ECdesigns

[M_audio]

On 9/6/2016 at 1:17 PM, mordante said:

I do not think EC Design will go anywhere.

 

Their product line changes to often and it seems they just abandon pervious designs.

According to EC Design, they are working on Mosaic II in order to minimise external dependencies in the manufacturing process.
 

They don't abandon their previous design, but build on the same NOS design and enhance it.

[M_audio]

On 6/8/2016 at 4:02 PM, juanitox said:

i will compare mine soon with the T+A 8 DSD , the Mosaic sounds very refined and natural and perhaps will be more analog than the T+A in PCM ( need to be confirmed) . but of what i have heard with DSD512 or even DSD 128 it does not play in this league .

the MOSAIC also needs my MUTEC MC3usb toslink output to give it"s best .

 

I just bought T16 in order to relax with this DAC. I will also go for Lifatec cable once i get it, but using XTOS.
I have enough of these DS DACs since i've heard Wadia 581 in my system.

[M_audio]

Mosaic UV is their latest and is not available any more. Right now they are working on Mosaic II.

[M_audio]

I just got the Mosaic T16 and i just can say I am all set now for the next 10 years.
It has a great design and WAF, external LPSU which i regard as advantage compared to Mosaic UV. 

Got Beady Belle playing right now - Cricklewood Broadway 24bit, and this is IT!

I really can be compared to my vinyl system i sold. And I am not sorry.

[M_audio]

One Hi-Rez picture of the NOS, optical only amazing DAC.

Had enough of the Delta-Sigma ringing terror on my ears.

 

Delta-Sigma is totally wrong direction, and it appeared only because it was cheaper to produce.
 

The guys at EC Designs made a marvellous product, too bad it is not available any more.

[M_audio]

All lights on
Full NOS ahead
192 kHz

 

[M_audio]

Just listening for the first time to this excellent electro ambient Pan American release from 1998 on Kranky. I remember it through CD on Unico CD Primo with tube gain-stage - precise, cold and sterile.

RIpped and played tru fantastic EC NOS DAC it really sounds more like vinyl, organic and natural. Lotsa details. 

[M_audio]

And there it is! Their new multibit DAC, battery driven for 363€! I guess they have learnt a lot from their previous products so this one can only be great.

I am absolutely pleased with their 1st Mosaic DAC and have no reasons to change, but if i would look for a multibit DAC this would be my 1st choice.

[M_audio]

52 minutes ago, Norton said:

 

Thanks, look interesting.  I’ve twice been interested in buying from them in the past but each time they’d sold out and moved on to a fresh design, which is not that reassuring.

 

Might give it a go this time (DAC+player) as it’s fairly cheap proposition, good to see that there are some constants between designs (Toslink etc).  Can’t work out what makes the 24 bit versions of the DAC  and player so much more expensive though (look to be the same apart from bigger batteries) . Would be good to know a bit more about the particular MB implementation and a pity that the player uses  USB rather than SD card.

 

 

 

The 24-multibit implementation is probably much more work-intensive for them than 16bit, since they don't work with chips off-the-shelf.

I can assure you that 16-bit are more than enough - in case of EC Designs.

Through extensive talks with a friend, who does recording and producing of classical and jazz music (and teaches at music academy), i came to conclusion that he is right - mostly one listens to less than 16-bit of dynamic headroom, so 16 bit are more than enough, while the 24-bits are needed in the process of creating the CD - for editing, mixing and cutting.
My EC Designs Mosaic converts the 24-bit FLACs  into 17bit. Of course marketing needs some buzz-words so 24 as a number sounds better than 16
LP's have even less resolution than 16-bit, yet my previous analogue system was amazing..on the level of 5k CD-Players. 
So basically it is all about implementation.

Another thing that i just recently did following the recommendations of my music-friend - upsample 44 & 48 kHz in Audirvana to 96kHz with Izotope SRC & specific settings, and now, it sounds again better (Mosaic was known for its bit relaxed approach - now there is more upbeat). The premise behind is that NOS DAC sounds better at 96kHz since then the not-filtered garbage moves into non-audible area.

This little new MOS16 is really a no-brainer for this amount of money.

[M_audio]

6 hours ago, n-a said:

Hi all,

 

I can confirm that the EcDesigns Mos16 is exceptionally natural sounding dac. However it needs good source and amplification. I tried it first with basic sources and it was not that good. Cd transport + Ifi spdif purifier did the trick. Now I think it is the best dac that I have had and maybe even better than the Theta Gen V-a that I had. Not so dynamic sounding but very natural. I like it it very much. Doesn`t get me stressed when listening to music  It is interesting that there is so many "ways" to build good sounding dac, one weights a "ton" and another is light as feather but both sounds good.

This is similar to Mosaic T16. I use W4S RUR for regenerating the signal before it goes into EC Designs own TOSLINK converter. I am even thinking about Intona before the RUR to decouple computer from the RUR. I guess what you need is something like Mutec to convert USB into a good optical signal. 

[M_audio]

21 hours ago, hopkins said:

@Norton

Could you try the UPL with the Toslink input of your Resonessence DAC ? I am curious to know whether the "magic" comes from the UPL, or the UPL+MOS combination. Thanks

The magic is obviously the DAC. I hear it everyday in the form of (very similar) Mosaic T.
The UPL is "just" the sugar on the top.

The Sabre-Resonessence is completely different design and vibe. 

[M_audio]

14 minutes ago, Norton said:

I use a QED I found in my spare cables box, seems fine, can’t imagine cable will make much difference, not least as EC designs recommend just the basic plastic type rather than pricier glass. Note if using MOS with UTOS  you will need a specific mini Toslink to std Toslink cable, EC designs recommend avoiding adapters.  I bought another QED Performance to match.

EC Designs say the optical they ship is enough to hear sonic advantages of their NOS DACs, but if you ask them for something better, they actually recommend Lifatec.
I have Lifatec and it's much better than standard plastic cable. Certain grayness i can hear with plastic is gone with Lifatec, and sound is more natural. It all depends on the resolution of your system and your hearing sense.

[M_audio]

Well that is good to hear about MBL-Monoblocks. 
ST-10 is known for its livelieness but also it is known that it lacks low level detail. ST-10M should be better tin this aspect but cost the double.

In my case MBL monoblocks would probably be too weak.

[M_audio]

On 6/5/2020 at 7:32 PM, Norton said:

In the house...

 

First impressions: DAC sounds very very good indeed - substantial  step up on MOS16.  New UPL seems quite complex to use in terms of software and having files correctly tagged etc.  I’ve only been able to play using my old untagged UPL16 sticks so far.  Unit cheeks look like real wood to me.

So the 96ETL accepts a USB-stick as a source in the front, but can be used also as input to computer USB output also (normal USB B input)?
Looks great!

[M_audio]

5 hours ago, hopkins said:

 

I have only had the chance to listen to the "PC connected version" (the U192ETL) in a very basic setup, and maybe it will improve with a slightly more optimized PC as a source. Don't know yet.

 

I am not going to invest in linear power supplies, ethernet regenerators, and all that stuff,  because I don't want all that in my living room, and I don't believe it will reach the quality of the UPL96ETL (USB key device) anyway. But I will try in someone else's system.  I think they released the U192ETL so you can also have the convenience of streaming, in addition to the "uncompromised" quality of USB key playback. 

 

Put something like W4S RUR (with external LPSU) before U192ETL and you might be impressed.
PC/MAC Output is bad.

[M_audio]

HiFi-Advice stated their DACs sounded better than much more expensive DAC like Jeff Rowland Aeris. 
That's the reason why i got interested and bought their first products, and still have it.

[M_audio]

Just now, hopkins said:

 

Yes actually, you are right, and that is also what got me interested initially.

but i think it was maybe the only one

[M_audio]

3 minutes ago, Tzougie said:

 I played with the MOS24 and the UPL16 for two years now, it's a great combination, exchanged the UPL16 for the UPL96 in combination with my MOS24, and it's a huge step foreward, also exchanged my. XTOS USB to Toslink converter for a U192ETL with my MOS24 and it's also a big step foreward for my streaming, source for streaming is a NUC with Audiolinux.

The UPL96 MOS24 is still superior.

I use XTOS to feed Mosaic T16 DAC, and was thinking if the U192ETL might be better?
How much better is it?

Although XTOS is Mini-USB in -> Mini-TOSLink out, meaning i would have to change 2 cables, namely USB and MiniTOSLink too. 

[M_audio]

On 6/16/2020 at 7:08 PM, Tzougie said:

I used the XTOS with a seperate Tentlabs power supply and a lifatec glassfiber cable, exchanged it for the U192ETL with ETL cable, and it sounded much much better in a way, that I can enjoy streaming again, you have to change only one cable, the USB A-B cable, the ETL cable comes with the U192 ETL.

 

yeah, but i can't use the ETL cable with Mosaic T16 DAC, can i? 

I tweaked my system last year around Mosaic T16 and finally got great sound. So i don't want to change it. I always try to get a maximum out of a component if the component sounds promising, which Mosaic did and it payed off in the end. 

[M_audio]

4 hours ago, Tzougie said:

The Mosaic T16 has a toslink intput ?

The ETL cable is backwards compatible,  so you can use it on any DAC with a toslink input.

Mini TOSLink. so yeah i would need an TOSLink to MiniTOSLink adapter (which degrades the signal). could be an experiment.

[M_audio]

Oh so it seems like U192 is good! Might give it a try once.
Although in case of streaming I prefer to stream my own stuff. Once i compared HiRez from Quobuz to local files and local always sounded better. 

And with Mosaic DAC i found out by chance that it even makes a difference if it is a Flac or Wav - Wav file simply sound better..
Highs are more wet, mids are more palpable..bass bit deeper. Then tried to convert flacs to wav format, but didn't notice the difference with converted wavs. Only when ripped from CD directly to wav instead to flac, the wav's sound better - in my system.

[M_audio]

8 minutes ago, Huubster said:

 

Yes, try it, it's that good. I haven't compared using my dedicated usb streamer to a computer yet, but I will do that on short notice, I'm curious whether it does make a difference.

 

 

Streamer should sound better, streamers (mostly) have better output than computers. I let the output of my MacBook into a Reclocker which is powered by external LPSU, so in the end thisis  the power that also goes into the ECD XTOS. The DAC gets its power from another ECD LPSU. 
MacBook output alone sounds a bit synthetic..
 

Quote

I have tried the same using my Innuos server. WAV sounds definitely better in my system as well. The theory I heard about this is that using WAV means the processor doesn't have to decompress real-time, causing less noise in playback. I found this theory because I was looking online for an explanation why in my system WAV from a decompressed FLAC sounded better then the FLAC itself. Especcially noticble in my 24/192 flacs decompressed to WAV, far more 3d effect.

Oh good to hear that, so i'm not hearing ghosts. Yes this is also my theory about the additional processing and uncompressing, but i made it myself (being an IT person i know a bit about real-time algorithms and what goes on there).
Maybe i could try to convert some hi-rez FLACs - when i get some space on the MacBook.
Now i have to ripp all the CDs to wav, which were previously ripped to FLAC. 

[M_audio]

2 hours ago, jwr159 said:

I could use some advice. I would like to figure out a way to integrate the U192ETL/DA96ETF into my AV system. 

 

My system currently is Apple TV --> HDMI --> Surround Receiver --> TV --> audio return --> Speakers. I am really disappointed with the sound quality with music. 

 

I'd like to go to just a two channel system for TV while using the U192ETL/DA96ETF for audio. But I am not sure how to best separate the video to the TV and the audio into a U192ETL.

 

The only solution can come up with is to replace the Apple TV with a Mac Mini. which I believe allows me to separately control the video and audio outputs. So the plan would be:

1. an HDMI output to the TV for video and 

2. USB output to the U192ETL/DA96ETF for audio. 

 

Are there any other alternatives?     

 

Try looking for HDMI Audio De-embedder or HDMI Audio extractor. Most have however an Optical out, for that case you would need an Optical to USB-Converter..sound would still be better than it is now, but for sure not as good as it could, because of multiple conversions of the signal.
What about your Surround Receiver, does it have Optical out for Audio and does it work? For that you would still need Optical to USB, but usually HiFi converters do the opposite - USB to Toslink.

It would be better with MacMini & USB audio out into U192ETL (and even better with a Recklocker between it.)
USB cables make also a big difference in sound (depending on the rest of the chain)

[M_audio]

7 minutes ago, jwr159 said:

 

I woll look for a audio de-embedder or extractor with USB output. 

 

My original plan was to get rid of the surround receiver all together, replace with an audio amp, and then use an optical to USB converter from an output of the TV and into the U192ETL. 

 

I do not believe optical to USB converters exist. I have look and found nothing.

 

Hence, the idea of replacing the Apple TV device with the Mac Mini.

 

Assuming there is no other solution, I am fine using a reclocker for the USB output of the Mini. 

Yes a good amp instead of receiver is the best solution. However the route via TV into U192 is not so good, because of many signal conversions which will only degrade the signal.

You dont need a reclocker for the USB out from Mac Mini, but it makes the signal better. Direct output from Mini into U192 works too.
But a decent Reclocker with its own LPSU should help, taking into account that Mac Mini does not have the best PSU and it is also integrated into it. A Reclocker with its own LPSU has the advantage of using the clean power from the LPSU and passing it into U192, instead of passing directly the dirty congested power from Mac Mini. 

[M_audio]

I have received a super support from them. I broke the input of the XTOS (1st version of U192ETL), and shipped it to them to repair it - i received first class support from their side.