tdgruen wrote: > But in theory am I thinking right? They call these dacs "asynchronous > USB" for a reason right? They have incorporated unique "clocking" > technology at the USB interface that does a great job of handling > jitter. These dacs that have other inputs must be handling jitter > differently at those inputs, but beyond that I don't know what that > means. I guess it could vary tremendously from dac to dac and may be > greatly affected by the output source, connections, yadda yadda......is > that right? If those assumptions are correct, then that's what's > driving me to get the USB to work.
Well... yes and no. :) It is called "asynchronous" because the data transfer timing is independent of the data stream timing. In theory. It lets the DAC tell the computer when it is ready for more data, instead of the computer forcing the data down the throat of the DAC at a constant speed. This makes it easier to maintain completely separate clock domains, with a DAC audio clock totally independent of the computer/data transfer clock. Note that not all asynchronous USB DACs do this - it is still easiest to derive the audio clock from the incoming data clock. At the same time, many non-USB DACs do reclocking, buffering and sample rate conversion, resulting in a similar isolation of clock domains. So, the short answer is "your mileage might vary" :) "To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=94512 _______________________________________________ Touch mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
