• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Dedicated PCI/PCIE digital audio transport

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
I think the real issue is that the mainstream sees digital audio connections as any kind of thing to think about. It's all HDMI nowadays.
Most of the devices use HDMI nowadays sometimes foregoing optical and spdif!

Blind testing, well I don't really want to talk about blind testing. It's of little interest to me. You guys go ahead with it.

I've made no pretensions that I am pretty subjective in the way I listen and make decisions regarding audio.

So...anyway, cash. Yeah, that's unfortunately the impression I've been getting. It's going to take some cash.
But....if it took cash....what device is there that fits my description?
It's not a crazy complicated description but it must have these things.

Consumer level (one AES output - not break out cables with 8 snakes).
PCI/PCI-express
Good clocks or whatever is considered high quality in terms of a digital transport.
 
OP
G

garbulky

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
1,510
Likes
827
Not a transport but a DDC which I'm happy with, needed since my Onkyo A5-VL has SPDIF input (no USB).

View attachment 10676
Nice. I've seen that one before. It looks really nice. Somebody reccomended me that sometime before. They were happy with it too. See stuff like that would be right up my ally if it was a PCI transport. Reasonably priced too.
Thanks for the response.
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,522
Likes
37,052
Well okay. I don't know if any device like you describe is available.
 
OP
G

garbulky

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
1,510
Likes
827
Well okay. I don't know if any device like you describe is available.
Thanks for trying. I figured if it existed, somebody here probably would either know or show me something interesting that was related.
 

Vincent Kars

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Technical Expert
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
781
Likes
1,555
This reminds me of computer audio 10 years ago.
At that time best practice was buying a card by RME or Lynx, not because of the AD, not because of the DA but to get best possible SPDIF out.
Those on a budget settled for ESI Julia or M-Audio 24/96

At that time USB audio was using adaptive synchronization.
In retrospect it combined the worst of both worlds, the complexity of USB and the timing is still generated by the source just like SPDIF/AES.

From 2010 on the implementation switched to asynchronous USB.
This solved the timing problem as in this case the DAC is in command hence the jitter performance will be as good as the clock of the DAC allows for.
In essence, zero input jitter.

Looking at today’s measurements, async USB in general beats SPDIF/AES in the jitter department.
A discrete soundcard fulfilling all of you requirements will be very hard to find.
Today discrete sound cards are targeting gamers (soundblaster) not 2 ch audio.

Maybe this link is of use: https://www.thomann.de/gb/marian_se...lu08UTt94D5hZ-MFqWbnvOTOBSdlu0ixoCT3AQAvD_BwE
 
OP
G

garbulky

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
1,510
Likes
827
This reminds me of computer audio 10 years ago.
At that time best practice was buying a card by RME or Lynx, not because of the AD, not because of the DA but to get best possible SPDIF out.
Those on a budget settled for ESI Julia or M-Audio 24/96

At that time USB audio was using adaptive synchronization.
In retrospect it combined the worst of both worlds, the complexity of USB and the timing is still generated by the source just like SPDIF/AES.

From 2010 on the implementation switched to asynchronous USB.
This solved the timing problem as in this case the DAC is in command hence the jitter performance will be as good as the clock of the DAC allows for.
In essence, zero input jitter.

Looking at today’s measurements, async USB in general beats SPDIF/AES in the jitter department.
A discrete soundcard fulfilling all of you requirements will be very hard to find.
Today discrete sound cards are targeting gamers (soundblaster) not 2 ch audio.

Maybe this link is of use: https://www.thomann.de/gb/marian_se...lu08UTt94D5hZ-MFqWbnvOTOBSdlu0ixoCT3AQAvD_BwE
Thank you. It's interesting you bring up the Juli@ and the M-audio. I remember considering them some time ago. In a way I am stuck in the past.
The Seraph you mentioned is essentially what I'm looking for, but without the breakout 8 cable snake and more consumer oriented.

I wonder if it's because there is no space to put a single XLR connector on a PCI slot which is why they never seemed to have made one....even back before async usb.
 
OP
G

garbulky

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
1,510
Likes
827
Thanks. Those look like DAC soundcards to me with a digital output included not a dedicated transport.

I used to use something similar: an Asus Xonar Essence ST PCI. It's basically a different version of those cards you linked. It has analog outputs but also a digital coax output.
What made it a bit different is that it has an onboard jitter reduction chip. Not sure how the jitter chip functions.
asus-xonar-essence-st.jpg
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,522
Likes
37,052
I can tell you the m-audio 24 96 had very high jitter. I still have one in a spare parts bin. The level of jitter sidebands on a jtest are unusually high.
 

March Audio

Master Contributor
Audio Company
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
6,378
Likes
9,317
Location
Albany Western Australia
I think the real issue is that the mainstream sees digital audio connections as any kind of thing to think about. It's all HDMI nowadays.
Most of the devices use HDMI nowadays sometimes foregoing optical and spdif!

Blind testing, well I don't really want to talk about blind testing. It's of little interest to me. You guys go ahead with it.

I've made no pretensions that I am pretty subjective in the way I listen and make decisions regarding audio.

So...anyway, cash. Yeah, that's unfortunately the impression I've been getting. It's going to take some cash.
But....if it took cash....what device is there that fits my description?
It's not a crazy complicated description but it must have these things.

Consumer level (one AES output - not break out cables with 8 snakes).
PCI/PCI-express
Good clocks or whatever is considered high quality in terms of a digital transport.

If you are worried about connection types and sound quality (there are genuine reasons why hdmi is flawed) then you would use usb.

You may have no interest in blind testing but uncontrolled sighted listening and comparison is one reason you have drawn incorrect conclusions regarding usb.

Also, why are you interested on AES over spdif? The interface is the same ( ignoring voltage level) with the same fundamental flaw of embedded clock.

If you still want a card you will have to go professional with break out cable, soundcard with output, otherwise I dont lnow of a solution either. Vincents link above is not in your price range.
 
Last edited:

Jimster480

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 26, 2018
Messages
2,880
Likes
2,032
Location
Tampa Bay
Thanks. Those look like DAC soundcards to me with a digital output included not a dedicated transport.

I used to use something similar: an Asus Xonar Essence ST PCI. It's basically a different version of those cards you linked. It has analog outputs but also a digital coax output.
What made it a bit different is that it has an onboard jitter reduction chip. Not sure how the jitter chip functions.
asus-xonar-essence-st.jpg
Yes they are sound cards with transports, but they do match what you were asking for minus having an included DAC. Also within the price range.
 
D

Deleted member 65

Guest
Yes they are sound cards with transports, but they do match what you were asking for minus having an included DAC. Also within the price range.

Installed the Asus Xonar ST card in my eldest sons PC's quite a few years back. To encourage him entering the world of good sound reproduction I also upgraded opamps on the soundcard to expensive NJR Muses01.
Still waiting for him to appreciate the excellent sound in his games ... ;-)
 

Jimster480

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 26, 2018
Messages
2,880
Likes
2,032
Location
Tampa Bay
Installed the Asus Xonar ST card in my eldest sons PC's quite a few years back. To encourage him entering the world of good sound reproduction I also upgraded opamps on the soundcard to expensive NJR Muses01.
Still waiting for him to appreciate the excellent sound in his games ... ;-)
I have a Xonar DG that I have had for quite some time. It was my "upgraded sound" for 5+ years.
Before that I had a Cmedia 8768 sound card and before than a 8738 sound card. I always "upgraded" the sound in my PC since the mid 90s when I was a kid. I remember saving for a sound card because the AC97 sounded so flat and horrible through my speakers.
 
OP
G

garbulky

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
1,510
Likes
827
I can tell you the m-audio 24 96 had very high jitter. I still have one in a spare parts bin. The level of jitter sidebands on a jtest are unusually high.
If you are worried about connection types and sound quality (there are genuine reasons why hdmi is flawed) then you would use usb.

You may have no interest in blind testing but uncontrolled sighted listening and comparison is one reason you have drawn incorrect conclusions regarding usb.

Also, why are you interested on AES over spdif? The interface is the same ( ignoring voltage level) with the same fundamental flaw of embedded clock.

If you still want a card you will have to go professional with break out cable, soundcard with output, otherwise I dont lnow of a solution either. Vincents link above is not in your price range.
I don't really have an explanation as to why I want it. I like the look of XLR cables, I guess? I am interested in better clocks. I've already got the BNC adapter working with the Musiland Digital Times and that was a lot of fun. But I really like using XLR cables!

My conclusions as to preference are never be incorrect as far as I am concerned. All the way until I change my mind! :D It's an inherent weakness of subjective listening.

Not saying that my subjective preference would not quickly be shown to be insignificant and biased by blind testing, of course.

If you looked at my gear, blind testing would have told me to spend a lot less on much less stuff. Not arguing against its results. But that's not the gear I ended up with.
I've got a solid state drive. Musiland Digital Times, DC-1. XPA-1 gen 2 monoblocks using XLR connections.

With blind testing the results would have suggested I used the gear I also already own. Much cheaper that way.

$30 Behringer UCA 202 or my old $125 XDA-1 DAC for more connections,
$40-ish my ancient mechanical hard drive PC (no arguments there. They sound the same either way blind or not. I just wanted faster processing for startup time and such.)
$230 Emotiva Bas-x a-100 amp.
 
D

Deleted member 65

Guest
I don't really have an explanation as to why I want it. I like the look of XLR cables, I guess? I am interested in better clocks. I've already got the BNC adapter working with the Musiland Digital Times and that was a lot of fun. But I really like using XLR cables!

My conclusions as to preference are never be incorrect as far as I am concerned. All the way until I change my mind! :D It's an inherent weakness of subjective listening.

Not saying that my subjective preference would not quickly be shown to be insignificant and biased by blind testing, of course.

If you looked at my gear, blind testing would have told me to spend a lot less on much less stuff. Not arguing against its results. But that's not the gear I ended up with.
I've got a solid state drive. Musiland Digital Times, DC-1. XPA-1 gen 2 monoblocks using XLR connections.

With blind testing the results would have suggested I used the gear I also already own. Much cheaper that way.

$30 Behringer UCA 202 or my old $125 XDA-1 DAC for more connections,
$40-ish my ancient mechanical hard drive PC (no arguments there. They sound the same either way blind or not. I just wanted faster processing for startup time and such.)
$230 Emotiva Bas-x a-100 amp.

Each to his own ... and that's fine
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,522
Likes
37,052
I don't really have an explanation as to why I want it. I like the look of XLR cables, I guess? snip

But I really like using XLR cables!

I prefer whenever possible to use XLR cables myself. The common mode noise rejection is sometimes valuable.

In the case of digital however, we have a format designed to inherently be highly resistant to being degraded by noise picked up. So using Toslink or coax SPDIF is no big disadvantage over AES/EBU on balanced cables. A failing of sorts with all these SPDIF connections is the clock is embedded in the digital stream and must be extracted.

You say you like good clocks. Asynch USB has inherently better clocking results because it divorces timing from the digital stream of data. It relies on usually accurate crystal clocking right at the DAC itself (the most accurate place for it).

Now if you still want what you want no one else can complain. We have however pointed out why you probably can't find what you want.

Hey, I wish all recordings were three channel rather than stereo. All well and good, but other than doing my own there are simply not many such recordings available. So I simply enjoy stereo.
 

March Audio

Master Contributor
Audio Company
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
6,378
Likes
9,317
Location
Albany Western Australia
I don't really have an explanation as to why I want it. I like the look of XLR cables, I guess? I am interested in better clocks. I've already got the BNC adapter working with the Musiland Digital Times and that was a lot of fun. But I really like using XLR cables!

My conclusions as to preference are never be incorrect as far as I am concerned. All the way until I change my mind! :D It's an inherent weakness of subjective listening.

Not saying that my subjective preference would not quickly be shown to be insignificant and biased by blind testing, of course.

If you looked at my gear, blind testing would have told me to spend a lot less on much less stuff. Not arguing against its results. But that's not the gear I ended up with.
I've got a solid state drive. Musiland Digital Times, DC-1. XPA-1 gen 2 monoblocks using XLR connections.

With blind testing the results would have suggested I used the gear I also already own. Much cheaper that way.

$30 Behringer UCA 202 or my old $125 XDA-1 DAC for more connections,
$40-ish my ancient mechanical hard drive PC (no arguments there. They sound the same either way blind or not. I just wanted faster processing for startup time and such.)
$230 Emotiva Bas-x a-100 amp.

As said already, each to their own. There is no problem with that, but this forum is based on evidence and technical realities. You are going to struggle to get the answers you are looking for here.

You mention wanting better clocks. Problem is the clock embedded in the spdif/aes signal needs to be recovered by the dac. The performance of the dac in recovering the clock is the important factor here, not necessarily the initial quality of the clock in the interface card. The clock is recovered by PLL and jitter performance may also be affected by async upsampling in the dac chip.

This is the fundamental flaw of spdif/aes. Its why usb is the better choice, the dac owns the audio word clock and places it where its needed right next to the dac. So Im afraid your reasoning isnt valid.
 
Last edited:
OP
G

garbulky

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
1,510
Likes
827
I get it guys, USB is much better because of the clock at the DAC. DBT experiments show no difference between connections. I've heard this stuff before several times. I'm also familiar with things like level matching, subjective bias, audibility threshholds for electronics. That most electronics including DACs, amps, and things like that easily exceed audibility threshholds and what really matters is the room acoustics, and speakers. etc.


Now one thing of interest is....is there a way to not use the DACs clock? Is such a thing even possible? I've heard of "world clocks". How do they work? Do they offer a benefit in terms of actual jitter performance?
Also is there such a thing as a balanced digital output? From what I gather AES is not balanced.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom