2. digital
  3. 139886-13434

Why does my DAC sound so much better after upgrading digital SPDIF cable?

I like my Mps5 playback designs sacd/CD player but also use it as a DAC so that I can use my OPPO as a transport to play 24-96 and other high res files I burn to dvd-audio discs.

I was using a nordost silver shadow digital spdif cable between the transport and my dac as I felt it was more transparent and better treble than a higher priced audioquest digital cable a dealer had me audition.

I recently received the Synergistic Research Galileo new SX UEF digital cable.  Immediately I recognized that i was hearing far better bass, soundstage, and instrument separation than I had ever heard with high res files (non sacd),

While I am obviously impressed with this high end digital cable and strongly encourage others to audition it, I am puzzled how the cable transporting digital information to my DAC from my transport makes such a big difference.

The DAC take the digital information and shapes the sound so why should the cable providing it the info be so important. I would think any competently built digital cable would be adequate....I get the cable from the DAC to the preamp and preamp to amp matter but would think the cable to the DAC would be much less important.

I will now experiment to see if using the external transport to send red book CD files to my playback mps5 sounds better than using the transport inside the mps5 itself.

The MPS5 sounds pretty great for ca and awesome with SACD so doubt external transport will be improvement for redhook cds


128x128karmapolice
boxer12
1,703 posts
 
" And yet you do not know it actually made a difference, all you know is that you heard a difference" 

In regard to audio, that is exactly what I'm concerned with. 

" Ah! The ol' "Better hearing", "Better equipment" argument"

Yep
mzkmxcv
558 posts
 

@boxer12

If the difference is due to placebo, it at the end of the day makes no difference from an actual improvement, as you feel the system is sounding better. However, your perception may not work in the same way as someone else, so actually claiming it performs better would be disingenuous.

The fact of listening for a difference itself will lead you to look for differences and possibly hear them even if they don’t exist. This also is in replay to audioengr and how he said his customers heard a difference, just the fact of asking if they heard a difference would itself invalidate any findings. Just remeber the story I told in the beginning, people heard distinct differences even though the system stayed the same. Our brains are easily fooled, just think back to what color that dress was (it’s black/blue; I saw white/gold the first day and the next day I could only see black/blue, truly mind blowing).

@audioengr

Also, I mixed psec with ns. Going from 22psec to 7psec is not audible. Some studies/trials have been done, and human audibility of jitter is >10ns (~20ns one study found), which is 10,000psec. And again, any good DAC would get rid of jitter to beyond audibility in the first place.
steakster
720 posts
 
mzkmxcv
I will be the first to say I don’t have a golden ear, my $4000 towers speakers don’t sound much better than my $300 bookshelves . . .
Your honesty is greatly appreciated.    Fortunately, I can hear a difference.  

melm
309 posts
 
@ mzkmxcv

You wrote, "I have seen measurements showing jitter in Toslink, but they were showing >100kHz and even in the MHz range, so it has no influence on music."

IMO this reveals that you don''t understand the influence of jitter, to wit, what jitter is all about.   My DAC, for ex. uses  femtosecond clocks to minimize jitter.  And they do.  The difference between clocks like these and lesser clocks can be heard.
mzkmxcv
558 posts
 
@melm

Look at how Stereophile tests jitter, it actually is in our hearing range. Who cares if the timing errors are at 500kHz?

You claim the clock differences can be heard, I no doubt believe you hear a difference, I do doubt though that any differences are above our audibility thresholds (and not by a reasonable margin, you are claiming differences that are magnitudes upon magnitudes upon magnitudes lower than what studies have found).  

And again, our audibility threshold to hear jitter has been tested to be >10ns, the fact of using a femtosecond clock is irrelevant, as a jitter error of 1 femtosecond won’t sound better than an error of 1 nanosecond.
More to discover