| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Didital Things » High Quality Music Server / CD player (166 posts, 9 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 2 of 7 (166 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2 3 4 5 » ... Last »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  The commercial music servers...  Touch screen remote...  Didital Things  Forum     37  234868  01-10-2008
  »  New  About the DAW playback software...  Best hardware with best software...  Didital Things  Forum     11  69798  03-22-2008
  »  New  Recording/Playback software..  Free stuff...  Didital Things  Forum     14  63845  08-24-2008
  »  New  To Rip or not to Rip...  Ripping with better playback...  Didital Things  Forum     2  23107  03-18-2009
  »  New  The contra-ridicules solution for a good DAW?..  Happy to see this thread...  Didital Things  Forum     1  21603  06-18-2009
  »  New  DAW drives configuration and backup strategies...  Not expensive to recover DATA, avoid Corporate Recovery...  Didital Things  Forum     3  26288  10-05-2009
  »  New  Weiss Engineering DAC202..  Attenuation...  Didital Things  Forum     5  32345  06-21-2010
  »  New  Pacific Microsonics Model Two: What Platform, Software ..  XLR to RCA adaptor. Watch out...  Didital Things  Forum     1  17436  03-17-2011
  »  New  Windows Based Transport: A quiet and capable Source?..  DAE Firmware quality...  Didital Things  Forum     47  170513  11-01-2011
  »  New  Memory Player Box?..  Maybe I will not order the Pure Teflon capacitors after...  Didital Things  Forum     2  31932  11-03-2011
  »  New  Why I hate computer playback...  Higher power cpu...  Didital Things  Forum     17  75242  04-16-2012
12-11-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
jessie.dazzle


Paris, France
Posts 456
Joined on 04-23-2006

Post #: 26
Post ID: 9131
Reply to: 8443
Timing is everything
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy wrote :

"...The USB is full duplex or bi-directional interface where stream flows in both ends. This enables designers to put a clock that might everything on the receiver side (DAC) and let this clock to manage the USB’s and even reader timing. USB sends data in burps by requests of by scheduled timing, this marks all might be managed by receiver side clock. In ASE/EDU the receiver shell recognize the timing marks and PLL or re-clock data. In USB there are no needs for PLL or re-clocking as the data arrives at the marks of the original clock. The USB in this case acts like an elephant that sticks a long trunk to another devise and sucks juice… according to my consultants this USB implementation is the most proper way to do the things..."

This is the point I was trying to make in the following post
http://www.goodsoundclub.com/GetPost.aspx?PostID=8293&Phrase=
where I quoted the manufacturer of a USB DAC reproducing the following information:

"...The USB interface is bidirectional, and has built-in error correction and buffering at both ends; it is an asynchronous interface. Clocking synch problems associated with SPDIF are not present with USB. The result is that the data on the disk is identical to what is leaving the DAC all the time...At start-up, the DAC tells the computer it can handle 16 bit audio at 32K, 44.1K and 48K. Since the USB receiver only has to handle these 3 frequencies, the clocking to the DAC has almost no jitter. SPDIF actually has to be synched to the exact frequency of the transport (i.e. if the transport is working at say 44.0896K instead of 44.1K the DAC has to sync to that frequency). Therefore the jitter problems of SPDIF are all but eliminated. The result is a zero error protocol to link between computer and DAC, with ultra low jitter... I wrote that there is no filtering : However, this unit uses a tube in it's output stage ("...Once converted, the analog signal is sent directly to a 6GM8/ECC86 dual triode output tube, which in turn drives a pair of output transformers..."); the tube probably has some sort of filter-like effect..."

Those considering a USB DAC may want to read my impressions in the above-linked post.

jd*


How to short-circuit evolution: Enshrine mediocrity.
12-11-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
nycparamedic
Posts 7
Joined on 12-09-2008

Post #: 27
Post ID: 9132
Reply to: 9131
The Asynchronously gifted Wavelength Audio DAC's
fiogf49gjkf0d
Jessie,

I just managed to snag a used Wavelength Brick version 1 for a very good price. The Brick and Cosecant v2 use the same DAC section, unless you purchase a newer Cosecant v3 that is offered with an upgrade to a multi-bit 24/96 DAC chip.

I listened to my Brick for about a week with my custom Linux music server and I am *thoroughly* impressed with its very musical sound. I was *very* skeptical of the design of this DAC and its very high price. The DAC does use an older TDA1543 DAC chip. I was also somewhat baffled by Stereophile's Class A rating and the actual content of the  review. No measurements either...

I was also thinking of purchasing a Benchmark DAC1 USB for comparison. If you buy directly from Benchmark they offer a 30 day no questions asked and no restock fee guarantee.

12-11-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,545
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 28
Post ID: 9133
Reply to: 9131
The problem that I have with idea of USB DACing.
fiogf49gjkf0d

 jessie.dazzle wrote:

Those considering a USB DAC may want ....
Before I wrote the post that Jessie reefed I consulted with a few quite knowledgeable people in the digital field who explained to me all aspect of USB DACs. From what I understood it is clear that if (a big “if”) a USB DAC is properly implemented (that they admitthat  is not frequently happen) then USB DACs  have a lot of advantages over non-USB methods. However, what I feel is “strange” (among what I have seen) is that as soon people begin to use USB DACS then they forget about the guilty of DAC itself and begin just to stress the “quality” of USB method. A DAC is DAC. Take two DACs and see which one is better with the same let say S/PDIF interface. If the USB-able DAC turned out to be "better" with S/PDIF or EBU then, only THEN, engage the USB and observe the alleging USB's advantages and enjoy the ride.

People make DACs for 30 years very complex and very expensive, some of them a very good. The last few years there is an army of little USB that sold for very little money has a few chips and a few op-amps. Many people who make them have even no own recourses to write own USB drivers. I do not make assumption that those DACs are not good, they might be very good but I juts a bit skeptical then they are not as good as the USB topology might allow them to be.

So, for sake of preventing a self-delusion, in a competition USB DACing vs. dual-clock DACing I would like to hear the USB DAC driven by S/PDIF and get a feeling that is a good DAC itself. I do not see people talk a lot about it… That is what I see a “problem” with idea of USB DACing.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-11-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
tuga


Posts 174
Joined on 12-26-2007

Post #: 29
Post ID: 9134
Reply to: 9132
The TDA1543 and the NOS sound
fiogf49gjkf0d
Hello,

I have owned a TDA1543 based Kusonoki style (passive I/V, digital filterless, non oversampling) DAC for almost two years.
You can have a look at the measurements here.

I find that this kind of implementation (Kusonoki) has a very distinct signature that is not very compatible with the reproduction of symphonic music: it's dynamically challenged, coloured, veiled and lacking at the frequency extremes.
One could almost call it the digital version of single driver speakers.

The TDA1543 was chosen for it's ability to bypass the active output stage but the TDA1541 is technically a far superior chip.
I have never heard Audio Note's or any other non-TDA1543 based NOS DACs but it would be interesting to know whether these qualities are due to the use of a economy version chip, passive I/V, non-oversampling or the lot.

Cheers,
Tuga


"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira Pascoaes
12-12-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
nycparamedic
Posts 7
Joined on 12-09-2008

Post #: 30
Post ID: 9139
Reply to: 9134
Of TDA DAC chips and such
fiogf49gjkf0d
 tuga wrote:
Hello,
I have owned a TDA1543 based Kusonoki style (passive I/V, digital filterless, non oversampling) DAC for almost two years.
You can have a look at the measurements here.

I find that this kind of implementation (Kusonoki) has a very distinct signature that is not very compatible with the reproduction of symphonic music: it's dynamically challenged, coloured, veiled and lacking at the frequency extremes.
One could almost call it the digital version of single driver speakers.


Thanks for the info. I have to admit that I have not listened to any high-dynamic symphonic music with the Wavelength Brick DAC yet. I'll sure give it a go when it comes back from surgery.

Their website does mention this: "These DACs incorporate the TDA1543N2 (select top 5%) DAC chips with passive I/V using Shinko Tantulum resistors..." What exactly does "select top 5%" means I have no idea. Are there crown version  of this chip like the TDA1541? I didn't see one when I opened up the DAC.

The TDA1543 is known to have a rolled off response at the high frequenices. I knew of this before getting the DAC used; another reason I was skeptical of this DAC. I listened carefully between my Adcom GDA-700 and the Brick, and thought the Brick souded much better. Not dull or rolled of.

Cheers
12-12-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
tuga


Posts 174
Joined on 12-26-2007

Post #: 31
Post ID: 9141
Reply to: 9139
Méfiez-vous...
fiogf49gjkf0d
...of manufacturers claims. They have to make a living out of selling their gear.
From what I gather, the "select top 5%" are just that: no physical diferences, just tighter quality control.

About your comparison, it would help to know what speakers you are using and the material you played.
The ADCOM uses the PCM1702 20bit chip which is technically superior but I had a Denon with the same chip that sounded like crap (in part due to a "tiny" transformer).

Cheers,
Tuga


"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira Pascoaes
12-12-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
nycparamedic
Posts 7
Joined on 12-09-2008

Post #: 32
Post ID: 9143
Reply to: 9141
Newer NOS DAC chips???
fiogf49gjkf0d
 tuga wrote:
...of manufacturers claims. They have to make a living out of selling their gear.
From what I gather, the "select top 5%" are just that: no physical diferences, just tighter quality control.

That's what I suspected.
 tuga wrote:
About your comparison, it would help to know what speakers you are using and the material you played.
The ADCOM uses the PCM1702 20bit chip which is technically superior but I had a Denon with the same chip that sounded like crap (in part due to a "tiny" transformer).
Speakers are a pair of original B&W Matrix 804. The room, 17x13, is dedicated to listening and has numerous Real Traps installed. Music was various, Beethoven String Quartets by Juliard at the Library of Congress; White Stripes; Jolie Holland; Belle & Sebastian; Camera Obscura; Okerville River. Stuff that I listen to fairly often.

Is there anyone making a newer Non-Oversampling DAC chip that is better than the older Phillips TDA chips? I am also curious to read John Atkison's review of the Wavelength Audio Cosecant v3 USB DAC. He asked for a reiew smaple after hearing the DAC -with the 24/96 DAC module- at RAF 2008.
12-18-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
alexd
Posts 7
Joined on 12-19-2008

Post #: 33
Post ID: 9197
Reply to: 8265
High Quality Music Server / CD player
fiogf49gjkf0d
Hi all.
We are small company, dedicated to creation of highest quality audio products. Analog and Digital. We have auditioned many music servers on the market.
However most of them do not sound as good as good quality 16Bits cd transport. The approach of connecting MAC or PC to high quality External DAC is
not an audiophile solution. The switching noise from MAC or PC power supply will find its way into your digital signal, which will cause jitter, noise, reduced soundstage, and harshness on your analog output.
The best approach is to use a completely dedicated music server. Designed for Audiophile applications to start with.
We have designed and built high quality external DAC (now selling direct from our web site), which deals with jitter. Our DAC improved computer generated output (SPDIF or USB-AUDIO) significantly, still the sound is better from High quality CD-Transport .
Alexd
3 Dimension Audio
www.3d-audio.com
12-18-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
tuga


Posts 174
Joined on 12-26-2007

Post #: 34
Post ID: 9198
Reply to: 9197
Noise? Go optical...
fiogf49gjkf0d
 alexd wrote:
Hi all.
We are small company, dedicated to creation of highest quality audio products. Analog and Digital. We have auditioned many music servers on the market.
However most of them do not sound as good as good quality 16Bits cd transport. The approach of connecting MAC or PC to high quality External DAC is
not an audiophile solution. The switching noise from MAC or PC power supply will find its way into your digital signal, which will cause jitter, noise, reduced soundstage, and harshness on your analog output.
The best approach is to use a completely dedicated music server. Designed for Audiophile applications to start with.
We have designed and built high quality external DAC (now selling direct from our web site), which deals with jitter. Our DAC improved computer generated output (SPDIF or USB-AUDIO) significantly, still the sound is better from High quality CD-Transport .
Alexd
3 Dimension Audio
www.3d-audio.com
Hello Alexd, You can use an optical interface to filter the switching noise. By the way, you identify the existence of such noise but the specs of DAC18 don't mention how you get rid of it. Regards, Tuga


"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira Pascoaes
12-18-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
nycparamedic
Posts 7
Joined on 12-09-2008

Post #: 35
Post ID: 9199
Reply to: 9197
Of the vaguest specifications but, of course, the best intentions...
fiogf49gjkf0d
 alexd wrote:
Hi all.
We are small company, dedicated to creation of highest quality audio products. Analog and Digital. We have auditioned many music servers on the market.


Wait! Let me guess. You're gonna tell me the way it *should* be done, right???

 alexd wrote:
However most of them do not sound as good as good quality 16Bits cd transport. The approach of connecting MAC or PC to high quality External DAC is
not an audiophile solution.


Of course! Because you have tried at least a couple of hundred of combinations of different music servers, pre-amps, speaker cables (not mention expensive inter-connects), and speakers?? Right? No to mention you did all of this blind testing in a properly treated listening room? One where the midrange and bass peaks and nulls were properly smoothed out? Yes?

 alexd wrote:
The switching noise from MAC or PC power supply will find its way into your digital signal, which will cause jitter, noise, reduced soundstage, and harshness on your analog output.
The best approach is to use a completely dedicated music server. Designed for Audiophile applications to start with.


And I can't be running my custom server ( a single board computer which draws only 5 watts max) from a large capacity sealed battery?? And this SBC (single board computer) would not be considered a dedicated music server? Running a stripped down Linux distribution that s running entirely in RAM? No to mention that every FLAC file is buffered *enitrely* to RAM before it get sent to USB... And I have complete control of my music server secondary to its open source software??

 alexd wrote:
We have designed and built high quality external DAC (now selling direct from our web site), which deals with jitter. Our DAC improved computer generated output (SPDIF or USB-AUDIO) significantly, still the sound is better from High quality CD-Transport .


Yup! I'm sure you did! And your specifications could not be more generic than a Top 40 pop song! No mention of what brand DAC chip you are using or its implementation!! Or did you buy a fab and tap out your own custom circuit, thus negating the need to use any OFS (off the shelf) DAC chip available from Philips, Analog Devices, Sabre, etc., etc.

Not to mention that the grammar structure in the abovequoted paragraph... (You company is listed as being resident in Carson City, Nevada)

This quote from your website:

"The DAC18 utilizes a unique architecture which essentially eliminates jitter."

Essentially!!!!! No how's, what's, where's, or any of those pesky details!!! You just *essentially* got rid of it!!

Your solution is *unsrupassed*!!! Just take my credit card and charge what you think is a fair price! Trust me, I won't worry in times that mimic a 1930's style economy.

 alexd wrote:
Alexd
3 Dimension Audio
www.3d-audio.com
12-18-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,545
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 36
Post ID: 9200
Reply to: 9197
The problems in the DAW's switching PS?
fiogf49gjkf0d

 alexd wrote:
We are small company, dedicated to creation of highest quality audio products. Analog and Digital. We have auditioned many music servers on the market.
However most of them do not sound as good as good quality 16Bits cd transport. The approach of connecting MAC or PC to high quality External DAC is
not an audiophile solution. The switching noise from MAC or PC power supply will find its way into your digital signal, which will cause jitter, noise, reduced soundstage, and harshness on your analog output.
The best approach is to use a completely dedicated music server. Designed for Audiophile applications to start with.
We have designed and built high quality external DAC (now selling direct from our web site), which deals with jitter. Our DAC improved computer generated output (SPDIF or USB-AUDIO) significantly, still the sound is better from High quality CD-Transport .

Alex, I would like to point a contradiction in what you say. Your “high quality external DAC” is not usable with “many music servers” as it look like your DAC is 16/44. I can’t imagine anybody build a music server to play juts 16Bit files. Particularly considering that you agree that “sound is better from High quality CD-Transport”.

The point about switching noise from MAC or PC power supply is well taken and well know. It very much makes sense to build a conventional PS, non-impulse PS fro music servers, though I did not credible comments that it does make any sonic improvement. Intellectually the switching suppers are bad, I would agree with it, even thought I have no idea how switching supply might cause jitter. Noise, yes. The residual switching pulses, yes? But jitter? I do not think so, explain if I am wrong.

Also, I would like to hear your opinion what methodologically appropriate was you might suggest to identify that my current music server does suffers from switching PS problems?  I hear very same sound with no identifiable difference between direct feed of my preamp driven from tuner vs. the preamp driven via AD-DAW-DA path. If so, then how shell I learn about the tangible switching PS problems? BTW, sine I use “external”  PS for my DAW I might ease to try it…

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-18-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
alexd
Posts 7
Joined on 12-19-2008

Post #: 37
Post ID: 9201
Reply to: 9199
High Quality Music Server / CD player
fiogf49gjkf0d
Why are you so aggressive?
Te specs on web site are most generic on purpose.
We do not want the competition to copy our design before we applied for patents and protected our IP.
If you'd like to know more details, call us and we will try to explain to you what we are doing, not how.
Our company is in Carson City, Nevada. and by the way we are using Analog Devices dac IC in 16 bits version (DAC18), we will be using
Texas Instruments in our 24 bits version (coming soon). The DAC18 got its name, because it took 18 month to create this product. It is not intended for music server application,
but for highest quality Red Book  CD reproduction. For people, who want to use for a music server, we do have a USB input option.


As far as Music Server goes, the single board computer with linear power supply or battery supply is correct approach, I was talking about MAC or PC.
 
12-18-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
nycparamedic
Posts 7
Joined on 12-09-2008

Post #: 38
Post ID: 9202
Reply to: 9201
The tongue was firmly planted in cheek.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 alexd wrote:
Why are you so aggressive?
Te specs on web site are most generic on purpose.
We do not want the competition to copy our design before we applied for patents and protected our IP.
If you'd like to know more details, call us and we will try to explain to you what we are doing, not how.
Our company is in Carson City, Nevada. and by the way we are using Analog Devices dac IC in 16 bits version (DAC18), we will be using
Texas Instruments in our 24 bits version (coming soon). The DAC18 got its name, because it took 18 month to create this product. It is not intended for music server application,
but for highest quality Red Book  CD reproduction. For people, who want to use for a music server, we do have a USB input option.


As far as Music Server goes, the single board computer with linear power supply or battery supply is correct approach, I was talking about MAC or PC.
 


Considering the nature of online forums and the internet in general, I was *not* being "so aggressive" I was merely being sarcastic considering the nature of your post. I did not use one profane word, insult, or phrase in the extreme pejorative. I have been very kind and restrained in my reply considering some of the posts I have seen directed at manufacturer's who shill their products on other forums.

A few of us were having a discussion about computer music servers; myself describing my own custom DIY Linux that anybody could put together; sans "IP". I wasn't selling anything, but you are. Your first post to this forum was about you plugging your product!!! My response was a subtle, if not humorous hint, about why you shouldn't. I was not trying to insult or berate. I was just hoping you get "the hint".

And if you are truly worried about someone stealing your "Intellectual Property" then maybe you should have not boasted about your product until every single T was crossed and every single I was dotted. And I'm not even going to go into why I think the term IP is a complete sham:  http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html
But to each his own.

I hope your line does well.
12-18-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
alexd
Posts 7
Joined on 12-19-2008

Post #: 39
Post ID: 9203
Reply to: 9200
The problems in the DAW's switching PS?
fiogf49gjkf0d
You are right, the DAC18 is 16 bits device, we could not find many sources of 24 Bits material being output in digital form via SPDIF or USB.
Due to the Digital Copyright Law, no devices can output (in digital form) anything higher than 16 Bits / 48 Khz signal.
So most of the equipment makers (cd transports, sound cards, etc....) either convert the signal to 16 bits /44.1Khz/48Khz or mute the output completely.
To answer your second question the noise is the major factor contributing to jitter.
I can get very technical about it with simulation plots, calculations, etc... But I am not sure I'd like to do it on the forum. It could be very boring for non engineers.
To answer your question about DAW output  vs tuner. Well Tuner is not highest quality source to start with. I do not think you will hear much difference between DAW analog output and tuner analog output.

12-18-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,545
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 40
Post ID: 9204
Reply to: 9203
Yes and no. Still, it does not answer the question and PS.
fiogf49gjkf0d

 alexd wrote:
To answer your question about DAW output vs tuner. Well Tuner is not highest quality source to start with. I do not think you will hear much difference between DAW analog output and tuner analog output.

It is unquestionable that an FM tuner technically speaking is not a highest quality source to start with but my demands for DAW is very practical and utilitarian – I record FM and my objectives for music server to be able handle FM, nothing more or less. I do not upload up CD, tapes or LP to music server. Still with all my familiarity with FM limitations I might assure you that good FM incredibly complex source for DAW recording and reproduction. A good FM station, a good tuner and a good quality LIVE Broadcast is so sophisticated material that any if not the best A/D, DAW, D/A will round it, even at the limited technically quality of FM. You see, LIVE is live and it has (in some cases) such a complexity of imaging and space that bad digital kills. I have a few cheap USB-based A/D and D/A in here that I was conceding to use for second recording system – they just do not handle FM quality, whatever the quality FM is. So, I would be cautious with your discard of FM quality. I believe that I do have an access to the very good alternative to FM sources (CD, LP, Tape) and frankly speaking I do not feel that FM is some kind of “black ship” among audio sources.

In a contrary to what you said when I try to observe a difference between DAW analog outputs (I used externals DAC) and tuner analog output, in case if I screw up something with my DAW, then I do hear a very clear difference. Over the time I have developed my own methodological ways to tell is the A/D-DAW-D/A chains performs well and equal to what my FM stream does. Change 1dB of gain on DAW – and the A/D-DAW-D/A chain immediately underperforms... There are some other check points… That is why I asked you if you have any check points for subjective testing the noise from impulse PS.

Rgs, Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-19-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
tuga


Posts 174
Joined on 12-26-2007

Post #: 41
Post ID: 9205
Reply to: 9201
NOS and the highest quality Red Book reproduction
fiogf49gjkf0d
 alexd wrote:
by the way we are using Analog Devices dac IC in 16 bits version (DAC18), we will be using<br>Texas Instruments in our 24 bits version (coming soon). The DAC18 got its name, because it took 18 month to create this product. It is not intended for music server application,<br>but for highest quality Red Book&nbsp; CD reproduction.


Hello Alex,

In my experience NOS DACs neither provide "excellent dynamics and unsurpassed sound quality" nor "a highly-accurate reproduction of the original recording."

Frequency response: 20Hz - 22.05KHz
Signal/noise: 90db

What made you follow that route? Was it all the internet hype about the Kusunoki minimalist concept?

Regards,
Tuga


"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira Pascoaes
12-19-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
jessie.dazzle


Paris, France
Posts 456
Joined on 04-23-2006

Post #: 42
Post ID: 9206
Reply to: 9197
Beyond the transport
fiogf49gjkf0d
Alexd wrote :

"...most of them do not sound as good as good quality 16Bits cd transport..."

"Most of them"... Well you are honest; enough so to admit that some do, though they may not be of your own creation.

"...Our DAC improved computer generated output (SPDIF or USB-AUDIO) significantly, still the sound is better from High quality CD-Transport..."

Again, very honest.

Based on my experience, I would encourage you to keep trying; it is possible. In my case, the CD transport (which is no slouch) is soundly beaten. Apart from using it to make the occasional comparison, I have not touched the CD transport since unpacking the DAC.

"...The approach of connecting MAC or PC to high quality External DAC is not an audiophile solution. The switching noise from MAC or PC power supply will find its way into your digital signal, which will cause jitter, noise, reduced soundstage, and harshness on your analog output..."

I consider that excellent news... The last thing I want is "an audiophile solution"! Ok, just a bit of humor... I know what you meant to say. In my case there is no discernable difference in sound quality when powering the computer from its battery versus from its transformer (I use a USB DAC with a high-sensitivity all-horn system).

I wish you the best,

jd*


How to short-circuit evolution: Enshrine mediocrity.
12-19-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,545
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 43
Post ID: 9207
Reply to: 9206
The media is the bitch.
fiogf49gjkf0d

 jessie.dazzle wrote:
In my case, the CD transport (which is no slouch) is soundly beaten. Apart from using it to make the occasional comparison, I have not touched the CD transport since unpacking the DAC.

Jessie, I see an inconsistency in what you say. You are pleased with your USB DAC driver from you DAW but you still load files to you music server from CDs, that mean that you still read then via some kind of transport, would it be DAW transport of external dedicated audio transport. Where I see the contradiction is in my view is that what we look at the performance of the transports we need to abstract ourselves from our takes on DACs. Feed the DAW’s transport and dedicated audio transport into the same DAC. Do you still feel that it is “soundly beaten”? 

Let me give you a test to discover for yours where the sound is been lost. Find a raw stream from any good A/D converter. You must not use DVD-A, SACD of any other souses – they are already ruined by media. You need a raw 16/44stream from A/D. Save it in 16/44 format and listen it from you music server. Then use any available fore you mean to put this file to CD and read it from any transport you have. No matter what you do you will have severely worsened sound, make a conclusion.

The point is that CD format itself, not even the 16/44 is a bitch. The same is with any other format. You might have a good 24/96 file but as soon you load it to DVD-A it turns to shit. A raw 1-bit at 2.8224 MHz DSD is very fine but ported to SACD disks is it loses a lot, not to mention that the whole DSD conversion saga is a fraudulent in a way. The transports of DAC is not a problem the media is the problem. So, the fact that you do not touch the CD transport since you did whatever says very little as you still are touching a CD transport each time you are uploading you CD to you DAW.

The CaT


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-19-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
alexd
Posts 7
Joined on 12-19-2008

Post #: 44
Post ID: 9208
Reply to: 9205
NOS and the highest quality Red Book reproduction
fiogf49gjkf0d
Hello, I must say you did not listen to NOS DAC properly designed.
Most of the NOS DACs on the market are following minimalist concepts.
Meaning, they merely are just a combination of SPDIF receiver chip and DAC chip itself.
While this approach is working in theory, in practice such a design produces mediocre sound.
The multi-bit non oversampling DAC requires rock solid bit clock to produce accurate sound.
The bit clock is recovered from incoming SPDIF signal. This recovered clock can have excessive amount of jitter.
When such a clock fed to DAC IC, the result is slow sound, compressed soundstage, lack of nuances.
In case of our DAC, we do not use minimalist concept. After 18 month of research and development, we have created
a design, that does not use SPDIF recovered clock at all. The DAC IC sees the clock with less than 3pS of jitter.
The resulting sound is really of  "excellent dynamics and unsurpassed sound quality".
As far as accuracy goes, due to the fact that no versampling takes place, every bit of sound you hear is what was recorded on CD.
There are no interpolated samples in the stream, therefore you do not replace recorded samples with interpolated ones.
There is no Delta-Sigma modulation either, we use AD1865N-J highest grade multi-bit DAC IC.
The DAC18 really makes music sound right.
12-19-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
alexd
Posts 7
Joined on 12-19-2008

Post #: 45
Post ID: 9209
Reply to: 9204
Yes and no. Still, it does not answer the question and PS.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Well, the issue you are talking about is very complex. You have many components in your signal chain, that contribute to the noise and signal quality,
not only in power supply,but also in the signal chain ckts. The USB A/D converters have their own power supplies, though they use USB power as an input,
they still condition power internally. So you will have diminishing results just by improving power supplies only in your  DAW.
The issue of properly handling FM signal is related to the capabilities of your A/D converters. Your A/D converters have analog and digital anti-aliasing filters and delta-sigma modulated A/D chips.
These chips and filters add their own signature to the sound. If you look at the CD/DVD mastering studio's equipment, you will see infinite level of controls on all the input gain, filter anti-aliasing filters, clock generator circuits, etc..
Even then, every recording is highly depended on recording engineer's taste and skills. In your home set-up, you have very limited control, almost everything,  except gain is preset.
As I said before, this is not only power supply issue.
Regards,
Alex
12-19-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
scooter
Posts 161
Joined on 07-17-2008

Post #: 46
Post ID: 9210
Reply to: 9208
Idea...
fiogf49gjkf0d
Hi Alex:

I originated this thread and have to say it has been an interesting ride for the last few months.

Now that you've thrown your name into the mix, I think it would be interesting, and is fair to ask, if you would agree to loan a demo unit to someone on the board to get some feedback. No pressure of course, and there is obviously some risk on your side which you need to consider (e.g. unit gets lost or damaged, review is less than stellar, nobody even wants to review the unit, sunk cost of 2 way postage, etc.) so I would not be surprised if you pass on the inquiry.

Just to be clear, I would not expect a 10 star rating and hyped rants about any product on this site, as it is not a review forum, but, if you can convince someone to check out your unit, I would expect you could receive, for limited effort on your part, some insightful critical commentary which could help your efforts going forward, if indeed you believe that there is room for improvement.

To keep things independent, I will not participate but maybe Mr Cat, Mr Dazzle, or someone else would be willing to spend a few minutes checking out your solution. Best of luck.

S
12-19-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,545
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 47
Post ID: 9211
Reply to: 9210
Come on!!!
fiogf49gjkf0d

scooter,

I think you are not clearly understand at what kind “forum” you are participating. There is no “board awareness” and there are no needs for any “board demo trail”. One of the accomplishments of this site that people do not give a damn about other and everyone on their own. I insist that it is the way how it shell be and if you propose other alternatives the you are in a wrong place. There are absolutely no needs for “group consciousness”. If you like Alex’s DAC then contact him directly and do not convert this site inot AA of DIYAudo type of crap. There is no need for you to discuss or to argue the subject of the “horde evaluations” any further in this thread.

Rgs, Romy


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-19-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
alexd
Posts 7
Joined on 12-19-2008

Post #: 48
Post ID: 9212
Reply to: 9210
Idea...
fiogf49gjkf0d
Hello, I agree with you,there is a lot of risk involved in it.
However we do have an in home trial program.
You simply pay for the unit and shipping, we will send you our DAC. You can listen to it in your own setup, if not completely delighted, return the unit to us in original condition (no missing material, no cosmetic or electrical damage)
within 30 days, and we will refund your purchase price, excluding shipping.
Best regards,
Alex
12-19-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
RonyWeissman
Lyon, France
Posts 138
Joined on 05-29-2004

Post #: 49
Post ID: 9213
Reply to: 9206
MAC airport Express
fiogf49gjkf0d
Hi Jessie :

I'm sorry if this is not the subject of this thread as I have a bit of a problem following computer/digital discussions, but since you read french, there is a fellow in france selling a device to send audio signals from iTunes to audio systems which seems very interesting :

http://db-system.fr/bd_system/Airport_Express_modifiee_-_WiFi.html

The guy works a lot with Vitavox S2s, builds tube amps, MC step-ups etc. so seems "in the loop" as far as his references.

Again, sorry if this is completely off topic.

R Weissman
12-19-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,545
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 50
Post ID: 9214
Reply to: 9209
Saying it, I do aknowledge and understand...
fiogf49gjkf0d

 alexd wrote:
The issue of properly handling FM signal is related to the capabilities of your A/D converters. Your A/D converters have analog and digital anti-aliasing filters and delta-sigma modulated A/D chips.

Actually if I am not mistaken my A/D do not use any delta-sigma modulated A/D chips as it is a pure multibit A/D. It is not important however. What is important is that for sake of A/D conversion the FM recording is surprisingly nasty thing. FM cares its stereo information in subcarrier up to 53kHz and if the subcarrier and the 19kHz pilot are not properly killed then they interferes with A/D inputs. Anyhow, this is not the subject of FM and it’s recording so I would call myself for a discipline. However, the message I would like to send that there is no need to demean FM as some kind of inferior sources. In my home FM beats hands down any other source and if you have a good local station then it would do in your home as well. Saying it, I do aknowledge and understand all limitation of FM.


 alexd wrote:
Even then, every recording is highly depended on recording engineer's taste and skills. In your home set-up, you have very limited control, almost everything,  except gain is preset.

And here is where the live FM broadcast acting as a liberation force, taking the “taste and skills recording engineers” (which are mostly insultingly-barbaric) out of the consideration. It is my favorite subject but it s not the subject of this thread, I have a separate forum dedicated to off-air audio.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Page 2 of 7 (166 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2 3 4 5 » ... Last »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  The commercial music servers...  Touch screen remote...  Didital Things  Forum     37  234868  01-10-2008
  »  New  About the DAW playback software...  Best hardware with best software...  Didital Things  Forum     11  69798  03-22-2008
  »  New  Recording/Playback software..  Free stuff...  Didital Things  Forum     14  63845  08-24-2008
  »  New  To Rip or not to Rip...  Ripping with better playback...  Didital Things  Forum     2  23107  03-18-2009
  »  New  The contra-ridicules solution for a good DAW?..  Happy to see this thread...  Didital Things  Forum     1  21603  06-18-2009
  »  New  DAW drives configuration and backup strategies...  Not expensive to recover DATA, avoid Corporate Recovery...  Didital Things  Forum     3  26288  10-05-2009
  »  New  Weiss Engineering DAC202..  Attenuation...  Didital Things  Forum     5  32345  06-21-2010
  »  New  Pacific Microsonics Model Two: What Platform, Software ..  XLR to RCA adaptor. Watch out...  Didital Things  Forum     1  17436  03-17-2011
  »  New  Windows Based Transport: A quiet and capable Source?..  DAE Firmware quality...  Didital Things  Forum     47  170513  11-01-2011
  »  New  Memory Player Box?..  Maybe I will not order the Pure Teflon capacitors after...  Didital Things  Forum     2  31932  11-03-2011
  »  New  Why I hate computer playback...  Higher power cpu...  Didital Things  Forum     17  75242  04-16-2012
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts