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

[Blizzard]

Cool. For those too scared to DIY anything involving high-voltage (like me), the Teddy Pardo power supply fits nicely under the e20/e22, except the color doesn't match.

 

Looks the the Teddy supply uses the same Hammond case that both Exasound and I used. Only they used the black one with plastic end panels. If you want to make it matching just order the clear anodized version and swap out innards. Will take 2 minutes max if you can run a screwdriver and remove 8 screws.

 

Here's a link to the aluminum end panel version. It comes with thin aluminum end panels with black plastic bezels. There's also a cheaper plastic end panel version along with a thicker black painted cast aluminum end panel version.

 

http://ca.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Hammond-Manufacturing/1455T1601/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMsgaWLkU6GBSH7ZdBOPMmCx

[trappy]

Almost every review I read of the e22 gushes about how great the DSD is. Am I the only one who prefers it doing redbook? Admittedly DSD has never really sat well with me, but still, even with that the exa is a phenomenal PCM DAC. Do people maybe think it wouldn't be worth the price as a good PCM DAC? I think it is...

[Blizzard]

Almost every review I read of the e22 gushes about how great the DSD is. Am I the only one who prefers it doing redbook? Admittedly DSD has never really sat well with me, but still, even with that the exa is a phenomenal PCM DAC. Do people maybe think it wouldn't be worth the price as a good PCM DAC? I think it is...

 

 

Are the DSD files you tested direct from Analog to DSD? You really need to watch out for DSD albums that are sourced from PCM. Many of the SACD releases were sourced from PCM and upsampled to DSD using inferior early gen A/D converters.

 

Why did they commit such a crime? Answer is because they wanted to pump out a pile of SACD titles quickly in the early days of SACD to get them to market. It was much less work to just use the PCM sources.

 

Conversion from PCM to DSD is a lossy process. If the file was ever PCM it should stay PCM. DSD shines when sourced directly from analog master tapes, or from DXD. If your comparing PCM sourced DSD to redbook, yes I agree that redbook can sound better.

 

 

 

Another thing you need to make sure of is that your media player is setup to play the DSD natively.

[trappy]

Are the DSD files you tested direct from Analog to DSD? You really need to watch out for DSD albums that are sourced from PCM. Many of the SACD releases were sourced from PCM and upsampled to DSD using early gen A/D converters. Conversion from PCM to DSD is a lossy process. If the file was ever PCM it should stay PCM. DSD shines when sourced directly from analog master tapes, or from DXD. If your comparing PCM sourced DSD to redbook, yes I agree that redbook can sound better.

 

 

 

Another thing you need to make sure of is that your media player is setup to play the DSD natively.

 

I've checked all of that stuff, and I will continue to experiment. There are some aspects of DSD that can be amazing to me, especially the sense of ambient space. But on the whole I prefer PCM, especially on vocals. But that's really just a matter of taste in the end. The point of my rant, triggered by something Geoffrey Armstrong said in another thread, is that the e22 seems to be being reviewed as a machine whose specialty is DSD, but I find that odd considering it's every bit as good, if not better on PCM, and considering 90% of what people are going to be playing through it is PCM. I just wondered if other people thought it was a bit of an also-ran on redbook; which is not my experience at all.

 

As a side note, I do find the reviewing of DACs in general to be pretty weird, especially when they're reviewed by people who "new to this whole computer audio thing." It's not as bad as it was a couple of years ago but still...

[Jud]

Admittedly DSD has never really sat well with me

 

What you're really saying is you prefer the exa's internal conversion (first to higher res PCM, then to a DSD-like sigma-delta modulated format) to some/most/all of the DSD files you've played through the exa. So DSD, or at least a DSD-like format, does sit well with you as long as it's the exa doing it.

[trappy]

What you're really saying is you prefer the exa's internal conversion (first to higher res PCM, then to a DSD-like sigma-delta modulated format) to some/most/all of the DSD files you've played through the exa. So DSD, or at least a DSD-like format, does sit well with you as long as it's the exa doing it.

 

You make it sound so dirty when you put it that way ;-)

[trappy]

What you're really saying is you prefer the exa's internal conversion (first to higher res PCM, then to a DSD-like sigma-delta modulated format) to some/most/all of the DSD files you've played through the exa. So DSD, or at least a DSD-like format, does sit well with you as long as it's the exa doing it.

 

In all seriousness, you make a very good point, and one I'm nowhere near as well-versed on as you are. Is this a common strategy of DAC-makers, or is the exa unusual in this regard?

[Blizzard]

I've checked all of that stuff, and I will continue to experiment. There are some aspects of DSD that can be amazing to me, especially the sense of ambient space. But on the whole I prefer PCM, especially on vocals. But that's really just a matter of taste in the end. The point of my rant, triggered by something Geoffrey Armstrong said in another thread, is that the e22 seems to be being reviewed as a machine whose specialty is DSD, but I find that odd considering it's every bit as good, if not better on PCM, and considering 90% of what people are going to be playing through it is PCM. I just wondered if other people thought it was a bit of an also-ran on redbook; which is not my experience at all.

 

As a side note, I do find the reviewing of DACs in general to be pretty weird, especially when they're reviewed by people who "new to this whole computer audio thing." It's not as bad as it was a couple of years ago but still...

 

 

 

In order for a fair comparison of PCM vs DSD, you must have 2 files sourced from the same master tape, and converted directly to both PCM and DSD. Even then the choice of A/D converters will affect the sound.

 

Which tracks meeting the above criteria have you compared?

[trappy]

In order for a fair comparison of PCM vs DSD, you must have 2 files sourced from the same master tape, and converted directly to both PCM and DSD. Even then the choice of A/D converters will affect the sound.

 

Which tracks meeting the above criteria have you compared?

 

To be fair, not that many, and I'd have to go and find some notes to tell you which. My comparisons have been done more with material upsampled to DSD 128/256. In almost every case I have liked some elements of the DSD (not always the same ones) but have preferred the overall feel of PCM. As you and Jud have both pointed out, however, that doesn't really tell me (or you) that much about whether I prefer PCM or DSD. So my beef, I guess, is that people are reviewing it based on DSD and upsampled (to DSD) operation rather than "straight," whatever the hell straight means in this case. No wonder I'm confused... With that in mind, I would be very interested in hearing a NOS DAC sometime. Until someone tells me there's no such thing, of course

[Jud]

You make it sound so dirty when you put it that way ;-)

 

Hah! You mean I should start charging for my services?

[Jud]

In all seriousness, you make a very good point, and one I'm nowhere near as well-versed on as you are. Is this a common strategy of DAC-makers, or is the exa unusual in this regard?

 

It is what nearly all modern DACs do except for a tiny handful. Unless you know absolutely for certain that you have an R2R and/or NOS DAC, it is nearly certain your DAC is doing this internally.

[Blizzard]

To be fair, not that many, and I'd have to go and find some notes to tell you which. My comparisons have been done more with material upsampled to DSD 128/256. In almost every case I have liked some elements of the DSD (not always the same ones) but have preferred the overall feel of PCM. As you and Jud have both pointed out, however, that doesn't really tell me (or you) that much about whether I prefer PCM or DSD. So my beef, I guess, is that people are reviewing it based on DSD and upsampled (to DSD) operation rather than "straight," whatever the hell straight means in this case. No wonder I'm confused... With that in mind, I would be very interested in hearing a NOS DAC sometime. Until someone tells me there's no such thing, of course

 

 

 

 

Upsampling PCM to DSD is a lossy process. If your doing it on the fly with Jriver it's even worse. If you want to truly evaluate DSD you must use original material sourced direct from master tapes, converted from DXD or recorded direct to DSD.

 

When reviewers are raving about the E22's DSD capabilities, they are using the tracks made using the above mentioned techniques.

 

If you really want to compare and see the difference I know the perfect album. If you like the music of course.

 

Album is Cat Stevens "Tea for the Tillerman"

 

Reason I chose this album is because there's both a PCM and DSD version sourced from the original analog master tapes. and both using the latest state of the art A/D converters

 

1st one is the 24/192 PCM version on HD tracks. It was converted to PCM digital using the latest state of the art A/D converter from Msb Technologies.

 

Tea for the Tillerman | HDtracks - The World's Greatest-Sounding Music Downloads

 

2nd is one was just released on Acoustic sounds. It's a double DSD version using from what I hear the latest high end Sony A/D converters.

 

Cat Stevens-Tea For The Tillerman-DSD Double Rate 56MHz128fs Download|Acoustic Sounds

 

 

Download both and compare. This will be a true PCM vs DSD showdown on the E22.

[bmoura]

DSD shines when sourced directly from analog master tapes, or from DXD.

 

Or from DSD recordings....

[Blizzard]

Or from DSD recordings....

 

 

 

Yes your right. I forgot to include direct to DSD recordings in this post. Although they are quite rare. Everything has to be setup flawlessly, because there's no way to mix tracks or apply filters once in DSD. There's also no way to compare DSD to PCM versions fairly using these recordings. Because if converted to PCM, there will be losses.

[ted_b]

I forgot to include direct to DSD recordings in this post. Although they are quite rare.

 

NativeDSD has literally hundreds of them.

 

An the other subject, I have found that the e12 sounds like it's sweetspot is DSD256 to my ears, and that HQplayer upsampling everything (that includes PCM) using the right modulators and filters, to DSD256 is the best I can make that DAC sound. A really musical DSD engine for under $2k. Yes, it plays PCM fine too, but DSD256 seems to be a panacea.

[trappy]

Blizzard, thanks for your advice. I'll definitely check those versions out.

[bmoura]

Yes your right. I forgot to include direct to DSD recordings in this post. Although they are quite rare.

 

Some of the labels that record regularly in DSD, like Channel Classics and Pentatone, would disagree with you there. Each has well over 100 original recordings in Stereo and Multichannel DSD.

[ted_b]

Another PCM vs DSD comparison that is similar to the Cat Stevens one is the Norah Jones boxset (especially 2nd and 3rd album) done a couple years ago. Again, they are not perfect in that they are completely different masterings (like Tillerman) but close enough. The 24/192's were done by Greg Calibi and the DSD transfers by Kevin Gray.

 

If you want the ultimate comparison, go get the Massimo Gon Liszt piano recording. A two disc SACD/DVD-A that was recorded simultaneously. However, it's purely a solo piano.

[Jud]

Upsampling PCM to DSD is a lossy process. If your doing it on the fly...it's even worse.

* * *

This will be a true PCM vs DSD showdown on the E22.

 

Well, no. See my comments above regarding what goes on internally in the exa (and every other sigma-delta DAC). It will be a showdown between sigma-delta modulation in whatever ADC was used with Acoustic Sounds' Tea for the Tillerman version, and the signal chain for the HDTracks version, which means conversion from sigma-delta modulated format to PCM in whatever ADC was used, then internal on-the-fly conversion in the exa from PCM to sigma-delta modulated format.

 

Unless you have two DACs in your home, one R2R/NOS and one sigma-delta, you are *never* comparing PCM to DSD.

[ted_b]

 

Unless you have two DACs in your home, one R2R/NOS and one sigma-delta, you are *never* comparing PCM to DSD.

 

True, but you are at least comparing how your exaSound handles a 24/192 source vs DSD64 one. It IS worthwhile.

[Blizzard]

Some of the labels that record regularly in DSD, like Channel Classics and Pentatone, would disagree with you there. Each has well over 100 original recordings in Stereo and Multichannel DSD.

 

What I meant was rare compared to DSD recordings sourced from either PCM or Analog. Which labels on Native DSD record direct to DSD?

[kumakuma]

What I meant was rare compared to DSD recordings sourced from either PCM or Analog. Which labels on Native DSD record direct to DSD?

 

All of them?

 

https://www.nativedsd.com/information/about-dsd

[Blizzard]

Well, no. See my comments above regarding what goes on internally in the exa (and every other sigma-delta DAC). It will be a showdown between sigma-delta modulation in whatever ADC was used with Acoustic Sounds' Tea for the Tillerman version, and the signal chain for the HDTracks version, which means conversion from sigma-delta modulated format to PCM in whatever ADC was used, then internal on-the-fly conversion in the exa from PCM to sigma-delta modulated format.

 

Unless you have two DACs in your home, one R2R/NOS and one sigma-delta, you are *never* comparing PCM to DSD.

 

 

Regardless of what goes on in the DAC chip, applying extra steps of lossy processing between the original source and the DAC chip, will only cause extra losses. Sure it may color the sound in a way that some may find enjoyable to listen to, but it won't make the data any truer to the original source.

[Blizzard]

All of them?

 

https://www.nativedsd.com/information/about-dsd

 

 

No many are sourced from analog tape

[Fitzcaraldo215]

A few months ago, a music reviewer friend brought over a set of 5-minute samples which were purported to be a remastering from analog done 4 ways:

 

1x DSD

2x DSD

192K PCM

DXD= 352k PCM

 

The analog master tape was Cantate Domino from the Proprius catalog, a justifiably very famous analog recording from somewhere in the 70's or 80's.

 

We listened to each remastering carefully several times through my E28 XLR/femto via USB. JRiver was the player, Martin Logan Prodigies were the speakers via a Spectron Musician III Class D amp.

 

The most striking thing was how almost totally indistinguishable they were from one another. We felt there might have been a slight, and I mean very slight, touch of greater smoothness and transparency from the 2x DSD. But, it took very careful listening to discern that. Neither of us was confident that our slight preference would stand up to an unsighted blind or double blind test.

 

Later, I played the 1x DSD in my normal playback mode, which is on the fly conversion to 88k PCM, bass management xovers to my sub at 60 Hz and Dirac Live room correction. That was to us the clear winner sonically, easily exceeding and distinguishing itself positively from the 4 unprocessed originals. Some of the reasons for that are, I am sure, obvious.

 

I am sure that discussion, caveats or disagreement with this could rage on for pages. But, those are the honest anecdotal reactions from our listening that night.

 

I do not think the matter is closed for all time based on this. But, for now, it seems to confirm that my normal listening mode and signal processing may be optimal to my ears in my system for now vs. purer or higher rez source material.