View Full Version : Nothing matters before the dac?
Is the accepted wisdom that in digital reproduction, nothing before the dac matters (obviously notwithstanding file quality) as it's all just ones and zeroes until that point?
And if this is true, is it fair to conclude that any old half knackered pc, running whatever OS you like, connected via a bog standard ethernet will perform as well as anything that could be designed specifically for the audiophile purpose?
Reid Malenfant
25-06-2012, 20:34
No, I'm not sure about PCs, you ought to have a good read of John (welder) server thread, but with transports there can me huge differences that frankly you wouldn't expect.
John cut down a PC motherboard until it got down to the basic functions & discovered it sounded better with each bit of non needed circuitry removed...
All things are in no way equal :(
.
John cut down a PC motherboard until it got down to the basic functions & discovered it sounded better with each bit of non needed circuitry removed...
All things are in no way equal :(
funny that ... i have found the same thing with valve amps too.
but then the component quality and implementation get more critical.
Transports make a big difference especially with non-reclocking DACs. Flimsy transports that rely on loads of error connection & an unbuffered, badly impedance-matched SPDIF out are going to sound glassy and more digital than properly designed transports. I have 3x decent transports that I use and can tell them apart blind with the DVD player being the most natural and tightest bass.
is it fair to conclude that any old half knackered pc, running whatever OS you like, connected via a bog standard ethernet will perform as well as anything that could be designed specifically for the audiophile purpose?
Most definitely not, I'm afraid your conclusion is very wrong.
My laptop is the worst of all my sources.
Laptop via USB to DAC.
NAS box via WiFi to Squeezebox Touch to DAC via coax.
Pioneer DVD player via optical to DAC.
And the winner - Townshend Rock not to DAC :)
sq225917
25-06-2012, 23:16
It depends on the dac.
magiccarpetride
25-06-2012, 23:26
Is the accepted wisdom that in digital reproduction, nothing before the dac matters (obviously notwithstanding file quality) as it's all just ones and zeroes until that point?
And if this is true, is it fair to conclude that any old half knackered pc, running whatever OS you like, connected via a bog standard ethernet will perform as well as anything that could be designed specifically for the audiophile purpose?
While it certainly would depend on a DAC, the issue resides also with the unwanted noise that a poor transport box tends to introduce into the audio chain. This noise then gets amplified and finds its way into the chain of the signal reproduction. This is why, with each upgrade to one's digital transport, the music keeps sounding better and better. Mostly the upgrades serve to lower the noise floor of the digital transport.
And having a brilliant DAC cannot help you with that even one bit.
I guess in some ways it goes back to the old mantra source first and this case its the transport
In my own experience yes it does matter
bobbasrah
26-06-2012, 07:04
Is the accepted wisdom that in digital reproduction, nothing before the dac matters (obviously notwithstanding file quality) as it's all just ones and zeroes until that point?
And if this is true, is it fair to conclude that any old half knackered pc, running whatever OS you like, connected via a bog standard ethernet will perform as well as anything that could be designed specifically for the audiophile purpose?
If only it were that simple.... what is on your drive is data, what goes into the DAC is that data interpreted/transformed to a stream the DAC can understand then convert.
An analogy might be a word/excel file on the drive, which is unintelligible data until Word/Excel interprets/transforms it for display/print etc....
sq225917
26-06-2012, 07:42
@MCR just exactly how does a transport introduce 'noise' into the system. All it can introduce is jitter or dropouts. Dropouts almost don't exist these days, except with substandard dacs that cannot attain a signal lock and a decent dac will buffer/reclock the signal and remove jitter to below the level of audibility.
The one thing a transport does not add to the system is noise, not least because 'every' working dac provides better than 110db signal to noise ratio, so be very description 'noise' must be a good 20db below audibility.
'Noise' is a very specific technical term in audio, transports most certainly cannot add it to the signal, whatever other audible effects they might be believed to have.
StanleyB
26-06-2012, 08:02
@MCR just exactly how does a transport introduce 'noise' into the system. All it can introduce is jitter or dropouts. Dropouts almost don't exist these days, except with substandard dacs that cannot attain a signal lock and a decent dac will buffer/reclock the signal and remove jitter to below the level of audibility.
Are you writing this as a product designer, or have you got any sort of technical qualification or manufacturing experience in these products?
sq225917
26-06-2012, 11:23
Stanley, why would the answer to your questions change the facts of the matter?
Should you like to discuss this with me I'd be happy to do it on DIYaudio.com which is a suitable space for such technical discussions and won't affect either of our standings on this good site.
Thanks all for your comments so far.
It seems pretty clear that this is not the accepted wisdom then! My reason for asking is that I've heard it stated and wanted to verify.
It depends on the dac
SQ, you think it could be so with 'the right sort of DAC'? Any expansion (that I might understand)?
Most definitely not, I'm afraid your conclusion is very wrong
Thanks Tim, but just to be clear, it's a supposition, not my conclusion. I don't know anywhere near enough about this stuff to offer such an opinion.
StanleyB
26-06-2012, 12:48
Stanley, why would the answer to your questions change the facts of the matter?
Should you like to discuss this with me I'd be happy to do it on DIYaudio.com which is a suitable space for such technical discussions and won't affect either of our standings on this good site.
I am certainly not worried about my standing on AoS. Should I? I have seen or heard of no reason to harbour any such worries.
As for transferring a discussion on Aos to another forum: what purpose does that serve? It certainly won't benefit the AoS community, which is where the question was posed and your conclusions were presented.
So coming back to my original question to you: a simple "yes" or "no" will be more than sufficient.
@MCR just exactly how does a transport introduce 'noise' into the system. All it can introduce is jitter or dropouts. Dropouts almost don't exist these days, except with substandard dacs that cannot attain a signal lock and a decent dac will buffer/reclock the signal and remove jitter to below the level of audibility.
A couple of ways I have seen that problems can get into the system.
1. While the DAC and the transport can lock onto the system, it still means the DAC is being driven by the clock in the transport, so speed stability of the transport clock can find its way through the system. The transport clock can be affected by the power supply in the transport, and that will be affected by the servo motors in the transport reading the data from the disk. So even though on the bench with a test spdiff signal all can look perfect, playing a disk can be different.
2. Noise can find its way into the spdiff signal such that while the DAC doesn't loose lock on the incoming signal, it can introduce bit errors and lost samples. Not enough to be obviously audible, but introducing subtle degradation. There is no error correction or detection in spdiff above a simple parity bit so nothing in the chain will detect an even number of errors per frame without making a comparison of the data out and in.
When I was playing with a dac design I was surprised to find how audible a single sample error can be (ok in this case it was as big a error as it can be), the processing setup I had was taking the i2s and creating two differential streams from it, the mistake was the inversion of the max negative signal was not being mapped to the max positive signal, but was staying as the max negative signal. A single sample doing this was audible.
magiccarpetride
26-06-2012, 16:28
When I was playing with a dac design I was surprised to find how audible a single sample error can be (ok in this case it was as big a error as it can be), the processing setup I had was taking the i2s and creating two differential streams from it, the mistake was the inversion of the max negative signal was not being mapped to the max positive signal, but was staying as the max negative signal. A single sample doing this was audible.
Not only audible (which could be pushed back as a 'subjective' criterion), but also clearly measurable (which is done using the 'objective' approach with impartial measuring instruments). It's been demonstrated that upon improving/upgrading the digital transport, the signal-to-noise ratio can get measurably improved. This fact invalidates any theories which categorically claim that it is impossible to hear any differences between two different digital transports, and that a shitty $20 DVD player from Walmart sounds absolutely the same as an esoteric ultra high-end $20,000 digital transport fitted with the top of the line power cable.
sq225917
26-06-2012, 20:44
Stanley the answer to your question about me has no bearing on the facts. A decently designed dac, should reject jitter and filter out noise on the signal inputs. A well implemented FIFO buffer or ASRC shouldn't be too hard to implement for someone who places so much importance on design experience and qualifications. The same goes for a touch of galvanic isolation via a pulse transformer. Of course there's no accounting for a 'broken' transport that simply cannot output the data cleanly and I exclude broken hardware from my comments.
Ashmore, I don't know the Caiman or the Bushmaster but I'm assuming by comments made about losing lock and noise in the signal that they neither buffer nor employ ASRC to reject incoming jitter and the Bushmaster doesn't seem to have the greatest ability to lock onto the incoming signal. Maybe Stanley can explain how he's managed to design a new dac with a worse ability to lock an incoming signal than his previous dac.
Guys,
Can we have no more of the Stan vs. Simon (sq) show, and get back to what the thread is about? I'm sensing an increase niggling between you two, which I'm nipping in the bud right now.
Any more of it will be deleted without further warning - cheers!
Marco.
Daniel Quinn
27-06-2012, 09:56
The lawyer in me can't resist intervening in the Stanley/Simon debate . One problem in law is people play the person not what the person says, So Status can count for more than substance and people can get away with charging £500 an hour and speak any old crap .
Stanley is playing the man not the substance . Simon is correct the questions asked by Stan are irrelevant to the validity of what he says and stan's attempt to undermine what he says by illujding to his technical superiorty [ I am assuming this is true ] is churlish and irrelevant . Criticise what people say by examining what they say , not by illuding to irrelevant factors .
I on the other hand am totally ignorant to the content of the conversation so couldnt commnet either way :lol:
Ok, Dennis. I'll let that one go, but I must insist that any further contributions to this thread relate purely to the thread topic!
Marco.
... but I'm assuming by comments made about losing lock and noise in the signal that they neither buffer nor employ ASRC to reject incoming jitter and the Bushmaster doesn't seem to have the greatest ability to lock onto the incoming signal. Maybe Stanley can explain how he's managed to design a new dac with a worse ability to lock an incoming signal than his previous dac.
Simon, the BM has no issue locking on to the incoming signal. The reports relate to auto detecting which source is in use...anyhow its not of any concern now as Stan has resolved it.
StanleyB
27-06-2012, 11:01
Ok, Dennis. I'll let that one go, but I must insist that any further contributions to this thread relate purely to the thread topic!
Hi Marco, I would respectfully ask of you to at least offer me a chance of reply to Dennis. As he is new here, I do not take it for granted that he would be aware that I make a cheap DAC. Neither would he be aware that Simon has made a few less than flattering remarks about the Bushmaster on another thread, and continued on the same theme in this thread, followed by an implied questioning of my character.
It doesn't appear unreasonably of me to ask for clarification on what basis certain conclusions were arrived at. This in view of previous comments made by Simon, especially since there are several happy Bushmaster's owners on AoS who paid peanuts for my DAC.
Sure, Stan, I totally understand. The problem is, where does it all end? You have your say, then Dennis replies, then Simon chips in, etc, etc, and round and round we go.....
Ok, I'll let this discussion continue for the time being. However, if I see it turning into another niggling contest between Simon and you (and/or Dennis, or whomever else), I'll lock the thread, delete the offending posts and ban ALL those responsible for a week.
Therefore, be very careful what you write and ensure that it doesn't provoke a retaliatory response from your 'adversaries', as it were.
Do I make myself clear? And I'm addressing that to EVERYONE.
Marco.
A decently designed dac, should reject jitter and filter out noise on the signal inputs. A well implemented FIFO buffer or ASRC shouldn't be too hard to implement for someone who places so much importance on design experience and qualifications. The same goes for a touch of galvanic isolation via a pulse transformer.
SQ, I think that all depends on your design criteria. It is normally accepted that 'less is more' in HIFI and that the best sounding equipment is that which does the least amount of messing around with the signal/sound.
I for one would not want buffers/filters/transformers in my DAC. I would rather that it simply converts the digital to analogue with the absolute minimum of interference. There should be no need for buffers, filters and transformers if the source supplying the DAC has been designed and built correctly.
Your comment seems to me to be like saying that a phono preamp should filter out cracks and pops from the vinyl.
All just my opinion.
Val
Daniel Quinn
27-06-2012, 11:45
As far as my involvement in this goes , I'll try nipping in the bud . :) so the people with knowledge can crack on .
Stan I am aware of what you do and I must say I have never found anything you said objectionable before and to my mind there are far more complimentary comments upon the Bushmaster than negative on this forum , so much so that you have even piqued my interest and I have no cd or digital music at all at the moment .
I was not aware of your ongoing debate with Simon , but to be honest it was irrlevant. My unncessaery and egotistical butt in was a plea to play the ball not the man . It contained no value judgements and I did not take sides as my ignorance will not allow me to thats all . It was just a hearfelt plea for people to address what people say , not who they are .
Indeed, and such sentiments are at the core of our ethos, and we expect everyone on this forum to comply with what's written there.
One thing people should be aware of is that AoS is a big forum now, and so I neither have the time to read all of the posts made, especially in sections of the forum which are less of an interest to me than others, nor 'micro-manage' people, like I used to do, when AoS was smaller.
Therefore, that means two things:
1) I'm relying on people behaving themselves and/or people hitting the 'Report Post' button, if they see potential trouble, where it will then be dealt with appropriately.
2) Due to a simple lack of time, I'm more likely to adopt a 'zero-tolerance' policy, and simply remove any troublemakers, at the outset, in order to have an easy life.
I would therefore advise some people to carefully digest the above and how they conduct themselves here in future.
Marco.
Simon, I'm afraid that this...
I don't know the Caiman or the Bushmaster
...doesn't tally with this...
the Bushmaster doesn't seem to have the greatest ability to lock onto the incoming signal
You don't have a Bushmaster and yet you seem to be repeating hearsay that is not representative of the majority of Bushmaster owner's findings - and I include myself.
So to repeat what others have asked, let's discuss the issues (not the people), and let's keep it strictly evidential, please.
Is the accepted wisdom that in digital reproduction, nothing before the dac matters (obviously notwithstanding file quality) as it's all just ones and zeroes until that point?
And if this is true, is it fair to conclude that any old half knackered pc, running whatever OS you like, connected via a bog standard ethernet will perform as well as anything that could be designed specifically for the audiophile purpose?
If this was true then all music player software would sound the same, there would also be no point after market linear power supplies which would then seem to cast doubts on the efficacy of such supplies for any equipment.
I believe i can hear a difference between my Linux OS set up and Win XP for example and that difference is to my ears enough to have gone to considerable trouble to get a Linux system up and running.
While there may be a certain amount of truth in the idea that a well designed Dac should adequately deal with computer generated noise and jitter the assumption here seems to be that the majority of Dacs are well designed. I have my reservations from my limited experience.
Sure, Stan, I totally understand. The problem is, where does it all end? You have your say, then Dennis replies, then Simon chips in, etc, etc, and round and round we go.....
Ok, I'll let this discussion continue for the time being. However, if I see it turning into another niggling contest between Simon and you (and/or Dennis, or whomever else), I'll lock the thread, delete the offending posts and ban ALL those responsible for a week.
Therefore, be very careful what you write and ensure that it doesn't provoke a retaliatory response from your 'adversaries', as it were.
Do I make myself clear? And I'm addressing that to EVERYONE.
Marco.
Very fair moderation. Cant fault you Marco.
Cheers, Darren. It's simply a matter of trying to be fair :)
Marco.
sq225917
27-06-2012, 15:21
Simon, I'm afraid that this...
...doesn't tally with this...
You don't have a Bushmaster and yet you seem to be repeating hearsay that is not representative of the majority of Bushmaster owner's findings - and I include myself.
So to repeat what others have asked, let's discuss the issues (not the people), and let's keep it strictly evidential, please.
I don't have a Bushmaster, so I have to rely on the comments posted by members on the forum, I assume they are all true, whether they are good or bad comments. Are you now saying I have to 'quote' posts whenever i repeat an opinion or experience from another poster? Is that just negative viewpoints or does the same hold true for positive outpourings of love as well? I'd just like to know where I stand, maybe we should just ban the referencing and repeating of all second hand opinion on the forum...
I understand that you consider the comment, not representative of everyone's experience, and I agree with you. But that doesn't make any difference to the fact that the comments were made in the first instance.
Re discussing the people, you might want to ask Stan, It was he who started the personal questioning, not me.
NRG, glad to hear the issue with the Bushmaster struggling with source lock has been fixed. How is it implemented for customers who have units already, I assume there's not an 'in field' software update for the fix?
TopBalcony
27-06-2012, 15:32
To revert to the question in the OP, my thoughts up until a few weeks ago would have been that yes, the Dac is nearly all that matters (within reason).
Up to that point, my usual source was a SBT, running from USB out and via a V-Link II into a Rega Dac. Then, on a whim, I decided to buy a camera connection kit for my Ipad, to enable USB out from the Ipad, so as to try that as a source. I was very surprised that the Ipad sounded significantly better than the SBT.
So my current source is the Ipad, running Ipeng, and controlled either by a long USB cable or an Ipad Touch. Since settling on this I've tried different Dacs against the Rega, including a Xindak and HRT Streamer. My surprise now is how similar the Dacs sound, to the extent that I would be hard pressed to tell any difference between them.
....
NRG, glad to hear the issue with the Bushmaster struggling with source lock has been fixed. How is it implemented for customers who have units already, I assume there's not an 'in field' software update for the fix?
No, its field replaceable, as easy as replacing a socketed opamp...if you can do that then you can update the software.
To revert to the question in the OP, my thoughts up until a few weeks ago would have been that yes, the Dac is nearly all that matters (within reason).
Up to that point, my usual source was a SBT, running from USB out and via a V-Link II into a Rega Dac. Then, on a whim, I decided to buy a camera connection kit for my Ipad, to enable USB out from the Ipad, so as to try that as a source. I was very surprised that the Ipad sounded significantly better than the SBT.
So my current source is the Ipad, running Ipeng, and controlled either by a long USB cable or an Ipad Touch. Since settling on this I've tried different Dacs against the Rega, including a Xindak and HRT Streamer. My surprise now is how similar the Dacs sound, to the extent that I would be hard pressed to tell any difference between them.
I think this is where a great many forum posts concerning perceived benefits in swapping components about, getting new kit etc do the unwary reader a disservice.
I can think of maybe a handful of pieces of equipment that I’ve heard in my system with time to listen and compare that have made, what I would consider, a major differences let alone obviously better.
I think what should be born in mind is people love to exaggerate it seems. Knowing the poster and applying a bit of common sense and referral to ones own experiences often helps, as does looking very carefully at why it might be within a persons interest to overstate the capability of a particular item.;)
With regard to digital sources, ime, the improvements form one source to another are often very very small. This doesn’t mean for the more obsessed they are not worth considering, but if one is expecting night and day differences, or even major improvements, the likelihood is you’ll be disappointed.
It seems “massive” and “order of magnitude”, “another level”, “vastly superior”, etc mean different things to different people. :scratch:
To me and to many other reasonable people such terms might hint at being able to pick the difference with a blindfold on, wearing mittens and a road drill operating at 5 metres away.
What I have found is the differences are very subtle, often not worth worrying about. A lot depends on how far your particular case of audiophilia has progressed. :D
None of this means that differences don’t exist, or that they are not worthwhile improvements. There is also some truth in the idea that if you attend to the small differences and do this throughout the audio chain the sum of the improvements can transform a system.
I don't have a Bushmaster, so I have to rely on the comments posted by members on the forum, I assume they are all true, whether they are good or bad comments.
It isn't clear cut, is my problem with repeating this kind of hearsay. Any number of local issues could be preventing lock, not necessarily to do with the Bushmaster. It isn't helpful to repeat these without having experienced them yourself so that you can give us the background to it.
I understand that you consider the comment, not representative of everyone's experience, and I agree with you. But that doesn't make any difference to the fact that the comments were made in the first instance.
I'm not denying that, but to take them and then make the statement "the Bushmaster doesn't seem to have the greatest ability to lock onto the incoming signal" is to miss out that there are many more BMs with no reported problems locking. I could say it's inflammatory, but I don't think you meant it to be.
Back to the O/P. My experience says that everything matters, including the transport or streaming device. We've talked about jitter and general noise injection, there is also the matter of imperfections in the data stream causing undue work by the clocking, buffering and DAC circuits and, ultimately, the power supply. One of the reasons perhaps why DACs like the Bushmaster respond so well to stiffer power supplies is that they are better able to reject data stream issues without affecting the resulting analogue signal.
magiccarpetride
27-06-2012, 17:33
I think this is where a great many forum posts concerning perceived benefits in swapping components about, getting new kit etc do the unwary reader a disservice.
I can think of maybe a handful of pieces of equipment that I’ve heard in my system with time to listen and compare that have made, what I would consider, a major differences let alone obviously better.
I think what should be born in mind is people love to exaggerate it seems. Knowing the poster and applying a bit of common sense and referral to ones own experiences often helps, as does looking very carefully at why it might be within a persons interest to overstate the capability of a particular item.;)
With regard to digital sources, ime, the improvements form one source to another are often very very small. This doesn’t mean for the more obsessed they are not worth considering, but if one is expecting night and day differences, or even major improvements, the likelihood is you’ll be disappointed.
It seems “massive” and “order of magnitude”, “another level”, “vastly superior”, etc mean different things to different people. :scratch:
To me and to many other reasonable people such terms might hint at being able to pick the difference with a blindfold on, wearing mittens and a road drill operating at 5 metres away.
What I have found is the differences are very subtle, often not worth worrying about. A lot depends on how far your particular case of audiophilia has progressed. :D
None of this means that differences don’t exist, or that they are not worthwhile improvements. There is also some truth in the idea that if you attend to the small differences and do this throughout the audio chain the sum of the improvements can transform a system.
I agree with your assessment, however would like to point out that comparing two different audio configurations is no different than comparing any other 'consumable' products. Such as comparing two different brands of wine, cheese, beer, bread, pizza, sports car, etc. What to one person may seem like a night-and-day difference between two bottles of wine, may to another person appear as if the differences are absolutely non-existent. It's impossible to say who's right in such case. So we go back to the good old 'subjective' issue. Different people are blessed/cursed with different physical and physiological constitutions, which govern their sensibilities toward certain experiences. There is really no point in arguing who's right and who's wrong when it comes to personal impressions and preferences.
The moral: take all self-confessed impressions offered on online forums with a humongous grain of salt.
could be preventing lock
Can I just point out that there seems to be some confusion here. I am not aware of any reports that the Bushmaster has an issue locking on to a digital signal. It locks on perfectly.
The only issue reported has been that of the automatic input selection failing to sense the presence of a signal on an input. This is something completely different and a function that most other DACs do not have.
It would seem that Stan has identified the cause and issued a fix.
Val
bobbasrah
27-06-2012, 17:57
I think this is where a great many forum posts concerning perceived benefits in swapping components about, getting new kit etc do the unwary reader a disservice.
Excellent post John.:cool:
Night and day differences require a transparent system apparently.....:doh:
I agree with your assessment, however would like to point out that comparing two different audio configurations is no different than comparing any other 'consumable' products. Such as comparing two different brands of wine, cheese, beer, bread, pizza, sports car, etc. What to one person may seem like a night-and-day difference between two bottles of wine, may to another person appear as if the differences are absolutely non-existent. It's impossible to say who's right in such case. So we go back to the good old 'subjective' issue. Different people are blessed/cursed with different physical and physiological constitutions, which govern their sensibilities toward certain experiences. There is really no point in arguing who's right and who's wrong when it comes to personal impressions and preferences.
The moral: take all self-confessed impressions offered on online forums with a humongous grain of salt.
Certainly people have differing aural acuity.
Certainly people have differing experiences of the world around them.
TopBalcony
27-06-2012, 18:12
I think this is where a great many forum posts concerning perceived benefits in swapping components about, getting new kit etc do the unwary reader a disservice.
I can think of maybe a handful of pieces of equipment that I’ve heard in my system with time to listen and compare that have made, what I would consider, a major differences let alone obviously better.
I think what should be born in mind is people love to exaggerate it seems. Knowing the poster and applying a bit of common sense and referral to ones own experiences often helps, as does looking very carefully at why it might be within a persons interest to overstate the capability of a particular item.;)
With regard to digital sources, ime, the improvements form one source to another are often very very small. This doesn’t mean for the more obsessed they are not worth considering, but if one is expecting night and day differences, or even major improvements, the likelihood is you’ll be disappointed.
It seems “massive” and “order of magnitude”, “another level”, “vastly superior”, etc mean different things to different people. :scratch:
To me and to many other reasonable people such terms might hint at being able to pick the difference with a blindfold on, wearing mittens and a road drill operating at 5 metres away.
What I have found is the differences are very subtle, often not worth worrying about. A lot depends on how far your particular case of audiophilia has progressed. :D
None of this means that differences don’t exist, or that they are not worthwhile improvements. There is also some truth in the idea that if you attend to the small differences and do this throughout the audio chain the sum of the improvements can transform a system.
John, if your post is commenting generically on my post then I have absolutely no idea what you are saying (you will have to be far more direct).
Assuming you have an underlying specific agenda, have you compared an Ipad to an Sbt as a source via a usb to spdif converter?
Hi Martin,
It isn't clear cut, is my problem with repeating this kind of hearsay. Any number of local issues could be preventing lock, not necessarily to do with the Bushmaster. It isn't helpful to repeat these without having experienced them yourself so that you can give us the background to it.
I completely agree. Let impassioned, or particularly critical views of any kit, be the sole domain of the owners of said kit, based on their practical experience of using it. Otherwise, criticism can be unfair, and skew the reality.
Marco.
John, if your post is commenting generically on my post then I have absolutely no idea what you are saying (you will have to be far more direct).
Assuming you have an underlying specific agenda, have you compared an Ipad to an Sbt as a source via a usb to spdif converter?
I think that John's getting a bit too much on his soapbox again, with some of his favourite 'pet hates'! ;)
Therefore, I wouldn't worry about it. His comments were of a general nature and not directly aimed at you.
Marco.
Daniel Quinn
27-06-2012, 18:28
Its a funny world , before Top Balconys post , I was just about to say I thought welders comments were excellent generic comments on the state of affairs and I wish I'd written them .
p.s - is there an etiquette vis-a-vis real name or forum name?
TopBalcony
27-06-2012, 18:37
I think that John's getting a bit too much on his soapbox again, with some of his favourite 'pet hates'! ;)
Therefore, I wouldn't worry about it. His comments were of a general nature and not directly aimed at you.
Marco.
Cheers Marco. My only motive in posting was maybe to encourage people with Ipads (and access to a usb dac) to consider investing about £5 in a usb connection kit. They may be pleasantly surprised, like I was:)
I've read some good discussions on www.diyaudio.com going over the noise and interference by and into the laser sections of CD players/DVD players and how that then effects the players ability to accurately read all the data on the CD.
Vibration of the drive and eccentricity of the CD surface also meaning that feedback loops on both the focus and positional parts of the laser control are working over time and the high frequency and consequencial EMF of those feedback loops can then muck up the data signal and themselves etc etc. Not to then mention reading through scratches on a vibrating, oscillating surface blah blah..
The discussions have then led on to how this can effect the sound and error correction etc etc.
So with 'real-time players' to coin a new term, there is potential there to effect the actual 1s and 0s coming off the CD.
I'm not knowledgable enough to know work out what could happen when ripping/reading off the hard drive, how software translates that data, how hardware handles the data blah blah to know if that happens with servers etc too.
Can I just point out that there seems to be some confusion here. I am not aware of any reports that the Bushmaster has an issue locking on to a digital signal. It locks on perfectly.
Yes indeed, Val, the two different issues have become needlessly blurred. The not locking into the correct input that some people have seen is for me a non-issue, since I prefer to manually select them anyway.
Reid Malenfant
27-06-2012, 19:37
p.s - is there an etiquette vis-a-vis real name or forum name?
I'd refer to you as Dennis, I'd be happy for you to call me Mark.
The forum name can be handy as there does tend to be more than a few Marks :D
Definately when replying to threads such as private exhibitions where you are thanking a forum member for a purchase.
Hope that helps, apologies for the thread drift...
Back to pre DAC :)
Interesting question by the OP. The simple answer is yes, only the DAC matters. Give a DAC the right data at the right time and only the DA circuit at the end of the line will influence the analogue output. Next question though is what do you call a DAC? You're taking stored data and turning it into real-time audio so I would argue my USB DAC isn't really a DAC at all until it's plugged into a PC, same as a networked DAC needs to be connected to a network etc. That's immediately then an issue if some part of the whole system either changes the data or affects timing in a way that can't be controlled or recovered. That could include electrical issues like grounding (which I've occasionally had issues with with USB), software changing the data, OS and drivers that aren't rock solid and fully integrated etc. etc.
I'm reasonably convinced that with my DAC set up as clock master and with an async USB connection to the PC, no grounding issues, no driver issues, the DAC box is the only significant influence on the sound. YMMV as they say.
Cheers Marco. My only motive in posting was maybe to encourage people with Ipads (and access to a usb dac) to consider investing about £5 in a usb connection kit. They may be pleasantly surprised, like I was:)
S'ok, John's on record as saying that he struggles to hear the difference between two "competently designed" amplifiers (:eek:), so he's unlikely to distinguish between anything more subtle!
Marco.
My apologies John. As Marco pointed out, it was general rant and I'm not quite sure why I quoted you. I do this from time to time. ;)
(tthought i had quoted the OP) :scratch:
S'ok, John's on record as saying that he struggles to hear the difference between two "competently designed" amplifiers (:eek:), so he's unlikely to distinguish between anything more subtle!
Marco.
Indeed, but apparently I'm not alone in this and feel comfortable in the knowledge that some of the "experts" in the industry have similar problems. ;)
Lol...
The only "expert" in the audio industry, for me, is someone else whose ears I trust! ;)
Marco.
Doesn't trust anybody ears but his own. :)
Bearing in mind that I mostly buy bespoke kit from specialist 'one-man band' manufacturers, if they can continually produce, to my ears, outstanding sounding equipment, over many years, then in turn, I trust their ears - simples! :)
In effect, they have to demonstrate to me that their equipment can reproduce music the way that I consider it optimally done. If they can, the designer(s) responsible are added to my (very small) list of 'trusted ears'.
The same applies to people who can continually assemble superb sounding systems.
Marco.
Patrick Dixon
27-06-2012, 22:12
The reason why a transport or a pc can affect the output is down to the design of the digital interface between it and the DAC. The most common way to connect a transport/PC to a DAC is SPDIF, and because it's a continuous synchronous data stream that contains the timing information along with the data, noise and distortion can affect the timing of samples at the point that they're converted back to the analogue domain - even though the actual 1s and 0s aren't affected.
FIFOs and ARSC either don't completely solve the problem or introduce problems of their own, so although some DACs are less sensitive to SPDIF differences, I haven't yet heard one that is completely agnostic.
A word clock fed back to the transport/pc from the DAC is one way that the problem can be overcome - and then you are just down to the quality of the DAC and its clock.
Well a lot of people who have heard your kit have reported that it sounds excellent so you must be doing something right.
I have no idea if your kit produces the type of sound I could live with, obviously, but from what i can gather from various peoples description of my kit, I seem to prefer what many seem to consider a rather "hard" and lively and forward presentation.
It doesn't sound forward or hard to me but as you've pointed out, I may not fully appreciate some of the more subtle tones.
I'm not taking the piss. I've heard to much loud music over the years and I know my hearing is limited at high frequency and at certain harmonics.
It's about being happy with the sound you've got innit.
Given I've had pretty much the same kit bar the more recent digital additions over the last thirty odd years, and of course the modifications, and have grown to really like listening to my kit in preference to most other systems I've heard, being able to tell one piece of wire or amp from another with any great degree of accuracy doesn't really bother me.
I don't post to impress anyone with my aural acuity, or my systems performance. I just tell it like I hear it. :)
The reason why a transport or a pc can affect the output is down to the design of the digital interface between it and the DAC. The most common way to connect a transport/PC to a DAC is SPDIF, and because it's a continuous synchronous data stream that contains the timing information along with the data, noise and distortion can affect the timing of samples at the point that they're converted back to the analogue domain - even though the actual 1s and 0s aren't affected.
FIFOs and ARSC either don't completely solve the problem or introduce problems of their own, so although some DACs are less sensitive to SPDIF differences, I haven't yet heard one that is completely agnostic.
A word clock fed back to the transport/pc from the DAC is one way that the problem can be overcome - and then you are just down to the quality of the DAC and its clock.
You'd think these guys would just use a proper 75ohm BNC connection and properly impedance-matched lines huh...
RCA / coax cables are responsible for a lot of the reasons why transports sound different.
If you think of SPDIF signals like bouncy balls that hit a wall whenever there's a sudden impedance change then you get the idea of what can happen to the time that the 1s and 0s are supposed to arrive... SPDIF should be 75ohms, but RCA sockets can change it to 30 odd Ohms and cause signal reflections.
The manufacturer of my DAC refused to put RCA sockets in, so I get 2x 75ohm BNC sockets without a suitable transport...
Interesting question by the OP. The simple answer is yes, only the DAC matters. Give a DAC the right data at the right time and only the DA circuit at the end of the line will influence the analogue output. Next question though is what do you call a DAC? You're taking stored data and turning it into real-time audio so I would argue my USB DAC isn't really a DAC at all until it's plugged into a PC, same as a networked DAC needs to be connected to a network etc. That's immediately then an issue if some part of the whole system either changes the data or affects timing in a way that can't be controlled or recovered. That could include electrical issues like grounding (which I've occasionally had issues with with USB), software changing the data, OS and drivers that aren't rock solid and fully integrated etc. etc.
I'm reasonably convinced that with my DAC set up as clock master and with an async USB connection to the PC, no grounding issues, no driver issues, the DAC box is the only significant influence on the sound. YMMV as they say.
Simple answer but it does assume a perfect digital input - perfect in the sense that it is exactly the stream that was intended and is being trasnsmitted perfectly all the way through from where the bits are stored.
Not so sure that actually happens.
Well a lot of people who have heard your kit have reported that it sounds excellent so you must be doing something right.
It ticks the boxes for me, but at the end of the day every system is some form of compromise.
I have no idea if your kit produces the type of sound I could live with, obviously, but from what i can gather from various peoples description of my kit, I seem to prefer what many seem to consider a rather "hard" and lively and forward presentation.
Well, most live music sounds a bit like that, but most hi-fi systems you hear tend to sound overly pleasant and 'rounded-off', in comparison. However, there is a balance to be had.
In general, though, I'd always favour systems which sound more 'upfront,' than laid back, particularly to demonstrate that 'valves & vinyl'-based systems don't intrinsically sound in any way 'soft'! ;)
Anyway, we should let these good people get back to the thread topic....
Marco.
Simple answer but it does assume a perfect digital input - perfect in the sense that it is exactly the stream that was intended and is being trasnsmitted perfectly all the way through from where the bits are stored.
Not so sure that actually happens.
Yes the theory is simple; right bits, right time, right output. In reality as you say that may not happen. In my experience it's do-able though there have been issues with the PC. Comparing a vinyl source run through an ADC->DAC realtime vs. stored and played back from the PC via async USB I'm now getting pretty much the same results both ways so it is the conversion that defines the end result.
I always got consistent results with an Apple Airport Express too so that was certainly very robust in it's data handling, it is consistently mediocre sounding though. I'm also quite fond of my Sony X1060 Walkman which sounds great if not quite up to dCS levels.
The main point though is these are not just converter chipsets, they are converter systems and data-handling is integral to the DA process.
You'd think these guys would just use a proper 75ohm BNC connection and properly impedance-matched lines huh...
RCA / coax cables are responsible for a lot of the reasons why transports sound different.
If you think of SPDIF signals like bouncy balls that hit a wall whenever there's a sudden impedance change then you get the idea of what can happen to the time that the 1s and 0s are supposed to arrive... SPDIF should be 75ohms, but RCA sockets can change it to 30 odd Ohms and cause signal reflections.
The manufacturer of my DAC refused to put RCA sockets in, so I get 2x 75ohm BNC sockets without a suitable transport...
Exactly, I modded my SB with pulse transformer and BNC sockets, using Mikes cable it made a very significant improvement. Adding a BNC to the BM at some stage is on the cards...
Clock locking my transport to my dac was a huge improvement for me.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.