On-board digital out...

[sphinx99]

I just want to confirm the following - if I am sending audio to an external DAC (say, a receiver or DAC/AMP combo) of high quality, then there is no advantage to investing in a better sound card than whatever standard "soundmax" onboard audio comes on a typical motherboard these days.

True/false?

I currently send audio (digital) to a Benchmark DAC1 when using headphones, and to an Onkyo TX-NR3007 receiver for speakers. It's a cabling mess, and the receiver does drive other things than computer sound so speaker and receiver location isn't always perfect, but I've been quite satisfied with this setup. Is it true that upgrading to one of those pricey boutique sound cards would not change the performance of this setup one bit?

 

[sdgserv]

In theory no...
Now for my worthless opinion..These are the cards I have used
EMu 404
EMu 1212
Julie@
Prodigy2 HD

In each case the sound changed to a more robust full sound. Your DAC is one of the best, my opinion would be to feed it the best 1s' 0's you can

 

[sphinx99]

Thanks for the reply sd. Interesting reply because one of the reasons I ask is that I do have a 1212m that I had bought for 24-bit audio capture quite a few years ago on another PC that's long since died, and I've been wondering whether I would see better results rolling it in, in place of on-board sound. In theory, it shouldn't make one whit of difference; 1s are 1s and 0s are 0s, jitter aside, and I think my DAC deals with jitter...

(Not that my ears are sensitive enough to notice.)

 

[7andabit]

All Intel chipsets based on PCI Express bus – like i915 and i925 – support High Definition Audio. This standard provides two new features: multi-streaming, which allows more than one audio signal to be sent to a different audio device – for example, to watch a DVD on your living room transferring the audio through a wireless network while talking through a voice over IP solution at the same time on your desktop in your office – and high quality audio.

High Definition Audio provides 7.1 surround audio with 192 kHz sampling rate and up to 32-bit resolution. Other audio solutions embedded on the chipset support a maximum of 48 kHz sampling rate and 20-bit resolution, even when they support 5.1 configuration (”6-channel surround audio&#8220.

Intel is promoting High Defition Audio together with Dolby Laboratories, who created three audio ”levels“ for PCs using HD Audio: Dolby Sound Room, Dolby Home Theater and Dolby Master Studio, which are targeted to the entry-level user, to the mid-range user and to the high-end user, respectively. The features of these ”levels“ are the following:

Dolby Sound Room: 2-channel audio supporting Dolby Virtual Speaker and Dolby Head Phones technologies. These two technologies simulate 5.1 audio using only 2 speakers, based on Dolby Pro Logic II technology. It has a signal-to-noise ratio of at least 75 dB.
Dolby Home Theater: 6-channel (5.1) audio with a signal-to-noise ratio of at least 85 dB, based on Dolby Pro Logic II technology.
Dolby Master Studio: 8-channel (7.1) audio with a signal-to-noise ratio of at leas 95 dB, based on Dolby Pro Logic IIx and Dolby Digital Live technologies.

Something really interesting about Dolby Pro Logic II technology it that it allows the system to use 5.1 audio (or 7.1 audio with Dolby Pro Logic IIx) even if the audio source has only two channels (as it happens with CDs, for example), through the use of a series of filters.

Digital Live technology is the streaming technology from Dolby Labs, used to transfer music that is stored in the PC to a receiver located in your living room through wireless LAN, for example.

The idea behind these ”levels“ is to make it easy for the user to know what is the on-board audio quality from the motherboard he (or she) is buying, simply paying attention to what Dolby logo is printed on the box (Sound Room, Home Theater or Master Studio).
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/What-is-High-Definition-Audio/265

Audio can be available in two different formats: analog or digital. Computers are digital systems so they can only produce and manipulate audio in digital format. The problem, however, is that in the real world audio is an analog entity. Speakers are expecting an analog signal so they can reproduce sounds; you can’t feed speakers with a digital signal – the so called “digital speakers” are in fact analog speakers with a digital-to-analog (DAC) converter converting the digital signal sent by the computer into analog signal. On motherboards there is a chip called codec (short for coder/decoder) that is in charge of converting digital audio signals into analog and vice-versa. This component is very important as it defines the audio quality of a sound card, and we will talk a lot more about it later.

The process of converting the digital signal sent by the computer into an analog signal, so you can hear sound on your speakers – for example, when you play an MP3 file or when you play a video file – is called digital-to-analog conversion or DAC for short. The inverse process, i.e., converting analog sounds sent to the computer through a microphone or through its “line in” input into digital – for example, when you hookup a tape deck or a turntable to your PC to convert old music into MP3 files – is called analog-to-digital conversion or ADC for short.

On any sound card – including those embedded on motherboards – you can find two types of connectors: analog and digital. Analog connectors (usually 3.5 mm mini jacks) allow you to connect your sound card directly to speakers (i.e., “analog speakers&#8221. This is the cheapest and easiest way to connect speakers to your PC.

Digital connection, also known as SPDIF (Sony/Phillips Digital Interconnect Format) can be found in two flavors, coaxial (using a mono RCA connector) or optical (using a connector called Toslink). This connection allows you to connect your sound card to home theater receivers and digital speakers. As we have already explained, loudspeakers are analog devices. Home theater receivers and digital speakers have a digital-to-analog converter inside that converts the digital signal received into analog and then send the signal to the speakers.

Digital connection provides some advantages compared to analog connection. First, usually home theater receivers and digital speakers use a better codec than the one used on the motherboard and because of that the audio quality is higher (lower noise level, mainly). Secondly, home theater receivers and digital speakers may provide features not found on analog speakers, like Dolby Pro Logic, which simulates surround sound when the original sound source is just stereo (i.e., two channels only) – using analog speakers you can only have this kind of feature if the software you are using provide them. And in third place, with digital connection you need just one cable to connect your PC to your home theater or digital speakers, while with analog connection you need one cable for each pair of speakers (on a 5.1 system you will need three cables, for example).
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/How-On-Board-Audio-Works/28

Supports Multichannel LPCM HDMI Audio, Up To 7.1 channel/32 bit/192 kHz

According to a couple of sources, the upcoming ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series graphics cards will support multichannel LPCM HDMI audio (actually up to 7.1 channel/32 bit/192 kHz)

Bit Perfect Sounds by WASAPI Exclusive Mode
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Here bit perfect audio means audio streaming bypassing Windows Vista Audio Engine, thus no other application's audio will play and signal processing has no effect. This is achieved when the audio renderer selects the WASAPI (Windows Audio Session API) exclusive mode (as opposed to the shared mode). Basic flow of audio streams is

Shared mode:
Audio source -> Decoder -> DS Renderer -> WASAPI -> Audio Engine -> Audio driver -> HDMI
Exclusive mode:
Audio source -> Decoder -> ReClock -> WASAPI -> Audio driver -> HDMI
Unfortunately there are only a couple of players/renderers that support the WASAPI exclusive mode, and for movie playback, ReClock (since 1.8.3.7) is the only solution right now. Please read WASAPI Support for details of ReClock WASAPI support.

Current Solutions for Multichannel LPCM HDMI Audio
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

So we have plenty of choices for multichannel LPCM over HDMI:

IGP

- Intel G965, G33 and G35 with SDVO HDMI device (since 2006)
- Intel G45
- GeForce 8200 & 8300, nForce 750a & 780a SLI mGPU for AMD
- GeForce 9300 & 9400 mGPU for Intel

Discrete Graphics Card

- ATI Radeon HD 4350/4550/4600 Series/4800 Series

All the above solutions lack PAP (and software) hence, audio from premium contents is downsampled to 16bit/48kHz. None of them supports Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio bitstreaming.

Sound Card

- ASUS Xonar HDAV1.3
- Auzentech Auzen X-Fi HomeTheater HD

They are the only solutions that supports full-resolution LPCM and Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio bitstreaming.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1029603

In addition to producing high definition picture quality, Blu-ray discs also output high definition sound. But if you're using your PC to watch your Blu-rays [movie discs], you're not likely to hear anything superior to CD-quality sound. Soundcards on the market today are configured to downsample your HD quality sound and relay it in CD-quality 16bit/44KHz format."
http://www.computershopper.co.uk/news/246060/whos-hampering-your-bluray-sound.html

In Windows Vista, hardware acceleration is no longer available for audio effects in DirectSound3D (DS3D), which is the sound component of DirectX, because Windows Vista has done away with the hardware audio abstraction layer that Windows XP uses. In short, Windows Vista can only provide basic sound for PC games that were written to use DS3D.

Windows Vista uses the new Universal Audio Architecture (UAA), which provides the developers of games greater flexibility and stability than the hardware audio abstraction layer.

If you play games written for Windows XP and you have a Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi sound card, you can download a utility for it called ALchemy that converts DS3D instructions to OpenAL, which works in Windows Vista. If you don't have that sound card, it is advisable to stick with Windows XP until this compatibility problem has been resolved. You should check the site of the manufacturer of your PC's sound card for updated device drivers or a workaround.

Question: Can Dolby Digital Live be used with an old Creative Lab's or other makes of sound card?
Answer: Dolby Digital Live (DDL) is not a hardware feature of a sound device, it relies on the software encoding performed by the sound card's device driver. It is supported by sound-card drivers from Creative Labs and in some device drivers for audio devices made by manufacturers such as Asus, Auzentech and Realtek. Creative Lab's current licence with Dolby ensures that most of its new sound cards have suitable drivers.

A 5.1 sound system uses three inputs just to be able to produce that level of sound. 7.1 surround sound systems, which have Dolby Digital decoders, are fed via an S/PDIF digital input, the cables for which are available in coaxial and optical versions.

http://www.pcbuyerbeware.co.uk/Sound.htm

Hope thats enough proof to get rid of the soundcard myth

 

[sphinx99]

I will assume that to mean that for stereo 2.0 with a DAC handling any sort of jitter issues my on-board sound my present, I do not need another sound card for the purposes of improving SQ.

 

[7andabit]

I will assume that to mean that for stereo 2.0 with a DAC handling any sort of jitter issues my on-board sound my present, I do not need another sound card for the purposes of improving SQ.

No. It will passed thru to your DAC on the receiver which got a better DAC than most sound cards. A CPU alone can handle sound better than the low budget soundcards hanging around newegg. The SQ will in the end depend on your speakers/ receiver relationship. Onboard jitter issues you need a stable HD Audio driver of realtek. Ive noticed theres one posted in another thread. Realtek HD 2.35. Its stable without issues

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1598138

 

[sdgserv]

Thanks for the reply sd. Interesting reply because one of the reasons I ask is that I do have a 1212m that I had bought for 24-bit audio capture quite a few years ago on another PC that's long since died, and I've been wondering whether I would see better results rolling it in, in place of on-board sound. In theory, it shouldn't make one whit of difference; 1s are 1s and 0s are 0s, jitter aside, and I think my DAC deals with jitter...

(Not that my ears are sensitive enough to notice.)

Hey try it..Drop the EMu in, if you can hear a diff. great if not sell the card. You have one hell of a dac. I doubt jitter will be a problem. What do u have to lose

 

[sphinx99]

Some notes,

1. I did manage to get the 1212m working (NOT EASY) and didn't notice any difference whatsoever with digital output. The Emu W7 x64 driver situation makes this a dead card for me.

2. I finally found a mini-toslink-to-toslink cable and was able to connect my DAC1 to the iMac. While I haven't figured out how to enable/verify bitperfect., etc., on the OSX platform, it does sound absolutely fantastic. I'm also able to send 24/96 stereo from my Windows PC to the DAC1 using onboard sound, and this sounds great too.

 

[Spooony]

Reason why we buy sound cards is to get 5.1 in gaming. Most games 5.1 gets send to the analog of the card so hooking it up via digital we loose that positional audio. One or two games like BC2 gives you 5.1 over digital but thats due to the game using its own codecs and doing the processing rater than the card. For headsets we need a amp to do dolby for the headphones thats where a soundcard comes in again. But if you want 5.1 on your receiver you can get the DTS 610. Cost around $30 and is outside your pc. it converts all your games 5.1 analog to 5.1 digital

 

[EarlKeim]

Spoony,

Your post is too general and in fact wrong in many ways. The reason people buy sound cards is to have superior sound to onboard solutions or better sound than what they previously had in their dedicated sound cards.

Not all sound cards do 5.1. Most modern onboard sound chipsets are capable of 5.1 output, if you set it to do so, in gaming and movies.

Many people buy sound cards now for superior analog quality and the ability to change components of the card for even better analog output. Some users have problems as well with case noise affecting their onboard sound, so a shielded dedicated sound card alleviates that as well.

People can game with audiophile quality sound in either stereo or 5.1. The X-Meridian 2G we reviewed has good analog sound and it does have the ability to reproduce 5.1 analog sound in movies, games, and upmixed music, . ASUS and HTOmega have customizable cards as well.

Losing positional audio? This is wrong also. If you have a card that does Dolby Digital or DTS encoding, the audio signal from your dedicated sound card or onboard sound chipset is converted to digital for output using a single cable to digital receiver. The information is the same, it is just sent to another destination for decoding and output. Many receivers have quality digital to analog converters for output.

If you buy a 5.1 analog speaker set and use an analog card that can 5.1 analog audio, you will have surround sound. If your 5.1 capable card has DTS or Dolby encoding that analog data is encoded and sent to the receiver through a single cable and is decoded and reproduced there as well. It is not simply about better positionality.

 

[Spooony]

Spoony,

Your post is too general and in fact wrong in many ways. The reason people buy sound cards is to have superior sound to onboard solutions or better sound than what they previously had in their dedicated sound cards.

Not all sound cards do 5.1. Most modern onboard sound chipsets are capable of 5.1 output, if you set it to do so, in gaming and movies.

Many people buy sound cards now for superior analog quality and the ability to change components of the card for even better analog output. Some users have problems as well with case noise affecting their onboard sound, so a shielded dedicated sound card alleviates that as well.

People can game with audiophile quality sound in either stereo or 5.1. The X-Meridian 2G we reviewed has good analog sound and it does have the ability to reproduce 5.1 analog sound in movies, games, and upmixed music, . ASUS and HTOmega have customizable cards as well.

Losing positional audio? This is wrong also. If you have a card that does Dolby Digital or DTS encoding, the audio signal from your dedicated sound card or onboard sound chipset is converted to digital for output using a single cable to digital receiver. The information is the same, it is just sent to another destination for decoding and output. Many receivers have quality digital to analog converters for output.

If you buy a 5.1 analog speaker set and use an analog card that can 5.1 analog audio, you will have surround sound. If your 5.1 capable card has DTS or Dolby encoding that analog data is encoded and sent to the receiver through a single cable and is decoded and reproduced there as well. It is not simply about better positionality.

Your telling me a sound card has a better dac than a receiver dream on.
Your getting 5.1 via digital on your receiver? Show me a gaming thats make use of the soundcard to apply digital and where it gets pass thru to your receiver with the dolby lights flicking on. In fact why would the card use its DAC when it gets send thru for decoding by the receiver? So your thinking your card actually does the Dolby right. Why would you worry about quality then if a receiver is going to convert it to analog. You got the wrong idea what DDL is.

Dolby Digital Live (DDL) is not a hardware feature of a sound device, it relies on the software encoding performed by the sound card's device driver. It is supported by sound-card drivers from Creative Labs and in some device drivers for audio devices made by manufacturers such as Asus, Auzentech and Realtek. Creative Lab's current licence with Dolby ensures that most of its new sound cards have suitable drivers.

Remember I was talking about a DIGITAL connection where the DAC of the receiver is the one converting it to ANALOG

 

[Mr. Wolf]

From everything I've read and tried, a separate sound card performs no better than onboard DDL/DTS when running digital out (coaxial/optical) to an external receiver/amp/DAC.

 

[EarlKeim]

yes I do agree with you Wolf.

If only we could understand Spoony

 

[450]

Spooony, have you used DDL or DTS Connect on a modern system?

From everything I've read and tried, a separate sound card performs no better than onboard DDL/DTS when running digital out (coaxial/optical) to an external receiver/amp/DAC.

+1.

 

[sphinx99]

OP here; sorry for resurrecting an old thread.

I am trying to figure out how to setup some sort of bitstreaming from a Windows 7 PC to my DAC. As before, I'm still using a DAC1 but have upgraded to a HD800 for the cans since then. I have a few different PCs that I listen to music with, all of which have toslink audio (on the motherboard) usually of the "soundmax" variety. I notice that out of the box Windows 7 seems to be adjusting the audio - volume keys on the keyboard do indeed adjust volume.

Since my DAC has a volume knob that I'd prefer to use, is there a way to always have the PC output a volume-agnostic bitstream to the DAC over toslink and let me adjust volume on the DAC amp? Is this something that can be done without having to install sound cards for this purpose?

Reason I ask: I listen to music from three different PCs. One is an old i7-920 using motherboard toslink audio. One is a 27" iMac (~ 2010) with a mini-coax adapter. One is a laptop whose docking station has coax digital audio. I'd like a "raw" audio signal from each of these to my DAC, which tends to follow me from computer to computer.

 

[Godmachine]

Your internal DAC has to fully support WASAPI or ASIO directly for it (your DAC) to by pass the software mixer in Windows. If it isn't working than its a driver issue or perhaps try different software like Jriver.

 

[sphinx99]

"if it isn't working" == Windows 7 volume adjustments resulting in volume changes in the headphones?

 

[Procyon12]

i used to not see much of a difference untill i got a relativley higher end dac.

i use a beresford TC-7520SEG.
in USB in wasapi it sounds the best for me.

my psu went out so i was computer less for sometime. i used an old dvd player in optical in the time being. much to my surprise, it did not sound as good as USB. which is confusing to me.

when i got my computer back i decided to try a few things.
optical onboard in directsound in jriver- sounds terrible 5/10.
optical onboard in j.river with wasapi - sound good, but not as good as usb. 7.5/10
optical onboard in j.river with ASIO4ALL - same as wasapi.
dvd player on optical - sound good, around the same as onbaord with wasapi - 7.5/10
usb on j.river in direct sound - sound very good 8/10.
usb on j.river in wasapi - just marginally better than in direct sound. 8.2/10.

now, obviously, there is a difference. the vast difference between directsound and wasapi for the onboard is huge. this leads me to believe that bad drivers can have a detrimental effect on sound.

the second thing to remember is that yes, its 1's and 0s, but the 1's and 0s have to come at the exact right time. my dac supposedly has a quite good usb spidf transceiver chip, even though it is only capable of a lesser resolution. people have had lots of sucess with better usb spidf transceivers, such as this v-link.

http://www.amazon.com/Musical-Fidelity-MFVLINK-V-Link/dp/B004PH03GU
i wish to try this one day, to see if it is an improvement over my usb.
you benchmark is even much higher end than mine. dont use onboard to save a little money.

oh, and as for the volume thing, thats completely driver related. my volume on windows does nothing with my usb, but it effects my onboard digital. when i use ASIO4ALL or wasapi, then only it gets locked in.

 

[Godmachine]

"if it isn't working" == Windows 7 volume adjustments resulting in volume changes in the headphones?

Yes. All volume changes should be external and the windows 7 sound mixer should be completely bypassed as well. If you can still mess with it then its not fully working.

 

[Godmachine]

i used to not see much of a difference untill i got a relativley higher end dac.

i use a beresford TC-7520SEG.
in USB in wasapi it sounds the best for me.

my psu went out so i was computer less for sometime. i used an old dvd player in optical in the time being. much to my surprise, it did not sound as good as USB. which is confusing to me.

when i got my computer back i decided to try a few things.
optical onboard in directsound in jriver- sounds terrible 5/10.
optical onboard in j.river with wasapi - sound good, but not as good as usb. 7.5/10
dvd player on optical - sound good, around the same as onbaord with wasapi - 7.5/10
usb on j.river in direct sound - sound very good 8/10.
usb on j.river in wasapi - just marginally better than in direct sound. 8.2/10.

now, obviously, there is a difference. the vast difference between directsound and wasapi for the onboard is huge. this leads me to believe that bad drivers can have a detrimental effect on sound.

the second thing to remember is that yes, its 1's and 0s, but the 1's and 0s have to come at the exact right time. my dac supposedly has a quite good usb spidf transceiver chip, even though it is only capable of a lesser resolution. people have had lots of sucess with better usb spidf transceivers, such as this v-link.

http://www.amazon.com/Musical-Fidelity-MFVLINK-V-Link/dp/B004PH03GU

i wish to try this one day, to see if it is an improvement over my usb.

Except that the DAC you linked doesn't support asynchronous output via USB. This can impact clipping and doesn't offer a clean , pure signal.

This is an excellent DAC , highly recommended and I've used it personally :

HRT Music Streamer II , currently $149 on Amazon and totally worth it. The only downside is that it doesn't offer any other kind of output except via RCA jacks. But the DAC sounds really amazing for the price.

 

[Procyon12]

Except that the DAC you linked doesn't support asynchronous output via USB. This can impact clipping and doesn't offer a clean , pure signal.

i never said that the USB transceiver was the best, i just said it has quite a good usb transceiver. as i said i am anxious to try the v-link with it.

This is an excellent DAC , highly recommended and I've used it personally :

HRT Music Streamer II , currently $149 on Amazon and totally worth it. The only downside is that it doesn't offer any other kind of output except via RCA jacks. But the DAC sounds really amazing for the price.

it is a very good dac, and i reccomend it to people all the time. but i feel mine is a significant upgrade from it, but of course it costs 2x as much.

 

[Godmachine]

i never said that the USB transceiver was the best, i just said it has quite a good usb transceiver. as i said i am anxious to try the v-link with it.



it is a very good dac, and i reccomend it to people all the time. but i feel mine is a significant upgrade from it, but of course it costs 2x as much.

Of course yours sounds better , as you mentioned at double the cost. There is a nice bump in quality from the $150 range to the $300 range.

 

[jeremyshaw]

o.0


Anyhow, as to the OP's original question: no, it should affect a thing, unless if the onboard crapware's driver set tries to "enchance the experience," of the digital out signal. What I have found out after reading a bit too much head-fi, OCN, and [H], is some people actually like these adjustments, and enjoy them over "plain," nonaltered audio. Though poor mastering to begin with may be a good and acceptable reason for the preference.

 

[timestretch]

Except that the DAC you linked doesn't support asynchronous output via USB. This can impact clipping and doesn't offer a clean , pure signal.

Async USB is a snake oil buzzword used to market new high-end gear and nothing more. The only thing it would possibly affect is jitter (and clipping would have nothing to do with that - who said that this would have anything to do with clipping?). Moreover, jitter isn't even a problem with an adaptive or syncronous USB setup. Async might make it a little bit easier to design a low-jitter setup, but by NO means is an equally low jitter setup impossible via an adaptive implementation - and numerous such solutions totally exist. Some people make it sound like any adaptive setup is going to be audibly different than an async setup *merely* because of the difference in async/adaptive implementation. If you believe that, I have some cables to sell you.

http://www.head-fi.org/t/493152/low-jitter-usb-dan-lavry-michael-goodman-adaptive-asynchronous

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1201-Music-Server-Project&p=19380#post19380

Some consecutive quotes form another forum:

Sorry to bust your bubble but asynchronous USB is snake oil - snake oil that doesn't do any harm (unless badly implemented), but snake oil none the less.

All it does is allow the DAC to take over the clock timing for the usb, supposedly to protect from "noisy" or "inaccurate" clock timings from the computer.

It's bullshit, computer clock timing for USB are not noisy or inaccurate, in fact they are very much the opposite, the clock is taken from the computers main clock generator which governs the entire PC and if it wasnt exceedingly accurate computers would not function at all.
USB is a tried, tested and well matured standard near perfected over several generations of hardware.
A vast array of USB devices require MUCH higher and accurate datarates than any USB audio device (hard drives, flash memory - anything that can max out USBs data transfer really), all require just as exact clock timings for the transfer of data as audio, and USB is near-flawless.

It's bullshit made up by a couple of high end DAC sellers in order to justify the stupid prices they charge for cheap chinese electronics in a pretty box.

Until there is any evidence, that this method helps reduce jitter (USB is inherently a low jitter communication method - due to it's short distance and design) I wouldn't puch much if any stock in their claims.
Given jitter is usually caused by outside electronic interference, thermal noise or just randomly - it isn't a big deal for such low bandwidth applications as audio devices (even 192 kHz @ 24 bit stereo is less than 10 mbit/s in bandwidth - even USB 1.0 could handle that - USB 2.0 can handle it 48 times over).

A tiny buffer adding minimum latency (which does not matter at all for playback) will give the system more than enough time to correct any data errors before output.

Oh I should add, for the sake of fairness that these DACs may indeed reduce jitter, when measured on an oscilloscope - and jitter is always undesirable - it can be a real issue when you're dealing with highly sensitive, high speed applications over long distances - but USB is none of those.

So while it might actually reduce jitter (I'd need to see some data, which a quick google didn't reveal any of) - it would have near-zero effect on audio quality.

Reducing something that is a minor and inaudible issue, to something even more inaudible is a waste of time and money.

Aye, async vs adaptive is sort of dumb. You can't hear the "jitter" in any adaptive usb dac I've ever tried, soooo.... what? You "can't hear the jitter even less," with the async DACs?

And people seem to misunderstand, overestimate the differences of adaptive and async, and how jitter even works, too. For example, the "adaptive" Benchmark DAC1 USB has "asynchronous resampling," meaning that it isolates the conversion clock from the interface clock -- in this case, jitter from the interface can never measurably impact the conversion clock. They call this design, "UltraLock," but it sounds (seems, not literally audibly sounds) similar in principle to an async design. So what is the problem, exactly? They've tested it with an Audio Precision System 2 Cascade test and found zero jitter artifacts.

If the advantage of async is "less jitter," what's the point? adaptive solutions in an ancient old DAC1 already have the issue of jitter solved; if there even ever was an issue, and of that I am doubtful.

There are far too many myths in audio. It pains me that Async is worshipped so much. It is a harmless design tech, but it is NOT the glorious thing that people think it is.