2. digital
  3. 172684-7805

Can the digital "signal" be over-laundered, unlike money?

Pretty much what is implied by the title. 

Credit to @sns who got me thinking about this. I've chosen a path of refrain. Others have chosen differently.

I'm curious about members' thoughts and experiences on this? 

Though this comes from a 'clocking thread' by no means am I restricting the topic to clocking alone.

Please consider my question from the perspective of all ["cleaning"] devices used in the digital chain, active and passive.

 

From member 'sns' and the Ethernet Clocking thread [for more context]:

 

"I recently experienced an issue of what I perceive as overclocking with addition of audiophile switch with OXCO clock.  Adding switch in front of server, NAS resulted in overly precise sound staging and images."

"My take is there can be an excessive amount of clocking within particular streaming setups.

...One can go [to0] far, based on my experience."

 

Acknowledgement and Request:

- For the bits are bits camp, the answer is obvious and given and I accept that.

- The OP is directed to those that have utilized devices in the signal path for "cleaning" purposes.

Note: I am using 'cleaning' as a broad and general catch-all term...it goes by many different names and approaches.

 

Thank You! - David.

david_ten

Showing 3 responses by cindyment

cindyment's avatar
cindyment
351 posts
 

@itsjustme , virtually all USB made now are async and they are effectively as queued as Ethernet. Bit errors on USB are close enough to 0 to be zero.

There is no "reclocking" in a USB DAC. There is only clocking. Not all are perfect, but if they were not close to perfect, then THD would escalate and even cheap DACs have excellent THD so that argument has little merit unless done poorly which seems to inflict boutique brands more than others (based on Stereophile tests).

What denotes a "properly engineered USB IF". The one issue that regularly comes up, and few deny, is system level noise mainly from the source. Easy solved. Isolate the USB.

cindyment's avatar
cindyment
351 posts
 

I don't want to misinterpret you or misquote you, so could you please write this more clearly before i reply? For example, are you saying that timing/jitter does not matter on the USB interface? If so, you are confusing a purely data signal with the quasi-analog signal that is fed to a DAC.So, please clarify the whole thing. Thanks.

Timing/jitter on the USB interface does not matter. This does not have any impact on the DAC analog output which uses a completely separate clock. That does not need to be a very expensive clock for very good audio performance. Sure, lots of expensive equipment makers say it does, but they can't ever support that claim. Chip based DACs, new ones at least, not 30 year old ones, are more immune to clock jitter as well.

Saying "quasi-analog" is marketing speak. It has no meaning. Clock jitter has meaning, namely clock jitter at the input to the DAC.

Electrical noise on the USB I/F due to ground loops is an issue, hence why I addressed isolation.

Please don't come back with pseudo-technical marketing fluff. That is not going to cut it except with people who have also drunk the Koolaid.

cindyment's avatar
cindyment
351 posts
 
itsjustme
471 posts

You ignored everything i said. I'm not being baited.

 

If baiting is asking you to justify your position to which I pointed out the inconsistencies and errors, then I guess I baited you. If I was baiting you though, i would just say I don't think you can justify many of your statements based on how these products work and inability to define "properly engineered",  though as been often said and does not seem controversial is that non-isolated USB can be a source of power/ground loop noise.

More to discover