2. digital
  3. 134406-3833

Digital inputs ....is one really better than another?

My current digital system is a Bryston BDP-1/BDA-1 combo connected via AES/EBU. My plan is to upgrade at least the DAC in the very near future. I noticed that most higher end DACS don’t have AES/EBU inputs. Is it because the AES/EBU is inferior in SQ? If this is the case, I want my replacement DAC to have AES/EBU for use with my current player and the preferred input for a future player upgrade.  
rockyboy
gdhal's avatar
gdhal
1,641 posts
 
In the case of the Schiit Yggdrasil, AES/EBU input is preferable over S/PDIF. Mike Moffatt says so.
rockyboy OP
335 posts
 
Bryston rep claims AES/EBU is best for BDP-1/BDA-1; but USB connection is best with the BDP-3/BDA-3. I wanted to upgrade to an Aurender player but the Aurender lacks AES/EBU; and Bryston told me SQ would suffer using the BDA-1’s USB. So my path forward appears to be either 1) keep the Bryston player and upgrade DAC to one with AES/EBU or 2) upgrade both units with ones having USB inputs. Right now i’m looking at buying a Lampizator DAC with AES/EBU. 
mesch
3,530 posts
 
Rockyboy, If I were considering a DAC upgrade over my BDA-1, I would also be considering the Lampizator line of DACS. I have heard elsewhere that the AES/EBU interface is superior. I but would like to add that I use a Audiophileo2 connected to my BDA-1 via AES/EBU directly without cable. I believe I heard on another forum that using a cable is better however I have not tried that. Wonder if the recommendation of use of cable is due to the 110ohm  requirement.
rockyboy OP
335 posts
 
Steve, are you saying that AES/EBU, when done right, is the best connection?
Mesch, you say your Audiophleo2 is “connected via AES/EBU directly without cable”.  Huh? How is that accomplished?
audioengr
3,282 posts
 

Steve, are you saying that AES/EBU, when done right, is the best connection?

There are positives and negatives with AES/EBU.

Positives:

1) some common-mode noise rejection - this can be accomplished with S/PDIF with a pulse transformer and it’s even better rejection.

2) edge-rates don’t have to be as fast as S/PDIF

Negatives:

1) usually requires a higher voltage than S/PDIF and an additional driver, which adds jitter

2) more difficult to make a good cable because of the connectors and twinaxial construction

3) edges must be consistent, rising and falling and with different timings, a difficult thing to accomplish

The bottom line for me is that if you know how to do S/PDIF correctly, it is the interface that will deliver lower jitter. And here we get to the reason why some manufacturers are preferring AES/UBU:

1) they don't understand how to make a fast S/PDIF interface

2) they don't understand how to match the 75 ohm impedance

I have modded enough different transports to know that these are the facts.

Steve N.

Empirical Audio


More to discover