Six DAC Comparison

I2S or 110 ohm  they both are top for connection.

they are not a myth, if that were true then why do Top companies use them ?

it comes down to how comprehensive they are implementing the connection

plain and simple . For example if you use a xlr  that does not mean the circuit is true balanced input to output . That’s my only point , Esoteric for just 1 example makes very $$ expensive and comprehensive dacs ,transports with I2S as their top sounding input , 110 ohm xlr can be excellent also .for a truly Great I2S cable you don’t want a generic cable with video more issues.  Tubulus Dedicated just for Audio IMO makes the best per $$ in quality ,value cables .this I2S cable will compete with cables 3-4xthe cost ,this too applies to their USB which I have and next year a statement usb cable too will be coming out. read their formula, they give you the basics about their design ,very sound and make a lot of common sense but very labor intensive.,their  top Ximius -I2S  is Great I  just ordered one as well as their top Ethernet cables ,,they will totally change your opinion of what digital can sound like I highly recommend their top 2 cables ,which have much more in depth shielding and other methods. Unless you own them you  have no valid opinion.!!

I agree 100% with Benjamin on the clocking part. The real myth is accuracy of the clock makes it sounds better not that an ocxo will sound better. Ted Smith of PS Audio has given similar explanation for audio, in the time domain small quanta accuracy is all that is needed rather than long term stability and yet we see OCXO clocks, which has the best long term stability, almost sounds better than a regular Femto/TCXO.

Moreover, it’s a given fact, and somewhat similar to I2S, that the proximity of the clock is important since it can significantly reduce emi and yet we see external master clock with 1M clock cable sounds better.

I have seen in some implementation with external master clock, a modestly priced 10Mhz OCXO did not improve the performance of the DAC until a very expensive one were used. This is very inline with what was described in the Mojo article regarding lower hash noise - the modestly price ocxo did not have a better hash noise than the internal clock itself and only when the expensive one was introduced did it improve the performance. I bet if we measured both these external clock in terms of accuracy in the time domain, we would be hard pressed to find any differences.

But having said all these, I am surprised that Mojo doesn’t employ an ocxo in their higher end dacs even when they believe it can improve the performance or maybe they did experiment and found no appreciable difference in how it sounds. Curious.

I'm using the most current USB driver.  For Windows it doesn't show up as Mystique but works just fine.  I've also tried an older driver which sounded the same so I reverted back figuring they must have a newer version for a reason.

@danager thanks for the info. Are you using the Thesycon or the Xmos driver from the JL Sounds download link ? Do you remember ?

@debjit_g 

I'm currently using

@danager thanks. Yes, Windows reports I2SoverUSB. I know this since I had Lampizator sometime back and it uses the same JL Sounds USB receiver board in their DACs.