(+) / (-) rose rs130

Hello @duffer5 I got some insight on whether an internal clock of RS130 is making sense or not from generative AI :stuck_out_tongue: , I am not professional of this part, so just for you guy to judge!

In terms of correcting jitter, both the clock signal from the source and the DAC can play a role.

Jitter refers to the variation in the timing of a clock signal or data transmission. It can introduce noise and distortions in the reproduced signal. To mitigate jitter, various techniques can be employed.

The clock recovery circuit in the DAC is typically responsible for reducing jitter. It uses specialized algorithms and filters to recreate a clean and stable clock signal from the received data. This ensures that the DAC accurately samples the data at the correct timing.

On the other hand, if the clock signal from the source has excessive jitter, it can negatively impact the quality of the DAC’s output. In such cases, additional clock jitter reduction techniques may be employed before the clock signal is fed into the DAC. These techniques might include using clock regeneration or clock cleaning circuits to remove or minimize jitter before it reaches the DAC.

In summary, the DAC’s clock recovery circuit is primarily responsible for mitigating jitter, but measures can also be taken to minimize jitter in the clock signal from the source before it reaches the DAC.

1 Like

Great info. What this tells me is that if you own the 150b and use an external DAC the upgrade maybe marginally to the 130 as the 150b has a very good internal clock so the signal will be exported with superior clock sync information into a high quality external DAC which should also have a high quality internal clock. As far as Ethernet sound reduction built into the 130 this can easily be achieved with the 150b for less than $250 USD with linear power supply or under $100 without the LPS.

I’m trying to find out exactly what USB specifications are for the RS 130. Are they 3.0, 3.1, or 3.1 Gen 2?
I would like to know this so I can see if the specific USB data conversion path degrades the noise/ jitter specifications as compared to a straight through IIS connection.

Most likely USB 2.0 and from my rudimentary understanding from others, 2.0 introduces the least amount of noise into the signal path. I would be interested in what @ROSEHAN has to say.

:man_facepalming: There is no point or use to I2S between devices. Any USB works fine, and any noise or jitter there is immaterial, it gets reclocked in the DAC either way.

Live experience of a Rose user. I moved from Rose 150 (streamer + DAC) to Rose 150 (used only as Streamer with USB) + Rockna Wavedream Signature Balanced DAC to Rose 130 + Rockna Wavedream Signature Balanced DAC. Rockna being a dedicated dac is a significant upgrade to Rose 150 DAC (AKM chip). Rose 130 is a significant upgrade to Rose 150, using Rose 150 as streamer alone. Everything is better with rose 130. I now use i2s to connect to DAC. Rose 130 is a very high end streamer and definitely improves the sound quality significantly. Everything is better - wider sound stage, more details, better tonality in the vocals deeper bass. Timing is a lot better - must be the OXCO clock. Rose 130 screen looks much better than Rose 150 (user experience in reality not looking at.specs here). Very impressed with Rose 130.

1 Like

Did you ever try the 150 with i2s. Apples to apples would be 150 via i2s and 130 via i2s. That being said if you are using i2s with the 130 it is your DAC’s clock that is setting the timing not the 130, that is the benefit of the i2s connection that the audio stream and timing data are set untouched via the HDMI cable to the DAC.

@Sk152 ; thank you for the first impressions by the way.

I have the same experience, moved from 150B to 150B with Denafrips Terminator II DAC connected with i2s to 130 with Denafrips Terminator II connected with i2s
Agree with @Sk152 overall sound improved in all aspects. What I like the most is the deeper bass which gives a much better soundstage.
The screen is definitely IPS, manual also says so, and is very clear with great viewing angle

I did use usb with rose 150 and the the same usb cable with rose 130. Exact apples to apples comparison and re confirm all the impressions of rose 130. My usb cable is occ silver and high end.

I also used a cheap dvi to i2s cable with rose 150 ($10 cable from Amazon) but the high end usb sounded better. I Could not find a high end dvi to hdmi i2s cable.

After using usb with rose 130 for about 10 days, I got a high end hdmi i2s (occ silver) cable and it sounds better than usb.

1 Like

In my DAC, using i2s cable, I have the option to use the DAC clock or the streamer clock. I have the setting on streamer clock. So I am using the clock of rose 130.

I put 150 and 130 side by side and the display of 130 is taller so bigger (it is the same width wise). 130 display is also brighter ( I had to scale down the brightness). One can instantly say that 130 is a better display (visually - not looking at technicals at all here. I see comments that technically 150 is suppose to better but in reality 130 has a better display)

1 Like

I have had my RS130 for more than a month now, I recently add Fiber optical Ethernet and fiber optical USB hub. Both have obvious improvements on Streamer (especially for Rosetube, improvements on both audio and video) and play my hard drives connected to the fiber optic hub.

I feel that playing from the hub has better sound quality than from the internal SSD. Anyone has such experiences?

Thanks!

May I know what fibre optic hub you are using? I am still waiting for the RS720

I bought from Amazon: Transwan USB 3.0 Hub Fiber Optical Extender

I bought Single Mode, With 4 USB3.0 ports ( not support USB 2.0/2.1.

They are on sale now for $299

Of course, I use Sbooster (linear power supply) for the hub, Ethernet switch, etc.

Hello
Can you tell me what fiber optical ethernet do you use? I can’t find anywhere any info about what models of SFP modules are compatible.
Thank you very much!

I believe that it has to be 10/100/1000M sfp. Both ends have to be the same. I tried both single mode and multi mode, both works.Single mode might sound a little bit better ( not sure).Final I decided to keep the single mode.

1 Like

Thank you for your quick reply! I have tried a single-mode 10/100 SFP from FS.com but it did not worked.
I don’t know why. What model did you used? Maybe from the data sheet I could find more. Thank you.

I bought these two from Amazon: made by
10Gtek:

1.25G SFP Transceiver 1000Base-LX, 1310nm SMF, up to 10 km, for Cisco GLC-LH-SMD, Meraki MA-SFP-1GB-LX10, Ubiquiti UniFi, Fortinet, Mikrotik, D-Link, Netgear, TP-Link TL-SM311LS and More, Pack of 2

Thank you very much!