Digital Sound FAQ

Any recent updates on all of this? There are allot of newer sound options on the market now. How about the Analog Devices integrated sound solution on the newer asus boards (like mine) or the realtex chips like on many of the p35's?

to clear it up, X-Fi is a multi-room technology, for SQ (sound quality) you'd be better off with an Audigy 2.

The biggest thing to effect sound quality is the DAC (24bit/96k sampling, and the speakers ofcourse) is a must. that being said, someone brought up D-class. yes it amplifes the hell out low frequencies, for overall SQ you'd be better off with an A/B class (most recievers), or T-class (texus-instruments/pioneer). If you're a real junky, class-A (vaccume tubes) amplifiers give the best SQ, but get hotter than hell. As per the original post toslink vs Coax, spdif... Coax is effected by EMR (electro-magnet Radiation [ie noise caused by neon light ballests or computers/cellphones]), whereas toslink (fiber-optic) isn't.

Just to clear something up that's been bothering me about HDMI. HDMI will do 1080P (1920x1080); however it only has two pins for audio combined with the processing of Blueray, the best it can possibily do is 5.1 audio, it will play sound over the 7.1/9.1 setups, but you're missing the 'true interpetation of the audio'. Your best setup is HDMI/DVI (yes they're the same thing) as your video and toslink (fiber-optic) as your audio.

As for speaker, powered speakers are aweful! They can produce great specs due to the nature of the system of measure (1watt @ 1 meater), but truely horrible. The more 'drivers' you have in a single enclosure the more IMD (inter-modulation distortion) you get: 1 tweeter, 1 woofer).

By cranking the bass on your system all you are doing is shortining the life of your drivers! a speaker CANNOT play frequencies below what it was originally designed for, get a subwoofer or sub-subwoofer.

Any further questions regarding Audio (all of it) feel free to PM me/e-mail.

ggledhil said:

to clear it up, X-Fi is a multi-room technology, for SQ (sound quality) you'd be better off with an Audigy 2.

Click to expand...

Having owned both, the X-Fi is clearly head and shoulders above the Audigy 2 in every respect. It has a better DSP, better opamps, and it has the crucial ability to play true 44.1KHz audio, whereas the Audigy series resamples everything to 48KHz, which mucks up the sound considerably.

The biggest thing to effect sound quality is the DAC (24bit/96k sampling, and the speakers ofcourse) is a must. that being said, someone brought up D-class. yes it amplifes the hell out low frequencies

Click to expand...

Any class of amp can be rather punchy, the main thing is how much current its putting out. Higher current amps make more bass. Alot of the low end amps out there have a hump in the 20Hz to 60Hz range, so your perception is that the "bass shakes the house".

for overall SQ you'd be better off with an A/B class (most recievers), or T-class (texus-instruments/pioneer). If you're a real junky, class-A (vaccume tubes) amplifiers give the best SQ, but get hotter than hell.

Click to expand...

Class T amps are made by Tripath Inc. They have nothing to do with Texas Instruments or Pioneer. Class T amps are actually class D, to add to the confusion. Theyre just called T amps because of the company who makes them, Tripath Inc. Solid state amps can be class A just as tube amps are. Class A solid state amps sound better than A/B solid state, but not as good as class A tubes.

As per the original post toslink vs Coax, spdif... Coax is effected by EMR (electro-magnet Radiation [ie noise caused by neon light ballests or computers/cellphones]), whereas toslink (fiber-optic) isn't.

Click to expand...

I think the term is EMI, electro magnetic interference. I always use coax, and only use optical if I have to. Optical is very susceptible to jitter, more so than coax is susceptible to EMI. Lower quality sources will almost always introduce a fair amount of jitter over TOSlink, but hardly any EMI over coax. Ive never had any interference on a coax connection, and I have lots of electronics strewn about my house.

Great writeup!

Thanks

In respect to PC Gaming with Enhanced 7.1 Headsets, which will produce the best gaming experience between Dolby Digital and Pro Logic II via an optical connection?

A digital amplifier works by using a DSP to convert the PCM signal from the PC or other device into a PWM or PDM signal that is then used to drive some power MOSFETs or IGBTs which actually drive the speakers. Many amplifiers use IPMs or HVICs, but those have MOSFETs or IGBTs inside.

DSP (Digital Signal Processor) - a microprocessor that is designed to efficiently process digitized signals in real time with low latency
PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) - a stream of numbers that represent the instantaneous value of the sound wave
PWM (Pulse Width Modulation) - a waveform that (ideally) consists of only 0s or 1s, but its average (low passed) value corresponds to the value of the sound wave
PDM (Pulse Density Modulation) - an alternative term for PWM, works the same way but the implementation often differs
MOSFETs (Metal Oxide Semiconductor Field Effect Transistor) - one type of power transistor used to make amplifiers
IGBTs (Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor) - another kind of power transistor used to make amplifiers, can handle much higher power than MOSFETs and generally only used for high power applications
IPMs (Integrated Power Module) - several MOSFET or IGBT chips and supporting circuits (driver, decoupling capacitance, etc.) within a single module
HVICs (High Voltage Integrated Circuit) - several MOSFETs or IGBTs and driver circuits (and other stuff like the Delta Sigma Modulator and DSP on some HVICs) on a single piece of silicon, considered the best for audio quality due to lowest parasitics (Note that "High Voltage" is usually on the order of 50V or so and is called such because the voltage is very high for an integrated circuit.)

Those interested in the mathematics of how PCM is converted into PWM might want to read the following: http://www.beis.de/Elektronik/DeltaSigma/DeltaSigma.html

Sir Barton said:

I think the term is EMI, electro magnetic interference. I always use coax, and only use optical if I have to. Optical is very susceptible to jitter, more so than coax is susceptible to EMI. Lower quality sources will almost always introduce a fair amount of jitter over TOSlink, but hardly any EMI over coax. Ive never had any interference on a coax connection, and I have lots of electronics strewn about my house.

Click to expand...

If optical is so much worse than coaxial, why is gigabit (and above) internet service almost always delivered using fiber instead of much cheaper coax? Why would there be any reason at all to use expensive, fragile fiber instead of copper wire? The truth is, fiber pretty much always gives better signal integrity. If you want a quick way to check signal margin, loosen a connection and see how loose it can be before the signal drops out.

I've had issues with a Philips digital amplifier introducing EMI over the coax and then finding its way into a sensitive measurement circuit connected to the same PC. Replacing the coax with fiber fixed the problem. (Later, I found the EMI was caused by a poorly designed driver within the amplifier causing large shoot through transients. That also explained why the amplifier ran unusually hot with no signal.)

Jitter is more of an issue with crappy HDMI sources, not as much over a toslink connection. The fact is, no matter the source and connection medium, if the source is crappy, the result will be crappy. Doesn't matter what kind of source, cable, connection. Garbage in, garbage out.

In terms of audio setups with computers, the trick is to isolate your audio interface from the rest of your computer as much as possible. The ideal setup is to have a PCI (or PCIE) USB card that does not share bandwidth from anything else. Then connecting an external interface to the USB card. This external interface than should either output a digital signal via Coaxial or Toslink (my preference is Toslink) to a separate DAC, or if this interface has a good enough DAC simply connect the interface to your preamp via RCAs or XLRs depending on your setup. XLRs only make a difference over long runs.

Are there good PCI sound cards that can do this? Yes, but there are far better external interfaces than computer sound cards. I do not have my build in my thread hooked up to my audio system as I have a Squeezebox Touch that completely eliminates a computer stage.

I wish I had bought a couple of these years ago, yeesh 1400 for a new set of em.

Just a drive by

http://www.tonepublications.com/review/we-review-the-bose-901/

*edit* sorry I wondered who brought this thread back from the grave, but apparently was me looking around

MattMan657 said:

In terms of audio setups with computers, the trick is to isolate your audio interface from the rest of your computer as much as possible. The ideal setup is to have a PCI (or PCIE) USB card that does not share bandwidth from anything else. Then connecting an external interface to the USB card. This external interface than should either output a digital signal via Coaxial or Toslink (my preference is Toslink) to a separate DAC, or if this interface has a good enough DAC simply connect the interface to your preamp via RCAs or XLRs depending on your setup. XLRs only make a difference over long runs.

Click to expand...

The digital side is just data. Onboard works every bit as well as a sound card or any other interface.

NiHaoMike said:

The digital side is just data. Onboard works every bit as well as a sound card or any other interface.

Click to expand...

Ehh I disagree. From my personal experience external interfaces are far superior to the majority of onboard soundcards. I'm far more into audio than I am into computers at this point in my life and have owned numerous digital setups that onboard has never kept up with. Although I agree for the common user, onboard will get the job done, but for audiophiles it doesn't fit the bill.

My favorite is an HDD in an external enclosure plugged into a Squeezebox Touch then connected via toslink to an external tube DAC. Completely skip the computer. Some people claim that they experience better results with having a more powerful device handle the processing and decoding then have the Squeezebox simply output it, but I didn't see any improvement with that. But then again, if we're going for best quality, gotta stick with records.

NiHaoMike said:

The digital side is just data. Onboard works every bit as well as a sound card or any other interface.

Click to expand...

If you're happy with your onboard sound, more power to ya I guess.

Next, we'll have someone claiming that FLAC stored on SSD sounds better than FLAC stored on HDDs (or vice versa)... Or that it sounds better if the SSD is connected to a RAID controller card... S/PDIF is just a serial data link. The exact same data makes the exact same sound. The only way a sound card can do better on digital is if it supports bit perfect and onboard cannot or if it supports a higher sample rate than the onboard. Nowadays, onboard can do bit perfect and up to 24bit/192kHz.

And then there are "audiofools" who believe that they could improve audio quality with one of those exotic power cables, completely ignoring all the "ordinary" wiring before it. Almost as ridiculous are the exotic digital cables and speaker cables. A good cable (doesn't have to be overpriced, just good quality) can indeed make a difference with low level analog signals, but apart from tube amps, modern equipment rarely deals with low level signals. (If those exotic cables actually made a difference, the big test gear companies like Agilent and Lecroy would be bundling them with their high end scopes.)

*sigh*

There are plenty of so called "audiophiles" out there who claim that X way overpriced cable does better than Y reasonably priced good quality cable, but refuse to let you hook up your network analyzer, scope, or whatever, claiming that the difference cannot be measured. That's how you tell the difference between a real audiophile and an audiofool.

You don't need to spend thousands of dollars on interconnects (like MIT cables), not worth it, but they absolutely do make a difference more so than power cables and digital cables. Have you ever experimented with your own ears on your own audio system? Well, I have with several different tests (A/Bing, etc) and the proof is in the pudding. My system made leaps and bounds when I swapped out my previous cables for what I use now. Anyone who says that interconnects don't make a difference are in denial, or their equipment isn't good enough to notice the change. Probably the latter.

Power cables absolutely make a difference. Worth spending hundreds and hundreds of dollars on one, definitely not. But having a good quality one, compared to the average run of the mill IEC that comes with your TV, most certainly can make an improvement. Especially when pairing with a power conditioner.

I agree about USB cables not making a big difference, however there is a difference between using a POS USB and a quality made one. This was something else I experimented with. I was able to borrow an Audioquest Carbon USB, a thick nicely made generic USB 3.0 cable, and a generic thin lil ol' one. There was zero difference between the Carbon and the USB 3.0, yet a noticeable improvement (not enormous) over the lil thin one. I tested with the setup a few posts above.

As for SSDs, the only benefit an SSD could give over an HDD is reliability. Less moving parts = less chance of problems, which can only benefit your system. Likewise with a RAID setup over an NAS or something. Won't improve quality, just stability and reliability.

To be honest, I agree with what the guy in that video says when it comes to super expensive cables ($500 and up). But he really doesn't do a very good job supporting his claims. Just kinda ******* and moans about how cable companies make tech statements and how people are stupid and get sucked into it. We've all heard that argument a thousand times. No need for snake oil, etc blah blah blah. All I know is, when I swapped out my random interconnects and speaker cables for Morrow Audio brand (PH3, MA3, SP3), my system significantly improved.

At the end of the day, as long as your happy with your sound, that is all that matters. I sure as hell know I am.

The majority who use digital amplifiers/receivers don't have to deal with low level analog signals. It's a digital signal going into the unit and a high level analog signal coming out. The few using tube amps or legacy equipment do use low level analog interconnects and can benefit from better quality cable. Try to keep a high level (volume) starting at the source and adjust the volume at the amplifier in order to improve SNR.

Digital cables just have to work well enough to send the data intact. A really bad cable can cause a lot of bit errors but it would make itself very obvious with very garbled audio. Fiber cables are the best as they provide ultimate noise isolation, but must be handled with care as they're easily damaged. For coax, plain RG59 or RG6 works great.

Speaker cables deal with high level signals so induced noise would have little effect. RG6 works great for unbalanced outputs (pretty rare nowadays, confirm with a multimeter that the negative side of the amplifier outputs are all tied together) and CAT5 with all 4 pairs in parallel works great for balanced outputs.

Power cables make for the least difference since the PSU inside the equipment is supposed to isolate any incoming noise and all the wiring before it is going to be "ordinary" anyways. (If extreme overclockers could go further just by getting an exotic power cord, they will...) Just use any good quality shielded power cable and call it done.

I didn't even know people used upgraded IECs for computers. I only use them on audio equipment. www.signalcable.com are the power cables I use. Good value, won't break your wallet.

Yea, I use fiber optics whenever possible, but in ideal conditions the performance is exactly the same as digital coaxial. Toslink is a fail safe IMHO. However, people who use heavy duty digital coaxials with BNC connections swear by them, I've just never owned any gear that use em.

Although you are correct that phono signals, such as that from a turntable, require low cap cables, line level benefits greatly as well.

Speaker cables absolutely make a difference. If your speakers are transparent enough and have high enough resolution, they make a huge difference. I had some pretty decent shielded cables on my Vandersteen 2ce speakers, replaced them with bi-wired Morrow Audio SP3 and I was blown away at the improvement.

This isn't the only example that I've experienced. I have a pair of ADS 780/2 and a pair of Paradigm Studio bookshelves. I A/B'd both of them with another pair of Morrow Audio cables, a pair of Audioquests, a pair of Anti-Cables, and my generic shielded cables which actually are pretty good for the no-name. The Morrows were by far the best. The Vandersteens saw the biggest improvement with the bi-wire Morrows as they are the most revealing and transparent speakers I own. Some speakers are just far more sensitive to your gear upstream like my Vandys.

For full list of my testing gear, I used...
---ANALOG---
Completely custom Thorens TD-160 w/ SME 3009 & SAE1000E cartridge
ART DJ Phono Pre & Jolida JD-9 Phono Pre (I'd swap them to see both results)
---DIGITAL---
Seagate Constellation 1TB HDD in an external enclosure for digital files (mostly hi-res Flac) hooked up to a Squeezebox Touch via USB. Squeezebox to DAC via Toslink
Grant Fidelity TubeDAC11 w/ Amperex tube

Completely recapped and restored Marantz 3250 preamp
Completely recapped and restored Marantz 170dc poweramp (LOVE this amp)
Vandersteen 2ce, ADS 780/2, Paradigm Studio 20 v5

MattMan657 said:

I didn't even know people used upgraded IECs for computers. I only use them on audio equipment. www.signalcable.com are the power cables I use. Good value, won't break your wallet.

Yea, I use fiber optics whenever possible, but in ideal conditions the performance is exactly the same as digital coaxial. Toslink is a fail safe IMHO. However, people who use heavy duty digital coaxials with BNC connections swear by them, I've just never owned any gear that use em.

Although you are correct that phono signals, such as that from a turntable, require low cap cables, line level benefits greatly as well.

Speaker cables absolutely make a difference. If your speakers are transparent enough and have high enough resolution, they make a huge difference. I had some pretty decent shielded cables on my Vandersteen 2ce speakers, replaced them with bi-wired Morrow Audio SP3 and I was blown away at the improvement.

This isn't the only example that I've experienced. I have a pair of ADS 780/2 and a pair of Paradigm Studio bookshelves. I A/B'd both of them with another pair of Morrow Audio cables, a pair of Audioquests, a pair of Anti-Cables, and my generic shielded cables which actually are pretty good for the no-name. The Morrows were by far the best. The Vandersteens saw the biggest improvement with the bi-wire Morrows as they are the most revealing and transparent speakers I own. Some speakers are just far more sensitive to your gear upstream like my Vandys.

For full list of my testing gear, I used...
---ANALOG---
Completely custom Thorens TD-160 w/ SME 3009 & SAE1000E cartridge
ART DJ Phono Pre & Jolida JD-9 Phono Pre (I'd swap them to see both results)
---DIGITAL---
Seagate Constellation 1TB HDD in an external enclosure for digital files (mostly hi-res Flac) hooked up to a Squeezebox Touch via USB. Squeezebox to DAC via Toslink
Grant Fidelity TubeDAC11 w/ Amperex tube

Completely recapped and restored Marantz 3250 preamp
Completely recapped and restored Marantz 170dc poweramp (LOVE this amp)
Vandersteen 2ce, ADS 780/2, Paradigm Studio 20 v5

Click to expand...

Pretty impressive setup there.

Thanks. Took me awhile to build it up but I'm pretty happy with where I'm at. The biggest improvement I saw, in terms of digital audio, was eliminating the laptop. I had an older Dell laptop, that had no issues, as my music server. I had my external HDD in an external enclosure hooked up to it via USB, and connected to my Grant Fidelity TubeDAC11 via USB. The difference between the Squeezebox and the laptop was very very prominent. Everything improved drastically. Such a shame Logitech discontinued them. For their purpose they are/were some of the best digital audio devices money could buy. I installed an app on it called the Enhanced Digital Output application. It turns off the analog outputs to reduce signal path and allows output of up to 192khz. Highly recommended.


I know this is about digital audio, but this is the staple of my setup. My custom Thorens TD-160. I can safely say that this and my Marantz 170dc will NEVER leave my collection. The one caveat to the SME arm and SAE cartridge combo is that the SME is too low mass for the cartridge. So I did two things to mitigate this. I took a piece of super soft sorbothane from McMaster Carr and a Technics 4g headshell weight and tacked them onto the top of the SME headshell. Next I took a piece of super strong double sided tape w/ fiber glass for extra strength and mounted a quarter to the back of the SME's counterweight. Effectively it added about 10 grams to the arm's mass, making it a far better match with the SAE1000E. I typically use my Turntable for reference testing as it really does sound quite a bit better than my digital setup.