Why does my DAC sound so much better after upgrading digital SPDIF cable?
I like my Mps5 playback designs sacd/CD player but also use it as a DAC so that I can use my OPPO as a transport to play 24-96 and other high res files I burn to dvd-audio discs.
I was using a nordost silver shadow digital spdif cable between the transport and my dac as I felt it was more transparent and better treble than a higher priced audioquest digital cable a dealer had me audition.
I recently received the Synergistic Research Galileo new SX UEF digital cable. Immediately I recognized that i was hearing far better bass, soundstage, and instrument separation than I had ever heard with high res files (non sacd),
While I am obviously impressed with this high end digital cable and strongly encourage others to audition it, I am puzzled how the cable transporting digital information to my DAC from my transport makes such a big difference.
The DAC take the digital information and shapes the sound so why should the cable providing it the info be so important. I would think any competently built digital cable would be adequate....I get the cable from the DAC to the preamp and preamp to amp matter but would think the cable to the DAC would be much less important.
I will now experiment to see if using the external transport to send red book CD files to my playback mps5 sounds better than using the transport inside the mps5 itself.
The MPS5 sounds pretty great for ca and awesome with SACD so doubt external transport will be improvement for redhook cds
I’ve got a comparably modest digital source setup:
Allo Digione RPi to Schiit Modi Uber 2 to NAD C316BEE to Tekton Lore speakers
Did an a/b test with each cable upgrade: no-name cheapo rca analog interconnect to ZU audio mission from dac to amp = huge improvements.
Then the same with digital rca: monoprice 1.5 meter to amplifier surgery 1.5 meter from Digione RPi to dac = huge improvements.
in both cases- or at each stage- beyond satisfied, to point of giddy, weird smiles that kind of worried my wife (however, she also noticed the improvements). The degree of improved detail and stage was more than palpable.
Just wanted to share that that it was even noticed with a far lesser setup than most possess here. Happy Thanksgiving! 🍁
For the last 13 years I've had a media PC hooked up to my TV and Denon surround amp. I'm using an TOSLINK from the PC motherboard to the amp. So, this is a red light flashing on and off on the motherboard going down about 1m of some sort of glass tube (whatever an optical cable is made of) and the amp is reading the pulses of light. I only play mp3s and it's mainly dance/pop stuff (so nothing high brow) - it all sounds truly amazing. I've never heard music sound better than it does in my house.
Am I to understand that the cable is causing jitter to a flashing pulse of light and that the digital info being received by the amp is not totally correct? Or is jitter to do with extra devices and connections and distance between the source and the amp?
The only thing that I have ever found that affects the quality is to use some mp3 gain software that stops mp3 flies from clipping. Before lowering the gain to remove clipping they sound harsh, get rid of the clipping they are sweet as anything. I do find that any Youtube or Spotify stuff directly over the internet generally tends to sound a bit rough in comparison, I assume it's down to the gain and that internet stuff is designed to sound good through phones and laptop speakers and not a couple of thousand quid of amp and speakers.
I have shown that psec levels of jitter is indeed need, but it’s already >300psec for 16-bit.
Also, no, jitter doesn’t alter the reaslism of instruments/vocals, the type of jitter we are talking about is a rise in the noise floor, or distortion-like peaks of low-level. Meaning, it’s like a bit of static added in. And again, this whole conversation was about the how a new Toslink cable make a drastic reduction in jitter. Keep in mind how I showed even the budget-ish DragonFly DAC can reduce even immense jitter well below the noise floor anyway.
“I wouldn’t want a speaker with a super wide soundstage for instance, as that would cause too many reflections...”
The above statement clearly shows we’re dealing with a newbie to high-end sound reproduction. I take back my comment about his being a nerdy troll. My apologies.
Stereophile has several publications that explain the nuances of sound reproduction in high-end audio systems. I recommend mzkmxcv check out those sources.
It’s not a question whether jitter, per se, is inaudible. The question is whether jitter manifests itself in the audio reproduction of a digital source that is audible in terms of the dimensionality and realism of instruments and vocalists localized therein. Countless companies, as confirmed by critical listening sessions, have demonstrated that reducing jitter to psec levels in digital audio streams greatly improves the sound quality in high-end audio systems. This is largely incontrovertible.
If specs show me that any further reduction in jitter would be inaudible, then I wouldn’t spend time nor money looking at a re-clocker or anything, as it’s not theoretical, but actually impossible for there to be any audible improvement if the current jitter is below the noise floor.
For say speakers, I’ll look for speakers that measure close to ideal, and then try to demo (as if my room is overly reflective or narrow, I wouldn’t want a speaker with a super wide soundstage for instance, as that would cause too many reflections; the same goes for a narrower soundstage in a wide room).
Question for you: Do you purchase everything based on specs alone or you trust your senses? If the former, then you are definitely not only in the minority but most likely not getting your best bang for the buck. If the latter - which sounds unlikely, then you need to get your hearing checked.
+1, @nonoise, for acute perception of the discourse here. -1, @audioengr, for making a stupid political analogy that adversely affects my opinion of you. -2, @mzkmxcv, for being a nerdy troll here.
Forgot to add, in order for any jitter to be present for 16-bit (not factoring in jitter reduction by the DAC nor dithering), it needs to be less than 346psec ((1000000000000/44100)/(2^16) ).
So, since <346psec is litterally not present for 16-bit, without reduction or dither, making the claim that going from 22psec to 7psec was drastically audible should now be clearly evident as bogus (placebo).
And yes, there is no benefit from going higher than 16-bit, which can cover say 35dB to 126dB without dither, and 25dB to 145dB with noise shaped dither.
i don’t have a golden ear, that is very true. However, not a single person tested professionally/scientifically has been able to hear jitter below a nanosecond, so to say that 0.0012ns (22psec) of jitter is audible just isn’t true.
Jitter introduced by Toslink is not an issue, even without a DAC reducing it. With a DAC reducing it, the problem is non-existent; when doing a J-Test (pretty much worst case scenario of jitter), the $100 AudioQuest DragonFly Black had a jitter reduction of no worse than -105dBFS; meaning you could playback 35dB (average noise floor in a treated room) to 140dB and have no jitter present.
mzkmxcv, To believe that we as human beings understand everything about how each persons ears convey information to their brain is almost as arrogant as making the jump that if they hear something you don't, it's a placebo.
Jitter is an issue with every piece of digital gear, even Toslink. Toslink has the additional issue of conversion from electrical to optical and optical back to electrical. Each of these stages adds jitter. Even a single gate adds jitter.
If you don't think you can hear these differences, fine. I have hundreds of Synchro-Mesh customers that do hear the difference. I don't need your business.
The only reason that I respond to your posts is to debunk what you are saying, which may lead other audiophiles down the garden path.
It's like debunking the record crowd size claimed at the Trump inauguration. Somebody has to do it.
I know an iPhone isn’t resolving, just giving a reference point. However, did you use that link and take the test? Be honest if you actually could differentiate the 2 microsecond (random or periodic) with music playing; even if you could, now imagine the difference being ~91,000 times smaller (2 microseconds vs 22psec).
And again, customer feedback proves nothing, as placebo is more likely be factor.
As for a “personal attack”, Empirical Audio/you sell a $700 reclocking device, so I was pointing out it would be unlikely for you to admit, the truth, that jitter in Toslink cables is a non-issue.
Suggesting that for the time it takes for the speed of sound to travel 0.0000002979 inches (22psec), which is also a phase shift of 0.0001584° at 20kHz and 0.0000001584° at 20Hz, to be audible is on the verge of insanity.
@bluesmen: I have owned both the AA DTI and the SF Ultra Jitterbug. Both are great digital signal reclockers, significantly reducing jitter in the resultant digital stream and yielded greatly improved SQ. I can’t recall the DTI’s output jitter levels, but the Ultra Jitterbug output jitter level was < 40 psec.
The EA Synchro Mesh reclocker takes this principle to another level with a reported output jitter level of 7 psec. I can’t recall, but I think one has to have Steve modify the SM design (remove the output transformer?) to get that reduced jitter level. It’s an inexpensive mod. Here’s a link: http://www.empiricalaudio.com/products/synchro-mesh
I guess I need to upgrade the speakers in my iPhone X. I only can discern the differences of random jitter noise from that website link on my iPhone, regardless of file samples.
Yet I fall into Steve’s (@audioengr) camp regarding discerning obvious SQ differences due to a high quality jitter clock or external reclocker that produces ultra low jitter (e.g., 10 psec jitter output at the end of a BNC-terminated coaxial cable) when listening to digital music playback on my home audio system. A digital audio signal having psec-levels of jitter readily manifests itself as an improved analog audio SQ effect on the dimensionality of the reproduced sound field and the realism of instruments and vocals conveyed therein.
So, it should be obvious that if 2 million psec is not easily differentiable with music playing, than your original statement of going from 22psec to 7psec being a drastic difference should show you why I stated it was bogus, even if your gear and room are near silent,
It is not bogus. I have been demonstrating differences in jitter for 10 years at RMAF, THE Show, LA Audio Show and others. I can measure it and I can hear it with my systems. My customers feedback proves that these differences are audible. You need a system that provides pinpoint imaging and deep wide soundstage. You cannot get with this an iPhone.
Of course, given your job, I highly doubt you would state otherwise
What the hell is that supposed to mean? Is this a personal attack?
On my phone, I could guess the original 1kHz vs 2µs periodic (the others were obvious), but was magnitudes more difficult with music.
So, it should be obvious that if 2 million psec is not easily differentiable with music playing, than your original statement of going from 22psec to 7psec being a drastic difference should show you why I stated it was bogus, even if your gear and room are near silent, the difference in the noise floor with content playing would be insignificant, just like how going from dithered 16bit to 24bit is impossible to hear, as dithered 16bit has a dynamic range of 120dB, and the noise floor of a song is never gonna be say 20dB, so one could have a song that’s 20dB to 140dB be perfectly reproduced by noise-shape dithered 16bit.
Of course, given your job, I highly doubt you would state otherwise.
Jitter is well documeneted. However, comparing jitter between DACs has nothing to do with if you are using a $20 generic digital cable (coax or optical) or a $4000 Nordost one.
It certainly enters into it. If the cable is really poor, the jitter added will swamp what the DAC will deliver in terms of jitter. See these plots:
I didn’t say the DAC would eliminate jitter, I said it would reduce it to beyond audibility.
In your dreams.
Just take a second (pun intended) and just think how short a nanosecond is, and then a picosecond. Sorry, but no, we can’t hear a difference.
I know exactly how small a nsec and psec is, 10-9sec and 10-12 sec.
Who is we? You mean you I think.
I get this all the time on the forums. People with unresolving, noisy systems that think they have something great. All it takes is an inexpensive preamp to prevent you from hearing most of these differences. I have had systems for a decade that can discern easily the difference between a wav file and FLAC, AIFF and even uncompressed FLAC files. I can easily hear the difference in files with different offsets. You probably don’t know that this is. Some people reading these posts have much better systems and they can benefit from my advice.
I have been designing digital systems and managing design groups for 42 years as an EE. I know what I’m talking about.
mzkmxcw, it sounds like you're a genuine skeptic so why don't you just admit YOU don't hear a difference instead of discarding other people's opinions. There are a couple of other threads in progress right now debating similar arguments and there will never be a consensus on these topics.
I didn’t say the DAC would eliminate jitter, I said it would reduce it to beyond audibility.
Just take a second (pun intended) and just think how short a nanosecond is, and then a picosecond. Sorry, but no, we can’t hear a difference. And again, any customer feedback is irrelevant. There is positive customer feedback on using pebbles scattered across the room to act as diffusers.
Also, I mixed psec with ns. Going from 22psec to 7psec is not audible. Some studies/trials have been done, and human audibility of jitter is >10ns (~20ns one study found), which is 10,000psec. And again, any good DAC would get rid of jitter to beyond audibility in the first place.
I've heard this mantra over and over. You are believing the marketing BS. It is audible. Here are the customer feedbacks to prove it:
The studies that have been done by AES and others are flawed. I have read them and pointed out flaws in all of them.
As for the DAC reclocking: in your dreams. The only DAC that I have encountered where a customer thought it was totally immune to incoming jitter was the Benchmark DAC3. This result was probably clouded by his system which was likely not resolving or low-noise enough.
I know a few psec makes a difference, and the measurements I was talking about showed digital coax around 100psec at 100kHz to 1.4MHz and Toslink at 500-1000psec for the same reason. However, that’s well beyond human audibility so it doesn’t matter.
It does matter. Once you get a rig put together that is truly resolving, you can easily hear these differences. Everyone has a system they believe to be resolving but it just isn't the case.
Show me the jitter difference between an Amazon Basics optical cable and then from an AudioQuest Diamond optical cable. I have seen one users measurements where he compared a ~$3 optical cable to a $200 glass one, and the $200 was 5psec less.
I don't have any way of measuring accurately Toslink cables, only coax cables. Just spend $25 and get the Toslink I recommended. You will hear the difference.
However, keep in mind any properly made DAC (I’ve seen $1000 ones perform worse than $100 ones) will get rid of jitter anyway, even the AudioQuest DragonFly USB DACs will reduce the jitter to be inaudible.
I definitely will not keep this in mind, because it's simply not true. There is no such thing as eliminating all jitter, even if companies advertise this. Most DAC's benefit from a reduction in input jitter, even if they have reclocking inside. I used to mod many different DAC's, so I have a lot of experience here. I'm not a fan of reclocking inside the DAC BTW.
Look at how Stereophile tests jitter, it actually is in our hearing range. Who cares if the timing errors are at 500kHz?
You claim the clock differences can be heard, I no doubt believe you hear a difference, I do doubt though that any differences are above our audibility thresholds (and not by a reasonable margin, you are claiming differences that are magnitudes upon magnitudes upon magnitudes lower than what studies have found).
And again, our audibility threshold to hear jitter has been tested to be >10ns, the fact of using a femtosecond clock is irrelevant, as a jitter error of 1 femtosecond won’t sound better than an error of 1 nanosecond.
You wrote, "I have seen measurements showing jitter in Toslink, but they were showing >100kHz and even in the MHz range, so it has no influence on music."
IMO this reveals that you don''t understand the influence of jitter, to wit, what jitter is all about. My DAC, for ex. uses femtosecond clocks to minimize jitter. And they do. The difference between clocks like these and lesser clocks can be heard.
If the difference is due to placebo, it at the end of the day makes no difference from an actual improvement, as you feel the system is sounding better. However, your perception may not work in the same way as someone else, so actually claiming it performs better would be disingenuous.
The fact of listening for a difference itself will lead you to look for differences and possibly hear them even if they don’t exist. This also is in replay to audioengr and how he said his customers heard a difference, just the fact of asking if they heard a difference would itself invalidate any findings. Just remeber the story I told in the beginning, people heard distinct differences even though the system stayed the same. Our brains are easily fooled, just think back to what color that dress was (it’s black/blue; I saw white/gold the first day and the next day I could only see black/blue, truly mind blowing).
@audioengr
Also, I mixed psec with ns. Going from 22psec to 7psec is not audible. Some studies/trials have been done, and human audibility of jitter is >10ns (~20ns one study found), which is 10,000psec. And again, any good DAC would get rid of jitter to beyond audibility in the first place.
And yet you do not know it actually made a difference, all you know is that you heard a difference.
@audioengr3
I know a few psec makes a difference, and the measurements I was talking about showed digital coax around 100psec at 100kHz to 1.4MHz and Toslink at 500-1000psec for the same reason. However, that’s well beyond human audibility so it doesn’t matter.
Show me the jitter difference between an Amazon Basics optical cable and then from an AudioQuest Diamond optical cable. I have seen one users measurements where he compared a ~$3 optical cable to a $200 glass one, and the $200 was 5psec less.
However, keep in mind any properly made DAC (I’ve seen $1000 ones perform worse than $100 ones) will get rid of jitter anyway, even the AudioQuest DragonFly USB DACs will reduce the jitter to be inaudible.
Ah! The ol' "Better hearing", "Better equipment" argument. Neither will defy physics. Moving your speakers 1" will have an infinitely larger effect on your systems sound compared to changing Toslink or RCA cables.
Anyone who thinks "bits are bits" are fooling themselves. If that is the case try a toslink cable from best buy & compare it to a true 75 ohm coax cable. I've done it / The difference is not subtle. I'm also sure that Steve's "
Synchro-Mesh reclocker" would improve the sound even more. Just saying there are improvements to be had with the bits.
I have seen measurements showing jitter in Toslink, but they were showing >100kHz and even in the MHz range, so it has no influence on music.
Most jitter measurements are not useful if not even bogus. One number is insufficient unless there are plots to back it up. When I reduced jitter from 22psec to 7psec with improvements to my Synchro-Mesh reclocker, the difference was easily audible to me and my customers. You can never have jitter too low or inaudible IMO, at least not with todays technology.
It said these can effect jitter if all (cable and connector) are not 75ohm.
Very true, although the losses, dielectrics and even the conductor materials also have an effect. The ONLY coax cable to be using is a BNC-BNC. If you must have RCA connectors, use BNC to RCA adapters that are 75 ohms on the BNC end. I verified last year that even Belden 1694A is not close enough to 75 ohms. I had used it as a reference for tuning my products and had to go back and retune all of them when I got an aerospace quality cable that is quite close to 75 ohms.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
