 
|
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 |
209.97.232.197
In Reply to: RE: We'll be making an Ethernet DAC later next year. posted by Bar81 on November 03, 2008 at 05:32:32
>> are we to understand that there will be BNC/coax, optical and AES/EBU digital inputs and not just ethernet? <<
The problem is that adding all of that stuff would probably double the price of the unit.
The Linn DS only has an Ethernet input. I think there is a fair amount of wisdom in that approach.
The difficulty is that there is a fundamental difference between a properly designed audio player and stupidly designed audio player. A proper system puts the audio master clock in the box with the DAC. A stupid system puts the audio master clock in the box with the transport. Then the DAC has to *recover* the clock instead of *generating* the clock.
A recovered clock will always have higher jitter and worse sound than a generated clock. Furthermore, they are two completely different systems that must be switched in and out as different sources are selected. Finally, all of those inputs must be properly isolated (trivial with optical inputs, expensive with everything else) as well as made switchable, meaning that there must be controls and displays on the front.
The bottom line is that the increase in price would be significant. Perhaps even as much as 2x And I'm not sure how many people that use a computer for their audio want to also hook up "old fashioned" sources to their system.
So for now, we will probably start with an Ethernet-only DAC like the Linn. Then if there is enough demand later, we might make a box that has other inputs, or we might simply make a separate DAC for stupid systems that need a recovered clock. We'll see. The whole thing is only in the very preliminary conceptual stage right now, and everything is subject to change.
Follow Ups:
Actually, I have found that even computer converts seem to hold onto their vinyl and their CD players. They even want bypass on reclockers. After a while they finally give up on CD's, but the initial buying decision usually involves several digital and analog inputs. I have decided that for some products only digital inputs make sense, but I give them several of these.
Steve N.
I'm encouraged to read your intelligent posts in this thread.
Some comments about an Ethernet DAC as you call it:
- I've been following the SlimDevices product line for some time. I think the squeezebox H/W is a good idea. The Duet controller is a huge improvement over the 2 line remote w/o display that came with the Squeezebox 3. The SqueezeCenter or whatever they call it now is a huge mistake. Their server has a very sub-par interface and poor support for a wider variety of tags or for different ways to view and select music. They locked out everyone who wants to use the player s/w they like. The open source development model turned decisions over to early adopter geeks when they needed to make the s/w better adapted to a broader, less technical set of customers. SlimDevices/Logitech has pulled the decisions and control back into their company but they haven't fixed the problem.
- You should provide a device driver that looks like another audio output device and forwards the audio output stream over an Ethernet connection to your DAC.
- Wireless is still a source of problems for the customer and the manufacturer. Recognize the advantages and problems of wireless and not and be prepared to provide good customer support.
- An Ethernet DAC is not inherently suited to multi-room or home theater audio-video synchronization. You need to decide whether tight synchronization will be supported or not. If it is, you need to give a smooth, positive customer experience.
- Audiophiles are beginning to yammer about high bit rates being essential for any DAC solution. If you charge a lot of money for for your Ethernet DAC, you'd better have a high ceiling for the sample rate.
- It may make sense for you to start with a really expensive high-end device. However, I think the action will be at much lower price points than your high-end line. I'm certainly not a customer for a $ 5000 plus product.
- Long term, your company and the high-end industry will be much better off if you produce a standard protocol for communicating from the device driver in the computer to the Ethernet DAC. Then you want to work with Microsoft and Apple to get a high-quality, bulletproof driver into the standard Windows and OSX OS distributions. Much of the attraction of USB DACs has been the fact that no driver installation is required.
- You might also consider making an ASIO interface part of the driver package. Bypassing the Microsoft audio stack can be a simple way to get good, consistent results for audio output.
I've been an audiophile for about 40 years. I spent over 2 decades implementing real-time kernels, device drivers and kernel level s/w. Much of the current PC audio scene is a complete waste: charlatans fleecing know-nothings. I'm encouraged that you recognize the potential of an Ethernet DAC and I hope you will pursue the project.
Bill
That squeezecenter really put a dagger in it. I have to fight that thing almost weekly when testing new reclockers for customers. The original slim-server really worked flawlessly. This new thing sucks. The Duet is not all that easy either. They shipped it before it was ready. Big mistake to sell out to Logitech.
I'll tell you what is really sweet and easy to use and that is Sonos. see sonos.com
Steve N.
Would you mind dropping me an e-mail at chansen at my company name (four letters) dot com? Thanks.
Thanks. I hope you change your mind as an ethernet only DAC is just a no go for me at that pricepoint or else I would already have the Linn.
It's not a question of changing my mind. It's a question that you can't please all of the people all of the time. There's an old saying -- "Performance, features, price == pick two."
If we add external inputs it will either mean reduced performance or a higher price. I'm not willing to settle for mediocre performance, so that would mean a higher price. But as manufacturers we have to figure out how many sales would we lose due to the higher price versus how many would we gain due to the additional features.
Just out of curiosity, what is the setup you have where you need a DAC with both Ethernet and S/PDIF inputs?
Well, we've talked about this issue in another thread and IIRC the only issue with performance is one where the user is not taking proper precautions. If a user turns off all non-audio gear at the wall when listening to music then audio performance should not be affected.
I'll be using the digital coax input for Blu-Ray 2-channel HT playback. I also currently have my X360/PS2 hooked in on toslink as well as a laptop via USB to AES/EBU (although with something like an ethernet DAC this would become redundant).
You can see my setup here (although it's an older pic the setup remains essentially the same):
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vdone&1215779011
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 ]
