace. It was and remains a standard interface in the telecommunications industry (thus the AT&T ST nomenclature.)
I can share my journey so far. Originally had Roon WIFI to stream to DAC. Bought higher end DAC. Rossini APEX with separate master clock. Had RJ45 then wired directly from DAC to main router at the panel so it was not SHARING resources anymore with desktop computer running tasks. Big improvement. Next I put in NRG Edison wall outlets from Audioquest. These things are beasts that hold in connections from the upgraded power chords. The cheap outlets for a few bucks typically crack from the weight of the plug going in. I had separate power breakers installed with 10 gage copper ROMEX to each 2 plug outlet. 1 is for mono amp right speaker, one is for mono amp left speaker, another for pre-amp, another for Niagara 3,000 handling the non-high current products (DAC, master clock, CD transport). The difference is music and clarity was phenomenal. I have about 2,000 into the RJ45 direct wire, the power breakers with ROMEX, and the outlet plugs. That is with labor and materials. So for instance if your budget is 10k don't spend it all on gear and do nothing for the source feeding the power and the signal. Get the foundation right first. Now it might not make sense if you are fixing to sell your house or live in a rental apartment. Yesterday I received my Audioquest silver power chords and it made a huge difference. Used to have Rocket 88 Audioquest speaker cables. Using older demo cables audio company has the RED series which are almost equivalent to Thunderbird which is one step below Dragon the topline for Audioquest. The sound stage from the upgrade in cables you have to just hear in your own room it is amazing. At least it was for me. They do make Dragon cables for the speakers but all silver instead of mix of copper and silver. I have heard from others that all silver on the speaker cables makes them too technical and bright versus the silver and copper combo lends more to the organic side of sound. So I am using silver for power chords and XLR signal and copper & silver combo for speaker cables. Keep having fun out there.
I also forgot to mention that some say upgraded cables are snake oil. I can only say from my experience that IS NOT the case. I can clearly hear a difference with the cables. It's not just whether it's copper or silver or a mix but the strand count and also the space and construction of the cable between wires that gives it a specific musicality. The differences heard can vary in systems due to quality of the components, room set up, and having good clean power to work with.
Jeez write a book already.
I put in a dedicated line from wall to my main panel with thick Romex, put in hospital grade outlets yadayadayada and dedicated grounds. The guy buying my house is gonna be "what's a 'stereo breaker' for?" Not sure exactly what you did but it sounds prohibitively expensive and somewhat exotic. I really can't imagine going to all that trouble. So while I hear you and am glad you hear a huge difference, it sounds a little over the top. And frankly with what you've invested you might consider that you have a vested interest in hearing those improvements. I hope your reported results are somewhat fanciful because I don't want to go any further down that (not fun) road. I have not heard a difference in my system, BTW.
Interesting you mention wall outlets, if one does not use the orange hospital grade 20A wall socket, PS audio does or at least did sell their own version, for which is currently the only PS Audio product that I use. Definitely always have a dedicated circuit(s) to the listening room if one can. It makes a huge difference.
@@kennixox262 Thanks Ken. I used the audioquest 15 amp power outlets and then 20 amp power breakers. I can definitely tell a difference. Those that believe it doesn't make a difference can keep believing so. I know different. I can't speak to their system only to mine.
instead of having a standardized system, they make their own, because then they don't have to pay anything to others to use their patent. I think it's mean and impractical.
It will make a DAC. quickly become old and unusable.
but several also have optical or coax spdif
Not to be picky, but … while RJ45 is now the ubiquitous connector for Ethernet, I’m old enough to remember Thinnet and Thicknet, which used coaxial cable and connectors for Ethernet implementation. There’s a difference between physical and data layers of transmission, which is pretty much what we’re talking about 😊
My CD transport and DAC happily working away with AES/EBU in and XLR out.
Seems that the audiophile community and audiophile manufacturers would most likely prefer to come up with their own standards for things instead of using, or even considering the specs from others. It's probably an ego thing fluffed up with a considerable amount of self-confidence in knowing what's "right". Even if a manufacturer "borrows" a set of tech specifications from another manufacturer, it would be "tweaked" and given another name to make it seem like they came up with the idea to begin with. That's happens a lot with tech in general but no one will admit to doing this.
The ego theory of manufacturers makes sense. They "tweak" it, so they can claim they created or improved it. They keep it proprietary so we can't mix brands of transport and DAC.
Accuphase RJ45 has a separate clock. If you have their integrated CD player and it has an RJ45 in and out so that you can add their room tunning, just connect them. It's a big upgrade for just a cheapcable. It gets very close to their two box players. Which is why they don't mention it!
Some manufacturers like to prioritize to keep people in their eco-system. Apple is a best example of that manufacturing prioritizing craze.
instead of having a standardized system, they make their own, because then they don't have to pay anything to others to use their patent. think it's mean and impractical.
it will make a DAC. quickly become old and unusable.
but several also have optical or coax spdif
@@ford1546
I don’t have a Master’s degree in electrical engineering of any kind.😀
I am challenged enough with Dongle’s, cables as it is now and I live a simple life.
Hi End Audio equipment is not on my radar in life..😀 I am keeping it that way.
My iPhone and two laptops have built in DAC’s. Works fine for me..😎
I just listen to other people’s stuff.🤗
ua-cam.com/video/h68sbweBdzQ/v-deo.html
To my surprise, I just found out that an RJ 45 connected to a Cat 5 or 6 cable is not compatible to the same RJ-45 connector using the latest Cat 6 and Cat 7.
😢so true👍Another one of the 4000 reasons why digital stuff annoys me🤬😁
Nothing wrong with a one box player ... takes a bow
If you are mixing and matching brands, it is important to learn enough about how transports and DACs work that you know where things are processed and what is transmitted over each interface.
SPDIF is a compromised interface which will produce a compromised sound.
I2S has been around forever as an interface internal to a CD player.
The TDA1541a chip that Philips introduced in their earliest CD players works perfectly with an I2S input. I2S contains the clock signal. That is key. But a connection that is longer than 3-4" will degrade. So, to move between boxes, designers take the signal and run it over HDMI.
USB is something else. After the USB must be a USB-I2S conversion adding a clock signal. From there it will be I2S to the DAC.
It seems obvious that you'd want I2S connections from transport to DAC, as this is the native signal untouched by multiplexing. It's so ridiculous that there isn't yet a set standard for I2S/HDMI, and even more ridiculous that the industry hasn't yet accepted the free PS Audio set-up as standard. Maybe because PS Audio is small(ish) and doesn't have the clout, but who does? Sony? Philips?
I say Sony and Philips because they were at the forefront of the CD, and because they have given standards to the audio industry in the past. They are no longer on the cutting edge of audio, but they still likely garner some respect in the industry. So too should PS Audio garner respect in the industry though, with their high quality audio products and especially with Paul McGowan and his great teaching videos.
An absolute shame that they couldn't be a standard here, it would make life so much easier.
It would seem obvious that using a PS Audio transport with a PS Audio DAC would solve the compatiblity issue but what if you prefer or have a R2R ladder DAC? What do you do then?
By the way Paul, if you read the comments, when can we expect to see the new Direct Stream DAC. I'm interested in upgrading my basic R2R DAC but not sure whether to wait for your new Direct Stream or go for a better R2R DAC. A bit more detail on your new DAC would be useful.
I have a Denafrips Terminator Plus R2R DAC and a PS Audio transport using the I2S connection. Denafrips mentions PS Audio in their manual when talking about connections.
That's the issue.
For example, if you have a dCS DAC, you won't be able to get DSD out from an SACD to the DAC using the new PS Audio Transport.
Instead you either need to use something like the GeerFab D.BOB or buy the dCS transport that sends the data over dual AES/EBU.
Sony UBPX8000 player - HDMI - Sony receiver - Klipsch Cornwall speakers. Direct Stream to the Sony internal DAC on the receiver. No compatibility issues at least and it sound pretty damned good to me, which is all I'm worried about. 😁
Analogue; I think Krell have some weird pre/power connection? Digital; I don't think there are many transport/dac's devices that are incompatible as they 99% all have spdif. (odd budget DAC with USB only)
My braun shaver has a bespoke connector, but that's so it gets its correct power supply, same thing as the krell I guess lol
@@geddylee501 Its called 'CAST' and done via a mini XLR - only on the top of the line stuff which you need all your 'brawn' to lift.
@@robh9079 easily noone is gonna top that joke in this lifeless channel lol nice one
What's in all the Amazon boxes?
all empty
@@geddylee501 So what are they for? Does PS sell through Amazon?
@@andrewjackson9417 lol no idea
It's the wild wild west 🤠
Thanks! lol
There is no such thing as digital on/off, 1 or 0, because it takes TIME for a 0 to change to a 1, so the so called square wave will not be truly square, but partly curved/analog.
"Technically," yes, but it can come close! In my studies: If you took an infinite frequency range, you'll have a, "perfect square wave." "OFF," is not zero volts - it's a voltage below 0.8 volts, or about .3 v, or something. I studied this, many years ago. A "1," is above this value. The front of a square wave is composed of many high frequencies; the back end, many lower frequencies. If you have a wide frequency range, the resulting square wave will be, "pretty square." If you have a low power output amp, probably cheap, & way overdrive its channels, the output stage will, "clip," & the output will start to resemble a square wave, the top of the excursions will flatten out. The sound from a speaker will begin to be strident, very distorted, with too much distorted, high frequency sound. This is likely to damage, destroy the tweeter, perhaps the mid range, speakers, because the tweeter is designed to handle much less wattage than the woofer. If you're paying attention, you should hear this; if you aren't, or are drunk / stoned, or are trying to turn your volume way up in your house, so that you can hear it outside while you're working in your garage ~
Compatibility between DACs and Transports ???
That's why Digital Audio is Digital Audio !!!
I swear I square S !!! 🤣🤣🤣
Toslink and Coax digital are simple.. It just works for PCM's. I2S over HDMI is the super messy one when it comes to DSD playback. So if there are no standards, what are the caveats of getting transport to work with 3rd party DSD DAC for playback ? Hate to spend thousands of $$$ and find it has compatibility issues.. Been asking this question for 2 years ! :( Unfortunately, all this video says is there are compatibility issues... No advise on how to navigate around it to be successful. This is first video from PS Audio that I find to be not too useful, unfortunately, Still batting 999 though...
ua-cam.com/video/FEqHuHDbY4Y/v-deo.html
Manufacturers agreeing on a single, standard connection protocol? (KHNHNHHHH!)
One that would allow using different brands of equipment in combination? (KHNHNHHHH!)
Such fantasies people have!
It's a wonder (but a travesty) that they all use RCA jacks for analog signals...
Manufacturers seem to make little to no effort in explaining the pros and cons for the various inputs on their DACs.
Even high-end models offer next to no information.
Do you use USB, TOS, COAX, AES/EBU, etc?
For which inputs will the design of the cable matter, and to what degree?
For each input, what is the maximum cable length, before loss or sound degradation becomes an issue?
The manufacturers spend $$ researching, designing, and implementing several input options, and then tell the customer (by their silence), go figure it out.
The input matters, very much so, because not all inputs sound the same.
The level of engineering that a specific input has, for a given DAC, can vary wildly, affecting sound quality.
The input used can limit the sampling rate. It would be frustrating to choose a connection, and buy the associated cable and transport, only to find out that you cannot play 176.4 kHz files.
A chart for each model DAC, listing each input, and its pros and cons, should be made available, and should not be something that you have to hunt down to find, assuming it exists.
For high-end models, the sound quality for each input should be shown from best to worst.
When a customer spends big $$ on a high-end DAC, it stands to reason that they want the best sound quality out of that DAC. So which input would that be? The customer should not have to guess or do research.
It is a shame to spend $5,000 or $15,000 on a DAC, only to end up using an input that detracts from the DACs full potential.
Great idea to provide a chart of pros and cons for each input and rank them. You shouldn't have to call or email the company to get basic product information. Don't get me started on the absence of specifications and technical data on company websites. As you note, the R&D is high, but the documentation is low -- probably fear of competitors stealing their tech.
@@BruceCross The manufacturer does not need to publish their trade secrets.
But if an interface maxes out at 96 kHz, then that should be made clear. We should not wait until we try to play a higher resolution file to find out that we can't, and not even know why we can't. All we would know is that the file will not play.
If they know, for example, that their AES/EBU input provides the best sound quality, then they should make that clear. Perhaps not for a $100 DAC, because such a DAC has too many other limitations for it to make any difference. But for big $$ DACs, they should.
This is an issue for me, because the audio store's owner did not know the answer. He said that he uses the USB port, and it sounds great. I then called the manufacturer, and spoke to the engineer that built the DAC (it was a rather small company with less than 10 employees). He told me that his customers generally use the USB port, and are very happy. So that is what I did, and I was happy. It did sound very good.
Turn the clock forward a year or so, and I heard my same DAC via one of the other inputs, and it sounded better. But I already invested a good deal of $$ in a transport and USB cable, all of which I would not have done had I have know. It seems as though they gave me answers that they knew were the easiest for most customers to set-up (USB is simple).
But why the heck do they design and add on the other inputs, and then tell your customers to use the USB input? And especially when the customer explained that they want to know which input will sound best. Not good.
add BNC connectors to an external clock.. yeah we have a nice mess of connectors
Some companies like EMM Labs and Playback Designs use an ST fibre link between transport and DACs as a way to meet the Sony DSD copy protection requirements.
In the past we also had FireWire interfaces for SACD/DSD formats to be sent from transport to DAC.
And both Chord/DCS use a dual BNC protocol for DSD/DXD between transport and DAC
That's a LOT of Amazon orders! 😁
So...not only is the onboard DAC in your CD player not good enough, but now it has to be from the same manufacturer...yeah, my SACD player and my outboard dac connected though the optical connection is good enough for me. These manufacturers...smh...
USB-C for DACs, thanks
I’ve had issues in the past where a computer machine has USB sockets on the motherboard, but they were basic 9600 serial (E.g. 9pin) interfaces but with an USB socket interface. The bus and hardware connected to that socket did not recognise USB devices outside of basic input (keyboard/mouse) serial devices. I’ve seen similar deviations with RJ45 being used as serial interface and power, not for network. The plugs and sockets do not necessarily indicate that the hardware supports that type of connection.
Isn't AT&T Glass the best way to communicate the digital signal, because it isolates the ground between the transport and DAC?
It is, but very few transports and DACs offer it.
Wadia used to, but they're essentially dead now.
Compared to Toshiba Toslink (plastic), AT&T ST-Type optical (glass) is more expensive for the transceiver and fragile for the cable. The ST-Type has greater bandwidth, but both are limited by the S/PDIF standard to 192kHz/24bit. EMM Labs still offers it (EMM Optilink), but they are expensive. The interface has almost disappeared from the marketplace.
@@BruceCross To clarify, disappeared from the audio marketplace.
It was and remains a standard interface in the telecommunications industry (thus the AT&T ST nomenclature.)
This complicates matters even further.
Yup, bit like yesterday's video
Although most DACs and Transports all have spdif so are compatible...