MR

For me, an emotional response (feet moving) and an appreciation of the beauty of the musician's sound make it 'right.' Analytical listening is an excellent way to go broke. If I decide to change anything, it's at need (somethng broke) or format changes. When i moved from transport to computer, I tried many audio cards until I hit on a great USB-spdif converter that put the music back in the 'zone.' I have about a dozen 'reference' tracks. If i find myself rapidly switching aming them hoping I will like the next one better, then the component under test is a goner. If I delay listening to the next ref track because I am absorbed in the music, or better, I want to listen to the whole CD because I find the music beautiful and the performance engaging, then we're still in the zone. There are a lot of things that can rob music of its beauty (bouncy bass, symbols that sound like steam, thin 'breath-y' female vocals, massed strings that sound like hash, as examples). When I am instead reacting to the beautiful sound of the performance and getting the emotional intent, we're in the zone. You can move the needle a few percentage points one way or the other by spending tens of thousands of dollars, but if you find the music beautiful, why? I don't prescribe for everyone. Just sharing my experience over 30 years. I spend time, aim high (buy the best I can at the time), find the 'zone,' and then keep my wallet in my pocket.

I have built four different music servers; one was a pretty big failure, and the other three were troublesome for a time. The reference I settled on is a Core I5, 6GB, Win7-64, SSD and an internal 2TB "enterprise" SATA drive, high-end (Corsair 800W) supply. When I tried a sound card with this setup, I could not better the sound I got from a Theta Jade transport (connections to DAC via BNC). Using asynchronous USB (BNC to DAC) does better the Jade. I tried several asynch USB->S/PDIF converters and settled on the ART Legato because I have mostly redbook audio on hand. I came to believe that power and/or ground interference from the computer is hard for most DACs to deal with. Although the quality of the PC's power supply can make matters worse, I don't think perfecting the supply (pure DC) and/or eliminating fans, etc, accomplishes much given the number of high-speed clocks. There is a lot of RF and so potential RFI. I think this can travel on the PC's grounds and/or power legs (A whole sub-industry exists to clean up AC power for audio -- for instance, I use power regenerators to isolate the audio components). There are many audiophiles (me included) and companies who hear a benefit from isolating the digital nasties in a DAC from other components at the point of connection to AC power. If harmonics on the AC line can affect a preamp, then it's no stretch to suggest that the same thing can happen with a PC; worse, a direct connect to the DAC may provide a path for such harmonics to get into the preamplifier. The cable ART supplies does not connect to the PC's power, keeping it out of the cable. When compared to a standard USB cable, I hear a marked improvement with my DACs. This is consistent with my idea that any galvanic connection between the computer and the DAC will negatively impact the DAC. I almost gave up on the idea of computer-fed audio. I hear the effects of jitter (increased sibilance, tizziness) when compared to the Jade unless I use an galvanically isolated interface such as the Legato. There are many such interfaces on the market; I would just stay away from the ones that use the computer's power instead of their own and that fail to galvanically isolate the computer from the DAC. The sound I get from the computer is now significantly better than what I got from the Jade. So much so, I sent the Jade off to Hong Kong, where all good components eventually go. Like the right pair of glasses, like 1080p video, like a full-frame sensor digital SLR, what I hear from the computer, compared to the Jade, is just more "right."

This is not a comment directed at any one in particular, just a general observation.<br /> <br /> It's not reasonable to expect every USB interface to work out of the box with every DAC out there (and there are a lot out there). I hold on to my Theta Generation Va which was hot stuff in 1995. Because it's Red Book, it still makes great music and benefits in a stunning way when used with an asynch USB->SPDIF converter.<br /> <br /> However, if I were to assume that every USB interface out there will work or sound good with it, I'd be a moron. A lot has happened in electronic interfacing since 1993. A lot. There have been a lot of changes in standards, copy protection, etc, etc.<br /> <br /> That suggests there are going to be differences in what DACs expect -- most of them were engineered to go with the manufacturer's transports. Back before computer audio, mixing a transport from one mfgr with a DAC from another was asking for trouble. Makes me wonder if the all-in-one players didn't sound the best after all.<br /> <br /> The bottom line is the more that technology changes, the more the need to use our ears remains. Nothing is a silver bullet and almost anything can be made to sound lousy under the right conditions.<br /> <br /> It took me years of experience before I could trust that what I hear from my system is 'good enough.' It happened when I began to trust my own sense of enjoyment. If I enjoy the music, then I think my system sounds great.<br /> <br /> Despite the goals of the "Absolute Sound," almost anything can mess up the best sound out there. Just set it all up in the garage and have a listen.<br /> <br />

in with the EVO to say. I am letting it break in on a system with no amp (separate J River zone). All of my regular listening is through the Legato, with which I am well pleased. Maybe I will have an opinion in a few weeks.<br /> <br /> I should point out that I use a Jurrasic-era DAC (Theta Gen Va 96K balanced), vintage 1993.

to the HiFace. I lived with one for more than two months while I waited in line for another company's async USB->S/PDIF converter (the Legato -- costing almost 3x as much). The HiFace can't compete and shouldn't be expected to. I believe it's the close contact with computer power and grounds that causes the sound of my DACs to lurch forward, with some of the spitty-ness we call glare or haze. The more expensive interface box has its own all-out power supply and doesn't bring the USB power lines into the USB cable. The jkenny power mods to the HiFace back up what my ears hear. So much of this depends on the DAC -- how good its defenses are against ground and power noise in addition to how well it handles jitter. Some low-end DACs might sound the same with almost any interface -- and some high-end DACs may have the defenses to do the same. (For example, the Theta Gen VIII buffers the S/PDIF stream and then re-clocks it inside the DAC -- such a technique should tend to minimize jitter-based sonic differences among inputs).<br /> <br /> In our avocation, there is no "always and everywhere." No component *always* sounds better and no component *always* sounds worse. One thing I have learned from computer audiophilia is that component matching is critical given that we have the freedom to do so.<br /> <br /> BTW, I have a HiFace EVO as well, and to my ears it outperforms the HiFace by a good bit. It's not always the case . . . but in this case, maybe that's why it costs more.<br /> <br />

The signal path will break-in up to the point that it is disabled. For example, if you have a computer playing music and a DAC decoding the stream, connected to a pre-amp that's turned off, the computer (fwiw), the wire to the DAC, the DAC, and the wires to the pre-amp will all break-in. Source: Cardas Audio, which suggests breaking in signal wires from a pre-amp to an amp by running music through the former with the latter powered down. Components (DACs, amps, pre-amps, receivers) will properly break in when only when powered up and processing music. There is some benefit to merely powering up, but best results are obtained when signals (music or break-in noise) are flowing through the component.

I have only a few 96K files and tens of thousands of 16/44.1 files. For 44/16 playback, I concur that BNC delivers excellent sound, and I have been pretty happy with the ART Legato. I have not tried batch-software upsamplers, but have found upsampling/resampling and/or conversion to 24 bits on-the-fly in playback software less than satisfying (via a Lynx AES16 or a HiFace). The problem is, I think, in the playback software. So far, I can't find anything that beats an asynchronous USB->SPDIF converter for Red Book playback at a straight 16/44 (although some DACs that I listen to upsample to 96/24). I am looking forward to the time that manufacturers and playback software writers give us block-mode asynch transfer from computer to DAC, leaving the clock as an internal matter for the DAC. Assuming no power/ground or RF interference, block-mode transfer offers the DAC designer the best possible chance to show what its converter can do. It can be implemented using USB, Fire Wire, SATA, or Ethernet.

Following a hint from Chris, I tried this out with some mixed results. I used both the standard supply and a 5V li-ion battery. For USB devices that are having problems with grounds, power, or RFI, the Opticis improved the sound -- a lot.<br /> <br /> For a USB interface device (ART Legato) that already achieves galvanic isolation and has its own internal power, I got some improvement until the manufacturer supplied a USB cable with no internal power wires -- this sounded better than the Opticis.<br /> <br /> Where I was hoping to hit a home run was with the HiFace USB->S/PDIF interface which uses USB power. The Opticis cable and the battery seemed like the perfect combination since the HiFace would have complete galvanic isolation as well as a solid DC source. Unfortunately, the Opticis cable appears to the system as a USB hub and the HiFace drivers could not find the HiFace; the device could not be selected for playback even though it was known to Windows.<br /> <br /> It was, however, a nice theory.<br />

OK, this one surprised me. I fought for a while to get the sound I wanted from my primary system here at home; I finally got there when I installed an asynchronous USB interface. The music server for the primary system is stick-built (Intel DH55TC board, P5-650, 4GB, Corsair HX 750 modular supply, Seagate 1TB). It was my second build (I'll call it big-box). My first build was a small Asus board with an cheapie Core 2 Duo and a stock power supply. I have been trying to get good sound from this system in a secondary audio system at our lake house. Finally, after six weeks of trying, I gave up -- no matter what I did, I had a jittery-sounding result (haze, sibilance). I'll call this system little-box. When I got all the pieces here and could A/B, I discovered to my surprise that the jittery sound stayed with little-box to a greater or lesser degree. To my further amazement, the sound through my reference asynch USB interface is degraded with little-box. I reasoned (incorrectly, it turned out) that the cheapie power supply in little-box was the culprit; so I shelled out for a second Corsair HX750, installed it, and noticed no improvement. Given the performance of big-box, I decided to retire little-box build a new one, this time all-out (about $1600): Lian-Li PC-352A aluminum cube (yes, it has fans) ($180). Corsair HX650 supply (the 750 won't fit) ($110). Intel DH55TC motherboard ($100). 8GB Crucial DDR3 (4x2) ($220). 128GB Corsair SSD for Windows 7 ($330). 2TB Seagate Constellation ES SATA drive (for music only) ($330). I5-680 (3.6 Ghz) ($309). The internal PCI and PCIe busses are unused. Although I can't say which components are responsible, I can say that this new system (bigger-box) sounds better than the original big box. Since it isn't the power supply (and the motherboards are identical), it could be the additional processor power, memory, and/or the SSD. For example, a very popular and common asynch USB->SPDIF interface gives a much cleaner (reduced haze and glare) sound with bigger-box than with big-box. With little-box, the sound is not satisfactory. Clearly, the difference is not the interface. My best theory here is that the software (Win 7 Ultimate, J River 15) benefits from the performance enhancements (SSD, memory, processor power). Since bigger-box and big-box differ in only these respects, that's what I am left to conclude. What surprised me was that the computer side could make such a marked difference when using asynch USB interfaces(including my reference that can be optically isolated and has its own internal power). I am eager to hear any other theories. It's not just that building music servers appears to be addictive, it's that they're getting more expensive as I go .

I have tried both and settled on the Legato. The HiFace does more resolutions, but I am happy with 44.1. With the HiFace, I get more glare/haze in the presentation, which I suspect is due either to the use of USB power from the computer or a gound noise problem. I understand m2Tech has a model (EVO, I think) that has its own power. It's not reasonable to expect the HiFace to be the ultimate at its price, and I'm using a pretty high resolution back end. With the ART-supplied USB and BNC cables, I finally got the sound that I want from my DAC (Theta). I sold my Lynx AES16e card, if voting with my feet says anything. The Legato has its own power and comes with a custom USB cable that doesn't contain the power wires. This cable makes an additional improvement. With this setup, I get a relaxed, musical presentation with very tight bass. ART also supplies a longish coax cable (their Web site details all the theory behind this). It took me several months of trying various solutions before I got what I wanted from a music server. The computer is isolated from the power line (Audio Power box) and the Legato and DAC are driven by PS Audio power regenerators -- these boxes produce clean AC and both the DAC and the Legato seem to like it. I have not compared the Halide Bridge.

I must add my voice to those who praise the ART Legato asynchronous USB to S/PDIF converter; with it, my DAC is producing its best music yet, bettering my reference transport, a Theta Jade. The Legato provides galvanic isolation and carries its own power supply, distancing itself from both computer grounds and power. I used Cardas USB and AC cables and a PS Audio power regenerator (vanilla 60 Hz sine-wave power). I used ART's long BNC-BNC cable. My DAC is also a Theta (Casablanca II DAC and Pre with Xtreme cards configured for full-range stereo-only sound), built after Theta's Generation V and before its current music model, the Generation VIII. The Xtreme cards share technology with the Generation VIII, but the Casablanca does not, for example, buffer and re-clock the S/PDIF stream and so gets a significant helping hand from the Legato. I spent a lot of time comparing the Legato with an AES/EBU link from the computer and with the Jade transport. During ABX listening, the differences with the Legato were surprisingly small but amazingly significant. The Legato reduced glare and haze and improved the weight of drums and strings. Bass was more tuneful and focused, with more of the artist's intent. The overall result was that music had more emotional impact. I found my feet or hands tapping the beat consistently when listening through the Legato. I could relax into the music and forget my audiophillia. I wanted to let the music play rather than think of something to change. Some rock tracks (particularly Foreigner) that I have had a tendency to interrupt with the "next track" button played to conclusion. I use the "Quando corpus morietur" movement of Dvorak's Stabat Mater (Robert Shaw, Telarc) as a DAC torture-test. With less than great conversion, the very energetic soloists can quickly mount an all-out ear attack. The chorus can sound congealed, as if clipped. With the Legato, the soloists achieved their proper focus, and individual voices comprised the chorus without any of the treble nastiness that can haunt massed voices and strings. Shaw said he came to this piece late in his career, but he found every drop of its emotive power. This is why we spend more money than the price of a boom box. The Legato doesn't do the higher resolutions; but I have 2200 CDs and very little hi-res stuff, so it fits my music collection to a tee.

Certainly, one would most often play a copy to which pre-emphasis has been applied. I suggest hanging on to the original bits in keeping with Chris' principles of digital preservation for CD audio data. I think he makes an excellent case for hanging on to the CRC-correct bitstring as a read-only master for any subsequent processing or modifications, including playing them through a DAC that has pre-emphasis processing of its own. The bit can be turned on manually in the Lynx mixer, arguably too much of a hassle for everyday use, but possibly useful as a point of comparison.

The presence or absence of pre-emphasis doesn't appear to survive the rip; for those who might be interested, EAC has a writeup: http://blowfish.be/eac/Rip/rip12-preemph.html This is apparently an issue for some of the CDs I ripped; however, it appears to be mostly an issue on older CDs and with certain classical labels. Applying pre-emphasis during the rip would result in modified copy, so I am not immediately drawn to that idea; the procedure outlined by EAC first creates a bit-accurate wav and then produces a modified file without changing the original rip. I haven't found a way to automatically set the AES16/AES16e 'Emphasis' flag or simply pass the channel status data along in the rip.

Anybody understand how to use the emphasis bit? A search of the forum for "emphasis bit" yielded no posts. The Lynx mixer allows the bit to be turned on or off on each output channel. As I understand it, emphasis represents processing applied during recording; frequencies from 1 kHz to 20 kHz are emphasized. When the bit is found in the channel status data, the DAC applies de-emphasis to bring the frequency response back to flat. With the bit turned off, most of the FLAC files I am playing sound zipped-up (upper frequencies emphasized), a problem I have been fighting with clocks, cables, and some purely mad ideas. When I check "Emphasis", the DAC's flattening darkens the sound appreciably. What I don't understand is whether/how this information survives (or doesn't) the process of ripping FLAC files. At first blush, what I am hearing sounds better with the option checked.

I picked carefully through the CASH list and posts related to AES/EBU cables. That yielded the suggestion that Gotham wire might be less forward (Chris' observation) than the Mogami. After about 48 hours of burn-in, a Gotham wire (Redco) has significantly tamed the tip-up in the upper midrange/treble without apparent damage to bass/midrange. Subjectively, the tip-up was about 125 per cent and now seems more like 110 per cent or less. Can't say that this is an inherent difference in the cables (as opposed to an interaction with my stuff), but I hear what Chris heard. I am going to work on a comparison of an outboard asynch SPDIF converter with the AES16e to pick a final pathway for my setup.