USB or Mini-jack optical link?

[boshk]

Just started listening to 24bit songs on macbook pro but would like to listen it them on my CM1s.

Is there any advantage of using a USB cable vs minijack toslink to connect to my amp?

macbook pro laptop, audirvana plus, minijack I believe I can select 24bit/96kHz, USB....no idea yet

thanks

 

[unsleepable]

There may be some differences, depending on your amp. And if there are, whether they are relevant to you or not is another matter.

- Some DACs accept different maximum audio resolution on different ports.
- Often, USB connection is asynchronous and not subject to jitter introduced by the source. Some DACs may also de-jitter audio on other ports.
- Some devices also allow controlling the volume through USB, so it is effectively linked to your computer—which is quite handy.
- If the amp is far from your computer, optical cables usually work better, as USB 2.0 is by specification limited to 3m.

What amp do you have?

 

[boshk]

There may be some differences, depending on your amp. And if there are, whether they are relevant to you or not is another matter.

- Some DACs accept different maximum audio resolution on different ports.- Often, USB connection is asynchronous and not subject to jitter introduced by the source. Some DACs may also de-jitter audio on other ports.- Some devices also allow controlling the volume through USB, so it is effectively linked to your computer—which is quite handy.- If the amp is far from your computer, optical cables usually work better, as USB 2.0 is by specification limited to 3m.

What amp do you have?

I ordered a Rotel RA-12 but it doesnt arrive for another 3 weeks at the B&W dealers.

I know it doesnt have a USB for mac/pc so if I stick to the RA-12, I'm restricted to minijack-->optical

Just curious if there is much difference to people who have tried both types of connections.

I do have the following options:

1) change order from RA-12 to RA-1570 (more power, USB-PC....but at twice the price)

2) get an Arcam irDAC for the RA-12 if I insist on using USB-PC cable (probably wasted money there)

3) just stick to minijack toslink on macbook when I want to play songs 24bit-96kHz/higher on audirvana+

 

[unsleepable]

It would depend on the DAC—and since the RA-12 doesn't have a USB port, it won't be possible to compare. If you like how the RA-12 sounds and don't have a requirement for USB connectivity, I wouldn't give it a second thought.

I know it is not possible to extrapolate, but I've compared the sound of my irDac directly through USB, with an Airport Express connected to a TOSLINK port, and didn't find any difference.

 

[KidKomet]

If you can afford the outlay and you like to the Rotel sound. Go with the 1570, it's a no-brainer.

 

[MaxD]

I ordered a Rotel RA-12 but it doesnt arrive for another 3 weeks at the B&W dealers.

I know it doesnt have a USB for mac/pc so if I stick to the RA-12, I'm restricted to minijack-->optical

Just curious if there is much difference to people who have tried both types of connections.

I do have the following options:

1) change order from RA-12 to RA-1570 (more power, USB-PC....but at twice the price)

2) get an Arcam irDAC for the RA-12 if I insist on using USB-PC cable (probably wasted money there)

3) just stick to minijack toslink on macbook when I want to play songs 24bit-96kHz/higher on audirvana+

Option 3. And if you are unhappy with the sound just buy a simple USB Dac like Dragonfly 1.2 and you can't go wrong.

In my experience there is no difference between Toslink and Usb in modern de jittered Dacs like the one in Ra-12.

 

[cheeseboy]

Depending on the DAC and if you want to play DSD files, you may have to use USB....

 

[unsleepable]

In my experience there is no difference between Toslink and Usb in modern de jittered Dacs like the one in Ra-12.

Where did you find that the RA-12 de-jitters the audio?

 

[boshk]

damn, my av amp which I was using temporaily to drive my CM1s just died......well, the right side speaker channel died......

3 weeks till RA-12 arrives

 

[ReValveiT]

In my experience there is no difference between Toslink and Usb in modern de jittered Dacs like the one in Ra-12.

Where did you find that the RA-12 de-jitters the audio?

Jitter can be completely corrected with a buffer memory just a few kb's in size.

It's fair to say that most DAC mftrs can afford to implement a couple of pence worth of memory into their DACs.

Then there's the argument that jitter is a total non-issue anyway.

 

[unsleepable]

Jitter can be completely corrected with a buffer memory just a few kb's in size.

It's fair to say that most DAC mftrs can afford to implement a couple of pence worth of memory into their DACs.

Then there's the argument that jitter is a total non-issue anyway.

I think your statement is based on many assumptions.

To reclock the S/PDIF signal, the DAC does not only require a memory buffer. More importantly, it needs a clock. A DAC that can establish an asynchronous USB connection will have a clock, but one that can only connect with S/PDIF such as the RA-12 doesn't need to.

In addition, reclocking the signal does not solve all jitter. It has a very specific use case, and that is when the timing of the packets is correct but they are not sent in the appropriate moment. Because of this, I'd argue that reclocking is mostly relevant to computer sources, and I'm not entirely certain that it would be beneficial with other sources such as a CD player.

Anyways, my question was genuine. I just wondered if MaxD had read somewhere if the RA-12 attempts to remove jitter from the audio received on the TOSLINK port as I don't think that most DACs will do this—although I know of a couple that do.

 

[MaxD]

In my experience there is no difference between Toslink and Usb in modern de jittered Dacs like the one in Ra-12.

Where did you find that the RA-12 de-jitters the audio?

I found this info on the net on a concurrent forum site. Look with Google you will probably found it too. A poster said this is common to all new generation integrated pre, integrated and just DAC, he referred to Rotel RA-12, Marantz PM-6005 and NAD D 3020. As an owner of the NAD, I can say there is no difference in quality playing my audio files from USB or from optical or even coaxial (NAD has all and so my desktop motherboard Asus P8Z77-deluxe), I can't perceive any subtle differences in sound and - on the integrated DAC - just the optical input can handle 24 bit/192 Kb files. USB can't.

 

[davedotco]

In my experience there is no difference between Toslink and Usb in modern de jittered Dacs like the one in Ra-12.

Where did you find that the RA-12 de-jitters the audio?

I found this info on the net on a concurrent forum site. Look with Google you will probably found it too. A poster said this is common to all new generation integrated pre, integrated and just DAC, he referred to Rotel RA-12, Marantz PM-6005 and NAD D 3020. As an owner of the NAD, I can say there is no difference in quality playing my audio files from USB or from optical or even coaxial (NAD has all and so my desktop motherboard Asus P8Z77-deluxe), I can't perceive any subtle differences in sound and - on the integrated DAC - just the optical input can handle 24 bit/192 Kb files. USB can't.

Just goes to prove that much of what you read on the internet is bullsh!t.

As pointed out above, most dacs do not reclock the incoming data, they use various techniques to minimise jitter but reclocking is not normally one of them. There are exceptions but they tend to be expensive.

There also appears to be some confusion over usb transmission and usb inputs. Most amplifiers have a usb input that 'hosts' devices such as a hard drive, usb stick or iPod, this is common and fundamentally different from the usb input required to handle the audio out from a computer via USB.

The usb input on the Ra12 is a 'host', connects to drives, iPods etc, plug in such a device with music recorded in a supported format, mp3, wav etc and it will play.

The usb input on the D3020 is a fully asyncronous 'Type B' connector designed to take the output from a computer. It is a modern design and will handle up to 24/96 format.

Using a computer as a source there may well be differences in the performance using the different methods of connection, asyncronous usb is technically superior but may or may not be audibly better, very system dependent.

 

[DavieCee]

I am going to disagree with most of you but that is allowed, right?

I use a Macbook Pro connected to a Beresford Caiman DAC and the sound through USB is much more open than when using the optical out.

Just my opinion though, no science.

 

[davedotco]

I am going to disagree with most of you but that is allowed, right?

I use a Macbook Pro connected to a Beresford Caiman DAC and the sound through USB is much more open than when using the optical out.

Just my opinion though, no science.

I think that usb should be better, but implementation is everything.

If you can be bothered to try another test, take particular care over level matching and let us know what you think. If you have access to any kind of digital multimeter, measuring the output at the speaker terminals is relatively simple, match the voltages to match the level.