Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
sfraser wrote: > I never understood why they just can't put a decent clock and jitter > buffer in the DAC . If they did , the jitter and clocking issues should > disappear. A decent size jitter buffer will remove any jitter which may > occur during the unidirectional transmission of the data stream from the > transport device/LMS server etc. Reclocking the jitter buffer playout > to the DC chip locally would also help solve the problem. Most modern DACs do, and use an ASRC as well. "To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953 Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
I never understood why they just can't put a decent clock and jitter buffer in the DAC . If they did , the jitter and clocking issues should disappear. A decent size jitter buffer will remove any jitter which may occur during the unidirectional transmission of the data stream from the transport device/LMS server etc. Reclocking the jitter buffer playout to the DC chip locally would also help solve the problem. 2 CHAN. SYSTEM SB3->Benchmark DAC-1-> Bryston(BP-25,3B)->PMC TB2 HOME THEATER SYSTEM SB2-> Bryston(SP1,4B,4B,2B,2B)-> PSB Stratus Goldi BASEMENT SYSTEM Duet-> Parasound Preamp (carver M1.0t) ->Klipsch La Scala's BEDROOM SYSTEM SB2-> Sony BoomBox REAR DECK/PATIO Duet-> Yamaha Reciever-> PSB Mini's, OFFICE Squeezebox Boom KITCHEN Squeeze Radio ENSUITE Squeeze Radio sfraser's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2026 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
seanadams wrote: > Just to clarify I was talking about AES/EBU _in general_. There's > nothing wrong with how I did Transporter's AES/EBU output. The interface > is defective by definition, and therefore not possible to execute > reasonably by anyone. Hope no one is upset I found this old thread and dredged it back up! Too bad Sean is not around here these days. You will note what he said..."The interface is defective by definition, and therefore not possible to execute reasonably by anyone." Yeah, it is! Which is too bad. By using a balanced cable, it could have been better than plain ol' SPDIF. Especially when some jerks down in Texas try to isolate things with a transformer, which makes the shield "hot", and..well, it isn't the best approach, but it works. But, they (AES et al) messed up. (In fact, the original version was MUCH WORSE. I had a long phone conversation with the guy who headed up the AES working group on that, and without ever seeing an implementation of it, I 'splained to him what was obviously wrong with it. I can only imagine the look of horror, on his face, as I told him what was wrong and why. Funny thing is.less than a year later, they came out with a new version of it! With all of my suggestions. Too bad I didn't nail him down on the output voltage, and some of the other dumb things that were in it. Just goes to show how hard it is to make things idiot proof when the idiots are so dang ingenious. And the worst piece of gear I ever saw, with AES/EBU outputs came from Philips! And cost several grand. Go figure. Guess they never thought putting DC on the output would be a problem. Worked for them, as it was designed to go with something that needed DC on the outputoy vey.) OK, where was I? Ok, TOSLINK.. A few years back, I measured the "jitter" of the old Toshiba TOSLINK parts, and compared them to the flavor-of-the-month Chinese brand. Since someone paid me to do this, I can not share the details. But, I can give you a rough idea. All of them have a very high noise floor. That is the part that gives the "jitter number". (See other posts on why that number is useless.) The Toshiba is a bit better. The FOTM Chinese one performed better if you used the "high-speed" one. You could see the effects caused by using a crappier phototransistor in the regular speed one. It was bad. And right where you should expect a noisy transistor to have noise. In all cases, all of the "jitter" contribution was caused by the noise floor. IOW, they DID NOT affect the "close-in" jitter, which is what is really important. (No, I am not going to into that. I have done so numerous times over the last decade or two, and I am not going over it again. If it annoys you, keep it to yourself. I am not interested in hearing why you think I am wrong.) The fact that none of these methods (SPDIF, AES/EBU or TOSLINK) do not totally wreck the sound, even though they are highly flawed and have a ton of problems, is because it does not do anything to the signal in the most critical region. IOW, down around 1 Hz, and lower. And back to the question of return loss.. Yes, it does make a difference. I find it odd few ask about it. I'll just add if you get the return loss of the source, the cable and the receiver all correct (iow, below a certain level we put a lot of work into figuring out what that number is), then guess what? They all sound the same. Which would put a lot of cable companies out of bidnis. Where would this industry be without something to sell the punters that will make their system sound "different"/"better"? Peace. Out. http://ar-t.co ar-t's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Golden Earring wrote: > > Relaxing into the music now (Emmylou Harris + Mark Knopfler today, All > The Roadrunning That's exactly what I was doing yesterday, appreciating the technology uncritically with one of my favorite albums. LMS on a dedicated server (FitPC3) Transporter (Ethernet) - main listening, Onkyo receiver, Paradigm speakers Touch (WiFi) - home theater 5.1, Sony receiver, Energy speakers Boom 1 (WiFi) - work-space Boom 2 (WiFi) - various (deck, garage, etc.) Radio (WiFi) - home office Control - Squeeze Control (Android mobile), 2 Controllers (seldom used), Squeeze Remote (on Surface Pro 4) Touch x 1 - spare UE Radio x 1 - spare Boom x 1 - spare Controller x 1 - Spare Duet Receiver (backup) RonM's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17029 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
arnyk wrote: > Umm yes, Ecclesiastes. > > > > If you follow the relevant scientific argument that a DAC can only have > 4 kinds of technical problems, all of which are readily measurable and > for whom we know quite a bit about the audible thresholds... > > > > Confirmed. > > The TP's internal DAC was tested pretty comprehensively by Archimago in > his blog. If I ever get around to writing that article about > understanding technical measurements in terms of sound quality, the > executive summary can be expected to say that the TP is vast overkill. > Of course people say they sound different, but as you say good listening > tests confirming that are harder to find than rooster teeth. > > There are 400 or more different makes and models of audio DACs, each > selling to Audiophiles on the grounds of "Better sound". Technically, > there aren't that many significantly different designs. The vast > majority are based on less than 20 different DAC chips with just a few > using proprietary parts. Almost all of those chips are very good and > can't be logically expected to audibly change the sound of music > conveyed by the analog signals they output. People hoot and holler > about differences in power supplies and buffers, but they are even less > likely to affect sound quality. Hi Arny, Thanks for your prompt & helpful response. At least I for one appear to have bothered to actually ingest your posts! Relaxing into the music now (Emmylou Harris + Mark Knopfler today, All The Roadrunning + live tour album) then heading into highlights of Spanish GP. Alonso managed to put his hopelessly underpowered McLaren-Honda in 7th on the grid. He's looking like a good prospect for the Indy 500... All the best, Dave :) Golden Earring's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=66646 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Golden Earring wrote: > Hi Arny! > > I'm fascinated to notice that you've suddenly popped up over here. It's > actually quite spooky but disregarding that, are any of the members who > previously posted on this thread still active on the forum? > > I recall that somewhere in the Good Book (which I read once in my youth > for completeness) it says "there is nothing new under the sun". > Umm yes, Ecclesiastes. It seems that a lot of people were using external DACs & the word clock in on the TP back in the day, although no-one seems to have conducted any kind of rigorous testing of the ABX kind. It was interesting to find Sean Adams description of how he derived the quoted measurements for the TP. There didn't appear to be much consensus amongst the earlier posters as to which kind of lab measurements would be useful in the context of external DACs and digital connections... If you follow the relevant scientific argument that a DAC can only have 4 kinds of technical problems, all of which are readily measurable and for whom we know quite a bit about the audible thresholds... I believe that your position on this remains that it shouldn't make an audible difference because the TP's internal jitter is low enough to be inaudible & similarly that its in-built DAC is good enough to be indistinguishable from an external DAC in terms of discernible audible differences in a domestic listening environment with real ears, despite the possibility that minute measurable differences might be detected in lab testing. That's if I've understood your "reliable subjectivist" concept correctly. Please put me right if I've got any of this wrong, I'm not précising your early statements in my own words to irritate you but simply to ensure that I've fully got your drift. Confirmed. The TP's internal DAC was tested pretty comprehensively by Archimago in his blog. If I ever get around to writing that article about understanding technical measurements in terms of sound quality, the executive summary can be expected to say that the TP is vast overkill. Of course people say they sound different, but as you say good listening tests confirming that are harder to find than rooster teeth. There are 400 or more different makes and models of audio DACs, each selling to Audiophiles on the grounds of "Better sound". Technically, there aren't that many significantly different designs. The vast majority are based on less than 20 different DAC chips with just a few using proprietary parts. Almost all of those chips are very good and can't be logically expected to audibly change the sound of music conveyed by the analog signals they output. People hoot and holler about differences in power supplies and buffers, but they are even less likely to affect sound quality. arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
arnyk wrote: > False claim. One reason why digital signalling is so valuable is that > the digital signal can often be purified by means of regeneration. For > example when it is read off the disc, the digital data stream that is > read from optical disks is highly jittery, and often has errors. These > are generally perfectly removed by the normal functioning of a standard > optical disc player. Hi Arny! I'm fascinated to notice that you've suddenly popped up over here. It's actually quite spooky but disregarding that, are any of the members who previously posted on this thread still active on the forum? I recall that somewhere in the Good Book (which I read once in my youth for completeness) it says "there is nothing new under the sun". It seems that a lot of people were using external DACs & the word clock in on the TP back in the day, although no-one seems to have conducted any kind of rigorous testing of the ABX kind. It was interesting to find Sean Adams description of how he derived the quoted measurements for the TP. There didn't appear to be much consensus amongst the earlier posters as to which kind of lab measurements would be useful in the context of external DACs and digital connections... I believe that your position on this remains that it shouldn't make an audible difference because the TP's internal jitter is low enough to be inaudible & similarly that its in-built DAC is good enough to be indistinguishable from an external DAC in terms of discernible audible differences in a domestic listening environment with real ears, despite the possibility that minute measurable differences might be detected in lab testing. That's if I've understood your "reliable subjectivist" concept correctly. Please put me right if I've got any of this wrong, I'm not précising your early statements in my own words to irritate you but simply to ensure that I've fully got your drift. On the other thread (which has been getting a bit silly, I must shoulder my share of the blame for that!) you commented that you should perhaps write up something on the (or your, I wasn't quite sure) theory of audible perception in homo sapiens. With my deadly serious face on for once, I should be most interested to read that. Hope that you're having a pleasant weekend! Dave :) Golden Earring's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=66646 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
pfarrell wrote: > (starting a new thread) > > Themis wrote: > > In any case, it would have been much better if in the digital audio > > protocol the clock was explicitly indicated by the A/D (in the data) > > and stored with it. This way, transport wouldn't have to add its own > > jitter. > > > > Now, whatever is done, we can't go back. > > False claim. One reason why digital signalling is so valuable is that the digital signal can often be purified by means of regeneration. For example when it is read off the disc, the digital data stream that is read from optical disks is highly jittery, and often has errors. These are generally perfectly removed by the normal functioning of a standard optical disc player. arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
NewBuyer wrote: > ar-t;491667 Wrote: [color=blue] > > If using such a long S/PDIF coax cable for a short distance: Is it > appropriate to just coil-up the extra coax cable? > > Yes. Don't be mislead by all the BS about digital cables that is being passed around by audiophiles that lack the ability to properly test their claims. arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
ar-t;491667 Wrote: > Well, sort of. 16' is a number that we chose to agree on. It could have > just as easily been...oh, I dunno..12'. Or 22'. The > whole point was to make something that was long enough to do the job. A > few extra feet thrown in for good measure. You can go a lot further, and > not degrade the signal significantly. > > Pat Hi Pat, If using such a long S/PDIF coax cable for a short distance: Is it appropriate to just coil-up the extra coax cable? I've previously been advised that coiling the unused cable-length within audio setups can cause problems & should be avoided - but perhaps this doesn't apply to S/PDIF coax connections? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Well, sort of. 16' is a number that we chose to agree on. It could have just as easily been...oh, I dunno..12'. Or 22'. The whole point was to make something that was long enough to do the job. A few extra feet thrown in for good measure. You can go a lot further, and not degrade the signal significantly. Pat -- ar-t http://www.analogresearch-technology.net ar-t's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
ar-t;490868 Wrote: > ...What is too long? And why?... Hi Pat, Just checking my memory here please - did you previously mention somewhere, that about sixteen feet of good coaxial cable with BNC terminations, was your own recommendation for S/PDIF delivery? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
ar-t;490913 Wrote: > Ah.but that is AES/EBU, right? I have coax cables that are > longer than that in use. > > Pat Yes they were AES/EBU. I've never tried a s/pdif coax longer than 5m so can't comment on them. AFAIK the main thing is to make it not too short. I use 1.5m minimum coax cables. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker & Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Ah.but that is AES/EBU, right? I have coax cables that are longer than that in use. Pat -- ar-t http://www.analogresearch-technology.net ar-t's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
ar-t;490868 Wrote: > It is AR-T, thank you. I think there is a company called A.R.T. but I > don't know them. > > Yes, it does make a difference, depending on the DAC. > > What is too long? And why? > > Pat Pat - Apologies, I was typing from memory. At least I got the letters correct! Too long might be say >10-20m (depending on the quality of the cable) - I've had problems in the studio with s/pdif cables that long. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker & Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
kphinney;490870 Wrote: > Perhaps you should add this information to _your_ forum and correct the > wiki located at: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S/PDIF > And the Hardware Book here: > http://www.hardwarebook.info/S/PDIF > TC Electronics and Tanoy here: > http://tcsupport.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/tcsupport.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1305&p_created=1067521162&p_topview=1 > And even PS Audio here: > http://www.psaudio.com/ps/wiki/SPDIF/ > > BTW, if we can't discuss here, where exactly is your forum? We don't have a forum. Our product is discussed at other audiophile-related forums. (The only one that I follow is on Audio Circle. There are others, but I tend to avoid those places.) I don't think that discussing it here is appropriate, as one could say that it competes with the Duet et al. The folks who make those products might not appreciate it. Pat -- ar-t http://www.analogresearch-technology.net ar-t's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
JohnSwenson;489215 Wrote: > I don't have Sean's scope but I have been measuring jitter indirectly > using a spectrum analyzer on the clock (not the audio out, but the clock > itself). This is quite sensitive to changes in jitter, you can see > spectrum changes going through gates as Sean mentioned and its also very > good for looking at a recovered clock coming out of an S/PDIF receiver. > I can easily see the difference that different connectors and cables > make in the recovered clock. > > What it doesn't give you is a single number, you have to interpret the > spectrum. Different types of spectrum that have the same "ps number" can > sound very different, which is why I prefer to use this method rather > than the direct time measurement. (well the real reason is that I have a > good spectrum analyzer and I don't have a really good time domain jitter > analyzer and very little chance of getting enough money to buy one!) > > John S. Thank you! How many forums have I posted this on, for how many years? Jitter, as a number, all alone, is pretty useless. First off, you have to know whether you are talking about bit-clock rate, word-clock rate, or what frequency. A good number at word-clock rate would be awful at bit-clock rate. And then you need to frequency content, as well. Without that, the numbers mean virtually nothing. Looking a jitter on a spectrum analyzer is possible, but only if it is pretty gross. Which it will be in the case of the bit-clock in a SPDIF RX circuit. (That is why folks either use a ASRC or a secondary PLL.) Yes, you can see a difference in connectors and such. A really clean source, such as the clock in a certain product that is not made by Logitech/Slim Devices, can not be measured in that manner. No one here, other than you-know-who, has the ability to measure it. Pat -- ar-t http://www.analogresearch-technology.net ar-t's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
ar-t;490862 Wrote: > No, it was originally designed to be used as a test port during > manufacture. The marketing guys are the ones who probably had the idea > to make it a consumer interface. (That is why it stinks as an interface: > it wasn't really intended to be one.) > > Pat ar-t;490860 Wrote: > Why are you people discussing a non-Slim Devices product on their > forum? > > If you want to know how it works, you could just ask. But this is not > the time or place to do so. > > If you want to talk about SPDIF BW and return loss requirements, then I > am probably the guy to ask. But no one did. I don't get it. > > Pat Perhaps you should add this information to _your_ forum and correct the wiki located at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S/PDIF And the Hardware Book here: http://www.hardwarebook.info/S/PDIF TC Electronics and Tanoy here: http://tcsupport.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/tcsupport.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1305&p_created=1067521162&p_topview=1 And even PS Audio here: http://www.psaudio.com/ps/wiki/SPDIF/ BTW, if we can't discuss here, where exactly is your forum? -- kphinney -I like it, you may not. I understand and respect that.- kphinney's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10409 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Phil Leigh;487875 Wrote: > I don't have the expensive equipment to measure this... and it will be > cable/DAC dependant. > > I'm sure Pat from A.R.T. would have a view... > > It's generally a good idea to use a long s/pdif cable (but not too > long) to avoid reflections messing with the transition timings. What > difference this makes depends on the DAC. It is AR-T, thank you. I think there is a company called A.R.T. but I don't know them. Yes, it does make a difference, depending on the DAC. What is too long? And why? Pat -- ar-t http://www.analogresearch-technology.net ar-t's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
pfarrell;486011 Wrote: > (starting a new thread) > > Er, SPDIF is done, but its not the end of the world. > > SP/DIF was designed by Sony and Philips defined it as a inexpensive > consumer interface. No, it was originally designed to be used as a test port during manufacture. The marketing guys are the ones who probably had the idea to make it a consumer interface. (That is why it stinks as an interface: it wasn't really intended to be one.) Pat -- ar-t http://www.analogresearch-technology.net ar-t's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
ar-t;490860 Wrote: > Why are you people discussing a non-Slim Devices product on their > forum? > > If you want to know how it works, you could just ask. But this is not > the time or place to do so. > > If you want to talk about SPDIF BW and return loss requirements, then I > am probably the guy to ask. But no one did. I don't get it. > > Pat Where is _your_ forum located? -- kphinney -I like it, you may not. I understand and respect that.- kphinney's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10409 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Why are you people discussing a non-Slim Devices product on their forum? If you want to know how it works, you could just ask. But this is not the time or place to do so. If you want to talk about SPDIF BW and return loss requirements, then I am probably the guy to ask. But no one did. I don't get it. Pat -- ar-t http://www.analogresearch-technology.net ar-t's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
khewa;489040 Wrote: > I'm contemplating getting the Legato USB to SPDIF converter > (http://www.analogresearch-technology.net/LEGATO.html), which is using > the USB asynchronous technology to convert the USB data to SPDIF signal. > In your opinion, this product would not lead to a substantial > improvement in the sound quality, as it is not as close to the source > (the input USB data) as possible ? in effect, the Legato has it's own > clock and the DAC that it is connected to will have another clock. If > that is the case, the Legato product will not merit any consideration. The USB output of what exactly? -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker & Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
I don't have Sean's scope but I have been measuring jitter indirectly using a spectrum analyzer on the clock (not the audio out, but the clock itself). This is quite sensitive to changes in jitter, you can see spectrum changes going through gates as Sean mentioned and its also very good for looking at a recovered clock coming out of an S/PDIF receiver. I can easily see the difference that different connectors and cables make in the recovered clock. What it doesn't give you is a single number, you have to interpret the spectrum. Different types of spectrum that have the same "ps number" can sound very different, which is why I prefer to use this method rather than the direct time measurement. (well the real reason is that I have a good spectrum analyzer and I don't have a really good time domain jitter analyzer and very little chance of getting enough money to buy one!) With the mentioned legato converter you still have to go through the S/PDIF receiver in the DAC. You would be MUCH better off putting the guts of the legato in the DAC and running the DAC off its clock. You can still use the S/PDIF connection for the data since the recovered clock will not be used. Of course the DAC has to use an 11.2896 MHz MCLK. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
bhaagensen;486155 Wrote: > Because carrying the signal asynchronously as far as possible in the > chain is a simple solution which by definition avoids any (replay-chain) > generated jitter, since there won't be any. It has to get synchronous at > some point, but this should be as close to the dac-chip as possible. At > least in the "same box" so that the DAC, "source point" and the bus > connecting them can be driven off the same crystal. Thats IMO the best > solution, since its a solution by design and hardware wise it should be > a no-brainer today... I'm contemplating getting the Legato USB to SPDIF converter (http://www.analogresearch-technology.net/LEGATO.html), which is using the USB asynchronous technology to convert the USB data to SPDIF signal. In your opinion, this product would not lead to a substantial improvement in the sound quality, as it is not as close to the source (the input USB data) as possible ? in effect, the Legato has it's own clock and the DAC that it is connected to will have another clock. If that is the case, the Legato product will not merit any consideration. -- khewa khewa's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4751 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
> I think it's a shame that everyone seems content to speculate about jitter > while so few people actually test it. Sean, I think you just described the problem with most the high-end audio industry. Not just jitter measurements but every aspect of audio performance. Bill -- Listener Listener's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2508 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
tonyptony;487812 Wrote: > > Sean (or John S. or Phil L. if you've measured it), what is the output > return loss from the Touch SPDIF? And, if the numbers are available, > over what bandwidth? I'm not an expert on RF measurements but I doubt if that is a good metric per se for s/pdif performance when we can observe jitter directly. For example, we already know that RCA connectors have issues but that is really a minimal factor compared to things like the oscillator's noise and the particular design's s/pdif transmitter circuitry. However, do check out ar-t's TDA measurements which are really interesting. The tests I usually did were with a Lecroy 64xi reporting RMS variance from an ideal time interval, in a few configurations: 1) to measure the internal oscillators and to look for the added jitter as signal passed through logic gates (prior to s/pdif encoding), I would use the standard lecroy probe with a modified bayonet tip, having a minimal ground lead. This is where we get figures like "11ps at the oscillator" or "17ps at the DAC" for Transporter. 2) to measure the jitter of the s/pdif signal I would usually use an RG6 cable with an RCA crimped directly on one and and a BNC crimped directly on the other end. The RCA goes into the Squeezebox and the BNC goes into a tee with a terminating resistor right onto the scope input. The Lecroy has the ability to recover a clock from an arbitrary data signal. This is where we get figures like "50 ps at the DAC". 3) there is another test that is interesting which is to feed an s/pdif receiver chip and look at the MCLK coming out of it. Sometimes I would do this with Transporter's outputs looped to it inputs. I did not spend a whole lot of time on this but it was an interesting way to see the total performance difference between the various media. If anyone actually has a high-end scope and would like to try these sort of tests I could provide more guidance on how to do it. I think it's a shame that everyone seems content to speculate about jitter while so few people actually test it. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
tonyptony;487812 Wrote: > I've been following the Touch info while still using my SB3 and Duet and > was wondering... > > Sean (or John S. or Phil L. if you've measured it), what is the output > return loss from the Touch SPDIF? And, if the numbers are available, > over what bandwidth? I don't have the expensive equipment to measure this... and it will be cable/DAC dependant. I'm sure Pat from A.R.T. would have a view... It's generally a good idea to use a long s/pdif cable (but not too long) to avoid reflections messing with the transition timings. What difference this makes depends on the DAC. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker & Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
An article I found: http://www.nanophon.com/audio/towards.pdf -- kphinney -I like it, you may not. I understand and respect that.- kphinney's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10409 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
I've been following the Touch info while still using my SB3 and Duet and was wondering... Sean (or John S. or Phil L. if you've measured it), what is the output return loss from the Touch SPDIF? And, if the numbers are available, over what bandwidth? -- tonyptony tonyptony's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3397 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
netchord;486544 Wrote: > my question was about the TP XLR *input*,, vs its other digital inputs. > in my experience, the toslink definitely does not sound as good s Coak, > but i've only been able to listen to the BNC input via an adapter, and > the XLR input, not at all. Inputs/outputs = same problem. AES/EBU is a flawed design. Sean has done his best. Stick with coax or BNC (which in theory is the best since at least the impedance can be properly matched - but not with an adaptor!). -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker & Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Phil Leigh;486277 Wrote: > Sean who designed the TP stated otherwise quite recently. The AES/EBU > output is not as good (or at least no better) than the coax s/pdif, with > the toslink the worst. How much this matters depends on your DAC. my question was about the TP XLR *input*,, vs its other digital inputs. in my experience, the toslink definitely does not sound as good s Coak, but i've only been able to listen to the BNC input via an adapter, and the XLR input, not at all. -- netchord netchord's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21002 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
seanadams;486501 Wrote: > Just to clarify I was talking about AES/EBU _in general_. There's > nothing wrong with how I did Transporter's AES/EBU output. The interface > is defective by definition, and therefore not possible to execute > reasonably by anyone. > > Linky: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71262. Also note > JohnSwenson's comments about the high voltage. I understood it the right way, too. No worries Sean. ;) -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Cyrus 8xp - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
seanadams;486501 Wrote: > Just to clarify I was talking about AES/EBU _in general_. There's > nothing wrong with how I did Transporter's AES/EBU output. The interface > is defective by definition, and therefore not possible to execute > reasonably by anyone. > > Linky: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71262. Also note > JohnSwenson's comments about the high voltage. Oh no I didn't mean to imply you had! - I'm sure you did the best you could. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker & Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Phil Leigh;486277 Wrote: > Sean who designed the TP stated otherwise quite recently. The AES/EBU > output is not as good (or at least no better) than the coax s/pdif, with > the toslink the worst. How much this matters depends on your DAC. Just to clarify I was talking about AES/EBU _in general_. There's nothing wrong with how I did Transporter's AES/EBU output. The interface is defective by definition, and therefore not possible to execute reasonably by anyone. Linky: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71262. Also note JohnSwenson's comments about the high voltage. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
netchord;486194 Wrote: > > i understand the XLR *output* of the transporter is much better than > either SPDIF output. is the same true of the XLR *input*? Sean who designed the TP stated otherwise quite recently. The AES/EBU output is not as good (or at least no better) than the coax s/pdif, with the toslink the worst. How much this matters depends on your DAC. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker & Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
back in the day, i recall the original Proceed transport and DAC (the PDT and PDP)had Toslink, COAX, and Balanced connections, as well as a proprietary Proceed connection that used a special glass cable (the connector was not toslink). i spent an afternoon listening, and thought the sound of the proceed connection and XLR were very close, with the latter being perhaps slightly better (and susceptible to tweaking with different cables). COAX and Toslink were 3rd and 4th, respectively. i understand the XLR *output* of the transporter is much better than either SPDIF output. is the same true of the XLR *input*? -- netchord netchord's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21002 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
There's the audiophile spirit - Why try, you probably can't hear the difference anyway! -- miklorsmith miklorsmith's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4349 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Yes of course , my SPDIF and AES outputs on all my gear sound like doo doo and adopting one of these newfangled not a hope in hell chance of being adopted universally schemes is going to transform my system , hell even my wife would be able to hear the difference...from the next room.. :) -- Rodney_Gold Sb3/Z-sys RDP1/meridian DSP5500's TP/X-cans v3/Senns 650's TP/SCM 50a's SB3/Meridian DSP5000's TP/PS audio perfectwave DAC/woo audio Wa2 Headphone amp/Sehneisser Hd800's "The nicest thing about smacking your head against the wall is...the feeling you get when you stop" Rodney_Gold's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14618 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
radish;486139 Wrote: > You mean a Transporter, right? I believe the Transporter's clock input is wordclock? Frequencies are based on the sampling rate, in the kilohertz range? The Lessloss solution operates in the superclock/megahertz range, which they believe is better. I'm a technical idiot, but I believe the Transporter's system is different. JohnSwenson - that sounds very neat! -- miklorsmith miklorsmith's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4349 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Even though I'm generally in the "evil S/PDIF" camp my latest DAC actually uses S/PDIF (coax or optical). But I'm using both an in and an out stream. The DAC generates a stream that is has all zeros for data, this is fed to a soundcard that can sync its output stream to an incoming stream. It doesn't matter how good or bad the cables are etc since the timing on the S/PDIF links is not used for anything. The Local oscillators in the DAC are used to drive the DAC chips. By doing this I get to use an asynchronous interface without having to write any drivers, the soundcard manufacturer takes care of that for me. The best interface would be for something like the Touch to have clock inputs (NOT a word clock) that drive in instead of its local crystals, nothing other than a switch needed. The data can still go out over the existing digital outs. This automatically syncs it up to the device generating the external clocks and it can still switch between sample rates. The receiving DAC will have to look at its incoming stream and figure out what the sample rate is so it can choose the right clock to use, but that is not particularly difficult. As for a new interface I'm actually working on one based on netjack (network protocol for the jack server) which is a very simple protocol using UDP, its simple enough that it can be implemented entirely in a cheap FPGA. It uses standard network infrastructure so you can use regular ethernet cable, switches etc. It doesn't just have to use special hardware, it uses standard low level protocols so a computer can talk this directly out of its existing Ethernet port. The protocol was designed for studio use so it supports many channels and sample rates. Its not just a one to one system, you can have many different devices connected to the same network and route audio data between them. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
pfarrell;486152 Wrote: > > Why would you suggest an asynchronous protocol? The whole problem, if > there is any, with jitter is that its not synchronized well enough. > Because carrying the signal asynchronously as far as possible in the chain is a simple solution which by definition avoids any (replay-chain) generated jitter, since there won't be any. It has to get synchronous at some point, but this should be as close to the dac-chip as possible. At least in the "same box" so that the DAC, "source point" and the bus connecting them can be driven off the same crystal. Thats IMO the best solution, since its a solution by design and hardware wise it should be a no-brainer today... -- bhaagensen bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
bhaagensen wrote: > TCP/IP could be one choice, but its probably too complicated and > overkill (i.e. does too many things). Asynchronous USB could be another > choice, which I believe is already used in some transports/dacs today. > Such a choice would also narrow the "compatibility" gap with a lot of > present equipement. In terms of needed hardware it would be dead cheap I > believe. Why would you suggest an asynchronous protocol? The whole problem, if there is any, with jitter is that its not synchronized well enough. Just include a clock signal with the existing data signal, and joy and happyness. > HDMI well if becomes a political matter, I'm sure all is set for a > catfight. Yeah, anytime you get the record industry and the movie industry into technology, its very ugly. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Finding a replacement protocol for spdif isn't, and shouldn't, be a complicated technical matter. The only thing needed is a properly asynchronous protocol. There are lots of them, but why not choose something which can be implemented using off-the-shelf components. TCP/IP could be one choice, but its probably too complicated and overkill (i.e. does too many things). Asynchronous USB could be another choice, which I believe is already used in some transports/dacs today. Such a choice would also narrow the "compatibility" gap with a lot of present equipement. In terms of needed hardware it would be dead cheap I believe. HDMI well if becomes a political matter, I'm sure all is set for a catfight. -- bhaagensen bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
miklorsmith;486126 Wrote: > I have two other, more-typical SB3s but it would be great if a single > unit could be bought off the shelf that would give either option. You mean a Transporter, right? -- radish 'HELP ME RAISE MONEY FOR CHILDREN'S CANCER RESEARCH!' (HTTP://WWW.ADAMREEVE.COM/24IN24/) http://www.last.fm/user/polymeric radish's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=77 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
My big-rig setup includes a hacked SB3 with all analog circuitry removed that has been converted entirely to a bit-server. Its secondary clock has been removed and the master clock bypassed to an additional connector on the outside of the unit. It cannot run without an outboard clock signal, and was modded with my Lessloss DAC as clock. The Lessloss unit can operate in 'slave' mode, i.e. normal spdif mode, or it can act as clock-master with 'data in' and 'clock out'. The DAC replaces the transport superclock signal, these guys are WAY into the question of clocking,jitter, and solutions: http://www.lessloss.com/page.html?id=41 http://www.lessloss.com/page.html?id=33 http://www.lessloss.com/page.html?id=42 It takes two digital cables to run, one for data and the other for clock, so a little more complex. The SB3 mod was pretty cheap, a couple hundred bucks of a modder's time - that's the good news. The bad news is the DAC isn't cheap, about $4,500 today. Hey this IS the audiophile forum. :) The results are quite special. I've had quite a group of nice DACs and CDPs through the house and this is the best I've heard. I have a modded Rega CD transport that can take advantage of the feature too, though they now recommend CEC transports which have the clock input feature standard. It wouldn't be that hard for manufacturers to include the master-clocking feature Without any change in format. The connectors are the same, the data and clock streams are the same - just separated. In my experience it's completely worthwhile to do this but honestly, even the audiophile folks aren't talking about it. -- miklorsmith miklorsmith's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4349 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
I too think we are stuck with SPDIF which is unfortunate. It appears the two remedies are to employ an external clock to hopefully counter the woes that the flawed SPDIF protocol may impart on the sound you hear or to put everything into one box in order to avoid SPDIF in the first place. -- Pneumonic Main: Transporter Squeezebox 3 > Metric Halo ULN2 > Sonic Frontiers Ultra Jitterbug > Roksan DAC/PS Modwright Sony SCD 777ES Sonic Frontiers SFL-2 Preamp Quicksilver Silver 90 Mono Power amps Martin Logan CLS IIa Speakers Office: Squeezebox 3 > Lite Audio DAC60 Muse Model One Preamp Quicksilver 8417 Mono Power amps Vandersteen 2Ci Speakers Pneumonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10091 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
pfarrell;486088 Wrote: > Is I2S related to I2C? I2C is used all over the place. Not really... I2C is a general purpose, two wire buss, clock and data, with formats for addressing different devices on the buss etc. I2S is a much simpler three wire interface, with a bit clock, a L/R word clock, and a data signal. Cheers, Dave -- DCtoDaylight Audiophile wish list: Zero Distortion, Infinite Signal to Noise Ratio, and a Bandwidth from DC to Daylight DCtoDaylight's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7284 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Rodney_Gold wrote: > With 99% of all music lovers thinking that Mp3 is as good as it gets and > with 20+ years of legacy products using the evil spdif, what chance is > there of mnfgrs introducing yet ANOTHER digital standard? > Do you think another digital audio transmission interface would make > such a massive difference to sound quality that its really justified? > > from .sig > meridian DSP5500's Folks who are willing to pay for Meridian gear would gladly pay for it. The MP3 is good enough folks will assume we are all from Mars. But this is the audiophiles list. we are all a bit weird already. And we can dream. A large percentage of current SPDIF users don't care much about audio quality. Most that are used are in home theater rigs, where volume of booms is much more critical. Additionally, I'd bet that most folks who own gear with SPDIF connectors never use them, they have been standard on motherboards for years. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Rodney_Gold wrote: > PS audio use I2S via hdmi cable... Is I2S related to I2C? I2C is used all over the place. I was thinking that to make it have a chance, the new "better audio DIF" would have to use an existing commodity cable, such as USB 3.0 or HDMI. But I don't know if you can use these cables without using the appropriate full protocol. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
PS audio use I2S via hdmi cable...of course it sounds better , according to them , with one of their specilaised cables -- Rodney_Gold Sb3/Z-sys RDP1/meridian DSP5500's TP/X-cans v3/Senns 650's TP/SCM 50a's SB3/Meridian DSP5000's TP/PS audio perfectwave DAC/woo audio Wa2 Headphone amp/Sehneisser Hd800's "The nicest thing about smacking your head against the wall is...the feeling you get when you stop" Rodney_Gold's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14618 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
With 99% of all music lovers thinking that Mp3 is as good as it gets and with 20+ years of legacy products using the evil spdif, what chance is there of mnfgrs introducing yet ANOTHER digital standard? Do you think another digital audio transmission interface would make such a massive difference to sound quality that its really justified? -- Rodney_Gold Sb3/Z-sys RDP1/meridian DSP5500's TP/X-cans v3/Senns 650's TP/SCM 50a's SB3/Meridian DSP5000's TP/PS audio perfectwave DAC/woo audio Wa2 Headphone amp/Sehneisser Hd800's "The nicest thing about smacking your head against the wall is...the feeling you get when you stop" Rodney_Gold's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14618 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Recognizing that SP/DIF is less than ideal, the next step is obvious, propose an implement a new standard. The problem with this, is the vast majority of the marketplace see's nothing wrong with SP/DIF, and isn't going to pay anything more for it In fact, in addition to the separate word clock, there has been another standard proposed, and implemented by some manufactures: the I2S interface (I squared S). This derives from another Sony/Philips spec, a buss intended for IC to IC communication inside a CD player. The name is an abbreviation of Inter-IC Sound buss. The original version (championed by Audio Alchemy) used a DIN connector to handle the extra pins required. Not the best connector, as it isn't a controlled impedance connection, but at least it did split the data and clocks. Ultra Analog developed an improved version of this interface dubbed I2S enhanced, which extended the spec to allow for the clock to be sourced from either the DAC or Transport. It used a 13W3 connector, which is an odd looking beast used by high end graphics terminals. Externally, it looks like a DB25 but is interesting in that it has 3 75ohm coaxial cable connections along with 5 twisted pairs. Wadia (who ultimately bought out Ultra Analog) and Sonic Frontiers had products which made use of this interface. The point of all of this, is that better interfaces have been proposed, implemented, marketed, and failed Sad to say, but I think we're stuck with SP/DIF... -- DCtoDaylight Audiophile wish list: Zero Distortion, Infinite Signal to Noise Ratio, and a Bandwidth from DC to Daylight DCtoDaylight's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7284 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
pfarrell;486011 Wrote: > (starting a new thread) > > Themis wrote: > > In any case, it would have been much better if in the digital audio > > protocol the clock was explicitly indicated by the A/D (in the data) > > and stored with it. This way, transport wouldn't have to add its own > > jitter. > > > > Now, whatever is done, we can't go back. > > Er, SPDIF is done, but its not the end of the world. > > SP/DIF was designed by Sony and Philips defined it as a inexpensive > consumer interface. And while AES was aimed at the studio recording > market (i.e. professionals) it is not designed to be better. Other > than > using XLR connectors and not having the "do not copy" bit in the > stream, > its exactly the same spec. > > All of the problems with timing and clocks could be trivially fixed by > adding one extra wire to the cable, and sending clock. (and a bit of > signaling protocols to allow each end to argue over who is in charge > of > the clock). > > This would not prevent the cable from adding jitter, but you wouldn't > care, as any delay in the clock will also impact the data signal. > > In time, if there is sufficient demand, a new standard could evolve. > > As a wise man said: Standards are great, there are so many of them to > chose from > > > -- > Pat Farrell > http://www.pfarrell.com/ This an excellent idea, too. :) -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Cyrus 8xp - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Themis wrote: > So, the idea was : to include the A/D clock in the initially recorded > data. > This could allow all the intermediate "transports" to do just that : > transport the initial data (and clock, thus) without adding anything to > the stored data. Whatever the number of intermediate transports the > data+clock would remain unchanged. Close. actually, the clock becomes irrelevant with data on the "disk" then it is just data. But when recording, you need to have all of your ADC on the same clock. You need meta data to say what clock rate is applicable to the data, but the actual clock timing is no longer important. Then on playback, you pull the data off the "disk", and create a clock of the appropriate rate, and send the clock and data together. Of course, "disk" is just a storage place, it could be a flash drive, hard disk, or TCP/IP link. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Well, thank you for starting a new thread (I was a bit shy, to be honest). So, the idea was : to include the A/D clock in the initially recorded data. This could allow all the intermediate "transports" to do just that : transport the initial data (and clock, thus) without adding anything to the stored data. Whatever the number of intermediate transports the data+clock would remain unchanged. In the end, the overall error would be the one introduced by the D/A process trying to imitate whatever timing error was initially recorded. Perhaps it's a naive point of view, but, from the data+clock integrity point of view this is probably the best option. :) -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Cyrus 8xp - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
(starting a new thread) Themis wrote: > In any case, it would have been much better if in the digital audio > protocol the clock was explicitly indicated by the A/D (in the data) > and stored with it. This way, transport wouldn't have to add its own > jitter. > > Now, whatever is done, we can't go back. Er, SPDIF is done, but its not the end of the world. SP/DIF was designed by Sony and Philips defined it as a inexpensive consumer interface. And while AES was aimed at the studio recording market (i.e. professionals) it is not designed to be better. Other than using XLR connectors and not having the "do not copy" bit in the stream, its exactly the same spec. All of the problems with timing and clocks could be trivially fixed by adding one extra wire to the cable, and sending clock. (and a bit of signaling protocols to allow each end to argue over who is in charge of the clock). This would not prevent the cable from adding jitter, but you wouldn't care, as any delay in the clock will also impact the data signal. In time, if there is sufficient demand, a new standard could evolve. As a wise man said: Standards are great, there are so many of them to chose from -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
