2. pc-audio
  3. 1375540142

Computer audio, I am not convinced yet ......

I am extremely interested in using the computer (Mac or PC) as a source for a digital playback. It seems to be the right direction for modern digital playback, a good alternative to the age old CDP, has endless potential and most convenient. So, I got an EMM DAC2 (retail $10000) with USB input and connected it to an Windows laptop via USB. My preamp, amp, speakers and cables are also of very good quality. Played some track on my system from the PC (used Audacity software, a very good and high quality software for sound processing). In 2 minutes I had to turn it off. It is just mediocre sound compared to playing the same track through a $1000 CDP(Sony SCD XA5400ES). It is almost like listening to an internet-radio through my PC speakers. I was wondering what happened to my first rate sound system ? Later I replaced the Windows PC with a Linux based MacMini, hoping that I will get the result I wanted. But it did not improve much. I did not like the outcome. My listening experience with the computer set up was 4 minutes(2 with PC and 2 with Mac) total. Since then I have gone back to using the same old CDP. I think I blame on the USB interface for this failure. The USB interface has not come up to the state of the art of a modern CD player. I did not try other interfaces purposely. No High-Res, only 16bit/44.1 audio files. I dont listen to SACD. Fire Wire to USB, USB to SPDI/F, Fire wire to HDMI, Firewire to SPDI/F, and almost an infinite combinations of patch up ideas are out there. But I dont like a patch up solution nor do I like to compromise the sound in favor of convenience.

I have heard many audiophile friends changed to computer based playback system many years ago for good and they are happy too. But I am not convinced yet. I am eagerly waiting for computer audio to catch up. I am sure it is in the making but it still has to go quiet a long distance.

Your thoughts are most welcome.
topmostaudio
topmostaudio OP
28 posts
 
Simon, I was referring to a computer of some sort with a CPU as in a normal computer, but the computer is designed for audio and thus will be extremely costly yet not usable as a normal computer.

I can see very clearly that with the on set of this so called computer audio, a new type of device called "interface converter" is going to find its importance in the audio system much like a preamp found its position in interconnecting various sources to an audio system previously.

So, the audio chain with a computer will look like the following:
Computer => Interface Converter => DAC => Preamp => Amp => Speaker.
Previously it was
CDP/TT => Preamp => Amp => Speaker. OR
Transport => DAC => Preamp => Amp => Speaker

This new component "Interface Converter" will convert various digital Interfaces (I2S/HDMI/USB/FireWire/SPDIF/TOSLINK) => Analog or
one form of digital => another form of digital signal.

The quality of this conversion will dictate the quality of the system sound. Better the conversion quality better is the isolation between a mediocre computer HW and a high end audio system.
mrmb's avatar
mrmb
299 posts
 
I really like the "internet radio through my PC speaker sound” that I'm obtaining from my CAT amps and Soundlab M1PX speakers.

Gesh, generalization about interfaces and suppositions about a technology not yet being mature enough, are just that suppositions and generalizations. In my PC audio experience (as well as audio experiences in general), I've found that these 2-words define conclusions that always prevent one from making really wonderful discoveries.

Based on my satisfaction with the present status of computer audio, perhaps I fell into PC Audio trough that contained the only good hardware, but that’s simply not the case!

PC audio and the USB interface are as mature as any other high-end audio playback chain – e.g., box vs open baffle speakers, planars, horns, active/passive preamps, no preamps, vinyl, M/M vs M/C cartridges etc….. Will advancements be made in each of these audio niches, you betcha. Should one put off buying one of these niches, because they’re not yet mature enough, no.

Years ago I moved from a Wadia 861 CDP to computer audio and haven't missed a thing sonically. My first USB DAC was a Wavelength Brick Silver. My present DAC is a Wavelength Crimson.

In my system, high definition files (96/24 and above) sound extremely close to vinyl which is being spun on a Galibier turntable, Tri-planar tonearm and a Dynavector XV1s cart. So, from that standpoint, my audio buddy's systems and from many of the rooms at 2012's RMAF, great digital audio (and yes, USB derived) can be had with a little effort and not as much gnashing of teeth as some think, or would have you believe.

With an external HD, a Mac mini, PureMusic, and an iPad, I’m enjoying the heck out of my setup and 28,000+ tracks – redbook and HD’s.

From my current and obvious audio standpoint, my past, present and future state-of-the-art audio software is USB PC audio and vinyl.
hfisher3380
167 posts
 
I agree with most here who suggest that your USB interface was the likely culprit. I'm not familiar with the DAC you were using but IME most DACs with multiple input options have a severely compromised USB input. If you are dead-set on USB you should look at a standalone asynchronous USB DAC. This is what I am using at it beats the pants off of my previous CDPs - including SACD/DVDa on more expensive machines. In fact I used to have the very same Sony player you do and my Mac Mini --> DAC is so much better it is laughable.

Another thing to watch out for is to make sure your software player is transmitting a bit perfect signal to the DAC. Itunes alone is a no-go, you need aftermarket add-on software.
audioengr
3,282 posts
 
Spectron wrote: "It could be much cheaper if USB output from a music server will be well designed and well executed, if music server designer would asume that USB DAC input is mediocre and do THE RIGHT JOB on the side of music servers."

I'm afraid not. The master clock is still inside the USB interface in the DAC, not in the server. It's the USB interface in the DAC that matters.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
doggiehowser
672 posts
 
EMM Labs DAC2 USB port was designed almost 5 years ago when computer audio was at its infancy. Its USB port was almost an after though, and only capable of running 44.1kHz or 48kHz only and very likely used a synchronous USB connection (par for the course of that era).

The real beauty of that DAC would not be fully realised with the USB port. You should see a big improvement going to an asynchronous USB-SPDIF device like Wavelink HS, or Berkeley Alpha USB which also support Integer/Direct Mode with AudirvanaPlus on the Mac platform, and hooking the SPDIF to the coax/AES input on the EMM Labs DAC2.

You will find a marked improvement too if you use a dedicated computer that runs without the multiple processes running in the background. You will also find that stuff that improves hifi components (power supplies/vibrations) will also have an effect on your PC audio. There are linear power supplies, Solid State drives (no vibrations) that can be used on modified or custom built PCs/Macs.

That said, I find that spinning a disc still sounds marginally better than computer audio but with the leaps and bounds of computer software and technology, it's much closer today than it ever was.
More to discover