Jump to content
IGNORED

Future of Dacs: Jitter being addressed, how about power and volume!


Recommended Posts

I have to say that once again Mr Nugent is actively selling his products claiming scientific fact without reference to measurements or calculations!

 

Steve, I think we are all well aware of where you are coming from, gives us some figures or shut up!

 

Your posts are words circling a drain!

 

Power supply rejection ratios, regulator noise are all basics understood by 11 grade DT students.

 

Quite why the moderators let you get away with such obvious promotion of your products in this way is beyond me.

 

Once again, here is the challenge; prove it or shut up.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment

"Well, you would be wrong. At Intel for instance, there were a handful of doctorate-level guys that dealt with power delivery to uProcessors. I worked with them and knew them all."

 

I don't know the guys at Intel, and I am not saying that it is trivial, but I'm sure things are not a mystery to them. The theory is well understood, you work on the implementation with good engineering methods to get what you want and formulate guidelines and methods to give to your customers (for intel, the MB manufacturers)

 

Regarding thermal noise of resistors, fair enough, a quick google search shows that the noise is basically white noise at the uV level. Signal levels are in the V level or a 1000000 to 1 ratio or 120db. Since this is common mode noise, if I use a balanced input stage (e.g. the amp), I can filter that cm noise another 60-120 db. At that point it would be even hard to measure with sophisticated equipment.

 

I don't disagree that it is cool to find the best for everything, after all this is a hobby and everyone has their priorities. But certain things just cannot pass as science

 

www.hifiduino.wordpress.com

Link to comment

Hopefully Chris will be objective and frank in his review of all DACs. In light of the Berkeley Alpha DAC, Weiss Minerva DAC, Audio Research DAC7, Emmlabs DCC2se, Wavelength Cosecant, or dCS Scarlatti DAC, this is a rather bravado statement –

 

“Read the reviews. It crushes DACs costing upwards of $35K. Leaves everything in its price-range in the dust.”

 

And while multiple outstanding reviews from several reviewers are always a good starting point, there is no substitute for hearing and evaluating the component in your system and home. Manufacturers that offer demos or 30-day evaluation periods always get a big nod in my books, for it shows that if I am willing to pay their price, they are willing to stand behind their product and claims. While this does not guarantee that I will always get the best, it does guarantee that I will be happy with what I keep.

 

 

Link to comment

Hi sixty9,

 

I usually play in between -36 and -18dB, and when 16 bit material is played onto a 24 bit DAC you'd still loose NOTHING. Only at -54dB you would"

 

and

 

These 2 comments seem to be contradictory? You say anything less than 0db degrades unnecessarily, but also say you can got to -54db without losing any resolution. So if you don't lose resolution, why the degradation?

 

ALso, where do you get 54db from? 54db = 9 bits, but there's only 8 bit between 16 and 24.

 

About your last sentence : true. But I think it is what I said. "Only at -54dB your would" (loose on it !).

 

The contradictionary is, honestly, the fault of my writing. With normal digital volume it gets worse and worse, and it starts at loosing the first bit already. "Normal" means : everything you can get or will run into (OSes, Players). So it is just a general warning, if needed at all. What I actually tried to tell is that your max useable volume should be at max gain of the amp (meaning : the amp must be adjusted to that), and with some 4-6 "bits" of attenuation you'd be quite allright (which is different from 100% good).

When it is done properly, *and* you have a 24 bit DAC, you are 100% okay when the digital volume has been explicitly designed for that.

 

To give an idea what I am talking about : my digital volume is losless in this case. It means that out of an attenuated stream of 48dB (at ~ 1.5 dB steps) I can recreate the originial file.

No single one 48bit floating point whatever can do this that I know of, and I do it with 16 bits only, projected onto a 24 bit DAC.

So that is what I meant.

 

Sorry to be confusing !

Peter

 

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment

"Hopefully Chris will be objective and frank in his review of all DACs."

 

Hi Zorro - I have to be 100% honest and objective in my reviews not only because I want to but also because I allow everyone in the world to comment directly below each review. The CA readers would be all over me if I was anything but honest and objective. I actually love it this way!

 

 

 

 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment

I found this posting and I think it makes the most sense of anything i've found so far: http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Digital_Volume_Control_and_SNR

 

The gist is basically for volume you're looking at Signal to noise ratio (SNR) and bit resolution.

 

SNR: Digital volume is bad because it reduces the signal but not the noise (worse SNR).

 

Bit Resolution: Expanding a 16 bit signal to 24 bit does not give you 8 bits of headroom.

 

 

 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...