|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jan 13, 2016 19:07:58 GMT -5
Hi brubacca - Thanks for the idea. I respect your opinions highly. I have stuck with the Oppo because I like the sound of its DAC. I've compared it to the Emotiva XDA-1, XDA-2, Stealth DC-1, the AudioQuest Dragonflies (versions 1 and 2), the Jolida FX tube DAC, and a few more that I've forgotten. The Oppo has come out on top every time. So the easiest thing to do (and for the least money) is to move the server to the living room, and use its USB out to the Oppo's USB in. My amigo garbulky keeps trying to push me toward a Schiit Yggdrasil, but having just bought new speakers & a nice used preamp, the discretionary budget is tight. But of course, I DID buy a PowerBall lottery ticket for tonight! LOL |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jan 13, 2016 19:10:50 GMT -5
Hi brubacca - Thanks for the idea. I respect your opinions highly. I have stuck with the Oppo because I like the sound of its DAC. I've compared it to the Emotiva XDA-1, XDA-2, Stealth DC-1, the AudioQuest Dragonflies (versions 1 and 2), the Jolida FX tube DAC, and a few more that I've forgotten. The Oppo has come out on top every time. So the easiest thing to do (and for the least money) is to move the server to the living room, and use its USB out to the Oppo's USB in. My amigo garbulky keeps trying to push me toward a Schiit Yggdrasil, but having just bought new speakers & a nice used preamp, the discretionary budget is tight. But of course, I DID buy a PowerBall lottery ticket for tonight! LOL Moving the server is imo unnecessary. But it wouldn't hurt.  |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jan 13, 2016 19:23:04 GMT -5
It's necessary if I want to use the USB interface...
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jan 13, 2016 19:32:30 GMT -5
Hi brubacca - Thanks for the idea. I respect your opinions highly. I have stuck with the Oppo because I like the sound of its DAC. I've compared it to the Emotiva XDA-1, XDA-2, Stealth DC-1, the AudioQuest Dragonflies (versions 1 and 2), the Jolida FX tube DAC, and a few more that I've forgotten. The Oppo has come out on top every time. So the easiest thing to do (and for the least money) is to move the server to the living room, and use its USB out to the Oppo's USB in. My amigo garbulky keeps trying to push me toward a Schiit Yggdrasil, but having just bought new speakers & a nice used preamp, the discretionary budget is tight. But of course, I DID buy a PowerBall lottery ticket for tonight! LOL Moving the server is imo unnecessary. But it wouldn't hurt. New toys at $10.00 per box,,,,,,,,,no problem for you boom!!  Thats how much they cost! And Im sticking to that story!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jan 13, 2016 20:02:25 GMT -5
Someone posted (I think) in the today's humor thread:
My biggest fear is that when I die, my wife will sell my audio system for what I told her I paid for it!
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,100
Member is Online
|
Post by klinemj on Jan 13, 2016 22:14:06 GMT -5
just remember the world is not flat Blasphemer!!!! You were proven wrong in 1492, were you not!?!?!? How many of CC's ships fell off the side of the flat earth??? Two of three,correct? And some say they "sank". Huh..yeah,right...  Mark |
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Jan 13, 2016 22:21:43 GMT -5
Boom,
seriously, try getting a USB stick and put some flac files on it. I use a Kingston DataTraveler 2.0. Try inserting it into one of the two usb ports on the back of the oppo. Now use the oppo to play the files.
How does it compare to the same files played over the network?
While i have an oppo i have never done this although I may try. I have basically finished my HiFi and now it is time to start improving the HT.
|
|
|
|
Post by qdtjni on Jan 14, 2016 4:34:43 GMT -5
Not optical or ethernet if you're looking for "the best". But honestly I don't think audio interface is your problem Why not ethernet? |
|
|
|
Post by yves on Jan 14, 2016 6:14:48 GMT -5
Ethernet and streaming is little more than a convenience feature IMO. Coaxial RCA S/PDIF can have superior performance especially if used in conjunction with a separate external (femto)clock device that is hooked up via e.g. an optical ST connector (see the picture below). However, most consumer DAC units are lacking support for an external clock feed. Mainly as a result, a lot of people still swear by coaxial RCA S/PDIF used in the traditional fashion, i.e. without the separate clock but often with a separate USB-to-S/PDIF reclocking device to reduce transport jitter and also to provide better isolation against the electric noise that rides the electric conductors of the digital coax connection/cable. Because these reclocking devices typically are expensive if you want them to be good (take the Berkeley Audio Design Alpha USB as an example here), and because they typically are *still* using asynchronous USB anyway in the first place, IMO it can pay of better to look for a DAC unit that simply skips the conversion step from asynchronous USB to S/PDIF altogether. The biggest reason why asynchronous USB on a DAC still isn't more often preferred over traditional old S/PDIF is IMO because most DAC manufacturers are heavily skimping on the USB input part of their DAC products, using the term "asynchronous USB" merely as a marketing buzzword, thereby giving asynchronous USB the bad rep. But not *all* of them are, so at the end of the day I would try to avoid AES/EBU and S/PDIF because, well... without the external clock feed, the fact remains they're both flawed: audioworkshop.org/downloads/AES_EBU_SPDIF_DIGITAL_INTERFACEaes93.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Jan 14, 2016 7:00:56 GMT -5
TOSLINK = S/PDIF Your question was "what was best," not "what is best among what I already have." Maybe Boom means coax S/PDIF vs. optical/Toslink....... BTW, S/PDIF (Sony/Philips Digital Interface Format) is a type of digital audio interconnect used in consumer audio equipment to output audio over reasonably short distances. The signal is transmitted over either a coaxial cable with RCA connectors or a fibre optic cable with TOSLINK connectors. S/PDIF interconnects components in home theatres and other digital high fidelity systems. S/PDIF is based on the professional AES3 interconnect standard.[1] S/PDIF can carry two channels of uncompressed PCM audio or compressed 5.1/7.1 surround sound (such as DTS audio codec); it cannot support lossless formats (such as Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio) which require greater bandwidth like that available with HDMI or DisplayPort. S/PDIF is a data link layer protocol and a set of physical layer specifications for carrying digital audio signals between devices and components over either optical or electrical cable. The name stands for Sony/Philips Digital Interconnect Format but is also known as Sony/Philips Digital Interface. |
|
|
|
Post by lionear on Jan 14, 2016 10:25:46 GMT -5
Say, what? Audible differences between digital transport protocols/hardware? But... it's.... digital. :-)
May be one needs to consider different brands of digital cable, too. At the end of the day, a digital signal is an analog square wave signal, and it's going to be transmitted and received by analog circuitry. It can be thought of as 0's and 1's, but that's at the logical (software) level - which does not really exist. What exists is the hardware level, where we're dealing with voltages, currents etc. So how your digital cable interacts with the hardware circuitry would make a difference, too.
So it may be impossible to say which protocol (interface) might be the "best". It may depend on the individual implementation.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,494
|
Post by DYohn on Jan 14, 2016 10:32:42 GMT -5
I have stuck with the Oppo because I like the sound of its DAC. I've compared it to the Emotiva XDA-1, XDA-2, Stealth DC-1, the AudioQuest Dragonflies (versions 1 and 2), the Jolida FX tube DAC, and a few more that I've forgotten. The Oppo has come out on top every time. So the easiest thing to do (and for the least money) is to move the server to the living room, and use its USB out to the Oppo's USB in. Then there's your answer. Plug and play and enjoy. |
|
|
|
Post by qdtjni on Jan 14, 2016 10:41:12 GMT -5
Can't the OPPO act as a DLNA renderer?
|
|
|
|
Post by millst on Jan 14, 2016 10:42:09 GMT -5
There shouldn't be any significant difference between the two SPDIF cables since they are both using the same protocol. The big advantage optical has is that it optically isolates the components. No need to worry about electrical noise or ground loops. The tradeoff is that the max distance is much shorter. Some people hear a difference. If you do, go with the better one.
The clocking information is provided by your source (computer) for SPDIF and HDMI. Ethernet and async USB packetize the data and the DAC uses its own clock during reconstruction. Neither is inherently good or bad. It depends on where the best clock is in your setup and the PLL capability of your DAC.
The HDMI protocol is more geared towards video. You have to deal with hassles like HDMI handshaking or losing audio if your computer powers down the display to save audio. HDMI provides huge bandwidth enabling hi-def sound, but the chunks are larger (based on video frames), which can affect the clocking.
I would not trust the Airport Express for quality audio. It's known to resample (anything that's not 44.1kHz I believe).
The USB input with a drive shouldn't be any different than Ethernet. Everything is getting done by the Oppo. You are subject to network outages and slowdowns, of course.
A computer is definitely capable of the highest level of audio output. It's very unlikely to be your easiest method to get there, however. You need to get the right hardware, software, and configuration. If you're not prepared to tinker and/or don't get along with computers, you probably are better off spending extra for a dedicated source as brubacca noted.
-tm
|
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Jan 15, 2016 11:04:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Jan 15, 2016 11:22:04 GMT -5
Interesting article, thanks for posting. I have to say I agree with the first two comments, though, which I am pasting below. Odin412 11 hours ago
I can't hear any differences between USB, optical and coax connections, nor can I hear any difference between different cables. I do hear (or think I hear) far bigger differences depending on the time of day when I listen or the mood I'm in, if I'm tired, stressed, relaxed or happy. I think that psychoacoustics (and expectation bias) has a far bigger impact on the perceived sound than many of the tweaks (cables, etc.) that audiophiles tend to focus on.
ypdave 13 hours ago
Regarding premium versus garden variety cables,
If you can't demonstrate bits changing state such that they can't be corrected on the fly at the receiving end then you can't possibly claim there is any difference in the sound you think you're hearing.The first comment from Odin412 mirrors my own experience, and the second comment from ypdave states what to me is logical, common sense. If a cable is transmitting bits and there is nothing defective about that cable, then why would Guttenberg's more expensive cable be so much better than the generic cables? Either the generic ones are defective or his mind is telling him which ones to tout. If there really was a "best" digital interface, don't you think there would be a general consensus about that? |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jan 15, 2016 12:13:34 GMT -5
Hi monkumonku - The critical clause in ypdave's statement is "...such that they can't be corrected on the fly at the receiving end...". Correction capabilities vary. |
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Jan 15, 2016 12:15:23 GMT -5
Some cables must give us the jitters?!  Seriously though, timing errors can cause the sound field to collapse and cause sonic differences. Going into an asynch DAC should level the playing field, one would think. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Jan 15, 2016 12:18:31 GMT -5
Hi monkumonku - The critical clause in ypdave's statement is "...such that they can't be corrected on the fly at the receiving end...". Correction capabilities vary. Agreed. But that doesn't make any difference regarding the medium that transmits the digital signal. Some devices might decode a coax-transmitted signal better than optical or USB, but if a coax cable is made properly then why should one coax cable differ from another? Also regarding your original question, if correction capabilities vary and some devices can decode one type of cable better than another, then there really is no "best" interface. It would depend on the device, wouldn't you think? |
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Jan 15, 2016 12:20:58 GMT -5
^ Which is Mr. Gutt's final analysis. Everything in the chain can effect the final out come. Some things alot, other things only a...bit.
|
|
Thats how much they cost! And Im sticking to that story!! 
