[vklyushnikov]

Hi all,
I recently discovered this article: http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/oyaide-neo-d-class-a-usb-20-cable/  and became confused. From my experience I never got good enough sound from  BDA-2 / BDP-2  combo by USB - it cannot be compared with AES/EBU connection using good old ESI@Juli card. Sound is flatter and bass response is leaner with USB. I tried computer grade USB cable and DH Labs audio grade cable - DH Jabs is much better but sound is still behind my expectations. And now guy from Absolute Sound tells that he found magical cable. So my question is - how this is possible? I remember that Bryston engineers told us that exotic cables have no meaning with BDA-2 / BDP combo. I generally agree with this approach - because BDP-2 has linear power supply and should not generate much RF noise that is polluting USB audio lines usually. Nevertheless sound is bad with standard cables. Any thoughts / recommendations?

[Anonamemouse]

The secret with digital cable is two fold: 75 Ohm and shielding.
As long as those two criteria are met you can basically buy anything you like.
Expensive cables only sound better because you know how much they set you back.

[vklyushnikov]

The secret with digital cable is two fold: 75 Ohm and shielding.
As long as those two criteria are met you can basically buy anything you like.
Expensive cables only sound better because you know how much they set you back.

USB cable is 90 Ohm. Ok, hear is my cable http://www.silversonic.com/docs/products/USB.html. It costs $60 - and I sure has good shielding. While it sounds better than computer grade cable, sound is much worse than AES/EBU connection.

[Krutsch]

Some food for thought: http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/05/gordon-rankin-on-why-usb-audio-quality-varies/

For what it's worth, I have experimented with using USB out from my BDP-1 into a Bel Canto REFLink + DAC2.5, simultaneously with S/PDIF BNC out directly into the same DAC. I was impressed how good that sounded, basically by-passing the BDP's internal sound card and using the REFLink as an async receiver/converter. And, I have played with exotic cables (Kimber Cu, AudioQuest Carbon and the Curious USB Cable).

Does it sound "better"? Initially my thought was 'Yes', but going back and forth I am not sure. In any event, they are similar enough to my ears to convince me that good USB sound quality is certainly possible with my existing gear.

I think it's possible that the cable may matter, as well as quality of the USB transmitter and the receiver (i.e. the complete signal path). Here's another link that addresses issues with USB output from a PC/Mac: http://www.empiricalaudio.com/computer-audio/

I have learned to look at the internal USB hubs on my Mac and use the port with the least number of associated devices, ensuring that my external HDD is NOT on the same USB bus. This was really important with my Mac Mini - I was hearing audible dropouts until I found the correct combination of USB ports to use with an external DAC and HDD.

As always, YMMV.

[jtinto]

I thought that the AES/EBU spec is 110 ohm which is higher than a normal balanced 75 ohm cable

I also understood that you can use a 110 ohm balanced cable for both AES/EBU and analog signals but a 75 ohm can only be used for analog signals

[vklyushnikov]

Some food for thought: http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/05/gordon-rankin-on-why-usb-audio-quality-varies/

For what it's worth, I have experimented with using USB out from my BDP-1 into a Bel Canto REFLink + DAC2.5, simultaneously with S/PDIF BNC out directly into the same DAC. I was impressed how good that sounded, basically by-passing the BDP's internal sound card and using the REFLink as an async receiver/converter. And, I have played with exotic cables (Kimber Cu, AudioQuest Carbon and the Curious USB Cable).

Does it sound "better"? Initially my thought was 'Yes', but going back and forth I am not sure. In any event, they are similar enough to my ears to convince me that good USB sound quality is certainly possible with my existing gear.

I think it's possible that the cable may matter, as well as quality of the USB transmitter and the receiver (i.e. the complete signal path). Here's another link that addresses issues with USB output from a PC/Mac: http://www.empiricalaudio.com/computer-audio/

I have learned to look at the internal USB hubs on my Mac and use the port with the least number of associated devices, ensuring that my external HDD is NOT on the same USB bus. This was really important with my Mac Mini - I was hearing audible dropouts until I found the correct combination of USB ports to use with an external DAC and HDD.

As always, YMMV.

I own Berkeley Alpha USB/AES converter that  is considered  by many experts as the best and also have Mac mini 2011. Still results are far from great - from any USB port. Using USB out from BDP-2 through Berkeley sounds acceptable but ESI@Juli is still preferable. So I begin to think that USB audio is flawed by design. I also surprised that new Bryston IAD device is actually USB/AES converter and based on technology from BDA-2 USB port.

[jtinto]

I have a BDA-3 now, but I was just trying similar comparisons to what vklyushnikov described.
I don't know how the actual USB implementation differs between the BDA-2 and BDA-3, but the new USB interface seems to work very well.
With a Mac Mini source, I compared direct USB to an April Music Stello U3 using AES/EBU connection. The U3 was noticeably superior to USB on the BDA-2. With the BDA-3, they sounded very close. However, the AES/EBU connection allows upsampling while the USB does not. In some cases, the upsampling was a bit smoother sound.

[vklyushnikov]

I have a BDA-3 now, but I was just trying similar comparisons to what vklyushnikov described.
I don't know how the actual USB implementation differs between the BDA-2 and BDA-3, but the new USB interface seems to work very well.
With a Mac Mini source, I compared direct USB to an April Music Stello U3 using AES/EBU connection. The U3 was noticeably superior to USB on the BDA-2. With the BDA-3, they sounded very close. However, the AES/EBU connection allows upsampling while the USB does not. In some cases, the upsampling was a bit smoother sound.

James Tanner told already that BDA-3 USB is better than on BDA-2, but didn't tell technical details. However I already own BDA-2 so I still need to get best from it. Sad that nobody from Bryston engineers still didn't explain why BDA-3 USB is better and how to improve BDA-2 USB performance. There are lot of USB purifiers and regenerators on the market, but I'm not sure which path for upgrade to choose now. Regarding upsampling - I turned it off on BDA-2. While it improves some records, generally it adds extra brightness for 44/16 playback - I don't need it.

[James Tanner]

James Tanner told already that BDA-3 USB is better than on BDA-2, but didn't tell technical details. However I already own BDA-2 so I still need to get best from it. Sad that nobody from Bryston engineers still didn't explain why BDA-3 USB is better and how to improve BDA-2 USB performance. There are lot of USB purifiers and regenerators on the market, but I'm not sure which path for upgrade to choose now. Regarding upsampling - I turned it off on BDA-2. While it improves some records, generally it adds extra brightness for 44/16 playback - I don't need it.

Hi Folks,

I am not sure exactly what I said but I meant to say that I was surprised at how good the USB sounded in the BDA3. I always preferred the AES in the BDA2 but with the BDA3 I find them very close.

Engineering tells me the only difference in the BDA3 USB and the BDA2 USB is the ability to play DSD files.

james

[Armaegis]

I believe USB has the *potential* to sound better, but still has developmental hiccups. The data stream is a bit mangled but does afford two way communication, you're drawing power off the usb bus which is lousy and also running that power line parallel to your data lines, usb priority and power management from the cpu is lousy.

The @Juli card has advantages like running off the PCI block which has better data/power rates from the computer and a higher priority/hierarchy/whatever you want to call it. AES output is also balanced and thus better at rejecting noise.

[James Tanner]

The @Juli card has advantages like running off the PCI block which has better data/power rates from the computer and a higher priority/hierarchy/whatever you want to call it. AES output is also balanced and thus better at rejecting noise.
[/quote]

Hi

One of the advantages of our new Bryston Sound Card is that it runs off the high quality linear Bryston power supply in the BDP-2 rather than the computer circuit board power supply which the juli@ card runs off of.

james

[vklyushnikov]

The @Juli card has advantages like running off the PCI block which has better data/power rates from the computer and a higher priority/hierarchy/whatever you want to call it. AES output is also balanced and thus better at rejecting noise.


Hi

One of the advantages of our new Bryston Sound Card is that it runs off the high quality linear Bryston power supply in the BDP-2 rather than the computer circuit board power supply which the juli@ card runs off of.

james

Hi James, can you explain why new sound card will sound better than USB connection? As I understand IAD uses USB bus and same design as BDA-2 USB Port. So why I should prefer IAD to simple USB connection?

[James Tanner]

Hi James, can you explain why new sound card will sound better than USB connection? As I understand IAD uses USB bus and same design as BDA-2 USB Port. So why I should prefer IAD to simple USB connection?

Hi

No I was referring to the AES connection as being better with the new Bryston card - you are correct -USB bypasses the the BDP soundcard and the USB input on the DAC determines the quality.

james

[vklyushnikov]

Hi

No I was referring to the AES connection as being better with the new Bryston card - you are correct -USB bypasses the the BDP soundcard and the USB input on the DAC determines the quality.

james

Ok, isn't USB input on the DAC has same quality and design as BUC board? Perhaps the only difference is that board uses direct connection with USB bus? So we came to beginning - the cable between USB ports has large influence. Please correct me if I wrong.

[James Tanner]

Ok, isn't USB input on the DAC has same quality and design as BUC board? Perhaps the only difference is that board uses direct connection with USB bus? So we came to beginning - the cable between USB ports has large influence. Please correct me if I wrong.

HI

I agree some people feel there are differences in USB cables but from an engineering standpoint it is not something measurable.

james

[vklyushnikov]

HI

I agree some people feel there are differences in USB cables but from an engineering standpoint it is not something measurable.

james

May be Bryston uses for measurements some good quality professional USB cables? Can you reveal which brand?

[Krutsch]

HI

I agree some people feel there are differences in USB cables but from an engineering standpoint it is not something measurable.

james

From my earlier post: http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/05/gordon-rankin-on-why-usb-audio-quality-varies/

Gordon Rankin claims that he can and does measure differences in USB cables. Whether or not they are audible is another matter.

[werd]

Your problem is you have the XLR and BNC to compare it too. Ironically the BDP usb out is probably the best you will get USB from any computer file system IMO. It basically does everything a computer can't do with power supplies and basically locking out the noise. Outisde of some add-on Tweaking you might get from software. Which isn't much compared to noise.
USB is a failed medium.

[vklyushnikov]

Your problem is you have the XLR and BNC to compare it too. Ironically the BDP usb out is probably the best you will get USB from any computer file system IMO. It basically does everything a computer can't do with power supplies and basically locking out the noise. Outisde of some add-on Tweaking you might get from software. Which isn't much compared to noise.
USB is a failed medium.

I understand your point and agree with you. What I can't get that everyone is talking about great sound of new Bryston IAD board but it is actually USB/AES converter... If USB audio is failed why this device sounds great? Unfortunately I have no possibility to listen it by myself.

[werd]

I understand your point and agree with you. What I can't get that everyone is talking about great sound of new Bryston IAD board but it is actually USB/AES converter... If USB audio is failed why this device sounds great? Unfortunately I have no possibility to listen it by myself.

Well the BNC and XLR sound better and give you (or.possibly) an immediate A/B check from a BDP. The problem with USB on everything, there is an issue with the way it drives dacs. I do not know if it's the laptop, computer BDP Or what ever but it can not drive a dac like XLR or BNC. It Loses control in bass, it sounds less stiff. It might be the way dacs are conceived while some do not 75ohm choke on the input like the BDAs.

A USB only dac might be better but the ones I have heard seem to do the same thing. Or it could be just what I like but some fail bad.