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

[EuroDriver]

So what you are saying is, in order to achieve "sonic glory cake" as you call it, I need to use a player that introduces its own signature sound that differs from ever other bit-perfect player out there? There is a word for that, its called "Distortion"

 

In fairness, I'll give it a try, because I am open minded. If my NUC can't handle those CPU intensive filters (probably not), I have a 4.5ghz haswell system that I can connect up next week and test. When I am ready, do you mind if I IM you for specifics of how you feel HQ Player should be configured, or can you refer me to a URL that describes this configuration?

 

Here you go

 

Photo 2 of 2 from HQ Player settings

 

Photo 1 of 2 from HQ Player settings

 

To get started you can simply drag and drop a folder from Windows explorer on to the HQ Player Window, and the files will load

 

Click on the track in the lower Window to Play

 

To clear the lower window of tracks Click on the paint brush icon

 

You might want to get the hang of HQP running on Win 7 or 8 before running it in WS2012, first in GUI mode, then in MSM or Core Mode

[EuroDriver]

What's going on in PCM to DSD as far as I have been able to discern from various posts of the author is

 

a) Filitering of the PCM data to mitigate the artifacts introduced during the decimation process of the original Analog to Digital conversion

 

b) Interpolation of new samples between the original PCM samples

 

c) modulation signal level data into a DSD 256 stream using one of the 5th or 7th order sigma delta modulators

 

All this is being done with processing power and order of magnitude greater than what's is available in hardware chips used in the top DAC's

 

Our Exasounds do a superb job of playing back a DSD 256 stream

[Miska]

So what you are saying is, in order to achieve "sonic glory cake" as you call it, I need to use a player that introduces its own signature sound that differs from ever other bit-perfect player out there? There is a word for that, its called "Distortion"

 

But is the distortion caused by resource constrained processing performed at the DAC side when used with bit-perfect player? You need to remember that all modern DAC chips perform a lot of DSP processing especially with RedBook source formats. However, fitting a technically best possible processing into $10 chip that cannot have even passive cooling and that processing being a mere millimeter or less away from the sensitive analog section is another question. For example most top-class DAC chips have 32-bit integer internal DSP pipeline. While HQPlayer has 64-bit floating point DSP pipeline.

 

My quest is to do things in a technically best possible way without being constrained by computational resources and to minimize amount of DSP performed inside the DAC chip. And then also measure the actual results from the DAC's analog output.

 

There are hardware based implementations of upsamplers too, like this. If you like to compare, HQPlayer can output up to either 1.536 MHz 32-bit PCM or 49.152 MHz DSD.

[Jud]

moophone, it is interesting that you refer to your own subjective impression that there was no difference as an "objective" approach! Just as a matter of dictionary definitions you know it isn't, right?

 

Your thinking that there is not "supposed" to be any difference does not have a technically correct basis. Miska has already begun to indicate one error, that all bit perfect players must sound the same. If they use different filters to do the D/A conversion they will measure and possibly sound different, and no, this is not considered to be distortion of one versus the other, because neither can be perfect.

 

There are further technical reasons why your belief in lack of differences is in error. However, you should listen to what makes you happy, and if various changes give you no subjective perceived improvement, that's fine. You'll have more money for music.

[moophone]

No, I meant objective:

 

"(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts."

 

I am going to, however, subjectively compare HQPlayer vs JRiver (which I group into the same category as all other bit-perfect players) based on the information recommended in this thread. These players do in fact sound the same to me (I'm only considering JRiver and foobar in my short list btw).

 

 

moophone, it is interesting that you refer to your own subjective impression that there was no difference as an "objective" approach! Just as a matter of dictionary definitions you know it isn't, right?

 

Your thinking that there is not "supposed" to be any difference does not have a technically correct basis. Miska has already begun to indicate one error, that all bit perfect players must sound the same. If they use different filters to do the D/A conversion they will measure and possibly sound different, and no, this is not considered to be distortion of one versus the other, because neither can be perfect.

 

There are further technical reasons why your belief in lack of differences is in error. However, you should listen to what makes you happy, and if various changes give you no subjective perceived improvement, that's fine. You'll have more money for music.

[moophone]

Thank you for that info, Miska. This should be an interesting comparison and you'll probably hear from me again once I start.

 

But is the distortion caused by resource constrained processing performed at the DAC side when used with bit-perfect player? You need to remember that all modern DAC chips perform a lot of DSP processing especially with RedBook source formats. However, fitting a technically best possible processing into $10 chip that cannot have even passive cooling and that processing being a mere millimeter or less away from the sensitive analog section is another question. For example most top-class DAC chips have 32-bit integer internal DSP pipeline. While HQPlayer has 64-bit floating point DSP pipeline.

 

My quest is to do things in a technically best possible way without being constrained by computational resources and to minimize amount of DSP performed inside the DAC chip. And then also measure the actual results from the DAC's analog output.

 

There are hardware based implementations of upsamplers too, like this. If you like to compare, HQPlayer can output up to either 1.536 MHz 32-bit PCM or 49.152 MHz DSD.

[kennyb123]

These players do in fact sound the same to me (I'm only considering JRiver and foobar in my short list btw).

 

I noticed you use interconnects from Blue Jeans Cable in your system. I tried a set of these in my system and there was a considerable loss of information (though relative to far more expensive cables). My guess is there's a good chance these cables are hindering your ability to hear differences between players. Moving up to better interconnects will likely yield you even bigger gains than switching software players. Just my two cents.

[moophone]

Other than DAC to ASP input, cables from ASP to amplifier do not make any difference in an active system, and arguably no positive difference over a properly built cable in a passive system either. I do not wish to start a debate on cables. Its been done.

 

All that matters is capacitance. The BJ LC-1 measures conductor to shield: 12.2 pF/ft.

 

I assure you my system is more than capable of resolving the most intricate detail you can imagine, such as varying ASP electrical values by 0.1dB is actually audible (!). I also tested 3 types of cables including radio shack lamp cord from amp to speaker, and there is no difference at all which verifies the quote below.

 

This is from sigfried. Its a bit more speaker cable related, but the idea is the same (capacitance vs inductance)

 

"Cables can have audible effects and some manufacturers make sure they will, either through unusual electrical parameters and/or by suggestion. Weaknesses in the design of the output-to-input interface are exploited. In any case, sounding different does not automatically mean that you now have a more accurate transfer from electrical to acoustical output.

Realize that for an active speaker, such as the LX521, each power amplifier essentially sees a voice coil, either of the tweeter, midranges or woofers driver, and that is an easy load to drive. The speaker cable capacitance and inductance have insignificant influence upon the voltages across the voice coils of lower and upper midrange drivers with the large crossover inductor and capacitor in the signal path.

My guideline for speaker cables is to keep their resistance to less than 0.1 ohm for the roundtrip path of the current. This defines the maximum length of a 2-conductor copper cable for different wire gauges."

 

I noticed you use interconnects from Blue Jeans Cable in your system. I tried a set of these in my system and there was a considerable loss of information (though relative to far more expensive cables). My guess is there's a good chance these cables are hindering your ability to hear differences between players. Moving up to better interconnects will likely yield you even bigger gains than switching software players. Just my two cents.

[ted_b]

Monophone: one more try at forum decorum.... Please do not post opinions as empirical facts and then not expect or welcome a debate!! "Cables Making A Difference" is CLEARLY debatable and you already know that. Don't quote as if empirical dogma, then step back and say you don't want to debate. That is not acceptable, and once again calls out your forum participants who believe otherwise (like me, who has written cable reviews) as idiots. It does not engender good follow up (i.e in a "what could go wrong" scenario the answers are multiple). Just state your opinion (like, I don't think cables matter; I have not found cables to matter) or state nothing. To write a diatribe then say..."no debating" is not fair game in any language.

[moophone]

It's not an opinion. It's a well known fact that cables on the amp side of an active system do not matter beyond inductance. I even quoted Siegfried on the matter. I also said "arguably" no difference on the dac side. All perfectly valid.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kennyb123]

It's not an opinion. It's a well known fact that cables on the amp side of an active system do not matter beyond inductance.

 

A system built around such "facts" will most likely result in HQPlayer and JRiver sounding exactly the same. Desired outcome achieved?

[hifial]

GENTLEMEN, PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC OF THREAD. Thank you.

[moophone]

Did you disable your Exasound DAC Galvanic isolation by any chance? (switch in the back). The noise floor tests from exasound indicate there is no trace of any computer noise going into the DAC with it enabled. (see exaSound Audio Design > e22 > e22 Measurements).

 

The sound is being played from a buffer on the DAC, and the cable just fills that buffer. I'm curious how a USB cable would produce a sonic improvement for this application under normal circumstances (e.g. you dont have a pirate radio transmitter or RADAR in your livingroom..)

 

 

Here we go again. A USB cable is a USB cable and can not make any difference.

 

Well in most cases that may be true. BUT NOT IN ALL CASES. I have heard a few that have made an easy to hear and a positive improvement. And so did others I know that felt the same way as you.

 

Also why not just try it your self. Many have a home trial money back. My TotalDAC USB cable is one of them, as are others.

 

My TotalDAC cable changed the minds of two audio buddies.They felt the same as you until they heard it in their own systems. Now they own their own TotalDAC USB Cable.

 

Now I would recommend that you try more then one because you might like one over another.

Besides the TotalDAC; Light Harmonic dual end, Audioquest Diamond, Synergistic Research, J Play and CAD are ones that come to mind. I know at least some of them have a money back home trial.

 

If you try the TotalDAC let it run in your system for a few hours before any critical listening.

 

Oh, and one more thing. I never buy snack oil. I work too hard for my money.

[EuroDriver]

Did you disable your Exasound DAC Galvanic isolation by any chance? (switch in the back). The noise floor tests from exasound indicate there is no trace of any computer noise going into the DAC with it enabled. (see exaSound Audio Design > e22 > e22 Measurements).

 

The sound is being played from a buffer on the DAC, and the cable just fills that buffer. I'm curious how a USB cable would produce a sonic improvement for this application under normal circumstances (e.g. you dont have a pirate radio transmitter or RADAR in your livingroom..)

 

My E20 Mk3 does not have a galvanic insulation switch on the back.

 

I hear very noticeable differences between the OEM USB cable, the TOTALDAC D1, the Tellurium Q Black Diamond and the Corning USB

 

There is no doubt that the galvanic insulation works to reduce RF, but it's not blocking out all USB Bourne noise which is audible

[jtwrace]

I hear very noticeable differences between the OEM USB cable, the TOTALDAC D1, the Tellurium Q Black Diamond and the Corning USB

 

Which do you prefer and why?

[EuroDriver]

My E20 Mk3 does not have a galvanic insulation switch on the back.

 

I hear very noticeable differences between the OEM USB cable, the TOTALDAC D1, the Tellurium Q Black Diamond and the Corning USB

 

There is no doubt that the galvanic insulation works to reduce RF, but it's not blocking out all USB Bourne noise which is audible

 

Which do you prefer and why?

 

Hmmm, very difficult question to answer. In general these different cables "color" the sound in their own way. The TotalDAC D1 has a somewhat sharper color which works well with a laid back speaker. TQBD is smoother than the TDD1 and works well with a brighter speaker. The Corning is very neutral. To make it even more fun we have the Corning plugged into the PC and then a conventional USB cable between Corning and the DAC.

 

A further dimension to this excercise is the choice of SDM modulator in HQ Player as that affects to some extent the USB cable choices which work for the sound that our ears like.

 

I discovered this past weekend that 30 year old ears have very different preferences to mine when it comes to SDM modulators.

 

Needless to say, I am looking forward to trying out the Regen as the last USB stop before the DAC

[jtwrace]

Hmmm, very difficult question to answer. In general these different cables "color" the sound in their own way. The TotalDAC D1 has a somewhat sharper color which works well with a laid back speaker. TQBD is smoother than the TDD1 and works well with a brighter speaker. The Corning is very neutral. To make it even more fun we have the Corning plugged into the PC and then a conventional USB cable between Corning and the DAC.

 

A further dimension to this excercise is the choice of SDM modulator in HQ Player as that affects to some extent the USB cable choices which work for the sound that our ears like.

 

I discovered this past weekend that 30 year old ears have very different preferences to mine when it comes to SDM modulators.

 

Needless to say, I am looking forward to trying out the Regen as the last USB stop before the DAC

 

Thank you. Look forward to your impressions of the Regen compared to the others.

[Kal Rubinson]

My E20 Mk3 does not have a galvanic insulation switch on the back.

Nor does my e28, before or after the latest update.

[moophone]

The mkIII must have disposed of the galvanic isolation switch. Would you consider the stock USB cable neutral compared to the others? My system is built to be as neutral as possible - I'm not looking for any coloration.

 

Hmmm, very difficult question to answer. In general these different cables "color" the sound in their own way. The TotalDAC D1 has a somewhat sharper color which works well with a laid back speaker. TQBD is smoother than the TDD1 and works well with a brighter speaker. The Corning is very neutral. To make it even more fun we have the Corning plugged into the PC and then a conventional USB cable between Corning and the DAC.

 

A further dimension to this excercise is the choice of SDM modulator in HQ Player as that affects to some extent the USB cable choices which work for the sound that our ears like.

 

I discovered this past weekend that 30 year old ears have very different preferences to mine when it comes to SDM modulators.

 

Needless to say, I am looking forward to trying out the Regen as the last USB stop before the DAC

[moophone]

Here's something interesting.

 

As an exercise I just connected up an old 30' mic cable from the old studio since both the DAC and the Orion Analog Signal Processor support balanced. This is something I meant to do early on but forgot about.

 

Surprisingly the 30' balanced XLR cable is massively clearer, dynamic, and has more solid bass than the 4' Blue Jeans interconnect. Even ignoring the 4V vs 2V output difference, its quite apparent.

 

I'm going to pick up a pair of 6' Mogami Golds which is considered the best cable made in pro audio circles to compare to see if its cable, or balanced (or some combination) that yields the difference

[jtwrace]

Here's something interesting.

 

As an exercise I just connected up an old 30' mic cable from the old studio since both the DAC and the ASP support balanced. This is something I meant to do early on but forgot about.

 

Surprisingly the 30' balanced XLR cable is massively clearer, dynamic, and has more solid bass than the 4' Blue Jeans interconnect. Even ignoring the 4V vs 2V output difference, its quite apparent.

 

I'm going to pick up a pair of 6' Mogami Golds which is considered the best cable made in pro audio circles to compare to see if its cable, or balanced (or some combination) that yields the difference

 

Are you comparing this to SE?

[hifial]

From my experience with not only my exaSound but also a friends, in many different systems and many different interconnects, we always found XLR to sound better then SE. But YMMV.

 

 

Here's something interesting.

 

As an exercise I just connected up an old 30' mic cable from the old studio since both the DAC and the Orion Analog Signal Processor support balanced. This is something I meant to do early on but forgot about.

 

Surprisingly the 30' balanced XLR cable is massively clearer, dynamic, and has more solid bass than the 4' Blue Jeans interconnect. Even ignoring the 4V vs 2V output difference, its quite apparent.

 

I'm going to pick up a pair of 6' Mogami Golds which is considered the best cable made in pro audio circles to compare to see if its cable, or balanced (or some combination) that yields the difference

[moophone]

yes. 30' Balanced budget mic cable that cost around $25 and wouldn't be surprised if its noisy due to being twisted and bent to crap in my junk drawer for the last 4 years! These cables don't like this kind of abuse and get noisy after a while.

 

vs.

 

Blue Jeans LC1 unbalanced (SE) 4' cable (well cared for!!)

 

The difference was at least half as significant as going from stock Analog Signal Processor to DB's Subjective Neutrality tuning for the Analog Signal Processor. That won't mean much for non-Orion folks.

 

I just ordered 2 Mogami Gold 3' cables (used in pretty much all recording studios) I'll report back on difference to the budget 30' Balanced cable I'm now using.

 

Are you comparing this to SE?

[hifial]

Sorry but you are mistaken. The e20 MK III, e28 MK I and MK II and the e22 MK I and MK II have no such switch and its Galvanic Isolation is built in. Actually the e20 MK II or MK I had no such switch.

 

Also I (and others I know) have heard the benefits of the TotalDAC USB Cable and some of the other USB cables I mentioned to you in the above post in other systems with other DACs.

 

Such as a Meitner MA-1 DAC, which is one of the best designed Galvanic Isolated USB DACs.

 

 

Did you disable your Exasound DAC Galvanic isolation by any chance? (switch in the back). The noise floor tests from exasound indicate there is no trace of any computer noise going into the DAC with it enabled. (see exaSound Audio Design > e22 > e22 Measurements).

 

The sound is being played from a buffer on the DAC, and the cable just fills that buffer. I'm curious how a USB cable would produce a sonic improvement for this application under normal circumstances (e.g. you dont have a pirate radio transmitter or RADAR in your livingroom..)

[hifial]

Hmmm, very difficult question to answer. In general these different cables "color" the sound in their own way. The TotalDAC D1 has a somewhat sharper color which works well with a laid back speaker. TQBD is smoother than the TDD1 and works well with a brighter speaker. The Corning is very neutral. To make it even more fun we have the Corning plugged into the PC and then a conventional USB cable between Corning and the DAC.

 

A further dimension to this excercise is the choice of SDM modulator in HQ Player as that affects to some extent the USB cable choices which work for the sound that our ears like.

 

I discovered this past weekend that 30 year old ears have very different preferences to mine when it comes to SDM modulators.

 

Needless to say, I am looking forward to trying out the Regen as the last USB stop before the DAC

 

Ed, why do you have a conventional USB cable plugged into the Corning and the DAC? Does it sound better then just the Corning?

 

Also, while I can not speak about the TQBD USB cable I, and a few others, have to disagree about your assessment of the "color" of the TDD1 USB cable. I, we, have heard it in a VERY revealing, resolving and neutral system and none of us found it "sharp" in any way. Though I do hear that the TQBD is exceptional.

 

As you said in another post it all depends on each of our ears, and personal taste.