1. Home
  2. digital
  3. 198533-149317

USB connection to DAC: multi stage improvement

In my setup (Innuos Zenith Mk3, Antelope Zodiac Platinum with Sean Jacobs DC3/4 and Antelope Audiophile clock) sequential addition of decrapifiers has lead to increasing transparency, dynamics and soundstage depth.

My chain now reads like this

ZenithMk3->Singxer UIP->JHoinrich Isolator RH07b->IFi USB iPurifier3->LHY UIP2.0 Pro->Intona7054b->Zodiac Platinum

 

The Singxer is powered by Sean Jacobs DC3/4, The Lhy is reclocked by the Antelope clock

 

Of particular note: this is the best result of trying every conceivable permutation.

 

In terms of overall impact:

1. reclocking the LHY using the same clock on DAC and upstream Etherregen

2. introducing galvanic insulation after each powered device.

3. using isolator equipment with different chips at each stage.

 

i have learned the hard way that fighting ground level noise, RFI/EMI and other network noise is a gradual rather than binary solution at each step and that in digital audio ‘less is more’ doesn‘t apply as it does in the analogue section. Equally the whole bits are bits debate seems churlish against this background

antigrunge2
ted_b
90 posts
 

@lanx0003 It turns out that GoldenSound conducted testing in 2021 and advised audiophiles not to daisy-chain DDCs.

And he is correct. That would be weird, with each successive DDC reclocking the audio. Using one (or more) USB isolator(s) ahead of a DDC however, is a viable idea, and may improve the performance of said DDC.

USB isolators are oftentimes referred to as "reclockers," but the only clocking is the 8 kHz USB packet protocol. No matter how may isolators are in series, the audio bits are clocked only once - inside the DAC. 

Some report that daisychaining USB isolators helps. This seemed unusual to me as well, and I experimented with it, but it didn’t seem to bring further improvement in my system. It may be dependent upon how much high frequency noise is present. Numerous system specific variables are in play here.

lanx0003
1,974 posts
 

Another naive argument I have expected.  Conducting objective measurements is essential, rather than simply talking about it.  And if you decide to do so, it may be worthwhile to include electrical noise measurements as well.

antigrunge2 OP
1,580 posts
 

So: measuring is important. What you measure: not so much? Hony soit qui mal y pense…

lanx0003
1,974 posts
 

The burden of proof lies with whoever makes such a claim.

Listen, a DDC is essentially a USB isolator (many ddc has it now for electrical noise) combined with a reclocker (for jitter reduction), digital format conversion, etc. It does not matter how many stages of isolation or reclocking you add; quality matters far more than quantity.

From an engineering standpoint, there is no obvious reason to expect benefits to accumulate indefinitely. Once jitter is reduced below the DAC's sensitivity and galvanic isolation has already broken the electrical connection, additional stages often yield diminishing returns. That does not prove that no system can ever benefit from an additional stage, but it does mean that claims of large improvements should be supported by measurements over your subjective listening tests.

The lack of benefit from cascading DDCs was demonstrated back in 2021. You chose not to believe it, and that is your prerogative. Continue doing what you are doing—no one can influence those who believe they are smarter than everyone else when, in reality, ideology has gotten the better of them.

However, while you have every right to express your views, we also have the right to voice our concerns when we believe misinformation is being spread. If your goal is to persuade others, you would be better served by providing concrete evidence to support your claims rather than relying on instinct, assumptions, or personal belief.

antigrunge2 OP
1,580 posts
 

@lanx0003 

It‘s not so much that I don‘t believe it, it is plain irrelevant and I shall no more respond to your diatribes.

More to discover