This is untrue.
Run Fidelizer Pro on a PC, which may render the computer unusable for any other task than the playback, and you’ll hear very well the difference in SQ due to the reduction of noise.
The topic is not the quality of SysOp, that of course can not compare to the software I’m speaking about, but the effect that has noise on Bit perfect.
Not true, noise definitely affects audio in digital format. Audio sent in digital is not the same as text. Sound has far more subtlety. It can very easily become muddy or veiled in a system.
Yikes. I’m out.
(20)
I found a very substantial improvement in SQ in moving from 3.5 to AS. This was masked until the file analysis was completed, but was quite apparent afterwards. I am using a MacMini with the Apple silicon (not Intel), with the SysOptimizer on and no upsampling on either platform.
Nice. What were you listening on?
Way too many misunderstandings in this thread.
Bit perfect audio absolutely exists, and in this regard, “bits are bits” is absolutely a correct statement.
Audio player’s job is to send this bit perfect stream to the DAC or, if necessary, apply upsampling or DSP in which case it is of course not bit perfect.
For the USB audio, USB signal from the computer will always contain noise, timing fluctuations and other issues allowed by the USB Audio protocol, and this theoretically does not affect “bit perfect” playback in any way. It is still a bit perfect playback IF the stream can be recovered bit perfect at the DAC, as it is almost always the case, unless one uses 30m long USB cables or whatnot.
For USB Audio, DAC requests data from the computer, stores data in the buffer and then converts it using DAC’s internal clock. For a properly designed DAC, noise and timing issues in the USB stream coming from the computer is not an issue at all. More so, noise is absolutely expected. DAC’s use optically isolated USB boards, and other design methods to overcome noise issues, and ideal DAC is absolutely insensitive to noisy USB stream until the buffer is empty and then you hear clicks, or the sound stops.
For some weird reason, USB implementation in many DAC’s (surprisingly, even in many high end DAC’s) suck. In this case, of course, there may be a clearly audible improvement if player somehow manages to minimize noise coming from the computer.
HOWEVER, this is a band-aid fix. Proper solution is an USB isolator or re-clocker if those are not built in the DAC for whatever reason. Improvement will be magnitudes larger than if software based.
Situation is completely different with S/PDIF, where computer is a master. That is why computer’s optical out is usually the worst way to connect DAC. In this case, software player can really, even theoretically improve playback quality.
But again, a proper DDC will do way better job at this. Cannot even be compared.
All above can be easily measured. Nobody does that because it is in nobody’s interest to reveal how badly things are designed. DAC manufacturers specially build in deficient power supplies in even high end DAC’s, on different DAC’s either USB or S/PDIF input implementations suck.
All this allows to sell different magic devices that improve sound quality. If you ask me, all the high end audio industry is sick.
I do not even know how to politely describe situation where USB cable changes the sound of $10K DAC, when according to basic protocol specification there cannot be any difference and there is NO difference with a $500 DAC where, what a surprise, manufacturer is not selling an additional $5K “USB purifier”.
Well said. My DAC has jitter correction, dual clock and so on.
So in your opinion why does Audirvana sounds different from Audirvana Studio and from other bitperfect players? Does it use some DSP even when everything is off?
I like the sound of 3.5 but trying to understand
How come you don’t have the same playback in both scenarios? Of course you do.
The only POSSIBLE thing that could happen, depending on CPU/RAM load, is the interruption of playback; nothing to do with SQ itself.
Exactly my point - but one small clarification to your point 4: even if USB implementation may “suck” in certain DACs, this is, again, NOT related to bit-perfectness; and such a problem would apply irrespective of software used.
I use a Mac, but also has a PC that is configured for audiophile playback with Fidelizer and JPlay.
There’s a very significant difference in SQ, if you prevent other processes from running on your computer when you listen to music with any player.
EDIT
If I could get Bit perfect playback in practice, not in theory, there would be no difference in SQ, before or after suppressing the noise that other processes provoke in the computer.
It is not pleasant to have someone put words in your mouth that never were there.
Please, read my post more thoroughly, I did not say I could not perceive the difference between iTunes and AS, I said and hereby repeat it, I do not think I would be able to perceive the nuance you mention, in the conditions you mention.
In a recent simple audio test, I was shocked to discover that I am not hearing much above 12kHz.
Not the worst for my age, was I told. And under that frequency, the quality of hearing was deemed quite good indeed.
I do not know how old you are, but if you were to take the same test, you might discover something that would shock you too, and put all this matter in perspective.
I’m 61 years old, and I know I don’t hear up to 20 KHz anymore.
Nevertheless, I do hear a significant difference when I listen to a noisy computer and a silent one.
With the same Bit perfect setting, any player on my PC sounds muddy before I apply a supression to the noise of the PC with Fidelizer. The difference is as important as the difference between a decent non audiophile player and an audiophile player.
If you don’t believe me, download a free trial version of Fidelizer and check by yourself.
If Bit perfect had no relation with noise, in practice, I should have got the same quality sound nwith or without the reduction of the noise of the PC.
Not really. Digital signal distorted by jitter is still “bit perfect”, but may sound “muddy”.
The thing is, noise of computer should not affect jitter if DAC is connected through USB. If it does, it means DAC is somehow too sensitive to noise. Buying a DDC would certainly help more than any software fix, as computer remains computer no matter how much one optimizes it.
Of course, things like Fidelizer may help in certain cases, but it is still fixing the issue not where the issue is. Computer by definition is a noisy device and DAC should be designed to be insensitive to that. If it is not, better to fix the issue completely by some kind of DDC or USB isolator.
But, if the effect of Fidelizer is very audible (which should not be normally expected), there is a possibility that computer has more serious issues than noise, like short drop-outs, and DAC may be actually trying to interpolate instead of generating clicks like less expensive DAC would. In this case, DDC or isolator would not help, as Fidelizer fixes not the noise but computer’s ability to properly process audio.
Mon Dac est bit perfect à conversion R2R + Interface Numerique pour faire travailler les 4 horloges en parallele.!
je ne sur échantillonne rien…et c’est vrai que la version AS est plus transparente et propre
108264406_1231739440511021_6667867935014738274_n|500x500
Uploading: 130745953_3518657214854301_7338001161951451678_n.jpg…
Hi ron 13,
Your post is insightful and helped me to better understand some things that I could not explain.
To make you understand, I have to tell you the whole story.
Usually, I’m listening to music with my MBP and a DAC named iFi micro iDSD Black Label. With this DAC I didn’t notice much of a difference in playback, when the Mac is busy.
And what you say may explain the reason for that: this DAC has a component that is designed to reduce noise from the USB port. It’s a DCC named “iPurifier” (iFi also sells this component separately for other DACs). The DAC has also another component named “Low-jitter crystal clock” that may prevent distortion of the digital signal.
I’m not familiar with PCs. But I have a Dell workstation that serves me for some professional tasks with software that does not exist on Mac.
I decided as a side project, for the fun, to install some players on this PC and to improve its SQ.
I followed the advices of some members of the forum who use PCs , and they told me that I should install Fidelizer and Jplay on my Dell. So I got these applications and installed them.
I affected to this PC an old iFi iDAC, that does not have the components of the iDSD Black Label, that I mentioned above.
And in fact, with this old iFi iDAC, there is a very significant improvement in SQ when I use Fidelizer and JPlay on the PC.
I even compared the SQ of the PC to the Mac’s with the same iFi iDac, and my Mac (who lacked the optimization of Fidelizer and JPlay) sounded muddy in comparison to the PC.
Now I should make new tests with my iDSD Black Label who has DCC and Lo-Jitter clock.
I’ll do it when I’ll get from the support of iFi an ASIO driver for this DAC. (On Mac we don’t need drivers for the DACs.)
I’ll share my observations of these tests with you and the other members of the forum.
J’utilise la lecture de mes fichiers numériques avec un raccordement direct du casque au DAC USB.
Quand je veux écouter avec les colonnes, je ne connecte pratiquement jamais l’ordinateur et le DAC à la chaine Hi-Fi, parce que c’est plus simple d’écouter un vinyle, un SACD ou un CD à partir desquels j’ai ripé mes fichiers numériques.
EDIT
Je sur échantillonne avec un lecteur dont j’aime beaucoup le rendu sonore et qui a été conçu pour ça. Avec les autres lecteurs, je n’entends pas une différence sensible en mode de sur échantillonnage quand j’écoute les fichiers avec le DAC iFi Black Label.
Bonjour Doudou,
Quand vous utilisez le PC Dell avec Fidelizer installé, est-ce que vous avez aussi Audirvana implémenté ou juste Jplay ?. Merci pour les cr que vous partagez.
Bonsoir edwhiu,
Sur ce PC, je n’ai pas installé AS. Je l’ai seulement sur le Mac.
J’ai installé sur le PC un lecteur concurrent dans une version d’évaluation pleinement fonctionnelle pendant un mois. C’est pratique pour comparer le PC au Mac, parce que je possède une licence de ce lecteur pour le Mac.
J’ai installé aussi un logiciel shareware audiophile japonais, très sympa, qui est pleinement fonctionnel dans sa version gratuite avec pour seule limitation une bibliothèque qui ne dépasse pas 500 pistes.
Ces deux logiciels sont pour l’instant suffisants pour explorer les possibilités, complètement nouvelles pour moi, du PC.
Je n’ai pas essayé encore d’utiliser les fonctions de lecteur de JPlay. Je me suis seulement servi pour améliorer le transfert des données au port USB pour améliorer le son des deux autres lecteurs.
Doudou, j’apprécie votre réponse. Est-ce trop vous demander de partager le nom du lecteur concurrent ainsi que celui du shareware japonais ? En privé peut-être (edwhiu@gmail.com)?
Au fait, c’est sympa de communiquer en langue française.
edwhiu
Bonjour Fiorano33,
Toujours impressionnant ce matériel Audio-GD.
Pour ma part, je n’ai pas encore sauté le pas pour un des DAC mais j’ai le formidable Pré-ampli à Tubes HE1XLR.
Êtes-vous bien sous Windows 10 ?
Avez-vous installé Audirvana Studio avec Fidelizer ?
Merci,
edwhiu
