ECdesigns

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

35 minutes ago, laurentz said:

 

So many certainties without having listened to the device in question...

 

Not really - please notice my use of the conditional in those statements.

 

However, it is true that I have no interest in listening to these types of products any longer (streamers, DACs, but also preamplifiers and amplifiers). The new frontier for me is solely to explore better speakers. The rest is now pointless as I feel using them is just compromising for lesser sound. 🙂 

 

I recently changed my source to go back to a basic NUC model, with ECD's USB to Toslink adapter. 

 

On the NUC I have:

- Ubuntu server 

- 4 TB internal SSD

- MPD for local music

- upmpdcli for using Qobuz from my android phone 

- Spotify connect

 

The sound is identical whether connecting the NUC with wifi or a Lan cable. Linear power supply on the NUC has zero change to the sound. Same files played locally or through Qobuz sound exactly the same (blinded). USB cable changes nothing. Etc... 

 

Now that digital sources are taken care of I will be exploring the use of my analog source. I will be connecting my turntable to the powerDAC-S using the M2tech Joplin phono/ADC, which has a Toslink output. I received it and will be testing it soon. It actually has an spdif input, which could also be convenient to use for the digital side, and be able to switch between analog and digital easily. 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

Interesting to read Chris's review of the Linn DSM Klimax posted on this site's homepage. Interestingly, John Brown had shared a very similar video of Linn's DAC architecture (not exactly the one posted in Chris's review, but another one of theirs) so he must appreciate their work ? The approach does seem very similar: designing equipment that provides the most accurate reproduction (not to be confused with designing equipment that will "measure" well on a limited number of standard criteria). The video illustrates the level of effort and attention to detail required to reach that goal. Its not simply a question of assembling the best components...

 

This approach is not shared by all manufacturers, some of them having entirely given up on the idea that there could be an accurate reproduction, and just trying to design "musical" equipment. Lejonklou, for example (which I mentioned in the previous posts), states that "there is no ideal sound...". There are many others like him. Those are the manufacturers that like to be considered as "artists" or "artisans", not as "engineers". One could reasonably assume that if accuracy is not the primary goal, then it is probably not achieved.

 

Does all this matter ? If we, as consumers, have an opinion about all this (not everyone will, or will agree with this analysis), then we may interested to know how manufacturers approach their work ?

 

 

[jwr159]

Yes, interesting. I watched the Linn video. Chances are I will never hear the Organik DAC.  

 

The video attempts to explain in plain English the extraordinary level of enginnering performed by Linn. Things like custom algorithms implemented by the FPGA for upsmapling/modulation, ulta low jitter clocks, clock distribution, discrete flip flops. etc., I am sure all contribute to a great sounding DAC.

 

However, my reaction to the video is probably not as Linn intended. Too me, all they are doing is taking the engineering of a conventional FPGA based DAC design to the nth degree. Well no surprise, the end result cost a fortune.

 

Too me the EC Design approach is far more creative and innovative, meaning using Toslink to eliminate RF/EMI, serial in parallel out to reduce clock speeds, and using the r2r ladder to directly drive the outputs without a conventional output stage. To me, less is more, the EC Design approach is actually better engineering. 

 

Like I said, I will never hear the Linn. It probably does sound better than the EC Designs. But value wise, no contest. 

 

 

[fas42]

The takeaway message is that the only way to get optimum SQ in a digital replay chain is to take the exercise seriously - just combining the various bits in a less than rigorous way will certainly allow sound to emerge from the speakers; and it will certainly be easy to get great looking measurements. But the result will be less than ideal, subjectively.

 

Attention to detail is a key requirement - the slightest misstep will allow electrical noise to interfere with the analogue areas of the chain; and unfortunately this can completely ruin the listening experience ... in audiophilespeak, "it doesn't sound analogue, it sounds digital!"

 

The industry has a hard time accepting this. Until such thinking becomes mainstream, it will only be the outliers, and the ultra expensive that get it right. Or people who do the necessary tweaking to push their rigs over the line, .

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

It is nice to see that ECD's work does generate interest here and that some people  have an open mind and are curious. But It is time that ECD sell a few powerDAC-S so that more experience can be shared! Hopefully they will start selling them soon. John Brown told me he has assembled a few. Changes in VAT in Europe forced ECD to adapt their web site, delaying things a little more. 

 

Patience... Some of you I think will be blow away when you get a chance to listen to it. 

 

As for me, I have moved to a new flat and was finally able to hook up my speakers again to the powerDAC-S. Stan Getz is blowing his horn as I write. I am playing a CD ("People Time") with an old DVD player as I have not yet installed my PC. Stunning sound! Thanks again, ECD...

 

It has been very disappointing to see that some "serious" audiophiles (or I should say, audiophiles who take themselves too seriously?) have shown a lot of skepticism towards ECD's work, to the point where it has, I believe, tainted their listening. Maybe having a "one box" solution takes the fun out of the hobby for some?  One guy commented that he "does not believe it will work" and also, contradicting in a way that previous statement "its easier to make low power amplifiers". Funny guy. 

 

One person who listened to it went so far as to say that it was "all mids" without bass and high frequencies (he had never listened to my speakers so even if he honestly thought the bass and highs were lacking, I don't see how he could attribute it to the powerDAC!).  I think the videos I posted with the open baffles give a sense of the powerDAC-S's capabilities. I will post some more soon, with better recording equipment. 

 

Thankfully, there have been a few others with good ears and an open mind who have listened to the powerDAC-S (not only in my system) and praised it. Not that I ever had any doubts 🙂

 

Anyway, it is nice to have a space here to exchange with others interested in ECD's products. There is plenty of room for the skeptics to express their point of view elsewhere... 

 

 

[thierrylaurent75]

(sorry, bad manipulation)

[bodiebill]

54 minutes ago, hopkins said:

There is plenty of room for the skeptics to express their point of view elsewhere... 

 

No wonder this will remain an esoteric thread, shunned by many...

 

All cerebral dogmatics aside... For me my two ECD DACs were a breakthrough in musicality and affordability so I am an admirer, not a sceptic. Later I just happened to find one or two DACs that helped me get even closer to the suggestion of accurateness.

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

5 minutes ago, bodiebill said:

 

No wonder this will remain an esoteric thread, shunned by many...

 

All cerebral dogmatics aside... For me my two ECD DACs were a breakthrough in musicality and affordability so I am an admirer, not a sceptic. Later I just happened to find one or two DACs that helped me get even closer to the suggestion of accurateness.

 

I hope you will listen to the powerDAC-S at some point - you will immediately see what I mean. The powerDAC-R is very difficult to appreciate fully without the right headphones (impedance and sensitivity  being a key criteria). 

 

[laurentz]

1 hour ago, hopkins said:

One person who listened to it went so far as to say that it was "all mids" without bass and high frequencies (he had never listened to my speakers so even if he honestly thought the bass and highs were lacking, I don't see how he could attribute it to the powerDAC!). 

 

Ah, maybe I am that person. Maybe not.

It's quite possible anyway, since that was my impression. With the PowerDac as amplifier for your Davis, the result seemed to me bad, with especially a flagrant lack of dynamics, at least for your 3 guests of the evening.
I even suggested you to test this device with speakers with much higher efficiency, at the Maison du Haut Parleur, which seems to me much more adapted.

If I am this person in question, I did not attribute the weaknesses to the PowerDac, but to its association with the Davis Courbet.  Nuance. It turns out that when you used your Lavardin amplification, the result was worse on one aspect in particular, much better on the others, the overall balance being clearly in favor of the Lavardin. Here again, only one person saw things differently, you in this case. Beliefs can indeed influence perceptions...

 

Anyway, if you find speakers that really fit this PowerDac, it's really good for you

[Superdad]

1 hour ago, hopkins said:

Thankfully, there have been a few others with good ears and an open mind who have listened to the powerDAC-S (not only in my system) and praised it. Not that I ever had any doubts 🙂

 

Anyway, it is nice to have a space here to exchange with others interested in ECD's products. There is plenty of room for the skeptics to express their point of view elsewhere... 

 

I for one have expressed interest in EC Designs--since well before powerDAC announcements. However, I think you are getting well out in front them in your promotion of the powerDAC-S since:

a) It is not even available for sale yet;

b) It is nearly $3,700 with no installed base to report about it;

c) Its utility is mostly limited to just those who have highly efficient loudspeakers (or to wealthy headphone listeners I guess).

 

As I have posted before, I would purchase the powerDAC-R without hesitation except for its very low 1.4V rms output and nine 3dB level steps covering just a 27dB range. Also, I would need to find a decent USB>TOSLINK converter capable of higher than the 96KHz sample rate limit of the one EC Designs offers.

In addition, I have a lot of DSD albums so would need to find a way to play those properly. I can overlook all but the 1.4V max output level.

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

As I have said many times, I am looking forward to hearing what others have to say. Hopefully they will be on sale soon, and my excitement can be shared! 

 

My comments were not addressed to anyone who has already contributed to this thread, and there have been many open discussions here on ECD's products, their limitations, how to best use them, etc... 

 

More videos to come soon, for what it's worth.

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

20 minutes ago, Superdad said:

However, I think you are getting well out in front them in your promotion of the powerDAC-S

 

With all due respect, Uptone annonces products way before they become available and they are discussed in this very forum before anyone gets a chance to listen to them.

 

I don't see how sharing my experience of their first unit is so problematic.... 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

Concerning the adequacy between the amplifier and different speakers, I mentioned from the start that 90db speakers could be problematic. I do believe that the powerDAC-S is fine for such speakers provided you are OK listening at low volume, which is what I do. I also pointed out that the powerDAC-S provides much more low level resolution, therefore making low level listening more relevant. 

 

Anyway, none of this has anything to do with bass and high frequencies. 

 

When using 90 db speakers, and switching to another more powerful amplifier, such as the Lavardin, you do get obviously more volume, but is it really a good thing to have "more" of a bad thing? The sound is highly distorted, and instruments lose their natural timber. With a less accurate reproduction you also lose in instrument placement. 

 

ECD explained that distortion can give a false sense of "transparency" and I really think they are correct. Perhaps some "audiophiles" are so used to that distorted sound that they miss it when they don't hear it. 

[fas42]

Indeed, many audiophiles are "used to that distorted sound" - it's akin to watching a stage play where strong lighting is used, which is changed constantly in time with the action, to emphasize the dramatics. Fine as an adjunct to the aim of making the performance more entertaining; but no-one is going to mistake such effects as matching how real life takes place.

 

Loss of timbre, loss of instrument placement is what you get with less competent replay; and also means that you now have a whole heap of, er, "bad recordings", . But if an audio enthusiast has spent their whole time hearing nothing but this, then that's exactly what they will expect. From every system.

 

The real world is mids - if you spend some time just being aware of natural sounds, that's what you find is the case. Unless you go into some, special, extreme situation - so, accurate playback should deliver the same sort of experiences.

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

2 hours ago, bodiebill said:

No wonder this will remain an esoteric thread, shunned by many...

 

You have always expressed your opinion freely here, and your contributions have been mostly negative! What are you complaining about exactly? 

 

Shunned by who exactly?  Those who have sold their products? 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

2 hours ago, hopkins said:

You have always expressed your opinion freely here, and your contributions have been mostly negative!

 

To clarify, I meant to say that your opinion has been negative  ( you did end up selling it) - not your contributions. I perfectly understand that you could see negative points, that is not the issue and I have never made any attempt to "censor" you or discredit you. I hope not... 

 

I was disappointed to see that some people hold on to ideas and they cannot get past them. I believe it taints their hearing. Illustration got too personal. At least now things are clear with those concerned... 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

4 hours ago, Superdad said:

Its utility is mostly limited to just those who have highly efficient loudspeakers

 

There is a considerable margin between 90db and 102 db (the open baffle designed by ECD).  I mentioned another recent listening session at a friend's who has 92db (perhaps  93) speakers and there was plenty of dynamics and power reserve (power level never went past 8 out of 12 from what I remember). More feedback is needed, but the idea that the powerDAC-S only plays well with highly efficient speakers is wrong. 

 

Maybe I should open another thread on the powerDAC-S and put a big warning in red: for speakers above 92db (or low level listening) and everyone will be happy? 

 

As for cost, since you mention the price...  4000 € for a one box solution that does not require a high end source seems like a relative bargain to me. 

 

There are numerous threads on AudiophileStyle on DACs, in which participants rave about the product's performance. You can go over to the Tambaqui thread and read Barrow's comment about that DAC being a "paradigm shift" and such a bargain at 12000 euros (over the 30000 euro Linn DAC). 

 

I think my enthusiasm can be tolerated and if I lose my cool and tell a few detractors to piss off, then it can probably be simply ignored and we can move on. 

 

Thanks...

[One and a half]

oh. The EC designs DACs don't play DSD native, and have a Toslink input, that's it PCM only? 120 pages is discussion meltdown on this topic. 

EC designs frequently change their model line up, that does not instill confidence in long term. EUR3000+ is an investment that should not be obsolete in 6 months. Frequent model changes like Lampiztor creates chaos, this is not food with a use by date.

 

@Superdad 1.4V is OK with a moderately high gain preamp, no? In the Hovland days, this level would have been the norm? That's 0.707V rms, something.

[opus101]

44 minutes ago, One and a half said:

 

@Superdad 1.4V is OK with a moderately high gain preamp, no? In the Hovland days, this level would have been the norm? That's 0.707V rms, something.

 

He actually said 1.4V rms which is only 3dB down on the standard 2V rms of CD players and DACs.

[yogibear]

I never had any real issues with 1.4v RMS output of Power DAC R. When using optical output of my CDP the PDR remote came handy and I could not go past half volume and with USB input to play lossless from my laptop, I use 7-8-9 volume on the PDR. No preamplifier in both the cases. 
 

If anyone buys the PDS, why not utilize the PDS fully and make 100dB plus speakers yourself ?

 

I would suggest the Betsy drivers, 4 each side, off-centered, Open  Baffle, which should be theoretically 105dB with great HF and low end extension. I guess half volume of PDS will play very loud.
 

 https://wildburroaudio.com/speakers/
 

I have no personal interest in promoting above FR drivers but am just suggesting them as a nice option, just $100 a pair and very well reviewed. 
 

I am currently building and testing a high dB setup driven by PDR and tube amp and will post my impressions and details here soon. 
 

The idea is to compare PDR with PDS (hopefully) on same set of speakers. I am targeting 107dB sensitivity. 

[Superdad]

4 hours ago, hopkins said:

I mentioned another recent listening session at a friend's who has 92db (perhaps  93) speakers and there was plenty of dynamics and power reserve (power level never went past 8 out of 12 from what I remember). More feedback is needed, but the idea that the powerDAC-S only plays well with highly efficient speakers is wrong. 

You can spin it any way you wish, but at the end of the day the powerDAC-S has just 2.5 watts to drive speakers. I’ve been an audiophile since my teens—45 years ago—and played with plenty of low flea-powered amps and efficient speakers. My speakers now are about 91dB/W at 1m—and I can assure you that 2.5W is not enough to get the monkey going with them.

I like what ECD is trying to do, but they are not going to find a big audience for the -S model.

I still might give the -R a spin.  But no matter how sweet the DAC is, 3dB level steps are really the dark ages for volume control.

[laurentz]

8 hours ago, hopkins said:

 

When using 90 db speakers, and switching to another more powerful amplifier, such as the Lavardin, you do get obviously more volume, but is it really a good thing to have "more" of a bad thing? The sound is highly distorted, and instruments lose their natural timber. With a less accurate reproduction you also lose in instrument placement. 

 

ECD explained that distortion can give a false sense of "transparency" and I really think they are correct. Perhaps some "audiophiles" are so used to that distorted sound that they miss it when they don't hear it. 

 

Dynamics is the ability to reproduce a realistic contrast in the volume of the different information. 
You turn things around. An insufficient dynamic does not allow to have a credible restitution. With the Davis and Powerdac-S, there was not a small lack of dynamics, but a huge deficit.
This is obvious, but not to you... 
Those who don't hear like you are either idiots, "blinded" by their prejudices, or deaf people, whose hearing is distorted by bad systems...

Ok... but isn't this a form of fanaticism?

 

Just for my information, with which 92/93db speakers did the Powerdac work so well?

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

1 hour ago, Superdad said:

You can spin it any way you wish, but at the end of the day the powerDAC-S has just 2.5 watts to drive speakers. I’ve been an audiophile since my teens—45 years ago—and played with plenty of low flea-powered amps and efficient speakers. My speakers now are about 91dB/W at 1m—and I can assure you that 2.5W is not enough to get the monkey going with them.

I like what ECD is trying to do, but they are not going to find a big audience for the -S model.

I still might give the -R a spin.  But no matter how sweet the DAC is, 3dB level steps are really the dark ages for volume control.

 

I am not trying to convince you! I agree that 90 db will be challenging unless you do nearfield listening. But I'll repeat myself, there are many possibilities before getting to 100db territory. 

 

I do not think ECD is trying to find a "large audience". It is clearly not for everyone. However, given the opportunity to listen to it, even with less than ideal speakers, I believe most people (other than those who go in with the idea that it "will not work" and see it as a threat to their "audiophile beliefs") will understand what possibilities it provides and what level of fidelity can be achieved.

 

When you think of it, what ECD has done is pretty amazing: close to perfect source immunity and an audio signal that goes through only two components (I think) before reaching the speaker? We are very, very, far from conventional audio components here. 

 

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

To elaborate on my last comment, I personally believe they should have come out with the S model first and then offered different lower  power options for headphone users. 

 

The choice of speakers (or headphones) is key and that is what I hope to explore. Those monster open baffles are awesome, they have no components, but I am sure there are plenty of other good alternatives. Let the fun begin... 

[bodiebill]

9 hours ago, hopkins said:

You have always expressed your opinion freely here, and your contributions have been mostly negative! What are you complaining about exactly? 

 

I was merely reacting to your sentence

There is plenty of room for the skeptics to express their point of view elsewhere...

which struck me as not being very hospitable.

 

9 hours ago, hopkins said:

Shunned by who exactly?  Those who have sold their products? 

 

I meant shunned by those who do not feel welcome here as the thread has become somewhat sect-like and dogmatic, and sometimes even close to a one man show. Neither does it help that only a few people  have actual experience with the products, so maybe they read things, but do not post.

 

And again, I do admire the ECD approach and never felt negative about any of their products (and I had quite a few!). I just ended up finding some things I liked even better. But I guess in your book that is negative.