-
Welcome to ASR. 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!
Innuos Phoenix USB Reclocker Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
From the Darko review ...
Listening tests tell us that the Phoenix can juice higher sound quality from the D/A conversion process. Just as Robert Fripp optimisesDavid Bowie’s Scary Monsters, Innuos optimises the Kii Three’s D/A conversion.
The Phoenix isn’t an everyman hi-fi product. It’s more of a righteous demonstration of what’s possible from outboard USB correction. If you’re already committed to a network streamer and don’t wish to make the jump to one of Innuos’ ZEN devices, the Phoenix advances sound quality to put our digital front ends much closer to where we wish them to be than where they once were. Bravo.
^Drivel
VientoB
Addicted to Fun and Learning
The usual utter waffle. Horrible man.
These guys must be loving the new LLMs doing all the stir up audiophile word salad games they had to before. Now it’s "write a raving review of {enter your useless gadget of the week} using audiophoolery terms for an uneducated hipster audience”. Wait 20 seconds, wet your pants as laughing too hard, add some pictures and publish. Done. Wait for the YT paycheque.
Well, this is just one in a long list of audio electronics equipment that target the elite rich, who won't have time to do the required research and buy accordingly. Most of these come recommended via dealership who customise the entire system for their elite customers. I am not surprised
! Thanks for the review @amirmVientoB
Addicted to Fun and Learning
Also they can watch uber-reviewer Darko and he will confirm it's the thing to buy.Well, this is just one in a long list of audio electronics equipment that target the elite rich, who won't have time to do the required research and buy accordingly. Most of these come recommended via dealership who customise the entire system for their elite customers. I am not surprised
I do watch his videos for other stuff, music primarily. They are well made from a technical perspective.
I agree they are well done, and over the past year or two he has gotten farther away from subjective things and focused more on objective performance. He’s far less of a goof than Tarun.
Hipster Doofus
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2020
- Messages
- 320
- Likes
- 444
MY nelson pass amp camp amp kit looks more complicated...at $350
Attachments
VientoB
Addicted to Fun and Learning
I refuse to watch any of his videos.
VientoB
Addicted to Fun and Learning
A British Audiophile?
BlackTalon
Addicted to Fun and Learning
yes, but it is waaaaay more expensive. It is really, really tough reclocking air. They would explain how they do it, but: a) it is top secret, and b) we would not be able to understand their explanation. Best just to send them the $17,995 and don't ask any questions. You will not believe the difference you hear.
Tarun started off as a Physics teacher turned audiophile and then later on becoming a subjective goof
He has less of a excuse for being a subjective goofball than ever now!Tarun started off as a Physics teacher turned audiophile and then later on becoming a subjective goof
OP
- Thread Starter
- #115
That someone needs to be the manufacturer. That is low hanging fruit and seeing that they don't even provide that, makes me think it may not be doing what it is claiming.
DavidM1
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2023
- Messages
- 208
- Likes
- 237
Ha! To be clearer, I think the general interest in hifi waned in the 1990s due to the perception that it was full of expensive gear that only the cognoscenti could appreciate. Nonsense products are off putting for the mainstream.
5th element
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2019
- Messages
- 44
- Likes
- 164
Okay so the fundamental problem here is that the timing, for modern USB audio, is completely irrelevant, as is USB clock jitter.
All modern USB audio interfaces use asynchronous USB data transfer. Meaning that the audio data transfer is asynchronous to the USB clock, or, any other clock within the domain of the PC.
The USB interface, most commonly provided by Xmos, uses feedback around the data flow. The audio data is buffered inside the Xmos chip inside a small buffer and then output to the DAC. The flow of this output data is synchronised to a low jitter clock provided by the manufacturer of the DAC itself and in this case that's Topping.
When audio is playing, and the buffer starts to empty, the Xmos interface sends feedback to the operating system that it needs more data. More data is thusly sent and the buffer fills back up. It's rather incredible, I find actually, that the buffers used are tiny but the feedback and operating system can react quickly enough to ensure seamless playback.
The point is that the flow of data, from Xmos to the DAC, is completely separate to the flow of data from the PC to the Xmos. The clock inside this device is irrelevant to the DAC.
The only time this unit might have some influence is if an older USB audio interface was used. The ones that don't use a separate, asynchronous, audio clock. These extrapolate the audio clock from the USB data stream provided by the PC.
I doubt anyone would be using such a USB interface with a reclocker as expensive as this. Nevertheless if you're going to be testing them you might as well use a DAC where the influence of it could, potentially, be seen.
Any of TIs PCM27xx/29xx series would do but they might be of such low performance that it would be impossible to see any difference.
All modern USB audio interfaces use asynchronous USB data transfer. Meaning that the audio data transfer is asynchronous to the USB clock, or, any other clock within the domain of the PC.
The USB interface, most commonly provided by Xmos, uses feedback around the data flow. The audio data is buffered inside the Xmos chip inside a small buffer and then output to the DAC. The flow of this output data is synchronised to a low jitter clock provided by the manufacturer of the DAC itself and in this case that's Topping.
When audio is playing, and the buffer starts to empty, the Xmos interface sends feedback to the operating system that it needs more data. More data is thusly sent and the buffer fills back up. It's rather incredible, I find actually, that the buffers used are tiny but the feedback and operating system can react quickly enough to ensure seamless playback.
The point is that the flow of data, from Xmos to the DAC, is completely separate to the flow of data from the PC to the Xmos. The clock inside this device is irrelevant to the DAC.
The only time this unit might have some influence is if an older USB audio interface was used. The ones that don't use a separate, asynchronous, audio clock. These extrapolate the audio clock from the USB data stream provided by the PC.
I doubt anyone would be using such a USB interface with a reclocker as expensive as this. Nevertheless if you're going to be testing them you might as well use a DAC where the influence of it could, potentially, be seen.
Any of TIs PCM27xx/29xx series would do but they might be of such low performance that it would be impossible to see any difference.
Wunderphones
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2021
- Messages
- 103
- Likes
- 150
But, you know, if you have a DAC that’s not as good as a Topping DAC that you can buy for like 700 bucks, and you have 4000 bucks that you can spend to fix the problem with your DAC, the smart thing to do is spend the 700 on a new DAC and the remainder on hookers and blow.
kchap
Addicted to Fun and Learning
It does not, but it is so petty. To get around it.
- Copy the link, in my browser it is Right click > Copy link address.
- Open a new tab.
- Paste the address.
renaudrenaud
Major Contributor
I had to watch one or two videos from Darko, and beyond the laughable nature of his claims, the most shocking thing is his grotesque arrogance and the way he informs people that they are merely vulgar audiophiles without discernment, while he knows better.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
