In Reply to: RE: Gordon's work with async USB created more problems than it solved. posted by slider on June 26, 2013 at 08:40:24:
Slider said:
"I think if you look into it a bit more, you'd probably find that async USB, and audio USB protocols in general, don't quite work as you describe. They are all still running in isochronous mode, meaning a fixed and time sensitive data transfer based on the sample rate and bit depth. The asynchronous end point just gives the receiving device an opportunity to occasionally suggest to the source whether that timed transfer should contain more or less data. Most of the USB interface is operating the same as when running in the other isochronous modes."
Hmmm. What's the evidence for this? Even if so, where's the evidence that this is problematic for sound quality?
Lots of talk but unless the problem can be demonstrated, it could just be baseless conjecture versus a real issue that should be fixed.
-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Gordon's work with async USB created more problems than it solved. - Archimago 06/29/1310:14:36 06/29/13 (8)
- RE: Gordon's work with async USB created more problems than it solved. - SBGK 23:48:55 07/2/13 (3)
- RE: Gordon's work with async USB created more problems than it solved. - slider 08:56:06 07/3/13 (2)
- RE: Gordon's work with async USB created more problems than it solved. - SBGK 00:35:03 07/5/13 (1)
- RE: Gordon's work with async USB created more problems than it solved. - Tony Lauck 07:19:01 07/5/13 (0)
- Evidence? - slider 11:29:17 06/29/13 (3)
- RE: Evidence? - John Swenson 23:25:56 06/30/13 (2)
- RE: Evidence? - slider 08:48:08 07/1/13 (1)
- RE: Evidence? - John Swenson 16:59:02 07/1/13 (0)