Group Test: USB gadgets (AQ Jitterbug, Uptone Regen, iFi iUSB3.0, iPurifier, iPurifier2, UPDATE on p.15…)

[DM]

I'm not so sure about the Ifi isolation, they never mention a voltage that it can withstand without creep, like the Intona industrial or standard of 4kV or 1kV respectively.

 

The PSU for ifi products were shown in a poor light and compared to linear supplies. For isolation an LPS-1 is isolated from output to input completely, this is what's necessary to stop contamination through the power supply. Sadly all these fixes just add complexity and make a real mess of the signal chain. Looking at all this AES3 and AOIP have benefits for pcm and would be superior to USB since isolation is already built in. They are unfortunately hopeless at supporting DSD.

 

I think 4kV or 1kV insulation is rather irrelevant in USB audio. USB is 5V, so in theory an insulation rating of 10V is the same as 4kV.

 

Regarding the PSU comes with the iUSB3.0, the iPower, iFi claimed 1uV noise, I haven't seen many LPS comes close to that noise figure. I do have a couple iPowers here, will try do a test when next time I am in my friend's lab to confirm (not sure can his lab measure down to 1uV, will give it a try anyway).

 

 

If the iPower does post a 1uV noise performance, then it's unlikely to be the bottleneck ...

[Middy]

Just to clarify this RoboSnake of hell...

This isn't a defacto chain of sonic improvement..Good God no.... It was in a small way in DMs vain seeing what works.

I had the IFI IPURIFIER 2 first with my previous Dac (Oppo HA1) Now the Mytek Brooklyn..

 

An Intona Standard hidden in a shielded case. I chained the 2 as it made a slight benefit to include the Purifier.

 

The i Defender was me being lazy and not making a ground lift and clean 5v line mini cable.

Intona kills the battery on my phone. The Battery supply will be modded to house more MAH later to give 30000mah. So no twice weekly charging..

 

This mess is because IFI'S I defender is a top chain pass through design, acting as a USB extension in a PC usb slot.

 

This configuration is because I keep away from PC transport and run UAPP (Android USB AUDIO PLAYER PRO) from a phone in bit perfect mode. Plugged into an otg extender is fine but not when you have a 5v line trailing power cable attached.

 

The 2 hard adapters in Grey blue only convert USB A to B. If I had the mind to I could desolder and make them USB B... A buy it now on amazon is faster? to get them working down chain..

 

The IFI DEFENDER was me being lazy and the wife banning me from soldering in the house.

The I purifier like DM was. .. does it do anything chained? or Singular?

 

But getting all in this in a chain as you can see is a bloody mess and funny to look at.. and itchy Amazon fingers, waiting 6 weeks for a headphone upgrade over xmass are the work of the Devil..

 

This falls in nicely with DM'S testing of what works as it was half in my brain to do so!!! but not as technical. Just my big old ears..

 

Cheap add on parts removed from IFI'S main tech is tempting. As we know thier main products have these as standard.

2 hours over time at the weekend in work payed for 1 IFI Trinket so no major loss for me to try....

 

I only displayed this mess as DM jumped my gun before my headphones settle as planars, Mr SpeakersEthers Flow(200) hours settle to where hopefully I can hear what the IFI trinkets do or dont add..

Single or mega chained....

But I am unique here I think in my transport and bed side setup for quiet listening and reading..

 

My power chain is almost as excessive.... With A DC purifier in there. Sbooster 12V Linear> Balanced isolation transformer > DC Offset Filter>

I have a lot of work to evaluate everything when I can. A nightmare of AB testing Power and USB Configurations.

 

The hard part is the Ether flow upgrade has completely changed the detail retrieval from my music, making this process both easier and harder.

 

As I have to start again evaluating my music and what happens when you add one or more USB toys to help or hinder.

 

if I can do a product evaluation half as good as DM has.... It will be worth the effort and cost.

 

So please excuse the horror show picture...

It was just for fun with them all attached for DM and my personal fun factor....

But small spending like a crazy audiophile kleptomaniac to say "Ooooh I wonder if that works???" has trapped me between 'a rock and a hard..adapter'

[emoji4]

Reading all this back I realized I may need help or cut up my credit card. ..

 

 

Sent from my SM-G900F using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[Ncore1]

8. Intona High Speed USB Isolator (USB2.0, US$348)

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]32563[/ATTACH]

 

This is a little gem that does things slightly differently, it is a regeneration device with galvanic isolation. We audiophiles just love the word “Galvanic”, don’t we? It was designed for industrial use (that’s why the 2.5kV voltage rating), but picked up by the audiophiles.

 

It is a USB2.0 design again, why everyone in audio is still stuck in USB2.0? I do understand that most audio gear is still USB2.0, but nowadays most computers have more USB3.0 ports than USB2.0 ports…

 

Together with the micro iUSB3.0, they two are the most expensive items in the group. Well, US$300ish is actually penny money in an audiophile world, just look at what an audiophile cable will cost. I guess the plastic is necessary for the 2.5kV industrial rating but it is really ugly, my friend said it looks like a US$19.99 cable TV isolator from Bestbuy. Well, looks aside, it is the performance does the talking.

 

Lab

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]32562[/ATTACH]

 

We were a little bit surprised of the findings, the Intona noise was as good as the computer USB port! Which means it was bad … even the cheap iPurifier2 beat it hands down. Also during testing, we encountered a few operational issues:

 

(1) it could only provide around 300mA of juice, if we up the load to 400mA, the intona drops to 4.57V (should be 5V), so if the DAC need a bit of juice (e.g. LH Lab Geek Out), it just didn't work.

 

(2) sometimes the intona just won’t to connect to the system at all, need a good few retries to get it working. In one of my friend’s system, it still won’t connect as of now. But in my system, it sometimes refuse connection on a rainy day, but normal use is largely fine.

 

So in the Lab department, the intona is probably the worst one, it is obviously a product design for industrial use and not for home audio use. Will the woeful lab result translate 100% into the sound?

 

 

 

Hi

 

Just curious about this result as it doesn't seem to relate to the one posted on Intonas website

 

Their result posted below shows a worst case of -100 dBu at 10 Hz and about -120 dBu at 1kHz. Please note this is dBu, so IIRC this is reference to 0.77 v and therefore if you reference 5v its actually another 16 dB lower.

 

So my first question is, what is your reference voltage in your scale? Is it the soundcard FS?

 

Second question, is the SC input single ended or differential?

 

Third question, was the sound card and intona plugged into the same computer?

 

I think I would respectfully suggest there might have been a measurement error. I will try and perform some measurements myself and see what I get for this device.

 

[YashN]

Just to clarify this RoboSnake of hell...

 

Middy...

 

Just admit...

 

you like...

 

suspension...

 

...

[Ncore1]

My results for the Intona are quite different, very much like Intonas own results. My guess DM is that you measured on the same PC as the Intona was attached to thus destroying the isolation.

 

Yellow is the ADC noise floor (unterminated)

 

[Ncore1]

Agree with you on this, Intona must be deployed with due care:

 

 

• it's galvanic isolation is surely a plus
  

• the way it regenerates the USB signal is quite unpredictable, as it is not native USB transfer. Following is from my EE friend:
  

many many data conversions happened inside the Intona (USB serial>Bi-directional parallel, Bi-directional parallel>Uni-directional parallel, Uni-directional parallel>Bi-directional parallel, Bi-directional parallel>USB serial); so if any one of the conversion is a tiny bit out, the whole chain suffers, also there is the additional latency and timing issue to solve.

 

• it's power output is down right horrible
  

Not sure I agree with your friends comments there, I don't think he understands the process.

[One and a half]

I think 4kV or 1kV insulation is rather irrelevant in USB audio. USB is 5V, so in theory an insulation rating of 10V is the same as 4kV.

 

Its not so much insulation, but protection against voltage peaks.

 

On the contrary, the low 5V can easily be snotted by a larger voltage, for example a complete meltdown between AC power and the computer. 5V becomes 120V, even higher if there's an arc with sufficient energy. That's why the Intona protects to the levels that they do, to safeguard the connected load, without damage. That's before we get into a discussion of mains borne spikes, which I have seen in a 240V system reaching 1300V with malfunctioning equipment. The little wall wart from ifi could never withstand this level without shooting through to the load.

 

The noise figure that ifi quote is just the power supply with typically nothing connected. Once a load is connected, it's a different story.

[Ncore1]

Oh just for completeness here is the USB noise of the Sony Laptop I was using.

 

DM, if you have measured on the same computer as the device tested, all your data could have potential problems.

 

With the amount of spuria seen on all your measurements, I would suggest this is the case.

 

[YashN]

My guess DM is that you measured on the same PC as the Intona was attached to thus destroying the isolation.

 

That certainly wouldn't be a proper way of making measurements.

 

I find the so-called conclusions in this thread about the 'variability' of the Intona to be very dodgy.

 

Not to mention several classes of devices which do very different things are somehow lumped together in the same basket.

[kilroy]

That certainly wouldn't be a proper way of making measurements.

 

I find the so-called conclusions in this thread about the 'variability' of the Intona to be very dodgy.

 

Not to mention several classes of devices which do very different things are somehow lumped together in the same basket.

 

The OP includes the affect on sound quality. That seems to be the basis for his ratings. Regardless of the so-called "class" of device, many people, including me, make their buying decisions on the degree of improvement to sound quality. That said, his findings are pretty close to mine, using my ears.

 

Still I would hope that the technical side of his presentation is as error-free as possible. But again maybe very few people make buying decisions solely based on charts and graphs.

[Ncore1]

The OP includes the affect on sound quality. That seems to be the basis for his ratings. Regardless of the so-called "class" of device, many people, including me, make their buying decisions on the degree of improvement to sound quality. That said, his findings are pretty close to mine, using my ears.

 

Still I would hope that the technical side of his presentation is as error-free as possible. But again maybe very few people make buying decisions solely based on charts and graphs.

They don't reflect mine.

 

Two problems with this.

 

Firstly the data is supplied (I have no doubt in good faith) as a direct indication of the products worth and effectiveness. The implied statement is that a quiet power supply is beneficial. To have any credibility the data needs to be good. It looks dodgy at best.

 

Secondly, I'm sorry to say that your ears are a poor judge of technical quality. Without objective data to back it up you are just choosing what you subjectively prefer, and / or are biased to be pre-disposed to.

 

Nothing wrong with this of course, but don't confuse it with actual technical efficacy or actual improved sound quality.

[mmerrill99]

They don't reflect mine.

 

Two problems with this.

 

Firstly the data is supplied (I have no doubt in good faith) as a direct indication of the products worth and effectiveness. The implied statement is that a quiet power supply is beneficial. To have any credibility the data needs to be good. It looks dodgy at best.

I agree - if you are presenting data as a means of comparison between devices then that data needs to be as accurate as possible.

 

Secondly, I'm sorry to say that your ears are a poor judge of technical quality. Without objective data to back it up you are just choosing what you subjectively prefer, and / or are biased to be pre-disposed to.

 

Nothing wrong with this of course, but don't confuse it with actual technical efficacy or actual improved sound quality.

Don't agree. What you hear & evaluate is the judge. Yes we can be swayed by bias & pre-disposition, just as easily as we can be swayed by measurement bias & pre-disposition. We are not talking about 'technical' quality as this becomes a meaningless term when we don't know what measurements equate to good sound.

 

So we have to live with the fact that we are using our auditory processing mechanism for judgement & evaluation of what we here in the knowledge that it is imprecise & flawed but we really don't have any choice!

[Ncore1]

Then you dont understand what I said.

 

Measurements are what they are, they arent subjective. They are just factual information.

 

Feel free to have personal subjective opinions, its fine, it really is. There are not however necessarily representative of technical or audio quality. They are meaningless beyond the individual. They really are only what you like.

[mmerrill99]

Then you dont understand what I said.

 

Measurements are what they are, they arent subjective. They are just factual information.

Sorry but "factual" is a misleading term. The measurements chosen to be performed on a device are chosen from a limited set of ossible measurements & are therefore very much subject to editorialising by the tester. Furthermore, the measurement results are 'interpreted' by said tester (often others have different 'interpretations) & therefore also subjective in nature. So, I would state that the term "factual" is a very overused one & needs to be qualified as I've begun to do above

Feel free to have personal subjective opinions, its fine, it really is. There are not however necessarily representative of technical or audio quality. They are meaningless beyond the individual. They really are only what you like.

I find that when I find what I hear in agreement with a sufficiently large enough group of people, I consider that what I'm hearing is not "meaningless beyond the individual"

 

Your couching of measurements as "factual" & hearing as "meaningless beyond the individual" is the usual distortion seen on audio forums.

 

Both approaches contain the same balance of wrong & right as each other - neither is superior & both act as useful guides but the strengths & weknesses of both have to be always borne in mind.

[Ncore1]

The measurements are factual information that can be objectively peer reviewed and verified just as I did with DMs results. Period.

 

What subjectively goes on inside your head is your reality and your reality only.

 

This is no distortion........well except what might be going on in your head due to the sighted subjective tests people like to perform.

 

Has it crossed your mind that people may like certain distortions? Agreeing with many other people is a red herring. After all many people beleive in God. Has zero bearing on his actual existence.

 

People still like the sound of turntables.........nothing wrong with this, like whatever you like, but dont pretend it has any relevance to technical or audio quality. case closed

[kilroy]

I don't listen to technical quality. I listen to music. Case closed.

[Ncore1]

Then why bothercwith this thread that has a large technical content as the basis of it conclusions. Go off and enjoy whatever you fancy. Fantastic!

 

Do you subjectively test sighted? If you do youvwill have biases that influence your judgement btw.

[kilroy]

Then why bothercwith this thread that has a large technical content as the basis of it conclusions. Go off and enjoy whatever you fancy. Fantastic!

 

Do you subjectively test sighted? If you do youvwill have biases that influence your judgement btw.

 

Always room here for another newbie know-it-all! Nine posts and you're already taking members to task. You're neither the OP or admin so I'll post as I please.

 

I actually own or have owned the majority of devices being discussed here so have a natural interest in the thread. Didn't come here to argue. Regardless of the technical aspects, which I do understand, I more or less agree with the OP's findings. Case closed.

 

Have a great weekend!

[bogi]

Measurements are what they are, they arent subjective. They are just factual information.

 

Measurements are typically providing incomplete information about what we are hearing. We listen to complete sound but measurements are focused only to some concrete aspects of sound. Measured values can be considered to be objective, but we are using interpretation of measurements. That part is not so easy. Unbiased and correct interpretation, correctly considering the conditions under which measurements were done, is not always the case. So ... measurement interpretations cannot be automatically considered to be objective, it depends on people who make those interpretations.

 

Ncore1, please don't hijack this thread further. Please respect that others may have different opinion.

[Ncore1]

Measurements are typically providing incomplete information about what we are hearing. We listen to complete sound but measurements are focused only to some concrete aspects of sound. Measured values can be considered to be objective, but we are using interpretation of measurements. That part is not so easy. Unbiased and correct interpretation, correctly considering the conditions under which measurements were done, is not always the case. So ... measurement interpretations cannot be automatically considered to be objective, it depends on people who make those interpretations.

 

Ncore1, please don't hijack this thread further. Please respect that others may have different opinion.

Yes measurements are interpreted hence my comments regarding peer review and validation. They are absolutely objective and open to scrutiny.

 

I'm sorry but this is a thread that is using measurements and subjective observation to assess a bunch of products. IMO neither aspect of that assessment has been performed correctly hence the discussion, and its actually others such as yourself with your additional comments that are perpetuating it if anything.

 

This is not hijacking it is absolutely relevant. So please respect me and don't try and silence the discussion.

 

OK, do you have anything relevant to add about the measurements that DM has made, or the problems associated with sighted subjective listening tests?

[kilroy]

Yes measurements are interpreted hence my comments regarding peer review and validation. They are absolutely objective and open to scrutiny.

 

I'm sorry but this is a thread that is using measurements and subjective observation to assess a bunch of products. IMO neither aspect of that assessment has been performed correctly hence the discussion, and its actually others such as yourself with your additional comments that are perpetuating it if anything.

 

This is not hijacking it is absolutely relevant. So please respect me and don't try and silence the discussion.

 

OK, do you have anything relevant to add about the measurements that DM has made, or the problems associated with sighted subjective listening tests?

Sighted subjective listening tests are not the topic of the thread. More obfuscation. Maybe better off over on the WB forum.

[Ncore1]

Sighted subjective listening tests are not the topic of the thread. More obfuscation. Maybe better off over on the WB forum.

No they are not the topic. They are one cause of problems with the information presented.

 

What obfuscation Is going on here? It seems more as if you want to divert away from discussing the results a potential problems with them.

 

 

OK, simple statement - thanks to DM for performing the tests, but overall I don't hold much credence to them due to the technical measurement issues and the basis (bias issues) of the sighted listening.

 

Whats your problem with that?

 

Do you have any relevant response to that?

 

So you want to close down the conversation and pack me off.

[kilroy]

No they are not the topic. They are one cause of problems with the information presented.

 

What obfuscation Is going on here? It seems more as if you want to divert away from discussing the results a potential problems with them.

 

 

OK, simple statement - thanks to DM for performing the tests, but overall I don't hold much credence to them due to the technical measurement issues and the basis (bias issues) of the sighted listening.

 

Whats your problem with that?

 

Do you have any relevant response to that?

 

So you want to close down the conversation and pack me off.

 

No more response at all. You've taken every poster to task. Apparently the only "relevant" posts are ones that would side with you. Good luck. I remember what my mother said about arguing with certain types of people.

 

Welcome to the Ignore List.

[DM]

Oh just for completeness here is the USB noise of the Sony Laptop I was using.

 

DM, if you have measured on the same computer as the device tested, all your data could have potential problems.

 

With the amount of spuria seen on all your measurements, I would suggest this is the case.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]32631[/ATTACH]

 

This is one pretty good USB port from a PC:)

 

What’s the Sony Laptop model Number, Load, Test equipment did you do your test under, we want to see if we can replicate these results.

[bogi]

What obfuscation Is going on here? It seems more as if you want to divert away from discussing the results a potential problems with them.

 

I am not trying to silence the discussion. I appreciate that you pointed to troubles with measurements here done and that you brought your own measurements. That's fine. But as you see others have different meaning to value of listening comparisons. If discussion will continue to be only about listening vs. measurements, then you hijacked this thread.

 

IMO better when you start your own thread about relation of listening and measurements. That may lead to never ending discussion. Don't expect any common agreement.

 

I am interested in this thread and I wish it to be continued on topic.