(13-Mar-2015, 21:47)Stigmater Wrote: [ -> ]Question that i couldn't find answer for is:
what are the difference between USB Audio Class 2.0 and new USB 3 that we can find on new macs.
USB 3.0 refers to the bus itself, whereas USB Audio Class 2.0 defines a specific type of device that can be connected on the bus. These are independent specifications. That is, a USB audio class 2.0 device can operate on a USB 2 or USB 3 bus. As far as I know, USB 3 in itself doesn't directly affect the USB audio class specifications.
One of the things that the USB organisation has tried hard to do, and largely succeeded, I think, is to maintain backward compatibility so that equipment defined against older specifications can be used with later equipment using newer specifications. A big part of this is the way devices can advertise their capabilities to a host when they're first connected (part of the so-called "enumeration" process).
This being the Aurender thread leads to the question of why Aurender on many of it's models chooses to use exclusive USB 2 output, rather than SPDIF or AES/EBU. Is USB technically superior if implimented properly? Or is USB used to achieve maximum compatibility with DACs which are primarily designed for use with computers, hence USB compatible?
(13-Mar-2015, 22:43)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]This being the Aurender thread leads to the question of why Aurender on many of it's models chooses to use exclusive USB 2 output, rather than SPDIF or AES/EBU. Is USB technically superior if implimented properly? Of is USB used to achieve maximum compatibility with DACs which are primarily designed for use with computers, hence USB compatible?
As I understand it, asynchronous USB should in principle be superior to AES/EBU from a clocking point of view, because the DAC can use its own, highly stable clock rather than having to recover it from the input stream (e.g. with a phase-locked loop). Also USB provides much more robust error detection capabilities, although for isochronous transfers used by audio devices there is no automatic re-transmission mechanism to support error recovery.
Against that, you might argue that USB could be more prone to injecting noise into sensitive analog circuits, if not dealt with carefully.
So USB should perhaps give both better sound quality and wider compatibility than AES/EBU. In practice it'll still depend on good engineering (like the obsessive attention to detail in the totalDAC devices), so I'd hesitate to generalise...
Mr Thumb5 - I give you true thumbs-Up
you are right on all accounts. you speak as USB designer. Are you on their body ?
I was not on any body but simulating during spec definition stage for JDEC (DDR) and Display Port / HDMI.
one more thing to add here is USB 3 can go upto 2.5Ghz or even beyond (not sure about the latest specs), thats about the physical layer (Tx Chip to interconnect to USB cable to Rx Chip) speeds. however at the protocol layer one can configure to work as USB 2 or 3.
Thumb5 - all correct exchange of speed, protocol the TX and RX agrees before data traffic starts. Error correction in Audio/Video is like, once heard /viewed, we dont have a choice but to move on, no re-sending because there is error existed.
So coming back to the topic, I have D120, i have no other choice but to look at USB (no AEB port) after reading many threads on this forum, I m keen on N100.
[Sorry in advance for an off-topic post]
Thanks for the compliment, Jnan_devi. I'm not involved in the standards body for USB, but I have recently written USB audio class 1 and class 2 drivers for an embedded system (actually an in-car device based on VxWorks). The drivers were for both the host side and the device (peripheral) side; the peripheral side driver supported asynchronous synchronisation mode - that turned out to be a tricky part to design and code.
Simulating high-speed digital stuff like DDR interfaces and HDMI always seems like a black art to me - it must be an interesting line of work.
Back on topic, the N100 looks like a really nice device.
Aurender has fixed the link to the software. Don't know if it's because of my request or not, but it's a plus.
(14-Mar-2015, 09:49)Eddye Wrote: [ -> ]Aurender has fixed the link to the software. Don't know if it's because of my request or not, but it's a plus.
from experience they are prompt and very responsive
glad that the link is working now and let us here your opinion guys on the N100
Have the track star rating features now returned / remained following the updates?
(14-Mar-2015, 11:06)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]Have the track star rating features now returned / remained following the updates?
It is there in Conductor with my X100. And I suppose it will be there for W, S, and N as well
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
