- Μηνύματα
- 5.197
- Reaction score
- 20
By Michael Fremer • Posted: Jan 21, 2011
Ayre Acoustics' designer, Charlie Hansen, has little good to say about S/PDIF.
He claims that asynchronous USB performs far better, which is one reason he omitted an S/PDIF input from the DX-5.
I could hear no differences between CDs played on the Audio Alchemy transport and fed to the Debussy via S/PDIF, and the same CDs ripped to and played by the Sooloos music server and connected to the Debussy via S/PDIF.
I could also hear no differences between CDs played via S/PDIF, and the same CDs ripped and played via USB.
However, the 24-bit/96kHz files of Markus Schwartz's Equinox, transferred to the Sooloos and then fed via S/PDIF to the Debussy, sounded quite different from the same files decoded via the Debussy's USB port.
The USB playback was noticeably airier and more spacious; the S/PDIF version sounded flatter and somewhat thicker, but also had more bass, which could have accounted for the thickness.
This was disturbing -I would have preferred to have heard no difference at all.
It made me wonder: Since the Sooloos server is essentially a computer, why doesn't it have a USB output?
That said, I heard no differences between the 24-bit Beatles files decoded via S/PDIF–Sooloos and MacBook Pro–USB, so perhaps something else was involved in the different sounds of the Equinox files.
You can't really fight it, nor should you: the Blu-ray disc excepted, the future of digital storage and playback is not any sort of silver optical disc.
Rather, it will be hi-rez files downloaded from the Internet, stored on a hard drive, and decoded by an outboard, multi-input D/A converter such as the dCS Debussy.
I don't see how even the most committed analog diehard would not enjoy the sound of high-resolution digital files decoded by the Debussy, fed via S/PDIF from either a dedicated music server like the Sooloos or via USB from a computer hard drive.
S/PDIF vs USB, Conclusion
Πλήρες
Ayre Acoustics' designer, Charlie Hansen, has little good to say about S/PDIF.
He claims that asynchronous USB performs far better, which is one reason he omitted an S/PDIF input from the DX-5.
I could hear no differences between CDs played on the Audio Alchemy transport and fed to the Debussy via S/PDIF, and the same CDs ripped to and played by the Sooloos music server and connected to the Debussy via S/PDIF.
I could also hear no differences between CDs played via S/PDIF, and the same CDs ripped and played via USB.
However, the 24-bit/96kHz files of Markus Schwartz's Equinox, transferred to the Sooloos and then fed via S/PDIF to the Debussy, sounded quite different from the same files decoded via the Debussy's USB port.
The USB playback was noticeably airier and more spacious; the S/PDIF version sounded flatter and somewhat thicker, but also had more bass, which could have accounted for the thickness.
This was disturbing -I would have preferred to have heard no difference at all.
It made me wonder: Since the Sooloos server is essentially a computer, why doesn't it have a USB output?
That said, I heard no differences between the 24-bit Beatles files decoded via S/PDIF–Sooloos and MacBook Pro–USB, so perhaps something else was involved in the different sounds of the Equinox files.
You can't really fight it, nor should you: the Blu-ray disc excepted, the future of digital storage and playback is not any sort of silver optical disc.
Rather, it will be hi-rez files downloaded from the Internet, stored on a hard drive, and decoded by an outboard, multi-input D/A converter such as the dCS Debussy.
I don't see how even the most committed analog diehard would not enjoy the sound of high-resolution digital files decoded by the Debussy, fed via S/PDIF from either a dedicated music server like the Sooloos or via USB from a computer hard drive.
S/PDIF vs USB, Conclusion
Πλήρες
