 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
92.67.104.74
I am planning on using a Toslink from an Apple Airport Express to stream to a Benchmark DAC1. I would like to do something about the likely jitter on the digital audio stream from the Airport Express, but fear that the Monarchy DIP may be doing nothing different than the asynchronous sample rate conversion the comprises the Benchmark's so-called "jitter rejection mechanism" already does.
I guess what I need here is a real 'PS/Genesis digital lens', so I may have to wait for PS Audio to get such a thing to market. But if anyone has an argument why the little black box from Monarchy audio should be considered for my application, I would be glad reconsider my position.
TIA, dsdreamer
Follow Ups:
If you haven't already, look up the stereophile review of the airport express. It is on their website. The jitter for the airport express measured very low. I don't know if the Monarchy would be worth the money in your situation. I use one with my Airport express, but more as a toslink to spdif converter (I have a Hagerman Chime with USB and SPDIF input, but not toslink, so I cannot compare with and without using the airport).
Do get a good glass toslink cable, if you don't already have one. That would probably offer more bang for your buck.
-Aaron.
in using a Monarchy DIP in front of any high quality DAC. I have tried the Monarchy DIP in front of a Benchmark USB DAC1 and a Apogee MiniDAC. In both cases it degraded the otherwise excellent sonics. Not only are you introducing a lesser quality component, you a also adding another set of interconnects. However, the Monarchy DIP was very effective in improving the sound of some of my budget DACs such as the Zhaolu or TC Electronics Konnekt. I suggest you contact the manufacturers for their thoughts unless you just want to hear for yourself.
Based on the data sheet of the Analog Devices ASRC chip used for sample rate conversion in the Benchmark, I can see no theoretical reason to use external dejitter boxes. See http://www.analog.com/static/imported-files/data_sheets/AD1896.pdf, e.g., figure 8.
But then, it is hard to explain so many forum posts like those of Kenn below. Moreover, it is harder to explain things like the off-ramp, pace-car, superclock combinations offered by Empirical Audio, if a Benchmark DAC1 can solve all such problems for much less money.
At times like this I find myself resorting to a Charles Hansen like response along the lines of "something is going on, but we don't know what." Of course it could be that it is just me that doesn't understand what is going on, so I would be glad if anyone can offer some plausible theories.
--dsdreamer
not DIP. That led me to suspect that the upsampling algorithm in DAC1 may not be the best. Hence, I have been a steadfast user of SRC upsampler.
So, instead of the jitter front, you may want to check out the upsampling options.
Again I had disappointing results with either the Benchmark USB DAC1 or the Apogee MiniDAC. I had good results with my Zhaolu and TC Electronics Konnekt DACs. The jitter control in both the Benchmark or Apogee DACs are far superior to what the Monarchy units offer. An additional set of interconnects does not help either. Another factor is that I was using toslink connections from my MAC to the DACs. The attached test results suggest that the Monarchy DIP is not the best choice for optical inputs. My personal opinion is that upsampling in the audio chain should only be done once at the superior location, which is typically in a high quality DAC and not in the computer or any of these budget add on products. But hey, I suggest that anyone interested get the manufacturers comments and the Monarchy units are cheap enough for most folks to try. The reputable suppliers all offer a 30-day return policy if you feel it does not improve the sonics.
I believe that the Empirical Audio stuff is in a different league than the Monarchy DIP. I wish I could compare a EA modded DAC1 against my USB DAC1 without committing a purchase for at least 30 days in case EA unit does not meet my expectations. I also wish I could afford to try the Big Ben clock for my Apogee MiniDAC. But for now, I have exceeded my budget for digital and I do not expect significant improvements without spending significant dollars. I have found significant differences in sound between these moderately priced DACs but no one DAC is always distinctly better. The analogy I always use is headphones. My current favorites are AKG 701, Grado RS1 and Senn 650 - all with different strengths and weaknesses and I love them all.
I can feed the Benchmark by USB and by S/PDIF (optical)
The same PC feeding the same bits in 2 different ways to the same input jitter immune DAC. I heard distinct differences, the USB is more dynamic, the optical more transparent.
A couple of weeks later I repeated the A/B comparison, couldn’t hear any difference at all.
This is typical for a listening test, there is a strong subjective element in it. Sometimes you hear a world of difference, the other time you don’t.
The only way to make sure is an ABX test. I never did as in practice the difference is to small to bother if you are listening to music instead of your equipment.
I’m inclined to say that a jitter reducing device in combination with a input jitter immune DAC makes no sense. In principle it shouldn’t make any difference at all.
If the DIP does a couple of things more like sample rate conversion, it might yield a difference in sound as different algorithms might produce a different sound
The Well Tempered Computer
"The only way to make sure is an ABX test."
If an ABX test shows a statistically significant difference then you can reasonably conclude that there is a difference. Unfortunately, a likely outcome will be that the test will not show a statistically significant difference. In that event it would be improper to conclude that there is no difference. You will be back where you started.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Tony Lauck
"Perception, inference and authority are the valid sources of knowledge" - P.R. Sarkar
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
thanks for sharing this, and the wikipedia link.
this fallacy could be further put to use with a variation:
Absence of one's ability to elicit evidence
(e.g. inability to hear a difference)
is not evidence of absence of ability of others
(to hear a difference).
I'm always appalled at veracity of the claims of the
"there is no difference" set, simply due to their
own inability to hear a difference.
Cheers,
clay
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absenceI agree, but pragmatically spoken, if you can't ABX is, why bother
The Well Tempered Computer
Your presumption that larger distortions are more reliably detected by an ABX test is a good one. However, in setting your priorities, keep in mind that the ability to detect a difference may not be the most important criteria.
There are different types of distortion. It is possible that some types of distortion that are difficult to perceive contribute to the build up of listener fatigue, while other types of distortion that are easy to perceive contribute little to fatigue. For example, distortion in digital playback due to moderate levels of jitter may be difficult to detect, but I find it fatiguing and unnatural. Conversely, additive white noise at a moderate level (-60 db) is readily detectable, but is not fatiguing.
Tony Lauck
"Perception, inference and authority are the valid sources of knowledge" - P.R. Sarkar
On paper, there is no point. The same goes for Digital Lens.
I did find DIP Upsampler improved the sound of DAC1 in some cases. That does not seem to make sense either. But that's how it was.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
