exaSound e18 - e20 - e28 - Info and Experiences Post All Here

[4est]

Gosh I am glad matthias(TY) linked to this thread from the http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/which-digital-analogue-converter-just-direct-stream-digital-20173/index5.html#post326887 one. I was iffy about DSD until I tried these settings on my BII/Amanero combo. Nice!

An update on the comparison JRMC19, Foobar+SACD, and HQ Player doing Redbook to DSD conversion

 

I had a chance to have a quick listen to HQ Player with Poly-sinc-2s with DSD7 settings for Redbook to DSD256 playing into the E20 Mk III

 

The sound is simply amazing. CPU load was 30% so quite comfortable for the quadcore i5.

 

For Redbook to DSD256, HQ player is in a class by itself.

 

We then used HQ Player to upsample DSD64 to DSD256 also using the DSD7 filter, the sound quality, the clarity, air, sense of space, you name it, the reproduction was faultless.

 

Again no hint what so ever of malign volume control in effect.

 

It will be interesting to compare A+ playing DSD256 with HQP playing DSD 256 as well as upsampling from DSD 64 to DSD256

[exa]

Three months ago exaSound developed an extension to the ASIO standard for Mac OS X.

 

Today I am happy to announce that Decibel - a very straightforward to use Mac OS X audio player with a clean and user friendly interface - has just become the first Mac OS X audiophile-grade player with ASIO support.

 

Decibel supports both DSD over PCM (DoP) and native DSD over ASIO. Check it out on the new company website www.feisty-dog.com and on sbooth.org.

 

You can find out more about the exaSound ASIO for Mac OS X on the exaSound blog:

Decibel 1.3 - The First Audiophile Player with Mac OS X ASIO Support

DSD 256 Available on Mac for the First Time

[elcorso]

Three months ago exaSound developed an extension to the ASIO standard for Mac OS X.

 

Today I am happy to announce that Decibel - a very straightforward to use Mac OS X audio player with a clean and user friendly interface - has just become the first Mac OS X audiophile-grade player with ASIO support.

 

Decibel supports both DSD over PCM (DoP) and native DSD over ASIO. Check it out on the new company website www.feisty-dog.com and on sbooth.org.

 

You can find out more about the exaSound ASIO for Mac OS X on the exaSound blog:

Decibel 1.3 - The First Audiophile Player with Mac OS X ASIO Support

DSD 256 Available on Mac for the First Time

 

Great news George!...

 

This was a must for every Mac user, and not to be dependent anymore on Core Audio capricious support to 'integer mode' depending on the OS X of the day.

 

Just beginning to listen now, then I can't tell you nothing about the SQ, plus, just burning in a Paul Hynes LPSU with my exaSound e22.

 

Processor use is the half under ASIO & DSD than on Core Audio. Then there is a difference between DoP and Native DSD playback, as I noticed several years before, but everybody contradicts me (I don't want discussions about this, please).

 

Kind regards,

 

Roch

[Sam Lord]

Great news George!...

 

That is great news, I hope it makes life easier on CA designers as they create apps for the Mac.

 

...Just beginning to listen now, then I can't tell you nothing about the SQ, plus, just burning in a Paul Hynes LPSU with my exaSound e22....

 

Roch, Dear Old Friend, it's time you got a new front end. I'll just take that dusty 'ol dac off your hands, won't even charge you cause, well, I love you man.

[elcorso]

Roch, Dear Old Friend, it's time you got a new front end. I'll just take that dusty 'ol dac off your hands, won't even charge you cause, well, I love you man.

 

Well, my buy and sell department has a lot of activity in my small country.

 

Unfortunately I can not export, thanks to our horrible mail facilities.

 

Cheers!

 

Roch

[Sam Lord]

Ah, Louisiana!

 

At least you can view the making of Duck Dynasty.

 

If that program is unfamiliar, do not look it up. Trust me.

[matthias]

Three months ago exaSound developed an extension to the ASIO standard for Mac OS X.

 

Is this extension to the ASIO standard for Mac OS X restricted to exaSound or are other DAC manufacturers allowed to use this technique?

 

Matt

[exa]

Other DAC manufacturers and player developers can use the same techique.

[matthias]

Other DAC manufacturers and player developers can use the same techique.

 

If I understand correctly at the moment the only support on the software side is by Decibel and on the hardware side by exaSound?

[exa]

There are other companies working on OS X ASIO based on the exaSound specification. It is up to them to make announcements when they are ready.

[matthias]

There are other companies working on OS X ASIO based on the exaSound specification. It is up to them to make announcements when they are ready.

 

Thanks,

IMO it is much better than DSD via DoP.

 

Matt

[jhwalker]

There are other companies working on OS X ASIO based on the exaSound specification. It is up to them to make announcements when they are ready.

 

c'mon iFi and LH Labs

[ted_b]

Thanks,

IMO it is much better than DSD via DoP.

 

Matt

 

Why? Is your Mac getting noise from processing a simple DoP flag? Don't get me wrong, George's efforts in creating drivers to directly process DSD are noble and great, but I am surprised that a Mac would spit up like that...an Atom-based pc processor maybe..an NUC maybe...but a Mac? On my i7-based pc I cannot tell the difference with a gun to my head...on my Caps Carbon (atom-based) I like ASIO slightly better, but it's nitpicking.

[jhwalker]

Why? Is your Mac getting noise from processing a simple DoP flag? Don't get me wrong, George's efforts in creating drivers to directly process DSD are noble and great, but I am surprised that a Mac would spit up like that...an Atom-based pc processor maybe..an NUC maybe...but a Mac? On my i7-based pc I cannot tell the difference with a gun to my head...on my Caps Carbon (atom-based) I like ASIO slightly better, but it's nitpicking.

 

Two things:

 

 

1. in my understanding, Core Audio limits throughput to DSD128 (for some reason, bandwidth, I believe), so DSD256 and 512, etc., are not possible except through ASIO or the like at this time
   
2. DoP roughly doubles the processing overhead vs. simply streaming DSD through ASIO
   

 

Why would we *not* want lower processor utilization and access to the higher speeds, all things equal?

[matthias]

Two things:

1. in my understanding, Core Audio limits throughput to DSD128 (for some reason, bandwidth, I believe), so DSD256 and 512, etc., are not possible except through ASIO or the like at this time
   
2. DoP roughly doubles the processing overhead vs. simply streaming DSD through ASIO
   

Why would we *not* want lower processor utilization and access to the higher speeds, all things equal?

 

Indeed.

From the exasound blog:

Native ASIO DSD on Mac offers many benefits for audiophile-grade music playback:

True asynchronous operation. With Core Audio the Mac is always the master, the DAC works as a slave device. With ASIO the DAC is the master. (Which makes you wonder if that was the reason why ASIO was removed from OS X

Simple and reliable support for Integer and Exclusive Mode. ASIO always works in Exclusive Mode.

Improved performance - CPU load for native DSD is much lower compared to DoP. Older computers can play high-sampling rates DSD.

Improved reliability - DoP has to switch to PCM mode if a marker byte is lost.

Faster seamless transitions from PCM to DSD within the same playlist.

 

Matt

[ted_b]

Two things:

 

 

1. in my understanding, Core Audio limits throughput to DSD128 (for some reason, bandwidth, I believe), so DSD256 and 512, etc., are not possible except through ASIO or the like at this time
   
2. DoP roughly doubles the processing overhead vs. simply streaming DSD through ASIO
   

 

Why would we *not* want lower processor utilization and access to the higher speeds, all things equal?

 

As i said earlier, I applaud any mfg (especially George ...I am a customer first and foremost ) who creates a driver that works directly via ASIO. And in theory ASIO is great, but the idea behind DoP was not to produce poorer sonics...and I have huge issues with the claim that its DOUBLE the processing....ain't what I've seen, and I've been looking at DoP since day one. DoP was developed to allow more mfg'ers to jump on the DSD bandwagon and not have to create their own drivers. And in very few and far between situations have I heard a DoP sonic blemish. So, to me, theory is great, but market acceptance and player ubiquity with little or no downsides was a huge development. But I'll take ASIO, yes, thanks.

[matthias]

As i said earlier, I applaud any mfg (especially George ...I am a customer first and foremost ) who creates a driver that works directly via ASIO. And in theory ASIO is great, but the idea behind DoP was not to produce poorer sonics...and I have huge issues with the claim that its DOUBLE the processing....ain't what I've seen, and I've been looking at DoP since day one. DoP was developed to allow more mfg'ers to jump on the DSD bandwagon and not have to create their own drivers. And in very few and far between situations have I heard a DoP sonic blemish. So, to me, theory is great, but market acceptance and player ubiquity with little or no downsides was a huge development. But I'll take ASIO, yes, thanks.

 

Ted,

a comment from another thread:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/understanding-tass-abcs-direct-stream-digital-downloads-v-forrester-18756/index2.html#post284330

 

This short thread is very interesting.

 

Matt

[ted_b]

Thanks for that, but two things:

1) 8 channel DSD256? Ok, fine...my Atom-based (at the time) server does 6 channel DSD64 (as reported with my e28 review) just fine; I would assume at 8 channel DSD256 yes of course the cpu would start to gag! Duh! What's the point here? That bandwidth ain't DSD64 vs DoP 64 (which is simply a 24/176 and flag load).

2) I don't consider bitstream bandwidth as cpu processing overhead per se. IOW, 24/192 (twice the mps of 24/96) does not spike my music server's cpu by 2x over 24/96. Both fit easily in the bandwidth limitations of the bitstream vehicle (USB, ethernet, etc). If you, in fact, felt that way then any upsampling or higher rez music source argument would be easily overcome by the "cpu processing overhead" argument. I don't worry about these things until the signal path begins to moan and groan with noise. With 8 channel DSD256 then, yes, I would expect some yelling.

[Hiro]

Indeed.

From the exasound blog:

Native ASIO DSD on Mac offers many benefits for audiophile-grade music playback:

True asynchronous operation. With Core Audio the Mac is always the master, the DAC works as a slave device. With ASIO the DAC is the master. (Which makes you wonder if that was the reason why ASIO was removed from OS X

Simple and reliable support for Integer and Exclusive Mode. ASIO always works in Exclusive Mode.

Improved performance - CPU load for native DSD is much lower compared to DoP. Older computers can play high-sampling rates DSD.

Improved reliability - DoP has to switch to PCM mode if a marker byte is lost.

Faster seamless transitions from PCM to DSD within the same playlist.

 

Matt

 

 

DoP was a stopgap solution.

 

Now that Native ASIO DSD playback has been made available on both Windows and Mac OS X it will become the go-to method for DSD streaming.

[matthias]

Thanks for that, but two things:

1) 8 channel DSD256? Ok, fine...my Atom-based (at the time) server does 6 channel DSD64 (as reported with my e28 review) just fine; I would assume at 8 channel DSD256 yes of course the cpu would start to gag! Duh! What's the point here? That bandwidth ain't DSD64 vs DoP 64 (which is simply a 24/176 and flag load).

2) I don't consider bitstream bandwidth as cpu processing overhead per se. IOW, 24/192 (twice the mps of 24/96) does not spike my music server's cpu by 2x over 24/96. Both fit easily in the bandwidth limitations of the bitstream vehicle (USB, ethernet, etc). If you, in fact, felt that way then any upsampling or higher rez music source argument would be easily overcome by the "cpu processing overhead" argument. I don't worry about these things until the signal path begins to moan and groan with noise. With 8 channel DSD256 then, yes, I would expect some yelling.

 

Ted,

please have a look at all of Miskas replies in this thread. 8-channel is not the point.

Matt

[matthias]

DoP was a stopgap solution.

Now that Native ASIO DSD playback has been made available on both Windows and Mac OS X it will become the go-to method for DSD streaming.

 

I agree completely.

Matt

[ted_b]

You guys understand that each DAC mfger would have to write his/her own ASIO driver, right? It's great that George and others have done this, but to simply empirically state that "it's now the go-to" is short-sighted IMO. The DAC mfg'ers have to weigh in. I pleaded with Meitner through 2012 and 2013 on the issue (they have ASIO drivers but not compatible with DSD) and they said they have tons of other things to do before they'd justify spending time and resources on writing an ASIO driver, especially when DoP was working fine. I would think this is the business case for many of these folks.

[bmoura]

Ted,

please have a look at all of Miskas replies in this thread. 8-channel is not the point.

Matt

 

Unless you want to hear DSD and PCM in Multichannel as well as Stereo. Then 8-channel IS the point!

[matthias]

Ted,

why should we give Windows advantages for DSD256 and DSD512 in the future? These are very cumbersome to do with DoP. In these areas DSD shines brightly because there are no noise issues like with DSD64 and DSD128. Miskas DSC1 par example is tuned for DSD256+.

 

Matt

[exa]

Hi Ted,

 

Here is the case for ASIO on Mac the way we see it:

 

The DoP implementation of DSD 256 requires support for PCM at 705.6kHz and 768kHz. Such sampling rates are a real challenge for both computer CPU and USB audio interface. Our DACs don't have the ability to do PCM at 705.6kHz, so we have to "fake" 705.6kHz and 768kHz in the Core Audio driver. It is getting too much, first you have to package DSD as PCM to create a DoP stream, then you have to make virtual support for 7xx kHz. On one of the Mavericks beta releases PCM at 705.6kHz didn't work at all.

 

One DoP marker every two bytes is 33% overhead. But this is true for 24bit devices. For 32bit drivers like ours the overhead is 50%. Multiply this by 8 for 8 channels, raze the sampling rate to 768kHz and you will see the performance issues.

 

I think we are approaching the limits of what can be achieved with DoP.

 

Integer mode was reintroduced on OS X Mavericks, but it didn't work with our older drivers. There are two Core Audio driver architectures - Kernel Space and User Space. Our older drivers are Kernel Space, Integer mode works only for User Space. The transition from Kernel Space to user Space took one year. I think it is wise to have to have ASIO as well. What if with the next release of OS X Integer mode or support for 7xx kHz disappears again?

 

Core Audio is always the master of playback timing, ASIO is asynchronous by design - I don't have to explain the obvious advantage here.

 

ASIO is cross-platform compatible. There is no reason to expect SQ differences between Windows and Mac.

 

exaSound offers both DSD256 over DoP and native ASIO DSD. I hope to see more support for ASIO.