It is just a USB hub chip that is well implemented. What a USB hub does is allow a USB in connection, decode it & regenerate a new USB signal that is transmitted out of a number of USB ports. This particular USB hub chip has 2 output USB ports but only uses one of them.sbgk wrote:Thanks John, informative stuff.
how does the device know it's dealing with a poor usb signal ?
It is this regeneration of the USB signal happening on the chip that cleans up the signal - as long as the PS & clock are properly implemented. I've done some experiments & even without the careful impedance matching that JS talks about, there is a worthwhile increase in SQ.
Maybe better impedance control would bring more improvement - I don't know but I suspect that the improved SQ is more about the other factors I mentioned. In fact what we might be seeing is the same thing as Nige has done - but he did it at the PC end i.e changed the USB clock & improved the PS feeding the USB port - whereas this is being done at the receiving end or close to it
We won't know this until we try it on some of Nige's builds that have a treated USB port
Yes, it's all a consequence of using equipment designed for digital processing where noise below a certain level is not of consequence i.e if it doesn't flip bits then it will work in the digital domain.We are all suffering from the design decisions made by designers/engineers who thought bits are bits.
As we've always said here, general purpose computers are not optimal for audio - it takes trojan efforts to get anyway close to this.
We are also faced with a number of challenges in all of this:
- we can hear the SQ improvements but so far nobody has been able to measure them
- I suspect that low level noise floor fluctuations are at the bottom :) of this & this will prove particularly difficult to measure especially as the tool of choice for audio measurements is FFT
- Another challenge is that these SQ improvements are not usual stuff that we dealt with in the analogue domain - amplitude/frequency/phase changes - they seem to be more insidious than this - SQ improvements that affect the whole presentation of the audio scene. BTW, I don't want to mention the dreaded blind A/B test , but I will - these sort of differences are not easy to identify for a number of good psychoacoustic reasons.
- finally, we are up against the fact that digital audio works reasonably OK, even with this noise issue so there are a lot of bits are bits types that think they have reached "perfect sound"
Maybe we should start another thread on this rather than pollute this one?