 
|
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 |
71.229.164.121
In Reply to: RE: Did I miss the discussion re: the latest TAS article on USB DACs ... posted by Stephæn on July 1, 2009 at 08:28:06
To summarize, of the USB DACs Allan Taffel tried (and Wavelength chose not to participate for whatever reason), he didn't care much for any of them and preferred computer I/O to DAC via Firewire. "In my tests, FireWire proved to be a far better audio interface than USB."
I actually like TAS and think they're more in tune with the hottest topics concerning modern audiophiles than many other audio mags. They seem to monitor the pulse of the audiophile community and publish articles that are timely and relevant.
Follow Ups:
I am not surprised as FireWire was from the onset designed for streaming audio (or video) while USB was designed to connect peripherals such as mice and has only later been patched to make streaming audio possible.
"In my tests, FireWire proved to be a far better audio interface than USB."
It's easy to agree with that quote, knowing that they didn't test any Async USB devices.
"It's easy to agree with that quote, knowing that they didn't test any Async USB devices."
Well, not really.
Just because they didn't test any asynch USB DACs for the article doesn't mean they haven't heard any. These aren't people off the street who are having their very first high-end experience. The guys at TAS work in the industry. They go to the shows. They know what's out there. If they don't then they shouldn't be writing reviews.
Someone who read only that article may question just how good are Asynch USB DACs? I question whether TAS is a credible source of good information.
> > If they don't then they shouldn't be writing reviews. < <
Yup.
Did they ask you for a sample?
Much of that review is fair and covers low to high end dacs, although they did not test Gordon's technology.
> > Did they ask you for a sample? < <
No, it's a funny thing. After we found out that their top reviewer stole $50,000 worth of cables without receiving any punishment (in fact the company loaned the reviewer the money to pay for the stolen cables), we severed all ties with the magazine. No ads, no review samples, nothing.
The editors of TAS were not pleased to have their dirty laundry aired in public. Is the condemnation of USB a way to try and get back at us? I don't know -- you decide. I haven't even seen the article yet.
Haven't seen the article yet. Preferred TAS when it was a journal. Still subscribe. RH does a good job reviewing digital. He uses a computer and dac for his system. Surprised to see TAS reviews on the Ayre website.
thanks
barondla
Good point. They are very old. We should probably pull them down, as I really am not very interested in promoting their magazine.
It's interesting that the article says Wavelength chose not to participate but they didn't elaborate. The author made it sound like Wavelength was "afraid" to participate.
That is simply horrendous. I cannot believe they stole cables (just a rhetorical expression---I do believe you). I had heard very nasty suspicious behavior stories about TAS but never had it corroborated like this. I am reluctant to buy another issue.
I was at the 2007 ces in vegas in a 'power line conditioner' manufacturer room and they had indicated their top designer was in negotiaton meetings with tas and could not be here to explain new products. The body language indicated that the spokeperson was not happy with the 'negotiaton' and it was rather uncomfortable. The next issue of tas this manufacturer received fantastic reviews. I knew others who worked with tas for a while and told numerable sleazy stories about the internal workings of tas.
I obviously don't have the details of the incident.
But if you have severed ties, then you cannot complain about the lack of a review.
I checked their website. I found "Budget USB DAC Survey" in a list of articles in the August 09' issue (#194). Is that it? What does 'budget' mean to them?
Bob
I reviewed three DACs.
The most expensive was under $300.
That's what budget means to me...
Which review was this? I wasn't able to find it in a quick search. Sounds ideal for someone like me in the market for a budget DAC.
It's in the current - just-released - August issue, right behind the Alan Taffel USB article.
N/T
...and perhaps some I'm forgetting.
And Audio Research
... since supposedly some actual design went into those. However, I do recall that Stereophile measurements for Bel Canto's jitter were pretty subpar.
And that threw the measurements off.
This is from memory, btw.
> They did a followup on the bel canto - JA had a problem adjusting his
> software volume control...And that threw the measurements off.
> This is from memory, btw.
You can find the review at the link below. I am not sure what I wrote
that gave rise to your perception that I "had a problem adjusting [my]
software volume control." I was driving the Bel Canto with my Mac TiBook,
using Bias Peak to play back test tone WAV files. This is what I wrote in
the review:
"there were very slight changes in output level apparent when I fed [the
DAC 3] a continuous tone via USB. (This didn't happen with the other
inputs.)" I wasn't having problems with any "volume control"; instead,
the output level of the DAC3, fed USB data, continuously varied, not by
much, perhaps a couple of millivolts on a 2V output, but that's not
something usually seen with DACs and not with the Bel Canto via S/PDIF.
This behavior didn't change significantly when I switched to the Mac mini
that I use as my general music server.
I did check that CoreAudio wasn't changing the sample rate, BTW.
I did have other problems listening to music using my TiBook as source:
"Selecting the USB Audio Codec as the computer's default audio output in
the System menu and playing back 44.1kHz-sampled files with iTunes, the
sound was accompanied by what sounded like FM "birdies"; ie, silence when
no music was playing, but a random whistling when it was. I couldn't
eliminate this no matter how I tried—wondering if it was a grounding
issue, I tried using the laptop in battery-powered mode, but no luck."
I solved this by switching to the Mac mini.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Here is what I was thinking of:
"Repeating these tests feeding the Bel Canto's USB input, I wasn't sure what to expect, as the bit and word clocks are no longer embedded in the data; in fact, the data clock is generated locally. While the jitter with 24-bit data was even lower than with TosLink data, at just 63.2ps (fig.10, black trace), 16-bit data gave a moderately high 637.3ps, dominated by data-related sidebands (fig.10, grayed-out trace). Does this measured performance correctly characterize the DAC3's performance via its USB input? Was, for example, the very low 24-bit figure due to the data being truncated to 16 bits? Test-equipment manufacturer Audio Precision recently loaned me a sample of their state-of-the-art 2722 analyzer; in subsequent issues I will be further investigating this aspect of the Bel Canto's behavior, along with some other new digital processors."
"Other than the jitter performance via its USB input, the Bel Canto e.One DAC3 is the best-measuring digital component I have encountered."
I don't have the follow up which may have explained how to avoid this high jitter you got via USB in some way. I thought it had to do with your using a software based volume control somewhere, maybe in iTunes. I also could be confusing your review of the Bel Canto DAC with a review of another DAC entirely which had this issue. Perhaps a Benchmark.
If I had the print issue I could look at the manufacturer's comment and your follow up, but I don't save them. If I cared enough I could ring up Bel Canto...but they don't me and they have other priorities, as I am sure you do also. (BassNut.)
And my memory is not so reliable, so....
A lot of lumping USB solutions into one bin going on.
The "afterthought" methods are often adaptive move or just use the "USB Codec chip of the day". Very few are doing an asychronous direct-I2S method like wavelength, empirical or Scott Nixon.
And which firewire approach are we talking? Some here have testing SPECIFIC firewire applications and they were terrible.
I think generalizations are the bane of this forums existence lately...
Cheers,
Presto
Read the article
Judging by this statement from Bob Harley, maybe Wavelength knew they were going to slam the USB interface so he chose not to participate."...If you have a choice between SPDIF and USB, there's absolutely no doubt that SPDIF will sound better. The next issue of TAS has a major feature article on the limitations of the USB interface, along with notes of listening comparisons between USB and SPDIF..."
I don't subscribe to TAS, but now I'm curious as to what's in the article. I thought asynchronous USB had finally equalled or even exceeded SPDIF.
"If you have a choice between SPDIF and USB, there's absolutely no doubt that SPDIF will sound better."
Right on! So SPDIF out of my motherboard to *ANY* dac is going to blow away a Wavelength, Empirical audio or Scott Nixon solution?
Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
dCS SPDIF or reclocked SPDIF might be a contender. But to say "SPDIF beats USB" is to make a very laughable overgeneralization.
Cheers,
Presto
... in a decade old Stereophile review of Wadia CD player with digital input, John Atkinson measured lower jitter when going SPDIF from external transport (PS Audio something) versus internal Wadia's. And, BTW, the number was low on absolute scale, too - something like 179 ps, I believe.
May be SPDIF is inherently flawed, but everything needs to be looked at in the right context.
Sounds like TAS is closing some doors with that interpretation
Well I'd be surprised if both Wavelength and especially Ayre would stake their reputations on USB-only products that don't sound good. Ayre has some of the best sounding CD players out there. They never made a SPDIF DAC because Charlie didn't think the interface was good. So it's not like they don't know what they are doing or are hearing.
I can't comment personally on Ayre or Wavelength products and I have yet to try any brand of USB DAC in my system. But you're right, Wavelength and Ayre both have great reputations so I don't think they would risk going to USB if it didn't sound at least decent. But in their case, they have their own special USB implementation that departs from the mainstream norm.
"Wavelength and Ayre both have great reputations so I don't think they would risk going to USB if it didn't sound at least decent. But in their case, they have their own special USB implementation that departs from the mainstream norm."
To be fair, their 'special' USB interface is a very recent development. This is especially true for Wavelength, which got into USB DACS several years prior to the advent of the 'special' interface. As I recall, there were several positive reviews of 'pre-special interface' Wavelength USB DACs.
Bob
Well, I don't know why Wavelength chose to not participate but the article does seem rather harsh toward USB in general.
But I do enjoy TAS. Compared to some of the other mags, TAS seems to have a better pulse on what the hot topics are. When Class D amplifiers were all the rage, TAS was right there with a Class D shootout. Computer audio seems to be a very hot topic and again TAS is right there with relevant articles.
Post a Followup:
| 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 © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
