Why have external DACs embraced USB?

[GotNoRice]

Looking at most of the reasonably priced external DAC offerings, I find it alarming how many use USB as their only input.

This means that using one of those DACs requires you to replace any existing soundcard you already have with some generic POS USB sound solution. I can appreciate the elegance of this simplicity for novice users who simply wouldn't want to, or aren't smart enough to deal with their existing soundcard in conjunction with an external DAC, but then again, what percentage of those who would even seek out an external DAC in the first place fit into that category?

I currently have an X-Fi Titanium HD. I like the DAC it has and I'm not necessarily in a hurry to replace it but many of these DAC offerings do pique my curiosity and it would be fun to try them. Issue is that I use a lot of the features in my X-Fi Titanium HD. I love it's microphone processing abilities, I use the EQ sometimes, I use CMSS-3D sometimes, I record stuff using the nice analog inputs the card has sometimes. The idea of replacing this with some generic USB BS makes me cringe.

So the million dollar question: What's so bad about just being able to run a cable from the Digital output on my X-Fi to the Digital input on a DAC? Why don't many DACs even have a Digital input anymore?

 

[Neutrino]

what about this one:

https://emotiva.com/products/dacs/xda-2



also something like a Scarlett 2i2 will give some very good mic capabilities alongside a very good dac (no CMSS and other creative stuff though)

http://global.focusrite.com/usb-audio-interfaces/scarlett-2i2

PS. also I don't think a USB DAC requires you to replace the sound card, you should be able to use them both

 

[Skripka]

Looking at most of the reasonably priced external DAC offerings, I find it alarming how many use USB as their only input.

This means that using one of those DACs requires you to replace any existing soundcard you already have with some generic POS USB sound solution. I can appreciate the elegance of this simplicity for novice users who simply wouldn't want to, or aren't smart enough to deal with their existing soundcard in conjunction with an external DAC, but then again, what percentage of those who would even seek out an external DAC in the first place fit into that category?

I currently have an X-Fi Titanium HD. I like the DAC it has and I'm not necessarily in a hurry to replace it but many of these DAC offerings do pique my curiosity and it would be fun to try them. Issue is that I use a lot of the features in my X-Fi Titanium HD. I love it's microphone processing abilities, I use the EQ sometimes, I use CMSS-3D sometimes, I record stuff using the nice analog inputs the card has sometimes. The idea of replacing this with some generic USB BS makes me cringe.

So the million dollar question: What's so bad about just being able to run a cable from the Digital output on my X-Fi to the Digital input on a DAC? Why don't many DACs even have a Digital input anymore?

What is so bad about using a bus (TOSLINK/SPDIF) that is 30 years old and has been bandwidth strangled in the consumer realm for more than 20 years (since the unveiling in consumer space of surround sound)....and that should have been completely deprecated no more than 15 years ago? It is like asking why don't we keep using serial ports.

Do you really need to ask?


PS-USB is a digital connect for audio. And where available is almost always superior. That being said many USB DACs still have legacy SPDIF/TOSLINK ports.

 

[StoleMyOwnCar]

I'm not sure what you're complaining about to be honest. USB is plenty for just sound, and USB IS a digital transmission type. Far from cheap, and it's also pretty standard (and flexible). I think some DAC's still have optical, not sure.

But as for your concern, it's not a concern at all. In Windows 8 with my Soundblaster and my O2 DAC AMP hooked up I can control what sound goes where and what the default output and communication device is. So my DAC+AMP can be put in charge of all sound output, and my Soundblaster can be in charge of the microphone. Sound output can also often be controlled on a per-program basis. Any program that lets you select the output device or input device, you have full control over what's output/input device it's using. I've used this combo without problem. Playing music on my T1's while using Raidcall to talk with my friends and play Civ 5.

It's not like your sound card just disappears when you hook a DAC up. It's still there. You just have an extra device that you can choose to use.

 

[GotNoRice]

what about this one:

https://emotiva.com/products/dacs/xda-2

This supports Digital inputs so it's not an issue, but it's a bit above the price range of the DACs I'm looking at.

also something like a Scarlett 2i2 will give some very good mic capabilities alongside a very good dac (no CMSS and other creative stuff though)

http://global.focusrite.com/usb-audio-interfaces/scarlett-2i2

I'm not sure if the Microphones it is meant to work with are the same impedance as your typical computer desktop microphone, but even if it is, I'm not really looking pay extra to replace the capabilities of my existing card just to accommodate a wonky interface.

PS. also I don't think a USB DAC requires you to replace the sound card, you should be able to use them both

You mean like constantly switch back and forth?

What is so bad about using a bus (TOSLINK/SPDIF) that is 30 years old and has been bandwidth strangled in the consumer realm for more than 20 years (since the unveiling in consumer space of surround sound)....and that should have been completely deprecated no more than 15 years ago? It is like asking why don't we keep using serial ports.

Do you really need to ask?

Was there supposed to be a point in there that was relevant to this thread, because if so, I couldn't find it. Fact is, a traditional Coax/Fiber digital connection does nothing to degrade the sound when using 2-channel audio (as I am). The only place where this is even an issue are low-end DACs aimed toward computer users. On the high-end, traditional digital connections such as those aren't going anywhere for a while.

PS-USB is a digital connect for audio.

Nowhere in this thread was I contending otherwise, I was simply referring to specific connections using established terminology. Of course, USB being "digital" doesn't help me for my purposes.

And where available is almost always superior.

Quite honestly I doubt that, but even if there are some inaudible differences between the two, it still wouldn't be "superior" for me to lose a half-dozen valuable features on my soundcard that I use frequently.

To be clear, I don't have an issue with a DAC including a USB input, I just have issues with it NOT also including traditional digital inputs.

 

[GotNoRice]

I'm not sure what you're complaining about to be honest. USB is plenty for just sound

Issue is that I want to retain the capabilities of my soundcard, while using the new DAC.

and USB IS a digital transmission type.

Again, nowhere did I ever contend otherwise.

But as for your concern, it's not a concern at all. In Windows 8 with my Soundblaster and my O2 DAC AMP hooked up I can control what sound goes where and what the default output and communication device is. So my DAC+AMP can be put in charge of all sound output, and my Soundblaster can be in charge of the microphone. Sound output can also often be controlled on a per-program basis. Any program that lets you select the output device or input device, you have full control over what's output/input device it's using. I've used this combo without problem. Playing music on my T1's while using Raidcall to talk with my friends and play Civ 5.

I know that I can have multiple output devices, but what I'm looking for is to just have one. I'm already happy enough with my existing DAC that moving to a ghetto setup simply wouldn't be worth it for me.

 

[Skripka]

Was there supposed to be a point in there that was relevant to this thread, because if so, I couldn't find it. Fact is, a traditional Coax/Fiber digital connection does nothing to degrade the sound when using 2-channel audio (as I am). The only place where this is even an issue are low-end DACs aimed toward computer users. On the high-end, traditional digital connections such as those aren't going anywhere for a while.



Nowhere in this thread was I contending otherwise, I was simply referring to specific connections using established terminology. Of course, USB being "digital" doesn't help me for my purposes.



Quite honestly I doubt that, but even if there are some inaudible differences between the two, it still wouldn't be "superior" for me to lose a half-dozen valuable features on my soundcard that I use frequently.

To be clear, I don't have an issue with a DAC including a USB input, I just have issues with it NOT also including traditional digital inputs.

My point was and is that TOSLINK/SPDIF should have died with VGA. It should have disappeared no later than HDMI's appearance as the standard audio/video interconnect in fact.

Why do we have a myriad of kludge codecs "Dolby" this and that that need chipsets else the connection isn't compatible? Because SPDIF/TOSLINK didn't die when it should have.

USB has more bandwidth and you can consequently do much more with it. Which is why it is superior. You also don't loose any audio quality, in fact you can gain much. Which is also why it is superior. TOSLINK/SPDIF was out of bandwidth just after it was introduced. There is no positive side to using SPDIF/TOSLINK. Zero. Zilch. None. Which is why external DACs don't commonly have it anymore.

Which is what you asked.

 

[GotNoRice]

My point was and is that TOSLINK/SPDIF should have died with VGA. It should have disappeared no later than HDMI's appearance as the standard audio/video interconnect in fact.

Why? So everyone has to replace every component they have every time a new interface comes out? Even "VGA", which you say already died, is still pretty damn common even on new computers.

Why do we have a myriad of kludge codecs "Dolby" this and that that need chipsets else the connection isn't compatible? Because SPDIF/TOSLINK didn't die when it should have.

What does Dolby have to do with 2-channel audio? 100% of my usage involves nothing other than PCM. Traditional digital connections are not limited by 2 channel PCM in any way, shape, or form, even far beyond 16-bit/44.1khz.

USB has more bandwidth and you can consequently do much more with it. Which is why it is superior.

I don't need my DAC to do anything other than turn my Digital input into an Analog output.

You also don't loose any audio quality, in fact you can gain much. Which is also why it is superior.

So it should be easy for you to provide some examples of USB outperforming regular digital connections while using 2-channel PCM, right?

TOSLINK/SPDIF was out of bandwidth just after it was introduced.

Please provide an example where the bandwidth limitations of a traditional digital connection has a negative effect on 2-channel PCM.

There is no positive side to using SPDIF/TOSLINK. Zero. Zilch. None.

I don't need there to be a positive side, I just need it to get the job done. This thread isn't about which interface is superior, because it's apples and oranges. One interface allows me to use the DAC in conjunction with my existing soundcard, the other does not. If I could use USB for my purposes, I wouldn't have any issues using it.

 

[MrGuvernment]

I have a DAC with USB and other goodies to connect, but what i found for USB is feedback, on 3 systems i have tried it on from a new sager laptop to a older 3930K system with an Intel mobo and my old i5 gigabyte system, i can hear the hiss and whines of my computer when using the USB connection from USB2 ports or USB3...

So i prefer to use other inputs.

 

[Skripka]

Why? So everyone has to replace every component they have every time a new interface comes out? Even "VGA", which you say already died, is still pretty damn common even on new computers.



What does Dolby have to do with 2-channel audio? 100% of my usage involves nothing other than PCM. Traditional digital connections are not limited by 2 channel PCM in any way, shape, or form, even far beyond 16-bit/44.1khz.



I don't need my DAC to do anything other than turn my Digital input into an Analog output.



So it should be easy for you to provide some examples of USB outperforming regular digital connections while using 2-channel PCM, right?



Please provide an example where the bandwidth limitations of a traditional digital connection has a negative effect on 2-channel PCM.



I don't need there to be a positive side, I just need it to get the job done. This thread isn't about which interface is superior, because it's apples and oranges. One interface allows me to use the DAC in conjunction with my existing soundcard, the other does not. If I could use USB for my purposes, I wouldn't have any issues using it.

So you never listen to BluRay movies? Guess what? Their audio tracks are recorded far beyond anything a SPDIF/TOSLINK connection can do.

DACs come ship with the most capable and compatible connections to service the most customers. And virtually no one needs to stick to SPDIF/TOSLINK anymore (aside from those saddled with legacy hardware). Indeed there's no reason to limit oneself with ancient tech especially in consumer space. There are applications that can live off USB1, does that mean the universe should never have abandoned USB1 for the 1% of users and applications that will never notice a difference?

USB is simply better, which is why it is the standard for DACs. It is universal, and there's no real downside, unlike most other compare/contrast scenarios with hardware. If you want to keep using ancient tech because you have the interconnects, continue by all means....but I've given you your answer as to "why".


As far as your usage scenario, many upper tier USB DACs still ship with TOSLINK/SPDIF. And should work, presuming you do not need to send a bitstreamed "Dolby" endcoded signal

 

[GotNoRice]

So you never listen to BluRay movies? Guess what? Their audio tracks are recorded far beyond anything a SPDIF/TOSLINK connection can do.

I certainly do. When viewing on my computer, the audio is processed down to 2-channel PCM before it ever hits the DAC.

I understand your point if you were talking about a home theater, and the connection between a blu-ray player and a receiver. That also has absolutely nothing to do with my situation either. It should have been quite obvious even from my very first post that I am talking about stereo playback, and talking about stereo DACs.

A stereo DAC has 2 channels. There will never be a situation where you are transmitting more than 2 channels of information to the DAC. Traditional digital connections do not represent a bottleneck in this scenario.

DACs come ship with the most capable and compatible connections to service the most customers. And virtually no one needs to stick to SPDIF/TOSLINK anymore (aside from those saddled with legacy hardware).

You're obviously just making shit up now. USB is pretty much useless for anything other than connecting to a computer (obviously). Are you contending that computer users are the only users of external DACs? There is a whole world of high-end audio where computers are still largely sneered at as a source (not that I agree).

USB is simply better, which is why it is the standard for DACs.

I notice you gloss over the idea of actually providing any proof of this, and instead just repeat the same unsubstantiated BS over and over again. It's okay, I understand Looking forward to another one of your replies talking about 5.1+ audio in the context of stereo DACs lol.

It is universal, and there's no real downside, unlike most other compare/contrast scenarios with hardware.

Not having control over your source isn't a downside? I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[StoleMyOwnCar]

Issue is that I want to retain the capabilities of my soundcard, while using the new DAC.

Which for all intents and purposes I pointed out that you can. Your sound card still has all its abilities, and you can use your DAC. What you want is the drivers to affect the DAC as well as sound card... which to me is a half-hearted way to do things anyway...

I know that I can have multiple output devices, but what I'm looking for is to just have one. I'm already happy enough with my existing DAC that moving to a ghetto setup simply wouldn't be worth it for me.

And you can just have one output device. What exactly do you want the soundcard to do? Modify the bits before sending them out to the DAC via optical so that the sound is different? If you want EQ, various programs will do that for you. Here is one:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/equalizerapo/

If you're too lazy to do this, your problem. DAC's aren't made to work with your sound card, they're made to just convert digital to analog. Whatever sound bits your system is putting out, that's what they do.

Why? So everyone has to replace every component they have every time a new interface comes out? Even "VGA", which you say already died, is still pretty damn common even on new computers.

USB2 has only been superseded by USB3. Which is compatible with USB2. USB is a very widely adopted and capable standard on PC's. I don't see why you're considering one or the other as the "standard". If anything blame the guys that made those other connections instead of just going with USB.

Which is dead end anyway. It's no one's fault these connections got used for what they do. It's just how it is.

I don't need there to be a positive side, I just need it to get the job done. This thread isn't about which interface is superior, because it's apples and oranges. One interface allows me to use the DAC in conjunction with my existing soundcard, the other does not. If I could use USB for my purposes, I wouldn't have any issues using it.

No, you can get the job done either way. If it's just EQing, I just gave you a link up above. There are plenty of workarounds for this (and I've pointed out you can use them both at once, so your wording is incorrect anyway). What you're saying is that you're lazy so you want to be able to use one set of drivers for all audio on your system (which that link above probably will do the trick either way).

Sounds like a bunch of whining for no good reason to me. If you just want a DAC that has an optical in, I'm pretty sure most receivers these days still do. I'm also sure that there are DAC's that have, too. Here's one:
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_772D1/...21505&awat=pla&awnw=g&awcr=47439157465&awdv=c
Here's another:
http://www.amazon.com/FiiO-Digital-Analog-Audio-Converter/dp/B005PWPUW6

I think most other ones are made with the assumption that you're going to just connect them to a computer and then put them out to a headphone or speaker amplifier and listen to music the way it was recorded. EQing is your problem.

And if you're happy with your current DAC, why are we having this discussion? If your current sound card is fine for you why do you want a DAC?

 

[Skripka]

I certainly do. When viewing on my computer, the audio is processed down to 2-channel PCM before it ever hits the DAC.

I understand your point if you were talking about a home theater, and the connection between a blu-ray player and a receiver. That also has absolutely nothing to do with my situation either. It should have been quite obvious even from my very first post that I am talking about stereo playback, and talking about stereo DACs.

You ask a question then you refuse to listen to the answer instead preferring to argue when you don't know what you are talking about.

BluRay audio is 192kHz at 24bit per channel. This is MANY times higher in quality what your ancient SPDIF/TOSLINK connection can handle short of massive lossy compression.

A stereo DAC has 2 channels. There will never be a situation where you are transmitting more than 2 channels of information to the DAC. Traditional digital connections do not represent a bottleneck in this scenario.

Read the above and listen for a change instead of trying to justify your equipment usage.

You're obviously just making shit up now. USB is pretty much useless for anything other than connecting to a computer (obviously). Are you contending that computer users are the only users of external DACs? There is a whole world of high-end audio where computers are still largely sneered at as a source (not that I agree).

I work in high-end live audio productions, and you're the one making shit up here.

Every FOH rig for every major roadie band has desktop computers crammed into roadie cases./ Most often old MacPro towers. They are NOT sneered at, they are a required tool for every band performing.

I notice you gloss over the idea of actually providing any proof of this, and instead just repeat the same unsubstantiated BS over and over again. It's okay, I understand Looking forward to another one of your replies talking about 5.1+ audio in the context of stereo DACs lol.

I keep having to repeat myself because you continue to not get it at all.

USB is better. 99% of the time. There's no throughput issues, there's no fragile fiber optic cable, there's these days no problems with jitter or lag or even noise floor or what have you. It is simply a superior interface the overwhelming majority of the time. And the whole industry agrees with me, which is why USB has usurped Firewire which usurped TOSLINK/SPDIF originally.

Not having control over your source isn't a downside? I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Your lack of control over your source is a problem of your choice of hardware and your drivers. It sucks to be you.

 

[GotNoRice]

Which for all intents and purposes I pointed out that you can. Your sound card still has all its abilities, and you can use your DAC. What you want is the drivers to affect the DAC as well as sound card... which to me is a half-hearted way to do things anyway...

I've done this before, I know it can be made to "work". It still means many of the features on my soundcard (EQ, CMSS-3D, etc) still won't work. It's also a pain in the ass compared to having one simple audio path and I'm really not looking to do it again.

And you can just have one output device.

You mean, by simply having the USB DAC as an output device and essentially ignoring my X-Fi as an output device. That's not much of a solution.

What exactly do you want the soundcard to do?

Everything it already does.

DAC's aren't made to work with your sound card

In what way am I asking it to "work with" my soundcard? Other than the soundcard being the digital source, from the perspective of the DAC, it's not "working with" my soundcard anymore than it would be "working with" a CD Player if that was connected as the source.

they're made to just convert digital to analog. Whatever sound bits your system is putting out, that's what they do.

And that is 100% exactly what I'm asking it to do, no more, no less.

USB2 has only been superseded by USB3. Which is compatible with USB2. USB is a very widely adopted and capable standard on PC's. I don't see why you're considering one or the other as the "standard".

I haven't discussed anything about standards.

If anything blame the guys that made those other connections instead of just going with USB.

USB wasn't around when the other connections were made...

No, you can get the job done either way. If it's just EQing, I just gave you a link up above. There are plenty of workarounds for this (and I've pointed out you can use them both at once, so your wording is incorrect anyway). What you're saying is that you're lazy so you want to be able to use one set of drivers for all audio on your system (which that link above probably will do the trick either way).

What I'm saying is I'm looking to replace my DAC, not my soundcard. Interpret that as you will.

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_772D1/...awat=pla&awnw=g&awcr=47439157465&awdv=cSounds like a bunch of whining for no good reason to me. If you just want a DAC that has an optical in, I'm pretty sure most receivers these days still do. I'm also sure that there are DAC's that have, too. Here's one:
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_772D1/...21505&awat=pla&awnw=g&awcr=47439157465&awdv=c
Here's another:
http://www.amazon.com/FiiO-Digital-Analog-Audio-Converter/dp/B005PWPUW6

Yes, I know the DACs I'm looking for still exist, but they seem to become more and more rare by the day.

And if you're happy with your current DAC, why are we having this discussion? If your current sound card is fine for you why do you want a DAC?

Yes I am happy with my current DAC. No, that does not equate to never wanting to potentially try anything better.

BluRay audio is 192kHz at 24bit per channel. This is MANY times higher in quality what your ancient SPDIF/TOSLINK connection can handle short of massive lossy compression.

All of my music is 16-bit/44.1khz and I don't expect that to change for quite some time. If you've bought into the high-resolution kool-aid, I suggest you give this article a read: http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

Every FOH rig for every major roadie band has desktop computers crammed into roadie cases./ Most often old MacPro towers. They are NOT sneered at, they are a required tool for every band performing.

My previous reference to high-end audio certainly wasn't a reference to bands performing on the road.

USB is better. 99% of the time. There's no throughput issues, there's no fragile fiber optic cable, there's these days no problems with jitter or lag or even noise floor or what have you. It is simply a superior interface the overwhelming majority of the time. And the whole industry agrees with me, which is why USB has usurped Firewire which usurped TOSLINK/SPDIF originally.

Nothing has "usurped" traditional digital connections, which is why they are still found on the more expensive DACs. It's really just the computer-centric low-end DACs where USB comes into play.

You also continue to claim USB as superior when I'm not actually disagreeing with you on that point. The issue is that USB and traditional digital connections don't work for the same purposes. USB may be "superior", but as long as traditional digital is "good enough" to the point of not limiting the signal in any way (which is true) while allowing me to do what I need, then that is what I prefer.

This thread has devolved into butt-hurt USB DAC users focusing on the superiority of USB (in situations where that superiority isn't even relevant) when the thread was never questioning the superiority of either format, nor does it even make sense to directly compare interfaces with drastically different capabilities and uses. I see no point in continuing.