tdgruen wrote:
Actually, my wifi has proven capable of streaming 192. I should
reiterated something I shared in an earlier post. If I use digital coax
out of the SBT to the DAC, with EDO, I get 192 to play. The DAC has a
display that shows the sample rate, and so can the squeezebox.
So
jimbobvfr400 wrote:
So if coax works perfectly why not use it?
Fair question. I need more time to listen through coax, but I chose NAD
because of its USB asynchronous technology. What I keep hearing is,
when done right, asynchronous USB has the ability to reduce jitter
extremely effectively
tdgruen wrote:
Fair question. I need more time to listen through coax, but I chose NAD
because of its USB asynchronous technology. What I keep hearing is,
when done right, asynchronous USB has the ability to reduce jitter
extremely effectively and produce superior sounds quality. NAD
Julf wrote:
Any DAC using reclocking/buffering (often using an asynchronous sample
rate converter) will provide the same degree of jitter immunity,
independent of what interface is used. Asynchronous USB just makes
implementing buffer synchronisation much easier.
If what you're saying is
tdgruen wrote:
If what you're saying is true Julf, that would be an easy solution to my
problem. Hoping that's true in the case of this DAC. The way NAD
describes this device could lead you to think otherwise though:
The D 1050s digital inputs allow you to connect many different
