Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: USB transient noise with external DAC (Read 27317 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #75 –
Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
Whereas Realtek ALC's "like" 48 kHz more and 44.1 is supported well but through zero-stuffing mechanism, variable sample rate mechanism - source http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/datasheets/ALC898_DataSheet_0.60.pdf , page 15, chapter 7.2.5.
According to the very datasheet you linked, the DACs operate natively at 44.1 kHz. The variable rate of delivery is used to deliver exactly 44,100 samples per second using a transmission medium that transmits exactly 48,000 frames per second by putting one sample in some frames and no samples in other frames. (You can also refer to Intel's HDA specification, which covers this in much more detail in sections 5.4.1 and 5.4.2.)

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #76 –
Quote from: eagleray on
Photography is not audio.
Since you talk about photography (visual), I will use another visual example to explain a proper blind test.

Let's say Joe claims a particular HDMI cable delivers better graphics quality but I can't see any differences. I suspect Joe is really able to detect the differences or not. I can also arrange a blind test. For example, replace the cable randomly without letting Joe knows and ask him to tell which HDMI cable is used.

So it means blind tests can also be extended to other aspects, not only audio.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_experiment

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #77 –
Quote from: bennetng on
Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
I have recently purchased ASUS Xonar U7 USB
Does the U7 still functional as a class compliant device without installing the Asus driver? SMSL M3 should be no problem (it has no dedicated driver after all) but Asus U7 and X-Fi HD have more functions than a simple USB DAC so I am a bit worry about that.


Xonar U7 has a switch at the bottom where you can select 1.1-2.0 mode. In 1.1 mode it probably works without driver but some functions are limited. In 2.0 mode (which I use) it needs asus driver but it is no problem to install it on windows 10 and works flawlessly.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #78 –
Quote from: Octocontrabass on
Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
Whereas Realtek ALC's "like" 48 kHz more and 44.1 is supported well but through zero-stuffing mechanism, variable sample rate mechanism - source http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/datasheets/ALC898_DataSheet_0.60.pdf , page 15, chapter 7.2.5.
According to the very datasheet you linked, the DACs operate natively at 44.1 kHz. The variable rate of delivery is used to deliver exactly 44,100 samples per second using a transmission medium that transmits exactly 48,000 frames per second by putting one sample in some frames and no samples in other frames. (You can also refer to Intel's HDA specification, which covers this in much more detail in sections 5.4.1 and 5.4.2.)

Thank you for the link to Intel HDA I have not read it before. It starts to be a little OT for this thread, but can this mechanism be considered as equal to 48 kHz support which does not use this technique? Intel says "The Link is optimized for sample rates of 48 kHz and integral multiples thereof". And is it full equivalent to e.g. SoX resampling to 48 kHz at software level? I have doubts about it, although I have written and it is clear that Realteks through this technique support 44.1 pretty well .

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #79 –
Quote from: eagleray on
I thought if I could not detect any difference in an uncontrolled test, there was no point to a controlled test. 

There have been many instances where DBTs have produced positive results when sighted evaluations didn't.

Managing bias includes both correcting an erroneous perception that there is no difference, as well as correcting an erroneous perception that a difference exists, when the differences are small.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #80 –
Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
Xonar U7 has a switch at the bottom where you can select 1.1-2.0 mode. In 1.1 mode it probably works without driver but some functions are limited. In 2.0 mode (which I use) it needs asus driver but it is no problem to install it on windows 10 and works flawlessly.
Nice, thanks.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #81 –
Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
Thank you for the link to Intel HDA I have not read it before. It starts to be a little OT for this thread, but can this mechanism be considered as equal to 44.1 kHz? support which does not use this technique? Intel says "The Link is optimized for sample rates of 48 kHz and integral multiples thereof". And is it full equivalent to e.g. SoX resampling to 48 kHz at software level? I have doubts about it, although I have written and it is clear that Realteks through this technique support 44.1 pretty well .
The key difference is Realtek's approach does not change the digital output (bit-perfect) but the SoX approach does. It can be proved by a null test.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #82 –
Quote from: bennetng on
Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
Thank you for the link to Intel HDA I have not read it before. It starts to be a little OT for this thread, but can this mechanism be considered as equal to 44.1 kHz? support which does not use this technique? Intel says "The Link is optimized for sample rates of 48 kHz and integral multiples thereof". And is it full equivalent to e.g. SoX resampling to 48 kHz at software level? I have doubts about it, although I have written and it is clear that Realteks through this technique support 44.1 pretty well .
The key difference is Realtek's approach does not change the digital output (bit-perfect) but the SoX approach does. It can be proved by a null test.

Yes that is highly probable but what about the DAC work results ? Is it better/recommended to let the sound card do the "variable sample rate" technique (keeping bitperfect but through that at first sight complicated mechanism - what about timing etc?) or do high quality SoX resampling and send at 48 kHz native link rate ?

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #83 –
Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
Yes that is highly probable but what about the DAC work results ? Is it better/recommended to let the sound card do the "variable sample rate" technique (keeping bitperfect but through that at first sight complicated mechanism - what about timing etc?) or do high quality SoX resampling and send at 48 kHz native link rate ?
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,112488.msg927166.html#msg927166
I recommend let the Realtek do it as there is no sign of additional distortion over 48k mode.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #84 –
Thanks for reference with detailed description. Do I read the results correctly that it is a minimal if any difference between 44.1 and 48 kHz handling by Realtek DAC's (summary items are very similar in the attached test) ?

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #85 –
Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
Thanks for reference with detailed description. Do I read the results correctly that it is a minimal if any difference between 44.1 and 48 kHz handling by Realtek DAC's (summary items are very similar in the attached test) ?
Yes. Let the Realtek do it, it is safe.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #86 –
Ok, thanks for experienced and measurements-based info, that is very valuable. Trying it right now :) if you need more info about Xonar U7 USB, feel free to ask here or in PM.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #87 –
So far nobody has answered my original question regarding transient noises. For the ES9023 DAC chip the manufacturer claims operation without pops.  This chip is many devices including the famous ODAC.

"13 February 2016: The world was blessed with the passing of a truly vile and wretched person."
Antonin Scalia died on that day last February.  He was a close friend of Ruth Bader Ginsberg, one of the most progressive justices on the court.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #88 –
Quote from: eagleray on
So far nobody has answered my original question regarding transient noises. For the ES9023 DAC chip the manufacturer claims operation without pops.  This chip is many devices including the famous ODAC.

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,112488.msg927117.html#msg927117

To elaborate on that previous answer, the chip is capable of transient free operation, but the manufacturer has to actually implement it correctly.  That usually means muting the outputs util clocks stabilize.  Page 5 of this datasheet explains how it is done on the 9023:

https://myl8test.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/es9023-datasheet.pdf

In addition, there may be additional circuitry inside a product that can introduce transients if the manufacturer is careless.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #89 –
Quote from: saratoga on
Quote from: eagleray on
So far nobody has answered my original question regarding transient noises. For the ES9023 DAC chip the manufacturer claims operation without pops.  This chip is many devices including the famous ODAC.

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,112488.msg927117.html#msg927117

To elaborate on that previous answer, the chip is capable of transient free operation, but the manufacturer has to actually implement it correctly.  That usually means muting the outputs util clocks stabilize.  Page 5 of this datasheet explains how it is done on the 9023:

https://myl8test.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/es9023-datasheet.pdf

In addition, there may be additional circuitry inside a product that can introduce transients if the manufacturer is careless.

Much more than that. The ES9023 transient control features are nice, but they don't do anything that can't be done outside the chip.

Furthermore, a lot of things have to be done right PC hardware, the OS, the device driver, the I/O device firmware, as well as the I/O device hardware. 

Transients can be added or removed in many places. The only one-size fits all solution for audio system transients is in the audio system and generally involves output line control (e.g. speaker relays).
 

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #90 –
The OS device driver and PC do not matter; digital hardware cannot be used before a clock is supplied, and by then it is already too late.  This is really not that complex either.  You are supposed to design the system so that the MUTE is asserted by some simple analog circuit, and then disengaged once the clock stabilizes.  Even if the circuit did not support that, a simple relay or even FET would be sufficient to implement the same thing. 

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #91 –
Gentlemen, the design of the ODAC is open source, so you might want to satisfy your curiosity as to how the chip was implemented.      I am getting something else.  Either it works or it does not. 

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #92 –
Quote from: eagleray on
Gentlemen, the design of the ODAC is open source, so you might want to satisfy your curiosity as to how the chip was implemented.      I am getting something else.  Either it works or it does not. 

Absolutely, and I reread for the upty-umpth time the detailed doc for both the ODAC (several versions) and the DAC chip before I commented, as is my habit.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #93 –
Quote from: saratoga on
The OS device driver and PC do not matter; digital hardware cannot be used before a clock is supplied, and by then it is already too late.  This is really not that complex either.  You are supposed to design the system so that the MUTE is asserted by some simple analog circuit, and then disengaged once the clock stabilizes.  Even if the circuit did not support that, a simple relay or even FET would be sufficient to implement the same thing. 

Interesting that you admit that that Mute has to be asserted, but seem to imagine that the PC hardware, the OS, and the device driver are never involved. Or is that not what you are saying?

In the beginning of this thread the problem presented was that Mute was not being properly asserted when the PC goes into Suspend mode.  Are you not aware of the intimate involvement of the PC and the device driver in the Suspend process?

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #94 –
I received an SMSL M2 yesterday.  It made no weird noises on boot or shutdown.  I thought I was home free.  Then I stopped then restarted music on foobar and a loud pop exploded from my speakers.  I tried WASAPI, direct sound, ASIO and even VLC to no avail.  Funny, it worked perfectly on my Mac.  The vendor, Parts Express is taking it back and even paying for return shipping.  Their tech support guy said they were having problems with Windows 10 computers with USB audio gear which was previously problem free.  In particular a certain professional microphone could not remember its settings on Win 10 machines.

Could it be Win 10 breaks the USB code in the DAC?   Either that, or the designers messed up somewhere.

Perhaps I should heed Arnold's advice about his box of audio interfaces which are no better than an onboard Realtek. I just hoped for a couple of bucks some improvement (to what) was possible. 

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #95 –
Quote from: eagleray on
Perhaps I should heed Arnold's advice about his box of audio interfaces which are no better than an onboard Realtek. I just hoped for a couple of bucks some improvement (to what) was possible. 
If you have an external DAC that sounds different from the Realtek then that DAC might be defective or colored, like those NOS DACs. Read this thread and see a "successful" 44.1 vs 88.2 ABX here:
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,110058.0.html

Another interesting and much debated article about the Realtek chip:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/high-end-pc-audio,3733.html
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,104787.0.html

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #96 –
bennetng, I am familiar with the Tom's Hardware test.  It has been discussed all over the place.  I am inclined to accept the result although it has been criticized for having only 2 participants.  The ALC889 does have better published specs than most other Realtek chips.  I don't know how much it matters.

I recall reading one of the reasons SACD has not been a great success is it could not be demonstrated to be superior to standard CD's in blind testing.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #97 –
Fourth try, FiiO e10k from B&H $75.99, free shipping, 30 day return policy.

No noises at boot, shut down, wake from sleep, or restarting music playback.  This one does 44.1, 48, and 96 only.  I tried some of the others first because they had 88.2.  I guess I can live without 88.2.  Is there a best way to resample 88.2 to one of the three supported frequencies?

This device has a volume control for the headphone jack and a separate line out which must be controlled by the playback app.  There is a separate headphone amplifier chip in the device, but I don't expect to use it much.  Some like this arrangement as it allows one to leave their headphones plugged in all the time if they switch back and forth to speakers a lot.

They must have sold a lot of these.  There are over 450 customer reviews at Amazon in the two years it has been available.

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #98 –
I don't see much 88.2k content, not that I've ever seen any reason that has been adequately substantiated as to why an audio DAC should necessarily have to support anything  above 48k. 

Re: USB transient noise with external DAC

Reply #99 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
Quote from: saratoga on
The OS device driver and PC do not matter; digital hardware cannot be used before a clock is supplied, and by then it is already too late.  This is really not that complex either.  You are supposed to design the system so that the MUTE is asserted by some simple analog circuit, and then disengaged once the clock stabilizes.  Even if the circuit did not support that, a simple relay or even FET would be sufficient to implement the same thing. 

Interesting that you admit that that Mute has to be asserted, but seem to imagine that the PC hardware, the OS, and the device driver are never involved. Or is that not what you are saying?

Yes that is exactly what I was said. 

From your tone I guess you disagree?  Or are you really just unclear on what I said above?