@ROSEHAN
Brand new RS130, brand new RD160 and brand new Rose fiber kit for SFP
For this connection to work the first time: I had to FACTORY RESET
It worked for 12 hours and now it DOES NOT WORK.
Tried again with FACTORY RESET. DOES NOT WORK.
Also: I2S (HDMI) does not work between them either.
RS130: RoseID 0D8559
System version 5.9 (official)
Audio Firmware: XMOS 3152
RD160: I would provide system information for the RD150, but your manual does not help with that.
I am perfectly happy returning these both unless you can resolve this to my satisfaction.
Toslink is not hires, so no.
I2S also does not connect between them. I’m pretty sure that the RD160 is the problem, but the RS130 has some world-crap software from at minimum the user interface …that I can tell you as a career software developer and CTO. It is absurdly antiquated and is NOT user-centric.
I’m awaiting a call from the store that sold them to me, as good as they sounded when they worked for 12 hours – I do not trust Hifi Rose the company at this point. It is a shame because they have a real flair for the hardware and case design.
In 2025, when you send $12,000+ on a streamer and a DAC – they really really need to WORK RELIABLY.
I am proposing this as a way for you to troubleshoot the pairing of the 130 and 160 without spending a fortune. If you do not want your ears to be offended by 24/96 or 24/192 for the few minutes that it takes to troubleshoot, you are free to ignore my advice.
Thank you – I can actually get them to talk via SFP fiber (my preferred) BUT it is completely unstable and requires repeated factory resets of the DAC… I know the DAC takes coax input from another streamer I have (a reliable connection) but if I use coax output from the RS130 to the RD160 it does not reliably work.
Switching inputs between RS130 and RD160 is BRITTLE and causes lasting regret until the DAC is factory reset. That is insane, I can’t imaging not firing a software team that does that. I have NEVER had to input so many email addresses and passwords to get into any audio device – its moronic for home use.
I’ve updated the code on the RS130, but it looks like the RD160 requires some unknown process (really? in 2025?) via the service port. So, I believe I am at the mercy of a slow response from Hifi Rose. (UPDATE:) After another hour (can you believe how frustrating these two devices are?) I found (not in any manual, by the way) I should say, “I stumbled across” a means to upgrade the DAC.
Having purchased these two richly capable mid-tier devices, I’m going to correct the idea that toslink is equivalent to I2S or SPF fiber:
Based on technical specifications and audiophile, in-depth reviews, I2S (Inter-IC Sound) typically offers the highest theoretical audio quality, followed by SFP Fiber (for streaming), with Toslink (optical S/PDIF) often considered the most convenient but technically limited option.
I2S is used to connect DACs to audio transports, designed to keep audio data and clock signals separate, minimizing jitter.
Audio Quality: Generally considered the best for high-end audio, supporting very high sample rates (up to 32-bit/384kHz or higher) and DSD formats without compression.
Pros: No Clock-Data separation, eliminating the need for complex, error-prone, or noisy encoding (unlike S/PDIF).
Cons: Not designed for long distances; usually restricted to within a single unit or short-distance HDMI connections (I2S over HDMI).
Verdict: Ideal for connecting a high-end digital transport/streamer directly to a DAC.
SFP connects fiber optic cables directly into network streamers or specialized audiophile switches, bypassing copper Ethernet limitations.
Audio Quality: Excellent, particularly because it provides complete electrical galvanic isolation, eliminating electrical noise (EMI) from the network router or PC.
Pros: Ideal for high-resolution streaming. Completely immune to ground loops. It offers “inky-black” backgrounds in high-end systems.
Cons: Expensive and requires compatible hardware.
Verdict: The premier choice for separating a high-end DAC from network noise.
Toslink - Convenient and Immune to Interference
Audio Quality: Good, but limited to 24-bit/192kHz (sometimes 96kHz depending on the transmitter). It is often considered slightly less detailed than coaxial or I2S due to potential jitter during optical-to-electrical conversion.
Pros: Total immunity to electrical interference and ground loops. Very common on consumer equipment (TVs, soundbars).
Cons: Limited bandwidth compared to modern standards. Fragile connectors and fiber, and sensitive to excessive bending. Often compresses surround sound formats (e.g., cannot handle Dolby TrueHD).
Verdict: Best for eliminating noise in consumer setups, but inferior for high-end audio
With several home setups that have extremely clean and resolving tube and/or SS preamps and amps, along with speakers that are exceptional in imaging and resolution, along with actually oscilloscope-clean power – You would hear the difference. The additional frequency range may not be heard directly, but it interacts with what you hear in ways that you have to investigate in order to understand why the sound that you hear is more life-like and less colored. The goal for me is getting close to a live performance, I mean close.
And this, children, is what happens when someone having absolutely no clue reads too much AI garbage. Or audiophile form garbage.
BS. I2S offers theoretically higher resolution than Toslink. TOslink is already well above anything that can be either heard or reproduced.
That’s a con, unless talking about the clock inside a single device (the only use case I2S has been designed for).
I2S has been designed only for connections inside a single device, over carefully laid out traces on a PCB. It was not designed, and should not be used for connecting two separate devices.
Funny how really high-end devices do not include any I2S nonsense. It has all the disadvantages of S/PDIF, either Toslink or coax (tying the DAC to the source clock, supplied over a jittery connection), albeit at higher rates, and adds total lack of any standardization (because, again, it was never supposed to be used for connecting devices; there are much better options) but does not provide any benefits.
SFP has nothing to do with fiber or copper, it can be either. And there is no such thing as an “audiophile switch.” Funny again that neither professional gear nor anything really high-end uses it.
Copper ethernet is already galvanically isolated. And sticking an SFP module gives you a noisy devices with extra opto-electrical converters straight into your DAC. Because noise
In practice it does absolutely nothing audible either way.
When you see words like “:inky black” you know that you are reading complete bullshit.
Regular Ethernet, unless one is dumb enough to use shielded cables at home (CAT 8, looking at you) does not do ground loops either.
The premier choice for separating the clueless from their money. If it did anything useful, studio gear and something high-end would actually use it. Selling a device with SFP slot is cheaper for the manufacturer anyway.
Firstly, not an issue with DACs that have PLL, and no less detailed in any sensible way. Even 96KHz sampling rate is so far beyond anything audible that going any further provides no benefit.
No a con at all, it’s more than enough.
Real verdict – not as good as USB if you want complete immunity to jitter AND support for the highest available rates, but ideal for ensuring that no electrical noise is getting through.
Resolving tube amps Well, those things would add so much distortion that one could hear the difference.
And once you understand, you realize that you’ve wasted a lot of time and money on dsomething completely useless.
For that, inasmuch as it is possible at home, one needs a) good speakers, b) room treatment, c) good DRC setup, and d) a DAC and preamp/amp that are actually transparent over the audible range. Something that RS250 is surprisingly better at than RD160. Not at all surprisingly, SFPs, I2S, and other snake oil from midmarket companies that can’t compete on engineering quality with either some collective Toppings and Wiims on low end nor with Trinnovs and dCS’s and Burmesters on the high end are only found in devices aimed at people who can neither afford “pride of ownership” level high end nor are intelligent enough to realize that there are no sonic benefits over the aforementioned Wiims.
T+A Elektroakustik does not generally use the I²S interface for external connections between devices in its high-quality audio components, as other manufacturers (e.g., PS Audio) do via HDMI, according to Ricable (https://www.ricable.com/de/il-protocollo-i2s-e-il-cavo-supreme-hdmi/). I²S is primarily used internally for chip-to-chip communication.
Of course. T+A is definitely a luxury product with a luxury price, but the company employs real engineers (unlike BS Audio which em[ploys Uncle Paul).
Isn’t it interesting that a T+A DAC streamer costing 10 times as much as any Rose product does not have any I2S connectors, SFP slots or external clock inputs.
They do have a proprietary IPA-Link connector for getting full resolution DSD from their own SACD players which might be somewhat similar, but it uses a specially designed cabling that is optimized for that kind of signal, and it’s there only because Sony would not allow digital SACD output over anything commonly used. They do not claim that it sounds better or should be used for anything other than a specific SACD player.
Of course when you can’t design a DAC capable of outputting a sinewave properly (Uncle Paul) or want to charge 20x Wiim price for 1/10th functionality then I2S, SFP, external clocks etc. becomed an obvious selling point.
Yes it is a darn good connection. I just do not like powered speakers in my home, I can see this in a venue or commercial space… but in my home, I prefer to go with a better amp and DAC than your in-speaker amps and DAC… I no longer use DSPs either, I prefer to shoot the space for its characteristics and address those directly, rather than than add color in the signal.
It’s fine. Most active speakers internally work with 24/96 or 24/192 at best so it’s quite sufficient. Theoretically, if they take USB input it would be a smaller cable and would remove any possibility of jitter, but it is highly unlikely that it would be audible either way.
Tell us you have no idea what you are talking about without telling us you have no idea what you are talking about…
You could have tried posting something intelligent. Or at least not factually incorrect for a change. But that’s beyond your abilities, so you just spray whatever your father (if you even know him) taught you.
Pathetic. And yes, you are a clueless clown with no idea about anything you opine on.
Well, those things would add so much distortion that one could hear the difference.
