+- Devialet Chat (https://devialetchat.com)
+-- Forum: Devialet Chat (https://devialetchat.com/Forum-Devialet-Chat)
+--- Forum: Phantom I (103 DB, 108 DB, Premier Classic, Silver & Gold) (https://devialetchat.com/Forum-Phantom-I-103-DB-108-DB-Premier-Classic-Silver-Gold)
+--- Thread: Optical vs. Dialog Sound Quality (/Thread-Optical-vs-Dialog-Sound-Quality)
Optical vs. Dialog Sound Quality - oilman - 18-Feb-2016
Having done some comparisons, I find the Phantoms' sound quality noticeably better using Dialog compared to the optical input. I compared using Tidal songs (all lossless, "HIFI" available tracks) optical output from a Mac Mini to my right Phantom, and then the same song played through Tidal in Spark. In each case, I found the Spark/Dialog songs to have better ambience, air and more natural sounding vocals. Others have posted that they also feel Dialog sounds better.
I wonder if any of you have theories as to why, and if Devialet can possibly improve the optical input sound quality in future firmware updates? Is perhaps jitter mostly eliminated by sending the buffered song data to the phantoms, whereas real time D/A conversion through optical suffers jitter errors? Optical is generally known to be very jitter prone - in fact, 7 times worse than coax transmission.
Also, have any of you played with the Audio Midi settings in OS X to compare different output sample rates? My initial thoughts are that upsampling to 192khz sounds better, but I haven't spent much time on this. How important is it for the upsampled rate to be an even multiple of the original 44.1khz information (i.e., 88.2khz, 176.4khz, etc.)?
RE: Optical vs. Dialog Sound Quality - jonstatt - 18-Feb-2016
I think somewhere there was a thread that explained that the jitter was effectively eliminated as the information has to be re-clocked as part of the transmission from Dialog to phantoms. I will try the same test as you. Could you give me an example track that you felt the difference was most obvious with? My PC soundcard optical output is fed into Dialog and I will use Tidal this way and direct on the Phantom and A/B between the two just as you did.
RE: Optical vs. Dialog Sound Quality - oilman - 18-Feb-2016
(18-Feb-2016, 12:04)jonstatt Wrote: I think somewhere there was a thread that explained that the jitter was effectively eliminated as the information has to be re-clocked as part of the transmission from Dialog to phantoms. I will try the same test as you. Could you give me an example track that you felt the difference was most obvious with? My PC soundcard optical output is fed into Dialog and I will use Tidal this way and direct on the Phantom and A/B between the two just as you did.
I used Adele, Hello. It's a pretty good recording, and useful for comparison since the vocals come on right away without having to scroll to a different part of the track.
I'm interested to hear your results.
RE: Optical vs. Dialog Sound Quality - Pim - 19-Feb-2016
(18-Feb-2016, 11:30)oilman Wrote: Having done some comparisons, I find the Phantoms' sound quality noticeably better using Dialog compared to the optical input. I compared using Tidal songs (all lossless, "HIFI" available tracks) optical output from a Mac Mini to my right Phantom, and then the same song played through Tidal in Spark. In each case, I found the Spark/Dialog songs to have better ambience, air and more natural sounding vocals. Others have posted that they also feel Dialog sounds better.
I wonder if any of you have theories as to why, and if Devialet can possibly improve the optical input sound quality in future firmware updates? Is perhaps jitter mostly eliminated by sending the buffered song data to the phantoms, whereas real time D/A conversion through optical suffers jitter errors? Optical is generally known to be very jitter prone - in fact, 7 times worse than coax transmission.
Also, have any of you played with the Audio Midi settings in OS X to compare different output sample rates? My initial thoughts are that upsampling to 192khz sounds better, but I haven't spent much time on this. How important is it for the upsampled rate to be an even multiple of the original 44.1khz information (i.e., 88.2khz, 176.4khz, etc.)?
Hi mate,
Just out of interest, where did you get that information from that optical is 7 times more prone to jitter than coax?
RE: Optical vs. Dialog Sound Quality - Jamington2004 - 19-Feb-2016
Devialet openly admit that Optical is not as good as wifi
I think they said "yet" when they said it to me so maybe improvements are planned
It is certainly less stable for me - the other day I had one channel cutting in and out, switched to spark tidal and it was perfect
RE: Optical vs. Dialog Sound Quality - oilman - 19-Feb-2016
(19-Feb-2016, 10:47)Pim van Vliet Wrote:http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/Intro/SQ/Toslink_Coax.htm(18-Feb-2016, 11:30)oilman Wrote: Having done some comparisons, I find the Phantoms' sound quality noticeably better using Dialog compared to the optical input. I compared using Tidal songs (all lossless, "HIFI" available tracks) optical output from a Mac Mini to my right Phantom, and then the same song played through Tidal in Spark. In each case, I found the Spark/Dialog songs to have better ambience, air and more natural sounding vocals. Others have posted that they also feel Dialog sounds better.
I wonder if any of you have theories as to why, and if Devialet can possibly improve the optical input sound quality in future firmware updates? Is perhaps jitter mostly eliminated by sending the buffered song data to the phantoms, whereas real time D/A conversion through optical suffers jitter errors? Optical is generally known to be very jitter prone - in fact, 7 times worse than coax transmission.
Also, have any of you played with the Audio Midi settings in OS X to compare different output sample rates? My initial thoughts are that upsampling to 192khz sounds better, but I haven't spent much time on this. How important is it for the upsampled rate to be an even multiple of the original 44.1khz information (i.e., 88.2khz, 176.4khz, etc.)?
Hi mate,
Just out of interest, where did you get that information from that optical is 7 times more prone to jitter than coax?