Excellent tutorials, Paul. I just discovered your channel and am learning so much even though I’ve been an audio enthusiast for over 50 years. Thank you so much.

Hello Paul, Thank you for this clear explanation of I2S. I have a DAC with an I2S input and after some research i found an I2S pcie card fot my computer. I can only say that you are completely right in preferring the I2S format. It sounds great. No need for reclocking and so on. Best regards, Mark

One of the best things about an external i^2s interface is the ability to designate master/slave clock without a dedicated word clock, e.g. having a downstream device be designated as master. Anything to help jitter with the best clock in your digital chain.

One of the most interesting episodes so far! Kepp it up please!

Thanks, Paul, for the wonderful (as usual) explanation and congrats for the HDMI idea!

I have that same Phillips (relabeled Magnavox)cd player you described. It has filtered, unfiltered, and the single RCA digital out you described. It has that famous 'Crown" DAC chip, and the ability to program the sequence of songs played on the CD. FTS was I guess EPROM because it produced an address that was permanent unless programmed to be erased. I've since moved to a Marantz, which is a big improvement.

Damn I was trying to slim down my you tube channels and then I find this awesome channel. thanks Paul now subscribed

Hello, and Congratulations Mr Paul McGowan for the nice topics, and the relaxing and at the same time comprehensive way, of analyzing all these subjects regarding audio/music procedure!! I love electronics, audio-video equipment, ICT,... and beyond the scientific interest, the way they helped us to live better , and enjoy among other things..MUSIC. :)

Paul. Can you comment about the instability (in the form of drift) of the clock signal coming from a device like a cd player with a mechanical transport?

Superb explanation! A great format that hopefully has come of age for the near future for all manufacturers. Only concern is there isn't a standard for connector or wiring scheme so alternate brands can be mixed. I guess the tinkerer has to figure it out if they want to stray from product brands?

I don't think this video quite answered that question as I think it gets interpreted when seeing the actual title of this video, but nevertheless, this video definitely IS very interesting and informative as to the deeper, more technical aspects of how digital data works and how it is or can be transported among the different conponents of an audio system... I think he might be onto a great future expandable idea using an HDMI cable for that! Hopefully it can be utilized by enough companies to become a new standard for better digital data transfer among future audio components! We'll see... However, with that being said, when I first clicked on this video, I was under the impression, (from the video's simple title), that it was answering the question of which digital *recording* and playback *format* is "best"... But THAT, in and of itself, is a VERY debateable topic, and would definitely end up being a MAJOR "can of worms" to try and tackle in only one of these relatively short videos! Maybe this video should have been more accurately titled "What's the Best Digital *Interface* ?" (based on the exact details of that listener's question and the resulting info presented here)

Paul, Topping DAC now uses your IIS Hdmi cable. I have no idea if I can connect my SACD player HDMI output to this IIS jack on the back of the Topping DAC 70. The manual says nothing about this.

id love to visit you someday and talk a lot about sound, a big greetins from latinamerica. your work is so nice.

Excellent explanation, learned a few details to the story that I’ve always wondered about.

Standardizing on one cable and connector format is a win-win for everybody, IMHO. Just look at the mini-USB connectors, or the wall wart power supply connectors. I have many devices that use the mini USB, but they each seem to be slightly different and will not fit each other’s connectors even though USB is all the same. We also need connectors to have a lock to keep them connected properly, like XLR.

Awesome video! I am learning much, much, much. Your videos are priceless really and I thank you so much for having them. :)

While connecting your transport to your dac. HDMI is best. Even though most dacs run pcm 2.0 Just kinda rare to find dacs with HDMI inputs right now. Maybe more will take advantage in the future and become more available.

So im guessing you could add a i2S to any transport or cd player if you find the right pin outs and wire a hdmi or rj45 jack on the back ?

I have never heard of Cover Art over S/PDIF. Where does it fit? Do they sacrifice some bottom bits and buffer the graphics over time, cos they can't interrupt the audio? Back when early CD players came out, was quality computer graphics really a thing? I thought video of sufficient definition was analogue, and digitized artwork only came with the internet age. SPDIF is great format. Works over a basic audio cable even. Can be transported over video transmitters. And has sufficient bandwidth at 96kHz, 24-bit, stereo (4.6 Mbit), over a decent cable. But copyright holders refused to create a standard for high bitrate audio over SPDIF because of lack of copyprotection.

Thanks Paul, very informative. I am using a Sony ES SACD player that uses a "HATS - High-quality Audio Transmission System (H.A.T.S.) - SACD audio synchronization" interface over HDMI for reduced Jitter. I use this player in my 5.1 surround audio system and not my 2 channel system. I understand it as a pull feature rather than a push feature to keep jitter to a minimum. Are you familiar with that and if so do you think it compares favorably with the I2S connection? Cheers, David

@sinclabs

6 жыл бұрын

Ok, thanks. Just from my observations it is quite good. But it is terrible if you do not use the corresponding "HATS" equipped Sony chip and DAC (so your right on). On a side note your videos are great and keep them coming. Lots of good info. Cheers!

HDMI is high definition multimedia interface

Thanks Paul. Very interesting.

We thank you and we value your wonderfull and quite thorough explanation a lot. Please, allow me one question (since I use an SPDIF-fed, NOS dac, but sometime ago, I got the "tweaking bug" and wanted to convert its input to I2S- I didn't dare, in the end-): What sonic improvements can one expect by switching from SPDIF to direct I2S interconnection, all other things remaining the same?

@fullranger3435

6 жыл бұрын

I appreciate your reply but now you make me a bit unhappy and restless again! I'm trying to calm down my audiophilic greediness, thinking "better is the enemy of good, excellent is the enemy of very good, spectacular and breathtaking are the enemies of excellent etc", but I'm afraid the bug is back!... I haven't noticed a "fog" yet but if you say so, I'm sure it's there and I'll surely notice it when it will have gone! What I have noticed is unpleasant and blurred low-level detail with older digital recordings, using older dithering techniques and, possibly, having missed a few bits (from the initial 16) in the process.(OK, no need to reply again, I don't mean to take advantage of your kindness! Thanks a lot again Paul! Great work!)

I used I2S in the old Audio Alchemy and Camelot gear. Nifty interface. Interestingly, even though the two companies used the same DIN cabling, it wasn't the same implementation and they weren't compatible. I'm good with the I2S being the best-performing interface, but it's a rare bird. Yes, PS Audio. Yes, Wyred4Sound. But that's about it these days, and if we'd like to simply connect a computer audio feed to something, the world seems to be quite fixed on S/PDIF and USB.

SPDIF came out originally with a hookup that was the same as an RCA connector, they only started using Alesis optical interface later on, commonly called ADAT, it was originally a proprietary optical audio connection for audio. I have never seen an HDMI(High Definition Media Interface) ADAT (PH006) is really much better. So maybe you should think again before using HDMI. Here is an article from Sweetwater Sound about the ADAT connection. it is rather pedestrian and much more detailed articles can be found using Google. Specifications for ADAT I/O Interface. Article #21320 Updated on Apr 27, 2007 at 12:00 AM The ADAT Interface (PH006) is an interface that links the Alesis ADAT to supported Digidesign systems.Features: Up to eight channels of live digital audio input and output between Session 8 PC or Pro Tools and the ADAT. Machine control and sample-accurate playback for up to sixteen ADATs. Fast eight channel backup of Session 8 sessions.FRONT PANELPower Switch, Power LED: I = on, O = off, green LED.Online LED: Yellow LED illuminates whenever an ADAT is on-line with Session 8 PC or Pro Tools.Lock LED: Green LED flashes when Session 8 is attempting to sync an ADAT and illuminates when they are locked.BACK PANELOptical In/Out: Fiber Optic ports for Alesis proprietary optical digital audio transfers.Sync In/Out: 9-Pin female serial ports for Alesis proprietary sync for timing and machine control.Computer 1 & 2, Peripheral 1 & 2: 50-Pin female connectors allow connection between the I/O card and Interface(s).4/8 Button: Selects Interface type (single 882 Studio Interface or 882 I/O Interface = in, dual 442 Audio Interfaces/S8XL = out).Slave Clock In/Out: 2 BNC female connectors for 256x sample rate clock in and out.Word Clock Out: BNC female connector for 1x sample rate clock out.MIDI In/Out: Standard 5-pin female MIDI connectors for SysEx communication between Session 8 and ADAT.AC Power: Standard modular AC connector. Auto power selecting power supply (100V-240V). Hope this helps...remeber, research can save you time and money when developing tecfhnologies for your own company.

@avsystem3142

2 жыл бұрын

ADAT over optical uses the Toslink cables that were originally designed for transmitting SP/DIF signals. SP/DIF digital format has a limited bandwidth but the optical cable is capable of much higher bandwidths, which is why it can easily transmit eight channels of 48 KHz digital audio in the ADAT format. Like you, I also initially asked why not use optical for I2S and then I realized why not. To use optical it would still have to be multiplexed and then demuxed, all the data still would have to pass through s single pipe. Using HDMI, as Paul explained, allows all the clocks and actual digital audio data to be on separate conductors.

Well to add to this, do you think HDMI connection is as good or better than USB? My DAC has both connections available and I am just lost in the difference. I need to do a 10 foot connection and I hear USB is not good for longer than 9 feet or 2 meters, so maybe HDMI would be better?

@StringerNews1

6 жыл бұрын

xburgos1, as long as the DAC is capable, ie. hasn't created unnecessary problems that a 5 cent part could easily have prevented, there is no absolute "better", only different. For certain purposes, different interfaces are a better choice though. If you have a laptop with no digital audio output, the USB interface is a good choice. If you have hi-rez music on Blu-ray, regular HDMI is a way to listen to those discs easily. HDMI is also the easiest way to play uncompressed surround sound. That doesn't mean that the AES or S/PDIF input is any less better, it's just different interfaces for different types of input devices.

@avsystem3142

2 жыл бұрын

The difference is serial vs. parallel. SP/DIF, USB and Ethernet are serial transmission formats. PS Audio is using HDMI to sent the various components of I2S in parallel over different conductors. Remember when PC connected printers used parallel port connections? The connector has 25 pins. That was first replaced with an RS-232 serial interface and then finally with USB (Universal Serial Bus).

I use AES50 a great deal. I hate the licensing of Dante. I remember using SPDIF on Soundblaster audio cards in bothe RCA and TOSLINK variants.

It appears to me, and I could be wrong, is that a robust HDMI ( High Definition Multimedia Interface ) cable with a bulky connector tends to stress the female connector built into the receiver ( or other device ). as the cable connector is usually installed horizontally in a receiver, instead of a stronger vertical position, the stress is greater. Is there any method to my madness?

@interupt0

6 жыл бұрын

Burkhold St. Rudderberg Yeah, something I've worried about as well. I found jigging up some strain relief prior the socket the best way to deal with these concerns (wire wrap works very well for this function).

@burkholdst.rudderberg3574

6 жыл бұрын

Yes! A design that has to be modified by the consumer, is not properly designed in the first place!

@smvwees

6 жыл бұрын

I got a few HDMI cables that are angled... though on my device the wrong way... up. If there was a consistancy where every device had for example the wide side of the hdmi connector at the bottom, but they don't. On my tv it is even a vertical connector.

@avsystem3142

2 жыл бұрын

I've always thought it was a mistake to not have some sort of mechanical lock on HDMI connectors like, e.g., XLR connectors.

@burkholdst.rudderberg3574

2 жыл бұрын

@@avsystem3142 Electronic companies are here to make money not to make sense!

Simple CAT5e can transfer 100 megabit of data up to 100 metres with no errors. It costs pennies per metre. Why would you need a more expensive cable for a much lower bandwidth single like digital audio?

@jdlech

5 жыл бұрын

up to a hundred meters in a low EM environment, which is certainly not the environment at the back of a stereo rack.

@omgror

5 жыл бұрын

It works fine in the much more electrically noisy environment of a busy data centre.

@disneyjoe7

5 жыл бұрын

omgror analog vs digital same cable different signals around them.

@duroxkilo

4 жыл бұрын

@@jdlech low or high EM environment doesn't make one bit of difference when we're talking about such low transfer rates needed in digital audio... in essence you could send the same data 10s of times before the first note of the song is played thus having a (perfect) digital copy... but that is not required in any real world situations as CAT5 will do just fine in server racks or very EM-noisy industrial floors. little experiment for anyone interested: take a CAT5 or higher, connect your pc to your router and use the PING -t command to communicate with your router. position the cable so it's avoiding electrical cables and devices. let it run for 1 hr. after one hour hit ctrl+C and store the number of lost packets. now take the same cable and wrap it around an electrical cable and a power source (such as in a PC or Amp or whatever). PING your router for one hour. compare the number of lost packets. and remember, the lost packets can be resent unless it's a live streaming kind of a scenario.

@avsystem3142

2 жыл бұрын

@@duroxkilo CAT5 also seemed to me to be a better choice than HDMI. A single Ethernet cable can transmit hundreds of digital channels in the Dante format. I've used CAT5 to send the HDMI (audio and video) out of a PC several hundred feet to an AV system using HDMI to Ethernet converters.

FLAC lossless is my format of choice. 24 Bit 192 KHz.

@_Historia_Magistra_Vitae

4 жыл бұрын

@Dusty S: FLAC is fine ... 24/192 on the other hand is completely useless.

Very good idea.

great sir..

I don't think you answered the question. I interpreted this as more of a FLAC, DSD type format. Which format do you think will persevere...?

@Fallen7Pie

5 жыл бұрын

He answered the question asked you're thinking a different category of digital format for which the answer is FLAC. FLAC is what everything is archived to online for several reasons and even if someone comes up with a better compression algorithm it will most likely end up being added to FLAC as a flag

@PotentChr0nic

4 жыл бұрын

Fallen7Pie can FLAC contain DSD streams?

HDCD Mastered CDs! Will play on any cd player. Will play at twice the resolution on MEDIA PLAYER and can make custom playlists from any ripped cd!

how can we use a coaxial input.. can we play from phone using a 3.5mm jack to rca cable to coaxial input of a dac? does tat work or is there any other specific way of using the coaxial input

@americanpatriot646

6 жыл бұрын

Kishor G coaxial would need to go to a dac/headphone amp and there you go.

@SquareBrick

6 жыл бұрын

The 3.5 mm jack on the phone presents an analog signal. It has already passed through the DAC in your phone.

@StringerNews1

6 жыл бұрын

Not with any phone I know of. I've seen maybe one laptop that has a coax S/PDIF mode on the headphone jack, more with Toslink. You might have luck with USB OTG if your DAC has a USB input. The best bet for phones with Bluetooth 4.x is a Bluetooth receiver like the Audioengine B1. Look for the aptX codec on that gear.

Converting any information to another format can only lose information, it can never gain information. Thus, the best digital format is an exact copy of the source - no conversion, no enhancement, no alteration. You can't get better than that. Also - Aren't those timing signals supposed to be exactly the same frequency at all times? If so, then you really don't need to transport those timing signals anywhere because you know exactly what those signals are supposed to be. So you can simply buffer the data in a FIFO buffer of reasonable size just before the DAC. Then the DAC can produce its own timing signals as precise and accurately as you desire, and process the data from the buffer through the DAC using your own timing signals. An advantage being you now have control over the accuracy and precision of the timing signals. These days, a 4mb buffer costs pennies.

any lossless digital format, is the best digital format

i would think that displayport is even better than hdmi since on everything data related its a better cable

@davidwelner9994

3 жыл бұрын

But hdmi is more mum and dad friendly, and therefore more likely to be ubiquitous and cheaper at the time the decision was made.

@sudd3660

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidwelner9994 it cant be cheaper since hdmi has a licensing fee

My favourite music file formats are: .MOD .XM & .S3M

@justinlloyd6455

4 жыл бұрын

Oh my god. Who alive can tell me what those stand for? Its been almost 20 years since I downloaded such a file format. In the horrible days of dialup before DSL, MP3, DVD, etc.

@nliberty

4 жыл бұрын

@@justinlloyd6455 tracker files. the computer regenerates the sound itself, with a sound card. "chiptunes" were made with these.

And E =mc2

hi def multi-channel Interface

@avsystem3142

2 жыл бұрын

No, HDMI stands for High Definition Multimedia Interface, because it carries both video and audio.

Eq Media Player "64 band eq"

CD by far 👌👍💿🎵🎶🎵🎶

Auralic Lightning Link

Neil Young would agree !

I never heard of cd's till the very late 80's when i first started to see them in stores.

@avsystem3142

2 жыл бұрын

I purchased my first CD in 1983. I assume that you didn't go into stores such as Circuit City in the early '80's.

What's the best digital format? MQS And the answer to your question which isn't related to the title of the video is Optical.

@googoo-gjoob

5 жыл бұрын

first, did you mean MQA? second, yes, optical was best... 20 years ago.

@avsystem3142

2 жыл бұрын

Optical is not a format, it is a type of signal transmission medium. Optical cable can transmit any digital format with a compatible bandwidth. But note: Optical transmission is serial. PS Audio is using an HDMI cable as a way to send the multiple components of I2S in parallel over different wires. In an event, optical is not "better" than, e.g., AES/EBU, it is just different.

format....? .wav

Paul? I can always hear a strange irritating harmonic from digital sources. Like a little tinge ring I've never heard from analog.

No, I^2S does not "sound the best", or have any real advantages to the end user. There is already a standard way of carrying digital audio between devices, it's called AES3, and nothing "sounds" better because nothing works better, not even a little bit. The only reason to use a non-standard interconnect is for brand lock-in, so you're stuck with the same vendor for everything. That's only a benefit to the vendor! BTW, S/PDIF is virtually identical to AES3, and the "P" in S/PDIF stands for Phillips, the same company that developed I^2S for IC-to-IC use. They're different things for different purposes. As an external interface, I^2S does not "solve" any real problems that haven't already been made non-issues with the existing serial formats. Promoting it as somehow better than AES3 is a difference without a distinction.

@justthebeginning1448

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for you insight 👍🏾

@ArtemisCables

4 жыл бұрын

It still has to go through another conversion process which at times is capped in bit rate. The fact that you don’t know that I²S is an evolutionary native method of connecting to a DAC without unnecessary conversions scares me.

HDMI High definition media input

Bottom line for your average audiophile, its not gonna get much better than FLAC. Are there better quality formats? YES! But IMHO your not going to gain much advantage lest you own a $10K + setup.

MQA 💀

You will get signal loss and distortion with any cable. With that said, digital formats are all 1’s and 0’s. Binary is lossless. So, your listening experience will be subjective, no matter the source or recording medium. I firmly believe analog is the way to go with paper drivers. Just my 2 cents. Thanks.

that is just bullshit..and not true..the only thing that's matters is how the music was recordet..if u have a great recording like miles davis Filles De Kilimanjaro it donst matter if u here it on mp3 or flac or wav..for the record THE SOURCE is all that matters,,,if u have a bad source like an bootleg recording u can convert it up to352khz,,it still would sound like shit,,

@avsystem3142

2 жыл бұрын

I agree with you up to a point. However, a 128 mbps MP3 and the same recording in FLAC or WAV format can definitely be distinguished from one another in even a moderately priced hi-fi system. I have several thousand CD's which I ripped to MP3 at 128 mbps. I am perfectly content with that quality for casual listening. When I constructed a home theater system with good quality components and played those MP3's I definitely could hear a difference between that and the same well recorded source in WAV file. But yes, GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out) still applies.

@mcintoshkid

2 жыл бұрын

@@avsystem3142 hey ,meanwhile i think your right i just listen to flac and mp3 a lot,,flac is better yes,,,thankyou

First

Ones and zeros...